Ron Paul and Jon Huntsman: Third Party False-Flag Attack Benefits Mitt Romney

On January 4, 2011, an anonymous account was created on YouTube, and minutes later, a video depicting Jon Huntsman as a "Manchurian Candidate" was uploaded to the account. The video was tagged with a 10 keywords, eight of which relate to Huntsman's campaign and the New Hampshire primary, including the tags used by Huntsmans' daughters, "jon2012girls." It also featured the caption, “American Values And Liberty… Vote Ron Paul."

Minutes after that, a link to the video was sent to the Jon Huntsman campaign via Twitter. YouTube records indicate that the first viewer of the attack video came from Huntsman's campaign website. Within hours, both the Huntsman campaign and numerous commentators in the establishment Republican blogosphere, and then, the so-called "mainstream media," were accusing Ron Paul supporters--and by extension, Ron Paul himself--of launching the attack video.

Even the most cursory examination would have revealed the video, and the media firestorm the Huntsman campaign generated, as a false flag attack against Ron Paul and his supporters.

This may be one of the most successful false flag political attacks in recent memory, judging by the number of formerly legitimate news outlets that have accepted the Huntsman campaign's claims that the Ron Paul campaign is somehow responsible for the video.

Thousands of videos are uploaded to YouTube every hour of every day. Why did this video catch the attention of the media, when most anonymous videos are only viewed by their creators and (perhaps) a few family members? Why did the Huntsman campaign even acknowledge the existence of this particular video, when there must be hundreds of anti-Huntsman videos online?

It's a standard strategy in politics--you don't "attack down." Neither the Ron Paul campaign, nor his millions of passionate and engaged supporters, have anything to gain by attacking Huntsman, who finished in last place in the Iowa Caucuses with 0.6% of the vote. The independently wealthy Huntsman has the funding to continue in the race, but appears to have no campaign organization on the ground, few volunteers, and virtually no public support, judging by national polls.

There's no evidence whatsoever that the video was created by a Ron Paul supporter or anyone associated with Paul's campaign. In fact, Ron Paul described Huntsman, a former diplomat, in positive and friendly terms during an appearance on The Tonight Show with Jay Leno.

This false flag attack is clearly part of a psy-ops campaign aimed at undecided voters in New Hampshire.

So, who is responsible for the attack? Who benefits most?

Huntsman's adult daughters have created other "strange" videos in support of their father, and Huntsman did promise on January 4th that his daughters had something in the works against Ron Paul, so the possibility that the video was created by someone associated with the Huntsman camp cannot be dismissed out of hand. And the fact that the video was first linked to from the Huntsman campaign's website does tend to support the hypnothesis that the campaign itself was the source of the video.

(However, others with more technical savvy than myself have noted that referral addresses can be faked.)

From a PR and media manipulation perspective, I think there are three possibilities:

1. This "Manchurian Candidate" video is the latest in volley in the Huntsman daughters' heretofore-ineffective viral video and Twitter campaigns. But because the unquestioning credulity of the media has created such sympathy for the Huntsman family, it's now impossible for the Huntsman Girls to own up to the video without losing face.

2. The anonymous video is a proxy attack aimed at the Ron Paul campaign by a third party (perhaps surrogates for another campaign) whose goal is to discredit Ron Paul's growing legion of supporters, and by association, Ron Paul, just days before the New Hampshire Primary.

3. Huntsman's campaign and associates are blameless in terms of creating and posting the video, but are complicit in generating and benefiting from the media firestorm associated with the video.

If the campaign was not generated by a Ron Paul supporter or the campaign, who created it?

Who benefits most by a decline in Ron Paul support in New Hampshire, and a rise in support of Huntsman, who is polling better in New Hampshire than he is anywhere else?

Huntsman benefits--but any spike in support is likely to disappear before South Carolina, unless he somehow manages to finish first or second in New Hampshire.

Santorum benefits--but he still doesn't have a national base of support, enough money to run a national campaign, nor the support of anyone outside his evangelical base.

The only campaign that benefits from this--and has both the money and media support to orchestrate it, and the ability to take advantage of it beyond New Hampshire--is the Mitt Romney campaign (unless Hunstman somehow manages to vault out of last place and finish in the top two).

Romney knows that it's now a two-man race between himself and Ron Paul. Jon Huntsman does not have a ground game. He gets virtually no support from conservatives, no support from libertarians, and his only support appears to come from Democrats and so-called "moderate" Republicans (Romney's "base," if he has one.)

I suspect that the Romney Campaign--perhaps working in coordination with the Huntsman campaign--is likely the source of this false flag attack.

Since baseless accusations are now the "standard of proof" required by the so-called "mainstream media," I invite investigative reporters at the Washington Post and other dinosaur media to prove me wrong.