2 votes

Gary Johnson Smear - This Time They Say He Is A CFR Member!

Some of the latest smear that detractors sling at Gary Johnson is really reaching. The latest smear campaign tries to tie Gary Johnson to the Council on Foreign Relations. At first people were saying that Gary was a member of the CFR but it is easy to disprove because his name does not appear on the CFR member's roster that is online.

The latest version says that Gary Johnson has an adviser named Douglas Turner that is a CFR leader. The problem with this is that Doug Turner was a campaign adviser for Gary in his 1994 and 1998 campaign for New Mexico Governor. Doug Turner's biography shows that he was also term member of the CFR and was their "International Affairs Fellow For Japan in 2005-2006". What you have here is someone that worked with Gary Johnson and then 7 years later worked with the CFR for two years. Isn't that a stretch to imply that Gary Johnson has someone on his staff that is a member of the CFR? Doug Turner is also a life time member of the National Rifle Association and was a member of the NRA while he was with the CFR. Does this expose the NRA as CFR stooges? To think that would be silly now wouldn't it?

We saw this same kind of smear with Ron Paul and we know better. Let's not fall for this same kind of tactic when it comes to Gary Johnson.

Gary's name is not on the CFR membership roster:

See the smear:

See a bio on Doug Turner: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doug_Turner

Doug Turner on the CFR web page:

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

You may be right here ...

... but the NRA is extremely suspect. They carry on the battle, until a critical juncture arrives, then support the wrong side, or do nothing to stop them.

Their advocacy for candidates also sucks. Did they EVER support Ron Paul, the clear and obvious pro 2nd Amendment choice for President?

No. They did not. The NRA may or may not be working for the CFR, but they clearly are establishment, almost the same thing.

2/3 of the guys at the range I go to cannot stand the NRA.

The NRA is a fake

controlled opposition. They help write gun legislation. They are the approved gun rights advocates....because they are about controlling gun rights.
You don't have to be a member of the CFR to be controlled by the CFR. I think Michelle Obama is a member but Barry isn't, but I feel it's pretty safe to say Barry is managed by the elites.

So-the campaign adviser's political associations define the man

...and the guilt by association extends on a sliding timeline...

What does that say about campaign adviser Jesse Benton's association with neoconservative Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell?

If you apply your same 'smear logic' to Ron Paul, in other words?

Support the Constitution of the United States

YOU are the one SMEARING people... I just asked a few questions.

My name is Marshall, and I'm the founder and editior for The Jeenyus Corner. I would like to point out for the morons who can NOT read, or only choose to process the parts that fit their purposes. If you note the first sentence of the last paragraph of my article (which you claim is a smear):

"Could Gov. Johnson be unaware of the CFR’s role in the New World Order?" (which IS possible, hence my asking the question.)

I have simply asked questions. Making no conclusions, leaving that up to the reader. YOU, however, have intentionally painted me as someone who is out to tell people that GJ is a member of the CFR, which is FALSE! I NEVER made such a claim, even though you're accusing me of doing so.

Further more, It's Gary Johnson, himself who says we need to KEEP PERMANENT bases in Afghanistan... how does that jive with being an "anti-war" candidate.

Johnson supporting military action against FAKE Kony 2012 mess: http://youtu.be/f-1ktig7Pwg

Johnson on KEEPING GITMO open: http://youtu.be/cRlGXuGHfrc

Those are both policies promoted by the CFR, and when someone has a campaign manager for two successful elections, they don't sever ties with that contact when they leave the office.

Now, I'd ask you to re-phrase your accusations about me, and my post (which are inaccurate). If you didn't distort the intent of the article I wrote, and call it a blatant smear (which IS FALSE, I just ASKED LOGICAL QUESTIONS) I'd have no problem.

It's very telling that you attack someone who is mearly posing questions, accusing them of trying to smear a guy who claims to be libertarian, yet supports a war of interventionism in Uganda, and the NON-LIBERTARIAN policy of keeping Git-Mo open. (Not to mention the fact that GJ has said he'd keep the PERMANENT BASES in Afghanistan.)

You can find me on the corner...

You make a lot of false statements before you ask your question

What do you think of your second paragraph that consists entirely of this statement:

"It is quite alarming to realize that the former New Mexico Governor has a connection to a high-level CFR member, Doug Turner."

That sounds like a statement and not a question. You completely omit from what you now claim was a "question piece" that it was years after being an aid to Johnson that Turner was associated with the CFR for 2 years. Your piece was intended to elicit a negative reaction to Gary Johnson and contained information to support your goal and omitted information that would not support what you know darn well that you intended. You are pretending to not know what you are doing or you really don't know what you are doing as a journalist. Either way, everything you say is suspect.

Anonymous Libertarians

I'm a moron I guess

I'm probably one of those you speak of. I copy-pasted a post from your blog by someone else, that I thought was pertinent. Keep in mind I was knocking on doors (at least a 1000) for Paul in the summer of 1988 (not sitting in an easy chair, tapping keys on the net, there was no net). Back then, we had to go outside to campaign. The net is a great thing for liberty candidates to get exposure, but on the other hand, back then no one had the ability to sign up for wordpress and call themselves a journalist.

Let me remind you (I'm sure you already know) David Koch may throw some money at Mitt, but he's also a long time Libertarian, much more so in the past. I personally don't like the guy, but he has also donated to many LP candidates in the past, including Ron Paul in 1988. He ran as VP, with Ed Clark, in 1980 as LP. Back then he was advocating most of the things Paul now says (and Johnson). They pulled the highest votes in 1980, and might have been on all 50 states (I would have to look it up).

I'm an older guy, obviously, and am not always on top of every YouTube as it is uploaded. I too was taken in by the Kony deal. I saw it on the news and the guy appeared to be a monster. After seeing those reports and the photos of the kids, I was ready to go myself and get him. Shortly thereafter, I saw the vids and read more, then understood it was a false flag. Not that Kony was a good guy, he is indeed a monster. Just not quite the monster portrayed initially in the news.

The questions you didn't ask,, Was Turner in the CFR when he worked with Johnson on his Governor campaigns? Should Johnson turn back any Koch funding? Should Paul have turned down Koch funding in '88?

Should Paul have turned down Thiel's $2.3 million (Peter is a member of Bilderberg). Is Dr Paul in cahoots with Bilderberg because of it? Should Paul have sent back StormFront donations? Is he "associated with" StormFront, because he didn't? You see Marshall, I have been countering these slanted hit pieces against Paul for over a year now (and even in 2008). I know slanted postings when I see them.

You didn't just simply ask questions, you posed questions to convey an attempt to paint Johnson as some sort of a evil agent of the dark side. He knows he can't win, just like Paul knew he couldn't win. They aren't going to allow that. But listen to what Johnson is telling the public,, much of the same things Paul continues to say.

Your blog post uses hand picked points to craft a negative perception, not to provide unbiased info. You make it sound like Johnson was aware that Turner was CFR during his governorship (when Turner was not).

You also weave in suppositions with no basis in facts. "It is quite alarming to realize that the former New Mexico Governor has a connection to a high-level CFR member, Doug Turner."

Is it alarming that Dr Paul has connections to Bilderberg, racist newsletters, congressional and/or political liberty organization fraud and Storm Front? (I always replied to those yellow journalism offerings as well, and still do).

Then this supposition: "It is likely that the two continue to have a working relationship and remain in close contact."
Do you have any facts to back up that there is currently a working relationship? Or even remain in close contact? I have long time friends and business clients that are ardent Obama supporters, does that make me suspect as an Obama supporter?

You are a smart guy (even a self-proclaimed "jeenyus") so you fully know just what I'm saying. If you truly had questions about Johnson you could have participated in his online Townhall a couple nights ago. Your blog was not an attempt to asl provocative questions in a search for truth, it was slanted, biased and a hit piece like so many I have seen against Paul (and still do, which I still defend).

If you have questions, then look for answers, not add opinion, negative innuendo and supposition in order to sway opinion to match your own (or simply try to exploit candidates for attention-getting). If you are going to be a journalist, try to be a good one. We have a plethora of "hit piece hacks" trying to get some spotlight by railing against a pro-liberty candidate.

While he is certainly no Ron Paul (who is?) he is in front of the public advocating smaller government, slashing spending, audit/end the Fed, ending the indef det in NDAA, abolishing the IRS and Patriot Act. He advocates military nonintervention (he even explained Kony in his townhall, but you didn't add that to balance your article). He advocates ending the drug war.

He is putting these issues in front of the public. There is simply no reason, for a liberty minded American (whether you want to vote for him or not) to block these messages. No doubt it will be Mitt or Barack as our next president, but we need to take every edge to keep the message out front at every opportunity. Take every edge, every time.

We all stand together or we all fall apart.


Koch is also HEAVILY involved with the Rocafellers. All I did was ask questions. If asking questions is smearing someone, then we are ALL GUILTY.

You can find me on the corner...


Doesn't he have his own blog page? I don't want to come to the daily PAUL and hear about JOHNSON!!! PLEASE STOP!!!

This is posted under the forum heading "Liberty Candidates"

Look at the top of the page right under the title and you will see the forum name that this is posted in. You will notice that the Daily Paul has different forums and this post is under the forum heading "Liberty Candidates" and that would include Gary Johnson.

Anonymous Libertarians

Didn't you know

that they changed it from Ron Paul to P=Peace AU=elemental abbreviation for Gold and L=Love? I'm sorry to break your heart but Ron Paul is no longer campaigning but this site is supposed to be here to promote the ideas that Ron Paul has implanted in our minds. That one simple thing "Liberty". I am glad we can come here and talk freely about Liberty Candidates. Are you saying that if some other Liberty Candidate was getting attention on here you would whine about them too?

Educate and inform the whole mass of the people... They are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our Liberty. -Thomas Jefferson

... and to smear people for asking questions, apparently.

I'm being falsely accused of saying that GJ is a CFR member, when I NEVER said such a thing. All I did was pose the question about his fmr. campaign manager going on to join the CFR, and serving in the leadership ranks of the organization.

But apparently, according to Mr or Mrs(?) RONonymous, asking simple questions about a candidate is heresy and an attempt to "smear" them.

In my opinion, it's NOT asking questions that's put us in the mess we're in today. And the fact that someone would literally try to smear me by accusing me of smearing people and by inference, try to associate me with the people who tried to smear Dr. Paul, which is another blatant lie about me. RONonymous is acting like (and to be clear, I'm not calling him/her one, just their attack on me) a TROLL.

It's very Anti-Liberty to bash people for posing questions about any candidate. Especially if that candidate claims to be anti-war, but said he would support military action in Uganda, and also says that he'd keep Git-Mo open. But I'm assuming that RONonymous would say it's slander to point out things that Gary Johnson himself has said on tv in interviews. Not to mention the fact that Johnson has recieved donations from the Koch's. Those are questions that need to be asked, and accusing people of "smearing" Johnson for bringing up valid (no matter how minor they may be) questions.


You can find me on the corner...

I'm trollish now?

I'm trollish now but not quite a troll . . .

OK, I'm just going to ask you a question and I don't mean to imply anything. It's just a simple question and I should be able to ask you a simple question if I am to put any credence to anything you write:

Mr. Jeenyus, how long are you planning to smear Gary Johnson?

Anonymous Libertarians

Asking a question is SMEARING?

How is asking a question the same as smearing?

What YOU did, by blatantly LYING and claiming that I said Gary Johnson, himself, was a CFR member. That is a LIE, I never said that, and you explicitly are claiming I did. That makes you... A LIAR! PERIOD!

Did I tell people not to vote for GJ? NO!

Did I tell people that someone said something that they never said? NO, but YOU DID.

You can find me on the corner...

Every time someone says something they are not talking about you

You happen to be the latest version of the smear and no one said that you were a part of the first smear that so many have seen. You think everyone is talking about you and you hear things that were not said. If the way you laid out your one sided evidence and your questions was meant to be objective then you need to work on your objectivity.

Anonymous Libertarians


Why do these back-handed, innuendo questions need to be asked. Are you afraid of blowback "when he becomes president"? Do you think he needs to be dissected into little tiny pieces to vet him for his job as president?

Paul was a long shot, at best, to become president. The same with Johnson. As someone who is almost 60 years old, and active in the movement since 1980, I am quite aware that the corrupt establishment holds all the cards. Trust me, so does Dr Paul. So does Johnson.

If Johnson were to get into the debates, he wouldn't be debating on whether a former adviser is now in the CFR. He would be changing the dialogue to getting out of Afghanistan. Not starting a war in Iran. Pulling all foreign aid. Changing NDAA, abolishing the Patriot Act, the IRS, the police state. He could bring the drug war front and center.

He will not be joining in with them advocating detaining or assassinating American citizens and all of the above-mentioned issues. If you want to see more than Obama and Romney up there, in agreement on the aforementioned issues, with no voice for the movement, then you can work against Johnson by doing the same backhanded articles that have been pulled on Paul all along.

It's never been about winning the presidency in these efforts (although neither Paul nor Johnson would turn it down) it's been about waking up Americans to reality. Regardless of the tiny nit-pick points people have thrown up against Paul, or now throw up against Johnson, it will be Mitt or Barack. The best we can do is wake up America and try to paint the next president into a corner.

If your real desire is to prevent Johnson from being the president, I don't think you have to worry about that. I personally believe Mitt and Barack are the ones truly in need of exposing past indiscretions, and my bet is that you will find a whole heck of a lot more on them, than Johnson (or Paul). They are the non-liberty candidates. How about trying to point your light on them?



Gary Johnson is a distraction.

Gary Johnson IS NOT GOING TO WIN! He is not going to reach even 3%. Every second spent gabbing about this third party loser is time taken away from getting Liberty candidates elected.


exactly is supporting your local liberty candidate being harmed by people supporting Johnson? I know I can support Gary Johnson and my local liberty candidates at the same time; its really not that hard.

Educate and inform the whole mass of the people... They are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our Liberty. -Thomas Jefferson

Johnson- Said he would keep Git-Mo OPEN!

I never said anything about the damn concentration camps, but for the record. GJ said he would keep Git-Mo open, so that says a lot.

You can find me on the corner...

How does this

tie into my comment at all?

Educate and inform the whole mass of the people... They are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our Liberty. -Thomas Jefferson


In response to the writer's comment about stopping genocide.
The U.S. did not enter WWII because of genocide and mass graves.
We entered the war first with Japan, then Germany because Germany declared war on us. Nothing to do with genocide.(Of course Roosevelt was itching to go to war with Germany and succeeded through the back door, inspite of 80% of Americans objecting to another war.)
If the U.S. waged war on every country that commits genocide, we'd be perpetually at war (which we are now), even though they may not have waged war against us. This is most certainly interventionism.
Non intervention doesn't mean approval of heinous acts in foreign lands.
We see the blowback today as a result of our policing, overthowing regimes,invading, bombing and at the same time sending tens of billions in foreign aid to these countries, all of which is intervention. It MUST stop.


LKY's picture

Newly enlightened

I have always been a conservative. But, I was more enlightened by Dr. Paul of his message about liberty. Now, I have definitely changed my minds on a few issues and disagree principally with Republican.

Gary Johnson is the one among the three that has more agreement with Dr. Paul. He does not have the thirty years record as Dr. Paul does. But, he is just like most of us, who has been enlightened recently, and has changed his view on what he used to believe. If he is willing to carry on the message of Dr. Paul, then I will support him, and hold his feet to fire. Even he is not 100% Ron Paul, his presence on the ballot gives us a chance to vote for the principle of liberty.

The RNC has to learn that if they want our support, then they have to learn from Dr. Paul, and join us. Let politician Johnson to us, and we shall influence and guide them.

So from

what people are saying in the comments that one of Johnson's campaign advisers that worked for the CFR years after Johnson was long out of office that he is connected to the CFR. Did anyone even read the post? (good post by the way) So saying this, that he is connected to the CFR, is the same as saying that Ron Paul is connected to Bilderburg because of that guy from the one of the liberty PAC's went to the Bilderberg meeting this year? Or that he just ran for president to get supporters money like Jesse Benton or John Tate did? And this whole thing on his stance on humanitarian wars or stopping genocide is wrong or makes him a neocon; let me ask you this; if your neighbor and his family was getting murdered next door you wouldn't help because that is interventionism? What about Germany and what they did; taking over Europe and killing millions of people and dumping them in mass graves; would you not want to stop that? If he is for stopping genocide then if he was president then he would come out against the UN for the genocide in the third world countries. Oh and one more thing; do you really think if he got elected Ron Paul would not be in his administration, and a very powerful position at that?

Educate and inform the whole mass of the people... They are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our Liberty. -Thomas Jefferson

The one who calls himself a Jeenyus

I saw this comment on his 3rd rate blog.
Chris Rice
September 12, 2012 at 6:07 pm Log in to Reply
Great smear guys! A former campaign adviser later becomes a CFR member! Gary Johnson never had an adviser that was a CFR member but he does have one that later after no longer being an adviser becomes a CFR member! You turn that into some giant conspiracy theory and sling a truckload of mud at Gary Johnson. Bravo for your boldness and two thumbs up for your correct assumption that many of your readers don’t think and will take this exactly as you intend for them to take it!

I have been an ardent supporter, campaigner and donor for Dr Paul in every election including 1988. I grew weary of, every time, battling contrived and slanderous comments against Dr Paul. This "jeenyus" use to speak against the same BS he is now doling out on Johnson.

I think his concept of Johnson using Paul's campaign to benefit himself is ironic, as it appears "jeenyus" used Paul the same way to pimp his blog. Now he is exploiting Johnson as well.
"Look at me, look at me,, I'm a Jeenyus!!" Yea,, we are looking. :\

What I also find ironic, while I'm on a rant, is that after 30+ years of supporting the movement, working hard for Paul going back almost 25 years, I'm now labeled as "one of those Johnson people" because I have moved my efforts to Gary. Paul said Johnson is wonderful and people need to look at him, so I am making huge efforts to provide a way to look at him.
So now I'm a traitor to Ron Paul? Give me a break, I knocked on a 1000 doors (literally) handing out fliers in the summer of '88. Now people who were still poopin' their diapers in 1988 call me a traitor??? At least I don't consider myself as a "jeenyus".

We stand together, or we fall apart.

You are known by the company you keep

Doug Turner=CFR

Doug Turner & former Gov Gary Johnson at opening day tax protest - NM Roundhouse


Is protesting taxes something bad?

So if I go to protest taxes and a CFR member is there then that makes me what? I don't care if they knew each other previously, I'm glad that they are both protesting taxes! You might also notice that Doug Turner ran for Governor of New Mexico in 2010 and sits on the Albuquerque Managing Committee of the National Dance Institute of New Mexico. If you live in New Mexico and you like to dance you must support the CFR!!!!

Anonymous Libertarians

I don't care..

..if they have fried chicken every Sunday at each other's houses. It still doesn't mean Johnson embraces the CFR, or is some part of it by virtue of knowing someone in it. I know (and deal with) a lot of Democrats. It doesn't make me an Obama supporter.

At the risk of bumping this thread

I just want to say to anyone here who is putting his/her support behind Gary J then you
are very much misled.

Jumping on the Ron Paul Revolution bandwagon and spouting how much he admires and likes Ron
Paul and that Ron Paul was right - blah! blah! and blah!

How pathetic can he possibly get to use such horrible tactics to ride on Ron Paul's coattails.
It sickens me that anyone could stoop so low.

Good luck with your support of this charlatan.

PS Gary J is NO libertarian either. Neither is the LP. It's a top down organization.

Ron Paul is My President

What does Ron Paul say about Gary Johnson?

Forget what Gary says about Ron Paul or that he endorsed Ron Paul in 2008 and in the GOP Primary/Caucus in 2012. Let's look at what Ron Paul has said about Gary Johnson:

"I think he's wonderful and I think he's doing a good job and people should look at him" - Ron Paul on Gary Johnson after the RNC

Please watch Ron say it on video from the floor of the Republican Convention a few weeks ago:


Anonymous Libertarians

I know what Ron said.

I have read that quote and I disagree.

And I usually agree completely with he says, but not this time.

Ron Paul is My President