Lord Malloch-Brown:
Another British Crown Coup-Maker Behind U.S. Vote Fraud

by Gretchen Small

[Print version of this article]

Nov. 21—The central role played in rigging the vote tallies in the Presidential election by voting machine and software company Smartmatic, identified by President Donald Trump’s campaign legal defense team in its November 19 presentation of evidence of fraud to the press, reveals the role of the British Royal Family itself in the drive to steal the November 3 election for Joe Biden.

It should come as no surprise. It is well documented that British intelligence set up and ran the Russiagate fraud; that the first public calls to impeach or assassinate President Donald Trump came from Britain, even as he was first taking office; that Britain’s Ambassador Kim Darroch had to be recalled when his efforts to control the U.S. Presidency were exposed; that the British House of Lords in December 2018 instructed that a second Trump presidential term must be prevented at all costs; among other egregious acts of aggression.

It would be a grave error to believe that interference comes from Venezuela, Iran, China, Russia, or even from the disgusting George Soros alone. Our enemy is London’s Empire, as it has been throughout the history of the United States.

Smartmatic’s parent company, SGO, is chaired by Lord Mark Malloch-Brown (and he plays a hands-on role in its operations), but Malloch-Brown’s role in the 2020 election battle goes beyond SGO/Smartmatic.

A member of the Queen’s UK Privy Council, Knight Commander of the Order of Saint Michael and Saint George, former British cabinet minister and Minister of State in the Foreign Office, and decades-long imperial political strategist directing money-bags George Soros, Malloch-Brown was the “principal conduit between Britain” and Barack Obama from the time of his 2007-2008 presidential campaign. His appointment to the Privy Council is the key to understanding Malloch-Brown’s importance as a British Crown agent.

He has a long history of orchestrating elections as part of “color revolutions” to overthrow nationalist governments in favor of British lackeys committed to imposing radical free trade policies of the Queen’s financial speculators. Search EIR’s online archives, and you will find repeated exposés of Malloch-Brown’s attacks on the principle of the nation-state itself. He was part of the team, with Soros, that set up the International Criminal Court (used almost exclusively against African leaders); pushed the British “Responsibility to Protect” (R2P) doctrine used to overthrow the Westphalian order of national sovereignty; supported the overthrow of Libyan ruler Qaddafi; helped create Saakashvili’s “rose revolution” in Georgia.

He has now deployed his networks to set up the election as the trigger for great conflict inside the United States. It is therefore urgent that the report we provide below be understood now, to stop this operation dead in its tracks.

Smartmatic Feels the Heat

Not long after the Trump team’s November 19 vote fraud press conference, Smartmatic removed its biographical notes about its chairman from its website. Whereas several paragraphs promoting the Lord as prominent in British business and international affairs had previously popped up when the links to his biography were clicked, now a blank page appears: “The news record is not available anymore.” The only reference to the British peer remaining on the site is a link to Smartmatic’s “Fact-Sheet” against all those unfair lies about it out there, where it is acknowledged that Malloch-Brown exists, as a sort of twice-removed cousin who is not, we say not working for George Soros!

Smartmatic protests,

Does Mark Malloch-Brown work for George Soros? No. Lord Mark Malloch-Brown sits on the Board of Directors of more than a dozen organizations, including SGO, the parent company of Smartmatic. Malloch-Brown is also on the board of Open Society Foundations, a philanthropic organization founded by Soros that supports democracy and human rights in more than 100 countries.

EIR reported long ago that Malloch-Brown never “worked for” Soros. While Soros has certainly enriched him, the Baron is higher in operating rank than the money-bags.

Originally created by Venezuelan engineers, Smartmatic in 2005 purchased Sequoia Voting Systems—a leading provider of U.S. voting technology—from the British company De La Rue. In 2014, a new holding company was created, SGO, with Smartmatic as its main venture, chaired by Baron Malloch-Brown. The company’s headquarters is in London.

Joining Lord Malloch-Brown on the board, with two engineers from the original team of Venezuelans who created Smartmatic, is another British knight, Sir Nigel Knowles, whom the Queen had appointed her representative as High Sheriff of London for 2016. The Office of High Sheriff being the oldest Royal appointment in the realm.

SGO describes Smartmatic as its largest component, in everything from revenues to profitability, geographical presence, innovation, etc. Smartmatic claims to be the—

world leader in election technology … [having] successfully designed and implemented secure voting technologies for election commissions on five continents in 25 countries. We’ve recorded and tabulated more than 5 billion votes with zero security breaches.

The latter claim had been previously loudly disputed inside the United States and internationally, but none of that stopped Smartmatic from being approved as a U.S. Department of Defense vendor and included as a founding member in 2017 of the Department of Homeland Security Council for the Election Infrastructure Subsector, by DHS’s now-dismissed Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) head, Christopher Krebs.

Smartmatic’s Lucrative Philippine Frauds

Smartmatic’s most notorious case of repeated election fraud, outside of the 14 elections it ran from 2004 to 2015 in Venezuela, occurred in the Philippines. The story is important to the Malloch-Brown case.

Smartmatic machines were used in the 2008 regional election in Mindanao. The Manila Times reported in a scathing June 21, 2016 editorial, “Never Again! … to Smartmatic,” which listed case after case of its fraud. In the Mindanao case, when zero results came in from several precincts on the island, a Smartmatic technical person, over 530 miles away in Manila, accessed the machines and made a correction, “the first proof that Smartmatic can change the results in any region, at will, from anywhere in the country,” the Manila Times wrote.

When Smartmatic voting machines were purchased by the Philippine Commission on Elections (COMELEC) for the 2010 national election, the machines failed pre-election tests run by COMELEC and by the Philippine Computer Professionals Union. The latter reported a list of more than 15 problems which ranged from election data not always being properly encrypted before being stored or transmitted, to finding encryption keys explicitly coded into the source code in one case, potentially revealing them to anyone.

COMELEC ruled that the election would proceed anyway, leading to charges of fraud being perpetrated by both Smartmatic and the government.

The Manila Times reported that in the 2013 election, Smartmatic again demonstrated it could access the system and “tamper the results at will,” when it stepped in to “correct” the votes in a race where 10 million votes had been registered for a candidate in the first two hours alone. At the end of the election, Smartmatic results showed government party candidates receiving 60% of the votes, those from the dominant opposition 30%, and the rest of the candidates 10% ... in every region, for all 16 candidacies—a political and statistical impossibility!

When COMELEC then banned Smartmatic from bidding for the 2016 presidential race after its machines failed compliance tests, Malloch-Brown, now chairman of SGO/Smartmatic, flew personally to Manila within a few weeks of the decision to throw his political clout around. After many meetings and press conferences, wonder of wonders, COMELEC changed its position and announced that the Smartmatic machines worked after all, and that the Philippines would buy 23,000 of their new optical mark reader machines to be used in the 2016 polls, at a cost of US$55.5 million.

Turning Elections into ‘Color Revolutions’

During his June 2015 trip to ensure Smartmatic would not lose its most lucrative contract, Malloch-Brown reminisced to the Philippine Daily Inquirer about his personal role, almost 30 years before, in using the February 1986 presidential elections in the Philippines to overthrow President Ferdinand Marcos, on the back of a so-called “People’s Power revolution.”

That was his first venture into orchestrating election fraud on a national scale, long before electronic counting machines existed. He had started his career as a correspondent for the 177-year-old imperial mouthpiece, The Economist, but in 1985, in his early thirties, he shifted his focus to manipulating elections, by joining the “strategic communications consulting” firm, U.S.-based Sawyer-Miller Group, as its lead international partner. He had become a co-owner of the firm by the time he left in 1994, to put his improved political manipulation skills to work as a “development specialist” at the World Bank.

Times of London editor James Harding once promoted the Sawyer-Miller team as “the Manhattan Project of spin politics: a small but extraordinary group who invented American-style political campaigning and exported it around the world,” in his book, Alpha Dogs: How Political Spin Became a Global Business.

That tale is an exaggeration. The Sawyer-Miller team, Malloch-Brown included, were no insightful geniuses; they were merely skilled at using techniques of mass psychological warfare honed over decades, in particular, at the British psychological warfare center, Tavistock. Los Angeles Times reporter Barry Siegel’s November 24, 1991 profile, “Spin Doctors to the World,” captures the soul-less cynicism of the oligarchic lackeys, Malloch-Brown emphatically included, playing at being the masters of the world. Sawyer-Miller’s team bragged that their advertising campaigns did not aim to sell products or candidates, but to “manage attitude and behavior. That’s what we do. We design strategies to affect behavior and attitudes of a particular constituency,” founder David Sawyer told Siegel.

The firm’s team understood its task was to induce the American people to believe (or at least accept) that the radical free-trade economics spearheaded by Margaret Thatcher at the time was necessary for society, even as that policy destroyed their jobs, communities, and children. This use of “mass communications” to impose British oligarchic economics of austerity, scarcity, and backwardness was dubbed “electronic democracy.” Sawyer excused his actions in the same fashion as Malloch-Brown’s later partner George Soros did in explaining why he felt no guilt about working for the Nazi occupiers against his fellow Hungarian Jews in his youth. Sawyer told Siegel, I try “to control the terms of the debate. If I don’t someone else will.”

Malloch-Brown described his task most explicitly in a June 27, 1991 article, “The Consultant,” for Granta on his work for Sawyer-Miller in getting oligarch libertine Mario Vargas Llosa elected president in Peru in 1990:

I believed … Peru’s future was in stabilizing the economy by radical measures—privatizing industry, permitting competition and entrepreneurship. I had seen half-hearted reform programmes fail. Democracy would last in the region only if it could be shown to be consistent with bold leadership. But I also felt that, like marketeers of other products, my colleagues and I could make his politics of rapid economic adjustment with its inevitable early consequences of higher real prices and increased unemployment, attractive to the consumer. We could do for Mario what Mrs. Thatcher’s consultants had done for her: to take the hard edge off a radical programme for economic recovery.

(He failed that assignment. Alberto Fujimori beat Vargas Llosa by a 20% landslide.)

When Sawyer-Miller was hired to make sure that the neo-conservative sugar oligarch Corazon Aquino toppled Marcos on behalf of the Anglo-American cabal, Malloch-Brown was assigned responsibility. (Rumors have it that the firm was hired at the request of the CIA; Malloch-Brown admitted to Siegel that they were “occasionally briefing the CIA.”)

EIR detailed why and how Marcos was set up and overthrown, and the LaRouche movement’s role in that fight, in the December 24, 2004 article, “Shultz and the ‘Hit Men’ Destroyed the Philippines,” but was unaware then of Malloch-Brown’s role.

In his 2015 interview with the Philippine Daily Inquirer, Malloch-Brown made clear he still relished his crowning touch in running Aquino: issuing a fraudulent “exit poll,” made up out of thin air while the vote was still being counted, which “established” that Aquino was winning, 55-45%. That “exit poll” was then blasted all over the press, setting the stage for a giant campaign to discredit the election result as “fraud” when Marcos won the election, 53.6% to Aquino’s 45%.

With the media blaring that Aquino had won, using Malloch-Brown’s invented poll, “people’s power” protests quickly followed, providing cover for the already-planned military coup which installed Aquino in power before the month was out. The purpose of the coup quickly became clear: The industrial, agricultural, and scientific development that Marcos had fought to introduce in the Philippines was reversed. One of Aquino’s first acts was to mothball the completely finished Bataan nuclear plant which was about to start generation.

Malloch-Brown was still gleeful decades later:

Marcos did not really recover after that. It was a very exciting experience to watch. … I have done an awful lot of campaigns since, but I still say I learned my whole business on Cory’s campaign.

The Vote Fraud against Trump

Malloch-Brown stayed at the World Bank after leaving Sawyer-Miller until 1999, when he was deployed into a series of posts at the United Nations, culminating in his 2006 stint as Deputy Secretary-General under Kofi Annan. Throughout, Malloch-Brown continued to push the oligarchic policy that “development” in developing sector nations be limited to “appropriate technology” (pick-and-shovel jobs programs—maybe lit by dim solar-powered light bulbs). It appears to have been during his period as head of the UN Development Program (UNDP, 1999-2005) that he established his first ties to Hugo Chávez’s Venezuela, as Smartmatic was positioning itself as a major election machine vendor for the regime. In 2002, his offer to assist talks between Chávez and the opposition culminated in his sending UNDP observers to supervise signature collection for the 2004 recall referendum (in which Smartmatic’s machines were first used on a national scale).

His first known ties to Soros emerged in his last year at Sawyer-Miller, around two public projects: Soros’s Advisory Committee on Bosnia (1993-1994) and their joint creation of the International Crisis Group (ICG) between 1993 and 1995, about which more below. Their close ties probably existed earlier, as during his years at the United Nations, Soros would charge Malloch-Brown nominal rent while he lived in one of Soros’ luxury New York apartments. After leaving the United Nations, Malloch-Brown joined both Soros Fund Management and Soros’s Open Society Initiative as Vice Chairman.

It was in the last months of Tony Blair’s government that Malloch-Brown was tapped to work directly under the Queen, a decision culminating in July 2007. After he had been named Minister of State at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office with responsibility for Africa, Asia, and the United Nations in the new Gordon Brown government, Malloch-Brown was knighted and made a life peer in the House of Lords with a barony in “appreciation” of his international work (his official title: Baron Malloch-Brown of St. Leonard’s Forest in the County of West Sussex). Most important, he was appointed to the Queen’s UK Privy Council.

As Australian patriots have recently forced out into the open—over great Royal objection—Privy Councils are not honorary bodies that answer to the elected governments in countries where the Queen of England is still the Sovereign, as the Royal Family and its retainers would like you to believe. Members of the Privy Council, who serve for life, answer to the Queen and carry out her orders. See “Her Majesty’s ‘Prerogative Powers,” in the May 17, 1996 issue of EIR.

Malloch-Brown’s later appointment as chair of the Royal African Society (RAS) in 2013 reflects the continuing esteem with which the British Crown views the work of its lackey, the Royal Family having been the Patrons of the RAS since its founding over 100 years ago.

Obama, Biden, Soros and the
International Crisis Group

It is perhaps not a coincidence that Malloch-Brown was “honored” by appointment to the Privy Council at the time that he was in charge of handling British relations to then-presidential candidate Barack Obama. Obama henchwoman Samantha Power told the Times of London in a February 24, 2008 interview that Malloch-Brown was “the principal conduit between Britain and the candidate” Obama. Obama “came to admire” Malloch-Brown when he was Deputy Secretary General of the United Nations, she reported. Obama “was really taken with him. It is a relationship that has persisted.”

Malloch-Brown’s ties to the Obama-Biden Democrats clearly “persist.” The day after the 2020 presidential election, he re-tweeted a message from Patrick Gaspard, the President of Soros’ Open Society Foundation (on whose board Malloch-Brown sits), which instructed:

Hey Dems, you’re about to retake the Presidency from the hands of this madman. Stop walking around like zombies. Stop the flagellation about all the people who voted for the racist misogynist. Recognize the win. Own it. And do something with it.

With this attitude towards Donald Trump, and his company running a major part of the election of the President of the United States, is it a “conspiracy theory” to think that Malloch-Brown’s Smartmatic might have already been “doing something with it”? Remember his remarks about his Philippine coup-making 35 years ago. Now review the work of the International Crisis Group (ICG), which he and Soros founded in 1995. As usual, Soros put up the money for it, and Malloch-Brown took a leadership position. He continues as its co-chairman today.

By 2000, ICG staff, funding, and activity had been built up such that its then President, Gareth Evans, could accurately describe its operation “as a private Foreign Office, doing things that well-focused and well-resourced governments ought to be doing but often do not.” The ICG’s monthly Crisis Watch bulletin shaped the policy of many governments, operating as had Sawyer-Miller by “controlling the dialogue.” Its official “Our History” page proudly cites Liberal Richard Holbrooke and neo-conservative Richard Armitage on how each equally relied on ICG’s evaluations when they were in government. Ambassador Holbrooke said, “Nothing I saw in government was as good as this.” Deputy Secretary of State Armitage enthused,

I don’t think there’s any other group globally that has the global presence—the global reach—that it has. Crisis Group forced me to get out of my usual thought patterns … listening to a new set of voices and seeing through a new set of eyes.

ICG claims credit for orchestrating such key nodal points in taking down the sovereign nation, as getting acceptance at the UN for the “Responsibility to Protect” (R2P) doctrine concocted to justify such imperial “humanitarian” invasions as that ordered by Barack Obama against Libya, and the Colombian “peace” agreement with the FARC narco-terrorists which de facto legalized drugs.

In 2020, the ICG turned its sights on the United States. Its target: President Donald Trump. For the first time ever, the ICG issued a report on the United States. Its title showed its intention: “The U.S. Presidential Election: Managing the Risks of Violence.”

Directing this operation is ICG’s current President, Robert Malley. Malley had founded the ICG’s Middle East and North Africa program before taking positions in the Obama administration as Special Assistant to the President, Senior Adviser to the President for the Counter-ISIL Campaign, and White House Coordinator for the Middle East, North Africa and the Gulf region. In other words, Malley was advising Obama on the policy of supporting the Muslim Brotherhood and Islamic jihadis, that Gen. Michael Flynn famously denounced.

After the Obama administration was out, Malley went back to the ICG, moving up the ladder rapidly to take up its presidency in 2018.

The ICG U.S. report was issued on Oct. 28, 2020, and claims to have been based on research carried out by its staff from June to October. The “research” must have been minimal; it reads like the reports issued from the Transition Integrity Project’s war games and the media propaganda generally heard in the run-up to the election: Violence is likely to engulf the U.S. around and following the election, and President Trump is the chief cause of this danger through his “rhetoric” that fraud could occur and his “failure” to curb the real paramilitary threat of “white nationalists” while talking about the perhaps-existing Antifa, etc. The importance of the ICG report, however, lies in its call for foreign governments to prepare to intervene against any possible effort by President Trump to charge vote fraud, even before the election had taken place.

This self-proclaimed “private Foreign Office,” directed by Privy Council member Malloch-Brown and financed by George Soros, instructed:

Trump could decide to declare premature victory as part of a strategy to discredit Democratic mail-in ballots. Foreign heads of state and government should not allow themselves to be seen as validators of this tactic regardless of the pressure the White House might exert upon them. …

Should things take a turn for the worse, Washington’s traditional overseas allies may also be in the best position to remind U.S. leaders—both in the executive branch and in Congress—how much is at stake in terms of the country’s global standing and its ability to claim to serve as a model of democratic governance for others. … Should the need arise, those with access to Trump and his inner circles should tell them privately and publicly that they will have no support if they try to interfere with tabulation of results or, in case they lose, the peaceful transfer of power. Others should echo those messages.

The British Crown has gambled everything on succeeding in its drive to ensure the United States comes back under its firm control.