Exposing government corruption

This blog was not set up for political discourse (though we always seek to bring forth truth no matter what area of discussion) however from time to time I feel some things outside the usual area I cover are too vital to ignore.

Most of us are tired of all the politics and attacks during this ¹past (and apparently ongoing) political campaign. I propose the following summary of leaks released by Wikileaks (see link here or at the end of this post) may explain in great part what has been going on.

For those who might be fuzzy about the veracity of Wikileaks itself (due to misinformation from main stream media), all you need to know is they are simply an information clearing house, so to speak. They actually are doing what reporters should be doing. Reporting on things the government does that leakers feel the people should know about i.e. government corruption.

This by the way, was in fact why the founders believed freedom of the press is so vital. To be an unrestrained watchdog of government and a check on government corruption.

By the way, what would be the best way for those involved in government corruption to avoid scrutiny? Control the press. For more on this click here. 

By way of analogy, what if you worked for a bank and discovered the president and directors of the bank had developed a scheme by which money could be siphoned off into their own personal accounts without detection and you had solid proof this was occurring. But when you tried to bring this to others within the bank, they simply dismissed it as nuts (he's the president after all and everyone knows he's a good guy). They ridiculed you either out of fear of losing their job and/or their reputation being smeared or because they were party to the corruption and getting some kickback through the scheme.  

You knew in time this would cause the bank to collapse. Not only were you concerned about the depositors but also the shareholders. And you did not want to be a party to any of this if the bank went under. But to come forward and expose this likely meant either your termination or being slandered, hurting your reputation and ability to get work elsewhere or worse, etc. If the corruption were great enough and the stakes high enough, there could even be a risk to you or your family's life. 

What would you do? Where would you go? You feel you must do something but do not want to put yourself or loved ones at risk or in harm's way. 

You would go to someone willing to bring forth the information to the public to see the evidence for themselves, without revealing you as the source. That is precisely what WikiLeaks offered. This was similar to what ¹Snowden did as well. 

How does Wikileaks get its information? From leakers... whistleblowers within government or whatever operation they are a part of and bringing proof of corruption to Wikileaks. Nothing more and nothing less.

Why do the leakers come to Wikileaks? Because Wikileaks has an impeccable track record of not divulging their sources since their inception in 2006. If they ever did, the leakers would stop bringing them information. Reason? If they were exposed, the information they brought forth could result in their losing their jobs, or possibly far worse. Just like any reporting outlet, Wikileaks never divulges their sources who seek anonymity for their protection.

Nor have they ever published anything that has proven to be anything other than what it is, direct words ("unintended confessions") from the sources themselves. In this situation, ALL the information is correspondence by or between the sources themselves or documents produced by those sources of their nefarious actions. No commentary, no editing, just pure proof of corruption from the source themself.

WikiLeaks also does considerable research to confirm the veracity of the information given to them, otherwise, they don't report it. This is also part of why they have an impeccable reputation for accuracy. Nothing they have brought forth to date has proven to be inaccurate in substance or regarding the parties involved. Not even by the guilty parties themselves. In fact, from what I understand, there hasn't even been an attempt to refute the information brought forth. The parties know it would be pointless because the documents/reports are rock solid, 100% accurate. So instead they attack and disparage WikiLeaks as a diversion away from the facts that they report. The classic ad hominem attack. 

If you were the party being exposed, what would your attitude be towards the reporter (in this case WikiLeaks). You would despise them, would you not? After all, they have been party to exposing your criminal activity. 

For those who care to know Assange, the chief editor is what we would call liberal politically. For those who wonder why so many "hits" have been on liberal politicians, it is simply because those are the leaks being brought to them i.e. apparently the corruption is more common among the left or at least the reports are more frequent. 

Remember, WikiLeaks is not the source of the leaks, only the distributor of them. If they get any proof of corruption, regardless of the source or their political affiliation, they pass it along. Wikileaks simply reports and exposes the corruption being brought to them. Nothing more and nothing less. It does not target particular political agendas or parties. 10 years ago, WikiLeaks became famous for exposing elements of the Bush administration and the Iraq wars, and quickly became heroes to the left at the time.

https://wikileaks.org/nsa-201602/ 

For the top 100 leaks posted through WikiLeaks prior to these most recent ones regarding Vault 7 click here. 

Here's is the latest report as of this post from Assange himself. 

For some comments on what is going on, here is what I believe is a spot-on assessment by Monica Crowely, who herself was a victim for coming forth with the truth. 

For a discussion on corruption within media click here.

For a discussion of a Christian's role toward government click here

_____________________________

¹This article was originally written March 2017, shortly after the 2016 election.

*Now that Assange and Snowden are out of the picture Project Veritas took up the mantle of exposing corruption through investigative reporting. They were so effective that criminal elements infiltrated the board, went after James O'Keefe the founder and had him fired. As a result O'Keefe started O'Keefe Media Group (OMG) to resume his investigative reporting.