Who Hijacked Our Country

Friday, January 28, 2011

WikiLeaks: Making Banks Squirm

Love him or hate him, Julian Assange has accomplished something that legislators and regulators have only pretended to do: making bank executives squirm. He told 60 Minutes:

“I think it's great. We have all these banks squirming, thinking maybe it's them.”

There’s supposed to be an upcoming “megaleak” of a so far unnamed bank. Tens of thousands of documents will be leaked, which will presumably lead to massive investigations of that bank.

These are the sociopathic thieving cocksuckers who almost derailed the entire global economy two and a half years ago. With the help of their congressional prostitutes, they've blocked almost every attempt to prevent a similar meltdown from occurring. So far they’ve been “punished” with record salaries and bonuses. They’ve also gotten the occasional stern lecture from one of their henhouse foxes who's pretending to regulate them.

These thieves have spent jillions of dollars purchasing our entire government, but so far they haven’t been able to purchase WikiLeaks or any of its spinoffs.

Squirm, Motherfuckers.

And WikiLeaks is just the beginning. There’s a ton of new WikiLeaks spinoffs and copycats springing up all over Europe. How is anyone going to crack down on all of them?

Wanna play Whack-A-Mole, anyone?


Labels: , , ,

7 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Tom,

Despite the many cable networks and news sources we have today claiming they are digging the truth to keep the business honest, no one comes close to what Jack Anderson did.

Now these leakers may do what the press, browbeaten investigators, neutered regulators and bought politicians could never do..

Keep these guys honest!

I wonder if any of them will qualify for protection under our whistle blower laws?

Erik

January 28, 2011 at 10:48 PM  
Blogger MRMacrum said...

Uncomfortable truth. I am still on the fence about Wikileaks. Knowing that they are capable of real damage makes me nervous. But on the other hand, I like the idea there is someone outside the influence of governments and corporations who is willing to shed light on the ugly secrets that are part of every large organization.

Whistelblowers - Maybe the idea that whisleblowing is the ethical thing to do, no organization wants to have one inside their own network. They will always be punished. I learned this one fact the hard way early in life. Playing basketball in high school, the guy covering me was called for fouling me. I spoke up and said he didn't deserve it as I had thrown my elbow into his gut just before he fouled me. I was called on a technical and then I was pulled from the game. The coach made me ride the pine for three more games before I was able to play again.

January 29, 2011 at 5:13 AM  
Blogger Suzan said...

Cause we know how they treat whistle blowers.

More power to them.

Free Bradley!

Love ya, Tom.

S

These are the sociopathic thieving cocksuckers who almost derailed the entire global economy two and a half years ago. With the help of their congressional prostitutes, they've blocked almost every attempt to prevent a similar meltdown from occurring. So far they’ve been “punished” with record salaries and bonuses. They’ve also gotten the occasional stern lecture from one of their henhouse foxes who's pretending to regulate them.

January 29, 2011 at 8:18 AM  
Blogger Tom Harper said...

Erik: I almost forgot about Jack Anderson. There aren't many people like that any more. Government and corporate secrecy are more closely guarded than ever; somebody like Jack Anderson would probably have a mysterious accident in today's climate.

MRM: I agree it's uncomfortable. I'm still on the fence myself. But something like this had to happen in reaction to all this official secrecy. I think of WikiLeaks (and similar groups) and the Corporate-Government Complex as rival gangs. If one gang becomes too powerful and unaccountable, it's nice to see a different gang come in and start shaking things up, even though you know that both gangs are dangerous.

Suzan: That takes courage to be a whistleblower, and their courage is usually rewarded with jail (or worse).

January 29, 2011 at 4:41 PM  
Anonymous S.W. Anderson said...

I suppose if a Wikileaks document dump were to ignite enough public outrage that pols would be obliged to pass the tougher, more-thorough financial reform we really need, that would be to Wikileaks' credit.

However, when it comes to wrongdoers at a major bank winding up in court and, hopefully, going to prison, a big Wikileaks document dump could backfire.

There's a concept in law known as chain of evidence. It's why police have evidence rooms where they document what goes in, who brings it, when, etc., who comes in and sees it, and who takes it out. Because if evidence isn't secured, it could be stolen or tampered with, making it invalid for use at trial.

Documents swiped by person or persons unknown and held who knows where, and how, by Wikileaks amounts to a whole lot of tainted crap no prosecutor can bring to court. A prosecutor might be able to use information gleaned from a Wikileaks document dump to get other docs and testimony, maybe. I have a hunch many would just throw up their hands and walk away.

January 29, 2011 at 9:30 PM  
Blogger Beekeepers Apprentice said...

SW has a good point.

Really, probably the only court that any bank's leadership will be brought before is the court of public opinion. Then the bastards will pull a Tom Lay and have a heart attack smack in the middle of it all.

As for wikileaks...I'm leaning toward "right on, man, sock it to them!" However, another part of me wonders how much of the big picture those docs might...might reveal anyone will really want to see.

January 30, 2011 at 6:14 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

SW,

Here's where it get's iffy. I mean we watched Ken Starr make a mockery of established law when Linda Tripp illegally taped Monica Lewinski and it was allowed as evidence anyway - many people asked "but wait a minute!"

The Wiki papers themselves don't have to be used as evidence, but it it (for example) pointed to a certain record and you could look at the record and it proved the leak true then the admissibility of the Wiki Leak is therefore moot.

Not the mention just of the perception of public wrong doing by those documents is enough to do a serious hurt on these corporations. You have seen what just mere rumors have been doing to BofA stock.

Erik

January 30, 2011 at 4:51 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home