What is the Deep State?
To some, the Deep State is an anonymous, faceless resistance; or as Glenn Greenwald first penned, the entity which “… goes to war with the president-elect, using unverified claims.”
To others, it is a vast administrative bureaucracy, unaccountable to anyone; in fact, an “extralegal state within a state.”
Some call it part of a conspiracy theory. And, at least one conspirator recently received priceless support for their agenda through the op-ed pages of The New York Times.
But who wrote that piece? What was his name? Are there others? How many of them were there? We’ll get to that.
But first, some political science, or as my mentor Saul Alinsky would say, “We should start with what the world is, not as we would like it to be.”
This unelected cabal of federal government employees—the Deep Staters—are getting away with subverting the will of the people. In fact, the Constitution is being stomped upon by the actions of the members of the Deep State. They are in all branches of government and they are hiding among two million other federal employees.
At the most fundamental level, Americans make their voices heard through elections. This is the process to bestow consent for our representatives to govern on our behalf.
The actions of the Deep State fly in the face of the consent part of the governance equation. They seek to subvert the “democratic” process, and through those actions are creating inequality in the application of the Rule of Law. When this is permitted to happen, the will of the people can be thwarted in favor of any agenda that can gain support among the other comrades in the Deep State. That should worry progressives, civil libertarians, and journalists a lot more than it should worry fascists.
Members of the Deep State view themselves as having nothing to lose.
In many ways, they are correct. Government employees use their federal union representation to further an insurgence against the wishes of the people.
Congress used to be a lawmaking body, but it has significantly abdicated its authority to executive branch agencies. Many agencies now exist with little oversight. Much of Washington operates without accountability or transparency, because — and this foreshadows what’s about to come from Project Veritas — some of them are quite brazen in expressing, “It’s impossible to fire a federal employee.”
As a nation of laws, we expect the people we elect to make and uphold the laws, not disregard them. The agencies of Washington D.C. also must be held accountable.
Then there is the Fourth Estate, which has been fanning the flames of the Deep State prior to, and aggressively so since, November 7, 2016. The media has created a cycle of politically motivated leaking followed by retrenchment when those “leaks” were proven to have been deeply misleading. We also have seen a confluence of error-ridden ‘scoops’ of shadowy intelligence agencies colluding with political operatives to dispel or prove political narratives.
We don’t get to see the faces of these shadowy figures, are unable to assess their motives; and the media seems to ignore their real and often obvious objectives.
Therefore, it becomes necessary to unmask and show the faces of these individuals who seek to disturb the fabric of our Republic. In order to do that, it becomes necessary to expose them with their own words.
Our next hidden camera investigation is going to unmask the Deep State.
No doubt the media will object to this, first in terms of methods. They’ll claim that it’s unethical to record people without their consent and produce that into a video story.
It isn’t. Certainly not when another person is present and doing the recording. Surreptitious recordings are not an invasion of their privacy. We, through establishing a rapport with these Deep State people outside their offices, have no duty to keep the information the subject tells us confidential. We did not entrap them. For all of us, their images and voices capture their character much more accurately than any portrait of them painted through a complex arrangement of words on newsprint.
What makes people uncomfortable about surreptitious recordings, is their power: the brutal reality, the rawness and irrefutable nature; make them all the more necessary.
Undercover recordings are not unethical. What is, is the use and abuse of anonymous sources in journalism over the last two years. One commentator described the recent bold license taken by Bob Woodward. Woodward offers second-hand quotes from anonymous sources, months after the events in question. One source described Woodward as “… a Washington ventriloquist who keeps straight the strings of the talking puppets.”
Unlike the author of Fear, we won’t quote anonymous sources in the administration relaying what happened. We’re going to put anonymous Deep State players on the record, unbeknownst to them.
And unlike the New York Times op-ed page, we won’t omit the author or speaker’s name to “… protect them from losing their job.” They don’t need much protection. Federal job security is so great, federal workers are more likely to die at work than lose their jobs. That’s right, death — rather than poor performance, misconduct or layoffs — is the primary threat to federal workers’ job security.
When we release our series of stories, we’ll give you the names and show the faces of those who choose to “resist” while being sustained by patriotic taxpayers. When the subject of our next video, an employee in the Executive Branch, says, “Resist everything. Every level. F*** s*** up;” you’ll be able to see his name and his face. You’ll also see his title, direct employer, the movement of his lips, the cadence in his voice, his demeanor, his arrogance, his lack of introspection, and ultimately, him bragging about how nobody will ever hold his comrades nor him accountable.
When an employee of the executive branch gloats about targeting private citizens in an effort to “… go against the Constitution of America,” how could we NOT publish his name.
There is a deeper philosophical reason we do this.
Transparency is required of those that govern. Privacy belongs to the people that put them there.
The consensus in Washington is the inverse of this statement, because it serves their own political interests, not the people’s interests. But when we protect the identities of those seeking to thwart the consent of the governed; and support attacks against citizens because of their creed, thoughts or political donations — a severe injustice is done.
Herein lies the conflict of visions between Project Veritas and the Media Establishment.
Project Veritas must unmask and show you the faces of representative members of the Deep State. Government exists with the consent of the governed and that consent cannot be manufactured by the masked and subversive. This truth must be pursued at all costs, including going undercover. Project Veritas’ main goal is to deliver ‘Veritas to the Vulgate’ or ‘Truth to the Masses,’ which we believe is the core of journalism. Opinion and anonymity are available in abundance, but the truth is sometimes scarce but always paramount.
We’re going to expose these people to hinder their efforts and because it likely will deter others. We are confident Americans are going to do the right thing if they have the facts. They simply don’t have transparency to what’s going on. They have no idea. The executive and legislative branches of government may have to buck up and do their jobs and institute sweeping reforms. Perhaps there will be a restoration of the separation of powers and equality before the law.
So, we’re going to expose them…
One-by-one.
We are finishing the search for every rotten, crooked, law-breaking individual in this Deep State. We and others are going to find you.
We’re going to unmask you.
We’re going to make you famous.
In Veritas,
James O’Keefe
Yes, it is true that owners of media organizations push their political philosophy on others, but we know going it that they will do that. Google is a search engine that employs advertising to fund their free goodies. What a shock to them though was the outcome of the 2016 Presidential election. Google could not believe the number, having double and triple checked them, they still were shocked on what happened.
en-mass. They sure did, but those who did are the ones who voted for Hillary. 
