Fierce debate erupted among Wikipedia moderators about whether members of the Justice Department, CIA, or government in general can be trusted when they contradict the liberal narrative. Liberal editors on Soros-funded Wikipedia have been waging a smear campaign to downplay and discredit sources exonerating former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn. Breitbart News published a withering exposé accusing Wikipedia editors of censoring information that contradicts their favored narratives. Editors had “worked to exclude or downplay evidence cited by the Justice Department in support of dismissing charges that claim Flynn knowingly made materially false statements to the FBI regarding conversations with a Russian Ambassador,” Breitbart alleged.  Wikipedia editor Korny O'Near expressed his concern that Wikipedia’s entry on Flynn had omitted critical information about his case. This included the revelation about a “possible perjury trap” where government agents appear to have conspired against Flynn: “[T]here was a release of previously-unseen documents relating to the investigation of Michael Flynn, including one that shows that, before the meeting with Flynn, one FBI agent had written, ‘What's our goal? Truth/Admission or to get him to lie, so we can prosecute him or get him fired?’. Should this article mention this release of documents? And if so, should it be done in the context of allegations that Flynn was the target of a perjury trap?” Liberal user Valjean responded by condemning this revelation as “conspiracy theories” and “part of a cover-up,” even “when it comes from the now-sitting government of the USA.” Valjean specified that “Nothing coming from Trump's Justice Department, FBI, CIA, anything, can be trusted.” Breitbart alleged that Valjean, formerly under the name “BullRangifer” has been “previously involved in slanting articles about the Russia investigation.” These revelations had been deliberately meddled with, Breitbart suggested: “Travis Mason-Bushman, whose current account is ‘NorthBySouthBaranof’ on Wikipedia, attempted to label these allegations “conspiracy theories” and otherwise downplay them. When this label was rejected, Bushman removed the paragraph. Mentioning the FBI notes in the body of the article was also rejected. When subsequent discussion appeared to show support, mention of the notes was restored, but the editor who added it agreed to remove it again after being threatened with sanctions by an editor who argued support was insufficient to find ‘consensus’ for the material.” This is not the first time Wikipedia editors have sought to deliberately rig the platform against the conservative movement. A brawl erupted among Wikipedia editors over whether Fox News could even be used as a credible source in Wikipedia entries. It ended by being a source that could only be used with proper warnings in place. A former Wikipedia editor blasted Wikipedia for its brazen bias, and slammed the platform for a multi-year scorched-earth campaign against popular conservative talk radio host Mark Levin. Conservatives are under attack. Contact [email protected] and demand that Wikipedia treat conservatives fairly. If you have been censored, contact us at the Media Research Center contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable