profiles James O’Keefe

From :

Stinger: James O’Keefe’s Greatest Hits

Curran Hatleberg for The New York Times
By ZEV CHAFETS

The temperature was hovering near 90 degrees on the afternoon of Memorial Day when James O’Keefe III emerged from the woods and ambled over to my car. He was tall and thin, with pale skin and matted reddish hair. When his mug shot ran in the papers, some people told him he looked like Matthew Modine. Others said Lee Harvey Oswald. On the day I met him, he wore muddy work boots, filthy jeans and, despite the heat, a long-sleeved shirt. “Keeps the mosquitoes off,” he said. All day he was in the outback of a regional park just west of the Hudson, breaking rocks with a pickax to construct a trail. As a boy he was an Eagle Scout, but this wasn’t a nature project. O’Keefe, the man whose video stings helped take down high-ranking people at National Public Radio and led to the demise of Acorn, the nation’s biggest grass-roots community organizing group, was doing federal time.

Yup, he sure was: due to the way in which Mr O’Keefe caught Senator Mary Landrieu (D-LA) being dishonest, he committed a misdemeanor. But, since our good friend Blubonnet is such an advocate for the whistleblowers — Julian Assange and Bradley Manning come to mind — I’m sure that she’ll be right up there, defending Mr O’Keefe for his actions to expose political corruption. :)

The Times article is a long one, and one which seems pretty fair; you’ll have to follow the link to read the whole thing. But just one more paragraph, especially for Perry:

His takedown of Acorn was even more devastating, although Bertha Lewis, Acorn’s former chief executive, contends that the videos were dishonest. “He is demon, a liar and a cheat,” she says. “What he did was despicable. He created a fiction.” Bertha Lewis still insists that Acorn did not offer advice on how to break the law. Clark Hoyt, a former public editor for The New York Times, reviewed O’Keefe’s raw footage and edited tapes and concluded that “the most damning words match the transcripts and the audio, and do not seem out of context.”

Of course, the lovely Miss Lewis thought that Mr O’Keefe was a “demon, a liar and a cheat,” but not because he created a fiction; it was because he documented the truth. That’s why the Congress defunded ACORN.

It’s a long article, but definitely worth your time. And my thanks to Cheryl for forwarding me the article.

22 Comments

  1. Breitbart is a scoundrel working only to diminish progress of The Liberal’s agenda, like human rights which those like ACORN are about, and the NYT is not much more than an arm of corporate America, but sometimes they do print valuable pieces. The one you bring to focus is not one. Brad from Bradblog has attacked (proven as fraudulent) for exposing the real stories behind what the gulliable Rs are sucked into believing. I believe Brad, and the Rs have proven themselves to be scoundrels, and Breitbart has been convicted for his shenanigans. Brad was not.

    http://www.bradblog.com/?p=8601

  2. Clark Hoyt, a former public editor for The New York Times, reviewed…

    Uh-huh. Right. Whatever.

    Next up – Fox News being used as a credible source on the Murdoch hacking scandal…

  3. The Phoenician wrote:

    Clark Hoyt, a former public editor for The New York Times, reviewed…

    Uh-huh. Right. Whatever.

    Next up – Fox News being used as a credible source on the Murdoch hacking scandal…

    [Guffaws!] OK, so you are dismissing The New York Times as a credible source, using as a reference a blog with references like:

    * 911, Iraq, PNAC , All roads lead to Israel
    * Canadians for 9/11 Truth
    * Europe 9/11 Truth
    * Full El Al flight took off on 9/11 from JFK to Tel Aviv

    in its sidebar.

    Those are only a few of the choice items: the site’s blogroll is a long list of anti-Israeli and far-left wing causes. But, to you, that counts as a credible source, while The New York Times does not.

    I am amused.

  4. And Blu wrote:

    Breitbart is a scoundrel working only to diminish progress of The Liberal’s agenda, like human rights which those like ACORN are about, and the NYT is not much more than an arm of corporate America, but sometimes they do print valuable pieces. The one you bring to focus is not one.

    So, for you, whistleblowers from the left, like Julian Assange (possibly a rapist) and Bradley Manning (probably a traitor), are heroes and should be honored, but individual investigators who expose bias and even criminal wrongdoing on those from the left, why they’re “scoundrels.”

    People like Andrew Breitbart and James O’Keefe and Lila Rose have exposed organizations like Planned Parenthood and ACORN enabling underaged prostitution — read: child rape! — and statutory rape, but, to you, they’re the villains.

  5. “People like Andrew Breitbart and James O’Keefe and Lila Rose have exposed organizations like Planned Parenthood and ACORN enabling underaged prostitution — read: child rape! — and statutory rape, but, to you, they’re the villains.”

    Genuine whistleblowers like Richard Clark, Julian Assange, and Bradley Manning are to be applauded, but whistleblowers Breitbart, Hoyt, and O’Keefe, well they simply are not whistleblowers, they are propagandists who select out their video clips to fabricate a story, therefore are dishonorable to our country, in my opinion. The truth is meaningless to these people.

    If it were not for these genuine whistleblowers, how else would we know what goes on behind closed doors in our government of which we would not approve if we knew?

    Those with Machiavellian proclivities do not like whistleblowers, that’s obvious!

  6. Genuine whistleblowers like Richard Clark, Julian Assange, and Bradley Manning are to be applauded, but whistleblowers Breitbart, Hoyt, and O’Keefe, well they simply are not whistleblowers, they are propagandists who select out their video clips to fabricate a story, therefore are dishonorable to our country, in my opinion. The truth is meaningless to these people.

    Copy and paste, Copy and paste, Copy and paste, Copy and paste, Copy and paste, Copy and paste, Copy and paste … talking points, talking points, talking points, talking points, talking points, talking points, talking points, talking points …

    Gap bridging my ass, you senile fraud.

  7. OK, so you are dismissing The New York Times as a credible source

    No, just Clark Hoyt. The comments about his credibility are all over the place; I just grabbed teh first couple with the best looking formats. Go google.

  8. Perry, you presented the facts perfectly.

    The Rs around here seem to forget that any and ALL organizations are imperfect. When they are diminishing Republican hold, they are a problem. Breitbart MISREPRESENTED the facts. HE WAS CONVICTED for it.

    Then, someone that exposes slaughter, war crimes, acts that Charles Manson was imprisoned for, well then, “he’s a traitor”. Oblivion suits them just fine.

  9. Abraham Lincoln said: “I see in the near future a crisis approaching. It unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. The money powe preys upon the nation in times of peach, and conspires against it in times of adversity. It is more despotic than a monarchy, more insolent than autocracy, more selfish than bureaucracy. It denounces as public enemies, all who question its methods, OR THROW LIGHT UPON ITS CRIMES, I have two great enemies, the Southern army, in front of me, and the FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS at the rear, the latter is my greatest foe. Corporations have been enthroned, and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working UPON THE PREJUDICES of the people, until the wealth is aggregated int the hands of the few, and the Republic destroyed. I feel at this moment, more anxiety for the safety of my country than ever before, even in the midst of war. God grant they my suspicions may prove groundless.”

    You all continue to keep supporting those threats to our country. By the way, who do you think owns the media? And Lincoln was assassinated after he tried taking the absolute control the Federal Reserve (actually a private institution) away from them.

    Kennedy was assassinated after challenging them.

  10. Perry makes me laugh:

    Genuine whistleblowers like Richard Clark, Julian Assange, and Bradley Manning are to be applauded, but whistleblowers Breitbart, Hoyt, and O’Keefe, well they simply are not whistleblowers, they are propagandists who select out their video clips to fabricate a story, therefore are dishonorable to our country, in my opinion. The truth is meaningless to these people.

    Well, Perry, if they had actually “select(ed) out their video clips to fabricate a story,” y’all wouldn’t care. Your problem is that they weren’t fabricating a story, but telling the truth. Planned Parenthood didn’t fire some staffers and have to start another staff training program because the tapes were forgeries; they had to do that because the tapes were accurate. ACORN didn’t lose its federal funds because the tapes were forged; they did because the tapes were accurate. NPR didn’t lose its president because someone on the right lied; she lost her job because we told the truth.

    Truth to liberals is like light to roaches; they scurry away and hide, as fast as they can.

  11. Perry wrote:

    Genuine whistleblowers like Richard Clark, Julian Assange, and Bradley Manning are to be applauded,

    If he did what he is accused of doing, PFC Bradley Manning betrayed his country. James O’Keefe committed a misdemeanor in pursuit of a story, was convicted, and is paying the legal penalty for that, as the Times original documents. I’d suggest that PFC Manning might also be convicted, and will have to pay the legal penalty for his crime. Seventy years in Fort Leavenworth ought to just about do it. :)

    Julian Assange may well have committed no crime for which he could be prosecuted in an American court concerning the WikiLeaks releases. Still, it wouldn’t exactly break my heart if he winds up being convicted on the Swedish rape charges.

  12. Dana, any organization will have its zits. My objection is coloring an entire organization the same color as a zit, which is exactly what Breitbart, Hoyt, and O’Keefe do/did, and you love it – I understand that very well indeed!

  13. Dana, any organization will have its zits. My objection is coloring an entire organization the same color as a zit, which is exactly what Breitbart, Hoyt, and O’Keefe do/did, and you love it – I understand that very well indeed!

    I’d ask if you “understand very well” that this is precisely what you do to groups like the Tea Party, anti-illegal immigration types, et. al., but I know very well that you do not. Because you’re a brazen hypocrite who subscribes to the notion that such negative attributes should only be conferred upon conservatives.

  14. “It’s time for a Phoeny-like off-topic interjection: How ’bout that “settled science,” eh?

    When you see verbiage like this: “… than alarmist computer models have predicted, ….”, or this: “… than United Nations computer models have predicted, ….”, or this: “… but real-world data have long shown ….”, you know you have an author intent on putting political spin into his reporting, therefore his statements on the science cannot be taken seriously! If fact, James Taylor of Forbes does a disservice to the science that has been reported in the Peer reviewed Remote Sensing scientific journal.

    That said, looking through the published paper, I would say that this is a well-written, well-researched report which merits utmost attention.

    Those who are scientists, who have worked in science, and who have published as well, recognize that discrepancies like this are found and reported all the time. This work has to be scrutinized and folded in with all of the other major works to see if the big picture needs to be reformulated. And I am sure that this will be done. This is the exact mechanism which enables scientific understanding to move forward. Thus, I am not the least bit surprised to see this report.

    In the future, Forbes would do well to choose a scientist to summarize these new findings in an article, and leave the politics out of it!

    PS: I note that Spencer and Braswell do not mention the fact that water vapor is a global warming atmospheric constituent based on the same basic science, (the infrared radiative forcing theoretically expected from anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions), which demonstrates the same about atmospheric carbon dioxide gas. Moreover, carbon dioxide and water are the combustion products of the burning of fossil fuels. Therefore, could it be that the trapping of heat by the water vapor containing clouds may be anthropogenic related? I find it significant that Spencer and Braswell do not address the impact of both increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide and water vapor in the atmosphere. Thus, in my view, their research is incomplete.

  15. If fact, James Taylor of Forbes does a disservice to the science that has been reported in the Peer reviewed Remote Sensing scientific journal.

    James Taylor comes from the Heartland Institute, which is to say a libertarian propaganda outfit.

    If the science holds up (and it is yet to be subject to criticism), it’s heartening. However the propaganda spin put on it by Taylor is shown by the simple fact that this paper still supports global climate change. He’s pointing out a negative feedback that reduces the rate by which the globe heats – that the globe is heating is already observed fact.

    To quote the press release:

    HUNTSVILLE, Ala. (July 26, 2011) — Data from NASA’s Terra satellite shows that when the climate warms, Earth’s atmosphere is apparently more efficient at releasing energy to space than models used to forecast climate change have been programmed to “believe.”

    The result is climate forecasts that are warming substantially faster than the atmosphere, says Dr. Roy Spencer, a principal research scientist in the Earth System Science Center at The University of Alabama in Huntsville.

    That means, if it is true, we might have more time to change our energy use before we reach a catastrophic point. On the other hand, science on methane release from the permafrost suggests we may already be going over that cliff now.

    I can’t recall if it was Hoagie or Hube, but one of you w1ngnuts was saying “It’s too late to change anything, so why bother trying?”. Well, if this science holds up, maybe it’s not too late to change anything – so we should redouble our efforts before it is too late, surely?

    To give an analogy, this is a little like the debt ceiling crisis, with the GAO saying “we’ve discovered a trick to set the drop dead point from July to August”. That gave more time to find a solution – it didn’t resolve the problem.

    [retrieved from moderation - pH]

  16. More Bad Science Discovered:

    APNewsBreak: Arctic scientist under investigation

    By BECKY BOHRER – Associated Press | AP – 18 mins ago

    JUNEAU, Alaska (AP) — Just five years ago, Charles Monnett was one of the scientists whose observation that several polar bears had drowned in the Arctic Ocean helped galvanize the global warming movement.

    Now, the wildlife biologist is on administrative leave and facing accusations of scientific misconduct.

    The federal agency where he works told him he’s being investigated for “integrity issues,” but a watchdog group believes it has to do with the 2006 journal article about the bear.

    The group, Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, filed a complaint on his behalf Thursday with the agency, the U.S. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement.

    More here http://news.yahoo.com/apnewsbreak-arctic-scientist-under-investigation-082217993.html

  17. Perry wrote:

    Dana, any organization will have its zits. My objection is coloring an entire organization the same color as a zit, which is exactly what Breitbart, Hoyt, and O’Keefe do/did, and you love it – I understand that very well indeed!

    You think what Messrs O’Keefe and Breitbart and others uncovered was just a few blemishes, but I doubt it: my guess is that he’s simply found evidence of the blood-borne pathogen that permeates the entire organism. ACORN didn’t fold because they popped a zit; ACORN folded because it was corrupt through and through.

  18. Dana said: ACORN didn’t fold because they popped a zit; ACORN folded because it was corrupt through and through.

    No, it was not, it was helping the Ds, THAT was the problem the FAKE (through and through) Breitbart was doing his dirty tricks. He misrepresented the facts too. He’s a paid shyster.

    And all the powers that Lincoln warned of is exactly the folks he is working for. Republicans work for the big money, the war machine, and when too many decent Ds (not enough of them tho) get into office, it threatens their power. That is all it is about. Why don’t you start speaking up for humanity, the common man, instead of working for the banksters, Dana? You are a nice guy, you should start seeing more honestly and clearly to operate for us, the people, instead of the uber wealthy, which also seem to own your thinking process.

    ALBERT EINSTEIN: “The minority, the ruling class, at present, has the schools, and press, usually the Church as well, under its thumbs. This enable it to organize, an sway the emotions of the masses, and it makes tools of them.”

    JAMES MADISON: “The growing wealth acquired by them, the corporations, never fails to be a source of abuses.”

    I know you tire of these, but they continue to be relevant, more so now than ever.

Comments are closed.