James O'Keefe vs. CNN

[Snowboarder_Bo]

[The AP is reporting:

Conservative activist James O’Keefe has announced plans to release recordings Thursday morning that he says were made secretly inside CNN.

O’Keefe tells the network in an interview that the media is a “huge target” of his and he’s targeting CNN specifically because it “has a very important role as an arbiter of news.”

The network has drawn the ire of President Donald Trump, who has repeatedly labeled it “fake news.”

](http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_CNN_RECORDINGS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2017-02-23-07-18-06)IMO all of his previous efforts have been much ado about nothing, even if conservatives did find his ACORN smear enough fodder to destroy something they already hated. I admit I did particularly like how he got himself arrested and convicted in 2010.

I figured this belonged in the Pit because IMO he’s a jackass and a liar.

So what’ll it be this time? Another selectively edited controversy? A manufactured scandal? Or just another right-wing attention whore seeking attention and having it backfire on him again?

[GIGObuster]

In just to say that for less than what judges found against or how O’Keefe ended up settling out of court, mainstream networks would had unceremoniously canned the reporter ages ago.

That he is continuing to make hay in the conservative media and getting more money and recognition there should tell anyone with a brain about how trustworthy that right wing “news” media should be considered.

[Fotheringay-Phipps]

O’Keefe has undermined himself by some of his over-the-top antics, but his reporting is onto something.

See for example: The Acorn Sting Revisited from the NYT Public Editor.

[Evan_Drake]

I think he should do a Grand Exposé of the Federal Super Max prison in Colorado by getting arrested and convicted to 40 years.

[BigT]

@Fotheringay-Phipps

O’Keefe has undermined himself by some of his over-the-top antics, but his reporting is onto something.

See for example: The Acorn Sting Revisited from the NYT Public Editor.

Yip, F-P is defending the evil liar again since he’s on the conservative side.

Once you lie, everything you say is discredited. Just because one biased reporter went and talked to conservatives who were using the same tainted information to try and pretend something really happened, doesn’t change anything.

But you are the type who defends evil people, pretending they aren’t evil. Because you don’t seem to know the difference between good and evil, frankly.

[Fotheringay-Phipps]

Well I certainly don’t know the difference between BigT and a dimwit, that’s for sure.

You didn’t understand the article that I linked. Read it very slowly. Spend several days pondering it. Then come back.

[elucidator]

@Fotheringay-Phipps

O’Keefe has undermined himself by some of his over-the-top antics, but his reporting is onto something.

See for example: The Acorn Sting Revisited from the NYT Public Editor.

Dated March 20. 2010. The question appears to center on whether or not Mr. O’Queef dressed in his “White Boy Pimp” costume. In your mind, does the value of his investigative distorting rest on that point?

Did you notice this part?

…At one point, as the videos were being released, O’Keefe wore the get-up on Fox News, and a host said he was “dressed exactly in the same outfit he wore to these Acorn offices.” He did not argue…

Or this?

…The videos were heavily edited. The sequence of some conversations was changed…

Have you nothing better to do? Have you considered a hobby, like knitting?

[Chisquirrel]

@elucidator

Dated March 20. 2010. The question appears to center on whether or not Mr. O’Queef dressed in his “White Boy Pimp” costume. In your mind, does the value of his investigative distorting rest on that point?

Did you notice this part?

Or this?

Have you nothing better to do? Have you considered a hobby, like knitting?

He’s still spending several days pondering it. He doesn’t understand the story he linked. He’ll come back.

[Euphonious_Polemic]

@Chisquirrel

He’s still spending several days pondering it. He doesn’t understand the story he linked. He’ll come back.

… With the usual “defend an asshole Republican, and then deliver a juvenile insult to anyone who disagrees”. Predictable, if nothing else.

[GIGObuster]

@Fotheringay-Phipps

O’Keefe has undermined himself by some of his over-the-top antics, but his reporting is onto something.

See for example: The Acorn Sting Revisited from the NYT Public Editor.

:rolleyes:

Well, at least this is a teachable moment, you forgot to check what did happen to the ones that he accused of impropriety at acorn, besides O’Keefe having to settle out of court and apologizing to one of the workers in the first recordings because it became clear that he humored O’Keefe by giving what he wanted but it was clear that he was aware that O’keefe should be denounced if he was what he pretended to be then. And the ACORN worker did call the police reporting O’Keefe, something that the weasels in the right wing media and that opinion maker at the NYT forgot to report or to make and amendment later to his article.

And the last recording of ACORN by O’Keefe gave us another worker that showed that she did troll him because she, like the other early worker, suspected that O’keefe was a weasel indeed.

VIDEO – ACORN Worker Told James O’Keefe That He Looked Like Princess Diana

The report also notes that O’Keefe tried 3 times to get Vera to give fraudulent tax advice, and Vera ignored him. As Maddow reported, he kept the conversation going to try and get information to turn over to authorities.

As for Kaelke, we reported months ago that she was wise to O’Keefe’s game, and Brown’s report confirms this:

Kaelke told police investigators that she realized that this was a scam and decided to play along. (San Bernardino Police Report, Detective Baumgartner, dated September 15, 2009, at p. 1.) Kaelke told O’Keefe and Giles that ACORN would not approve of their business or of her giving them advice, but that she personally supported legalizing prostitution. (San Bernardino Tr. 2-3, 5, 14-15, 37.) She claimed Heidi Fleiss was a personal hero. She told them that she used to be a prostitute and gave them tips on keeping the business a secret. She suggested they set up the business as a massage parlor and sell vitamins as a cover. (San Bernardino Tr. at pp. 17-23.) When they expressed concern that neighbors might notice the underage El Salvadoran girls, she suggested they call the place a “group home.” (San Bernardino Tr. at p. 35.) When the group was discussing the abusive nature of pimps, Kaelke said she had killed her abusive ex-husband. She told a story about how she set up a self-defense claim by going to battered women shelters before the murder. (San Bernardino Tr. 26-27.)

Kaelke has stated that none of her claims were true and she was playing along with what she perceived as a joke. (San Bernardino Police Report, Detective Baumgartner, at p. 1.) At one point during the conversation she said, “if I didn’t know better and I don’t but I would think this is a total set up.” (San Bernardino Tr. 33.) Both of Kaelke’s former husbands are alive and have reported to law enforcement that Kaelke never attempted to harm either of them.

[Fotheringay-Phipps]

@elucidator

Dated March 20. 2010. The question appears to center on whether or not Mr. O’Queef dressed in his “White Boy Pimp” costume. In your mind, does the value of his investigative distorting rest on that point?

Did you notice this part?

Or this?

Remarkable how you managed to carefully select the aspects of the story which you think make your case, while leaving out the rest. Very similar to O’Keefe himself. I’ll help you out by posting some of what you saw fit to leave out:

With two associates, Michael McElroy and Rebecca Ruiz, I have reviewed the entire available public record, including the O’Keefe videos and what are represented on a conservative Web site as the full transcripts and audio of his visits to the Acorn offices. It is the same record from which FAIR and others are getting their alternative interpretation. I have talked with Andrew Breitbart, the conservative Web entrepreneur who arranged the release of the videos; Bertha Lewis, the chief executive of Acorn; and Scott Harshbarger, a former Massachusetts attorney general, and his associate, Amy Crafts, who were hired by Acorn last year to investigate what happened and to evaluate the group’s management.

[…]

Acorn’s supporters appear to hope that the whole story will fall apart over the issue of what O’Keefe wore: if that was wrong, everything else must be wrong. The record does not support them. If O’Keefe did not dress as a pimp, he clearly presented himself as one: a fellow trying to set up a woman — sometimes along with under-age girls — in a house where they would work as prostitutes. In Washington, he said the prostitution was to finance his future in politics. A worker for Acorn Housing, an allied group, warned him to stay away from the brothel lest someone “get wind that you got a house and that your girlfriend is over there running a house of women of the night. You will not have a career.”

FAIR said that in Brooklyn, O’Keefe and Giles seemed to be telling Acorn staffers that “they are attempting to buy a house to protect child prostitutes from an abusive pimp.” That’s right, but FAIR left out the part about their clear intention to operate a brothel, which the Acorn workers seemed to take in stride, with one warning: “Don’t get caught, ’cause it is against the law.”

The videos were heavily edited. The sequence of some conversations was changed. Some workers seemed concerned for Giles, one advising her to get legal help. In two cities, Acorn workers called the police. But the most damning words match the transcripts and the audio, and do not seem out of context. Harshbarger’s report to Acorn found no “pattern of illegal conduct” by its employees. But, he told me: “They said what they said. There’s no way to make this look good.”

ETA: O’Keefe had to settle because it’s illegal in CA to make these hidden recordings.

[GIGObuster]

Bottom line, this (and his early attempt at making a CNN reporter fall from grace with a stupid setup to cause a sex scandal) is what convinced me that O’Keefe method is to make others fall to boasting, exaggerations or trolling; and O’Keefe does not care if he was trolled in turn, he uses that trolling with a bit of editing to fool many willful suckers in the right wing.

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

@Fotheringay-Phipps

O’Keefe has undermined himself by some of his over-the-top antics, but his reporting is onto something.

See for example: The Acorn Sting Revisited from the NYT Public Editor.

James O’Keefe is on to one thing and one thing alone: a significant subsection of the population is so conflict-averse that you can get them to agree with nearly anything in the short run, and you can do it on video. He uses this blatantly fuckin obvious bit of human psychology to make these videos and to imply that organizations are doing terrible things, even though there’s precisely zero evidence that organizations are actually doing terrible things.

He’s basically using a party trick to scam Republicans into thinking there’s a problem.

[Fotheringay-Phipps]

@GIGObuster

Bottom line, this (and his early attempt at making a CNN reporter fall from grace with a stupid setup to cause a sex scandal) is what convinced me that O’Keefe method is to make others fall to boasting, exaggerations or trolling; and O’Keefe does not care if he was trolled in turn, he uses that trolling with a bit of editing to fool many willful suckers in the right wing.

As I said initially “O’Keefe has undermined himself by some of his over-the-top antics …”.

Big mistake to do that kind of stuff, because it gives partisans who want to just wave away everything he comes up with what to work with, and this can sometimes filter through to non-partisans as well.

@Left_Hand_of_Dorkness

James O’Keefe is on to one thing and one thing alone: a significant subsection of the population is so conflict-averse that you can get them to agree with nearly anything in the short run, and you can do it on video. He uses this blatantly fuckin obvious bit of human psychology to make these videos and to imply that organizations are doing terrible things, even though there’s precisely zero evidence that organizations are actually doing terrible things.

That’s not always what’s going on. But even where it is, a very large percentage of undercover sting operations use the same approach as O’Keefe. Do you apply this to all of them?

[Buck_Godot]

Back to the OP, I bet that the stunning expose that O’Keffe has is a few CNN staffers saying they don’t like Trump and are doing what they can to make him look bad.

Go figure, a president insults you and your profession and acts as a disgrace to his office, you might feel inclined to report negative things about him. I bet that if O’Keefe was around in 1972, he could catch Woodward and Bernstein saying bad things about Nixon.

[Buck_Godot]

@Fotheringay-Phipps

As I said initially “O’Keefe has undermined himself by some of his over-the-top antics …”.

Big mistake to do that kind of stuff, because it gives partisans who want to just wave away everything he comes up with what to work with, and this can sometimes filter through to non-partisans as well.That’s not always what’s going on. But even where it is, a very large percentage of undercover sting operations use the same approach as O’Keefe. Do you apply this to all of them?

Do undercover sting operations try to sell drugs to dozens of different people (most of whom decline) until they find some poor sucker who plays along and use that as evidence to incarcerate everyone who talked to them?

[running_coach]

@Fotheringay-Phipps

As I said initially “O’Keefe has undermined himself by some of his over-the-top antics …”.

Big mistake to do that kind of stuff, because it gives partisans who want to just wave away everything he comes up with what to work with, and this can sometimes filter through to non-partisans as well.That’s not always what’s going on. But even where it is, a very large percentage of undercover sting operations use the same approach as O’Keefe. Do you apply this to all of them?

I’m willing to bet they don’t get to show an edited video to the judge without providing all the original footage.

[bobot]

@running_coach

I’m willing to bet they don’t get to show an edited video to the judge without providing all the original footage.

Even the Chicago Police don’t get away with that! Anymore.

[GIGObuster]

@Fotheringay-Phipps

As I said initially “O’Keefe has undermined himself by some of his over-the-top antics …”.

Big mistake to do that kind of stuff, because it gives partisans who want to just wave away everything he comes up with what to work with, and this can sometimes filter through to non-partisans as well.That’s not always what’s going on. But even where it is, a very large percentage of undercover sting operations use the same approach as O’Keefe. Do you apply this to all of them?

:rolleyes:

First, while it is true that the trolling was used by O’keefe, that trolling is what told anyone that bothered to do research that O’keefe was punked, and so it was the right wing media and many other suckers out there. As I noted back then, adding poison pill items like “I killed my ex-husband” when the ex was alive and not abused at all was an item that serious sting operators do check before running away with it.

Second, the fact is that many on the right are **still **being punked by this bit of misinformation by O’keefe is also telling us the inadequacies of relying on right wing sources of information, because while that cite comes from the NYT, it is an **opinion **piece that has been still pointed at by many right wing media sources and that they have not made any corrections to their original reporting. Meaning that the misinformation and chicanery of many sources on the right will continue.

[SteveG1]

@Snowboarder_Bo

The AP is reporting:IMO all of his previous efforts have been much ado about nothing, even if conservatives did find his ACORN smear enough fodder to destroy something they already hated. I admit I did particularly like how he got himself arrested and convicted in 2010.

I figured this belonged in the Pit because IMO he’s a jackass and a liar.

So what’ll it be this time? Another selectively edited controversy? A manufactured scandal? Or just another right-wing attention whore seeking attention and having it backfire on him again?

I just want to know, why isn’t that rancid pile of festering shit, NOT in prison?