# James O'Keefe vs. CNN **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [February 23, 2017, 2:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/james-okeefe-vs-cnn/780552 "2017-02-23T14:38:02Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2017, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/james-okeefe-vs-cnn/780552/41 "2017-02-23T20:02:18Z")
> [@VinylTurnip](#): > > What I love about these threads is the rare opportunity for all of us to come together for a moment, however brief. O’Keefe is such a consummate slimeball, so morally bankrupt, so transparent, and so unassailably deserving of scorn and ridicule that no one, regardless of political affiliation feels compelled to debase himself by > > Oh. Yep, and him applying an out of date fig leaf to it just adds to the self-pile-on. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2017, 8:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/james-okeefe-vs-cnn/780552/42 "2017-02-23T20:09:36Z")
O’Keefe will need several lifetimes to overcome the negative credibility he has constructed for himself. The reasonable default position for now is to reject anything he claims on any topic. ---
**Author:** ![VinylTurnip](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/b2d939/32.png) [@VinylTurnip](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/VinylTurnip)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2017, 9:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/james-okeefe-vs-cnn/780552/43 "2017-02-23T21:56:03Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > Hmm … I seem to have offended somehow. Very unusual, but it does happen. _James and **F-P** , sittin’ in a tree…_ ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2017, 10:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/james-okeefe-vs-cnn/780552/44 "2017-02-23T22:02:13Z")
I seem to recall seeing that type of line used before. Guy like you needs to come up with something better. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2017, 7:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/james-okeefe-vs-cnn/780552/45 "2017-02-24T07:57:38Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > ETA: O’Keefe had to settle because it’s illegal in CA to make these hidden recordings. Just one more thing, almost forgot to notice that even O’Keefe had to admit that: > [@](#): > > In the documents, O’Keefe says he “regrets any pain” he caused Juan Carlos Vera, who was surreptitiously interviewed by O’Keefe in August 2009, according to the Los Angeles Times. The video appears to show Vera agreeing to help O’Keefe and another activist, Hannah Giles, smuggle young girls into the Untied States to work as prostitutes. **O’Keefe also admitted in the settlement he didn’t know Vera had contracted police after their conversation when he distributed the video.** So, yeah, one could hang to the grasping straw that what they said was bad, but as pointed before, the illegal sounding things were said in this case to humor O’Keefe (clearly in this and other cases items like smuggling of young girls was **not the** **intention** of Vera **nor there was ever any evidence of such a thing taking place** ). The trolling in that case had another reason: there was a concern by Vera to see how deep that yahoo in front of him was involved in the smuggling. ‘Too many leading questions to find loopholes or workarounds = he is likely a smuggler’ was then in the mind of Vera as he reported. Leading then to his call to the police right after the not dressed like a pimp “[pimp](http://www.dictionary.com/browse/pimp)”\* left the office. - First “pimp” there is the 1st traditional definition, the second “pimp” refers to the 2nd definition: “a despicable person.” ---
**Author:** ![Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/budget_player_cadet/32/205_2.png) [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Budget_Player_Cadet)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2017, 8:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/james-okeefe-vs-cnn/780552/46 "2017-02-24T08:53:35Z")
Copying myself from another forum… > [@](#): > > So is it just me or is the latest O’Keefe emission a whole lot of nothing? > > Just to pick a random conservative outlet covering it… > > [http://www.lifezette.com/polizette/cnn-editor-slammed-climate-change-doubters-creationists/](http://www.lifezette.com/polizette/cnn-editor-slammed-climate-change-doubters-creationists/) > > So what’s the critique? > > - A network anchor saying that global warming denialists are like creationists and that the science is in (which, as far as damning statements, is right up there with “oil spills are bad for the environment”) > - That same anchor admitting to a bias in favor of Obama, and complaining about right-wing spin of the same (because clearly, [the right is as clean and honest as fresh snow when it comes to their reporting on Obama](http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2015/feb/26/fact-checks-behind-daily-shows-50-fox-news-lies/)) > - An assignment desk editor calling FOX News horrible (see above link, and my commentary on the global warming thing) > - A disagreement on which polls to use when talking about Justice Sotomayor. > > So in hundreds of hours of footage from inside CNN, we apparently have two things which even remotely indicate any kind of liberal bias. > > First, we have an anchor who is a liberal complaining about the way the right dishonestly attacks Obama. However, the fact that FOX, Breitbart, Limbaugh, and many others viciously and dishonestly attacked Obama really shouldn’t be in dispute at this point. The sheer number of lies about Obama coming out of the right wing was kind of astonishing - my personal favorite being their misrepresentation of “You didn’t build that”, although there really are so many to choose from. > > Secondly, and slightly more damning, is CNN using a slightly dated poll in a story about Justice Sotomayor, before new news hit. Now, leaving aside just how small these potatoes are (no, O’Keefe, it’s not the same thing as fabricating a poll), apparently an editor at CNN agreed with the person in question. Which would seem to be decent evidence against the alleged bias. If CNN has a policy not to use Rassmussen, that’s hardly evidence of bias. And as [digg](http://digg.com/2017/james-okeefe-cnn-leaks-tapes-poll-project-veritas) points out, a Gallup poll done later found results similar to CNN - not to Rasmussen. > > So all in all, kind of a nothingburger. I was promised red meat, and got a sloppy joe that was 90% tomato sauce. What gives? ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2017, 11:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/james-okeefe-vs-cnn/780552/47 "2017-02-24T11:43:50Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > 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? 😕 Are you kidding? Shit yes I do. The “very large percentage” of undercover sting operations using this approach are illegal sting operations. When you entice someone to commit a crime they weren’t planning on committing is [entrapment](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entrapment). Are you unfamiliar with this? Granted, what O’Keefe did technically wasn’t entrapment. He didn’t have law enforcement powers; he didn’t actually convince them to commit real crimes. And he didn’t so much entice them to say bad things, as he made the situation unpleasant enough that his victims thought telling him what he wanted to hear was the easiest way to get rid of him. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2017, 1:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/james-okeefe-vs-cnn/780552/48 "2017-02-24T13:49:08Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > 😕 Are you kidding? Shit yes I do. The “very large percentage” of undercover sting operations using this approach are illegal sting operations. When you entice someone to commit a crime they weren’t planning on committing is [entrapment](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entrapment). Are you unfamiliar with this? What O’Keefe did is not entrapment, not “technically” and not otherwise. > [@](#): > > And he didn’t so much entice them to say bad things, as he made the situation unpleasant enough that his victims thought telling him what he wanted to hear was the easiest way to get rid of him. You have no basis for this assumption other than the fact that you _like_ those groups, and prefer to think that they were just “telling him what he wanted to hear”. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2017, 3:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/james-okeefe-vs-cnn/780552/49 "2017-02-24T15:30:47Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > What O’Keefe did is not entrapment, not “technically” and not otherwise. > > You have no basis for this assumption other than the fact that you _like_ those groups, and prefer to think that they were just “telling him what he wanted to hear”. OK ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2017, 3:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/james-okeefe-vs-cnn/780552/50 "2017-02-24T15:33:38Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > What O’Keefe did is not entrapment, not “technically” and not otherwise. > > You have no basis for this assumption other than the fact that you _like_ those groups, and prefer to think that they were just “telling him what he wanted to hear”. Nope, that was O’Keeffe telling you and many others what many on the right wanted to hear. And the evidence tell us that regarding the pimp of truth we already know many examples were what his targets said were things that he did want to hear, simply because there is no evidence whatsoever that things like the smuggling or killings took place. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2017, 4:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/james-okeefe-vs-cnn/780552/51 "2017-02-24T16:27:53Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Nope, that was O’Keeffe telling you and many others what many on the right wanted to hear. And the evidence tell us that regarding the pimp of truth we already know many examples were what his targets said were things that he did want to hear, simply because there is no evidence whatsoever that things like the smuggling or killings took place. Oh, hush. FP loves to read my mind, and he’s damned near perfect at it. When he can’t refute a clear argument, it’s his first refuge. My skepticism of O’Keefe has nothing to do with O’Keefe’s documented habit of lying out his ass. Of course I don’t think it was entrapment, despite the entire absence of evidence that ACORN workers were helping real pimps and traffickers out. No, it’s only because I’m a liberal: I ignore the mountains of reason and facts that support calling O’Keefe a scam artist, and only call him a scam artist because of my ideology. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2017, 4:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/james-okeefe-vs-cnn/780552/52 "2017-02-24T16:31:45Z")
You’re confusing your own empty assertions with “a clear argument”. You’ve not presented any sort of reason to believe that the people O’Keefe interacted with would not have done what they did had O’Keefe not convinced them to do it, which is what entrapment is about. What you did is simply assert that these people only said these things to get O’Keefe to go away. This is based on either your own mind-reading ability or your ideology, and my money is on the latter. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2017, 4:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/james-okeefe-vs-cnn/780552/53 "2017-02-24T16:40:31Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > You’re confusing your own empty assertions with “a clear argument”. > > You’ve not presented any sort of reason to believe that the people O’Keefe interacted with would not have done what they did had O’Keefe not convinced them to do it, which is what entrapment is about. > > What you did is simply assert that these people only said these things to get O’Keefe to go away. This is based on either your own mind-reading ability or your ideology, and my money is on the latter. …or, you know, on the absence of any evidence they ever did anything remotely like that except when O’Keefe pressured them into it. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2017, 4:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/james-okeefe-vs-cnn/780552/54 "2017-02-24T16:45:42Z")
Normally there’s no evidence of people doing wrong things. That’s the whole point of exposes. You can’t just wave away exposes by saying “_well besides for this expose what’s the other evidence that they do things of this sort? Entrapment!_” Just putting the words “pressured them into it” without any evidence of O’Keefe applying any sort of “pressure” is worthless. ---
**Author:** ![Chisquirrel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6bbea6/32.png) [@Chisquirrel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chisquirrel)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2017, 4:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/james-okeefe-vs-cnn/780552/55 "2017-02-24T16:51:06Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > You’re confusing your own empty assertions with “a clear argument”. > > You’ve not presented any sort of reason to believe that the people O’Keefe interacted with would not have done what they did had O’Keefe not convinced them to do it, which is what entrapment is about. > > What you did is simply assert that these people only said these things to get O’Keefe to go away. This is based on either your own mind-reading ability or your ideology, and my money is on the latter. I think the fact that several called the police right after he left speaks more to their states of mind than your fantasy. That investigations in New York and California both found no evidence of wrongdoing by ACORN doesn’t exactly help your position. This is a guy who has plead guilty to entering a federal office under false pretenses and attempted to smear and discredit a journalist investigating him. It’s good to know breaking the law is perfectly fine if you’re validating Republican wet dreams. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2017, 5:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/james-okeefe-vs-cnn/780552/56 "2017-02-24T17:05:04Z")
> [@Chisquirrel](#): > > I think the fact that several called the police right after he left speaks more to their states of mind than your fantasy. That investigations in New York and California both found no evidence of wrongdoing by ACORN doesn’t exactly help your position. Some did call the police, some didn’t. No expose snares everyone who is targeted and it’s not logical to say that because some guys were innocent then everyone else must be too. Investigations by law enforcement focus on whether illegal acts have been done, not whether morally reprehensible acts have been done. > [@](#): > > This is a guy who has plead guilty to entering a federal office under false pretenses and attempted to smear and discredit a journalist investigating him. > > It’s good to know breaking the law is perfectly fine if you’re validating Republican wet dreams. There’s nowhere in this thread that I’ve said or implied that everything O’Keefe has done is fine or that he’s a fine guy or anything of the sort. All I said is that his reporting is “onto something”. The rest is your own “wet dream”. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2017, 5:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/james-okeefe-vs-cnn/780552/57 "2017-02-24T17:09:14Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > Normally there’s no evidence of people doing wrong things. That’s the whole point of exposes. Goddamn, dude. The point of exposés is to show people **who are already doing wrong**. [Look at a list of exposés](http://flavorwire.com/511310/10-groundbreaking-documentary-exposes-of-closed-secret-worlds): -Going Clear exposes Scientologists. It doesn’t trick people into agreeing that Scientology is a good thing. -Prophet’s Prey exposes Warren Jeffs. It doesn’t trick people into marrying underage girls. -Sons of Perdition exposes a different aspect of FLDS. It doesn’t trick people into abandoning their teenage sons. -The Mormon Proposition (damn, there are a lot of exposés of Mormons on this list!) exposes Mormon involvement in Prop 8. It doesn’t trick people into funding FOcus on the Family. -Trouble in Amish Paradise exposes cruelty among Amish. It doesn’t trick people into excommunicating skeptics. -Blood in the Face exposes Neonazis. It doesn’t trick people into saying racist shit. Are you seeing a pattern? A real exposé finds an actual ill being done in the world and exposes people doing it. The evidence of the ill comes first, the uncovering is a response. O’Keefe had no evidence of this ill’s occurrence. He manufactured that evidence. > [@](#): > > You can’t just wave away exposes by saying “_well besides for this expose what’s the other evidence that they do things of this sort? Entrapment!_” That’s precisely how one makes an entrapment defense: you show that there’s no evidence the person was going to commit a crime, other than the response of the person to the undercover agent convincing them to commit the crime. Besides the undercover agent, what other evidence do you have that they do things of this sort? If none, the entrapment defense stands. I get the impression you know very little about entrapment as a legal concept, is that correct? ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2017, 5:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/james-okeefe-vs-cnn/780552/58 "2017-02-24T17:20:31Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > Goddamn, dude. The point of exposés is to show people **who are already doing wrong**. [Look at a list of exposés](http://flavorwire.com/511310/10-groundbreaking-documentary-exposes-of-closed-secret-worlds): > -Going Clear exposes Scientologists. It doesn’t trick people into agreeing that Scientology is a good thing. > -Prophet’s Prey exposes Warren Jeffs. It doesn’t trick people into marrying underage girls. > -Sons of Perdition exposes a different aspect of FLDS. It doesn’t trick people into abandoning their teenage sons. > -The Mormon Proposition (damn, there are a lot of exposés of Mormons on this list!) exposes Mormon involvement in Prop 8. It doesn’t trick people into funding FOcus on the Family. > -Trouble in Amish Paradise exposes cruelty among Amish. It doesn’t trick people into excommunicating skeptics. > -Blood in the Face exposes Neonazis. It doesn’t trick people into saying racist shit. > > Are you seeing a pattern? A real exposé finds an actual ill being done in the world and exposes people doing it. The evidence of the ill comes first, the uncovering is a response. > > O’Keefe had no evidence of this ill’s occurrence. He manufactured that evidence. You’re just playing with words. You list some exposes and say “it doesn’t trick people into …” with the implication that O’Keefe was tricking people into doing something. But the basic part you’re missing is any basis for your assertion that he tricked them or pressured them or whatever word you’re so casually slipping in there. The point of an expose is that it’s hard to find evidence of things that people might by inclined to deny. You present a situation where you suspect that people might be inclined to do wrong and if they do it in this instance then it’s evidence that they might be inclined to do it otherwise. > [@](#): > > That’s precisely how one makes an entrapment defense: you show that there’s no evidence the person was going to commit a crime, other than the response of the person to the undercover agent convincing them to commit the crime. Besides the undercover agent, what other evidence do you have that they do things of this sort? If none, the entrapment defense stands. > > I get the impression you know very little about entrapment as a legal concept, is that correct? The opposite is correct. It appears that you don’t know anything about entrapment. You might want to read the opening paragraph of your own link upthread. _“In criminal law, entrapment is a practice whereby a law enforcement agent induces a person to commit a criminal offence that the person would have otherwise been unlikely to commit. It ‘is the conception and planning of an offence by an officer, and his procurement of its commission by one who would not have perpetrated it except for the trickery, persuasion or fraud of the officer’”_ (emphasis added). The fact that there’s no other evidence of the guy doing this type of thing in other instances is not evidence of entrapment. What you need is evidence that the guy was unlikely to do it other than the officer taking extraordinary methods to get the guy to do it. So if the FBI offers a politician a bribe or offers to sell someone drugs etc. that is not entrapment. If the guy turns them down and they hassle the guy until he agrees or the like then you get into entrapment issues. Your understanding of entrapment is not uncommon but is wrong nonetheless. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2017, 5:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/james-okeefe-vs-cnn/780552/59 "2017-02-24T17:29:04Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > …or, you know, on the absence of any evidence they ever did anything remotely like that except when O’Keefe pressured them into it. Or even simpler: their targets were giving him rope to see if he was going to hang himself. And what was eventually found in the courts and the settlements was that O’Keefe did so. Of course, that an organization that helped poor people people vote and to offer other services was removed with thought crimes that were not even that, is considered a great accomplishment by willful ignorants on the right. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2017, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/james-okeefe-vs-cnn/780552/60 "2017-02-24T17:31:41Z")
> [@Chisquirrel](#): > > I think the fact that several called the police right after he left speaks more to their states of mind than your fantasy. That investigations in New York and California both found no evidence of wrongdoing by ACORN doesn’t exactly help your position. > > This is a guy who has plead guilty to entering a federal office under false pretenses and attempted to smear and discredit a journalist investigating him. You forgot “[attempted to bribe protestors to riot at Trump’s inauguration](http://boingboing.net/2017/01/13/james-okeefe-caught-trying-t.html)”. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/james-okeefe-vs-cnn/780552.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/james-okeefe-vs-cnn/780552.md?page=4)