Media Matters: Not-so-Breitbart and the story of James O'Keefe
Back in September, right-wing activist James O'Keefe told Fox News host Glenn Beck that he was "willing to serve prison time" for his work.
That just may happen.
According to an affidavit from the FBI, O'Keefe and three others were arrested on Monday in connection with an alleged plot to "interfer[e]" with the phone system in Sen. Mary Landrieu's New Orleans office. O'Keefe is perhaps best known for the heavily edited and misleading undercover videos he and Hannah Giles shot of low-level ACORN employees while the right-wing duo were dressed as a pimp and prostitute, an escapade that itself may have violated state criminal statutes.
The New York Times reports that "the four men, two of whom were dressed as telephone repairmen, were charged with entering a federal property on false pretenses with the purpose of committing a felony. The crime charged is itself a felony that carries a penalty of up to 10 years in prison."
As Media Matters' Eric Hananoki noted, O'Keefe's three alleged accomplices -- Joseph Basel, Robert Flanagan, and Stan Dai -- are right-wing activists as well. Basel was the founder of a conservative campus publication at the University of Minnesota-Morris, which, like the campus publication started by O'Keefe at Rutgers University, received funding from the conservative Leadership Institute's "Balance in Media" grant. Flanagan, the son of acting U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Louisiana William Flanagan, reportedly works at the conservative Pelican Institute in New Orleans, just half a block from Landrieu's office. Dai received $5,000 from the right-wing Phillips Foundation's Ronald Reagan Future Leaders Scholarship Program. Additionally, during his time as a campus conservative, Dai reportedly co-wrote "a satirical work entitled The Penis Monologues, apparently a takeoff on the Vagina Monologues."
News of the four's arrest spread quickly Tuesday.
Because Fox News had showered O'Keefe's undercover video work targeting ACORN with near wall-to-wall coverage, one would have hoped the conservative network would provide comparable coverage of the arrest -- it did not. In fact, a Media Matters study comparing coverage of the day following the release of O'Keefe and Giles' first ACORN tape and the day news of O'Keefe's arrest broke found that Fox News provided 13 times more coverage to the video.
Fox News' first segment on O'Keefe's arrest was as funny as it was disappointing (view it here). During the report, assignment manager Tim Gaughan called the news a "very weird story that probably needs a lot of context and a lot of looking into." Sage advice -- too bad the network often didn't offer ACORN the same deference.
It really shouldn't be much of a surprise that Fox News handled the O'Keefe arrest with such kid gloves. After the release of his ACORN videos, Fox and other media conservatives lavished praise on O'Keefe. Beck called him "courageous." Andrew Breitbart -- more on him in a bit -- said that O'Keefe "is already well on his way to being one of the great journalists" and that he deserved a Pulitzer Prize. Sean Hannity applauded him as a "pioneer in journalism." Bill O'Reilly said he deserved a "congressional medal." Right-wing author Ann Coulter said O'Keefe was "so magnificent." National Review editor Rich Lowry said he deserved an "award for impactful guerilla journalism." On Fox News Sunday, Chris Wallace featured O'Keefe as "Power Player of the Week." And when news came that O'Keefe might be sued by ACORN or its staffers over the videos, Hannity and Breitbart led the conservative media fundraising campaign for his defense.
The fact that the right-wing media were so smitten with O'Keefe no doubt accounts for their skittish, measured response to the arrest. The Fox News website Fox Nation even posted a headline that read " 'There's Much More to This Story.' "
Perhaps no one in the conservative media has more to lose over this story than the previously mentioned Breitbart, a protégé of Internet gossip Matt Drudge and proprietor of a variety of right-wing websites including BigGovernment.com. After all, he was first to champion the undercover ACORN videos O'Keefe and Giles shot last year.
Breitbart claimed that he was "out of the loop on this" and released a public statement to some in the press saying he had "no knowledge" "or connection to" O'Keefe's actions. Breitbart also admitted during an interview with conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt that he pays O'Keefe a "fair salary" so that "when he puts a story out there, it's on the Breitbart sites, the Big sites, that he can tell people what transpired." He reiterated during that interview that he was not connected with O'Keefe's actions in Landrieu's office.
It's been entertaining watching Breitbart lecture others on journalistic ethics when he's shown such little regard for truth in his own work. In fact, according to a report released this week by Media Matters, Breitbart's "Big" websites -- Big Hollywood, Big Government, and Big Journalism -- as well as his Breitbart.tv website, have in recent months laid claim to many "exclusives," touting controversial and sensationalist storylines that have been picked up by other conservative media outlets, from Fox News on down. However, a closer examination reveals that many of Breitbart's "scoops" have been based on speculation, gross distortions, and outright falsehoods.
Later in the week, Breitbart brought his ACORN video lies and full-throated defense of O'Keefe to MSNBC, where he was subjected to a grilling by David Shuster that was followed up by an interview with Media Matters' Eric Boehlert, who said Breitbart's type of journalism produces "the kind of Johnny Knoxville situation we get down in New Orleans."
Ultimately, Breitbart predicted "there will be tape to vindicate these four pranksters." Yep, the man who previously said O'Keefe deserved a Pulitzer is now calling him a "prankster." How's that for spin?
Breitbart continued to function as O'Keefe's de facto public relations flack as the week came to an end, posting a statement that "[o]n reflection, I could have used a different approach to this investigation" on his websites. Of course, Fox News is doing its part, trumpeting news of an exclusive O'Keefe interview with Hannity coming next week.
So, how on earth could James O'Keefe think for even a minute that these types of actions might be a good idea? The answer to that question can be found in his own words from just two weeks ago.
During an interview with Adam Weinberg of The Centurion -- the right-wing student publication at Rutgers University that claims O'Keefe as a "founding editor" -- Breitbart's protégé said, "The more bold you are, the more opportunities will be open to you. The less bold you are, the less opportunities in life will be open to you." He went on: "[T]he more you put yourself out there and you take those calculated risks -- the contrary of what people actually think is going to happen -- you're actually going to get opportunities."
That's the life lesson O'Keefe learned from his relationship with Andrew Breitbart -- the man who made him a right-wing star and Fox News celebrity.
Ultimately, a jury of O'Keefe's peers may decide his fate, but it should be lost on no one that Breitbart and his allies at Fox News share in the responsibility for what has been alleged to have transpired.
Other major stories
Right-wing media and the State of Dis-Union
President Obama's first State of the Union address provided a wonderful opportunity to assess the state of conservative media. The result? It's not looking good.
Following up on a host of assertions that Obama had little to show for his first year in office, Hannity kicked things off by offering a pre-buttal on Monday and Tuesday, referring to the upcoming speech as "propaganda" not once, but twice. On Wednesday, Beck promised his audience that he would watch the address, even though he said that the thought made him "want to hang" himself. John Stossel, also now part of the Fox family, helpfully suggested that the president use his time to apologize for his arrogance, while Neil Cavuto (yes, he's with Fox too -- spot a trend?) predicted that Obama might deliver the longest State of the Union in history. Soon, right-wing comedian Dennis Miller had accused Democrats of acting like the Menendez brothers. Newly minted Fox News contributor Sarah Palin was even beamed in live from Wasilla, Alaska, to remind viewers not to be fooled: Despite his words, the president still planned to "fundamentally transform this country." And then the speech started.
At least everyone was keeping an open mind.
During the remarks, National Review's Jonah Goldberg took the high road, tweeting that "Pelosi's got a really weird, glassy-eyed, Bride of Chucky thing going." NRO's blog The Corner also objected to Joe Biden's behavior after the vice president had the audacity to clap while other people were clapping. "It's not about you," wrote John Hood. "It will never be about you. Just relax and try not to distract attention from your boss by whispering under your breath or mugging for the camera." Appropriately, a short time later, the president chided "TV pundits" for "reduc[ing] serious debates to silly arguments."
As soon as Obama had concluded, the thoughtful reviews came pouring in. "The president looks like a jerk tonight," opined Hood. Stossel said Obama "certainly didn't sound humbled," as he should have. RedState's Erick Erickson thought that Obama's jokes during the speech "were cocky and snide," adding that the remarks constituted a "declaration of war on the free market." CNN hosted Erickson to discuss Obama's address. Fortunately, Roland Martin was there to offer a fact-check for Erickson's words -- the kind of balance Fox couldn't bring itself to entertain when assembling its guest lists.
The next day, conservative media figures were, in a word, grumpy. Beck revisited the theme of Obama's arrogance (a common refrain) and accused him of lying, as did many on the right. He compared Obama's relationship with the America people to that of a husband cheating on his wife (he doesn't respect us, in case you were wondering). He even called the president a "punk" for his criticism of a recent Supreme Court decision lifting limits on corporations' ability to make certain election-related expenses (Bill O'Reilly, Megyn Kelly, and Matt Drudge also attacked Obama's Supreme Court criticism, even though Obama's comments were in line with the views of four justices). Beck derided Obama's "enemies list" and suggested that the chiding of TV pundits was all about him. (Who's arrogant now, Glenn?) Then, feeling guilty, he toned it back and tried to be the bigger person, inquiring as to "how many children could be fed" with the money "in plastic surgery" between Pelosi and Biden.
Rush Limbaugh compared the remarks to "a speech by Hugo Chavez or Fidel Castro" and likened Pelosi, who also clapped during the speech, to "a trained seal at Sea World." He accused Obama of dividing the country by bringing up equal pay for women and said that passing legislation with a majority of votes in Congress is "what dictators do." And finally, not to be outdone, America's Mayor, Rudy Giuliani, voiced his dismay about the fact that Obama never said "war" during his remarks. (The claim was false, and Fox News' Steve Doocy had to offer a correction.)
It's worth noting that one significant problem persisted even outside of the conservative media constellation. Despite reports that "don't ask, don't tell" would be tackled in Obama's State of the Union address, the initial lineup of cable and broadcast network hosts and commentators offering analysis immediately following the speech included only one openly LGBT figure, MSNBC's Rachel Maddow.
The state of the media is, well, not very good.
This week's media columns
This week's media columns from the Media Matters senior fellows: Eric Boehlert asks if Fox News' coverage equals a GOP campaign contribution; Jamison Foser looks at Sally Quinn's Washington (it isn't pretty); and Karl Frisch discusses the shadowy world of corporate media policy governing political and issue-advocacy commercials.
Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube
Media Matters maintains active online communities on the nation's leading social networking sites. Be sure to join us on Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube to join in on the discussion.
Media Matters Minute now on YouTube
For some time now, radio shows and stations throughout the country have been carrying the Media Matters Minute, a daily, minute-long recap of our work topped off with the "most outrageous comment" of the day. We encourage you to subscribe (YouTube / iTunes / RSS) to the daily Minute podcast, hosted by Media Matters' Ben Fishel.
Special thanks to John Santore, who contributed to the production of this week's wrap-up.
This weekly wrap-up was compiled and edited by Karl Frisch, a senior fellow at Media Matters for America. Frisch also contributes to County Fair, a media blog featuring links to progressive media criticism from around the Web, as well as original commentary. You can follow him on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube or sign up to receive his columns by email.
James O'Keefe, will he turn on Breitbart? Lets hope for Sooner.
It's a sad day when a Criminal act is called a Prank.
What is more dangerous attacking a U.S. Senator or selling Crank?
Speak truth to power.
Mr. News
Go to O'Keefe's transcripts and find what he accuses ACORN of doing. Find advice on setting up a child prostitution ring, find what you and he accuse ACORN of doing and paste it in your posts.
Here is the Baltimore transcript:
http://biggovernment.com/2009/09/10/complete-acorn-baltimore-prostitution-investigation-transcript/
You can find the other transcripts on that site. Post your replies and show me he's legit.
Since I get to play by conservative rules any time I want, what I just said is sufficient for guaranteed proof, without even having to go back and find where I heard it from.
O'Keefe told Chris Wallace, in a puff piece last year that declared O'Keefe a "Power Player" that, in reference to liberals...
That isn't exactly the mindset of a journalist. But he's surely learned from his Godfather, Breitbart who said this to Hugh Hewitt a couple of days ago when asked if he had known what O'Keefe was up to, would he have tried to stop him?
So if Breitbart knew that his protege and employee was pn his way to New Orleans to commit a felony, he would have remained silent. Nice.
Now O'Keefe has issued a statement that is packed with lies. Which I took great pleasure in ripping apart.
The way prosecutors now go, with four suspects, is investigate further and start laying on more charges, until the pals start cracking and pointing fingers. If Mr. Breitbart financed this, and if it can be shown that he knew something, he is in big trouble too.
What is it with the right and wiretapping, huh? Do they think they have a divine right to snoop?
BTW, just to add a note about Stan Dai, he is not simply some 'collegiate prankster' -- he has connections to the US intelligence community, has taught classes in 'irregular' warfare, and was on their payroll until 2008. (Read Lindsay Beyerstein, "James Bond Wannabe Part of Right-Wing Plot to Tamper with Senator's Phones" here, AlterNet.org, Jan. 28, 2010, for further information.)
I have no idea what these buffoons were after at Landrieu's HQ, but if Dai was there, you can be sure it wasn't just for the purposes stated by the Gang of Four. (I recall that initial reports on the Watergate break-in claimed the burglars were just some overzealous low-level Nixon campaign workers before James McCord was revealed to be a former CIA agent, and G. Gordon Liddy's record as one of 'Hoover's Boys' at the FBI, as well as his work with the White House 'Plumbers,' was discovered. I also recall that, at first, no one could figure out why Nixon would bug the Dem HQ at the Watergate. Similarly, I think the true facts regarding what miserable treachery O'Keefe and his Crew were trying to perpetrate, as well as the financiers of this operation, will emerge -- perhaps they've even pulled this before.)
Also, thanks to MMfA for the best laugh I've had all day -- John Stossel called someone 'arrogant'? Sweet Lord.
I'm not sure if Media Matters or not, but your totally biased, singing to the left, toting the party line opinion, certainly does NOT.
So much for objective journalism. You know not neutrality, nonpartisanship, fairness, nor professionalism.
You sir, are a hack. And not a very good one at that. Someday, perhaps in the future, you'll get a good quality lesson in newsgathering and reporting.
Until then................take that tool out of your mouth.
You sound ridiculous.
Is there any comparison between those incidents and O'Keefe getting busted for his alleged activities? Well, no. Because going to bars and getting into fights has nothing to do with being a pizza delivery person. What O'Keefe was doing has absolutely everything to do with being a right-wing activist. I'm sure that Breitbart had an agreement with O'Keefe "Make sure I don't have specific knowledge of your plans," but there's a big difference between that and the "going to a bar and getting into a fight" situation.
I'm calling it now. He will not get convicted of a felony. I'm doubting it even goes to trial. He will be punished no doubt, but he won't server prison time.
No they don't. That's like when they said Bill O'Reilly was partly to blame for Dr. Tiller's murder.
This will go to a trial, unless of course, they plea out, and end up in prison. Which is possible.
O'Reilly's rhetoric about Dr. Tiller surely didn't help. As we've been told time and again, FoxNews has the BEST ratings out there. Are you telling me that someone watching O'Relly, with him RAILING against Dr. Tiller on many nights, and calling him a killer, had nothing to do with him getting shot in his church in front of his family?
O'Reilly was ethically responsible for Dr. Tiller's murder. Legally, not so much, but ethically and morally, you betcha. Do you understand the difference?
Hmmmm, let's see if some of us can recall back to the early days of rap music videos and MTV. Tipper Gore ran a successful campaign for the "Parental Guidance" stickers that now are now commonplace on CDS because in HER OPINION the rappers were responsible for murders, rape, disrespect, etc. toward women and others due to the content of their music despite THEIR constitutional rights. Of course, some of you may argue that this case of censorship and nothing like O'Reilly spouting his hate.
So, would you please explain to me how that differs from O'Reilly's daily spate of "Tiller the Baby Killer," and his being partially responsible for Dr. Tiller's murder? Shouldn't FOX and other entertainment media outlets also have to post "warnings" of violent material being aired on their shows? I know, I know, we can always turn the channel/dial, but how many folks buy into what O'Reilly and his ilk have to say, kinda like kids being influenced by "gangsta" rap and are sick enough to buy into the suggestions being thrown out there?
Thanks for reminding me that with all that's gone on, we've at least quarantined almost all of the evil in one place.
The rest of the media is filled to the rafters with hideously stupid people who are abdicating even the basest semblance of their duty, but at least they aren't trying to destroy the country.
As has been reported at Brad Blog and elsewhere, according to one investigation, when he appeared at each and every office, he was dressed like a college student - in slacks and a button down shirt.(http://www.proskauer.com/files/uploads/report2.pdf) He didn't even say that he was a pimp. He told them that he was her boyfriend and that they were seeking help escaping an abusive pimp. See it's all theater, not even particularly good theater, and you fell for it.
Obviously, I'm guessing that you got most of your info from FOX. Did FOX's employees get fooled. I don't think so. I can't prove it, but I think they knew, pretty much the whole time that they were pushing a fraud. There were enough bells and whistles with this that they had to suspect the truth, but they saw it for its propaganda purposes only.
Such a sad, sad life you lead.
http://rottenacorn.com/activityMap.html
OK. I get it! You robbed the bank but never spent the money! Make sure you tell the cops this and I'm sure they will just give you a warning.
Your false analogy is showing.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-atlas/acorn-is-back-in-the-news_b_438324.html
So again, what fraud and corrupt ACORN?
You guys are scared of your own shadows, let alone a small community organizing group that really doesn't have much power, or sway for that matter. If ACORN had as much juice as you guys keep thinking they do, we might actually get some good stuff done here in the US.
OK then. If it was just for money let us all forgive! BTW here is another list of folks who just want to make money:
http://rottenacorn.com/downloads/filedComplaint.pdf
mag: "You guys are scared of your own shadows,........"
Yep. Us guys are so silly for having the chizpah to think a Demoncrat votes 10 or 20 times, or having dead people vote, or your dog, or Donald Duck, or Mickey Mouse. What is WRONG with us!
But, I do have to admit you folks at least let me play here. I don't surf Righty sites except for Rush so I don't know if they allow you progessives to post on any of them but I give all of you a big thumbs up for letting me express my side so often. Sincerely, retired
Except it never happened justtired.
O'Keefe committed a crime whereas ACORN was "rumored" to have committed a crime by Republicans & FoxNews 24/7. But remember O'Keefe is a HERO to FoxNews and Republicans, so of course there's nothing to see or debate. Uh, oh. LOL.
See, if a dishonest employee sits and makes out false registration forms, that means that there is no one to commit voter fraud since the cards are simply MADE UP IN THE FIRST PLACE.
"...Although the voter fraud never materialized, the stories planted during the election season yielded a bountiful crop of misinformation. Particularly troubling was the mainstream news media's unwitting complicity in the conservative campaign to frame ACORN. For example, 80.3 percent of the print and broadcast stories about ACORN's alleged voter fraud failed to mention that ACORN itself was reporting voter-registration irregularities to authorities, as required by law..."
"...O'Keefe and Giles targeted ACORN, though, not to expose any bad advice being doled out by the mortgage counselors, but for the same reason that the political right: to put an end to ACORN's massive voter-registration drives that brought out poor African Americans and Latinos to cast ballots against Republicans. "Politicians are getting elected single-handedly due to this organization," he told the press in a Los Angeles Times story on September 19, 2009. O'Keefe and Giles timed the release of the video to distract public attention away from Obama's September 9 speech on health care reform..."
"...Last month, facts exonerating ACORN began to emerge. On December 7 an independent report by Scott Harshbarger, the former Massachusetts Attorney General and former president of Common Cause, cleared ACORN of any illegal conduct. The report stated, "While some of the advice and counsel given by ACORN employees and volunteers was clearly inappropriate and unprofessional, we did not find a pattern of intentional, illegal conduct by ACORN staff; in fact, there is no evidence that action, illegal or otherwise, was taken by any ACORN employee on behalf of the videographers." His report also noted that the videos were doctored and misleading.
"The videos that have been released appear to have been edited, in some cases substantially, including the insertion of a substitute voice-over for significant portions of Mr. O'Keefe's and Ms. Giles's comments, which makes it difficult to determine the questions to which ACORN employees are responding. A comparison of the publicly available transcripts to the released videos confirms that large portions of the original video have been omitted from the released versions."
"...Five days after the report was released, on December 12, 2009, federal judge Nina Gershon blocked U.S. officials from enforcing the funding ban on ACORN. She ruled that Congress had violated the Constitution's ban on bills of attainder, legislation that punishes a specific person or group without a fair hearing. ACORN lawyers quoted several Republicans making unsubstantiated accusations about ACORN being a criminal organization that deserved to be punished.
"[ACORN has] been singled out by Congress for punishment that directly and immediately affects their ability to continue to obtain federal funding, in the absence of any judicial, or even administrative, process of adjudicating guilt," Gershon wrote in her decision. Soon after the decision, some of ACORN's projects began receiving federal funds, including between $40,000 and $60,000 for housing assistance.
This decision and the Harshbarger report, which came on the heels of a successful ACORN lawsuit in Ohio that brought the state into compliance with the National Voter Registration Act, brought some hope to ACORN's members that public opinion might shift in ACORN's favor.
"...Soon after Harshbarger refuted the charges of financial wrongdoing and voter fraud against ACORN, a nonpartisan Congressional Research Service (CRS) report released on December 22 found no evidence of voter fraud associated with ACORN and "no instances in which ACORN violated the terms of federal funding in the last five years." Moreover, the report found that the two conservative activists who secretly videotaped conversations with ACORN workers and distributed those recordings on the Web without their consent violated laws in Maryland and California. CRS also noted that as of October 2009, ACORN had been subjected to at least forty-six federal, state, and local investigations, with only eleven still outstanding. Only one state, Nevada, brought charges against ACORN, under an ambiguous law that prohibited paying staff to register voters..."
"...More generally, few stories have explained that since it was founded in 1970, ACORN has made powerful enemies, and that the attacks on the group have a long history. With chapters in more than 70 cities, it has successfully fought banks that engaged in predatory lending, employers that paid poverty wages, and developers that gentrified low-income neighborhoods. It has also registered more than a million Americans to vote.
Not surprisingly, many businesses have long opposed the group's efforts to raise wages for the working poor. Banks, mortgage companies and payday lenders have fought ACORN's campaigns to strengthen regulation of the financial industry. [b]Business groups have funded anti-ACORN websites, such as rottenacorn.com, that aim to destroy the group's credibility. Republicans have long opposed ACORN's success at registering low-income, mostly minority voters, who are more likely to vote for Democrats.The mainstream media have consistently failed to explain this long conservative campaign to smear and vilify ACORN by using any means necessary, including lying and exaggeration..."
"...For the working poor, the attack on ACORN is a tragedy. ACORN's modest operation -- run out of well-worn offices, using donated computers and torn furniture, paying low salaries for long hours -- helped empower the poor to stop home foreclosures, increase wages through living wage campaigns, put up stop signs at dangerous intersections, rebuild parks and save neighborhoods from decay..."
The above excerpts were taken from an article written by John Atlas and Peter Drier :http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-atlas/acorn-is-back-in-the-news_b_438324.html
You keep posting lies and misinformation about ACORN Justtired and they will be met by the disenfectant of truth each time.
And yeah. Us mean ole Repubilcans want to bring back slavery and such. Only thing that matters to us is the Almighty Dollar! We of course don't care about our grandkids.
If you want some truth about ACORN:
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=33754
The "choice" crowd is gonna sue I heard.
This is why I think leftists have a mental disorder.
You also can't read. The ad alleges that Mrs. Tebow became ill while pregnant with Tim and the doctors recommended that she have an abortion and she said no. The problem is that she was living in the Philippines while pregnant with Tim. No doctor in the Philippines would have recommended that she have an abortion because abortion is illegal in the Philippines. Any doctor who would have recommended an abortion for her would have faced a 6 year prison term.
Try reading. I know it's hard for someone as demented and hate-filled as you, but try to wrap your head around what I was saying. The ad, most likely, is based upon a LIE. Didn't happen. Understand?
http://www.nlpc.org/stories/2009/09/22/scott-harshbarger-%E2%80%98bad-choice%E2%80%99-investigate-acorn
ACORN announced today that former Massachusetts Attorney General Scott Harshbarger has agreed to head ACORN’s investigation of itself. Leaving aside the valid question of whether any ACORN-funded probe can actually be “independent,” Harshbarger is a particularly bad choice.
Harshbarger has impressive-sounding credentials, but he is well-known for his political and ideological intensity. A quick Google check of his affiliations shows him sharing the program as a speaker at a Campaign Institute event in 2004 with Dan Cantor who is described as “founding executive director of the Working Families Party (WFP),” an ACORN front. See New York ACORN Front Group Based in New Orleans Gets Taxpayer Money.
ACORN board member Maude Hurd was eager to point out today that Harshbarger is “the former President and CEO of Common Cause, the good government organization.”
Harshbarger was indeed head of Common Cause for three years, where he demonstrated a deep political bias. A case in point was his cooperation in Nancy Pelosi’s hypocrisy on campaign finance. Of course, Pelosi has punted on whether ACORN should receive tax money.
In 2002, we caught Pelosi violating the clearest and most basic election law of all, the limits on campaign contributions, long championed by Common Cause. Acting on our Complaint, the Federal Election Commission (FEC) fined two Pelosi “leadership” political action committees. Under conciliation agreements reached with the FEC, the two committees — PAC to the Future and Team Majority — had to pay $21,000.
But that did not stop Harshbarger from singing Pelosi’s praises for her efforts to tighten campaign contribution law even further, in the form of Shays-Meehan, the House companion to McCain-Feingold.
At an April 2002 kick-off event in San Francisco for the so-called Campaign Finance Victory Tour, Harshbarger toasted Pelosi and proclaimed:
The cynics in Washington said we couldn’t beat the entrenched power of big money, and thanks to courageous, independent people like Nancy Pelosi, we started the job.
House members may have “leadership PACs” in addition to their own campaign committee. The purpose of leadership PACs is to make contributions to the campaigns of other Congressional candidates. Team Majority made thirty-six contributions to candidates in the amount of $5,000 each, the legal limit, to candidates that already had received contributions from PAC to the Future.
NLPC alleged that Pelosi operated two leadership PACs in order to circumvent contribution limits. Leo McCarthy, the treasurer of both PACs and the former Lt. Governor of California, candidly admitted to Roll Call that the “main reason” for setting up the second PAC was to “give twice as much (sic) hard dollars.”
Pelosi complained of “extremists in the Republican Party who have repeatedly tried to undermine campaign finance reform” and of “sneaky tactics employed by the Republicans” to weaken Shays-Meehan.
NLPC’s Complaint cited a second circumvention of the law, that of the limits on amounts donors may give to PACs. Team Majority, the newer PAC, reported sixteen contributions of $5,000 each from donors who also gave the maximum to Pelosi’s other PAC. Five of the donors gave to both PACs on the same day.
Within twenty-four hours of NLPC’s Complaint, Pelosi announced she would shut down Team Majority and retrieve contributions already made to candidates. Of course, Common Cause, under Scott Harshbarger, was silent about all this.
Common Cause, whose foundation is funded in part by leftist billionaire George Soros, at the same time conducted a highly personal and vituperative campaign against former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-TX). Common Cause alleged that DeLay had violated IRS law and House rules by establishing a charity called Celebrations for Children, which was building a 50-acre residential facility for disadvantaged children in Fort Bend County, Texas.
You are supportive of a man who has already broken the law in two states and is facing lawsuits by the victims of his illegal activities there and now, you are supporting him for committing and admitting to a felony. And, you're superior, how????
By having a normal brain.
What about the finding by federal judge Nina Gershon? What about the successful lawsuit by ACORN brought in Ohio that brought the state into compliance with the national voter registration act. What about the findings of the non-partisan Congressional Research Service which found:"...report released on December 22 found no evidence of voter fraud associated with ACORN and "no instances in which ACORN violated the terms of federal funding in the last five years." Moreover, the report found that the two conservative activists who secretly videotaped conversations with ACORN workers and distributed those recordings on the Web without their consent violated laws in Maryland and California. CRS also noted that as of October 2009, ACORN had been subjected to at least forty-six federal, state, and local investigations, with only eleven still outstanding. Only one state, Nevada, brought charges against ACORN, under an ambiguous law that prohibited paying staff to register voters..." What about the refusal of O'keefe and Giles to release the unedited versions of the tape. What about O'keefes refusal to interviewed by anyone but Faux. I give you facts you respond with propaganda.
I soooooooooo want to respond to this one, butt, I'm not gonna! ;-)