Extortion? Breitbart threatens to release more tapes during election unless DOJ investigates ACORN
From the November 19 edition of Fox News' Hannity:
Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.
HANNITY: And there's another aspect to this that is becoming part of the gubernatorial race out in California as it relates to the laws out there. Jerry Brown, who's looking for the Democratic nomination, Andrew, apparently had a staff member that was involved in a taping that they believed is illegal, they chose not to prosecute, but now they may go after you guys. Would that be hypocrisy?
BREITBART: Well, there's a lot of hypocrisy, and the dust has settled for ACORN, and at the end of the day, they've recognized that Eric Holder, the attorney general, has not initiated an investigation into ACORN after we now have seven tapes. There were five initially that came out. ACORN was defunded by the Senate, was defunded by the House, lost its link to the census. While all that damage occurred, Congress didn't come in to investigate them, obviously not the attorney general's office, and they've now realized, "let's get back into -- to get back into business," because they realize that the dust settled and they were not being investigated. It was Hannah, James and me who were being investigated. That's why we've been forced to offer this latest tape.
HANNITY: Well, are you saying, Andrew, that there are more tapes?
BREITBART: Oh, my goodness, there are. Not only are there more tapes, it's not just ACORN. And this message is to --
HANNITY: Wow.
BREITBART: -- Attorney General Holder. I want you to know that we have more tapes, it's not just ACORN, and we're going to hold out until the next election cycle. Or else, if you want to do a clean investigation, we will give you the rest of what we have, we will comply with you, we will give you the documentation we have from countless ACORN whistleblowers who want to come forward but are fearful of this organization and the retribution, that they fear that this is a dangerous organization. So if you get into an investigation, we will give you the tapes. If you don't give us the tapes, we will revisit these tapes come election time.
HANNITY: This is a blockbuster, what you're saying here. This -- that you guys have more tapes, you'll release them before the election, that could have a big impact on the election, obviously.
Mr. News
If their are children who could be in danger, as this group alleges, then why would they possibly not come forward with that information if they are so concerned that underage children are being sold into servitude and international sex rings?
Why are they appearing on t.v. and not going to the district attorneys office or the police?
What kind of people would hold on to that kind of information FOR A YEAR just to try and effect an election when, by their assertion, children are being sold and bought?
No they are not, they are showing a willingness on acorn's part in assiting others to break the law.
Your post shows a lack of knowledge about what happened here.
But like I said why are the edited clips that the dweebs at MMFA present daily acceptable to you and not these? Why not explain that.
The burden of proof would then be on James and Hannah to prove intent on the part of the employees, which a video tape cannot capture in this case. They would need more... alot more. A paper trail of some kind to prove that these employees pursued the purposed illegal activity. They have no more evidence beyond these recordings, and these recording provide no proof that as employees of ACORN that they had pursued anything beyond the consultation.
I think this is most easiy demonstrated on the part of ACORN in the most previous tape where the employee clearly... CLEARLY... states that for the couple to have any business with ACORN that it must be "legitimate." That alone exhonorates ACORN of any wrong doing and shows that the employees who were terminated were consulting the pair beyond anything that ACORN does, on their own. This tape also makes O'Keefe a liar.
And, all Holder has to do is subpoena the tapes, you slimeball. It isn't up to you.
The 2nd thumbs down is mine.
But one question, why do you libs only whine about thumbs down that goes against other libs, when they are given to cons you say nothing. I guess with you it is not the principle, that is not the least bit surprising.
The Congressional Research Office largely agreed that the Defund ACORN Act would be incredibly difficult to rationalize as having a "non-punitive regulatory purpose" and thus could qualify as a bill of attainder. They concluded their analysis with:
"Thus, it appears, that a court may have a sufficient basis to overcome the presumption of constitutionality, and find that the proposed Defund ACORN Act violates the prohibition against bills of attainder."
The CRO legal analysis can be found here: http://volokh.com/files/acornattainder.pdf
So, it's a bit more complicated then "hahahah ACORN thinks they deserve our money hahahaha" that Hannity and conservatives like to reduce it too.
But then again, I'm sure the Congressional Research Office has already been infiltrated by ACORN.
What a maroon
BTW, Hannity should be ashamed that he was given life.
Doctored tapes, what a joke, I guess they had ventriloquists putting words in the acorn reps mouths.
Illegal? Hardly, exposing the truth about an organization is anything but illegal, it is informative and a public service to the electorate. It is too bad you want to deny the truth.
Now imagine the same situation on the eve of an election. It's intent would be obviously to smear their opponents while offering poor if any proof at all that cannot be debated or investigated in a timely manner. That kind of thing could very well be construed as attempting to tamper with a Federal Election, and since they have claimed that this is their intent, it would be VERY illegal.
They are attempting to hold a gun to the heads of our DoJ and to Eric Holder in particular. In a word, extortion. They want these videos to force a congressional hearing, but all that they show is that ACORN obviously has some internal issues to work out in the lowest levels of their organization. There is no evidence of criminal behavior on the part of ACORN and that is just killing the wonder Trio, the far right, and obviously you.
In Breibart's own words... (listen to the desperation)
False. the acorn rep repeatedly spoke. Apparently you didn't see it. And of course MMFA doesn't want the truth either, they will never present them.
Next time try watching the tape before you speak.
Just to show you that I am not getting this from a left wing site, here is an article posted by Fox news about the latest tape.
That tape? Because I was refering to the one with the woman who filed the police report. As of yet, I have not seen a version of that tape unedited and with full audio. If there is more to this story then I would be glad to look at it, Fairliberal. Please provide a link.
They have malfeasance recorded and a track record to go with it. How about lets see some of the work Barry did for acorn? That would be good outhouse reading.
When you can't book a ticket on a flight to the Bahama's your name is put on a waiting list for the next available seat. Those that put their name on the list first have prioty over those that put their name on the list last.
When you go to the bank on Friday afternoons to cash your payroll check (if you lucky enough to have one) you take your place in line and wait your turn you don't try and crowd in line do you?
And I guess you admire their ethics and willingness to assist in breaking the law? Such fine people.
Now I am not saying that what these individuals did was correct, but the fact of the matter is that a willingness to assist other in committing fraud is not a crime. If James returned, filled out the forms and the Acorn employees sent them in, that would be fraud and an investigation would be warranted.
All you have done, fairliberal, is to come here and attempt to say that I am ethically bankrupt simply because I am looking at the legal arguments made by James and Breitbart. If you had read my full post and responded to the entire post rather than just selecting a small section and attempting to discredit me, you would have noticed that I said that an audit was appropriate. However, you did not. You only sought to discredit a valid argument by attacking the character of the author, something that you do on a regular basis.
It seems Bertha wants it both ways, she says it will have little impact but then points to the families that are impacted. Which is it?
And why sue if there is little impact?
Yep and continue to dig yourself a hole. "Where's the popcorn for this show?" <sarcasm>