No "façade": CNN correspondent Sylvester rebuffs Dobbs' efforts to get her to affirm his false accusations of secrecy against Appleseed
SUMMARY: On Lou Dobbs Tonight, Dobbs introduced a segment by Lisa Sylvester about a report by the nonprofit group Appleseed by asserting, "Many of these groups call themselves nonpartisan, nonprofit organizations when in reality they are nothing more than advocates for illegal alien amnesty and, in many cases, open borders. Lisa Sylvester reports on the façade." But Sylvester did not expose any such "façade," and Sylvester rebuffed Dobbs' efforts to get her to assert that Appleseed is something other than what it claims to be -- "[a] non-profit network of 16 public interest justice centers in the U.S. and Mexico ... dedicated to building a society where opportunities are genuine, access to the law is universal and equal, and government advances the public interest."
On the May 19 edition of Lou Dobbs Tonight, the host introduced a segment about a report by the nonprofit group Appleseed, which assessed the effects of state and local immigration enforcement, by stating: "Pro-amnesty open-borders advocates across the country are combining to fight local police efforts to crack down on illegal immigration and the lobby state legislatures and even city government. Many of these groups call themselves nonpartisan, nonprofit organizations when in reality they are nothing more than advocates for illegal alien amnesty and, in many cases, open borders. Lisa Sylvester reports on the façade." But contrary to Dobbs' introduction, Sylvester did not expose any such "façade." Indeed, Sylvester rebuffed Dobbs' efforts to get her to assert that Appleseed is something other than what it claims to be -- "[a] non-profit network of 16 public interest justice centers in the U.S. and Mexico ... dedicated to building a society where opportunities are genuine, access to the law is universal and equal, and government advances the public interest."
Following her report, Dobbs asked Sylvester the following: "So Appleseed is made up of pro bono attorneys at Harvard and MALDEF, the Mexican Legal Defense -- Mexican American Legal Defense Fund, La Raza, and the Southern Poverty Law Center, and somebody is -- do they put that really right out front on their letterhead?" (In fact, MALDEF, the National Council of La Raza, and the SPLC are not part of Appleseed.) Sylvester denied that the groups try to hide their identity, saying that "all of these groups are pretty clear what their agenda is in terms of -- but what they don't do is they often don't make a clear distinction between legal immigration and illegal immigration." Not satisfied with her response, Dobbs tried again: "No, Lisa, what I asked was, does Appleseed make it clear on their letterhead who the members are, the law centers that are part of Appleseed?" But Sylvester rebuffed his implicit accusation of secrecy on the part of Appleseed, saying, "They do make it clear which are the law centers. They also make it clear on who are their board of directors. These are members of law firms from around the country, Lou." Dobbs then said: "And yet, we seldom see that reported in the mainstream media that membership in the Appleseed Group when they do these reports. It's amazing." It is not clear what Dobbs was suggesting is "seldom ... reported in the mainstream media," but Appleseed provides links to the websites of its law centers around the country, most of which include lists of staff and boards of directors. Appleseed also provides a long list of law firms and other companies "who have successfully completed or are currently working on projects with Appleseed."
Dobbs concluded the segment by saying: "It's also the subject of our poll tonight. Do you believe that the stealth amnesty groups should have to declare their political agendas clearly instead of trying to hide their purpose from the American public? And, oh, you know, heaven forbid, the United States Congress? Cast your vote at loudobbs.com."
From the May 19 edition of CNN's Lou Dobbs Tonight:
DOBBS: Pro-amnesty open-borders advocates across the country are combining to fight local police efforts to crack down on illegal immigration and to lobby state legislatures and even city governments. Many of these groups call themselves nonpartisan, nonprofit organizations when in reality, they are nothing more than advocates for illegal alien amnesty and, in many cases, open borders. Lisa Sylvester reports on the façade.
[begin video clip]
SYLVESTER: Local police in Prince William County, Virginia, are taking classes on how to enforce federal immigration laws. Not everyone agrees this is a proper role for state and local governments. Appleseed, a network of public interest law centers based in the United States and Mexico, released a report saying it will deter witnesses and victims from stepping forward.
JOHN THESSIN (lead author, Appleseed report): It strains our relationship with our community. It hurts our ability to be involved in community policing and anti-terrorism efforts.
SYLVESTER: Appleseed was launched by members of Harvard Law's 1958 class and is still run and operated by lawyers working pro bono. It's just the latest of tax-exempt non-profit groups called 501(c)3s jumping into the immigration debate. Among others: the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, La Raza, and the Southern Poverty Law Center. They all advocate amnesty, trying to block immigration raids, and defending illegal aliens in the deportation process.
MIKE CUTLER (former Immigration and Naturalization Service agent): Increasingly, more and more groups are jumping on this bandwagon, and while they may be referred to as nonprofits, we know that there is profit to be found, whether it's membership, whether it's dues, where unions are concerned, whether it's commerce. There is an agenda.
SYLVESTER: Under IRS guidelines, 501(c)3s must be nonpartisan. They can't support a political candidate or party. But they are allowed to take a stand on public policy issues. The executive director of Appleseed insists they are balanced. Their board consists of Republicans and Democrats.
BETSY CAVENDISH (Appleseed executive director): We do research and policy advocacy, but we absolutely don't do politics. So we take a nonpartisan, research-based approach to looking at issues.
SYLVESTER: Maybe nonpartisan, but not without an agenda.
[end video clip]
SYLVESTER: Now, in the interest of full disclosure, Mike Cutler is a fellow at the Center for Immigration Studies. That's a tax-exempt nonprofit 501-3(c) [sic] organization. One of the biggest voices, though, pushing open borders is the U.S. Catholic Church, tax-exempt because it's a religious institution. Lou?
DOBBS: And so Appleseed is made up of pro bono attorneys at Harvard and MALDEF, the Mexican Legal Defense -- Mexican American Legal Defense Fund, La Raza, and the Southern Poverty Law Center, and somebody is -- do they put that really right out front on their letterhead?
SYLVESTER: In fact, all of these groups are pretty clear what their agenda is in terms of -- but what they don't do is they often don't make a clear distinction between legal immigration and illegal immigration.
DOBBS: No, Lisa, what I asked was, does Appleseed make it clear on their letterhead who the members are, the law centers that are part of Appleseed?
SYLVESTER: They do make it clear which are the law centers. They also make it clear on who are their board of directors. These are members of law firms from around the country, Lou.
DOBBS: And yet, we seldom see that reported in the mainstream media, that membership in the Appleseed Group when they do these reports. It's amazing. Lisa, thanks a lot. Lisa Sylvester from Washington. It's also the subject of our poll tonight. Do you believe that the stealth amnesty groups should have to declare their political agendas clearly instead of trying to hide their purpose from the American public? And, oh, you know, heaven forbid, the United States Congress? Cast your vote at loudobbs.com.
Having just watched Lou Dobbs' Thursday, May 22, 2008 broadcast to which he invited Paul Waldman to be a guest, I can only say that Dobbs deserves a solid triple thumbs down for his totally unprofessional treatment of Paul Waldman. I do value much of what Dobbs has to say, but I found his behavior during this broadcast unprofessional and inexcusable. I hope that CNN management gives him a couple of nights to reflect while I look forward to watching Kitty Pilgrim. She understands the basic tenets of interviewing guests while giving them the chance to speak without finding the need for endless editorializing.
TO MR. WALDMAN I extend my condolences and apology for Dobbs. Dobbs' show is almost never about opinion that differs from his. I wish that you would have referenced Lisa Sylvester's report on Appleseed and Sylvester's refusal to allow Dobbs to distort the facts in her report. It would have been better for you to stick to the facts of that story. You might have made it clear to Dobbs' viewers that Media Matters ANALYSIS of the Sylvester/Appleseed report made no mention of his stand on illegal immigration.
BTW, although I disagree with the NYT about their stand on illegal immigration, I have long since grown weary of Dobbs constant harping on it. He DOES distort the image of these immigrants who are admittedly breaking our laws by reporting far too often on the MINORITY who are criminals. I am sending a copy of this communication to Lou Dobbs.
Keep the faith, and keep on smiling.
You say that Lou Dobbs spends too much time on MINORITY that are criminals. My command over the English language isn't materful but I did think that ILLEGAL in ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT meant that they were criminals by coming here ILLEGALLY.
Lou Dobbs is a racist bigot who has inflated and conflated the immigration issue into a gigantic mountain when it is in fact, a tiny molehill. Most of what he says is a bald-faced lie, and the rest is exaggerated beyond belief. He spends so much time harping on this subject they should rename his show "The Lou Dobbs anti-hispanic-immigrant-total-rant-all-the-time".
What a putz. He makes me sick with all his racist baloney
Watching the video clip, it seemed at first funny, how dim and unsteady lou dobbs' mind must be, as he struggles to find some kind of flow to his words (a flow that was not there, struggle as he did), and as his eyes blink and his head tilts often, as he speaks, like a bad liar... then it seemed not so funny, more like watching a drunken man who thinks nobody knows he's drunk (when in fact everyone knows), and then it seemed maybe he wasn't drunk, just maybe one of these pill-popping chowderheads (like rush limbaugh), whose better days are all behind them, and who now carry several prescriptions for some of America's Finest Mood Altering Pharmaceuticals to get them through the day... watch the video, watch the man's eyes blink repeatedly, and slowly... watch the tilting and rolling of his strange old head... listen to the halting words, that would otherwise slur, if not for the practice of resorting to pulling the lips away from one another, so as not to slur... watch it, it's like a man who's had several drinks at lunch, but knows every trick in the book at how to hide it from his co-workers, but is now old in his own tired routine, and fools nobody really... either that, or he's doubling up on his prescription.
If there's anything as mean and as stingy and as ungrateful and as ignorant as ridiculing and attacking Lawyers for working pro bono, then I don't know what it might be. I do not wish to insult your intelligence, by telling you that "pro bono" means "for the good", but I would dare to tell you that "for the good" is a rather incomplete thought, and requires a filling out to make the more complete concept of "for the good of those who cannot otherwise find JUSTICE in our Legal system, it being such an expensive thing sometimes, and for them having not the money to afford it"... and seeing as the operative word there is JUSTICE, and that we have Pledged often (as school-children every day) that ours is a Republic where there is JUSTICE For All, then pro bono becomes "for the good of us all"...
And so Lawyers who work pro bono, work for the good of us all, by working for JUSTICE.
And only an ignorant fool would ever attack or ridicule Lawyers who work pro bono, because it's the same as attacking and ridiculing JUSTICE.
Even people who can afford a good Lawyer, don't ridicule pro bono work, or the Lawyers who work pro bono... they're the ones who know best of all how expensive JUSTICE can be, and knowing that, and seeing so many People without the money to afford it, they know how it is that we can be good to our Pledge, and how there can be JUSTICE For All... for the good of us all... pro bono.
(The other thing about Lawyers who do pro bono work: They had better have several paying Clients at least, and a whole list of them at best, if they're going to do much if any pro bono work... because pro bono doesn't exactly go around, in a circle, like the waters evaporate into the air, and the clouds rain on the mountains, to run into the rivers and the lakes, back to being the waters... which is to say, just because a Lawyer does pro bono work, doesn't mean the landlord of his office space does it too: or the phone company, or the insurance people, or that his aides or his secretary work also pro bono... they don't: it's only the lawyer who does this, he is the only one that works pro bono...
The term was invented for Lawyers, and only for them
...there is no such thing that I know of, called a pro bono landlord, or a pro bono phone company, or a pro bono gas station or insurance agent or grocery store...
No more than there are celebrity hack ingrate drunken pill-popping chowderheads on CNN working pro bono, for the good of us all, or for the good of anyone other than themselves.)
And what about the malevolent sense these people give the word "agenda"...
The way they use the word "agenda", you'd think it meant "conspiracy to commit a Felony"...
The word "agenda" as they used it, sounded like a plot to crash hijacked commercial airliners into office buildings...
I hope you all clicked the link to the Appleseed Network, and took a peek at their "agenda"...
Among the many good things I read that they do, I was particularly struck by what the Connecticut Appleseed did, when they kept after the Connecticut State Legislature to see to it that children who are covered by Medicaid in that State, are also able to have access to dental care... and I read also that the Connecticut Appleseed recruited volunteer dentists to treat children on Medicaid, children who otherwise "fall between the cracks" and would not ever see a dentist, for not being able to afford it (which makes me think that I was wrong when I said above that only Lawyers work pro bono: I guess some dentists do too, in Connecticut anyway)...
That's their "agenda", that and many other good things too, that you can read about.
The malevolent way in which lou dobbs and the other CNN hack spoke of Appleseed's "agenda", you'd think their agenda was something wicked and criminal, like shooting illegal immigrants on sight, or something else that lou dobbs and his kind think is just a fine way to spend their day doing.
Dem, I was going to type a huge comment about Lou Dobbs, until I read yours and saw that I hadn't much to add. As an attorney, I can tell you that pro bono is without attorney fees, but not without costs. All filing fees, expert witness fees, etc., must be born by the client. So people who use pro bono attroneys do have some skin in the game, contrary to what some critics say.
Secondly, pro bono is not unmonitored either. Attorneys in most jurisdictions file their pro bono hours with their bar association and account for their work. It is all also subject to the same strict requirements for protecting client confidentiality, proper levels of competence and ethics. An attorney is just as liable for malpractive and ethical violations for pro bono work as for fee work.
Thirdly, the ethics code fo conduct for attorneys actually promotes pro bono work and the bar associations make a big deal of those who lead the way with, sometimes, incredible numbers of hours.
Finally, doctors and dentists do also perform much "pro bono" work themselves through Doctors Without Borders, The Smile Train, and similar nonprofits. I encourage everyone to give generously to these organizations (they can be Googled).
Everyone is entitle to their opinion, and I usually share DEMS2020 views, but I am 180 degrees from the above posters. I think Paul Waldman made a complete #ss out of himself,and am surprised that MMFA would engage in this crap, even under mediamattersaction.org. Dobbs did go overboard, and i'm sure most of you have at some time. I think we are missing a very important point here. We've turned a blind eye to the illegal immigration problem for so long it's paramount. Regardless of what Lou Dobbs says, and even though he's sounding like a broken record IT'S GETTING ATTENTION, and needs to be dealt with
Illegal immigration is not the root problem. Dobbs could investigate how people come to uproot themselves and move to a foreign land. How does their native land come to be a place to leave? Our influence in creating the wave of immigration that is so threatening.
Beginning and ending your concern about this with some poor slobs trying to get out from under is lame.
Beginning and ending acceptable solutions to "the fence" is also lame. In the first of a lot of similar cases someone working in or on the fence empire was convicted of stealing and selling parts of "the fence".
One of my favorite sources, The Red Green Show, informed me that the longest unguarded border in the world is that between the US and France. Howcum Sweet Lou never brings this up?
Lou Dobbs is married to a Mexican American and his Mexican American in laws live with him, some racist. Have you people ever heard of overpopulation or sovereignty? Why would anyone want to remake this country in the image of India? America needs to control the population by limiting immigration to only those who are beneficial to the American people as a whole. Not just to benefit to themselves and the cheap labor lobby.The best way to help the the poor to the south is to help them where it counts in their home countries. By letting them illegally come here we are supporting the very government that drove them are here.