READER COMMENTS ON

"The Real Targets of the ACORN Smear Campaigns: Verifiable Truth, American Democracy"

(69 Responses so far...)





COMMENT #1 [Permalink]

... Big Dan said on 3/10/2010 @ 6:29 am PT...





Thanks for posting Rachel Maddow and helping explode the myth put forth by the right and believe it or not some liberals like Jon Stewart, that MSNBC's Maddow/Olbermann/Schultz are the "FOX 'news' of the left". The difference is they don't lie, they actually expose things, and they expose lies of the right and how their lies get into the mainstream media. They're populists who also attack Democrats (like Stupak) that are hypocrites and against the good of most Americans. They would LOVE everyone to think they're the "FOX 'news' of the left", which is false. For starters, they don't LIE, make things up, or distort and mislead like rightwing media.

COMMENT #2 [Permalink]

... Billy said on 3/10/2010 @ 9:27 am PT...





Just the latest episode of The Shock Doctrine. But instead of Dick Cheney and the Patriot Act, we're stuck with cowards like Barney Frank and a bill of attainder. We're still putting up with the goddamn Patriot Act, and we're still putting up with cowards like Barney Frank. And the New York Times stands tall beside them all.

COMMENT #3 [Permalink]

... BlueHawk said on 3/10/2010 @ 12:41 pm PT...





The last paragraph of Ernie's article says it all... Without the light of truth piercing the darkness wrought by right-wing propaganda that is designed to destroy organized opposition to totalitarian corporate societal control, like the citizens of New Orleans in the wake of Katrina's wrath, each of us, every man, woman and child, will be left to fend for ourselves against the harsh realities of a greed-driven, corporate security state whose heartless and corrupt leaders could care less whether we sink or swim. We, at The BRAD BLOG, are determined to see that this does not happen. I'm right in between the two camps that either; want to find a commonground way to work with the tea-baggers/right wing or dismiss them as blind tools of the fascist right wing propaganda machine. I understand the need to find commongraound with those whose views differ from ours.

But I'm dumbfounded about how to reach those whose brainwashing won't let them consider another's viewpoint at all...and whose whole position is based on falsehoods. As myself and David Lasagna have debated. I feel it's intellectually impossible to see another's point of view if that other isn't sincere or willing to give your point of view full consideration. It's like you're bargaining from a losing position to begin with... I do know that the truth ALWAYS wins out...and our present circumstances are no different. "They" want us to believe it's over and their lies have won. But outlets such as Bradblog and others refute that everyday...the truth tide will turn....SOON! God I hope it'soon...This country can't stand much more.

COMMENT #4 [Permalink]

... Adam Fulford said on 3/10/2010 @ 1:19 pm PT...





New York Times editor Clark Hoyt is a barefaced liar and a coward with an obvious far-right agenda.

COMMENT #5 [Permalink]

... Lora said on 3/10/2010 @ 1:22 pm PT...





Ernest, This is truly an outstanding summary of the whole ACORN hit job promulgated by Breitbart, O'Keefe, Giles, and then propagated by the NYT and other supposedly reputable news sources. Some thoughts: 1) I am sorry that any ACORN employees got the axe due to O'Keefe's and Giles' hoax. While it may be true that some of them did not act according to ACORN guidelines, nevertheless we should remember that they were conned. They were led to form a sympathetic relationship with Giles and O'Keefe first and then slowly and artfully led deeper into knowledge of the imaginary prostitution business through innuendo and careful insinuation of phrases and bogus information. I can't help but wonder if the employees who were fired would have acted that way in any other circumstance. Like the lobster that doesn't try to climb out of the pot if you raise the temperature slowly, they were gradually taken in. 2) I believe the illicit-underage-immigrant-sex-trafficking angle was the reason this hoax was successful in forcing Congress' hand so quickly. The right wing has been trying to smear ACORN for years and they were largely unsuccessful until now. It took the insinuation of sex of the most abhorrent kind --- trafficked undocumented foreign children as prostitutes --- and our governing body just lost its head. They wanted to make it go away --- and fast. Due diligence went out the window. Brilliant move on Giles' part, who apparently thought of the scheme, and O'Keefe who may have racheted it up a few notches. 3) You have to wonder. Let's see, the NYT and other papers and news outlets who ought to know better perpetuated this damaging hoax and have either ignored the facts when they emerged or outright refused to issue retractions (with a few exceptions). EVEN THOUGH these same outlets seem to have no problem issuing retractions when they are clearly wrong in other news reporting. Are they just stubborn? Or do they just not care? Or were they told not to get involved in correcting the facts about ACORN? I don't know. (Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they ain't out to get us!)

COMMENT #6 [Permalink]

... Jeannie Dean said on 3/10/2010 @ 4:15 pm PT...





Superlative job, Ernest. Well done. Will circulate and tweet. A nice companion piece to Ernest's that highlights the thrust of BlueHawk's (#3) and Lora's(#5) above comments from Bob Cesca, today: http://www.huffingtonpos...s-all-abou_b_493929.html "...each (Tea Party) topic abstractly hinges on race. The insistence that the tea party movement is more about taxes, big government and personal freedoms is partly true. And many tea party people honestly believe it. But if you dig below the surface into the details underlying these banner themes, it's not difficult to find that, yes, it's about taxes --- taxes on the rich to finance the extravagant lives of layabout welfare queens, or big government "ramming health care down our throats" as a means of slavery reparations to African Americans, and personal freedoms being stripped away by a liberal fascist Nazi who wants to give money and handouts to minorities... "...Developed by Republican strategists like Harry Dent and Pat Buchanan during the rebuilding of the GOP in the post Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act era, the Southern Strategy's goal was to win over southern whites by demonizing blacks using subterfuge, dog whistles and coded language. As I mentioned last week, the late Republican mastermind Lee Atwater described the use of the Southern Strategy as being all about the use of "abstract" issues that imply race without explicitly using direct racial epithets or even the words "black" or "white." "...Atwater described some of the abstract issues of his era as "forced bussing" or taxes, and framing these issues in a way that subconsciously fuels white resentment towards blacks, and serves to coalesce white votes around Republican candidates. After all, Republicans will readily admit that trying to win over black voters has been a lost cause since LBJ, so why not exploit that loss by playing to white racial bias and thus locking down larger chunks of the white vote?" Exactly. Cesca could've been writing solely about O'Keefe / Breitbart, there.

COMMENT #7 [Permalink]

... BlueHawk said on 3/10/2010 @ 4:28 pm PT...





Jeanie Dean @6 Spot on....

COMMENT #8 [Permalink]

... daleyrocks said on 3/10/2010 @ 5:21 pm PT...





Ernie - So many words, so many distortions and untruths. Patterico has a post up today which blows large sections of your post completely out of the water, but he ignored a lot. "Had Congress looked before leaping, they would have found that an independent analysis [PDF], furnished by former MA Attorney General Scott Harshbarger, disabuses much of the misinformation that has been propagated about the entire ACORN "pimp" hoax." - Not really, Ernie. Congress acted in September and ACORN voluntarily shut down certain operations in September. Why did they need to wait for Harshbarger's report to come out in December since we are not operating in a court of law, contrary to what you contend later. Harshbarger's report did not use the word hoax, that is your terminology for something you deem meaningful, but he did find the acts of the various employees very troubling and did not deny that they occurred, even with the admitted editing. "there have been 46 reported federal, state, and local investigations concerning ACORN; 11 still pending." - Ernie, I believe there are a lot more than 11 investigations pending when you include the county level investigations, but you might want to check my math. Also, the CRS report did not clear ACORN of illegal behavior as you and Brad have been citing in past references. They were not tasked with that investigation. The CRS for the most part merely searched news stories referring to ACORN. "Doctored videotapes are not 'evidence'" - Ernie, we are not in a court of law. As someone who claims to be an attorney, you should know that. If there is a legal proceeding, then you would have a legitimate point. The rapes should be described as edited and not doctored, but thanks for the hyperbole. "ACORN Housing is "a separately incorporated organization (not a subsidiary or affiliate) with which ACORN contracts for home buyer and foreclosure programs." Ernie, I find this a very curious part of Harshbarger's report and defense of the organizations. Maybe you can help me out. Immediately after the videos started getting released, Bertha Lewis started hitting the airwaves and issuing press releases making what turned out to be completely false claims about the activities of O'Keefe and Giles on behalf of ACORN and ACORN Housing and talking about terminating employees of the organizations. She was also the one who was quoted in the press release about shutting down operations. How could she do that for both operations if they were completely separate Ernie? Something doesn't smell right there. I call bullshit. Chew on these comments and read Patterico's post, Ernie. Enjoy!

COMMENT #9 [Permalink]

... Brad Friedman said on 3/10/2010 @ 5:47 pm PT...





DaleyRocks spewed: The rapes should be described as edited and not doctored, but thanks for the hyperbole. And thank you for the brilliant Freudian slip! First time to date you've been darn near correct in your continuing defense of accused felons, con-artists and admitted fraudsters! Good up the good work! The hoaxsters are counting on your support!

COMMENT #10 [Permalink]

... Ernest A. Canning said on 3/10/2010 @ 6:54 pm PT...





Daleyrocks said @8 "Ernie - So many words, so many distortions and untruths. Patterico has a post up today which blows large sections of your post completely out of the water, but he ignored a lot."

___________________ Not even close there Daleyrocks. Patterico, aka Deputy LA County DA Patrick Frey, was so overwhelmed by the logic of my well-researched and well-written piece that he was reduced to complaining that I did not add "according to sources" when I accurately quoted an article that appeared in Ruppert Murdock's New York Post after the Brooklyn DA revealed that the ACORN employees had not violated any law.

_________________________ Daleyrocks complains that he thinks there were more than 46 investigations of ACORN

_____________________________ It would be helpful if you paid better attention. I accurately reported that the Congressional Research Service had listed 46 federal, state and local investigations of ACORN; 11 still pending as of Oct. 2009, and further reported that, per the Congressional Research Service, none of them, nada, zero, zilch, showed that a single individual improperly registered by ACORN or its employees actually showed up at the polls to cast a vote. Understand the math supplied by the Congressional Research Service, Daleyrocks? 49 investigations, zero cases of ACORN-related voter fraud. Hello!!! ____________________ Daleyrocks wrote: "We are not in a court of law."

_______________________________ I agree, which is all the more reason why you don't try and convict people in the press or in Congress, let alone a nationwide organization of 400,000 member families on the basis of this idiotic hoax which took place in only three ACORN offices, 2 of which Harshbarger reported there were extenuating circumstances and one which led to the immediate dismissal of the part-time employees for violating ACORN's written protocols.

_________________ Daleyrocks wrote: "the NYT and other papers and news outlets who ought to know better perpetuated this damaging hoax and have either ignored the facts when they emerged or outright refused to issue retractions (with a few exceptions)."

__________________________ Precisely! But what troubles me, Daleyrocks, since you seem so obsessed with sex scandals is that you ignored the following from my piece: The same New York Times which ran with the O'Keefe/Breitbart scurrilous ACORN "pimp" lie, chose to ignore the sworn affidavits of former Blackwater/Xe insiders which not only alleged that Blackwater had engaged in murder, destruction of evidence, weapons smuggling, and corruption but specifically alleged that Blackwater operated a wife-swapping sex ring here in the US, and that, in Iraq, Blackwater had "young girls provide oral sex to Enterprise members in the 'Blackwater Man Camp' in exchange for one American dollar." I'll bet your pal Patterico never covered that little piece of information on his site, did he?

COMMENT #11 [Permalink]

... Macswain said on 3/10/2010 @ 6:55 pm PT...





DaleyRocks, If Patterico had such a solid argument, why are the likes of Ernest and I banned from commenting on his site? On the other hand, you & Patterico have been allowed to come on to Brad's site and make your arguments. It really betrays who has a lack of confidence and fear of embarrassment regarding the validity of the arguments being made.

COMMENT #12 [Permalink]

... deecee said on 3/10/2010 @ 7:41 pm PT...





Still waiting for Alan Grayson and congress to apologize.

COMMENT #13 [Permalink]

... Bob Ross said on 3/10/2010 @ 7:51 pm PT...





Aww how cute Patterico's lackeys are now coming over to comment with the same misconceptions. I learned all I needed about Patterico's frame of mind when I went through his Schiavo section where he talks about a balanced article he came across. I started reading the article. Within the first several paragraphs it accused Michael Schiavo of causing his wife's condition. If that's Patterico's idea of balanced I sincerely question his judgment. The fact is Patterico has to cherry pick much like O'keefe to try to make arguments then accuses others of the same thing.

COMMENT #14 [Permalink]

... Bob Ross said on 3/10/2010 @ 8:03 pm PT...





As for patterico's blog he moderates his comments before they ever appear. Brad's blog allows comments without filtering them unless you break the rules.

COMMENT #15 [Permalink]

... daleyrocks said on 3/10/2010 @ 8:36 pm PT...





"As for patterico's blog he moderates his comments before they ever appear." Bob - That would be false unless you have done something against the blog rules such as using multiple screen names after having been warned - then your comments go into a filter before they appear. "If Patterico had such a solid argument, why are the likes of Ernest and I banned from commenting on his site?" MacSwain - Patterico has publicly stated Ernie the Attorney is not banned, stop making shit up. Using multiple screen names will get you in trouble - If you believe you are banned, email Patterico and ask why and ask to be reinstated. Stop whining.

COMMENT #16 [Permalink]

... daleyrocks said on 3/10/2010 @ 8:37 pm PT...





Brad - Thanks for pointing out my typo and avoiding the falsehoods you and Ernie keep perpetuating here.

COMMENT #17 [Permalink]

... daleyrocks said on 3/10/2010 @ 8:55 pm PT...





Ernie - Your distortions continue to overwhelm and your reading comprehension continues to underwhelm. Patterico, aka Deputy LA County DA Patrick Frey, was so overwhelmed by the logic of my well-researched and well-written piece.....that the ACORN employees had not violated any law." Ernie, you have such an inflated sense of you abilities that you completely missed the point Patterico was addressing with your inadequate disclosure. Lying by omission is still lying, but as a purported lawyer you should know that. "We are not in a court of law." - Ernie, since you agree with this point, why do you keep harping on it. Nobody is trying to convict 400,000 ACORN members of anything, that's just a strawman argument you concocted to distract from the current discussion. The videos at hand were enough for Congress, the IRS, and the Census Bureau to act. Harshbarger did not call the tapes a hoax. The Brooklyn DA said O'Keefe and Giles were posing as a pimp and prostitute. It's only fringe lefty losers such as yourself and MMFA who are defending an organization the employees of which advised people on tax evasion, child sex slavery and mortgage fraud. Take a look in the mirror. What is wrong with you people! Have you no shame! Your point about ACORN and ACORN Housing being separate entities is debatable - you failed to address my point. "Daleyrocks wrote: "the NYT and other papers and news outlets who ought to know better perpetuated this damaging hoax and have either ignored the facts when they emerged or outright refused to issue retractions (with a few exceptions)."" Ernie, I did not write that. You need to be more careful as a purported officer of the court. Ernie - You can choose to be obsessed with Blackwater if you wish. I don't see the connection to the ACORN videos. You guys love conspiracies over here, though.

COMMENT #18 [Permalink]

... Fusion said on 3/10/2010 @ 9:08 pm PT...





BlueHawk @ 3 said "I understand the need to find commongraound with those whose views differ from ours.

But I'm dumbfounded about how to reach those whose brainwashing won't let them consider another's viewpoint at all...and whose whole position is based on falsehoods." I suggest a different approach though unable to say how it can be carried out. We need to bypass logical arguments with many regressives. I think we need to rely eg on Franti / Spearhead and others striking directly at the emotional level... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Franti

COMMENT #19 [Permalink]

... daleyrocks said on 3/10/2010 @ 9:13 pm PT...





"Daleyrocks complains that he thinks there were more than 46 investigations of ACORN" Ernie - I forgot that you screwed up on the above too. I said that I thought there were more than 11 investigations pending in the CRS Report. See, if you look at the wording of the report, when they total the pending investigations, they exclude the county level investigations, of which there are a boatload. Try to avoid the reflexive patellar partisan responses Ernie. They just make you look like an ass when they prove you don't know what you are talking about.

COMMENT #20 [Permalink]

... Jeannie Dean said on 3/10/2010 @ 9:40 pm PT...





Why can't visiting blogs ever play nice?... (#17) - Aren't you the one who comes over here and whines about articles you don't even bother to read? The one impervious to independent thought? Who's been proven wrong over and over again and isn't embarrassed enough by it to realize he's shredded his credibility here?

Are you so gray-matter challenged and surrounded by general stupidity that you think we won't remember you from two posts ago?

Well we do. So even before Ernie is gracious enough to take the time to put your above absurd-isms way out to pasture where they were illegitimately birthed by braindead bullies who hate that poor people can vote - consider: You've shamed yourself here many times in front of the whole class.

COMMENT #21 [Permalink]

... Ernest A. Canning said on 3/10/2010 @ 9:53 pm PT...





daleyrocks wrote @15 "If Patterico had such a solid argument, why are the likes of Ernest and I banned from commenting on his site?" MacSwain - Patterico has publicly stated Ernie the Attorney is not banned, stop making shit up.

___________________________ What Patterico "publicly stated" and what he "did" are not one and the same. When I initially called him out at Ponterico's Pontifications for his refusal to admit the obvious --- that the Baltimore ACORN transcript reveals, beyond a reasonable doubt, that O'Keefe did not pose as a pimp, Patterico blocked my IP. I know that because when I sought to respond to him, and went to post, my post simply vanished; never to appear. Obviously, some time after I complained about it at this site, Patterico reinstated my "privilege" to post at his, which I did today so that his readers can see for themselves. While I know that someone who is ideologically blinded by the right will come in here and try to challenge the cold facts I have left on this piece, I am truly hopeful that there are a few who have been taken in by hard-right propagandists will come here with their minds at least open enough to take in the truth that appears throughout this blog, and not just in my pieces. If you wish to cling to your delusions, that's your choice. Meanwhile, if you go to the top of this blog you will learn from the new piece I just posted that, today, a federal judge ruled that Congress had violated article I section 9 of the U.S. Constitution when it sought to strip ACORN of funding. Finally, I have twice asked Patterico why he did not call out one of his right-wing followers for posting what amounted to a thinly veiled terrorist threat against me at his site. Since he is a Deputy DA, I'd have expected nothing less. Yet, Patterico aka Patrick Frey has never responded to that simple question. Perhaps, if you have any sense of decorum, you'll take that up with him.

COMMENT #22 [Permalink]

... Ernest A. Canning said on 3/10/2010 @ 10:02 pm PT...





daleyrocks said @17 Your point about ACORN and ACORN Housing being separate entities is debatable. ____________________ There's no debate here! Read the Harshbarger report. Go to law school, my friend. Study corporate law. They are separate entities. The fact that they both use the name "ACORN" in their title is meaningless. ACORN Housing is neither a subsidiary or division of ACORN. ACORN Housing is a separate entity that enters contracts with ACORN. As to the balance of your points, and I mean this with the utmost respect, you are so ill informed that it is simply a waste of my time to converse with you. When you have something of substance to say, I'll consider responding further. Out!

COMMENT #23 [Permalink]

... Patterico said on 3/10/2010 @ 10:26 pm PT...





The only comments of Ernie's sitting in moderation at my blog violate my posting rule against slandering me professionally because of my blogging. The only comments of Brad's sitting in moderation at my blog violate my new, special rule, enforced only against Brad Friedman, for knowing misstatements of fact. Why do I have that special rule only for Brad? It's called tit for tat . . . sort of, because I never told any falsehoods --- but if he is going to claim I have, and then come tell actual falsehoods at my site, then yeah, I'm going to apply his rules to him. If I applied the "knowing falsehoods are banned" rule to every leftist at my site, I would have no leftist commenters. But since my comments here sit in moderation until they are too old to have any force, on the justification that I am saying truths that Friedman doesn't like, I have decided that the gander can enjoy the same sauce enjoyed by the goose. That's about all I have to say. I have given up commenting here because of Friedman's erratically imposed rules, which penalize conservatives but leave liberals who commit the same offenses untouched. If daleyrocks were not spending his time here being lied to repetitively, I wouldn't bother. My time is better spent composing posts revealing the multiple falsehoods told her. The volume of falsehoods here is so overwhelming I don't know if I can keep up.

COMMENT #24 [Permalink]

... David Lasagna said on 3/10/2010 @ 10:27 pm PT...





Great Job, Ernie!! San Diego is my favorite so far. Bears repeating. The interviewer, Juan Carlos, took a bunch of pictures of Hannah when she and O'Keefe were leaving. This seemed to greatly disturb O'Keefe.(from transcript) When they got to their car O'Keefe said(among other things)to Giles,"I thought he was gonna call his thug Mexican friends and come over and beat us up."(from the transcript) When they finally did leave Juan Carlos called his cousin the cop to get his advice on what to do about the couple he thought were human traffickers visiting his office.(from the Harshbarger report) Soon it was all revealed as a hoax. The edited and completely misrepresentative video of these events is then entitled--Acorn San Diego Child Prostitution Smuggling. Don't understand how that is not libel. Don't see why O'Keefe and Breitbart shouldn't be spending some uncomfortable time in court.

COMMENT #25 [Permalink]

... Ernest A. Canning said on 3/10/2010 @ 10:53 pm PT...





Very sound points, David Lasagna. There is certainly an intriguing question pertaining to defamation of ACORN by O'Keefe, Giles, Breitbart, Fox "News" and perhaps multiple other media outlets that ran with this story, especially when they refused to retract it after it unraveled. O'Keefe, Giles and anyone who conspired with them to secretly record what looks like confidential communications without the knowledge or consent of the ACORN and ACORN Housing employees may have opened themselves up to a charge that they committed a criminal violation of CA Penal Code 632. Thus, these two scam artists may not only face days in court, but days in the slammer.

COMMENT #26 [Permalink]

... Macswain said on 3/10/2010 @ 11:13 pm PT...





Daleyrocks, It must be a hard reality for you to accept that your idol misstates facts to justify his bogus bannings and that, in reality, he bans progressives who have exposed him for making false statements or weak arguments. I know from personal experience that Patterico doesn't moderate comments based on "rules" violations. When I found out he was moderating my comments, I challenged him on it and he said it was because I was telling lies. Of course, this is a serious charge and I asked him to identify just one lie, much less multiple lies. You'd think that if a person - indeed a lawyer - made such an inflammatory charge he'd have some evidence to back it up. Yet, Patterico never could identify a single lie. In reality, he began moderating my after I proved he made repeated false statements about John Kerry not releasing his military medical records to the media. He knows what happened and why he ran from further debating me. It's actual a quite common tactic of rightwing bloggers. Its sweet that you feel the need to carry Patterico's water. Anytime he wants to debate any of us "losers" in person, we're all available and not hiding from anyone.

COMMENT #27 [Permalink]

... Brad Friedman said on 3/10/2010 @ 11:16 pm PT...





Dep. D.A. Patrick "Patterico" Frey @ 23: Just like a wingnut. Change the rules to suit whatever you like. Versus our rules policy which is clear, simple, and linked at the top of every comment form as it has been for years. Your whining and dissembling is pathetic, but no longer a surprise. You can't support your positions, so you make things up, call people names, and block comments from those who you do not agree with. You've still miserably failed to answer the one single question I've asked you more than a dozen times now: Since you are a Los Angeles County Deputy D.A. you know very well what constitutes "evidence" and you know how to authenticate it. What steps have you taken to authenticate the "unedited audio" that you claim includes exculpatory evidence for the accused felon and admitted hoaxster that you are shamelessly blogging in defense of? You have referenced that "unedited audio" over and again to suggest it "proves" something or other, but you have failed to offer a modicum of information as to how you, as either a blogger or Deputy D.A. have bothered to ensure it's authenticity as being "unedited". I guess we can all assume you have done no such thing, and have chosen to believe the accused felon and admitted fraud. Good stuff there, counselor! Finally, you refer to "penaliz[ing] conservatives but leave liberals who commit the same offenses untouched". The charge is absurd on two levels. We "penalize" nobody, unless they violate the simple rules for commenting here, and that only after several warnings. Moreover, last I checked, conservatives were interested in the Rule of Law, as I am. I have so far seen absolutely no evidence that you are actually a conservative, otherwise you would be demanding that your own office investigate and prosecute what appear to be very clear crimes by O'Keefe and Giles within your own district of Los Angeles. Instead, you are defending them pseudonymously and shamefully on the Internet. You'll find real conservatives on this blog, Patty. Calling for the enforcement of the Rule of Law and the Constitution. You are nothing of the sort. You are a pretend conservative who, in reality, is nothing but a party-before-country rightwing propagandist. Good luck to ya, counselor. And shame on you.

COMMENT #28 [Permalink]

... daleyrocks said on 3/10/2010 @ 11:21 pm PT...





"ACORN Housing is neither a subsidiary or division of ACORN. ACORN Housing is a separate entity that enters contracts with ACORN." Ernie - If it is separate and independent, why was Bertha Lewis speaking for both organizations, in particular about personnel matters? Harshbarger's report says they dropped the number of subs from the 200+ from their lawyers report in 2008, with interlocking boards, etc., down to a madageable level, but provides no detail on when or how this was done - most probably deliberately. "you are so ill informed that it is simply a waste of my time to converse with you." Ernie - That's pretty funny coming from you with all the outright lies and distortions in your posts on this subject. I don't think you can stand someone scutinizing your screeds who isn't on your team and willing to overlook your blatant fudging of facts and lies, but that seems to be what this blog is all about.

COMMENT #29 [Permalink]

... Ernest A. Canning said on 3/10/2010 @ 11:39 pm PT...





Brad, you will note that in addition to his repeated refusal to answer your question, Patterico aka L.A. County Deputy District Attorney Patrick Frey has refused to answer multiple direct questions I've put to him. These include the following: 1. Whether he believes that his office should be investigating O'Keefe and Giles for a possible PC 632 violation; 2. Whether he ever spoke with O'Keefe directly, especially as it pertained to O'Keefe's methodology applied with respect to the audio tapes in order to assure their authenticity; 3. Why he failed to admonish a right-winger who posted a comment on his site that amounted to a veiled terrorist threat against me. Pat keeps saying that I "slandered his profession." I'm not entirely sure what he means by that, but since both Pat and I are attorneys, it would seem a bit self-defeating for me to slander my own profession. I did ask Pat whether his defense of an individual who could potentially become the subject of a PC 632 violation by his office raised any ethical concerns on his part. Is that what he means by slandering his profession? Pat's modus operandi is to level a personal attack on anyone and everyone who doesn't accept his rather myopic world view. I think you are quite right. He is not a "conservative," unless you accept John Dean's descriptor of a "conservative without conscience." I believe it more apt to simply suggest that his is typical of the hard-right, totalitarian mindset that does not tolerate anything or anyone who does not agree with him. If he actually believes half of the crap that he has spewed these past few weeks, then I fear he is suffering from some deep seated, psychopathology. If he does not believe what he is saying, then he is simply a dishonorable propagandist. At this point, I'm really not sure which descriptor aptly fits the man.

COMMENT #30 [Permalink]

... Macswain said on 3/10/2010 @ 11:50 pm PT...





It seems to me that the rightwing barometer for ACORN anger has reached an all-time high since their Republican Wisconsin AG and the Wisconsin "task force" investigation that they so hoped would prove ACORN was a fraudulent organization came up so woefully short. Moreover, as Patterico is the self-appointed arbiter of truth, one must wonder why his site continues to link approvingly to a post by Ed Morrissey accepting an allegation by the criminal defendant, who the right accepts is a fraud, as factual (the sex and special treatment allegation) without any other substantiating evidence. I guess when you're smearing ACORN, truth be damned.

COMMENT #31 [Permalink]

... Brad Friedman said on 3/11/2010 @ 12:38 am PT...





DaleyRocks @ 17 said: Lying by omission is still lying, but as a purported lawyer you should know that. Good point, Daley. Be sure to mention that next time L.A. County Deputy D.A. Patrick "Patterico" Frey brings up his canard about my having "lied" to NYT Public Editor Clark Hoyt about the "audio". There are a few words, both before and after his selectively quoted phrase, (not to mention a rather clear explanation at the top of what he's deceptively quoting from), that, um, should leave you calling him a liar. If you suddenly decide to become intellectually honest with yourself, in any case.

COMMENT #32 [Permalink]

... Patterico said on 3/11/2010 @ 12:50 am PT...





MacSwain, As I recall, you praised me for correcting re Kerry. Shall I roll the tape or would you like to retract now and save yourself the embarrassment?

COMMENT #33 [Permalink]

... Brad Friedman said on 3/11/2010 @ 12:53 am PT...





Whoops, one other point for... DaleyRocks @ 17: Ernie - You can choose to be obsessed with Blackwater if you wish. I don't see the connection to the ACORN videos. You guys love conspiracies over here, though. If by "conspiracies" you mean several sets of criminal allegations against Blackwater and it's top-most officials alleged to have conspired to run actual prostitution and child prostitution rings with federal tax-payer dollars --- more of which they receive in a single day than ACORN has received in its lifetime --- and to even cover up murder and so forth and massive defrauding of the federal government. If so, then no, we don't "love" conspiracies, but we do feel it's our patriotic duty to help expose them and hold the criminal conspirators accountable. You do understand these are allegations, in court, from several sets of company employees and the charges have not been exposed by the company itself (as with ACORN when they turn in folks who have defrauded them to officials), but against the company itself and its CEO, etc. I'd have thought as a supposed "conservative" you'd be in favor of cracking down on such things. Ya know, holding folks to the rule of law, fighting against massive government waste and corruption and stuff. Yet none of this stuff appears at Patterico's site, or at any of the "Andrew Breitbart Presents...Big Doings" sites for some strange reason. It's as if he and you and they don't care about this stuff at all. But perhaps you're busy chasing partisan political agendas and ghosts with ACORN, ACORN, ACORN instead of the actual, massive corruption going on under your nose, and presumably, to your liking??

COMMENT #34 [Permalink]

... Macswain said on 3/11/2010 @ 12:54 am PT...





Daley, Also be sure to explain "lying by omission" the next time Patterico suggests O'Keefe didn't lie when Steve Doocey introduced O'Keefe on Fox as wearing exactly what he wore to the ACORN offices when O'Keefe was wearing his outlandish, "stereotypical" pimp outfit.

COMMENT #35 [Permalink]

... Patterico said on 3/11/2010 @ 12:54 am PT...





Friedman: Did you write Hoyt and say O'Keefe would not release unedited audio? Yes. Did you correct your misstatement? No. Evidence forthcoming. With Hot Air and Instapundit links to my posts revealing your mendacity, you are building yourself quite a reputation as a purveyor of falsehoods. Congratulations!

COMMENT #36 [Permalink]

... Macswain said on 3/11/2010 @ 1:15 am PT...





Rico (since we're only using last names now), I always thought this grand debate on blogs and their associated comment sections was good fun. There was a time when he seemed to be able to laugh and roll with this rough and tumble world. But, dude, that last post seems to reveal a troubled soul. It appears you truly believe that you, Instapundit and Hot Air are some kind of grand arbiters of truthfulness that can simply bring progressive bloggers to their knees. That is simply a bizarre view. And the whole juvenile, tattle-tale thing ... Wow! Honestly, you may want to consider taking a break from this blogging thing for a while. You might be surprised to learn that the world can continue without your posts and you don't have to shoulder this burden of going through these extreme mental gymnastics in your efforts to describe all progressives as liars.

COMMENT #37 [Permalink]

... Jeannie Dean said on 3/11/2010 @ 2:45 am PT...





MacSwain ~ Righto! I didn't know this guy from a hole in the wall before I read his hostile-aggressive responses to Brad's recent devastating expose of O'Keefe's ACORN hit-job / hoax. Regretting I do now - he makes me want to wash my brain with some kind of chemical solvent. At first, I thought he was some unhinged fringe-y. Now? Now I do some more. And yet I'm told he's a public official of some kind. (I wouldn't believe that 'cause it seems too much of a stretch - but then Brad reported it, so...just another daily installment of his jaw-to-floor-dropping, dead accurate coverage.) Not sure if "Co" (why stop at the implied insult of using just last names? Why not just last SYLLABLES?) - not sure if Co knows (or cares) how crazy he reads, but it has been suggested (and the record will show) that he needs help.

COMMENT #38 [Permalink]

... Bob Ross said on 3/11/2010 @ 5:50 am PT...





Daley there must be some odd delsy then on patrick's site I refreshed the page several times waiting for my comment to appear. As for Patrick he whined over at his blog that he was put into moderation for knowing misinformation as opposed to the real reason. That he was personally insulting other posters and was warned multiple times to stop. Patrick, how is an article about schiavo balanced if the first few paragraphs accuse Michael of strangling his wife and putting her in that condition?

COMMENT #39 [Permalink]

... Bob Ross said on 3/11/2010 @ 6:49 am PT...





That should be odd delay. Phone has small keyboard.

COMMENT #40 [Permalink]

... David Lasagna said on 3/11/2010 @ 8:42 am PT...





Bob Ross-- I like the sound of "delsy". And as it sounds odd all by itself, an "odd delsy" is doubly emphatic.

COMMENT #41 [Permalink]

... Ernest A. Canning said on 3/11/2010 @ 8:51 am PT...





Patterico wrote: Did you write Hoyt and say O'Keefe would not release unedited audio? Yes. Did you correct your misstatement? No. Evidence forthcoming.

_____________________________ What "evidence"? Brad has repeatedly asked you what, if anything, did you do to authenticate that the audio was not edited. The mere fact that accused federal felon James O'Keefe and his serial dissembling employer and publisher Andrew Breitbart say that the audio tapes were not edited does not establish that they were not edited. Since you are obviously the very competent attorney you claim to be, then surely you took steps to authenticate the audiotapes before you called Brad out on the issue. How much longer do we have to await your "evidence" of authentication? I suspect the answer is, until pigs fly.

COMMENT #42 [Permalink]

... Ernest A. Canning said on 3/11/2010 @ 9:19 am PT...





Well, there you have it. After repeatedly refusing to answer my straight forward question as to whether he believed James O'Keefe* should be investigated by his office for what appears to be a violation of CA Penal Code 632 when he secretly recorded confidential communications inside three ACORN offices, Deputy DA Patrick Frey aka Patterico wrote at his blog: "Even if O’Keefe didn’t break any laws, the leftists will make something up. You read it here first." This would be the same Patrick Frey who denigrated the efforts by former LA County Deputy DA Vincent Bugliosi to set forth a legal case as to why George W. Bush should be tried for the murder of the deaths of U.S. service personnel occasioned by the lies Bush told to take us to war in Iraq as "politics." Clearly, Deputy DA Patrick Frey believes that one's political leanings provide the litmus test for determining whether an individual can be charged with a crime. Scary, a man who has taken a solemn oath to enforce the law, sees enforcement as a question of one's politics. *Of course, in addition to the possible PC 632 violation James O'Keefe has been accused by federal authorities of committing a felony when he entered the office of a U.S. Senator with the intent to tamper with her phone system. But obviously, in Patterico's way of thinking, since the Justice Department is currently under the leadership of someone appointed by a Democratic President, any charges against O'Keefe are simply political.

COMMENT #43 [Permalink]

... Lora said on 3/11/2010 @ 10:21 am PT...





It's been questioned here whether Daleyrocks is just misguided or deliberately lying. I just read his comments here trying to answer this question, and I must confess I am impressed. Daleyrocks is as slippery as an eel (that's a compliment, not an insult). I will address one paragraph from comment #17: "We are not in a court of law." - Ernie, since you agree with this point, why do you keep harping on it. [If you scroll back to comment #8, Daleyrocks brings up the point that we are not in a court of law: "Why did they need to wait for Harshbarger's report to come out in December since we are not operating in a court of law, contrary to what you contend later." It is disingenuous of Daleyrocks to accuse Ernie of "harping on it." ] Nobody is trying to convict 400,000 ACORN members of anything, that's just a strawman argument you concocted to distract from the current discussion. [Sure, Daleyrocks. Pretend that Congress' action didn't affect 400,000 members of ACORN. Oh,oh, wait...they weren't convicted, just punished (this is not a court of law)....my bad.]The videos at hand were enough for Congress, the IRS, and the Census Bureau to act. [Sadly, yes.] Harshbarger did not call the tapes a hoax. The Brooklyn DA said O'Keefe and Giles were posing as a pimp and prostitute. [Disingenuous slippery Daleyrocks ignores all the evidence presented here which discredits the whole "O'Keefe posed as a pimp" canard. And he ignores the fact that all sorts of people were taken in by it, including the Brooklyn DA.] It's only fringe lefty losers such as yourself [sadly methinks this was meant as an insult] and MMFA who are defending an organization the employees of which advised people on tax evasion [questionable --- the transcripts show that in some cases the employees were advising how to pay taxes on money earned --- but of course Daleyrocks knows this], child sex slavery [ok Daleyrocks, where in the transcripts does it show this? They don't and you know it] and mortgage fraud [and you mean exactly what by this?]. Take a look in the mirror. What is wrong with you people! Have you no shame? [Daleyrocks, the last three sentences apply to you!]" Just to set the record straight: The quote which Ernest attributed to Daleyrocks: "the NYT and other papers and news outlets who ought to know better perpetuated this damaging hoax and have either ignored the facts when they emerged or outright refused to issue retractions (with a few exceptions)." is in fact mine from comment #5.

COMMENT #44 [Permalink]

... Patterico said on 3/11/2010 @ 12:50 pm PT...





MacSwain, As I recall, you praised me for correcting re Kerry. Shall I roll the tape or would you like to retract now and save yourself the embarrassment?

COMMENT #45 [Permalink]

... David Lasagna said on 3/11/2010 @ 2:25 pm PT...





Dear Lora @ 43 At the risk of making myself and everyone else crazy again I will repeat-- I believe the kind of magic thinking you are trying to deconstruct here is endemic. Rachel gives new examples almost every night of the serial dissembling coming out of Washington. And this is dissembling that easily crosses the aisle(not much distance there, I'll grant you)in Washington. Having also witnessed this kind of thinking first hand for years in my family and in relationships I will say again--there is an awful lot of this going on. I think the field of inquiry needs to be opened up a bit. I believe there are psychological/emotional factors being manifested here that just don't give two hoots and a damn how much sense and reality you have on your side. Please, please don't misunderstand what I'm saying. Truth, sense, and reality must be championed. I think we're doing a hell of a job, all of us here, with that part. But my sense is if there is to ever be any agreement on common ground, if there is ever going to be anything other than a battle of wills, other factors may need to be considered. For instance as Robert Jensen writes concerning literal interpreters of the Bible-- "That is rooted, I believe, in a fear of a world that is complex beyond our understanding, a fear of the fact that uncertainty is the defining characteristic of human claims to knowledge. In such a world, it's not difficult to see why people would want to believe that there is a source of ultimate understanding that can reveal itself to people, rather than a contingent source of understanding that we must work hard to grasp, knowing that a definitive understanding is always just beyond our grasp. The second fear concerns the reaction to any challenge to such a belief; if the instinct to believe in this fashion is rooted in fear, a challenge to that belief is likely to intensify the fear. It usually is frightening for us all whenever we have to ponder the possibility that a central tenet of our belief system is illogical." I suspect this applies to rigid, fear-based political thought as well. I'm not sure it's possible to address what I'm suggesting/advocating here in this cyberspace format. Maybe the back and forths we're doing with the other side is the best we can do in this medium. I'm just trying to say that this ongoing political discussion/argument may not be in the slightest what is taking place internally between all the participants.

COMMENT #46 [Permalink]

... Macswain said on 3/11/2010 @ 3:03 pm PT...





Patterico says: MacSwain, As I recall, you praised me for correcting re Kerry. Shall I roll the tape or would you like to retract now and save yourself the embarrassment? I don't know if you have a reading comprehension problem or are intentionally dissembling. Nowhere did I say you did not correct your false Kerry posts once busted or that I initially complemented you on the correction. I claimed you were embarrassed by being busted and began moderating my comments thereafter. Of course, if I knew you were going to flip and begin moderating my comments, I wouldn't have complemented you at all. I also claim you accused me of telling "lies" and have never produced a single one. Why don't you roll the tape on that one? You're making yourself look worse when your sole defense is to submit goofy strawman arguments that have never been made. How many hours did you spend researching your takedown of an argument that was never made? Doesn't that tell you something about yourself you might seriously want to consider?

COMMENT #47 [Permalink]

... daleyrocks said on 3/11/2010 @ 5:46 pm PT...





Lora - The Brooklyn DA's press release about the investigation specifically describes O'Keefe and Giles posing as a pimp and prostitute. This whole "hoax" narrative was concocted by losers like Boehlert, stolen by Brad who did not do his homework before he began writing about it, merely as a means of discrediting the videos after the racism attacks did not work. The "hoax" narrative only works on those who did not watch the videos as they came out or are too stupid to understand what they are seeing since it was clear from the first video O'Keefe did not wear the gaudy pimp outfit into the ACORN offices and that footage was edited onto the beginning and end of each video for effect. Ignorance or stupidity, take your pick. Like the piece in FAIR today, it's clear the writer has not watched the videos and is merely ripping and rehashing Brad's lies.

COMMENT #48 [Permalink]

... daleyrocks said on 3/11/2010 @ 5:51 pm PT...





Brad and Ernie - Since Ernie agrees we are not in a court of law, what purpose does perseverating over the questions related to the standards of evidence related to the unedited transcripts and audio serve at this point. You jerks will just keep raising objections no matter what is put forward and continue lying, which is why Breitbart hasn't released the unedited videos, but you know that. It is pretty funny to watch an actor lecture an assistant DA about standards of evidence, though. Brad, don't ever change.

COMMENT #49 [Permalink]

... Bob Ross said on 3/11/2010 @ 8:09 pm PT...





Ah I get it Daley Brietbart won't release unedited tapes simply because he's afraid people will actually look at them. Kind of like how the Schiavo family never released the hours of footage they have because then people might actually pay attention to them. I find it funny that you'd take O'Keefe at his word after he already went around on TV saying he dressed in that outlandish costume. He already lied to you guys once yet you're willing to believe the hoax. Even so what actual crime did ACORN part timers commit? Do you hold the same standards for John Yoo and Alberto Gonzales?

COMMENT #50 [Permalink]

... Lora said on 3/11/2010 @ 8:24 pm PT...





Dear David @ 45, I will consider what you say. I don't think I am taking it wrong. I think you believe there are other factors at work here that facts and logic don't begin to address. That may be true. I'm sure it's true for some "believers." I guess I hope to sort out the "believers" from the "deceivers." I think they are two different breeds and I fear the "believers" are sorely used and manipulated by the "deceivers." I guess I hope that by exposing the "deceivers" we can hope to reach and influence the "believers." Dear Daleyrocks @ 47, I went on youtube and watched all the videos I could find. If you are looking for O'Keefe in his button-down shirt and slacks, you can find him. However, it was NOT "perfectly clear" as you say that O'Keefe did not wear his pimp outfit into the ACORN offices, especially after he appeared on FOX in that very same pimp outfit and we were told he was. Countless media outfits reported it. O'Keefe himself played part in this deception. This evidence has been presented over and over again right here. If it was "perfectly clear" as you say, then kindly explain why nearly everyone got it wrong. O'Keefe himself lied about it on FOX; hence we are perfectly justified in calling it a hoax. It is also a hoax because the transcripts and eyewitness accounts are so out of line with his heavily edited videos. As for ignorance and stupidity, I agree with you if you are referring to the NYT and other so-called reputable news and media outlets. They should have done some fact-checking. It does seem painfully clear that they did not watch the released videos at all carefully, or perhaps even at all. I release the general public from the "ignorance and stupidity" label, as they should have been able to trust the so-called reputable news organizations to give them the straight story. However, Fox and Breitbart and O'Keefe and Hannity and Giles get the label of deceivers and slanderers. They knew the truth was not anywhere close to what they were telling us, yet they chose to tell us anyway with the purpose of taking ACORN down. The rationale you put forward in your next comment to Brad and Ernest as to why Breitbart won't release the unedited videos makes no sense. The unedited videos will be the closest we have to the truth of what really happened. Folks can reach their own judgment about ACORN's and O'Keefe's and Giles' behavior. Unless Fox and the NYT spread falsehoods about what is happening on the unedited videos like they did on the edited ones, there will be no need to raise objections.

COMMENT #51 [Permalink]

... Ernest A. Canning said on 3/11/2010 @ 10:41 pm PT...





Daleyrocks @47 wrote The "hoax" narrative only works on those who did not watch the videos as they came out or are too stupid to understand what they are seeing since it was clear from the first video O'Keefe did not wear the gaudy pimp outfit into the ACORN offices and that footage was edited onto the beginning and end of each video for effect.

___________________ What a load of crap! O'Keefe wore the outfit outside one ACORN office; spliced it into every video, used voice-overs to make answers to what had been innocuous questions appear as if the ACORN employees were giving advice to a pimp and a prostitute when, in fact, they had posed, in the Baltimore office, for example, as a "dancer" and a "college student." O'Keefe, who not only refused to turn over the unedited videos, also refused to be interviewed by former AG Harshbarger. O'Keefe appeared on the Fox Propaganda network wearing the cheesy pimp outfit, and sat with a smug look on his face as Steve Deucy announced that he, O'Keefe, was wearing the exact same outfit he wore into the ACORN offices. Obviously O'Keefe told Deucey that he wore the pimp outfit into ACORN; otherwise why would Deucey have said it? (Or do you think Deucey pulled that line out of his ass?). Even in the highly unlikely event that O'Keefe did not tell Deucey that he wore the pimp outfit into the ACORN offices, O'Keefe's smug silence when Deucey said that this was the exact same outfit he wore into the ACORN offices is what is known in law as an "adoptive admission." Yeah, I know, Daleyrocks. We're not in a court of law --- which is precisely what makes it so terrible that ACORN was tried and convicted in the press and in Congress without so much as a single hearing on the basis of nothing more than these deceptively doctored videotapes and the McCarthy-like smear job of Republicans (and some gutless Dems) in Congress. Worse, O'Keefe, Breitbart, Fox News, Patterico and you --- yes I've read some of your earlier comments at Patterico's Pontifications, as part of this deceptive scheme, have sought to use the distorted images of these doctored videos; a few words extracted out of context out of a 46 page transcript and reassembled to make it appear as if the ACORN workers had done something illegal --- they had not. You and your ilk, in McCarthy-like fashion, then used this disinformation to smear an entire organization consisting of 400,000 member families in 75 cities. The real question, Daleyrocks, the one you have no doubt never addressed is why, since there were no published reports of illegal ACORN prostitution schemes before O'Keefe & Giles launched the "Great Pimp Hoax," the motley pair went into ACORN with their hidden cameras in the first place? The answer is as plain as the snot dripping from your nose. ACORN registers voters who do not vote for Republicans. ACORN assists the poor and lower middle class. ACORN is the class enemy that a billionaire-funded hard-right was and is Hell bent on destroying. For years, the hard-right tried to destroy ACORN by bogus "voter fraud" claims, but as the Congressional Research Service study reveals, there has not been a single instance in which a voter, improperly registered by an ACORN employee, cast a ballot at the polls. In fact, ACORN, the victim of the fraud, is the one that turns people in for registration fraud. Since the bogus voter fraud charge didn't work, the lying scum that make up the hard-right came up with this phony pimp hoax, and that is why they went into the ACORN offices in the first place with their hidden cameras. There is no question but that this was a deceptive hoax. The only unanswered questions are how much money and how many people are implicated in this deceptive hoax and whether, at least in California, the perpetrators of the hoax will eventually face charges for a criminal violation of CA Penal Code 632. Your many dissembling comments, Daleyrocks, call to mind the words from an old Paul Simon tune, "Who do you think you're foolin'?"

COMMENT #52 [Permalink]

... Ernest A. Canning said on 3/11/2010 @ 11:02 pm PT...





What's next, Daleyrocks? Will you be coming in to join with the rest of the loony right in claiming that Obama was not born in the U.S., or are you going to simply join with the likes of Sarah Palin in claiming that the health care reform bill contains "death panels?" Oh, but how can I say Obama was born in the U.S.? After all, this "is not a court of law."

COMMENT #53 [Permalink]

... Brad Friedman said on 3/12/2010 @ 9:39 am PT...





DaleyRocks asked: Brad and Ernie - Since Ernie agrees we are not in a court of law, what purpose does perseverating over the questions related to the standards of evidence related to the unedited transcripts and audio serve at this point. Thanks for asking. While the paper trail of when, how and where this repeated question has come up is readily available on the net both here and at Patty's site --- along with LA County's Dep. D.A. Patrick Frey's flat out unwillingness to even acknowledge the question, much less answer it --- I'll briefly recap to help you understand the answer, presuming you actually want one. "Patterico" Frey has continually called me a "liar" for this and that, which is what he does, apparently, in lieu of actual substantive criticism on just about anything. So that part is expected. But, in general, he has referred to the "unedited audio" as "proof" or "evidence" that I am "a liar". He's done that over and over again. Now, never mind that he's completely misrepresented that unauthenticated "unedited audio" and the unauthenticated text transcripts, both posted by the admitted hoaxters and accused felon, over and over again by deceptively stitching and reassembling parts of them to make his case (while ignoring the vast majority of both which do quite the contrary), as shown here in responses to his comments over and again. The point is that while that "unedited audio" seems to be the basis for his silly accusation that Ernie and myself (and Eric Boehlert and anybody else who does not agree with Patty's partisan, rage-filled, anti-ACORN derangement syndrome) are "liars", he has failed the basic benchmark for evaluating "evidence" before using it as "proof" of anything. As a reporter/blogger/political pundit, he should certainly know better. That is, after all, what I'm quite certain he has likely been critical of Dan Rather for in the past. But as a Deputy D.A., of all things, he has absolutely NO excuse for not understanding what constitutes "evidence" and how such things are authenticated. Thus, I've simply and politely asked him, over and over again, what steps he has taken to authenticate the "unedited audio" which he cites, over and over and over again, as "evidence" for me having "lied". He has refused to answer the question, which ought to help you understand how you've been connned and dishonorably mislead by this man. It also underscores that the basis of "evidence" which he has tried to use to attempt to label me as a "liar" --- evidence which, even if authenticated, actually doesn't prove me to be a liar, but never mind that --- is wholly speculative and is based on taking the word of the admitted scammers, and an accused felon for chrissakes!, in order to absolve those scammers and felons of guilt. His arguments, in other words, in either a court of law, or in the court of public opinion, or in the court of legitimate blog comment FAIL from the get go. He knows this, of course, which is why he won't answer the question, because he has failed to do even minimal due-dilligence. Instead, he simply screams "LIAR! LIAR! LIAR! LIAR!" and counts on his readers being too lazy, or intellectually incurious enough to bother to go figure that out. If you buy into what Patty has been selling, you are being scammed plain and simple. He may be disingenuous, but he's not stupid. He knows exactly what he's doing, and he knows that he is hoping to con you guys, plain and simple. From reading comments over at his site, including yours, it seems that con is working for at least some of the people, much of the time. Hope that answers your question, and thanks for asking it. Now go ask him what steps he's taken to authenticate the "unedited audio" which he uses as virtually his ENTIRE basis for attempting to disprove the independently verifiable and authenticated FACTS I've used from day one to illustrate the entire ACORN "pimp" hoax scam. You jerks will just keep raising objections no matter what is put forward and continue lying, which is why Breitbart hasn't released the unedited videos, but you know that. It is pretty funny to watch an actor lecture an assistant DA about standards of evidence, though. Brad, don't ever change.

COMMENT #54 [Permalink]

... daleyrocks said on 3/12/2010 @ 6:32 pm PT...





"It also underscores that the basis of "evidence" which he has tried to use to attempt to label me as a "liar" --- evidence which, even if authenticated, actually doesn't prove me to be a liar, but never mind that" Brad - You are a shameless liar. I listened to Larry O'Connor's radio show live and the lies were coming out of all your orifices simultaneously. You could not keep them straight. Just because the tapes were edited does not mean that something called unedited, has flaws in it because you have created some fabulist narrative about the tapes which even the liberal house organ, the NY Times, does not find credible. Labelling O'Keefe an accused felon also does not diminish the credibility of the unedited audio and video. Unless you have some specific claim which raises doubts about their authenticity, you are are again perfectly illustrating why Breitbart made the right decision about not releasing his videos. I'm sorry if you are too dense to understand that. Perhaps an illustration will help. Ernest keeps claiming that Giles and O'Keefe did not present them selves as a prostitute and a pimp in Baltimore, that she posed as a dancer. Complete and utter BS. Dancing was mentioned, but prostitution was clearly part of the discussion, hence the discussion of condom expenses. Also the underage Salvadorans turning tricks and turning over their money - whaddaya know - a pimp. Ernie has been shown those lines several times but keeps repeating his BS denying it. I call him a liar for his continued claims.

COMMENT #55 [Permalink]

... daleyrocks said on 3/12/2010 @ 6:51 pm PT...





Lora @50 You seem like a reasonable person, just a little confused. "However, it was NOT "perfectly clear" as you say that O'Keefe did not wear his pimp outfit into the ACORN offices, especially after he appeared on FOX in that very same pimp outfit and we were told he was. Countless media outfits reported it. O'Keefe himself played part in this deception. This evidence has been presented over and over again right here. If it was "perfectly clear" as you say, then kindly explain why nearly everyone got it wrong." I don't know who countless media outlets are. The citations here and at MMFA totaled something six to eight - hardly enough to "drive" a story. If you've got more, bring 'em on as they say. Nearly everyone I know understood that the pimp outfit was part of B-roll footage, so I don't understand your claims of people missing it other than my theories of ignorance or stupidity I outlines above. Liberals are not known for their senses of humor. "The rationale you put forward in your next comment to Brad and Ernest as to why Breitbart won't release the unedited videos makes no sense." Lora, it absolutely does and Brad and Ernest are vindicating it every day with their continued posting of fabulist nonsense about "hoaxes" and the tapes. Sorry if you can't see that. Even the NY Times finds the narrative the narrative Ernest and Brad are constructing not credible. Go figure. I'm also sorry you can't figure out that advising someone they can choose not to file a tax return if they want is tax fraud or manufacturing expenses or personal exemptions (Salvadorans) to reduce the income they report to Uncle Sam. Lying on a mortgage application, about the source of your income or other matters is mortgage fraud. With respect to defunding ACORN, were the grants for mortgage counseling from HUD intended for existing members or for outreach? Do you have any idea Lora? Tell me how the defunding was specifically disadvantaging the members.

COMMENT #56 [Permalink]

... Jeannie Dean said on 3/12/2010 @ 6:52 pm PT...





(#54) You've been neutralized here again and again. Dude, stay down. "Liarliar lie lie lying liar." Why not continue to completely drain the word of all meaning some more by repeating it over and over when it clearly doesn't apply? --Liar. Liar lying to liars.

--Am not.

--Are too, Liar. You're lying because I said so. That is how you sound.

Grow up or go away.

Or grow up AND go away.

COMMENT #57 [Permalink]

... Jeannie Dean said on 3/12/2010 @ 7:05 pm PT...





"...so I don't understand your claims of people missing it other than my theories of ignorance or stupidity I outlines above." That's because you're theory of ignorance or stupidity doesn't include you as part of the empty set. Your scientific sampling is corrupt. Maybe THAT's why Lora and I (and the New York Times and Washington Post and the Boston Globe and every other media outlet who got it wrong) are confused (and even more REASONABLY) doubtful of your stats. "Liberals are not known for their senses of humor." Wha..? Now you're just shootin' blanks.

I guess you guys have really taken over the Vegas Strip with conserva-flop Dennis Miller.

COMMENT #58 [Permalink]

... Bob Ross said on 3/12/2010 @ 7:45 pm PT...





Daley a pimp finds clients for his prostitute. If he was posing as a pimp he would have come out and said it from the beginning instead of beating around the bush. Unless you think Okeefe is some kind of pussy? Instead of claiming he was some college student and she was his girlfriend. As for "turning tricks" Okeefe got his wording wrong he said performing tricks. In the end what crime was committed here other than the breaking of the recording consent laws. Do you think someone Dyncorp should be defunded for actual crimes of child prostitution.

COMMENT #59 [Permalink]

... Ernest A. Canning said on 3/12/2010 @ 9:54 pm PT...





Bob Ross @58. You reference actual crimes of child prostitution committed by Dyncorp. While I discuss the sworn affidavits of former Blackwater that make such an allegation, I'm not aware of any against Dyncorp. Would greatly appreciate a link if you have it. Thanks.

COMMENT #60 [Permalink]

... Ernest A. Canning said on 3/12/2010 @ 9:56 pm PT...





Oh, and Jeannie Dean, I really chuckled at your "shooting blanks" observation as it applies to Daleyrocks, as there certainly appears to be a degree of impotence in his superficial mumblings.

COMMENT #61 [Permalink]

... Ernest A. Canning said on 3/13/2010 @ 7:30 am PT...





Another nonsensical post #53 from the Brad Blog's most nonsensical poster, Daleyrocks, responding to Lora #50: "However, it was NOT "perfectly clear" as you say that O'Keefe did not wear his pimp outfit into the ACORN offices, especially after he appeared on FOX in that very same pimp outfit and we were told he was. Countless media outfits reported it. O'Keefe himself played part in this deception. This evidence has been presented over and over again right here. If it was "perfectly clear" as you say, then kindly explain why nearly everyone got it wrong." _____________________ That sort of reasoning reminds me of the words someone had written on a men's room wall at UCLA when I was a student there in 1971. It read: "Eat shit! Ten billion flies can't all be wrong." On behalf of my dear intellectually challenged friend, Daleyrocks, I will repeat what should have been all the evidence required to determine that O'Keefe was not dressed as a pimp when he entered any of the ACORN offices: Hannah Giles, O'Keefe's co-conspirator in this concocted partisan "sting," has now admitted (once even on video) that O'Keefe never went into any of the offices dressed as a pimp.

COMMENT #62 [Permalink]

... Brad Friedman said on 3/13/2010 @ 2:29 pm PT...





DaleyRocks @ 55 said disingenuously: I don't know who countless media outlets are. The citations here and at MMFA totaled something six to eight - hardly enough to "drive" a story. If you've got more, bring 'em on as they say. Of course you know who the countless media outlets are. As I just explained in a comment to you on another thread, where you similarly tried to use the same laughable red herring: I have shown some 8 instances of the misreporting in just the New York Times alone since Harshbarger's report was released in December (unreported by the Times). That doesn't account for all of their misreports prior to the Harshbarger report. Nor the scores and scores and scores of similar misreports by CNN, Fox "News", AP, NPR, Washington Post, Dallas Morning News, Baltimore Sun and hundreds of other papers and media outlets. So you're serious with the above? Or being a disingenuous tool of the L.A. County Dep. D.A. Patrick Frey who keeps stepping on the same rake over and over again, and then lying about it in hopes of hiding the bumps on his own head? Thanks again for stopping by to help demonstrate how absurd the arguments are for the apologists of admitted hoaxters and accused felons. Looks like Patterico could no longer support his own nonsense he was posting here, so had to retreat back to the "friendlier" territory of his own blog where folks like you have a tendency to believe whatever he tells you without bothering to look into the facts. Here's hoping your next political scam will targets orphans and cripples! Those bastards and their "evil organizations" are really living large on the federal government tax-payer dollar and need to be stopped immediately! America couldn't be prouder of you guys. Impressive stuff.

COMMENT #63 [Permalink]

... Brad Friedman said on 3/13/2010 @ 2:58 pm PT...





DaleyRocks @ 54 said: Brad - You are a shameless liar. I listened to Larry O'Connor's radio show live and the lies were coming out of all your orifices simultaneously. You could not keep them straight. Cool! That appearance is online, so you should have no trouble pointing out any of those "lies" to us! I look forward to them. Or, you could do what seems to be the M.O. for you and L.A. County Dep. District Attorney Patrick "Patterico" Frey and Andrew Breitbart and James O'Keefe and all the rest of the wingnut scammers do, and just say stuff and then declare that it's true on the basis that you said it, so it's got to be true! Just because the tapes were edited does not mean that something called unedited, has flaws in it because you have created some fabulist narrative about the tapes Let's proceed as if the above sentence makes sense. You and Patty have based your defense of the admitted hoaxters on the basis that the "unedited audio" tapes "prove" somethign or other. Among them, you and he have claimed that they "prove" O'Keefe "posed as" and/or "represented himself" as a pimp. Among the reasons you make that dubious claim is because at some point in the unauthenticated "unedited audio" and unathenticated text transcripts, you point to a moment when O'Keefe said something about "turning tricks". That phrase, however, is not acknowledged by the ACORN Housing worker who is heard responding to "making money" but not to "turning tricks". Did she even hear the words "turning tricks"? Did O'Keefe even actually say it? If you're going to hang your weak argument that though O'Keefe represented himself as the girl's college student law school boyfriend over and over again, he was actually "posing as" and/or "representing himself" as a pimp, based on two words that come near the very end of a 46 page transcript, should you --- or the Dep. D.A. Patrick Frey --- have bothered to ensure that "unedited audio" was actually authentic and "unedited"? Shouldn't you and/or he have done the minimal due dilligence to ensure that not only did O'Keefe really say that, but that the person he was talking to actually heard him say that? These are basic, Journalism 101 and District Attorney 101 matters. But neither you, nor ne, nor anybody else hanging your pimp hat on this remarkable thin "evidence" have bothered to do step one of the most obvious, and responsible fact-checking before making your arguments which are, so far, disputed by one official law enforcement agent after another who have looked at the same material. Unless you have some specific claim which raises doubts about their authenticity, you are are again perfectly illustrating why Breitbart made the right decision about not releasing his videos. Well, we could simply take O.J. Simpson's word for it that he didn't kill his ex-wife, or we could bother to more closely examine his claims, since he's been proven to be a liar on several occassions, just as both O'Keefe and Breitbart and Giles have already been proven. As to withholding evidence from law enforcement, evidence said to demonstrate serious crimes, as O'Keefe and Breitbart are both claiming and doing, I'm not sure how you'd want to be an apologist for that either. But as you are clearly so enraged by Anti-ACORN Derangement Syndrome (AADS) that you are willing to justify anything, I suppose I shouldn't be surprised that you've also figured out how to reconcile being in favor of withholding 'damning' evidence of 'crimes' from law enforcement, since doing so continues to help justify your partisan political agenda. Also the underage Salvadorans turning tricks and turning over their money - whaddaya know - a pimp. Ernie has been shown those lines several times but keeps repeating his BS denying it. I call him a liar for his continued claims. I've already discussed that point above. The burden is on you and Breitbart and O'Keefe and Deputy D.A. Frey to prove your point. As Breitbart himself has said over and again (though only about O'Keefe and his arrest in New Orleans), folks in this country are innocent until proven guilty. You have failed to prove your point to a single law enforcement official. All of them who have looked at those claims have derided them as laughable, phony, and trumped up. And yet, you are hanging your hat on a transcript and audio which has been supplied by admitted liars without even taking the time to authenticate the transcript and audio you are relying on. Isn't that the exact same thing you folks claimed that Dan Rather did, and called for him to be fired because of? Why yes, it is. Double standards? "Double" may be too few for you guys. If you've got a legitimate story or scandal of corruption and child prostitution on the government dime, please let us know! Oh, look, here's one! But for some odd reason, neither the L.A. County Deputy D.A. Patrick Frey, nor Andrew Breitbart on all of his "Andrew Breitbart Presents..." websites has bothered to report any of it, even once, to my knowledge. Now I wonder why that would be?! You guys can continue putting politics and party before country. We'll continue to fight for democracy --- even your democracy --- whether you wish us to or not. You're welcome.

COMMENT #64 [Permalink]

... Ernest A. Canning said on 3/13/2010 @ 3:19 pm PT...





Brad, I've come to the conclusion that further dialogue with the serial dissembling Daleyrocks is pointless. Like the wing nuts who shut down one of the oldest forms of American democracy, the town hall meeting, Daleyrocks has arrived at the intersection of Brad Street and Democracy Blvd., seeking to tie us up with one idiotic point after another. When you refute him point by point, he just denies reality, poses a new set of passive aggressive questions, like the suggestion that we have to keep coming back to demonstrate what has already demonstrated, i.e., the irrefutable evidence that this entire scam was a hoax; the number of media outlets that erred in covering this story, etc. When I pose a direct question as to whether there was any evidence that ACORN was involved in prostitution before O'Keefe & Giles conducted their deceptive sting, Daleyrocks, without a link, suggested that I simply go to another site where O'Keefe supposedly stated his reasons for starting up this hoax in the first place --- as if the burden is on me to search through an entire site to find an answer when Daleyrocks could have directly answered (or admitted that he did not know the answer) --- that is the nature of the beast we are dealing with here. They can't compete with the facts or the law, so they repeatedly raise bogus points, time and again, hoping that, if nothing else, they can get the two of use expending enormous time chasing facts they are already fully aware of --- or, in the case of Daleyrocks, misquoting me out-of-context, thereby forcing me to make the same point I had already provided in the body of this piece. I believe this blog's policy precludes the deliberate act of posting comments known to be false. Daleyrocks has become a serial violator of that policy. He should be warned, and if this unacceptable tactic continues, he should be placed in moderation.

COMMENT #65 [Permalink]

... Jeannie Dean said on 3/13/2010 @ 5:34 pm PT...





Ernest writes: "Brad, I've come to the conclusion that further dialogue with the serial dissembling Daleyrocks is pointless." FINALLY! Have you, really? I hope so because:

a) it is.

b) we have(almost)unanimous concensus on that.

c) you guys have neutralized him in thread after thread, only to spend wads of your time reassembling long arguments to his same lame, already debunked, patently absurd allegations / name calling / insulting and stupid posts...

d) ...which, obviously, these hacks never actually READ, and I'm now skipping over because you've already said it quite well in the thread before that and most importantly because:

e)you both have bigger fish to Frey than Frey. And yes, these Deceivers(*) are hyper-aware of what they're doing. The INTENT is to keep you (and us) posting round in circles, on the defensive, arguing for fact as if it's an intangible, repeating their echo chamber of lies, hold our debate captive to their derision, make us play partners to their chest-beating, stooping, bravado. We have all been bearing witness in these threads, and there is no question that they are intentionally ushering in the Age of Duh. Enough. You are right, Ernest - any other commenters would have been long banned for so many despicable turns of tide. While I wouldn't mind seeing that happen, I am not advocating it. I very much appreciate that you and Brad are giving them every benefit of the doubt to post here in good faith(as they do not extend the same) and every good grace to try to make their case based here based on the merits of rational debate (as they can not rise to meet you in the same) no matter much they whine and wheeze and call foul. So keep them around if you must. But try to economize your responses to them. Instead of prepping mini-essays, provide a Hot Link to this series as rejoinder for new readers, and count on your regular readers to do the same on your behalf. We have to find ways of keeping their lies in check without allowing them to usurp you. Don't continue to feed their egos by giving them your bully pulpit, your valuable time, your beautiful deductive reasoning and super-solid, loving logic. They piss on such gifts. (Oh, and it should be painfully obvious by now that they are NEVER going to answer your fine questions. Ever. They can't, so they won't, as Ernest rightly reasons above.) Friends. You have defeated them. They are unraveling in front of us. I know you meant to hoist them on their own petard, but haven't they successfully hoisted their own petards to the moon and back by now?... (*Props to Lora for her important distinction between what she termed "Believers and Deceivers" - I think that terminology is a keeper.)

COMMENT #66 [Permalink]

... Jeannie Dean said on 3/13/2010 @ 5:42 pm PT...





...I just read that their petards were last spotted sailing over the Euphrates at 30,000 feet. (I'm not sure that sentence reasonable applies to petards, as I'm not really sure what petards are. Can they fly? Hm. Well, if they can, then these ones sure are.)

COMMENT #67 [Permalink]

... Jeannie Dean said on 3/13/2010 @ 5:50 pm PT...





Wiki: as a verb: "The word petard comes from the Middle French peter, to break wind, from pet expulsion of intestinal gas, from Latin peditum, from neuter of peditus, past participle of pedere, to break wind; akin to Greek bdein to break wind. (Merriam-Webster) Petard remains a French word meaning a firecracker today (in French slang, it means a handgun, or a joint)." Wow! I'm an accidental genius. Must've transchanneled that term from some very funny, French patriot, fairy-muse hovering about.

COMMENT #68 [Permalink]

... Bob Ross said on 3/15/2010 @ 6:11 am PT...





Ernie 59: Rachel Maddow has done a few pieces regarding Dyncorp being twice caught for illegal prostitution rings on the taxpayer dime as well as child prostitution. Here's one article

http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=11119 http://www.sourcewatch.o.../index.php?title=DynCorp "Kathryn Bolkovac, a United Nations International Police Force monitor, filed a lawsuit in Britain in 2001 against DynCorp for firing her after she reported that Dyncorp police trainers in Bosnia were paying for prostitutes and participating in sex trafficking. Many of the Dyncorp employees were forced to resign under suspicion of illegal activity. But none were prosecuted, since they enjoy immunity from prosecution in Bosnia." "Ben Johnston, a DynCorp aircraft mechanic for Apache and Blackhawk helicopters in Kosovo, filed a lawsuit against his employer. The suit alleged that that in the latter part of 1999 Johnson "learned that employees and supervisors from DynCorp were engaging in perverse, illegal and inhumane behavior [and] were purchasing illegal weapons, women, forged passports and [participating in] other immoral acts." The suit charges that "Johnston witnessed coworkers and supervisors literally buying and selling women for their own personal enjoyment, and employees would brag about the various ages and talents of the individual slaves they had purchased." "DynCorp is just as immoral and elite as possible, and any rule they can break they do," Some of the girls were as young as 12-15

COMMENT #69 [Permalink]

... Lora said on 3/16/2010 @ 3:08 pm PT...

