Patterico's Pontifications

2/28/2010

Another Lie from Brad Friedman (And Eric Boehlert!)

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 2:27 pm

“While we can’t know if the text transcripts O’Keefe released were accurate, since he refuses to release the audio tape . . .” — Brad Friedman, in his letter to Clark Hoyt.

The full unedited audio of every visit for which there is a transcript is available at Big Government. As Friedman knows, since I told him this repeatedly when we appeared on the radio together.

UPDATE: Apparently Eric Boehlert is part of this hoax as well. Eric Boehlert has linked Friedman’s post but did not lift a finger to correct Friedman.

Remember: Boehlert has repeatedly claimed that O’Keefe “lied” or committed a “hoax” merely because O’Keefe did not correct Steve Doocy’s claim about his manner of dress at ACORN. By Boehlert’s logic, Boehlert has himself engaged in a hoax, by endorsing Friedman’s post but failing to correct Friedman’s falsehood.

UPDATE x2: Robot Theater does actual Twitter messages between Boehlert and Breitbart:

H/t: PoliGrrl.

UPDATE x3: Thanks to Instapundit for the link. I want to make it clear again that Boehlert is being hoist on his own petard — as he has set up a standard for James O’Keefe that, if applied to Boehlert himself, makes Boehlert a liar.

I should also note that Boehlert’s relentless focus on O’Keefe’s clothing is a nonsensical issue. It has nothing to do with the actions of ACORN employees who believed they were helping someone set up a house for 13 year-old girls to turn tricks and give O’Keefe the money.

The unedited audio proves there was no nefarious editing. Don’t let the liars try to tell you different. Click the link and examine the evidence for yourself.

UPDATE x4: Friedman admits that he and Boehlert lied and tried to hoax people. Details here.

103 Responses to “Another Lie from Brad Friedman (And Eric Boehlert!)”

  1. seizing on the “almost every bit” loophole in 5,4, 3,…..

    redc1c4 (fb8750)

  2. red,

    I just changed the language from “almost every visit” to “every visit for which there is a transcript” since that is the more relevant issue.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  3. The only audio missing is from Philadelphia, where ACORN is suing Giles and O’Keefe. Breitbart has said he will release the unedited audio if ACORN waives their so-called privacy and withdraws lawsuit, and criminal authorities disclaim any intent to pursue a criminal investigation.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  4. “… the Media Matters eunuch, Eric Boehlert…”

    boiled to its essence…

    GeneralMalaise (c58b20)

  5. Cue the next fall back position:

    “While we can’t know if the audio transcripts O’Keefe released were accurate, since he refuses to release the video tape ..”

    Subotai (1a6549)

  6. Sure, Subotai. And when they release the videos, these people will just claim they have been dubbed. And they will use their little insinuations drawn from misleading quotes from the non-independent and hearsay-laden Harshbarger report to “corroborate” that slimy allegation.

    There is no end to the number of fall back positions.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  7. “There is no end to the number of fall back positions.”

    Unlimited, but recognized by critical thinkers as “full retreat” mode.

    GeneralMalaise (c58b20)

  8. Obviously, if you bother to read the notes to Hoyt and BrocknOn full (and/or have any sense of intellectual honesty) you know that’s obviously a typo meant to refer to “video” tape.

    But, if your Partick Frey it’s “another lie”. Keep up the dishonest work, gumshoe. And, while you’re at it, be sure to detail for us how you’ve authenticated the validity of those “unedited audio” tapes (or is the word of an accused felon and known dissemblers now serve as “evidence” and “proof” good for Deputy DA’s in Los Angeles now?)

    Good lord. You’re a quite a case, amigo.

    Brad Friedman (25f727)

  9. you know that’s obviously a typo

    Sure, I routinely type “audio” when I’m trying to type “video”. After all, the keys are just inches away from each other.

    Some chump (050674)

  10. Yeah, when Brad Friedman makes a written error it’s a typo. When others fail to correct someone in a high-pressure TV situation it’s a lie.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  11. Brad is an aggressive liar. Period. Full stop.

    JD (de0c49)

  12. Do you know what a typo is, Brad?

    I think you’re trying to say it’s a MISTAKE and not a lie.

    Which leads me to wonder why you can’t be said to lie, but O’Keefe failing to correct Doocy is a lie.

    Especially when the first moments of his first tape show him walking into ACORN in normal clothing. You claim he was trying to hide that — yet your proof of what he was trying to “hide” comes from his own freaking tape.

    Why would he PUBLISH what you claim he was trying to HIDE, genius?

    Doesn’t that show his lack of dishonest intent? Or are YOU the only one who gets the benefit of the doubt?

    Patterico (c218bd)

  13. Friedman, when they release the unedited video you’ll just claim that’s edited too. I’d bet my house on it.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  14. Is this the same Brad that was claiming, maybe Friday, that O’Keefe never posed as a pimp?

    JD (de0c49)

  15. It certainly seems like Friedman embraces a double standard that benefits him but not anyone he disagrees with.

    DRJ (daa62a)

  16. JD, yes.

    After not hearing from New York Times Public Editor Clark Hoyt for nearly a week — during which I’d sent him more and more indisputable evidence that Andrew Breitbart employee James O’Keefe never played his infamous “pimp” character in the offices of ACORN — he responded with a couple of blistering charges.

    I’m compiling a huge post collecting and debunking such statements.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  17. Obviously, if you bother to read the notes to Hoyt and BrocknOn full (and/or have any sense of intellectual honesty) you know that’s obviously a typo meant to refer to “video” tape.

    Heh.

    Subotai (1a6549)

  18. After not hearing from New York Times Public Editor Clark Hoyt for nearly a week — during which I’d sent him more and more indisputable evidence that Andrew Breitbart employee James O’Keefe never played his infamous “pimp” character in the offices of ACORN — he responded with a couple of blistering charge

    Interesting. I think he edited that statement. JD, do you remember what thread it I posted that on the other day?

    Subotai (1a6549)

  19. The trouble with dealing with people like Friedman, Patterico, is that (i) he will never accept what you write as he plays Twister with facts and his own prior statements and (ii) you will never, ever get the time you spent responding to him back.

    In other words, how is he not like your garden variety troll?

    He is counting on the fact that you are invested in showing how dishonest and hypocritical he is. I salute you for that, but I am sorry in advance for how it will likely end up.

    I might be wrong. I hope so.

    Eric Blair (c8876d)

  20. Here’s another place where Brad denies that O’Keefe “posed” as a pimp.

    Despite the Times’ repeatedly misreporting that O’Keefe was dressed or posed as a “pimp” while meeting with ACORN employees in those videos, and even after being shown in no uncertain terms that he did not ..

    http://www.bradblog.com/?p=7715

    Bolding mine.

    Subotai (1a6549)

  21. Normally, a fellow who is digging himself a deep hole is intelligent enough to recognize that at some point, he needs to climb out of it before it caves in on him.

    Amusingly, Friedman is not that fellow.

    GeneralMalaise (c58b20)

  22. Friedman, whose lie goes directly to whether the videos are accurate, has yet to issue a retraction.

    He and Boehlert incessantly refer to the trivial clothing issue as the “pimp hoax.”

    We need a pithy name for this falsehood, so when I refer to it incessantly in the future I’ll have a concise term for it.

    Behold liberal “journalism.”

    Patterico (ab4c74)

  23. Truth is a stand alone and doesn’t require any fallback position. That other kind of *truth* these people are playing with is the kind that’s in a constant state of flux, thus always needing a fallback position because it’s always disputable and can never stand alone. And keeping it this way saves their egos. This Brad person and this Friedman person appear to be intellectually dishonest at best and positively believe in playing fast and loose with their convenient truth. Truth isn’t supposed to be just what’s convenient or what saves face.

    It would just be so much easier if one admitted, Oh crap, I screwed up big time – I’m really sorry. And then maybe we’d have a modicum of respect. But as it is, the Not Trustworthy column is filling up.

    Dana (1e5ad4)

  24. eh, Brad and Boehlert….

    Dana (1e5ad4)

  25. Pimplex… pimpbrication… mispimpresentation… hypimpbole… pimpterfuge…

    GeneralMalaise (c58b20)

  26. “eh, Brad and Boehlert….”

    Scarlet Pimpernel & his trusty sidekick, Eunuch.

    GeneralMalaise (c58b20)

  27. Yeah, GeneralMalaise, that works.

    Dana (1e5ad4)

  28. Having watched each of the videos, and read their associated transcripts, I am certain that the O’Keefe as pimp is simply a fictional layer wrapped around the edited videos and mentioned only in the voiceover content. In the audio portions and transcripts, O’Keefe presents himself as a law student who plans to one day run for political office. (Except for the one time O’Keefe says he works for Wells Fargo.)

    Further, they present Giles as a prostitute who is fleeing from a physically abusive pimp. With regard to the dozen 15 year old Guatemalan girls (each ACORN office visit has the same basic script elements), they generally give the impression that they are trying to prepare a safe haven away from the abusive pimp, an off stage character in their script.

    From the Brooklyn, NY transcript: “Hannah (Eden[her character name]): He’s got all these 13, 14,15 year old girls from El Salvador and that’s what—I need to protect them like I know what its like and I have to protect them and like give them somewhere to live. (O’Keefe kept flipping between El Salvador and Guatemala, sometimes within a single interview.)

    From the San Bernardino transcript: “Hannah (Eden): They’re already they’re already working. And I would It’s I I’m hoping that I’ll have a safer environment for them”

    From the San Diego transcript: “Hannah: I want to get them before the pimp has time to bond with them.” (She referring to the fictional abusive pimp, not O’Keefe.)

    All said, I’m pretty sure that the only time the word “pimp” gets used during the various videos and transcripts is when O’Keefe and Giles are referring to the abusive pimp from whom Giles is trying to escape.

    Snertly (046fa9)

  29. You miss a lot in life, don’t you Snertly?

    Lazarus Long (a4f63e)

  30. Having watched each of the videos, and read their associated transcripts …

    Bullshit.

    All said, I’m pretty sure that the only time the word “pimp” gets used during the various videos and transcripts is when O’Keefe and Giles are referring to the abusive pimp from whom Giles is trying to escape.

    Did O’Keefe talk about setting up a house for Giles and the underage girls to turn tricks?

    Did he say he would take the proceeds and use them for his Congressional campaign?

    Since you claim to be someone who is so familiar with all the transcripts, I BREATHLESSLY await your answers to these questions.

    Bet you never answer.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  31. You are watching recent history be entirely re-written, right in front of your eyes.

    JD (336b12)

  32. Normally, a fellow who is digging himself a deep hole is intelligent enough to recognize that at some point, he needs to climb out of it before it caves in on him.

    The problem is that taintsniffers like Boehlert and Friedman have an unlimited supply of like-minded (using the term “mind” in its broadest sense) twerps to hang out with down in their hole. So they just don’t care if the hole collapses in on them. The nonsensical bile they peddle is its own reward.

    Phil Smith (4e586c)

  33. These are the kind of people that show me that my leaving Liberalism was the correct move. Moral standard bearers they are not.

    Michael B Babbitt (116505)

  34. Nice stealing of the xtranormal schtick, patterico. Unoriginiality is lame.

    D. Aristophanes (4633ab)

  35. It’s not mine, D. Aristophanes, you liar.

    Didn’t you steal it from RedEye?

    Patterico (c218bd)

  36. Did you see the hat tip, Doofus Aristophanes?

    That means it’s not mine.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  37. Tsk, tsk. Have you noticed that the amount of ad hominem attacks far outwieghs the amount of thoughtful expression here? The signal to noise ration sucks. By the by, Intense Debate does a really good job of threading comments, and it’s made by the same folks who do WordPress, I’m just saying… Also, I would apologize for the length of this post, but then you asked for it.

    So, here’s some analysis and quotes from the Balitmore and DC transcripts (Baltimore1.doc and DC+Final.doc). I’d have done the rest too, but I have a day job.

    Line counts are based on carriage returns in the source document. In Baltimore1.doc, Kenya = Hannah Giles.

    Baltimore1.doc
    854 lines of text
    girlfriend 44 (these are line numbers)
    prostitution 268, 470, 627, 763, 768
    pimp 534, 558 – each time referring to Sonny, the pimp Hannah is fleeing
    El Savadorian 349
    underage 379

    ===

    James: well i am doing pretty well for myself but i am coming to talk to you about my girlfriend, my girl Kenya here, we have kind of a unique life situation.

    ===

    Kenya: well I guess before it was a job. There was this guy that people would give me money and I would give money to him. But now I am just kind of well I met him (James) and now I am trying to get away from that guy

    James: I am trying to help her out maybe give her a place to go where she can perform her work, maybe a house where she can go where she doesn’t have to get targeted by this other guy, you know you know what I am saying?

    ===

    Tonja: right so you wanna get a house so you do need a tax return so what you do is. For ’08 how much did you make do you know..guesstimate.

    James: is that by herself or is that gross with the money she gave to that guy…this guy who has been harassing her

    Tonja: that guy..don’t worry about that guy because if he doesn’t do a quarterly report

    ===

    James: [unintelligible whisper] we have to bring it up a notch and start talking about doing illegal things with the taxes
    Kenya: [whisper] well just think of [unintelligible]
    James: [whisper] yeah
    Kenya: [whisper] lets get her to give us a list of advice and get her to follow through with it. We’ll ask her to write down a list of things we can write off and
    James: okay and then I can… what do you have in mind
    Kenya: you take it over from here because I am definitely like drawing a blank right now
    James: okay

    ===

    Shira: you are 19 years old you are of age but you don’t want, you want to keep them clean. Let them go to school. Make sure they go to school.

    ===

    Shira: they can still work, but they need to go to school, um basically… you want them to go to school you want them to get an education
    Kenya: do you think that street smarts are better than book smarts
    Shira: I think you need to have both
    Kenya: both
    James: & Kenya: hmm

    ===

    James: we wanna help these girls out though we wanna give them a better life

    *****

    Snertly (046fa9)

  38. *****
    I decided it would be nicer to break it into two posts. So, here’s DC.

    DC+Final.doc
    364 lines of text
    girlfriend 78, 201, 252, 266
    prostitution 123, 137
    pimp 201
    el salvador, guatamala 0
    underage, age 0

    James: My girlfriend is a prostitute.
    James: So I, I’m running for, I go to Georgetown law school

    ===

    James: And I’m running for a local election

    ===

    James: Prostitution is not legal in this area.

    ===

    James: See this is the problem because I’ve had my political meetings and she’s my girlfriend and I’m trying to set her up with a place so she doesn’t have to be beholden to some pimp. You know what I – trying, trying to give her a new life.

    ===

    Acorn 4: Since you’re a nice boy and your trying to put a girl back on the straight [unintelligible],

    James: I understand

    Acorn 4: You want to make sure that you distance yourself from that. Straight up. And the other thing is – okay, I know this is no disrespect to you, sweetheart. Okay?

    ===

    James: Well, she’s my girlfriend.

    ===

    Hannah: And I could just, when you know, the girls that are going to be living there, their going to be paying me so I could just, ya know, sinc… give him the cash.

    [This is as close as they get to James as pimp. As I understand it, pimps don't wait to be given the cash.]

    *****

    Snertly (046fa9)

  39. Snertly,

    I asked you a goddamned question:

    Did O’Keefe talk about setting up a house for Giles and the underage girls to turn tricks?

    Did he say he would take the proceeds and use them for his Congressional campaign?

    Since you claim to be someone who is so familiar with all the transcripts, I BREATHLESSLY await your answers to these questions.

    Bet you never answer.

    And you didn’t.

    Here’s from the beginning of a post I am working on. It would be done but I have a day job.

    O’Keefe: I am doing pretty well for myself but I am coming to talk to you about my girlfriend, my girl Kenya here, we have kind of a unique life situation.

    (Page 2.)

    Giles: I can’t afford to be on my own kind of thing.

    (Page 3.)

    O’Keefe: “I am trying to help her out maybe give her a place to go where she can perform her work” [and not be targeted by the other pimp].

    (Page 8.)

    O’Keefe: “Right now she is on my boat, she is living on a boat to do her work.

    (Page 9.)

    Tonja: so the type of business okay … the type of business of service you provide let me make sure there is a code for it okay

    O’Keefe: A code for prostitution?

    Tonja: Well, yeah I have to have a name and a code number.

    (Page 14.)

    Tonja: No you have to pay taxes on the money you make

    O’Keefe: Is there any way around that though

    Tonja: Yeah don’t file them and you continue doing cash

    (Page 16.)

    OH! I thought they didn’t advise them not to pay taxes!

    That’s just the beginning.

    I haven’t gotten to the part yet where they set up the house for the underage girls to turn tricks and give O’Keefe the money.

    I notice that you didn’t deny that.

    Because it’s true.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  40. Just for fun, and to point up the importance of context, here’s another snippet from Baltimore1.doc:

    James: Nice to meet you
    Kenya: Oh it’s hot in here
    Shira: you can take your top off
    Kenya: yeah…
    Shira: Please, you can take your top off… [Unintelligible] that’s so different, its so nice

    Snertly (046fa9)

  41. Another trollonic convergence.

    JD (c8c67e)

  42. [This is as close as they get to James as pimp. As I understand it, pimps don't wait to be given the cash.]

    They don’t wait until the tricks have been turned?

    Patterico (c218bd)

  43. As to “Did O’Keefe talk about setting up a house for Giles and the underage girls to turn tricks?” and “Did he say he would take the proceeds and use them for his Congressional campaign?”

    As far as Baltimore and DC go, the answer to both is No.

    Snertly (046fa9)

  44. [...] the rest here: Another Lie from Brad Friedman (And Eric Boehlert!) [...]

    Another Lie from Brad Friedman (And Eric Boehlert!) | Liberal Whoppers (d16888)

  45. As far as that Sadly No idiot goes, he really needs to clean up his site and all the juvies who post there. There is no intellectual reasoning whatsoever over there; it’s all juvie pornographic hate-filled humor, if you can call it humor. So don’t ever expect D Aristophony to be able to handle any real intellectual debate; he doesn’t have any experience in it.

    John Hitchcock (1efe81)

  46. Snertly sez:

    As to “Did O’Keefe talk about setting up a house for Giles and the underage girls to turn tricks?” and “Did he say he would take the proceeds and use them for his Congressional campaign?”

    As far as Baltimore and DC go, the answer to both is No.

    Bullshit.

    Tonja: they under sixteen so you don’t worry about that, but on the other part of the form you can use them as a dependents because they live in your house they are under 16 and they are living in your house. Well you live in a boat but because you are taking care of them so you can use them as a dependent

    O’Keefe: What if they are going to be making money because they are performing tricks too

    Tonja: but if they making money and they are underage then you shouldn’t be lettig anybody know anyway

    and

    O’Keefe: we want to use a lot of the money that we are getting

    Shira: you don’t want to use all of it

    O’Keefe: No I am saying we want to use a lot of the cash for my campaign

    You motherfucking liar.

    As JD says, we are watching history be rewritten in front of our eyes.

    By motherfucking liars like Snertly.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  47. I think the thing I am loving about you, Patterico, and Briertbart is you’re causing the entirety of the so-called talent of the nutroots obsess over this and not blog about much else.

    It’s hilarious.

    Topsecretk9 (ab69ad)

  48. Heh, Mister Patterico, sir, you’re letting the troll get under your skin. As was said 30 years ago, “take a chill pill.” Lay out all the trolls lies very clearly and precisely, of course. But don’t allow him the privilege of dramatically increasing your blood pressure. Ya know?

    John Hitchcock (1efe81)

  49. Besides, if you’re married and you have children and you perform the marriage act with your wife, what does that make you? ;)

    John Hitchcock (1efe81)

  50. I’m taking a liar and calling him what he is.

    I’m sick of people lying about this.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  51. Oops. I’ll give it to you about the campaign funds in baltimore1.doc, but I think “tricks” is clouded by a lack of context. In DC+Final.doc, “tricks” is mentioned once, in the context of Hannah’s activity, and “campaign” does not appear.

    My apologies for missing it.

    Snertly (046fa9)

  52. Patterico – I like the phrase “that is a f*cking lie, and you are a f*cking liar”. Concise. Direct. Unambiguous.

    Snrtly has been trolling Breitbart’s sites about this same dishonest BS.

    JD (331ad2)

  53. I would call it an exercise in self-expression, not trolling. I’m a big fan of accuracy and clarity, though I admit I don’t hit 100% on either one.

    On the other hand, I do manage to muddle through without cursing or namecalling.

    Snertly (046fa9)

  54. Look at #52. See what I have said about alphabetist trolls. They cannot say “I was wrong.” It’s not what they are about.

    After reading #52, I was reminded of Clintonian parsing. Cowardly and dishonest…and most of all, intended to make people angry.

    From sad little trolls come mushmouthed middle school debate club arguments.

    Eric Blair (c8876d)

  55. Another Hall of Famer, Patterico:

    “… I’m a big fan of accuracy and clarity…”

    Um. Not so much.

    Eric Blair (c8876d)

  56. No, snertly, you are definitely a troll, and your accuracy level is about 7 percent at best, which makes your honesty level 0 percent at best.

    John Hitchcock (1efe81)

  57. (@54 Snertly )On the other hand, I do manage to muddle through without cursing or namecalling.

    Of course, you are acting as an apologist an organization that was willing to assist in the creation of a child-rape business.

    But don’t let that get in the way of patting yourself on your self-righteous back.

    Pons Asinorum (95faa4)

  58. I think “tricks” is clouded by a lack of context.

    Bullshit. Tell me the context that explains how the girls turning tricks is not a description of them, you know, fucking turning tricks.

    On the other hand, I do manage to muddle through without cursing or namecalling.

    If I got out my aggression through lying, like you, maybe I could control my profanity.

    Asshole.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  59. I am amused by the ones that somehow think that calling names is worse than lying in service of Teh Narrative. It is a weird metric.

    JD (214c24)

  60. JD — I just hope this one stays the hell away from my kids.

    Pons Asinorum (95faa4)

  61. It would be interesting to see if Snertly posts on Sadly No or other like sites, and if so, if he engages in the regular language and attitudes shown on those sites. That evidence would prove him a liar even in his claim to not call names or use foul language.

    Actually, it wouldn’t be interesting. I just know he does, without even bothering to look. It isn’t important, anyway, because the troll is just being another troll, is all.

    John Hitchcock (1efe81)

  62. In DC they talked about setting up a house for Giles and several El Salvadorian girls who will be working for him. Giles says she will take the money and give it to O’Keefe. The ACORN worker tells O’Keefe to distance himself from the house of women of the night that Giles will be running because he is in political stuff and the revelation will be bad for him if people learn about the house of prostitution.

    Do you deny this, Snertly you fucking liar?

    Patterico (c218bd)

  63. Oh but he’s not posing as a pimp!!!!

    Patterico (c218bd)

  64. Remember two things, Patterico: (i) Clintonian parsing means you are honest even when you are lying, and (ii) the goal was to goad people, pure and simple. Do you honestly think that this kind of Mr. Peepers living his parents’ basement troll cares anything about kids getting sold into sex slavery?

    I can promise you they don’t. Alphabetism and juvenile nastiness is a bad combination.

    Eric Blair (c8876d)

  65. I said: DO YOU DENY IT?

    Snertly? I asked you a question.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  66. Here’s a hint. Stop doing word searches for “pimp” and read for content.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  67. For context of “tricks” in baltimore1.doc, the word “prostitution” is used on line 268. “Tricks” doesn’t appear until 378.

    The overall context of the interviews that I gathered is the ACORN folks trying to get these hapless ne’er-do-wells sorted out and on a better path. I can understand that you might not see it the same way.

    But if you’ll roll back to the genesis of this conversation, it was about the packaging of Mr O’Keefe’s story. I think sufficient specifics have been supplied to support the argument that the circus theater wrapping that O’Keefe and Breitbart chose to package this story are sufficiently misleading to, in the long run, undermine the value of the story.

    He could have made a stronger case, if he’d played it straight.

    But as it stands, there are several lawsuits going, and when the puffery is exposed for the sort of crass, emotionally manipulative excercise that it is, what’s left won’t get a second look.

    It seems rather telling that the only people caught up in legal, possibly criminal, entaglements from this mess are O’Keefe and Giles.

    Snertly (046fa9)

  68. I asked you a question about DC, Snertly. Your next published comment will answer that question.

    But once you’re done with that, answer me this, genius:

    How do you know that O’Keefe wore regular clothes inside ACORN?

    Answer: because it’s in his own fucking videos. In fact, in the first seconds of the first one, you see him walking into ACORN in regular clothes!!

    So your bullshit about how he is hiding that fact slyly omits the FACT that HE is the one who put that out there.

    How do you explain that, genius?

    Patterico (c218bd)

  69. It seems rather telling that the only people caught up in legal, possibly criminal, entaglements from this mess are O’Keefe and Giles.

    Indeed. It’s very telling as to how Obama’s DoJ overlooks criminal action that, if prosecuted, might hurt him politically.

    Telling indeed.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  70. “It seems rather telling that the only people caught up in legal, possibly criminal, entaglements from this mess are O’Keefe and Giles.”

    Yes, it certainly is telling. A guy who allegedly embezzeled a million dollars from ACORN, a taxpayer supported organization, is never arrested, while a guy who goes around exposing ACORN for what they are…namely criminals and scumbags, does get arrested.

    Quite a system we got.

    Dave Surls (ff8475)

  71. How do you explain that, genius?

    he’s a lying sack of shit?

    /going for the obvious answer…. %-)

    redc1c4 (fb8750)

  72. “And I want him to be successful and why I’m working so hard and bringing these girls in so when he does run for office he has unlimited funds.” — from the DC transcript

    Patterico (c218bd)

  73. It’s quite obvious that this consistent defense by Bohlert, Friedman and the trolls of ACORN, the former name of the Taxpayer Funded Democratic Party vote purchasing scam isn’t random.

    Even the stupid troll concedes that underage prostitution was to be used in support of campaign funds. It actually thinks that arguing that only one office of ACORN didn’t lay out a plan to aid underage prostitution is some kind of brilliant defense.

    How’s that again?

    We know the Obama administration supports dictatorships due to their position against constitutional democracy in Honduras.

    The economy is down, the deficit is up, and there isn’t enough tax money to buy off all those that demand payment to hold the Democratic party together. Thus, the desperate lies and idiotic arguments – all designed to distract from the wheels coming off of the ‘government gravy train’.

    Friedman, Bohlert and the trolls aren’t just liars. They’re freaks – and the only people they’re fooling are themselves.

    Apogee (e2dc9b)

  74. But … but … but …. He never dressed like a pimp !!!!

    JD (fd30f1)

  75. “It seems rather telling that the only people caught up in legal, possibly criminal, entaglements from this mess are O’Keefe and Giles.”

    Dude, ACORN no longer exists (I’m referencing its disbanding and reorg), in large part due to O’Keefe’s videos. Also please check out the Issa report.

    b (0f50d8)

  76. Too bad the law doesn’t allow for the flossing of liars like Friedman, Boehlert, D.Astrophanes, Snertly, timb, imdw, with a tire iron for each lie they tell.

    PCD (1d8b6d)

  77. Brad Friedman apparently never received this advice from any of the wise elders in his life:

    “The advantage to telling the truth is that you never have to remember what you’ve said.”

    furious (71af32)

  78. But if you’ll roll back to the genesis of this conversation, it was about the packaging of Mr O’Keefe’s story. I think sufficient specifics have been supplied to support the argument that the circus theater wrapping that O’Keefe and Breitbart chose to package this story are sufficiently misleading to, in the long run, undermine the value of the story.

    He could have made a stronger case, if he’d played it straight.

    But as it stands, there are several lawsuits going, and when the puffery is exposed for the sort of crass, emotionally manipulative excercise that it is, what’s left won’t get a second look.

    It seems rather telling that the only people caught up in legal, possibly criminal, entaglements from this mess are O’Keefe and Giles.

    Comment by Snertly — 2/28/2010 @ 11:35 pm

    What is “the story,” Snertly?

    I’ll answer my own question since their is no sign of global cooling in Hades: “The story” is that ACORN, a non-profit organization that — despite its shady past — has been awarded multimillion dollar government contracts, is so thoroughly corrupt that almost nobody at the front line of its lending units nationwide would out-and-out reject an application by a person posing as someone who fully detailed his plans to run a human trafficking ring in a new house using underage immigrant girls.

    THAT’S “The story.”

    Now, you insist there is a way that O’Keefe “could have made a stronger case, if he’d played it straight.” Fine and dandy, Snertmeister. I look forward to you telling us how “the story” could have been made stronger for folks like yourself — y’know, so that ACORN would have no reason to sue him to save its reputation and funding, and you wouldn’t be spending your time on a workday (on a Sunday afternoon, no less) combing transcripts for the word “pimp.”

    Meanwhile, I’ll be checking Accuweather.com. I’m planning an icefishing trip out on the River Styx.

    L.N. Smithee (cf6dfc)

  79. [...] various attacks of the left have disappeared into vapor, to the point were Patterico is running rings around them and Breitbart is making them look like [...]

    I award the Wheel of Fish award…to me. « DaTechguy's Blog (238897)

  80. 69: Dang, you sound like you just got forced to watch them. But yes, it’s that very thing that makes the circus sideshow trappings so wrong, but congrats! you’ve noticed what Hannity and many others didn’t.

    70: O’Keefe, in relation to the ACORN videos is being sued based on state law, the Department of Justice is on the federal level, remember?

    71: These guys can’t keep up with one issue at a time, god help you if you try to explain the difference between Acorn and Acorn Housing. I thought it was an interesting technical point early on, but unlikely to ever register on the audience at hand.

    72: yuk, yuk, yuk. Do you get a reach around when you suck up that hard?

    73: James: See this is the problem because I’ve had my political meetings and she’s my girlfriend and I’m trying to set her up with a place so she doesn’t have to be beholden to some pimp. You know what I – trying, trying to give her a new life. — from the DC transcript

    74: Congrats, you get the “made an effort” award.

    75: unlike this guy

    76: Dude, you’re delusional. It’s not so much that Republicans hate Acorn, but that Republicans hate voters, and Acorn signs up voters, so…

    77: yeah, ya’ll a bunch of tough guys fer shure

    78: Dunno, about him, but judging by present company he wouldn’t have been the only one.

    79: Scroll up, bubba, it would be rude of me to repost, but thanks for the effort.

    80: ditto

    81: The best way to get the last word on an internet argument is to wait a couple weeks then come back to the thread.

    82: let the self-congratulating circle jerk begin!

    Adios amigos, I’ll pray for you. But my daughter wants to show me prom dress candidates and that’s far more important, and far more fun than this exercise.

    Any body know engineering around here? What’s the result of an positive feedback loop?

    Don’t quit your day jobs.

    Snertly (046fa9)

  81. So Snertly comes back to a thread twelve hours after the last comment and replies and then accuses his critics of returning to old threads to win arguments.

    Snertly the long and the short of it is this. ACORN had no problem with setting up a commercial rape operation using underage, minority girls as long as the proceeds benefited the Democrat party.

    And you and others of your ilk have no problem with that.

    Have Blue (854a6e)

  82. (@83 Snertly) Adios amigos, I’ll pray for you. But my daughter wants to show me prom dress candidates and that’s far more important, and far more fun than this exercise.

    So long coward, but save your prayers for your children and their children; that they never run into organizations like ACORN; that good men and women will forever defend children and expose those that prey on them; that those who commit, shield, or apologize for child rape (in all of its hideous forms) forever be challenged and exposed.

    But mostly pray that you and “men” like you fail, so that the world your children’s-children inherit will never know of organizations like ACORN and the monsters you and they choose to enable.

    Pons Asinorum (95faa4)

  83. 84: Can’t tell the difference between advice and an accusation? Silly question, obviously you’re reality challenged.

    85: Watching knee jerk reactions is kinda funny, but there comes a point where I just feel sad for you. What a horrible paranoid world it would be to look through those glasses all the time.

    Snertly (046fa9)

  84. Snertly, the ACORN office one block east of my office has both ACORN and ACORN Housing signs on it, shares employees and uses the same phone number.

    Keep trying to explain it, maybe you’ll figure it out yourself.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  85. SPQR, it is just trolling, trying to get people to say nasty things so it can be nasty back. Just a fool trying to sound all tough and knowledgeable. I enjoyed the “positive feedback loop” comment, which is quite ironic, given the, um, relationship between the Left and the MSM.

    But as I say, the goal is to irritate and inflame, much like an infection.

    Eric Blair (03ba54)

  86. Eric, infection? You mean we are like white blood cells

    racist.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  87. @ Comment by Patterico — 2/28/2010 @ 6:11 pm

    ==> How about “BOEHLERT’S RAGS“?

    -S- (02b221)

  88. Well, I was thinking more about neutraphils. But yes, racism is firmly imbedded into us, is it not?

    Eric Blair (03ba54)

  89. @86 Snertly – You were asked a question @63, and then agian @66. You have failed to answer it @83, when you left.

    Pons Asinorum (95faa4)

  90. (@86 Snertly) Watching knee jerk reactions is kinda funny, but there comes a point where I just feel sad for you.

    Here is an organization that was willing to assist a child prostitution ring, yet you dismiss this by supporting the knee jerk reaction on the left.

    You choose to argue a position based on a falsehood, despite repeatedly being shown evidence to the contrary. You do this because somewhere inside, you know your position does not adhere to a morally rational and consistent inspection. Therefore you have two choices: embrace a falsehood to make an attempt to justify your position or resort to a ridiculous rationalization. You chose the former. This is the path of an intellectual coward.

    You cling to a falsehood like a drowning man clinging to a straw. Perhaps, that is the sadness you feel; you are lost.

    What a horrible paranoid world it would be to look through those glasses all the time.

    I do not wear any glasses. The world is what it is; magnificent in one instance horrid in another (and sometimes it is both, in the same instance).

    When I see an organization attempt to assist in the formation of a child prostitution ring, that is a horrid development. Your dismissals are meaningless and do not alter that fact.

    It does not matter to me if that organization is liberal or not, my stand is the same — I need no glasses.

    Your glasses are polarized; they drive your moral principles (or lack thereof). If a liberal organization commits an atrocious act, your polarized glasses filter it out.

    By attempting to mitigate what ACORN has done (albeit an irrational and ineffective attempt: the discoverer was not dressed as a pimp ?!?), you have acted as an apologist for this disgusting organization.

    You have sided with those that would prey on children.

    Pons Asinorum (95faa4)

  91. [...] generally — is a lot of Leftwing rantings on the internet (bloggers and various comments) (expose on such is here) going full-at-it in denigrating other individuals who have pricked the surface of the ACORN [...]

    ACORN & LEFTWING MEDIA WHO NURTURE THEM: PARASITIC INFESTATION ON THE SOUL OF THE U.S.A. – suzyrice.com (47121e)

  92. 93: If that’s what you saw then you indeed wear glasses, but perhaps you’re metaphorically challenged.

    As noted previously, O’Keefe’s presentation undermined his story. It could have been about how, even when presented with absurdity, Acorn should have treated it seriously, but instead the hype over O’Keefe’s circus theatrics were so patently obvious they garnered a segment on the Cobert Report.

    You are the victim of people practicing the philosophy of Joseph Goebbels (“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.” and Vladimir Lenin (“A lie told often enough becomes truth”).

    But you get to choose the blinders* you wear.

    (*Same metaphor, different object.)

    Snertly (046fa9)

  93. “You are the victim of people practicing the philosophy of Joseph Goebbels”

    snertly – Thanks for admitting you and your ilk are following the Goebbels model of lie telling, especially about the ACORN videos. Unfortunately your intended victims are not playing dead this time around.

    Thanks for stopping by!

    daleyrocks (5710d7)

  94. the hype over O’Keefe’s circus theatrics were so patently obvious they garnered a segment on the Cobert Report.

    NO WAY!!! This liberal canard made it on the COLBERT REPORT?!?!?!

    Wow. Because . . . he’s a conservative, right?

    So that’s BIG NEWS.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  95. When a partisan troll who actively misrepresents and distorts things writes:

    “…You are the victim of people practicing the philosophy of Joseph Goebbels (”If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.” and Vladimir Lenin (”A lie told often enough becomes truth”)….”

    Well, if that ain’t projection, I cannot think of a better descriptor.

    I suspect that the troll is a performance artist. It takes a special kind of thick headedness to not perceive it when you do things that you are condemning in others. So it has to be an unfunny act.

    Eric Blair (03ba54)

  96. LOL! 96: I know you are, but what am I?

    Sheez….

    97: I think the Colbert Report segment confirms the thesis: O’Keefe’s circus theatrics will overwhelm the rest of the story.

    Next on the horizon: RNC fund raising tactics.
    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0310/33866.html

    Conservatism has been highjacked, hollowed out, and stuffed with… very unpleasant stuff. As more and more leaks out, it will make a very big mess indeed.

    A future interesting question: How will the Democrats be rebalanced by the influx of disaffected Republicans?

    Snertly (046fa9)

  97. You’re about a delusional fuckwad, ain’t ya?

    EW1(SG) (edc268)

  98. EW, it’s just another alphabetist troll, worried about the polls. You remember. The polls showing how all the Hope and Change has turned to corruption and influence peddling and incompetence.

    So since their Smart Guy is, um, sans culottes, they have to act out.

    But they know what is waiting this year and the next in the polling places. And they know what party is responsible for the bottom falling out of Obamaism: the Obama fans themselves.

    Anyway, that is why they post what they do. If they were doing so great, why would they post here?

    Eric Blair (03ba54)

  99. (@95 Snertly) If that’s what you saw then you indeed wear glasses, but perhaps you’re metaphorically challenged.

    You were asked a question @63, and then reminded of that @66 and again @92 and still no answer. Perhaps you ought to answer that question first, and not worry about what I saw or the glasses I may or may not wear. Oh, and rather than listen to leftist talking points (repeats such as O’Keefe was not dressed as a pimp), simply start by listening to the evidence.

    You are trying to shield an organization that was comfortable helping with the sexual exploitation of children.

    As noted previously, O’Keefe’s presentation undermined his story.

    False; the evidence from the video is indisputable. ACORN was assisting O’Keefe in the setup of a child prostitution ring. O’keefe’s choice of wardrobe is irrelevant.

    It could have been about how, even when presented with absurdity, Acorn should have treated it seriously, but instead the hype over O’Keefe’s circus theatrics were so patently obvious they garnered a segment on the Cobert Report.

    The actions of ACORN are the rightful focus. After all, it was ACORN that was so willing to offer advice regarding the sexual exploitation of children.

    The hype, theatrics, and the Cobert show are meaningless, except to serve as devices to shield and suppress the truth about ACORN. (Indeed, your use of such devices reveals your inability to argue in an intellectually honest manner.)

    You are the victim of people practicing the philosophy of Joseph Goebbels (”If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.” and Vladimir Lenin (”A lie told often enough becomes truth”).

    I simply watched the video and listened to the ACORN employees offer advice, helpful to operating a child prostitution ring. No blinders

    You, however, latched onto the leftist talking points (O’Keefe is not a pimp) and comedy sitcoms (if Colbert says so, then it must be true). When challenged, you repeat whatever falsehoods necessary to shield and protect ACORN.

    It seems the philosophy of the men you invoked is a surprisingly good fit with your current defense of an organization that was willing to sexually exploit children. ACORN will never admit it (even despite video evidence) and now repeats whatever falsehood necessary to defend itself (as have you).

    But you get to choose the blinders* you wear.

    (*Same metaphor, different object.)

    We all get to chose are own blinders, but perhaps you should take yours off, reality is magnificent in its own right — even when it forces you to choose between an ideology that is perhaps appealing, and a rational moral code that demands the condemnation of child predators, regardless of party affiliation and talking points.

    Pons Asinorum (95faa4)

  100. (@99 Snertly) I think the Colbert Report segment confirms the thesis: O’Keefe’s circus theatrics will overwhelm the rest of the story.

    No Snertly; your need for a comedy show to hide what ACORN tried to do is simply a wish.

    The sexual exploitation of children is wrong, perhaps you even agree (and just maybe you do not even need a comedy show to validate such a moral judgment).

    Next on the horizon: RNC fund raising tactics.

    Conservatism has been highjacked, hollowed out, and stuffed with… very unpleasant stuff. As more and more leaks out, it will make a very big mess indeed.

    A future interesting question: How will the Democrats be rebalanced by the influx of disaffected Republicans?

    Interesting change of subject Snertly; your arguments have waned, your falsehoods apparent, your intellectual cowardice exposed – so now you run for cover into another subject. You still have that question you have so steadfastly refused to answer.

    Pons Asinorum (95faa4)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.6144 secs.