Veritas caught Ballot Harvester: Omar Connected Harvester SEEN Exchanging $200 for General Election Ballot.

[Yakshi]

Cool! Another "let's trick old white people" video! Thanks.

 

[Master Debator]

1. Regardless of their intent, it does not change what they were caught saying on those videos.
2. That's because they can not be an accomplice to a crime that was never committed. That still does not change what they said on camera, which is what I'm arguing.
3. Let's take the entire quote. " The video releases were heavily edited to feature only the worst or most inappropriate statements of the various ACORN employees and to omit some of the most salient statements ". What does the first part in red mean? It means that they did say those things and some of the less damning and innocent things they said were left out. The idea of any sting is to catch bad behavior if it exists. As for the 2nd red text, the report alludes to what that was. It was when some of them offered advice to help the girl out. Again, a sting is supposed to ferret out bad behavior. Them offering legitimate, above board help is their job, but in no way excuses the not-so-above-board help that was depicted on the videos.

Still a mark.

 

[Grim17]

...your arguments are hilarious. Can't you find someone, somewhere...ANYWHERE....who has written in defense of the discredited ACORN/Veritas sting/scam? Anyone OTHER THAN O'Keefe, himself, that is?

Huh? I posted those quotes from NY Times public editor Clark Hoyt and linked to the article. He said: "But the most damning words match the transcripts and the audio, and do not seem out of context."

Do you understand what that means? It means that the damning things said by those ACORN employees was legitimately represented and not taken out of context.


Scott Harshbarger, a former Massachusetts attorney general was hired to investigate the content of the videos. He was not hired by James O'Keefe... He was not hired by republicans... He was not hired by some right wing group... He was hired by Acorn and was quoted in Clark Hoyt's article saying “They said what they said. There’s no way to make this look good".

Do you understand what that means? It means what we all saw them say on those videos, is exactly what they actually said and can't be spun to make look any less damning.

So there you have it... Two independent professionals, a former Democratic AG on ACORN's payroll and a public editor from the NY Times, who examined the unedited audio and video, with both of them confirming that the nasty, unethical things spoken by those ACORN employees was not misrepresented or taken out of context.

Last time I checked, neither one of them was James O'Keefe, and James O'Keefe does not work for the NY Times.

Opinion | The Acorn Sting Revisited (Published 2010)

Acorn supporters say The Times got a story about a sting wrong. Did it?

www.nytimes.com

Opinion | The Acorn Sting Revisited (Published 2010)

Acorn supporters say The Times got a story about a sting wrong. Did it?

www.nytimes.com

Opinion | The Acorn Sting Revisited (Published 2010)

Acorn supporters say The Times got a story about a sting wrong. Did it?

www.nytimes.com

 

[Grim17]

So now you're saying that the California AG is lying, too, huh? The quote I posted was directly from his report on O'Keefe's scam videos.

The California AG isn't lying... You are.

That quote, as well as the entire report, is missing one very important thing that you continue to assert exists... Nowhere does it ever say that the editing resulted in any employee being misrepresented or taken out of context. Nowhere does it ever say that any of the editing resulted in a dishonest portrayal of any ACORN worker.

I'm sorry, but with the exception of the pimp outfit (which had no effect on the words that were spoken on the videos) there was no mention of deceptive editing anywhere in that report.

And again...the FACT that multiple reports detail that multiple employees simply played along with O'Keefe to get more information...and then reported them to the police...puts all of that if proper context.

Sorry, but the employees that didn't act inappropriately doesn't cancel out the ones who did.

You mean those HEAVILY EDITED videos? Those HEAVILY EDITED videos that misleadingly portray ACORN employees as willing participants in a sex trafficking scheme, when in FACT those employees reported O'Keefe to the police?

There you go again.... O'Keefe didn't portray any of those employees, they portrayed themselves.

Again yet again...the HEAVILY EDITED videos do not put the scene in full context. For example, if O'Keefe had not edited out all of the times ACORN employees tried to speak to/warn Giles...offer her help to get away from O'Keefe, etc. etc.....the impression created by O'Keefe's scam videos would have been much different.

Sorry, but them doing the right things doesn't cancel out when they did the wrong things.

That's like a man who saved a school bus full of children when their bus caught fire, thinking that makes a difference when he's caught raping 2 of them he tied down after pulling them from the fire.

Every time you repeat this lie, I'll just keep posting this:
" The video releases were heavily edited to feature only the worst or most inappropriate statements of the various ACORN employees and to omit some of the most salient statements "

Nowhere does the report ever say that those things resulted in dishonest representation of what they said and advocated for on those videos.
Nowhere in that report are any of those employees depicted as victims of deceptive editing by O'Keefe.

If any of those ACORN employees, especially the ones who were fired, had their words twisted and manipulated, or had been misrepresented through deceptive editing, they could have filed and easily won a defamation suit against O'Keefe and gotten a 7 figure settlement... But not one of them ever did, and common sense along with the words of a former democratic AG/investigator and NYT public editor should make it clear why that is.

.

 

[Master Debator]

The California AG isn't lying... You are.

That quote, as well as the entire report, is missing one very important thing that you continue to assert exists... Nowhere does it ever say that the editing resulted in any employee being misrepresented or taken out of context. Nowhere does it ever say that any of the editing resulted in a dishonest portrayal of any ACORN worker.

I'm sorry, but with the exception of the pimp outfit (which had no effect on the words that were spoken on the videos) there was no mention of deceptive editing anywhere in that report.




Sorry, but the employees that didn't act inappropriately doesn't cancel out the ones who did.




There you go again.... O'Keefe didn't portray any of those employees, they portrayed themselves.




Sorry, but them doing the right things doesn't cancel out when they did the wrong things.

That's like a man who saved a school bus full of children when their bus caught fire, thinking that makes a difference when he's caught raping 2 of them he tied down after pulling them from the fire.




Nowhere does the report ever say that those things resulted in dishonest representation of what they said and advocated for on those videos.
Nowhere in that report are any of those employees depicted as victims of deceptive editing by O'Keefe.

If any of those ACORN employees, especially the ones who were fired, had their words twisted and manipulated, or had been misrepresented through deceptive editing, they could have filed and easily won a defamation suit against O'Keefe and gotten a 7 figure settlement... But not one of them ever did, and common sense along with the words of a former democratic AG/investigator and NYT public editor should make it clear why that is.

.

Mark

 

[Kreton]

At first I was very skeptical of Trump, but he has proven to be the rather annoying man, who is just perfect to address the Leftist slime corrupting our nation.

-

The idea that politicians should be elected and allowed to lead our country based on whether or not they can piss off and further divide our country shows how much you hate America. Division is more destructive than any foreign power, terrorist group or any other factor to our country. You (and others like you) knowingly (and even bragging about) and willfully voting to destroy America is one of the most unpatriotic things I have ever heard.