»» Columnists

VIDEO – ACORN Worker Told James O’Keefe That He Looked Like Princess Diana

by Tommy Christopher | 1:00 pm, April 8th, 2010

» 81 comments

It’s funny because it’s true.

As we reported earlier, Rachel Maddow is rolling out what appears to be a series of segments digging into California Attorney General Jerry Brown‘s report on the unedited James O’Keefe/Hannah Giles ACORN tapes. One of the funnier details in that report is the bit of chitchat at the end, where ACORN receptionist Tresa Kaelke, already hip to O’Keefe’s ruse, tells him he resembles Princess Diana.

The report clears up a few other things, too, like the discrepancy we noted earlier about when San Diego ACORN employee Juan Carlos Vera called authorities. Check it out after this video of Kaelke’s exchange with O’Keefe:

It’s great that the unedited tapes have come to light, and that Maddow is using them to get at the truth, but before we go any further, I’d like to note that this should all be moot. Even before these tapes were released, even before the New York Times finally issued a correction about the fundamental deception at the heart of this story, this work product should have been roundly rejected by responsible journalists. The mainstream media’s embarrassment at possibly losing a “scoop” led them to mention flaws in O’Keefe’s reporting, then completely ignore them.

So, all of this is icing on the proverbial cake.

Aside from the deceptions pointed out by Maddow, Brown’s report also clears up the discrepancy over when San Diego ACORN employee Juan Carlos Vera called authorities. In September, the Associated Press reported that Vera had waited 2 days before calling his cousin, a detective. According to Brown’s report, telephone records show that Vera called the same day:

Immediately after the couple left, Vera telephoned his cousin, Detective Alejandro Hernandez, at the National City Police Department. He left a voicemail message for Detective Hernandez stating that some “crazy people” were in his office providing information. Vera did not explain the substance of the conversation and did not make reference to prostitution or human smuggling on the message. He asked his cousin to call him back. (Interview with Vera; Vera Phone Records, at p. 4 [reflecting a 2-minute call to Detective Hernandez’s cell phone at 6:40 p.m.]; Detective Hernandez Phone Records, at p. 132 [reflecting a call to voicemail at 6:45 p.m.].)

The report also notes that O’Keefe tried 3 times to get Vera to give fraudulent tax advice, and Vera ignored him. As Maddow reported, he kept the conversation going to try and get information to turn over to authorities.

As for Kaelke, we reported months ago that she was wise to O’Keefe’s game, and Brown’s report confirms this:

Kaelke told police investigators that she realized that this was a scam and decided to play along. (San Bernardino Police Report, Detective Baumgartner, dated September 15, 2009, at p. 1.) Kaelke told O’Keefe and Giles that ACORN would not approve of their business or of her giving them advice, but that she personally supported legalizing prostitution. (San Bernardino Tr. 2-3, 5, 14-15, 37.) She claimed Heidi Fleiss was a personal hero. She told them that she used to be a prostitute and gave them tips on keeping the business a secret. She suggested they set up the business as a massage parlor and sell vitamins as a cover. (San Bernardino Tr. at pp. 17-23.) When they expressed concern that neighbors might notice the underage El Salvadoran girls, she suggested they call the place a “group home.” (San Bernardino Tr. at p. 35.) When the group was discussing the abusive nature of pimps, Kaelke said she had killed her abusive ex-husband. She told a story about how she set up a self-defense claim by going to battered women shelters before the murder. (San Bernardino Tr. 26-27.)

Kaelke has stated that none of her claims were true and she was playing along with what she perceived as a joke. (San Bernardino Police Report, Detective Baumgartner, at p. 1.) At one point during the conversation she said, “if I didn’t know better and I don’t but I would think this is a total set up.” (San Bernardino Tr. 33.) Both of Kaelke’s former husbands are alive and have reported to law enforcement that Kaelke never attempted to harm either of them.

Finally, the report details how, in Los Angeles, an ACORN worker turned them down flat three times, before finally making a vague offer of assistance when O’Keefe and Giles refused to relent.

Now, there are some who will point out, correctly, that the LA ACORN employees should have reported the pair to police, but it is also worth noting that O’Keefe and Giles concocted a story that included violent gangsters and criminals. In poor communities especially, law enforcement is not known for its ability to protect those who report crime.

This report, and these tapes, only cover the ACORN tapes from California. The Brad Blog has requested that Brown’s office release the other tapes. There’s no telling what will be on those, but the revelations in the California investigation are, themselves, enough to end the career of any legitimate journalist. Unfortunately, in this brave new media world, outright lies aren’t quite the offense that shooting a pilot for a rival network is.

ACORN, Andrew Breitbart, fox news, Hannah Giles, James O'Keefe, Jerry Brown, Rachel Maddow, Tommy Christopher, Tresa Kaelke

TylerDurdin

Sorry,Mediaite and RM, ACORN is done, finished, over, kaput!
http://www.facebook.com/people/Bill-Adkins/1585417987 Bill Adkins

he point may be ‘moot,’ as you state, but Maddow is performing a public service by discrediting the Andrew Not So Breitbart conservative lie machine. Breitbart sold a bill of goods, Fox Not News Channel helped and the so called Main Stream Media lapped it up. If the MSM had only considered the source.
TylerDurdin

As I said, ACORN is gone- good ridden to garbage and RM shows she is garbage by trying to defend them.
http://www.anonymousfinch.com AnonymousFinch

Tommy:

The New York Times most certainly did not issue “a correction about the fundamental deception at the heart of this story.” That is a lie, and it should be retracted immediately. To the contrary, the New York Times stated that the issue of what O’Keffe was wearing did not detract from the overall story of ACORN’s malfeasance. Here’s the quote:

_____

Acorn’s supporters appear to hope that the whole story will fall apart over the issue of what O’Keefe wore: if that was wrong, everything else must be wrong. The record does not support them. If O’Keefe did not dress as a pimp, he clearly presented himself as one: a fellow trying to set up a woman — sometimes along with under-age girls — in a house where they would work as prostitutes. In Washington, he said the prostitution was to finance his future in politics. A worker for Acorn Housing, an allied group, warned him to stay away from the brothel lest someone “get wind that you got a house and that your girlfriend is over there running a house of women of the night. You will not have a career.”

FAIR said that in Brooklyn, O’Keefe and Giles seemed to be telling Acorn staffers that “they are attempting to buy a house to protect child prostitutes from an abusive pimp.” That’s right, but FAIR left out the part about their clear intention to operate a brothel, which the Acorn workers seemed to take in stride, with one warning: “Don’t get caught, ’cause it is against the law.”

The videos were heavily edited. The sequence of some conversations was changed. Some workers seemed concerned for Giles, one advising her to get legal help. In two cities, Acorn workers called the police. But the most damning words match the transcripts and the audio, and do not seem out of context. Harshbarger’s report to Acorn found no “pattern of illegal conduct” by its employees. But, he told me: “They said what they said. There’s no way to make this look good.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/21/opinion/21pubed.html
______

Tommy, why are you lying to your readers? If you disagree with the New York Times and think that they are wrong and Maddow is right then explain your basis for that claim, but don’t misrepresent what the New York Times said.

Even the New York Times and the investigator hired by ACORN admit that the ACORN workers “said what they said” and that there is “no way to make this look good.” So, why are you trying to do so?

Moreover, you shouldn’t lecture the media about whether or not this is a legitimate story that should have been reported in the first place when YOU ARE LYING ABOUT THE NEW YORK TIMES POSITION!
ImNotBlue

*Phew* it had been a few hours, and Mediaite hadn’t mentioned Rachel Maddow. I was starting to get worried.

Incidentally… I hear there’s big news in Kyrgyzstan. I can’t wait until tonight, when Rachel Maddow talks about it, so it can officially be considered “news.”

Maddow-ite, strikes again.
Tommy Christopher

Finch,

you really ought to dial back the calling people liars thing. I provided a link to the correction, and the balance of the statement is clearly my own, not the Times’. You might disagree, but calling me a liar is itself a lie.
TylerDurdin

I love it. RM is upset because O’keefe did not actually wear his pimp coat to the meetings and it’s O’Keefe’s fault for not having the ability to predicate the future and see that one ACORN worker actually reported them to the cops.
Bias-Media

I’ve noticed that Mediaite gives a lot of time for Maddow and Beck stories. But, is it me? or does Mediaite tends to favor Maddow over Beck?

Seems like Maddow’s assertions are never challenged; whereas Beck’s are always challenged (by Mediaite)
TylerDurdin

“this work product should have been roundly rejected by responsible journalists.”

Tommy Christopher you got balls. You guys refused to even report on this when it happened or the Edwards affair, so climb down off your high horse, mister.
germ

It’s not the first time Tommy has been caught in a lie. When Tommy was canned from AOL, it was blamed it on the fact that he was sticking up for women in a sick Playboy article (I commend him on that), when in fact, according to AOL Rep Melinda Henneberger, it was because,

The bloggers for the old AOL site, Political Machine, weren’t retained for the new site, Politics Daily, which has only been in existence for the last five weeks, and which we’re just staffing up. Sorry so dull, but there’s nothing more to it than that.

There are 4,300 mentions of his dismissal from AOL because of the AOL article, with only a handful updated to state the real reason he was let go.
http://www.anonymousfinch.com AnonymousFinch

Tommy:

Any reasonable person reading what you wrote would construe it as saying that the New York Times believes that there was a fundamental deception at the heart of the story. The New York Times does not believe that. You are misleading your readers to believe that the New York Times supports your viewpoint on the story when, in fact, they do not. That is a lie.
TylerDurdin

Tommy Christopher is just another liberal shill.
Bias-Media

Oh; and as for the basis of Maddow’s assertion…to me, it doesn’t matter if OKeefe was turned down 3 times before ACORN offered to help him; or 5 times, 10 times, etc. The fact of the matter is, ACORN did offered to help him.

If OKeefe was a real pimp, and refused to take ‘No’ for an answer, it looks like ACORN was his solution…because seemingly, eventually, ACORN will say ‘yes’

ACORN should NEVER have offered to help; regardless of how many times they turned down Okeefe. Do you honestly think a *real* pimp would’ve accepted the first rejection and walked away?
writer

I happen to think that Princess Diana was much prettier than O’Keefe. But that was a great acting job by all those Acorn women, since they ‘knew’ that O’Keefe was a fake. They went on and on with it, and never once looked at the camera. You can’t teach acting skills like that. You have to be born with it.
the real john t

Funny when a RWer uses the NY Times as their gospel. Most of the time they’re calling it a lying liberal rag.
http://www.anonymousfinch.com AnonymousFinch

Moreover, Tommy, you most certainly did not link to the New York Times’ correction. You linked to Mediaite’s prior opinion piece about the retraction, which also misrepresented the New York Times’ official position.

In other words, you supported your lie about the New York Times’ official position with a citation to Mediaite’s prior misrepresentation about the New York Times’ official position.

You people seem to believe that if you keep repeating the lie often enough it will become true.
Tommy Christopher

Germ, I’m not going to re-adjudicate that fight here. The source you cite is a demonstrable liar with a vested interest in lying about me. Also, I still work for AOL. That should tell you something.
TylerDurdin

Tommy Christopher, where were you when the NYT smeared McCain with the hit piece about him having an affair when there was nothing other than hearsay to support it? And where were ya when the National Enquirer ate your lunch and those of the rest of the liberal MSM on the Edwards affair.

Where were ya Tommy?
http://www.anonymousfinch.com AnonymousFinch

Bias Media:

You are correct. Moreover, the facts show that the police were called in 2 of the 7 ACORN offices. So, ACORN’s defense is, apparently, that they do the right thing 28% of the time.
Tommy Christopher

Tyler, we actually did report the ACORN story, every step of the way:

http://www.mediaite.com/tag/ACORN/

As for Edwards, we didn’t exist when that story broke, and I lost the charger for my flux capacitor.
TylerDurdin

“As for Edwards, we didn’t exist when that story broke, and I lost the charger for my flux capacitor.”

But you didn’t lose your liberal bias and you were writing stories back in 2008, so your excuse doesn’t fly.
Tommy Christopher

Tyler, can you google before you spit? I’ve written several denunciations of the NYT’s McCain smear.When the story first broke, I gave 5 different NYT editors an earful, on a Sunday, and none would go on record. I’m not the droid you’re looking for.
Bias-Media

Still blows my mind why anyone, ANYONE, would still try to defend ACORN. And it’s not just this OKeefe incident…

the only thing that blows my mind even more than these people (Maddow) who still tries to defend ACORN, are the people (Mediaite) who defends people who tries to defend ACORN…

Why would anyone defend corruption? or defend people who defends corruption? Let’s move on already…
TylerDurdin

“Still blows my mind why anyone, ANYONE, would still try to defend ACORN. And it’s not just this OKeefe incident…”

Ask poor Tommy- ACORN is dear to his heart.
http://www.anonymousfinch.com AnonymousFinch

Bias-Media:

I agree, but if Mediaite wants to defend ACORN, they have the right to. If they do it honestly, I’ll take their defense seriously and reevaluate my own position.

But when every story they run claims that the New York Times retracted the story, or that the key to the story is what O’Keffe was wearing (instead of what he said), or that every ACORN office called the police when in fact only 2 of the 7 offices did, then they willingly sacrifice their own credibility. They don’t want to convince someone like me (who can think for himself); they just want to provide talking points and retweets for the mindless drones out there.
Big_F-ing_Deal

Happy Slavery Month!!!!
TylerDurdin

Big_F-ing_Deal says:
April 8, 2010 at 1:48 pm

“Happy Slavery Month!!!!”

Said like a true liberal.

BTW, BHO’s polls hit an all time low.

Cry me a river!
ImNotBlue

TylerDurdin says:
April 8, 2010 at 1:29 pm

Tommy Christopher is just another liberal shill.

I’m going to stick up for Tommy for just a second here. Yes, he is a liberal shill (although, that’s perhaps not the most polite way of putting it), in that he comments from his perspective which is defiantly from the left.

HOWEVER, unlike so many others on Mediaite, Tommy doesn’t try to hide that this is his opinion. Notice that virtually everything Tommy writes comes under the “Commentary” headline. Now, compare this to Frances, Drew, and especially Glynnis, who include their personal thoughts and biases in virtually everything they write, but refuse to acknowledge that it’s their opinion. They present their information as “facts” under the standard article headers… not (as Tommy does) under the Columnist or Editorial mark.

And for that, he should be commended. He is acknowledging that these are his opinions… and thereby makes no attempts at a non-biased presentation. And while we may disagree on the points made (the tactics, or cherry-picked evidence), at least he’s making an effort most of the others at Mediaite (sans Steve) are willing to.
http://www.anonymousfinch.com AnonymousFinch

ImNotBlue:

All fair points. I will also say that although Tommy infuriates me more often than not, the guy can write. He is probably the best pure writing talent they have here.
the real john t

Finch

“They don’t want to convince someone like me (who can think for himself); ”
————————

The only thing you can think of, is your bitterness and hatred for anyone who doesn’t agree with you.
ImNotBlue

the real john t says:
April 8, 2010 at 1:52 pm

The only thing you can think of, is your bitterness and hatred for anyone who doesn’t agree with you.

Really, John? Really…?

Coming from you… Come on. Be serious, buddy.
TylerDurdin

Tommy, I would be interesting in reading your denunciations of the NYT’s for its smear on McCain.

Please provide links to your pieces.
germ

ImNotBlue, Finch, I have to agree. Tommy does his job well. Although I sometimes find his writings snarky and full of half-truths, I appreaciate that he will debate with the commentors and defend his points. I have much respect for Tommy, even if I don’t agree with him.

Colby is the other blogger that interacts with his commentors and it is greatly respected for doing it, even though he doesn’t have to comment on his pieces.
ImNotBlue

germ says:
April 8, 2010 at 2:10 pm

Colby is the other blogger that interacts with his commentors and it is greatly respected for doing it, even though he doesn’t have to comment on his pieces.

Oh, Colby interacts… you’ve got that right! I’ve got a few thinly veiled threats from him in my email inbox to prove that. (I think he’s still upset that I wasn’t impressed or concerned that he was able to “find” my email address, even though I never specifically provided it to him.)

Of course, Colby (like the rest) seem to have a blind spot when it comes to their own opinion… and rarely acknowledge the bias they’ve put forth.
http://www.anonymousfinch.com AnonymousFinch

Germ:

I have a minor disagreement. I don’t find Tommy to be “snarky” at all. When he goes after someone, he either goes for the jugular or does it with genuinely funny sarcasm. I think of “snarky” as an irritating attempt at sarcasm that falls short because there’s no real punch behind it. To my way of thinking, “snarky” should be Glynnis’ middle name.

And I love Colby.
germ

It may not be snark, but there is a tone in his writing that does not sit well with me.
TylerDurdin

Tommy when ya stop defending ACORN, please cite your articles on the following BHO flip-flops:

BHO’s floating the idea of a VAT when he promised no taxes on anyone earning less than $250k/year

BHO saying he was against requiring Americans to buy medical insurance
TylerDurdin

P.S. Tommy, I’m still waiting to see your numerous articles condemning the NYT’s smear on McCain.
Tommy Christopher

Tyler,

I am looking for the John McCain pieces, but as payment for all the research I’m doing, have a look at this one about Cindy McCain, which also contains a link dating back to my previous employ:

http://www.mediaite.com/print/game-change-mark-halperins-cindy-mccain-hypocrisy/
The Real Royal King

You’re a mensch, Tommy, and a good writer. I wouldn’t bother with Tyler, however. Once you link, he’ll just say “Sure, anyone can link in Arial, but what about Times New Roman?”
germ

Once you link, he’ll just say “Sure, anyone can link in Arial, but what about Times New Roman

As a web designer, that gave me a LOL.
Tommy Christopher

Tyler,

here they are. You should also note that I wrote both of these only a few months into my journalism career, knowing that it could be detrimental to it. That’s not to pat myself on the back, but to illustrate that my principles run deep. I also linked to both of these again and again in later articles where they proved relevant.

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2008/02/20/breaking-mccain-scandal-brewing/

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2008/02/21/iseman-gate-could-help-mccain-hurt-times/
Tommy Christopher

King,

thanks. I’ve found, though, that people who begin by misjudging you can become the most loyal supporters. It’s certainly been my experience.

I do hate like hell to give Politics Daily all this traffic, lol.
TylerDurdin

Thanks for the link Tommy. I applaud you for the piece.

I find it ironic that Halperin ( in the link on his name) would talk about how bias the press was for Obama in the election in 2008 given that his employer, Time, featured BHO on its cover 14 times in 2008 and of course, Man of the Year.
valkyrie101

I am loving all you Repubs who just do not have the integrity to just come out and say: O’Keefe and Breitbart punked FOX, Glenn Beck, O’Reilly, Hannity, and many other media sources, including the New York Times. Most of what they presented was a scam. And the funniest one was Beck solemnly showing the woman who was admitting to killing her ex-husband.

But after O’Keefe was told by the woman that she killed her husband shouldn’t he have immediately called the police? And after Breitbart saw the video, shouldn’t he have immediately called the police? And when FOX saw the video, before they showed it on Beck’s “entertainment” show, I am wondering if they called the police. Because ACORN workers are being trashed because they seemed to be going along with a child prostitution smuggling ring. The guy in San Diego, after having asked numerous questions of O’Keefe about what he was proposing, called the police. On the other hand, when someone admits to killing their husband, any responsible citizen should immediately report that because otherwise, a murderer, not someone thinking about committing a crime, is on the street.
Tommy Christopher

Tyler,

this is actually getting comical. Although I haven’t written about the VAT (I haven’t even read about that one yet), Barack Obama’s stance on the health insurance mandate was something I pointed out and criticized over and over again during the 2008 campaign.
TylerDurdin

Tommy, thanks for the links. I appreciate that you did call out the Times.

In hindsight, do you not feel it was ironic that you asked Joe Trippi, manager for Edwards, what his take was about the allegation?

LOL
TylerDurdin

Hey, TRRK, are you still posting your fiction on Mediaite again?
TylerDurdin

valkyrie101, spend your time defending something that deserves defending.
Tommy Christopher

Tyler,

yeah, that’s a good point. You know, another even bigger liberal than I am was waaaay ahead on the Edwards story, and got banned from Daily Kos for his trouble. Google Lee Stranahan+John Edwards.
valkyrie101

This is not a story about ACORN, tyler. Acorn is history, as you mentioned. This is a story about shoddy journalism, and the abuse of innocent people. It is absolutely irrelevent to this story whether any of the Acorn workers actually went along with O’Keefe. What is relevent is that O’Keefe perpetuated, and Breitbart facilitated, a scam, at least to a significant extent. And FOX bought it hook, line and sinker. As did much of the rest of the media (though only after FOX began showing videos 24/7). Several innocent Acorn workers were defamed by this nonsense.
valkyrie101

It will be interesting to see how the litigation goes….
http://www.anonymousfinch.com AnonymousFinch

Val:

There is no litigation. ACORN sued Brietbart and O’Keffe in Maryland, and made much about it in the press, but then never served the complaint. The complaint was subsequently dismissed non pros. But, luckily, it was dismissed without prejudice, so they can refile at any time until the statute of limitations expires.

I wonder why that happened? Some cynics might think it was because ACORN wanted to do a press release about the litigation, but didn’t want to follow through and subject themselves to civil discovery. But I’m sure that’s not it.

But to be on the safe side, I hereby offer my services to ACORN, and all of its employees who were defamed, on a pro bono basis. I’m highly experienced in defamation cases. In fact, 11 years ago I even published a law review article on New York Times v. Sullivan. ACORN can have my services free of charge if they agree to submit themselves to civil discovery.
TylerDurdin

Lee got banned from Daily Kos??

What did he do, tell the truth?
same2u

TylerTurd,

You are no relation to the stalker-troll who originated from TVNewser called BlueBear/JH333 are you?
valkyrie101

The plaintiffs are the innocent employees. I will be surprised if they do not sue.
TylerDurdin

“ACORN can have my services free of charge if they agree to submit themselves to civil discovery.”

Okeefe submitted them to uncivil discovery!

LOL
TylerDurdin

same2u how many times must I flush before you go away?
same2u

I will take that as yes…you vile little prick.
TylerDurdin

same2u, You are living proof that shit can grow legs and walk.
http://www.anonymousfinch.com AnonymousFinch

No, Val, the plaintiffs were both ACORN and the employees. And, you’re right, if everything that Maddow has been saying is true, they have an open and shut case. They’ll surely get a massive award, including punitive damages. That’s why I’m sooo surprised that they never served the complaint and let it get dismissed non pros. The sooner they get this going and submit themselves to civil discovery, the sooner that check will come in (if everything Maddow is saying is true, of course).

You would almost think that they’re afraid of proceeding with the litigation because truth is an absolute defense to a defamation claim. And civil discovery is so broad. Maybe they’re afraid of giving a deposition under oath? Maybe there are really, really damaging documents that would be produced in discovery?

No, no, that can’t be it. I’m sure they’re just having trouble finding a process server to serve the complaint.
valkyrie101

And of course, O’keefe’s next stunt got him arrested. Yet, he remains a hero to the right. Hey Glenn, if you are looking for communist techniques, consider these “end justifies the means” that the Republican faithful endorse.
valkyrie101

finch,
I imagine there are more than a few lawyers thinking about when the statute of limitations will run on this stuff. Of course, defamation cases are the most risky for the PI bar. Perhaps there will be a liberal idealogue willing to step up, despite the risks.
http://www.anonymousfinch.com AnonymousFinch

Val:

Defamation cases are among the most risky for the PI bar? How do you figure that? Quite the contrary. Defamation cases are very cheap to litigate because you don’t need to retain any experts. And the statute of limitations for defamation in most jurisdictions is one year. So, we’ll know soon.
TylerDurdin

If ACORN can win a case, I hope they award “same2u” the pimp coat; it would fit!

LOL
The Real Royal King

Same2U certainly got to U, Tyler.

—

ACORN v. O’Keefe is a case I’d like to see both parties lose. I’m sick of both of them.
germ

ACORN v. O’Keefe is a case I’d like to see both parties lose. I’m sick of both of them.

—-

Wow! We actually agree on something!
will99

Lets have a truce:The Rightwing can go after the big stuff like Government corruption and ratings,the liberals can have the punk with the camera and continued low ratings.
http://www.facebook.com/people/Boutros-Boutros-Gali/1130377518 Boutros Boutros Gali

You crazy liberals have got to be kidding. You’re not trying to explain away what ACORN did, are you? You couldn’t possibly be that low. Everyone saw it with their own eyes you simpletons. You can spin it all you want, but it doesn’t change the fact that ACORN is a criminal organization. Even without the O’Keefe sting operation. we already knew ACORN was a criminal organization because of all of their voter fraud and Rathke’s thefts. You nutty Bolsheviks never give up.
valkyrie101

Well finch, defamation cases against the media are notoriously hard to win because of the significant protections that the law affords them to error, with an absence of malice. And I doubt if O’Keefe has a deep pocket.
valkyrie101

Well Boutros, the issue here is not Acorn, the issue is shoddy journalism, and intentional fraud.
http://www.anonymousfinch.com AnonymousFinch

Valkryie:

That’s where you’re wrong. The New York Times v. Sullivan actual malice standard only applies to public figures. ACORN might be deemed a public figure, but the employees who were supposedly defamed certainly are not. (Simple test: Before the defamatory publications were made, had you ever heard of ACORN? Yes. Before the defamatory publications, had you ever heard of Juan Carlos Vera? No.)

New York Times v. Sullivan and its progeny do not apply to the individuals. If Rachel Maddow is telling the truth, it is an open and shut case of defamation. There’s no excuse for the employees to not file suit (as the Baltimore employees have already loudly proclaimed that they were going to do).
TylerDurdin

hey valkyrie, if ACORN sues and wins, the jury should award them something commensurate with the damage to their reputation: the pimp coat.
http://www.anonymousfinch.com AnonymousFinch

Val:

If you want a comparison to what SUPPOSEDLY happened to the ACORN workers, think of Richard Jewell:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Jewell

If Maddow is telling the truth, then the defamation against the ACORN workers was far, far less justified than what happened to Jewell (who collected millions).
http://www.anonymousfinch.com AnonymousFinch

And if Maddow is telling the truth, then there was actual malice by O’Keffe. You’re not saying O’Keffe accidentally got some facts wrong about ACORN. You’re claiming that he committed “intentional fraud.” If that’s true, New York Time v. Sullivan isn’t an issue.
valkyrie101

OK, your the lawyer. I am just saying that defamation cases are not favored by the PI bar because they are hard to win, in general. You want to say I am wrong? Whatever.
http://www.youtube.com/cmdrgmh cmdrgmh

You know, looking at the comments here on this thread I see a real moron here. TylerDurdin. Let me ask you a simple question. What crimes did ACORN commit??? What crimes were they found guilty of in a court of law??? So, here let me help you with that. NONE. 0, nada. They helped millions of poor people get housing. Right up until this big LIE was thrust upon them. Why? Because The President of the United States once worked with them in the 90′s. They did a great service to white black, asian, all people who needed help. So lets get to the real reason you don’t like them. You don’t like the Elected President of the United States. Well. thats too Fricken Bad. You Lost The Election. YOU LOST. Get over it. Loser, Loser Loser. Also in 2012, you will lose Again. And when you do, I hope you come back here and spread your hate filled speech so I can once again call you a Fracken LOSER. So Loser, how’s it feel to be a Loser????
http://www.facebook.com/people/Bill-Adkins/1585417987 Bill Adkins

” cmdrgmh says:
April 8, 2010 at 8:44 pm
You know, looking at the comments here on this thread I see a real moron here. TylerDurdin.”

If shit for brains was a valuable commodity we could all be super rich if we had drilling rights to Durdin’s head. That said, I’m glad that FINALLY the truth about Andrew Not So Breitbart’s hand in fabricating the ACORN scandal is coming to light.
TylerDurdin

Bill Adkins, you’re living proof that even a turd can be polished.
TylerDurdin

cmdrgmh,it sounds like you want the pimp coat, you liberal pimp!

How many times must I flush to get rid of you??
victor the crab

BWAH! Brilliant! He’ll make a good prison bitch once he’s sent up the river. All you right wing whackadoodles can go swallow it hard.