It's too bad Rachel apparently doesn't read The Brad Blog. If she did, she would have come to realize the criminal nature of the ACORN hoax much sooner than she did.

Consider, for example, Brad's 5/27/10 piece, FBI: O'Keefe DID Plan a 'Wiretap Plot' to Secretly Record Employees of U.S. Senator:

"One of those states was California, where O'Keefe ended up striking a deal with the Attorney General during his investigation of the videos, to turn over the unedited version of the audio and video tapes in exchange for immunity from criminal prosecution under the state's 'Invasion of Privacy Act,' (CA Penal Code 630 - 638), also known as 'California's Wiretap Act.' The Attorney General Jerry Brown's investigation ultimately found what every other official has found when investigating O'Keefe's phony ACORN tapes: they were highly-doctored to show something that didn't actually happen, no ACORN employees are seen violating any criminal laws, and O'Keefe himself was the only one who actually did, vis a vis his secret wiretaps of employees."

Too little too late...the effect of the lies and propaganda, just like those emails on climate last summer, have already had their desired effect. Had the media done their duty and not their jobs, well, the world would be a better place. But the high horse riding pious right wing has itself to look in the collective mirror as the biggest hypocrite, the biggest liar, the most deceitful. I am ashamed to be American...

Rachel really did a great job, but I'm still pondering the possible introduction of "unnamed defendants" in the Juan Carlos Vera lawsuit:

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=7940

If any person, knowing what was in the works, provided O'Keefe and or Giles with financial and or technical support, we (Vera) may be able to get at 'em during discovery.

And if just one more rat crawls from that nest (in addition to O'Keefe and Giles), would the deal with Jerry Brown be voided and the sentences adjusted? Is that how it works?

Andrew Breitbart's been proven a total fraud. He staked his entire reputation on James O'Keefe, a guy whose entire adult life has been spent pursuing a vendetta against an entire race of people. He lost.

But maybe that's the least of Breitbart's problems.

I'm stocking up on popcorn.

Looks like Rachel Maddow repeated her deception and dishonestly "edited" the CA AG report again to make it look like Vera reported O'Keefe and Giles to the police immediately instead of 9 Days later.

Why does Vera believe that he had a reasonable expectation of privacy?

Paul L.@ comment 4--

You are correct that Rachel Maddow misspoke and got the timing wrong on when Vera actually talked to his cousin. I don't see how this affects 1.the gist of her story in the slightest 2.the fact that Vera broke no laws 3.Vera did the right thing.
That this is the focus of your concern and complaint when a TV newsperson basically got a wildly misreported story exactly right instead of demands for justice and accountability from Giles, Okeefe, Breitbart, Fox, et al who deliberately got the story wrong, repeatedly lied, and did a hell of a lot of damage to innocents at the bottom of the economic ladder speaks volumes. Such sensibilities seem sociopathic to me.

Speaking of sociopathic and at the risk of an off topic comment--

Reading The Guantanamo Lawyers:Inside a Prison/Outside the Law. It is the most disturbing and painful reading experience of my life.

The ends justified the means...if there was a crime involved, so be it, let those who did it pay. The tax supported "community organizers" were willing and able to promote and assist the most despicable of crimes...shame on you for supporting such an organization.

@Lil Ol Me #8

Lil Ol Me,

Sorry darling, you need to review the unedited tapes and transcripts.

You also need to take a strong look at O'keefe's and Breitbart's extremely shady handling of their (utterly fallacious) "evidence" last year.

Remember, last year they actively prohibited anyone other than Fox news from accessing their material. They absolutely refused, from the beginning, to discuss the matter with anyone outside of Fox News.

And then, after making such an effort to keep others out of the loop, they screamed that they were being "censored", despite their own efforts to avoid any other news organization. Breitbart lied straight through his coked-up teeth about the whole matter. That should tell you something.

Furthermore, the tapes dont show people willing to help Okeefe and Giles in the "most despicable of crimes."

What they show is OKeefe and Giles lying about needing to shelter Giles and her charges from an abusive pimp who means them certain peril, and pressing people to help them because they claimed to be in serious danger.

The conversations about that issue (which was the most decisive matter in these exchanges) were edited out from the tapes, and re-configured to make it appear as if the ACORN workers were helping set up an underage brothel.

It was a lie... one staged only to malign and deceive for the most base and unconscionable political attacks.

It was a lie fabricated with the editing equipment that Okeefe purchased by a grant from Peter Thiel (theoretically, purchased for another project.)

Consider the infamous “tin can” issue, in which Giles asks for advice from Brooklynn ACORN in order to hide money from “Sonny”, who she says will tear up her place in order to get cash.

Fox billed only a portion of that conversation, and Giles stated in an interview that the tin can idea was offered to hide money from the government— and explicit and provable LIE!

If you cant see that at this point, then you are just making an effort to deceive yourself.

But you are indulging a cruel and manipulative smear more appropriate to an archaic witch-trial than to a real legal or journalistic investigation (as stated by famed Inquisitor Baron de Laubardemont back in the 1600s, “Give me 3 lines of man’s handwriting and I will hang him.” That’s Okeefe’s and Breitbarts method to a tee! The modern conveniences of the internet and Final Cut Pro allow them to take us back to some of the darkest periods in history)

O"keefe cant even be honest about being a conservative. He lies about that all the time, saying he "has no interest in conserving anything" and that he is a "radical progressive.” He indignantly claims to resent be called a “conservative.”

But that Liar not only was trained by a number of conservative activist organizations, he also founded a college paper which he proudly named "A Journal of Conservative Thought." He receives funding from conservative donors (Theil, the Leadership Inst., etc..) and collaborates with conservative politicians like Steve King. He even continues to receive awards from conservative groups, and speaks with Giles at conservative rallies.

For “not being a conservative”, he really hangs around, and works for that scene A LOT!

He is, in fact a conservative, but refuses to admit it because he’s trying to manipulate appearances.

He cant even be honest about who he is... and that should tell you something.

The guy lies simply as a matter of habit. He cant stop, even if he wanted to. And people like you only encourage this pathology.

In answer to Mark Da Shark @5, under CA Penal Code 632 it is unlawful to secretly tape record the conversation of another without their consent where that individual has a reasonable expectation that the conversation is confined to the participants--in this case three individuals seated inside an ACORN office.

Lil Ol Me @8's comment is typical of the mindless wingnuts who swallowed the ACORN pimp hoax hook, line and sinker.

The former Attorney General of MA, the Brooklyn DA's office, and the CA Attorney General conducted investigations which exonerated ACORN.

ACORN neither promoted nor assisted in the commission of any crimes, despicable or otherwise.

Shame on you, Lil Ol Me, for your mindless repetition of the hard-right's despicable lies which destroyed a benevolent community organization in order to destroy both truth and democracy.

One more thing Lil Ol Me,

I consider child molestation to be the worst crime imaginable. Most people do.

(and, btw, a false accusation of child-molestation is FAR more damaging than even a real accusation of racism... just something you might want to report back to your master Breitbart, who continues to burn over that one.)

If you have real evidence for child abuse/trafficking, you don’t play a year-long politicized game of media hop-scotch with it. You dont "drip" out the purported "evidence." You submit it openly, and give ALL of it to the authorities... at least if you are a sincere and decent person. Its that simple.

Furthermore, the more fallacious reports of abuse that are put into circulation, the more difficult it becomes for REAL victims to make their own REAL claims. Any beat cop will tell you that.

O’keefe has wasted precious time, money and resources that could have gone to help REAL victims. He doesnt care, and evidently neither do you.

(btw, have you thought about the cost to taxpayers his antics have accrued, what with the court costs, investigative fees, probationary fees etc...?)

(How about the burden Giles is placing on her own supports by begging for their money, while her dad makes long and frequent trips to Africa to help push his depraved prejudices. He at least has enough money, picked from his own congregation, to release his own line of BS books? Why are they asking their followers for money, when they claim to stand for such frugal values, and have millions at their disposal as is? Trips to the other side of the planet arent cheap. I know.)

Like Limbaugh, Okeefe wants to see the whole country suffer (especially the poor who he kicked to the streets using lies and deception.) He wants to punish us all for daring to vote for Obama.

He doesnt care about all the innocent people he maligned, and even less about the real impoverished Americans who were left with no support thanks to his work.

"Chaos for Glory" indeed!

ACORN was a fine organization that helped real needy families.

O'keefe attacked it as a poor proxy for Obama, and nothing more.

I am certain you never heard of ACORN before the 2008 elections... I KNOW Hannah Giles never had (she didnt even know what it was when she began her "investigation", she just knew she "didnt like them," and she has admitted that.)

Before you blather out all sorts of nonsense about what you assume to know about ACORN, maybe hoist yourself away from the computer monitor and go to a neighborhood that really was helped by ACORN.

You’d be surprised at the good work they have done.

And you'd be humbled by the priviledge you have to sit at a comupter and pound out your righteous rants, while so many of your fellow Americnas dont even have food in their bellies.

I mean, how much have you (or even Giles, Breitbart and Okeefe) done to help the needy?

Did the coast-guard ever thank you for helping out in Katrina, they way they thanked ACORN?

You are supporting the careless trivialization of one of the worst crimes imaginable in order to attack a fine and helpful organization, again, as a proxy for Obama.

You are following the lead of a dishonest, sociopathic charlatan, and all of this just because he and his crew are mad that a black democrat was elected to the White House.

Have some humility, let alone the honesty to admit that a proven lie fabricated by a proven liar was, in fact, a proven lie.

You should be so ashamed that you and your pals can shout down at the impoverished and voiceless in America, only because you have the time and the money to sit at your computer and 'bate over your indignation..., while they have nothing.

What utterly cruel and unmerited self-righteousness!

Trust me, in your own lifetime, you will see how far on the wrong side of history this whole thing is.

I do not understand how this fiasco even got off the ground to begin with. Wait, I do: idiots in the media saw an opportunity to indirectly strike a smear campaign against Obama and the democrats.

Such a sad sad chain of events that lead up to the disassembly of Acorn. I am all about uncovering political scandals, but I'd appreciate much better journalism than this Acorn disaster.

Ernest A. Canning replied, "In answer to Mark Da Shark @5, under CA Penal Code 632 it is unlawful to secretly tape record the conversation of another without their consent where that individual has a reasonable expectation that the conversation is confined to the participants--in this case three individuals seated inside an ACORN office."

I understand what is said in CA Code, but
just because a code is on the books, does not mean that it is enforceable as written. The law has to be shepardized.

What have the courts said on this matter? For example, does the finding in Katz v. United States apply? Is there a California case on point?

As we saw in Maryland, ACORN abandoned it's suit. Was it because of Maryland's case law such as Malpas v. State? Was it because they didn't want to allow the defendants to have discovery?

Further, if O'Keefe and Giles violated the law in these two states, why haven't they been charged?

My question is still in play. Why does Vera believe that he had a reasonable expectation of privacy?

@Mark Da Shark, #13

From the begining of the transcript for the San Diego tapes, p.4--

James: Wait. Before you, before you begin... um, can you... this is confidential, right?

JC: Yeah.

James: Thank you.

Eden/Hannah: It's like..., its not being recorded or anything?

Considering how many times james and Hannah make the point about confidentiality, i think the expectation of privacy is more than just reasonable.

But what's infinitely worse, is that James and Hannah deliberately misrepresented Juan Carlos and their encounter with him.

The very serious accusation they make, of him being a child molesting john, is completely obviated in light of the overall evidence, and the more complete representation of the encounter.

But they still havent updated their website or their narrative on the video, despite the fact that it was already revealed that the man contacted the police last year. They are continuing to deliberately slander an innocent man with a very very serious charge.

For as many hair-ball retractions as James and Andrew whine about, they are completely negligent when it comes to their own responsibility to do so.

The man tried to help them rescue girls who they repeatedly stressed as being in certain danger.

They then twisted their "evidence" of the encounter to make it look like something it wasnt.

What an asshole.

I'd still like to know how the Philly case is panning out. I sincerely hope Katherine Conway Russel gets them the max.

But James has too many rich-bitch connections. he's probabaly just picking up balls at the senators golf club.

Nevertheless, he will go down in history as one of the biggest assholes in our decade. You can count on that. His name will forever be synonymous with malicious dishonesty and a spineless lack of accountability.

SreeBee replied, "From the begining of the transcript for the San Diego tapes, p.4--....."

That has nothing to do with the case law on the matter.

Well Mark Da Shark, I wont pretend to understand the intricate contours of legaleeze the way I assume you truly do.

You and Ernest are FAR more in-the-know than I could ever be. So as far as the legal world goes, I will defer to the much wider breadth of knowledge which you two do in fact have.

I just hope that Vera and KC Russel get some real justice for themselves, and that James and Hannah face some semblance of accountability.

That being said, I still do not understand how the repeated concerns about confidentiality (as clearly expressed by James and Hannah) do not count as offering Vera some explicit expectation of privacy.

I mean that, at least, seems pretty straightforward.

I assume it’s the job of judges and lawyers to determine the applicability/relevance of such matters. From the outside, it seems that many people in those professions get quite intense when hashing their way towards resolution.

But I am not a lawyer, and (with all of my most sincere respect to your honorable profession) I don’t think I would ever, ever want to be one. (I dont mean that as a rip..., some of my life-long heros were lawyers.)

Nevertheless, I cant imagine much integrity or honor in a lawyer that would take Okeefe’s case... any more than I can imagine these in a lawyer that would represent Michael Vick.

In both cases the lawyers are making boku-cash by protecting cruel celebrity sociopaths for the sake of their adoring fans and the cognitive dissonance in which they wallow so happily.

[Ed Note: Comment deleted. Commercial spam. - BF]