<object width="420" height="245" id="msnbc8d780f"><param name="movie" value="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32545640" classid="clsid27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000" codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=10,0,0,0"><param name="FlashVars" value="launch=36204129&width=420&height=245"><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always" /><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" /><param name="wmode" value="opaque" /><embed name="msnbc8d780f" src="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32545640" width="420" height="245" FlashVars="launch=36204129&width=420&height=245" allowscriptaccess="always" allowFullScreen="true" wmode="opaque" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" pluginspage="http://www.adobe.com/shockwave/download/download.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash"></embed></object><p style="font-size:11px; font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; color: #999; margin-top: 5px; background: transparent; text-align: center; width: 420px;">Visit msnbc.com for <a style="text-decoration:none !important; border-bottom: 1px dotted #999 !important; font-weight:normal !important; height: 13px; color:#5799DB !important;" href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com">breaking news</a>, <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032507" style="text-decoration:none !important; border-bottom: 1px dotted #999 !important; font-weight:normal !important; height: 13px; color:#5799DB !important;">world news</a>, and <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032072" style="text-decoration:none !important; border-bottom: 1px dotted #999 !important; font-weight:normal !important; height: 13px; color:#5799DB !important;">news about the economy</a></p>
Only the unedited tapes from California were released, but I'd wager that most the other office visits were edited similarly.
Yes. It's a shame that some people were talking about this guy as if he was some kind of undercover journalist. Of course most of those people were on FOX news and don't really have an idea what a good journalist is to begin with. It's no wonder that the case against ACORN was thrown out by the judge.
Of course it was: I could tell it was from the very beginning, before they ever released the unedited video. Why? Because Fox was always very careful to show the answers ACORN gave, not the questions they were asked. The entire "investigation" was no more legit than a Weird Al interview. <object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/-Qmb7rKZp1I&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/-Qmb7rKZp1I&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>
So, why did it take so long for this to come out? Not that I really care about ACORN, but it is strange that ACORN lawers couldn't defend them better if this is the case.
Hey look I just edited your post - O'Keefe/Breitbart/Fox Style! Yes <strike> It's a shame that some people were talking about </strike> this guy <strike> as if he</strike> was some <strike> kind of </strike> undercover journalist. Of course<strike> most of those people were on</strike> FOX news <strike>and don't really have an idea what a</strike> good <strike>journalist is to begin with.</strike> It's no wonder that <strike>the case against</strike> ACORN was thrown out by the judge Because ACORN didn't have the unedited tapes to defend themselves, O'Keefe did. He played the edited tapes again and again to perpetuate his hoax and Fox News repeated it again and again to the point where it became accepted by the so-called mainstream media. They had no chance.
Now that's some solid journalism! I can't believe anyone would think you were anything other than a top notch investigative journalist. basso, among others should sing your praises.
Their lawyers did defend them against this. The court viewed the unedited tapes and ACORN was acquitted. The ACORN lawyers never lost a case based on any of the tapes from this tool.
Good segment, if it's true, feel sorry for the guy that reported them to the police. But Maddow in "aha!" mode is so irritating, show would be more watchable if she just toned down the delivery a bit.
Yes but their lawyers aren't in congress. Because congress passed some laws based on misinformation, doesn't seem like anything the lawyer could have stopped
In light of people losing their jobs over this, the misrepresentation and falsification is downright criminal. Fox news complicity is disgusting. SamF, what are the legal ramifications?
The employee could probably have a fun time with a defamation/false light publicity suit, and actual malice might really apply here.
