James O'Keefe tells his side of the telephone tizzy at Sen. Mary Landrieu's office:
I learned from a number of sources that many of Senator Landrieu’s constituents were having trouble getting through to her office to tell her that they didn’t want her taking millions of federal dollars in exchange for her vote on the healthcare bill. When asked about this, Senator Landrieu’s explanation was that, “Our lines have been jammed for weeks.” I decided to investigate why a representative of the people would be out of touch with her constituents for “weeks” because her phones were broken. In investigating this matter, we decided to visit Senator Landrieu’s district office – the people’s office – to ask the staff if their phones were working.
Hmm - "Our lines are jammed" does not mean the same as "our lines are broken." Pressing on:
On reflection, I could have used a different approach to this investigation, particularly given the sensitivities that people understandably have about security in a federal building. The sole intent of our investigation was to determine whether or not Senator Landrieu was purposely trying to avoid constituents who were calling to register their views to her as their Senator. We video taped the entire visit, the government has those tapes, and I’m eager for them to be released because they refute the false claims being repeated by much of the mainstream media.
The affidavit (which of course is not an indictment) mentioned two possible crimes - entering a Federal building under false pretenses, and attempting to tamper with the telephones.
If the judge and prosecutor want to get sticky about the false pretenses charge O'Keefe and his cohorts have a problem.
As to tampering with the phone, if O'Keefe's group was, for example, simply looking for a service log to verify whether the phones had been recently repaired, the prosecutor will have an uphill fight trying to prove malicious tampering.
Patterico had pointed in this direction a few days ago.
I still say the over/under on arraignment versus throwing out the charges is less than 30 days. This looks pretty weak and is like a 60 Minutes or Dateline story that got busted before the fact.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | January 29, 2010 at 03:51 PM
"Watergate Jr." was so huge it took just one day of on the ground reporting from David Shuster to close.
Posted by: Gabriel Sutherland | January 29, 2010 at 04:05 PM
O'Keefe says:
"We video taped the entire visit, the government has those tapes, and I’m eager for them to be released because they refute the false claims being repeated by much of the mainstream media."
Too bad that O'Keefe doesn't follow his own advice and release the full unedited ACORN tapes so we can see if the claims inspired by that prank of his were false. What's good for the goose...
Posted by: Allen Funt | January 29, 2010 at 04:12 PM
The Feds have the tapes. And, if they have no intention of returning this property to O'Keefe, isn't that an act of suppression that is illegal? I thought the First Amendment sets news free. Even if one political side doesn't want something to see the light of day. Thanks to Danube of Thought for posting O'Keefe's response to the media.
Posted by: Carol Herman | January 29, 2010 at 04:12 PM
Interesting that the office, according to O'Keefe, is "open to the public." If that's true, how can he be charged with entering under false pretenses?
Posted by: Danube of Thought | January 29, 2010 at 04:13 PM
Tell me it's legal for the Feds to hold the tapes, then show me how.
Thanks to Danube of Thought for posting up O'Keefe's response to the charges.
Posted by: Carol Herman | January 29, 2010 at 04:14 PM
Officials said: "the men, led by conservative videomaker James O'Keefe, wanted to see how her local office staff would respond if the phones were inoperative."
So they meant to DISABLE the Senator's telephone. This is worse than wiretapping.
FELONY!!!
Posted by: dee | January 29, 2010 at 04:16 PM
And, since when is entering in disguise (telephone vests, hats, equipment) going to go to the Federal Building's Telephone Closet "open to the public"?
Posted by: dee | January 29, 2010 at 04:20 PM
Officials said:
It's been un-American to not take unnamed officials' word at face value for over a year.
Posted by: bgates | January 29, 2010 at 04:38 PM
so we can see if the claims inspired by that prank of his were false
Has anybody proposed any conceivable situation in which ACORN employees' repeated interest in helping people off the street to set up brothels for underage illegal immigrants turns out to be innocent?
Posted by: bgates | January 29, 2010 at 04:42 PM
Damn, I was going to try to push the lie that the tapes revealing how ACORN supports and facilitates prostitution and underage sex trafficking, but "Allen Funt" has already dropped that steaming pile.
So I thought, might as well try to spread some trumped up bullshit stories about what O'Keefe actually did in Landrieu's office (please, don't look into the facts for yourself!) - but "dee" has already spread that manure around, too!
Well, that leaves nothing for me to say here except... fuck you wingnutz!!!!
Posted by: Semanticleo | January 29, 2010 at 04:48 PM
"And, since when is entering in disguise (telephone vests, hats, equipment) going to go to the Federal Building's Telephone Closet "open to the public"?"
I like the "going to go to", which really means they were never in any telecom closet. And I would hope a Federal Building is open to the public. Sounds like the government has some sub par union security workers there.
And what's wrong with a reporter wearing a disguise? I'm hoping it was a better looking outfit than his pimp outfit.
It sounds like the entire episode was recorded, so hopefully we all have a chance to see what happened.
Poor dee and her lefty friends have a bigger problem. Obama enters the a Federal Building everyday under false pretenses, why isn't he arrested?
Posted by: Ken 4 | January 29, 2010 at 04:48 PM
This whole episode is an example of fail from all sides. Replace the last part of this post's URL with the following to see my earlier comments:
in-support-of-patterico-and-okeefe.html
It's also an example of fail in very minor ways: instead of using this as a learning opportunity, see the comments that replied to mine.
Posted by: 24AheadDotCom | January 29, 2010 at 04:49 PM
Expect this to go away, cause Mary Landrieu does not want the spotlight on this issue.
Everybody knows she does not answer her phones. The other congressional offices can verify, because constituents are always complaining that all they get when they call ML is a busy signal.
I don't see how entering into her public office and filming what's going on breaks any laws.
I mean hey, it's not like they hacked into her private e-mail accounts or anything like that!
Posted by: verner | January 29, 2010 at 05:08 PM
I don't remember Code Pink being arrested at the Capitol for falsely representing themselves as the Grim Reaper.
Posted by: MayBee | January 29, 2010 at 05:12 PM
Of course not Maybee, they were evil conservatives. O'keefe's problem is that he didn't realize that in going after a key block of Obama's support, he'd have the FBI following him around. What, Landrieu's office has a direct line to the FBI?
Posted by: RichatUF | January 29, 2010 at 05:23 PM
I have it on good authority that O'Keefe was there to plant the Edwards-Reille tapes in Mary's office knowing the freezer Jefferson precedent would mean they'd be safe there forever.
Posted by: longtime girl | January 29, 2010 at 05:28 PM
Really, longtime? You wouldn't be kidding us?
Posted by: clarice | January 29, 2010 at 05:28 PM
You could lockup just about every politician in Dc with a "entering a Federal building under false pretenses" charge.
Posted by: Neo | January 29, 2010 at 05:31 PM
FWIW,
Over here the big news today put out by the BBC and CCN International is Tony Blair's question answering session about his thoughts and actions on the run up to the Iraq War.
Simply an observation about the Media, having just sat through about an hour of CNN International doing the story:
"The position of CNN is that Tony Blair is guilty." Without actually coming out and saying it, CNN International and its correspondents have rendered a verdict and it is that Tony Blair is guilty of lying about having done a secret deal with George Bush to illegitimately invade Iraq.
That is the position which they are convinced of and that is the unstated position CNN International foists on their viewers.
The reporting is all of this sort:
"Blair was very well practiced for these questions and somehow was able to avoid being caught out in any dishonest statements."
"When so and so pointedly asked him about such and such he was able to adroitly deflect the question and avoid incriminating himself."
"Blair was in top form and cautiously avoided stepping into so and so's trap, etc"
The entire 'taken for granted' tenor of the reporting is that Blair is guilty of whatever his opponents think of him, but that he was too slippery for the questioners to entrap him in his lies. So instead, they immediately turn the camera's now to so and so, who lost a son in Iraq and lets hear his ad hominem about Tony Blair...Right, thank you, that was Mister so and so who lost a son in Tony Blair and George Bush's s War.
"Well Nick Robertson, have we learned anything new today?"
"In a word "No". Today Tony Blair showed he still has the ability to avoid answering questions and not incriminate himself and etc etc etc."
The possibility that Tony Blair was actually telling the truth was never acknowledged by a single CNN International Reporter I watched for an hour. Their carefully unstated but emphasized opinion, was that he was lying, but he just didn't get caught."
That is the entirety of the last hour of CNN International projected to the world.
G'night.
Posted by: daddy | January 29, 2010 at 05:37 PM
Well, I suppose that's interesting, but check this one out: Nancy Pelosi's In-Flight Food And Drink Costs? $101,000.
And there's an image of a partial receipt. Life is good on the Government's tab! All this comes under the heading of "in flight services." Indeed!
Posted by: anduril | January 29, 2010 at 05:37 PM
I'm hoping it was a better looking outfit than his pimp outfit.
Hey, I liked the pimp outfit. (The fact that the ACORN dweebs bought it is just icing on the cake.)
Posted by: Cecil Turner | January 29, 2010 at 05:39 PM
That's the NEW Populism for you.
Posted by: anduril | January 29, 2010 at 05:40 PM
If the judge and prosecutor want to get sticky about the false pretenses charge O'Keefe and his cohorts have a problem.
If the area is open to the public, the false pretenses charge doesn't apply. And since O'Keefe was already there sans telephone repairman outfit . . .
Posted by: Cecil Turner | January 29, 2010 at 05:47 PM
Ther MSM had this above the fold and as the lede story on the tv news the day the indictment was announced. I predicted it would all disappear once the facts got out and did not match the narrative.
Conspiracy to embarrass a Senator, as far as I know, is not a Federal offense yet. With the way the Politburo is being run these days, they may try their best to change that.
Posted by: matt | January 29, 2010 at 06:04 PM
I can't help myself. Every time I hear Sen. Landrieu's name, I'm reminded of a classic Star Trek episode, "The Return of the Archons", in which Captain Kirk and his companions encountered a society held captive for six thousand years by a super-computer which a maniacal social engineer had programmed with his own personality. Landru was the name of the cyber-dictator.
Posted by: mefolkes | January 29, 2010 at 06:14 PM
True Mefolkes, but Landru is more like Obama, which caused otherwise rational people to behave like drones.
Ah Nick Robertson, the import from ITN, he always finds a good word for every enemy faction. It is of these crazy notions that
a past season of MI-6, with Government engineering AQ false flags, similarly with
Mossad taking over an Embassy, well you get
the idea. It's Bearded spock over there, 24/7
Posted by: narciso | January 29, 2010 at 06:37 PM
MeFolkes, I always think the same thing. Me -- a trekkie? Nah.
Posted by: DrJ | January 29, 2010 at 06:41 PM
I picked this up from Zombie Contentions, in retrospect, it was a really powerful ad, in the LUN
Posted by: narciso | January 29, 2010 at 06:47 PM
Me thinks he hung around Coakley way too long, inthe LUN
Posted by: narciso | January 29, 2010 at 06:53 PM
I don't remember Code Pink being arrested at the Capitol for falsely representing themselves as the Grim Reaper.
Or getting into the RNC under false pretenses.
Or getting into Congressional hearings under false pretenses.
Or...
Posted by: Rob Crawford | January 29, 2010 at 06:58 PM
Oh narciso...that video is great!
Posted by: Janet | January 29, 2010 at 07:03 PM
daddy,
Having lived for 6 years in London from 97 to 03, I am not surprised by CNN International or BBC's preconceived ideas of what Bush and Blair cooked up. I was there for 911 and I had to be restrained by my wife from kicking in the TV during BBC's late night Dimbleby show when BBC stacked the audience with Islamists. You ain't seen anything yet.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | January 29, 2010 at 07:11 PM
"Tell me it's legal for the Feds to hold the tapes, then show me how." They can keep it because it's evidence of a crime seized in the course of an arrest. O'Keefe will be entitled to get copies in the discovery process, and will get the originals back after the case is dismissed or tried.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | January 29, 2010 at 07:41 PM
Daddy-
New book. LUN.
Really good writer for a phenomenal institution.
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | January 29, 2010 at 07:42 PM
Ezra Klein is extremely pessimistic about Obamacare. And that's wonderful.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | January 29, 2010 at 08:02 PM
Klein's photo of Rahm with his hand on the chair of the invisible POTUS is enough to make me even more pessimistic about who is *really* in charge of the puppet's strings.
Posted by: Frau Skeptisch | January 29, 2010 at 08:17 PM
--Ezra Klein is extremely pessimistic about Obamacare. And that's wonderful.-
Let's hope the little dweeb finally gets something right.
Posted by: Ignatz | January 29, 2010 at 08:19 PM
in 30 years I have yet to make sense of the dollar, Melinda. 240 Yen/$ back then down to 93/$ today and more dollar purchasing power than and yet we maintain the highest purchasing power of any economy. Heck, over in the UK the prices read like dollars in terms of value, except the Pound is 1.6X, while the average middle class prole makes a pittance.
The game rigging of other countries has been unbelievable over the years. The mercantilism is amazing.
Having said that, we have debased our currency beyond any rational expectation of balance when calculating debt/equity. the only things saving us are Chinese greed for markets, the mess in Japan, and the lesser mess in Europe.The dollar is really just the best of a bad lot. Swiss francs anyone?
The battle between deflationary forces and inflation is almost surreal at this point. Housing and RE values are crumbling while there are too many dollars in circulation.
It's Friday evening, and as they used to say in the Monty Python skit, my brain hurts. Am going to join DoT in a virtual Bombay sapphire martini.
Posted by: matt | January 29, 2010 at 08:47 PM
Wow Frau, you are right. A scary picture.
Posted by: Janet | January 29, 2010 at 09:13 PM
Hey Mel, you're an irreplaceable treasure. Would you mind summarizing that book in a couple of paragraphs. I'm with Matt, although my knowledge of the dollar is less than his.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | January 29, 2010 at 09:30 PM
Welcome back, Frau. This is for you:
It is a full moon tonight. BOO!!!
Posted by: Ann | January 29, 2010 at 09:33 PM
Good God--the increasingly unbearable David Brooks imagines himself in a conversation with a truly imaginary Barack Obama:
"First, I would say, you need to distance yourself from the status quo. You need to detach from the Old Bull committee chairmen you foolishly affixed yourself to in your first year. You need to detach from all those deals with pharmaceutical lobbyists and earmark champions. You need to detach yourself from Washington’s ping-pong match of ideological overreach — as each party interprets victory as a mandate to grab everything."
Posted by: Danube of Thought | January 29, 2010 at 09:47 PM
Here's the whole Brooks thing. Be prepared to do some serious retching.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | January 29, 2010 at 09:49 PM
Ann - Ya think Rahm is screening O's blackberry messages or playing BrickBreaker? I'm sure he's thinking, hell I could do this job way better.
Posted by: Flodigarry | January 29, 2010 at 09:59 PM
Too bad that O'Keefe doesn't follow his own advice and release the full unedited ACORN tapes so we can see if the claims inspired by that prank of his were false. What's good for the goose...
Allen honey, you don't think they let the Feds keep the tape voluntarily, do you?
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | January 29, 2010 at 10:49 PM
I'm really starting to lose respect for the University of Chicago, after the Brooks experience,
Posted by: narciso | January 29, 2010 at 10:56 PM
Flodigarry:
I think he is emailing Soros a report card and delivering new orders. Hopefully, telling Obama to double down on the teabaggers and to send double the money to Brooks for his advice.
The Clintons must be clinking their glasses over this madness. It makes you almost admire the Clintons for their savvy political prowess over this daft political team that lets a paid political report write something as incredibly dumb as Brooks:
thousands of people working millions of hours and in all likelihood producing nothing.
Posted by: Ann | January 29, 2010 at 10:59 PM
Ann - I think you nailed it. It's the Soros direct connect hot line.
Posted by: Flodigarry | January 29, 2010 at 11:07 PM
Friday Night News Dump:
Rule of Law: Justice Department to clear Bybee and Yoo of any misconduct:
Holder Under Fire and Under The Bus
Happy Dance Anyone!!!!
Posted by: Ann | January 29, 2010 at 11:14 PM
I'm sure he's thinking, hell I could do this job way better.
I never parlayed training as a ballet dancer into millions of dollars in graft, but I think I could do that job way better.
And I continue to maintain that if I were ever alone in an elevator with David Brooks and Barack Obama with time to take only one swing, I'd punch Obama in the nuts so I'd be sure to hit both of them.
Posted by: bgates | January 29, 2010 at 11:27 PM
bgates -
heh! Quite the visual.
Posted by: Flodigarry | January 29, 2010 at 11:28 PM
Ann, the left will have a collective stroke.
Posted by: clarice | January 29, 2010 at 11:30 PM
They still have to insinuate that they did something wrong, when in reality they should
be given a medal, for the thankless work they did.
Posted by: narciso | January 29, 2010 at 11:39 PM
Advertise on NYTimes.com
U.S. Drops Plan for a 9/11 Trial in New York City
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | January 30, 2010 at 12:06 AM
Wow copy a regular link and get an extra line of advertising, what's that all about?
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | January 30, 2010 at 12:08 AM
They need to extract every dollar they can get, by any means, as they are losing great gobs of money
Posted by: Flodigarry | January 30, 2010 at 12:17 AM
Maybee tweeted something tonight that we should all remember while they are giving kudos and awards to Obama for being the first president to be bipartisan. (btw, Jake Tapper wouldn't even acknowledge Maybee's point or the importance of this report that his news room produced. )
Bush on Charm Offensive at Democratic Retreat
Remember that? What did President Bush get for it? Everything the left accused President Bush of doing was just a projection of what they wanted to do and is now a reality.
The good thing is they don't understand our strategy, they don't understand the army that has been built up over the hill, and they don't even recognize the Trojan horse called the Tea Party movement rolling towards them!
Posted by: Ann | January 30, 2010 at 12:35 AM
So what is their status, they are being held without charges, without a prospect of an effective hero, the worst of all possible worlds
Posted by: narciso | January 30, 2010 at 12:44 AM
(sic) hearing, and don't get me started on the idiot mayor in Newburgh (is it something
in the water over there) who want his ANG
as the venue, because it will put it on the map
Posted by: narciso | January 30, 2010 at 12:46 AM
"Daddy-
New book. LUN.
Really good writer"
I don't know Melinda.
I couldn't find a copy of your last recommendation, "The Road to Serfdom" by this Salma Hayek chick, but her ">http://www.amazon.com/Salma-Hayek-Unauthorized-Patricia-Duncan/dp/0312969821/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1264834507&sr=1-1"> Salma Hayek: An Unauthorized Biography though full of really good pictures and helpful in keeping me awake and all, is not quite up to your usual recommendation standards.
Posted by: daddy | January 30, 2010 at 02:05 AM
Best news of the day:
">http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2010/0129102rielle1.html"> John Edwards ex-mistress seeks to quash release of their private sex-video.
Posted by: daddy | January 30, 2010 at 02:30 AM
I don't know if this phone-gate is the end of James O'Keefe's video career, but if he was looking for new ideas, I'd love to see him turn the cameras on while Hannah pretended to be a Flight Attendant on ">http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=123472"> Speaker Pelosi's Airborne Military junkets.
Story says "
ON CAPITOL HILL
Taxpayers pay $101,000 for Pelosi's in-flight 'food, booze'
Posted by: daddy | January 30, 2010 at 02:40 AM
O'Keefe's mistake was disguising himself as someone with a job. If he had gone into Landrieu's office as an indigent victim he would not have aroused any suspecion.
Posted by: Publius, a.k.a. The Idaho Publius | January 30, 2010 at 02:51 AM
OT Sarah Palin will be in Houston on Feb 7 to campaign for Perry. Just got an email inviting me to the party. Looks like Perry is setting himself up nicely as the anti-Washington candidate.
Posted by: Holly | January 30, 2010 at 03:44 AM
The battle between deflationary forces and inflation is almost surreal at this point. Housing and RE values are crumbling while there are too many dollars in circulation.
And the govt cannot win this battle. In reality, they never should have entered it. The govt is not bigger than the market, although the Dims seem to think it is. It can nibble around the edges, but it can't out print it, and, in trying to do so, it's only making the situation worse.
Posted by: Pofarmer | January 30, 2010 at 06:24 AM
"First, I would say, you need to distance yourself from the status quo. You need to detach from the Old Bull committee chairmen you foolishly affixed yourself to in your first year. You need to detach from all those deals with pharmaceutical lobbyists and earmark champions. You need to detach yourself from Washington’s ping-pong match of ideological overreach — as each party interprets victory as a mandate to grab everything."
Sounds like a natural Sarah Palin voter to me.
Posted by: Pofarmer | January 30, 2010 at 06:26 AM
Was that your review at the Hayek book page, daddy?
Posted by: Extraneus | January 30, 2010 at 06:32 AM
I missed this explanation from O'Keefe's lawyer on Thursday:
That again makes more sense than a hypothetical attempt to disable or wiretap, but for some reason Sen Landrieu was not having any: Not sure if she's trying to pretend this is Watergate redux, but if so I predict she's going to look even dumber.Posted by: Cecil Turner | January 30, 2010 at 07:41 AM
Actually the kids at Duke, and Nifong come to mind. Nifong took the lead. And, see what happened to him?
The Feds have to lose O'Keefe's cell phone to keep this story alive. Maybe, that would be on par with Nixon firing Cox.
More Americans tune in "when the news turns." Used to be the expression said "when the worms turn."
Posted by: Carol Herman | January 30, 2010 at 12:45 PM
Cecil--you're going to love this--LUN
Posted by: clarice | February 01, 2010 at 09:54 AM
Thanks Clarice, that's classic.
But I think the analysis at Big Government misses the point. It's not just the tu quoque that ACORN et al do it too, it's that there's nothing wrong with entering public areas of government buildings. Like, who do those buildings belong to, anyway? Can't get excited when the ACORN guys do it, and similarly can't get excited when O'Keefe does it.
That said, there is an issue of trying to bluff your way into secure locations, and I'm not entirely sure that doesn't apply in the O'Keefe case. Seems to me the only real issue is whether or not the GSA office is secure. If so, he has a (minor) problem. If not, this criminal case is a joke.
Posted by: Cecil Turner | February 01, 2010 at 10:11 AM