Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Sheepshank

(12,504 posts)
34. ...and the expected cherry picked talking points.
Thu May 22, 2014, 11:56 AM
May 2014

Obama//www.wnd.com/2008/12/84434/

Michelle Obama’s old law firm is representing ACORN’s board in an internal embezzlement case
<<<<snip>>>>
The Obamas met at Sidley Austin when Barack interned there after his first year at Harvard Law School. After law school, Barack represented ACORN in a voter registration case.
Offering private legal support


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_of_Community_Organizations_for_Reform_Now
On June 14, 2010, the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) released its findings which showed that ACORN evidenced no sign that it, or any of its related organizations, mishandled any federal money they had received
<<<<snip>>>
In response to an inquiry from a Housing and Urban Development Department lawyer, David Barron, the acting assistant attorney general for the Office of Legal Counsel, wrote a five-page memorandum concluding that the law does not prohibit the government from paying ACORN for services already performed
Directing gov't investigation clearing ACORN

http://bizblogger.blogspot.com/2008/10/obama-defends-it-was-acorn-who-was.html
“Obama: So there’s been fraud perpetrated probably on ACORN, if they paid these individuals and they actually didn’t do registrations, but this isn’t a situation where there’s actually people who are going to try to vote, ‘cause these are phony names, and it’s doubtful Tony Romo is gonna show up in Ohio to vote, so this is another one of these distractions that gets stirred up in the course of a campaign."

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2009/12/08/DOJ-Defends-ACORN-Funding-Ban-While-Gutting-It Breibarts constant whine that DOJ and by extension Obama is making prosecution of ACORN voter registration fraud, embezzlement and de-funding too difficult.

After looking up the history of ACORN, it becomes very apparent that the Right and more specifically Issa, was making a long term, multi-pronged and concerted attack on the organization. From DOJ and state investigations, to the media lies to O'keefe continued stings. Clearly the public had been fed propogandized Right Wing redacted and edited news. The RIGHT was forming the narrative that they knew would engineer the suppression of Dem votes, so they had plenty of incentives to work hard at disbanding the organization. Congress holds the purse strings, they were convinced..or at the least finally had the means by which they could pretend to be convinced on ACORN wrong doing. Certainly actual missteps from the organizerss and volunteers of ACORN hurt them and put the final nail in the coffin. I believe Obama did what he could and at some point realized the huge, long term effort of legal and media based harassmentt and misinformation had tipped the scales.

In practical and realistic terms, how in the hell was he supposed to counter funding deregulationn of Congress?




Yes, this was entrapment, but what, exactly, is wrong about using, say, an oil company's money to djean111 May 2014 #1
"Middle East oil interests" TexasProgresive May 2014 #22
It's all about the money, eh? Trajan May 2014 #26
In one sense, you are right . . . markpkessinger May 2014 #39
Professional Smear Artistes. Octafish May 2014 #2
+1 a whole fucking bunch. Enthusiast May 2014 #7
this. navarth May 2014 #12
Yeah, why didn't the president step in? JohnnyRingo May 2014 #23
...and the expected cherry picked talking points. Sheepshank May 2014 #34
I'm still pissed about how FAST the Democratic Party Leadership threw ACORN... bvar22 May 2014 #40
Highly recommend. n/t Jefferson23 May 2014 #3
O'Keefe is what settles at the bottom of a fishtank. marmar May 2014 #4
No talent grifter Scarsdale May 2014 #15
Nah. There's nutritional value in that stuff. Catfish eat it. aquart May 2014 #30
Could Josh Fox sue O'Keefe for defamation? Or harassment? Or financial damages? DetlefK May 2014 #5
I think the term we're looking for here is "libel". surrealAmerican May 2014 #20
And stuck to his front door Warpy May 2014 #29
Placing items in a mail box is against the law maindawg May 2014 #6
He's working on behalf of corporate America, he'll never do time. Enthusiast May 2014 #8
O'Keefe's scams are rather transparent- LeftinOH May 2014 #9
That one was more than laughable. It was tragic. n/t Cleita May 2014 #11
But it was allowed to work. aquart May 2014 #31
It may have been laughable, but it is no laughing matter . . . markpkessinger May 2014 #37
Hopefully, that POS will be put on the boat to oblivion sooner rather than later. n/t Cleita May 2014 #10
More fun and games from James 'Booger' O'Keefe. navarth May 2014 #13
Can we please not compare this Sack of Shit JackInGreen May 2014 #16
The real question is who's funding him now starroute May 2014 #14
$$$ Scarsdale May 2014 #17
Welcome to DU, Scarsdale! calimary May 2014 #41
Some people are already trying to dig into this starroute May 2014 #19
On the domain name jberryhill May 2014 #33
As Josh Fox notes... blackspade May 2014 #18
Someone should get a big defamation claim against O’Keefe. Downwinder May 2014 #21
Good for Mr. Josh Fox Xyzse May 2014 #24
How can anyone take this guy seriously? KansDem May 2014 #25
They never dressed that way when they went into the offices. MohRokTah May 2014 #28
No, that isn't how he dressed . . . . markpkessinger May 2014 #38
I love it when the stinger gets stung by his own target. MohRokTah May 2014 #27
um, so how does this shitstain…. dhill926 May 2014 #32
Isn't O'Keefe on some sort of parole for a similar scam.... Sheepshank May 2014 #35
This guy should be in the 'Can' not at Cannes. MinM May 2014 #36
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Inside a Hollywood Hit Jo...»Reply #34