READER COMMENTS ON
"Hannah Giles Confirms (Again, This Time on Video) the O'Keefe-Breitbart ACORN 'Pimp' Lie"
(37 Responses so far...)
COMMENT #1 [Permalink]
said on 2/22/2010 @ 4:16 pm PT...
Wow. When I previously saw another version of this episode with Blumenthal it conveyed a dramatically different reality. It was from a different angle(more to the side of and behind Blumenthal)and the audio quality was not nearly so good. You could really only hear Black Bart. Hearing only Black Bart I got the impression that he was having his way with this young guy. Since you could hear absolutely no rebuttal, you couldn't see Blumenthal's face very well, and he seemed to be taking it on the chin, it gave me the false impression that perhaps there was some merit mixed into the aggressive, insulting attack Blackie was delivering.
Actually seeing and hearing the whole episode clearly offers a completely different reality. Blumenthal is not cowed at all. He looks rather bemused and is trying to respond, but there's no room to. Sense appears completely absent. Bartleby the Pimpener appears to be a rude, possibly dangerous madman.
If a little difference in just the video quality and angle of shot can produce such different versions of reality, imagine what could you do with a little editing and overdubbing.
COMMENT #2 [Permalink]
said on 2/22/2010 @ 4:36 pm PT...
Breitbart is seriously deranged. He has no game, none whatsoever. I think he's had his way before because he seems to be a pretty large and intimidating guy. I love that Blumenthal had none of it. And O Boy is that Hannah Giles girl dumb as rocks or what?
Who was the guy badgering Blumenthal in the middle of the video, not letting him answer.
"You like the word 'rubric'" Genius. "At some point you'll have to stop, because I'm going to keep giving you the same answer, because I agree with myself." I like this guy.
COMMENT #3 [Permalink]
said on 2/22/2010 @ 4:52 pm PT...
Breitbart is in full meltdown mode...
COMMENT #4 [Permalink]
said on 2/22/2010 @ 5:13 pm PT...
The media lies yet again...trying to convince us that Cheney actually has a heart
Cheney has had a long history of heart problems
Yeah, no kidding....1.5 million dead iraqis could attest to that, if the dead could speak.
COMMENT #5 [Permalink]
said on 2/22/2010 @ 5:15 pm PT...
This was not a partisan hit job; it was a racist hit job.
The fact that black people neither vote for nor get elected by Republicans is merely incidental.
COMMENT #6 [Permalink]
said on 2/22/2010 @ 5:35 pm PT...
Okay Brad and fellow Bradblogdinians,
Hannah Giles clearly appears to be joking with the "menstrual cycle" line. She even laughs and says she's sorry as if to acknowledge her humorous goofball interjection which interrupts Max. Blumenthal gives her a high five in recognition of and congratulations for her joke. They look like they might be having a nice little flirt with each other through the video.
So, if she is joking there, I think that's pretty cool. Looks like signs of intelligent life. We should be encouraged by that. I hope she'll respond to Brad's offer.
COMMENT #7 [Permalink]
said on 2/22/2010 @ 5:44 pm PT...
C'mon David, you really think she was joking with him? Dollars to donuts she has no clue what a minstrel is at all. She only played it off because he high-fived her on what he might have misinterpreted as word play on her part, and she went along with it. But seriously, I don't think she had a clue. The girl ain't that bright.
COMMENT #8 [Permalink]
said on 2/22/2010 @ 7:02 pm PT...
Giles was the only civil person there other than Max.
And notso Breitbart had nothing. He is an embarrassment to the human race.
COMMENT #9 [Permalink]
said on 2/22/2010 @ 7:42 pm PT...
Soul Rebel @ 7--
I absolutely think she's joking. Listen to her delivery. Then she's laughing almost immediately. Then she's apologizing for the joke and Blumenthal is high fiving her. They're having fun with it. If it was an unintentional "stupid" remark, why would she be responding to her own unintended gaffe like that so quickly? She wouldn't be aware of it. Listen to how immediately she's laughing at herself. You can also tell by her delivery. She knows it's a ridiculous thing to say but she's trying to keep a straight face. Then she can't keep it up and cracks up immediately. Blumenthal isn't misinterpreting unintentional wordplay. He's recognizing/admiring intentional wordplay and enjoying the moment with her.
As ping pong balls(?)I thought you said KING KONG'S BALLS(!)are my witness, she's joking.
COMMENT #10 [Permalink]
said on 2/22/2010 @ 7:43 pm PT...
Hannah Giles isn't dumb as the bag of antlers that she looks like - she was taught to be that by her prominent wingnut father Doug Giles.
COMMENT #11 [Permalink]
said on 2/22/2010 @ 7:53 pm PT...
Dr. Squid--comment #10--
Hannah Giles is what a bag of antlers looks like?
I must say I'm completely confused, but most delighted to hear that.
And beyond curious to see the rest of the animal.
COMMENT #12 [Permalink]
said on 2/22/2010 @ 8:04 pm PT...
is this dead horse sufficiently beaten yet?
COMMENT #13 [Permalink]
said on 2/22/2010 @ 8:42 pm PT...
i agree with David Lasagna that Giles was joking and appears to be quite intelligent and engaging. I also hope she takes Brad up on his offer.
Hannah, do yourself a favor and come look at the information here about ACORN posted previous to your and O'Keefe's video sting operation. You will learn a lot. Feel free to question, puzzle over, and investigate for yourself.
That video was shocking and revealing of a right wingnt tactic. I don't know what it's called but I've seen it before. Falsely accuse someone of something despicable to take attention away from your own despicable behavior. As in: Calling someone a racist is the worst thing a person can do! How detestable!
Well, no, actually, BEING a racist is far, far worse.
Max was stating his observations and relaying information --- i.e. FACTS --- and NOT calling anyone a racist. The facts speak for themselves, which was why he was hit with the virulent accusations.
COMMENT #14 [Permalink]
said on 2/22/2010 @ 9:02 pm PT...
Hannah Giles has no respect from me whatsoever, for hanging out with a bunch of rich rightwingers who only attack the poor and minorities. I'd have respect if they did a sting on Halliburton, but they're rich bullies who only key on Planned Parenthood and ACORN, organizations that help the poor and minorities.
Real "heroes", nowadays lowlife liars are looked up to. Just like torture is OK, attacking the poor and minorities is OK in America. Nothing to be proud of, a LOT to be ashamed of.
COMMENT #15 [Permalink]
said on 2/22/2010 @ 9:22 pm PT...
"As the "paper of record" the New York Times has still refused to correct their multiple, blatant misreports of this story, which helped lead to Congress passing unconstitutional legislation to defund ACORN"
Brad - Your repetition of these lies speaks very poorly for your opinion of your readership and betrays the completely fabricated, after the fact contruction of your fantasy smear.
Let's go to the time line:
9/10 Baltimore video release
9/11 Washington video release
9/11 Census Department severs ties with ACORN
9/14 Senate votes to defund ACORN 83-7
9/15 San Bernardino video released
9/16 ACORN suspends certain operations
9/17 San Diego video release
9/17 House votes to cut ACORN finding 345-75
9/19 Allegedly misleading Scott Shane piece appears in NY Times
When did that misleading Breitbart column appear Brad, 9/21 or 9/25?
Your timeline is completely bogus.
COMMENT #16 [Permalink]
said on 2/22/2010 @ 10:42 pm PT...
... saved the best for last ... andrew breitFART !
COMMENT #17 [Permalink]
said on 2/22/2010 @ 11:49 pm PT...
Wow! Blumenthal was in control 100% of the time. He was in control of the facts and his emotions and it infuriated Black Bart. I loved the part where Max points out that Black Bart's chin was quivering. Good job Max!
COMMENT #18 [Permalink]
said on 2/23/2010 @ 12:36 am PT...
Scott Shane's NYTimes article describing O'Keefe "dressed so outlandishly that he might have been playing in a risqué high school play" was published on September 15th.
Other than that, you'll have to share specifics, either to something I wrote you are alleging is incorrect and a link to something that verifies that it was incorrect. I don't have time to go digging into your facts for you, since I'm not sure what you're trying to suggest here with your timeline (which is either accurate, or isn't, don't know one way or another, but as I'm working on a piece in re: the Shane article, I can tell you you got that one wrong.)
COMMENT #19 [Permalink]
Ernest A. Canning
said on 2/23/2010 @ 2:59 am PT...
Hey Daily Crock, here's a couple of facts you left off your idiotic "time line:"
On Sept. 15, 2009 The New York Times publishes Scott Shane's "article" in which Shane falls for the Pimposter's deception hook, line and sinker.
On Dec. 11, U.S. District Judge Nina Gershon granted ACORN's motion for a preliminary injunction [PDF], ruling that it was likely ACORN would prevail on the merits of its claim that the House and Senate Appropriations Resolutions were unconstitutional Bills of Attainder.
Although no doubt fully aware of ACORN's pending lawsuit, on Dec. 10 & Dec. 13 the House and Senate enacted the "FY 2010 Consolidated Appropriations Act," an amalgam of six separate bills which the President signed into law on Dec. 16. The Act contains a provision which is virtually identical to the earlier resolutions passed, cutting off ACORN from federal funds.
On 12/17/09 ACORN filed a motion to expand the injunction to FY 2010 Consolidations Appropriations Act.
COMMENT #20 [Permalink]
said on 2/23/2010 @ 6:06 am PT...
Dear Rockin' Around the Pimperfest Crock @ comment 15--
This isn't a one way street carnival we're* running here. You've had several questions put to you by Ernest Canning which you continue to ignore. For me, not answering questions, then coming in and asking more misleading ones yourself continues to shred your credibility.
I also interpret such behavior to indicate that you are not interested in actual dialogue since you are not engaging in actual dialogue. So I then begin to shut you out/dismiss you.
Remedying this is easy enough. Make good-willed attempts to answer good questions put to you. Be engaged with the people you disagree with instead of just trying to ram shit down our throats.
Looking forward to seeing what you have to offer.
* I apologize for my presumptuousness in writing "we're" as this is not my site, and I'm just a guest, too. But I feel like this is a kind of home/refuge for me, hence the "we're".
COMMENT #21 [Permalink]
said on 2/23/2010 @ 6:14 am PT...
Brook @ 12--
This isn't a horse beating exercise. It's a resuscitation attempt. Trying to bring the media back to life. Big difference.
And I hope Brad and the rest of his merry crew will keep at it for as long as it takes.
COMMENT #22 [Permalink]
said on 2/23/2010 @ 6:40 am PT...
Dear Big Dan @ 14--
This speaks to our ongoing discussion at Bradophilia about including/bridging to the people we most heartily disagree with.
Big Dano, you're talking about a 20 year old kid!
Have you forgotten John Perkins transformation? And Frank Schaeffer's?
Life IS change. It seems to me we humans spend an inordinate amount of time being stuck and stupid with dysfunction and fear but we also seem quite capable of choosing different directions at times.
Zinn always made this point about how unpredictable events are. Spain going democratic after Franco. The Berlin Wall coming down. Gorbachev and glasnost.
My request is that you give the kid a break and see if you can find it in your heart to imagine what a bridge to her might look and sound like instead of the old Grumpelstiltskin at the toll bridge routine, muttering, "MblCriksitsmrbldruk! We don't like your kind!!"
Don't we ourselves have to offer something different if we want the world to change?
COMMENT #23 [Permalink]
said on 2/23/2010 @ 8:05 am PT...
Max Blumenthal edited out the part when he is caught in a lie that he never called James O’Keefe any names and was reminded of posting this on his blog.
"Now, here is a question Breitbart: Why are you paying and defending a racist?"
So when is Max Blumenthal going to release the full unedited video?
Just using the new progressive standard
"CONASON: It's not journalism unless they report everything that happened. It's propaganda. "
Or the part where he ran away because his targets were turning the tables on him and ambushing him on video.
COMMENT #24 [Permalink]
Ernest A. Canning
said on 2/23/2010 @ 8:16 am PT...
To Paul L. #23, Breitbart doesn't ask questions. He engages in angry rhetorical rants. The video depicts the mob mentality of the tea-baggers that demagogues like Breitbart appeal to.
But I think there's a solution. What we need is a national symposium of psychiatrists--hopefully the best and the brightest--who can strive to quietly come up with a cure for wing-nuts disease.
COMMENT #25 [Permalink]
said on 2/23/2010 @ 12:38 pm PT...
Hey, Brad.. good work on exposing the pimp lie, but in my opinion this is just the tip of the iceburg. Most conservatives and independents who have heard this story and seen parts of the video are not going to give a damn that he didn’t really dress as a pimp. The idea that a guy dressed as a pimp got advice from ACORN was simply the juicy headline that got people to see what the story was about. What people who are outraged at this story are mad about were the charges that ACORN gave them advice on how to avoid taxes, smuggle children, and use them as sex slaves. However, a close examination of the video and the transcript show that it doesn’t prove any of these claims. The whole video is outrageously deceptive in just about every aspect. I find it disappointing that I haven’t seen a whole exposition to debunk these claims and instead Eric Boulert says, “I'm not trying to excuse what was captured (illegally?) on tape. Everyone knows the embarrassing mistakes the poorly trained, low-level ACORN employees made when dealing with O'Keefe and Giles.”
One thing to note from the video, which I haven’t seen written about anywhere is the fact that there is clearly is a communication barrier between the “journalists” and the ACORN workers. Many conversations people with white middle-class backgrounds and people with poor African-american backgrounds have trouble taking off. There is also noise in the background throughout much of the movie and this makes this worse. An example in the video of these communication problems is when the guy blurts out something about condoms being an expense(which was used as one of the soundbites to convince people that the ACORN workers had to know of the illegal sexual activity), it seems obvious that the workers don’t even recognize that he said that and just go on talking about other things that would be business expenses.
Clearly the worst accusation by far is the one that they plan on using teen girls as prostitutes or sex slaves. To support the accusation, the breitbart gang are using the part where the workers say that they shouldn’t mention the immigrant girls making money and being underage to anyone because it is illegal. However, it is pretty clear to me that the workers mean that the activities are illegal because the girls are under 16 (it is illegal for anyone under 16 to have a job in many states) not that they are illegal because they are using them for prostitution. The workers don’t seem to have any idea that the “journalists” intend on using the children as sex slaves or prostitutes.
I could write an article for your site to break down the video to show just how deceptive just about every part is if you would like me to. I think it’s important that the other insidious claims out there are debunked.
COMMENT #26 [Permalink]
said on 2/23/2010 @ 1:04 pm PT...
For those interested in the truth of the video, it isn't even clear that the ACORN workers even know that the "journalists" are even talking about prostitution. They never directly say that she is a prostitute, it's only cryptically implied by saying things like "that thing the governor of NY did" and "I'll do tricks for money". The only times they actually mention prostitute is when they randomly ask, things like "is prostitution illegal in Maryland?" and "should I write down I'm a prostitute?"
So despite all of the propaganda, it's not even clear that the workers "knew" that she was a prostitute.
COMMENT #27 [Permalink]
said on 2/23/2010 @ 1:16 pm PT...
COMMENT #28 [Permalink]
Ernest A. Canning
said on 2/23/2010 @ 3:49 pm PT...
RJ89 #25 wrote:
What people who are outraged at this story are mad about were the charges that ACORN gave them advice on how to avoid taxes, smuggle children, and use them as sex slaves.
RJ89, I would strongly encourage you to take the time to read the independent analysis [PDF] furnished by former MA Attorney General Scott Harshbarger.
Parsing the heavily edited tapes, comparing them against the transcripts of the audio and interviewing employees, Harshbarger ascertained that:
(1) O'Keefe never entered the offices dressed as a pimp;
(2) O'Keefe both dressed and represented himself to be a college student seeking to "protect" Giles from her abusive pimp;
(3) O'Keefe and Giles represented that they wanted to buy a house not because Giles wanted to use it for prostitution but because she wanted to provide a shelter for 13 year olds in order to protect them from her abusive pimp.
(4) O'Keefe & Giles not only refused to turn over the unedited videotapes to Harshbarger but refused to be interviewed by him in connection with his independent investigation.
Whether one is conservative, independent, liberal, progressive, socialist or Marxist, is of no moment. This isn't about right and left, it's about right and wrong. It's about the American people's right to hear the unvarnished truth from America's paper of record, and the failure of that paper and so many others in the MSM to strive to get the facts!
COMMENT #29 [Permalink]
said on 2/23/2010 @ 5:19 pm PT...
#22 David Lasagna with extra sauce and Parmesan cheese:
Duly noted, I will give her a break...unless she keeps participating in these scurrilous antics of attacking organizations that help the poor and minorities, and hanging out with these rich Republican hatemongers.
Here's Breitbart's and O'Keefe's and presently Hannah Giles' party:
Virginia Republican says disabled children are a form of punishment for women who had abortions.
COMMENT #30 [Permalink]
said on 2/23/2010 @ 5:20 pm PT...
Go away from the Dark Side, Hannah! Come towards the light!
COMMENT #31 [Permalink]
said on 2/23/2010 @ 5:35 pm PT...
Beloved Ernest at #28,
Think you missed the boat on this one. RJ89'S very next sentence was--
However, a close examination of the video and the transcript show that it doesn’t prove any of these claims.
I think RJ's completely with you and already hip to the jive.
much love and respect,
COMMENT #32 [Permalink]
said on 2/23/2010 @ 5:37 pm PT...
COMMENT #33 [Permalink]
said on 2/23/2010 @ 7:07 pm PT...
PaulL @ 27 said:
it's not even clear that the workers "knew" that she was a prostitute.
Which is why the "Acorn representative said that they should not use the word "prostitute" on this loan application. She said "Performing Arts" should be how they refer to it from now on"
Yes. In one of the offices, one of the workers said that.
Of course, what was never said on the videos (only in the transcripts if one bothers to read them) is that they were trying to save the "prostitute" from the pimp who was trying to kill her. For her to get a house, so she could escape, she had to be able to show income on tax returns. The workers were advising her to pay her taxes, not "evade" them as Breitbart, O'Keefe and crew like to suggest.
Since there is no category for "prostitute", the tax advisor advised use of "performing artist" by way of telling her she must pay taxes --- even on ill-gotten gains!
Hope that's helpful. Try reading the transcripts (which, we'll presume, are accurate, but who knows?)
COMMENT #34 [Permalink]
said on 2/23/2010 @ 8:15 pm PT...
Upon further review, I'd like to retract my comments about Hannah Giles. She does appear to be engaging in purposeful humor. My bad.
COMMENT #35 [Permalink]
said on 2/23/2010 @ 8:45 pm PT...
Bead @18 et al - You are all correct that I got the date of the Scott Shane article incorrect. Sorry. Does that mean that Brad's conclusion that the article drove the Senate to act before it was published still stands?
Your basic premise that all people are as purposely blind and dumb as yourselves and believe O'Keefe was dressed ridiculously as a pimp is great. I would keep riding that, especially when most sentient people could tell the obvious B-roll editing at the beginning and ending of each video released.
Ignore the substance of the videos. It makes you look like idiots. Congress didn't. Bertha Lewis didn't.
From Bertha's comments in ACORN's 9/16/09 Press Release:
“As a result of the indefensible action of a handful of our employees, I am, in consultation with ACORN’s Executive Committee , immediately ordering a halt to any new intakes into ACORN’s service programs until completion of an independent review."
"Said Ms. Lewis: “We have all been deeply disturbed by what we’ve seen in some of these videos. I must say, on behalf of ACORN’s Board and our Advisory Council, that we will go to whatever lengths necessary to reestablish the public trust."
Lewis knew the damage created by having her employees caught on tape advising a pimp and prostitute how to evade taxes, engage in mortgage fraud and conduct a child sex slavey business. It's too bad morons such as yourselves don't see the same thing and keep defending the conduct on the tapes.
Oh, Ernest, if you ever make a comment worth responding to, I might just be tempted
COMMENT #36 [Permalink]
said on 2/24/2010 @ 3:09 am PT...
Daleyrocks @ 35--
1. What part of--the video tapes were edited and overdubbed so that it's impossible to know what really transpired do you not understand?
Do you just not believe that as a statement of fact? Is that it?
2. Though I have not, Brad has read through all the transcripts and asserts that the transcript version of what transpired and the video versions of what transpired are at odds with each other. Do you dispute that?
3. When you disagree with someone, do you have any other gear besides derision and insult or is that the extent of your conversational repertoire?
4. What is your goal in posting here? It seems like you're primarily interested in making war and insulting those with differing opinions. To what end? What's your purpose? What are you aiming for? How's it going?
5. Do you have any interest in finding common ground or are you the sole purveyor of truth?
COMMENT #37 [Permalink]
said on 2/24/2010 @ 8:56 pm PT...
I stand corrected. Max did refer to O'Keefe as a racist on his blog.
However, when Max said on the video he didn't call anyone any names, he told the truth.
Unless calling something that looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, etc, a duck is calling names....