TeaBugger Victimology

Oh, this is rich. Chief TeaBugger, James O’Keefe is preparing to argue that, the whole time he was sitting in jail with the son of the acting US Attorney for Shreveport, the US Attorney for New Orleans was abusing his rights.

Interviewed on Fox just moments ago, Andrew Breitbart claimed that alleged Landrieu phone tamperer James O’Keefe “sat in jail for 28 hours without access to an attorney.”

Breitbart, who has been on a public campaign defending O’Keefe, a paid contributor to Breitbart’s BigGovernment.com, also charged that the U.S. Attorney’s office in Louisiana leaked information to the press “helping” them to frame the episode as “Watergate Junior.”

It’s all retaliation, you see, because TeaBugger O’Keefe has pressured Eric Holder to investigate ACORN based on TeaBugger O’Keefe’s own attempts to frame the organization.

Asked by Fox’s Megyn Kelly what motivation the U.S. Attorney would have to make such an effort, Breitbart responded: “Well, it’s tied to the Justice Department. And we’ve been very aggressive in asking Eric Holder to investigate what’s seen on the ACORN tapes, and he’s ignored it.”

I guess Breitbart and his little TeaBugger honestly believe that the press, faced with news of inept Republicans entering Democratic offices in disguise with the intent of “interfering” with that office’s phones, would need a cheat sheet to make the connection with Watergate?

You know, several days ago I was willing to dismiss this as a stupid juvenile prank. But given the increasing concern that the perpetrators are showing–and their increasingly dubious stories–I’m convinced it merits a closer look.

In any case, I bet that O’Keefe is going to hang this complaint on being stuck with the representation of J. Garrison Jordan for 24 hours, rather than the big name Watergate lawyer who is now representing him, Michael Madigan. Because somewhere in the Constitution, I’m certain, it says citizens are entitled to a lawyer with Watergate experience, and may not be required to make do with the representation of local lawyers.

image_print
    • lawordisorder says:

      Aint that the gods honest truth, and the poor CIS in the forthood, the FBI here, and workerbees all over the place have to make that cl every singel day hundreds off times, there are bound to be FU all over, when you buy airport scanners…the lefty’s are all over you, wwhen you don’t and a bomb goes off then you should have no?

      Did those poor TEABUGGERS walk in on a legit op?, if so a coincidence? or were the FEDS trying the noble art of sending signals? in a soccer game that would be a yellow card. were the FEDS lured to do so? if so by whom?

      Or is it on the up and up these clovn were trying to pull a prank? or were they trying to do a real watergate?..BTW does it matter as it was obvios foiled, and so everybody now know that this is a NO GO? To me i looks like it knocked whatever wind there were out of the fare right and gave room to the moderates in the GOP or did i miss something? and if thats a wakeup call for US domestic politics on both side off the ile then im quiet glad to let it slide, to me it looks like both parties took a gut punch the dems in Boston MA and the republicans on this deal..and the CINC on live TV.

      Anyway if you should ask me scare the living heck out off the kids on the procecution side..and let them off with a warning if im corect in my assesments…but kinda hard sitting so far away

      Anyway EW AND BMAZ don’t you guys go shutting down the trashtalk too come superbowl…kinda hard finding a place in this town were i can watch it

      anyway have fun

      too4r

  1. lawordisorder says:

    Go get’em girl.. Hand em the best lawyer in town they would still get themselfs hanged with you, BMAZ and the FBI, US marchalservice on thier case. ,-)

    just watch the CINC hand the GOP their rear ends for breakfast…it will be days before they wipe the smile off my face, couldent agree more with uncle jim and Rachel on MSNBC bring out the popcorn, wiskey, flags, you name it cuz thats “change” if i ever saw it hehe on live telly too

  2. klynn says:

    You know, several days ago I was willing to dismiss this as a stupid juvenile prank. But given the increasing concern that the perpetrators are showing–and their increasingly dubious stories–I’m convinced it merits a closer look.

    The more they try to claim juvenile prank, the more connecting the dots needs to happen.

    Every few hours there is a new “victim” statement tweeted or made as a media blitz sound bite.

    A bit too much protesting I think.

    Like I wrote the other day, pranksters do not need a high end Watergate lawyer. Pranksters they are not.

    • Jim White says:

      Yeah, I keep thinking about Rove’s start with College Republicans and then couple it with the way Watergate went down. Bumbling “operatives” that would be totally dismissed by our current press. So that makes O’Keefe and buddies the perfect pawns for a current day high level group with bad plans.

  3. R.H. Green says:

    “Well it’s tied to the Justice Dept.” There’s that passive construction again,”tied to”. “Awlaki has been tied to Abdulmutallalab”. Like tied with rope? Seems like rather loose linking.

    • tbetz says:

      This seems like a perfect opportunity for the Justice Department to subpoena and release in their entirety as public records all recordings O’Keefe made outside, inside, approaching or leaving any Acorn office.

  4. earlofhuntingdon says:

    Nixon made hay with the Big Lie, the one so stark that, unlike a host of petty lies, no one would believe it was a lie. Karl Rove wove a two-term administration around it. Fox Noise made a network following that pattern, salting it, like a good Brooksian propagandist, with an occasional fact and a few truths, the better to make the Big Lie(s) seem less obvious.

    Now we have Tea Bugger, political big whig wannabes, trying to build careers out of it. “Abused my civil rights!” I thought in Teabuggerville, there weren’t any and that the government can always do what it wants with whomever it arrests. As Reagan’s AG Ed Meese once claimed, the police wouldn’t have arrested O’Keefe if they weren’t sure he was guilty. This is America, after all, and our police don’t make mistakes or imprison the innocent, let alone mistreat them.

    Now I’m sure that Loozeeannah Justice ain’t the same as small town justice or Texas Justice. It might even be real justice, Napoleonic Civil Code and all. But as EW says, with O’Keefe’s notoriety and the family connections of his cellmate, he’ll be the last inmate in the world to hear the immortal line, “What we have here, is a failure to communicate.”

    • emptywheel says:

      Well, and as I understand it, these boys got a VERY BIG favor in being taken to St. Bernard Parish rather than Orleans.

      So at least they were safe in jail for that 24 hours. A lot more than most men of their age in LA could say.

      • WilliamOckham says:

        Wow! They were taken to St. Bernard Parish instead of Orleans Parish? And now their employer is complaining on national teevee about their treatment. These guys better get Mr. Breitbart to keep quiet. Where I’m from, if the feds treat you nice (that was really nice treatment for four middle class white guys) and then you spit in their face, they tend to really take you for a ride after that.

        • Leen says:

          Yeah got sent home to mommy and daddy’s during the interim. Know this would not happen if you happened to be a poor white Appalachian dude or an inner city African American dude. Differenet rules if you are a white rich priviliged kid.

          Telling the truth is not “whining”

        • readerOfTeaLeaves says:

          Here’s hoping.
          If for no other reason that from what I read here, it now looks like they’ve gone and spit on the US Marshals, the GSA, and anyone else involved in protecting public property and due process.

          But they’ll continue to believe they are the ‘victims’.

          Whoever ‘trained’ these kids to think that entering federal property to conduct an ‘op’ is culpable for filling their heads with corrosive nonsense. If they’re ‘victims’ of anything, it’s of a set of privately funded institutions that led them to believe that they are so exalted they don’t have to respect the laws. How anyone filled their heads with that level of garbage is seriously scary.

          • freepatriot says:

            they’ve gone and spit on the US Marshals, the GSA, and anyone else involved in protecting public property and due process.

            they’ve spit on the US Constitution, the Laws Of the United States

            and more importantly, they’ve spit in the face of We The People of The United States

            can’t wait for a jury to deliver the payback for his actions

            james okeefe can sit in a cell and blame society, right beside ted kozinski

            • readerOfTeaLeaves says:

              Wow, the guy just doesn’t get it, does he?
              I assume that he continues to think that he’s the injured party in this trainwreck.

              But honestly, this whole thing is simply bizarre.

              If you asked the 20-somethings that I know to go break into some federal office, they’d think you were completely insane. And you would be, as far as I’m concerned.

  5. bmaz says:

    28 hours??? You have to be fucking kidding me. Getting a Federal detainee into local detention takes some time you know. Most defendants don’t see a lawyer for days, often a week or much longer. Once you are placed in a big city’s initial holding horseshoe (term of art for the pattern in intake processing), it is often nearly 24 hours before they can even find you, no matter who your lawyer is, for such an in custody legal visitation much less get it accomplished. This looks like absolute BS.

    When did Jordan get involved in relation to the arrest time?

    • emptywheel says:

      Dunno, but he bailed them out, and paid for their taxi out of there.

      I’m guessing the Big Watergate Lawyer was engaged, and he told a local guy to go free the Plumbers.

      • bmaz says:

        Makes sense. Well, the early babbling by the local guy may militate against that a tad actually; if Mr. Big Shot is calling the plays, you don’t usually go Aunt Blabby to the press if you are the local hand.

  6. PJEvans says:

    I remember that the more Nixon and his associates talked about Watergate being a two-bit break-in, the more certain I was that it was not.

  7. Gitcheegumee says:

    Landrieu caper prep: Whole lotta typin’ goin’ on | World news …Feb 1, 2010 … would get mixed up in a scheme that would land them in jail on a charge of entering … Several years ago, Wetmore hired O’Keefe to help establish dozens of … Did he know about the planned trip to Landrieu’s office? … five days before their arrest, said J. Garrison Jordan, Flanagan’s lawyer. …

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/feedarticle/8926176 – 10 minutes ago

    NOTE:A lot of interesting detail about their activities in the days prior to the Landrieu incident.

    • emptywheel says:

      A couple of details from that (which is by the AP):

      “They said they couldn’t talk about it, that the judge said they couldn’t discuss the case,” Angel said.

      NBC reported that the judge had gagged them. That’s not the same thing as him telling them to shut up. But it sounds like Angel, at least, believes the judge told them to shut up.

      But standing in the den of his Uptown house about a block off the city’s street car line, Wetmore just stared ahead silently when asked about O’Keefe and his other house guests. Did he know about the planned trip to Landrieu’s office? Is there a reasonable explanation for what O’Keefe and the others were doing? How does he know the three and when did he meet them?

      The 28-year-old student at Loyola University’s law school in New Orleans had nothing to say, only politely saying: “I’ll think about it” as he closed the front door.

      Wetmore IS talking. Just selectively. Makes you wonder why he didn’t want to talk to the AP.

      Flanagan only met the other three the day before the speech, five days before their arrest, said J. Garrison Jordan, Flanagan’s lawyer.

      Okay, I revise what I said above. Sounds like Jordan, who’s the guy that got the TeaBuggers out of the pokey, is now considered just Flanagan’s lawyer. Which suggests he might be someone daddy the prosecutor found for him. Which says he might be a no-nonsense criminal defense atty, who would advise someone to shut up and admit the truth.

      So maybe OKeefe is bitching about Flanagan’s representation now that he has, with the consultation of his WAtergate lawyer, decided NOT to admit to what he was doing.

      • Gitcheegumee says:

        re:representation——————-

        A source tells CBS News that the aim was apparently to try to catch Sen. Landrieu talking negatively about her constituents.

        Landrieu’s office released a statement saying, “This is a very unusual situation and somewhat unsettling for me and my staff. The individuals responsible have been charged with entering federal property under false pretenses for the purposes of committing a felony. I am as interested as everyone else about their motives and purpose, which I hope will become clear as the investigation moves forward.”

        The attorney representing Robert Flanagan, Garrison Jordan told CBS that unlike the others, his client lives in New Orleans and he says Flanagan is unconnected to the other men charged. Jordan says he did not believe his client knew O’Keefe before yesterday and said, “I think some things were misrepresented to him, my client didn’t think he was committing a crime.”

        The other attorney who was representing the other men charged had no comment.

        CBS News-link to follow

            • Gitcheegumee says:

              Well Dakine, I think a lot of people don’t have time to look for articles,and appreciate the courtesy of someone making the effort.

              I know I would.

              Not everyone who comes to this site makes comments. So, it is highly conceivable that they don’t know of these pieces.

              • dakine01 says:

                As may be, but I think if you went back and checked EW’s other posts on these guys, you’d find a lot of the same articles already linked by her.

                And I’d wager that the vast majority of the folks reading here probably did see that NY Times article this weekend.

                You can continue to do as you will of course.

                • Gitcheegumee says:

                  Dakine, these are recent pieces, and the CBS was in response to Emptywheel regarding representaion .

                  You rudeness is unwarranted.

                  • dakine01 says:

                    Well obviously we have different definitions of rudeness.

                    Having seen all the items you’ve linked in this thread last week, I wasn’t seeing anything that was new so I asked what is the point?

                    And as I also said, you will do as you wish.

                    Where’s the rudeness?

                    • Gitcheegumee says:

                      Well, just because they were old to you doesn’t meant that they are not brand new and useful to others.

                    • freepatriot says:

                      me thinks the rudeness was perceived because an innocuous and beneficial activity was described as a problem

                      more links = more information

                      better decisions follow from there

                      it’s a tempest in a teapot, so you two gotta git over it

                • freepatriot says:

                  do duplicate links cost money ???

                  if not, re-linking current threads to past articles seems like a good idea

                  jes my two cents

                • Lindy says:

                  I work a full day and then some. I appreciate the courtesy of some of those links. I get behind on my reading, and it’s helpful to me. Sorry I can’t keep up.

      • klynn says:

        Yep, the other day I linked to his private practice. He is a criminal attorney. He has one other partner in the practice.

        and @6

        Here is the explanation someone local is getting.

        About the transfer to St. Bernard, I’m informed by a very knowledgable source that the St. Bernard sheriff “has a contract to take federal prisoners, as well as prisoners from other parishes”. (Orleans had one too at one time, but probably not currently.)

        • klynn says:

          How do five young adult men, one local, one an out-of-state student at a local university and the other three from other states, come together just for, what their handlers have been trying to spin as, a juvenile prank?

          When did they know they were going to do this and who knew about it?

          • Gitcheegumee says:

            Riddle me this:

            There is no bugging mentioned in the affidavit, and law enforcement officials have admitted that there was no intent to wiretap.

            They didn’t even have bugging equipment with them -the way I understand it.

            So, what equipment did they have with them to allegedly test her phone lines?

            And if they allege they had no such test equipiment, then why a need to dress up like phone repairmen at all?

            • cinnamonape says:

              “There is no bugging mentioned in the affidavit, and law enforcement officials have admitted that there was no intent to wiretap.” Have they? Cite Please. According to an FBI agent who did not wished to be named Stan Dai was found with a “listening device” in the car.

              “They didn’t even have bugging equipment with them -the way I understand it.” Again source. In the reports about the affidavit by AP the FBI agent (unnamed) indicated the contrary. It is O’Keefe and Breitbart that are claiming there was no listening device found- because it was not mentioned in the affidavit.

              My understanding is that there was a bit of a time lag b/w the call from GAO and the apprehension of Flanagan and Basel. The question I have is, that unless one of them started making statements, then how was O’Keefe arrested with them. GAO would not have known about his involvement, so there had to be someone else make the link that “he’s with them”. But the oddest thing is the arrest of Dai. Blocks away in a car and somehow the Feds arrest him. Again, unless they got a squealer how?

              Also I wonder if these guys went through a scanner at security and that the images might pick up discarded electronic devices…discarded between the time the were fingered and that of their arrest.

              • Gitcheegumee says:

                Here is a link to the affadavit:

                Affidavit Detailing Charges Against James O’Keefe, Filmmaker Who …Affidavit Detailing Charges Against James O’Keefe, Filmmaker Who Broke ACORN Story. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next » · ». | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next » …

                http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/…/affidavit-detailing-charges-against-james-okeefe-filmmaker-who-broke-acorn-story.php?... – Cached

                NOTE: There is no doubt some parsing going on about what constitutes a bugging device or listening device. I suppose a phone can be a listening device, depending upon the intent with which you employ it.

                I came across a piece over at Raw Story last night where an attorney basically “took apart” the constructs over O’Keefe’s assertions.

                Also, it may be of note that it has been mentioned here about Landrieu’s position on the Homeland Security Committee.

                The New Orleans region has received enormous federal grant money for a “fusion center”. These are information gathering aggregators,data banks, used by interagencies of law enforcement.

                • cinnamonape says:

                  I seriously doubt that the FBI would refer to a cellphone as a “listening device”. Almost everyone has a cellphone nowadays. And while one could leave a cellphone around to pick up a conversation it would have to be jiggered to respond to sound, or to be remotely turned on and off.

          • eblair says:

            “How do five young adult men, one local, one an out-of-state student at a local university and the other three from other states, come together just for, what their handlers have been trying to spin as, a juvenile prank?”

            Great point. They will never be able to answer this question.

            • cinnamonape says:

              Three of them were trained by the same group to start up Conservative Newspapers on their campuses I believe that Wetmore was the trainer for the group. Wetmore > O’Keefe >Dai>Flanagan (but the claims that the latter just met the others days before is absurd…who invites utter strangers to stay with you for no purpose).

              • Sara says:

                “Three of them were trained by the same group to start up Conservative Newspapers on their campuses I believe that Wetmore was the trainer for the group. Wetmore > O’Keefe >Dai>Flanagan (but the claims that the latter just met the others days before is absurd…who invites utter strangers to stay with you for no purpose).”

                I believe the claim for what they did in Landreau’s reception area is that they “Manipulated the Phone.”

                I am not certain how this works, but on some phone systems you can enter a code, and that will cause the phone to ring and connect to an alternative number. It is a form of call forwarding, but in a multi-line system it is much more complicated, but used by phone installers when they are moving an office that must continue to operate. Anyhow, I am guessing that some form of this is what is meant by Manipulate….

                Thinking about it this way solves the problem of why Dai was not in the office, but rather off-site in a car. They were using cell phones, and cell phone locations can be traced quite easily. Perhaps — just a guess — the call forwarding was to Dai’s phone. The FBI could have easily run a trace on the number entered in a call forwarding script, traced the phone, and found and arrested Dai.

                What were they going to do with Senator Landreau’s calls — use your imagination. A nasty message to constitutants strikes me as a possibility.

                Now I don’t know anything not in the press — but this is just an effort to put the odd facts in some sort of order.

                But I do believe it is very important to sort out the matter of Sponsorship — who has been financing each of these defendents? It really is not so important that they knew each other for a long time, what may be important is that they knew OF EACH OTHER, because they are networked through their sponsorship. My guess is that some of the unindicted who are speaking to the press (Wetmore, Breithbart,) are not sponsors — they are more like decoys at this point. The point is to find the sponsors. Those with the money, those who could have exploited anything gained from playing tricks on Landreau.

                bmaz — most of the tricks that were part of G. Gordon Liddy’s plans for his “gem” series that eventually became Watergate were the product of former frat boy operatives who corrupted USC student elections. They called it Ratfucking.

                • robspierre says:

                  The call-forwarding idea is an excellent one and makes a limited sort of sense out of the stunt. A nasty message to constituents seems like an unlikely goal, however, since it would only work while they were actually in the lobby and they’d need to know constituent numbers. But forwarding disinformation to the press might be possible.

                  That said, what about the phone closet? What could they have hoped to accomplish there?

                • LiberalHeart says:

                  Oops. Sorry. I was thinking about eavesdropping but you clearly said call forwarding. I thought call forwarding depended on the phone line having that ability already part of the service. For example, I didn’t buy that option from my phone service supplier, though I could have for an extra fee. But that would have given the perps a way to fake how calls are handled. I wonder how much conversation they got into with the office worker. Maybe they recorded enough of her talking to splice together a fake response to an incoming call.

                  • Sara says:

                    “Oops. Sorry. I was thinking about eavesdropping but you clearly said call forwarding. I thought call forwarding depended on the phone line having that ability already part of the service. For example, I didn’t buy that option from my phone service supplier, though I could have for an extra fee. But that would have given the perps a way to fake how calls are handled. I wonder how much conversation they got into with the office worker. Maybe they recorded enough of her talking to splice together a fake response to an incoming call.”

                    I assume they could have called Landreau’s receptionist sometime in advance and asked various questions, and gotten any number of words and phrases that could be “edited” to say any damn thing.

                    I am just trying to solve the puzzle that EW initially put up here — the one where you look at three or four facts and say, “why do these things belong together???” Among these are, what did they do in Landreau’s office, and how did the FBI quickly connect with, find, and arrest Dai, when he was in a car several blocks away, and not in the office of the Pelican Institute? What this does is make the request to get into the phone cable closet something of a decoy act in the operation. We got into the weeds trying to figure out what could be done in such a closet, and if they had succeeded, Landreau and the Fed Investigators would probably also have torn the decoy closet apart trying to detect what they didn’t do.

                    I think they overlooked the fact that a live cell phone can be tracked with GPS to within a few feet of its location. Strange, that is how they find the targets for Predators and Reapers these days.

        • emptywheel says:

          The implication I got from some people is that there was a choice, and St. Bernard was probably deemed FAR safer for a bunch of white boys than Orleans.

          • klynn says:

            I cannot state one way or another, but I thought the info from the local blog was worth adding. I think the blog, or the other local blog it links to, also adds in the safety issue as well.

  8. ezdidit says:

    given the increasing concern that the perpetrators are showing–and their increasingly dubious stories–I’m convinced it merits a closer look.

    If O’Keefe faces ten+ years in stir for this, I’m pretty sure he’ll deal.

    After all, it was supposed to be just a spoof of aides not answering ringing telephones. His “parody defense” isn’t working out too well with Holder. It will be even less amusing in court. And if Breitbart keeps up the pressure, he’s likely to blow FOX off the story, too. (The only plus? The era of BigGovernment.com will be over.)

    • Hmmm says:

      Parody may be a defense to a civil copyright infringement suit, but it’s not to any of the Federal criminal statutes that Pimpy Boy & Co. face.

      BTW anybody else find Breitbart a dead ringer for George Liquor (from Ren & Stimpy)? Very distracting, but also very high hilarity quotient.

  9. Gitcheegumee says:

    Just for the record, Jim Letten’s office is also located in the same Hale Boggs Building as Landrieu.

    I was unaware of that,as I don’t remember it being mentioned.

    However, it would be the logical location .

  10. stryx says:

    And we’ve been very aggressive in asking Eric Holder to investigate what’s seen on the ACORN tapes, and he’s ignored it.

    This is fucking brilliant. “What’s seen on the tapes” is a fucking lie. Breitbart knows it, o’Keefe knows it, ACORN sure as hell knows it. Why should the Justice Dept. look at a fucking fictional representation of an event that never happened?

    I’ve got a better idea. How about Holder reads the transcripts and then we can decide what charges to bring against BigFuckUp and his Little TeaBuggers.

    • Gitcheegumee says:

      Thank you for posting a link, BSL.

      I had no idea that Margolis had a role in the Siegelman case.

  11. Hmmm says:

    So not to harp on it, but again, who’s paying for Big Watergate Lawyer guy? Of course IF anything nefarious were going on, and IF they were smart then they’d be careful to mask the engagement as a pro bono representation (and that’s definitely NOT to knock pro bono rep per se, IMHO it’s one of the very cornerstones of our claim to be a civilization). Then again, those whom the gods would destroy they first make very, very stupid.

  12. GregB says:

    I said days ago that now there is an accused wingnut in the dock the principles of due process and fair trials will become important to wingnuts.

    The same wingnuts who’ve argue for racial profiling of Muslims and stop and frisk searches of African-Americans and wire tapping for the rest.

    -G

  13. MadDog says:

    I’m sure Breitbart is right that AG Holder is a witting member of the conspiracy agains O’Keefe “Clowns R Us” & Co.

    The evidence you ask?

    Why it’s from AG Holder himself:

    Attorney General Holder Appoints Three New U.S. Attorneys to Advisory Committee

    Attorney General Eric Holder today announced the appointment of three new U.S. Attorneys to serve on the Attorney General’s Advisory Committee (AGAC): Sanford Coats of the Western District of Oklahoma; Steven M. Dettelbach of the Northern District of Ohio; and Jim Letten of the Eastern District of Louisiana

    (My Bold)

    USA Jim Letten, who’s office is prosecuting O’Keefe, was welcomed to the DOJ conspiracy committee with a hug from AG Holder, a secret handshake, and a “Way to go Jimmy!” cheer from his fellow DOJ co-conspirators.

    • Sara says:

      “USA Jim Letten, who’s office is prosecuting O’Keefe, was welcomed to the DOJ conspiracy committee with a hug from AG Holder, a secret handshake, and a “Way to go Jimmy!” cheer from his fellow DOJ co-conspirators.”

      On Rachel’s show she announced that Letten has recused himself from the case.

      She also pointed out that Letten’s appointment to the Committee at DOJ had led to Vitter’s decision to release the hold he had on the Obama Appointment for USAG for the Eastern District of LA — so way is now cleared for the Senate to confirm.

      I suppose that means the new Obama Appointee takes over supervision of the case.

  14. freepatriot says:

    I thought mr keefe was a law student ???

    does he NOT understand the criminal justice procedures

    according to guidelines established by the Supreme Court, me okeefe can be D
    detaind for up to 72 hours, OR REASONABLE TIME

    after 72 hours, or reasonable time, mr okeefe is taken to a court room where he is ARRESTED, in a Court of Law. mr okeefe is then read his rights, informed of the charges against him, and placed under the custody of the court

    I never attended a single day of law school, and I know THAT MUCH

    • Hmmm says:

      Esteemed colleague, may I humbly suggest that they’re perhaps not talking to us, nor to anybody else who actually knows anything, and so even though they know what they’re saying is wrong, they don’t even care that it is. Looks to me like what they’re doing is deliberately riling… well… other kinds of folks. Might even be the whole idea, when you get down to it… more absurdities meant only to fire up the low-info teabagger demographic, midterms-wise. Teabuggers for a teabaggers audience. That at least would be a rational (if evil and stupid) motivation for the whole otherwise deeply inexplicable circus.

      Shorter me: Engineered propaganda stunt?

      • freepatriot says:

        Shorter me: Engineered propaganda stunt?

        maybe mr okeefe should study how such propaganda stunts are received by juries

        I’ve never served on a jury, but I was the recipient of some rants from my mother, in regard to her jury service

        wanna know what pissed her off the most ???

        smug defendants who complained about the system

        one defendant thought he should tell the jury about how the government was wasting his time with all of this criminal trial stuff

        the poor guy never thought about all of the jurors’ time, that was being wasted, by a defendant who was clearly guilty

        that dude got 8 years of well spent time, reflecting on things you should never tell a jury

        took less than 37 minutes too

        knock yerself out, mr okeefe

        • Hmmm says:

          Don’t disagree a bit. Might have been a miscalculation on Pimpy Boy’s part. Though that doesn’t necessarily mean others didn’t knowingly send ’em into the gaping maw.

        • PJEvans says:

          I was a potential juror one time, The defendant came in, looked at all of us, and decided he’d rather plead guilty. It would be interesting to see what he saw ….

          • qweryous says:

            Predators live by sizing up their prey.

            An accomplished criminal perhaps saw that one or more of the jurors was not a suitable victim. Hence time to plead.

            Perhaps you scared him?

            (If all you have to sell is BS, need to be sure there are enough potential
            buyers in the pool to risk the trial outcome)

  15. GregB says:

    Brietbart will end up being a co-conspirator before this is all over.

    He doth protest way to fucking much.

    -G

  16. LiberalHeart says:

    A fox report ends by saying that Breitbart doesn’t think the wiretapping charge is true.

    WHAT wiretapping charge?

    Also, is O’Keefe claiming he asked for a lawyer and was denied the right to call one? If so, I’m sure the feds are as talented as he is with a camera so his story can easily be verified or debunked.

    • freepatriot says:

      is O’Keefe claiming he asked for a lawyer and was denied the right to call one?

      I hope so the law doesn’t say that you have access to an attorney at any time

      the law says you have a right to an attorney AT TRIAL

      no trial was taking place at the Federal lockup

      so why did mr okeefe need an attorney to hold his hand in a federal detention facility ???

      wanna bet mr okeefe can’t find a lawyer to present this argument in court ???

      intentional stupidity and intentional mis-interpretation of justice system procedure are grounds for disbarment

  17. desertwind says:

    Keep blabbing and the judge is gonna revoke that bond.

    I wonder if the case will be sent to another district outside Louisiana because of Flanagan’s dad.

  18. LiberalHeart says:

    Breitbart seems to be buying up all the “big” domains. Has anyone registered BigMouthBreitbart.com yet?

  19. JohnLopresti says:

    Individual right to film surreptitiously inside senator*s office.

    Individual right aspire to to film inside a senator*s (server farm) telecommunications patchboard room.

    Right to hire politicoes to impersonate telco personnel in mufti, both on the street and inside a government edifice.

    Civilian right to design and carryout a sting based upon misrepresentations both verbally in person and subsequently in video postproduction, with particular note to the right to perpetrate such deceptions against elected officials.

    Guarantee of privacy protections for personal papers and effects, like digital outtake bits lying on the floor of the projectAcornSmear film editing room.

    In the post-CitizensUnited world, probably should add, waiver permitting corporate sponsorship of plumber capers for any demagogic purpose intending to support constituency building in minority party during ten month span of time prior to and including the time when national and statewide primaries and final elections proceed.

    Though, to be somewhat lenient toward the wingknute victimology paradigm of irrepresibility, Miranda* did say something about silent…(and) have a lawyer present.

    ____

    *NB., foregoing devoid of links; Miranda available by caselaw search at findlaw site, q.v.

  20. freepatriot says:

    Though, to be somewhat lenient toward the wingknute victimology paradigm of irrepresibility, Miranda* did say something about silent…(and) have a lawyer present.

    oh the irony

    mr conservative poster boy seeking the protections offered by a LIBERAL ACTIVIST COURT RULING

    ROTFLMAO

    shameless

    and impossible to satirize

  21. LiberalHeart says:

    Why did Letten get himself taken off the case — and what do we know about assistant U.S. attorney Jan Mann?

    • klynn says:

      I wonder if it had to do with the “smell test” of Vitter insisting he be on the case?

      Distance from Vitter perhaps?

      • LiberalHeart says:

        I just found this:

        According to a brief news release sent to reporters on Monday evening, Letten decided to recuse himself from the investigation and “potential prosecution” of the men because of “various relevant factors.” These factors, which the release stated were discussed with officials at the U.S. Department of Justice, are not named.

        The recusal decision came the day after the men were arrested last week and the same day they were released from custody, according to the news release.

  22. Gitcheegumee says:

    Sen. David Vitter to lift ‘holds’ as Letten named to Justice Department advisory board

    By Bruce Alpert, Times-Picayune

    February 01, 2010, 11:15AM

    Term on panel will run through the end of Jan. 2011 Full story »

  23. Gitcheegumee says:

    Just my humble opinion, but with Blue Dog Charlie Melancon running against Vitter this coming November, its probably a good thing for Vitter that Mr. Letten recused himself.

  24. LiberalHeart says:

    Are you guys watching Hannity’s intereview with O’Keefe? He says what he wants to say, but doesn’t answer some direct questions. Says he can’t talk about the case, then talks about it — avoiding just the hard stuff that he can’t spin. And says he wants the tapes released. Wish the government would oblige him on that.

    • Gitcheegumee says:

      Yes….you can’t hear me screaming at the TV?

      Runny applesauce?? PLEASE.

      Louisiana’s Civil Code Article 29 specifies the age of majority as 18 years of age.

      These “kids” have been adult for many years now,under La. statute.

      • LiberalHeart says:

        I want to hear from all those networks he accused of using the same tactics he did. He brought up the Food Lion case. Did he not know how that turned out? What a tool.

  25. Gitcheegumee says:

    Well, how did he expect to determine that her phones were not allegedly working unless he had a device to test the lines?By just picking up the receiver? Ridiculous.

    I sure hope they got the film out of that minicamera on the hard hat.

  26. orionATL says:

    Well,

    Jose padilla was an American citizen who might have had terrorist intent.

    James o’keefe is an American citizen who might have had terrorist intent.

    Padilla was not entitled to an attorney (promptly).

    Is o’keefe so entitled?

    I think he is,

    but the case of citizen padilla has carvedout an extra-legal exception which our presidential government
    May use to keep a citizen in military custodt, wearing blinders and hearing blockers, in soliitary confinement.

    What proof Has the gov’t, other than his own word, that o’keefe had never moved from being merely a protester to being a terrorist?

    Should the attorney(s) for possible terrorist o’keefe have their client/counselor privileges honored or revoked?

    I’d say honored.

    But our u. S. Presidential goverent has carved out another exception for itself.

    Should habeas corpus promptly apply to citizen o’keefe as it did not promptly apply to citizen padilla?

    That question no longer has the simple, clearcut answer -” Yes, of course.”

    But all will be well, or at least better, for o’keefe

    because one of his “co-conspirators” has a daddy who is an apparchik.

    In the u. S. These days, as in the former ussr, having a daddy who is an apparatchik, can be the difference between spending time in solitary in a navy brig,

    And being sent to a safer jail for three hots and a cot.

    America – it’s a wonderful place if you might be mistaken for a terrorist, but have a daddy who’s an apparatchik among Your protectors.

  27. klynn says:

    EW,

    I am curious about a timeline issue on this.

    Vitter requests Letten both to be on the case and to remain as AG.

    But back in January this dispute between Vitter and Landrieu regarding AG’s was going on.

    Writing for the WBRZ News Advocate, Gerard Shields describes the actions being taken by Senator David Vitter (R-Louis.), who is blocking the nomination of Brian Jackson to a federal judgeship in Louisiana. What’s Vitter’s beef with Jackson? He has none. He just wants another guy, named Jim Letten, to be reappointed to his post. Mind you, Letten is not out of a job: he continues to “serve at the pleasure of the President” and does not need to “go through the nomination process again.” This isn’t good enough for Vitter, who seems to want President Barack Obama to go through a superfluous nominating process, or, at the very least, send Vitter an “update” of some kind.

    It’s all terribly confusing, until you read that there’s no substance behind any of this at all. Vitter and his fellow Louisiana Senator, Mary Landrieu, are just having some pointless feud:

    Then Letten recuses himself from the case. (Who knows why. Could be a number of conflicts of appearances or conflicts since one of the arrested is the son of his Shreveport counterpart.)

    Vitter remains quiet on this the whole time.

    Now, Letten evidently has a reputation for being premature.

    So then we hear this from Breibart to “frame” the sound bites (as premature/trial by press) without any specific information. Gee that works nicely that Letten just happens to have that rep and Breibart is ready with the accusation.

    “James O’Keefe sat in jail for 28 hours without access to an attorney, while the U.S. attorney leaked the information about his arrest, helping the media frame it as ‘Watergate Junior,'” Breitbart said.

    “The panty bomber on Christmas was given — you know, this guy’s from Al Qaeda, and he’s not even an American citizen, and he’s given access to an attorney right away. I believe that this was a concerted effort, this is just my opinion, to allow for the media to frame the issue to put James O’Keefe in a very bad position.”

    Suddenly all the AG positions go through in LA. Vitter drops holds and Letten ends up on a Holder advising committee?

    But these boys men were just pulling a prank or trying to be investigative journalists and that’s it?

    I don’t think so.

    I’ve got to work on a timeline on this because the sniff test is failing from all corners, even Vitter’s and Holder’s offices.

    Guess I need more information about Letten too.

    • bmaz says:

      By “AG” do you mean US Atty? Or are you referring to the Attorney General’s advisory committee, which looks nice on the resume, but has absolutely no independent extra power or jurisdiction of its own? Vitter was only holding nominees for Louisiana not all everywhere as far as i can tell. Breitbart is full of shit, the “leaks”, to the extent there were any, are extremely unlikely to be attributable to Letten and most of the information came from the charging document which is, of course, a public record. I am completely non-plussed so far with the attempts to find some big heinous tie in with Vitter, Holder, Letten et.al. These punks tried pulling an idiotic stunt, they got caught, were arrested, and are now out on pre-trial release and being prosecuted. It is really rather a pedestrian criminal case in that regard. The only real issue was who they were working for and/or funded by, and the odds of Holder, Vitter or Letten being that are close to zero. I find it pretty amusing how deep people are probing for conspiracy theories in a case that really demonstrates little to no basis for the same.

      • klynn says:

        Yes, I meant US Atty.

        The only real issue was who they were working for and/or funded by, and the odds of Holder, Vitter or Letten being that are close to zero.

        I think it’s the “who they were working for” that drives all the questions. But I’ll stop asking.

        I disagree with the characterization of “punks” because it simply feeds the “kids got caught” meme. They are not. Adults short on wisdom, with a curious set of connections to one another and strong contacts from powers of influence, I might agree with.

        • bmaz says:

          These were a band of freaking idiots. Making them out to be some giant plot like Watergate gives them FAR more credit than they are entitled to and lionizes them. They are a bunch of idiot punks, undoubtedly supported by some slightly bigger (but not by much) punks and tricksters; until there is a lick of evidence, they should not be made any larger than that. Equating these squeegee boys with Watergate and ex-spooks hired by the White House is freaking ludicrous.

          Never stop asking.

          • klynn says:

            bmaz,

            LA and NO have some memories for me from my past. A number of trips there for business reasons when I was in my teen years. As I spent time there, enjoying the vast cultural influences, I also found the political environment and history of political corruption added a slice/viewpoint to the perspectives of my experiences while visiting. This “slice” of the political history in LA and NO is one of many lenses I tend to read/view content of reports. First hand experiences have real influence, whether good or bad.

            Thus, the the added lenses of my experiences seem to give added input to my perspectives on this stunt at times. Do I think this is the next Watergate? Probably not.

            Do I think it was a stunt to influence the goal of LA to hold all seats GOP? My experience tells me, that is a good possibility. I cannot change the lens and personal knowledge that there are politically powerful groups in LA with that goal. Groups with some fairly strong national political influence too.

            Which is, in part, why I ask and find certain information curious to question or to springboard from for more questions or confirming facts which may serve as “dots”.

            My regrets for coming off as tin foil. I do have a number of questions about this merry band.

            (Travel to NY, LA, MA and DC on a regular basis throughout formative years can have its’ burden from a political view I have concluded. The kicker, living in Ohio.)

  28. Gitcheegumee says:

    Fusion Centers Major Target of Louisiana Homeland Security GrantsApr 14, 2009 … Specifically, $200000 will be awarded to the City of New Orleans to assist in the creation of a fusion center in Southeast Louisiana. …

    http://www.govtech.com/gt/639231 – Cached

    • bmaz says:

      And of what moment are fusion centers with the O’Keefe case? What in the world does this have to do with it; or is it just more gratuitous and spurious raw information of no particular relevance?

  29. Gitcheegumee says:

    Because,BMAZ, if someone wanted to,and I am not asserting that O’Keefe DID want to, compromise a sitting Senator’s office, very sensitive information relating to Homeland Security no doubt goes through her phone sysytem.

    Jim White linked a very informative article about the scope of projects that is under review though Homeland Security right now. I will locate.

    • bmaz says:

      Maybe he was after the Kennedy assassination or the moonshot “what really happened” story too, but there is not a lick of evidence for any of it; it is wild and useless speculation that lends the air of conspiracy theorism to a blog known for sober and factual discussion. I really don’t understand why you insist and persist in doing that.

      • Gitcheegumee says:

        I fail to see any refernce to conspiracy in my posts.

        It is fact ,not fantasy, that a sitting Senator, in a Federal building has been targeted .

        It is fact that her position on the Homeland Security committee makes her postion even more sensitive.

        From my perspective , you are the one who is choosing to insinuate that I am attempting fashion these facts into something other than they are not. And I don’t understand why you keep doing that.

  30. robspierre says:

    Maybe there is more to this. But maybe not.

    The whining, the excuse-making, the sense of entitlement, the money involved, the conservatism, and, of course, the collossal stupidity still say “frat boys” to me. The O’Keefe gang’s laughably naive notion of how workers look and behave reinforces my impression. The gang vividly reminds me of my days as an Austin janitor, when specimens drawn from Texas’ wealthiest families would pompously lecture this minimum-wage worker about themselves being Amurica’s Leaders of Tommorow, all the while reeking of vomit, booze, and the puddle of urine they’d left in my elevator.

    Sure, these boys are old enough to know better and ought to be out on their own earning their own livings. But I bet they don’t and aren’t. Frat rats are prone to never growing up, especially when they have a source of free money, such as their own trust funds or access to the trust funds of conservative commentators.

    • bmaz says:

      Just got too old for the frat house and moved into the wingnut house with their juvenile pranks; better funded, but same stupid bunk.

      • LiberalHeart says:

        Since you see it as a juvenile prank, do you think they shouldn’t get sent to jail? Or do you not see prank-ism as a legal defense, but you call it that so we don’t get carried away, giving them more importance than you think they deserve? Or do you call it that so we’ll focus on who pulled their strings? Or none of the above?

        • robspierre says:

          Oh, definitely jail. “Juvenile” does not rule out “criminal”.

          In every college town I’ve been in, the frat rats usually got handled with kid gloves as juveniles because they had powerful, indulgent, immature parents. They committed real crimes with impunity and grew up undisciplined. But, being an optimist about human nature, I say that it’s never too late too learn some.

          I say “usually”, above, because, if I remember correctly, the neighbors of one of the Austin frat houses got some temporary relief from juvenile pranks like assault, vandalism, and arson with a RICO lawsuit. I’ll bet that got the national chapter’s attention.

  31. LiberalHeart says:

    Another question for you lawyers out there: is there any legal significance to Flanagan’s name being the one spelled out on the title (?) of the affidavit?

    • bmaz says:

      Not particularly.

      As to whether they should be prosecuted; yes, they absolutely should for the exact crimes pertinent, which would appear to be exactly what they are charged with. They should be treated like any other common criminals charged with that offense. By my quick look, it is a felony, has a max of ten years and a likely presumptive under the sentencing guidelines of around a year, six months at the lowest end and may be eligible for alternative confinement. Although, considering that it was a US Senator’s office, it could also be aggravated (upward departure in Federal lingo). And yes, I am interested in them not being built up into something they clearly do not appear to be. They will thrive in that false glory and be able to further portray themselves as some political prisoners, when nothing could be further from the truth. They are two bit pissant idiot criminals.

  32. cinnamonape says:

    BTW Here’s something on Brietbart that gives some perspective on his personality. And I notice that he graduated from Tulane in 1991, after a couple of wayward semesters and at least one taken off. Vitter graduated from Tulane in 1988. That would mean that they were there together for at least two years. If both moved in the same conservative or fraternity boy circles it seems they might have been acquaintances.

    • cinnamonape says:

      Letten is also a Tulane Graduate…but a decade earlier than Vitter and Brietbart.

      “Jim Letten, who has served as the United States Attorney since April, 2001, is a native of New Orleans, having graduated from the Tulane Law School in 1979. He spent a total of four years in the Orleans Parish District Attorney’s Office, under then-District Attorney Harry Connick.

      He has served over twenty-five years as a federal prosecutor beginning with the U. S. Department of Justice Organized Crime and Racketeering Strike Force… Jim served as a lead prosecutor in the investigation, prosecution, and successful conviction of former Louisiana Governor Edwin Edwards following a four-month jury trial in early 2000….Appointed by John Ashcroft as the U. S. Atty in 2001…Senate confirmation in July, 2005. Served on the AG Advisory Subcommittees on National Security/Counter Terrorism, Environment Crimes and Violent Crimes. Retired Commander ~Naval Reserve Squadron Intelligence Officer, NCIS Special Agent, and Foreign Counter-Intelligence Officer.”

          • bmaz says:

            My guess is that it is a marginally benign conflict, but that it is convenient in a lot of aspects for Letten to not be associated with it and put some imprimatur upon DOJ main by seeking recusal. If I were him and I, for instance was friends with the dad who is USA in the adjoining district, I would take the opportunity to bail too.

  33. Neil says:

    O’Keefe “Willing To Serve Prison Time” For His Work VIDEO

    Apparently willing to do the time … but only under certain circumstances, such as less than 28 hours?

  34. Neil says:

    Angel [Ben Wetmore’s housemate in NOLA] said he asked the guys if what the newspaper was saying was true: Did they really try to mess with Landrieu’s phones?

    “They said they couldn’t talk about it, that the judge said they couldn’t discuss the case,” Angel said.

    How many on camera interviews has O’Keefe had so far? I saw part of one with Hannity.

    In addition, I’ve heard Brietbart on Shuster and someone interviewing O’Keefe’s dad.

  35. Neil says:

    James O’Keefe Explains What He Was Doing In Senator Landrieu’s Office on Sean Mannity – Part 1 VIDEO

    Did Landrieu ever say “her phones were jammed for a few weeks”? O’Keefe claims she did.

  36. Neil says:

    Is Wetmore the guy at the Leadership Institute (which funds college Republican newspapers among other things) who mentored O’Keefe, hired him and later told him to make a choice between the Institute and his activism?

    Wetmore took down his website when the arrests occurred.

    He must be concerned that his possible involvement in a felony could jeopardize his opportunity to become a member of the bar.

    The article says Wetmore “allowed” the plumbers to stay in his home implying a passive role but at the same time it says “Wetmore helped introduce many of the activists to one another and inspired them through his take on attention-grabbing tactics. His often behind-the-scenes role was detailed in a trail he left on the Internet, as well as in several interviews.”

    He may have put three of the four together.

    Ben Wetmore, 28, who was not arrested but who allowed Mr. Dai, Mr. O’Keefe and Mr. Basel to stay at his house in New Orleans this month. The authorities have not indicated that Mr. Wetmore, a Loyola law student, was connected to the incident at Ms. Landrieu’s office, but he has nonetheless played a vital role in Mr. O’Keefe’s career, as well as that of Mr. Basel and other activists.

    Mr. Wetmore helped introduce many of the activists to one another and inspired them through his take on attention-grabbing tactics. His often behind-the-scenes role was detailed in a trail he left on the Internet, as well as in several interviews.

    “Benjamin Wetmore: a mentor of mine; a genius,” Mr. O’Keefe said during an interview with The New York Times in September, after the Acorn videos were released. “He said, ‘Take on the politically correct crowd on campus, satirically.’ ” link

  37. JohnLopresti says:

    Telephone enclosure gear includes routers. I wonder how tech savy the plumbers were. The telco technology side of the senator*s pbx would also be interesting to match against the knowledge of the scammers. Ironically, Wetmore was listed in one site as having given a lecture in an American University class which currently is called Dissident Media, Communications 275, I believe; the companion course is related Comm270 Media and Government, prerequisite to Comm275. Samizdat came to mind; so did some of the conservative hype programs on radio and television. Having worked for a youth media training program I can appreciate student interest from all sectors of the political spectrum in learning the media dynamic.

  38. klynn says:

    …Dissident Media, Communications 275

    I read a newspaper interview of him from his undergrad years and he states he got a “D” in that class.

    How does one get into Tulane Law School with a “D” on one’s transcript?