As we discussed earlier, ACORN has decided to move forward with a lawsuit against the independent filmmakers who showed its employees engaged in potentially unlawful conduct. While insisting that it is terribly sorry for the actions of its employees, ACORN is pursuing the people who forced the misconduct into the open: filmmakers James O’Keefe and Hannah Giles. It is curious method of contrition but ACORN is seeking massive damages for nonconsensual surveillance.
ACORN is itself under criminal investigation in New York and experiencing a cascading impact by agencies and organizations severing ties with the organization. There is also a bill in Congress to prohibit contracts by the government with ACORN, though that bill raises serious constitutional questions.
The lawsuit, filed in Baltimore, also names Breitbart.com, which is run by conservative commentator Andrew Breitbart and posted the videos. Breitbart released five similar videos that O’Keefe and Giles recorded in ACORN offices in Washington, D.C.; Brooklyn, N.Y.; San Bernadino, Calif., and San Diego, as well as the Baltimore office.
ACORN has fired the two employees shown in the recent undercover video by filmmaker James O’Keefe of Veritas Visuals— showing the staffers advising a faux pimp and prostitute (here) on how to get federal assistance and lie on federal forms. Now, however, it is threatening legal action in what would be part of a trend of cases involving companies and organizations suing investigative reporters and filmmakers.
In this video, Four ACORN workers appear involved in potential criminal conduct:
ACORN chief organizer Bertha Lewis immediately went on the offensive and threatened legal action:
“It is clear that the videos are doctored, edited, and in no way the result of the fabricated story being portrayed by conservative activist ‘filmmaker’ O’Keefe and his partner in crime. And, in fact, a crime it was — our lawyers believe a felony — and we will be taking legal action against Fox and their co-conspirators.”
In bringing the lawsuit, ACORN joins a rather ignoble group of businesses seeking to sue journalists and filmmakers for uncovering improper conduct:
In Food Lion v. ABC , a store was shown in an undercover segment engaging in unsanitary techniques and accused Food Lion of selling rat-gnawed cheese, meat that was past its expiration date and old fish and ham that had been washed in bleach to kill the smell. Food lion denied the allegations and sued ABC for trespass. A jury ruled against ABC and awarded Food Lion punitive damages for the investigation involving ABC journalists lying on their application forms and assumed positions under false pretenses. (here). The Fourth Circuit however wiped out the punitive damage award while upholding the verdicts of trespass and breach of loyalty with awards of only $1 for each.
This case would come closest to a case out of the Seventh Circuit. Judge Richard Posner wrote the decision in Desnick v. ABCwhere investigative reporters went undercover in 1993 to show that employees of the Desnick eye clinic had tampered with the clinic’s auto-refractor, the machine used to detect cataracts so that the machine produced false diagnoses to find cataracts (and require procedures). The court rejected wiretapping claims (based on the state’s one-party consent rules) as well as trespass and defamation claims. On trespass, the court noted that the reporters were allowed into areas open to new patients. Posner relied on the consent to the entry to negate the trespass claim even when the entrant “has intentions that if known to the owner of the property would cause him . . . to revoke his consent.”
That seems quite close to the ACORN case. However, Maryland does require the consent of all parties, which is a difference with the Illinois case. They are focusing on the nonconsensual surveillance aspect. Maryland’s Courts and Judicial Proceedings Code §§ 10-402(a) and 10-410, requires two party consent to all electronic surveillance. It allows for both criminal prosecution and civil lawsuits.
ACORN attorney Arthur Schwartz insists that the videos were “clear violations of Maryland law that were intended to inflict maximum damage to the reputation of ACORN, the nation’s largest grassroots organizer of low-income and minority Americans.” Well, it didn’t seem to take much to produce this self-inflicted wound. Moreover, ACORN’s tactics have been controversial for years and the organization has been the subject of continual allegations of improper and potential criminal conduct.
For her part, while trying to destroy the filmmakers who disclosed the misconduct, Lewis insists “[w]e were just as shocked and horrified as the American public was. I will not tolerate such behavior. It is incumbent upon me and my board to set things straight.”
The decision of ACORN to aggressively pursue the filmmakers is, in my view, a mistake and evidence of continued poor judgment by the organization’s leadership. These filmmakers may be properly prosecuted under state law and such charges are being contemplated, here. However, ACORN should confine its role to that of a witness and focus on cleaning up its tarnished organization.
Buddha,
Really you don’t find the sentence, “If you think ACORN is even CAPABLE of any form of “political corruption”, you are racist.” Unreasonable or illogical?
Billy was on the right side to call that out. If I had been around, I’m sure you know I would have done the same. That is the kind of language that stops any intelligent discussion dead in it’s tracks. All it does is assume that others who hold a view different then yours are all on lower footing morally and that yours is the only “pure” cause.
Even if his major premise is correct, he still over looks the fact that people have opinions about stuff they’re ill informed about, or that other types of prejudice exist. For instance, I’m pretty sure that any large organization that deals with government money is capable of being politically corrupt. I bet there’s at least one rich person out there that distrusts ACORN because it deals with poor people. I bet there’s at least one farmer out there that distrusts it because it’s run by city folk. I bet most North Koreans wouldn’t trust it because it’s a organization based in the U.S.
He may have strayed from the subject a little after that (and even exposed a bit a plank in his own eye), but let’s not forget that if we want those we disagree with to start being reasonable, we have to ask the same of those we might agree with.
Even “one” is to many…
Billy,
I sort of agree with you re: JFK, but being in my 60’s I remember it well and he represented great hopes for me and my family. Where it gets sticky is that he was the only Catholic to have run besides Al Smith. Smith was a “dese,””dem,” and “dose” guy with a heavy NYC accent and that may have hurt him as much as
his Catholicism. In the 30’s one of the most popular radio personalities in the country was Father Coughlin an RCC Priest, who was virulently anti-Jewish. Then too, with the advent of TV their was Bishop Fulton J. Sheen, an RCC Bishop who was an inspirational speaker, writer and thus had great national popularity. No doubt JFK was hurt by anti-Catholicism, but I think it was a smaller group of people than history imagines.
I read your last post buddha, touche’!
Mike, the same type of “bigotry” was faced by JFK. Many protestant southerners were opposed to him being the President because he was Catholic. Many of these “anti-catholic” good ol’ boys are the same ones who dislike Jews. These bigots felt that he would be incapable of leading, because he would have to confer with the Pope, prior to making critical decisions that could affect the nation and world. This type of irrational thinking is what we call “bigotry”. It is irrational beacause the beliefs are not based in fact but based on some “illogical fear”. This isn’t astrophysics, its’ just recognizing and defining bigotry.
Miffed, like fear, is simply a reaction. Your reactions are the only thing in the world you have any actual control over as they are internal processes. Master them and they will not master you.
Billy,
Thank you for your kind words, however, regarding your remarks on bigotry and religion, I have some disagreement with you conceptually. I’ll use my being Jewish to first illustrate.
Although other Jews may believe differently, I believe that one could rationally believe that the Torah and 613 commandments that govern Jewish Religious practice are fanciful, ridiculous and/or even barbaric and not be anti-Jewish, or bigoted. In that instance they are using their intellectual faculties to make a judgement about the validity or non validity of a set of religious beliefs. It becomes prejudice and bigotry when a person believes that Jews are per se evil, especially if they practice their religion.
Much of the bigotry against Jews has come from two concepts, not necessarilly intertwined, but working together to produce sometimes disastrous results. The first concept is that Jews killed Jesus and took that blame upon themselves for all the generations that followed. The second is that Jews are a race.
From that first formulation all the later depradations that fell against Jews: the Ghettoization, banning of certain occupations,
expulsions from countries, Blood Libel, Crusades, Inquisitions and persecutions from Protestants followed. The second formulation of Jews as a race apart was begun by the RCC, but was merely a symptom of anti-Jewishness. This was made into science by the 19th Century Eugenicists and into firm, deadly doctrine by the NAZI’s and other Jew haters that followed.
In truth Jewish existence has always be problemmatic for Christianity since the later was supposed to replace the former and the Torah became the “Old Testament.” That Jews did not immediately embrace Christianity and would continue as a viable entity is problemmatic for Christianity, since in effect Christians have appropriated our holy book, claims of being chosen by God and indeed worship a Jew.
Now in that vein as a Jew and one who has read and re-read the Gospels, I can firmly say I don’t believe in their validity and thus the religion that they provide the bulwark for. This is not bigotry, it is a religious choice. Could my critique be harsher in light of what the RCC has done to Jews throughout the centuries? Certainly, but I have no need to offend your personal sensibilites, nor to criticize Christians and RCC members in general, who are merely following their own belief systems.
However, where the RCC is concerned, unlike Judaism, there is a governing body. In the instance of Priestly Pedophilia the record clearly shows a multitude of offenses and the RCC ignoring or covering up these offenses. I can be extremely critical of the RCC as an institution for making these bad choices and not be bigoted.
Now to take it further and yet return to the point at hand we have atheists and agnostics. Their particular belief systems are either that all religion is illogical and ridiculous, or that various religious beliefs have no basis in fact and while there might be a God, the as well might not be one. This is not bigotry, nor would their stating openly on the blog that a certain religion(s)are ridiculous be bigotry. Where it would become bigotry is if they said that all those practicing a particular religion are bad, evil, etc.
This is in essence my point. Open disagreement is not bigotry.
Criticism of religious intstitutions is also not bigotry. It becomes bigotry when being bad, evil etc. is attached to the persons believing in a faith as a whole and castigating them for their deep faith. I admit there is a fine line to be walked, but I think the path is easy to see.
I probably should have stayed out of the whole “ACORN” affair. I just get annoyed, because a person can take offense to an organizations’ “inability to run right”, without making them a racist! You guys on this blog, and I cite you specifically buddha, write “beautifully”, so does Mike and Mespo, all you guys! I just scratch my head and get frustrated because I “personally” would never make that leap! By the way, I howled with laughter, when I read that post about “the computer burping out a report”. I enjoy reading your posts and love the think tank atmosphere. I just get a little miffed when I see a person crossing that imaginary “mendoza line”..
Billy,
I didn’t say I didn’t approve. I said the exact opposite. I like a good show.
I’ve had this conversation before so all I offered was the advice of a spectator that you should bring your A game. It was meant as friendly advice. Take it however you like.
But I’d like to point out it is you who have adopted the adversarial stance by making claims and taking a defensive posture. That implies one has taken a side, which implies one of three necessary outcomes: victory, failure or stalemate – all of which are dependent upon the outcome of a conflict no matter what you dress it up as. A battle of words is still a battle. It is not me – a stipulated bystander – who has expressed a desire to “beat” anyone in this instance, billy. Rather it was you by making assertions and changing your posture. So let’s not get snippy, shall we?
I watched Justin V. pitch at Edison Field at Anaheim back in April, it wasn’t one of his better outings, he was through after the third. Since that outing he went on a tear! He has now beaten the “tribe” in all four starts this year. He carved them up last night and punched them out with 11 K’s..
We’re all just sharing…
buddha, nobody is trying to “beat” anybody, save you. I have shared my opinions, much like you all do. Because you don’t approve, so be it.
Beautifully stated and illustrated Mike. Thankyou for presenting a reasonable and thoughtful response. I am not attacking ACORN, or its’ efforts in the community. I take umbrage when a blogger assigns anyone to the rank of “racist”, because they challenge ACORN and some potential misconduct or impropriety, that may or may not have taken place. Stick to the argument, don’t flail around and play the “race” card because you think you can score some quick points, or curry favor from the “gallery”. I listened to the postion of TMax, and he writes well and sounded “spot on” until he “blew his wad” with the race “stuff’….
Billy,
Fair warning: Approaching the deep end of the pool.
The Bible as history and the books credibility as such is a well worn topic on this blog. In taking mespo to task, you have made an interesting choice. Next to Mike S., probably the hardest player to beat on this field at this particular game. I’m not telling you this to discourage you in any way. Please, I encourage you to continue in that vein if you wish. It’ll be a good show. I just wanted you to be aware of your surroundings. Safety first.
Well, after that interlude, back to the original story that sparked this thread. I agree with most of what tmaxPA has had to say, but I would like to expand further on one of the implications he made because I think it is important.
Every week at Grover Norquist’s office, in DC, a group of faux conservative big shots meet to decided the agenda of talking points to be used in the coming week and to work on the continuance of certain strategies. This meeting is attended by political activists, politicians and media types. Since the beginning of the Administration of the Bush/Cheney Crime Family the product of these meetings, is repeated mostly word for word, by congress people, pundits, “columnists” and media whores and becomes issues that tend to drown out what is really happening in the news, replacing it with a falsified set of grievances and “atrocities.”
For many years now ACORN has been on the top of Grover’s and the faux conservatives hit list. The why is very simple. They are predominantly a Black organization, registering people of color and/or people in poverty. They are a grass roots organization dedicated to aid in giving America’s underclass a voice in its’
political game. This is antithetical to the needs of faux conservatives because they devoutly believe that a wealthy elite and corporations should rule the US. The underclass, if it started voting in its’ own interests would greatly outnumber these priveleged few and their minions and thus represent a danger to their current control of the national dialogue.
Underlying Grover and the Gang’s chief point of attack against ACORN is that their membership and workers are overwhelmingly Black. The message against ACORN propagated by this demi-cabal is loaded with sub-rosa racial epithet. The thrust of the campaign against ACORN is thus racist in content and intention.
I don’t fully agree with tmaxPA that all who criticize ACORN are per se racist, given the amount of mud slung reasonable people might assume there is fire, where there is smoke. What I’ve written is not surmise but can be easily found using the search engine of your choice.
Lastly, I reiterate my previous point that in a large, diverse organization, one can always find people who are not following the given plan. This is especially true for a multi-state, multi-
city organization that works on a community level. As tmaxPA so cogently analogized, better ACORN receiving some Federal money than a traitorous outfit like KBR.
A number of those first century “delusions” you mentioned had a goodly amount of “corroboration”. In law isn’t that the thing you shoot for to establish credibility?
When you die, no one will care or remember save a few of your family members, Jung wil “continue” to be quoted and revered in academia, long after you are gone. Thats how stupid and lazy he was judge. Must have been all those fairy tales he wrote about..
billy:
Wonderful job of avoiding the central premise that Christian faith is simply a set of First Century delusions practiced by those who fear just about everything. The dirt you seeing flying isn’t from my argument’s “hole” but is,in fact, covering your assertion that because one man was pious and accomplished, that the piety must be true. That’s not undistributed middle; that’s a non-sequitur coupled with a pretty lame appeal to authority. That, as you say, is “logic.”
BTW Bob,Esq. is right. Jung was nothing if not lazy.
And BTW Billy,
You may want to pick up your copy of “Man & His Symbols” and flip through the pages. If memory serves, Jung only wrote no more than a 100 page introduction. The rest was authored by his students and colleagues.
Mespo: “That Pasteur was a devout Christian tells me nothing about his expertise in microbiology. It’s also worth remembering that Jim Jones and David Koresh were equally devout to their religious delusions too.”
Undistributed middle.
Missing the premise that all devout Christians are ‘devout to their religious DELUSIONS’ or that all Christians are delusional.
Logic.
It’s not just for breakfast anymore.