Is it time to comment on the O’Keefe arrest?
James O’Keefe, the man who was instrumental in making the ACORN-sting videos featured prominently by Breitbart, has been arrested along with three other men:
A witness told authorities O’Keefe was sitting in the waiting area of [US Senator Mary] Landrieu’s office and appeared to record [alleged accomplices] Basel and Flanagan on his cell phone when they arrived posing as phone workers. Landrieu, who was in Washington at the time, said in a statement that the plot was “unsettling” for her and her staff.
A federal law enforcement official said one of the suspects was picked up in a car a couple of blocks away with a listening device that could pick up transmissions. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because the information was not part of the FBI affidavit. Another official said Dai was the suspect arrested outside.
All four were charged with entering federal property under false pretenses for the purpose of committing a felony, which carries a penalty of up to 10 years in prison and a $250,000 fine.
“It was poor judgment,” Flanagan’s lawyer, Garrison Jordan, said. “I don’t think there was any intent or motive to commit a crime.”
My response is: since we don’t know what really happened, it’s hard to say what really happened. But here’s my startlingly bold official statement anyway: if they did something illegal, they should be prosecuted and denounced for this act. If they didn’t, they should be acquitted and the matter put to rest.
Of course, there’s political hay to be made in the meantime:
Democratic National Committee spokesman Hari Sevugan said Republicans once praised O’Keefe as an American hero, “yet today, in light of these deplorable and illegal attacks on the office of a United States senator by their champion, Republicans have not offered a single iota of disgust, a whisper of indignation or even a hint of outrage.”
Disgust and outrage don’t seem all that appropriate; I seem to have noticed people saying to wait for the facts, which does. Rushing to judgment, as Hari Sevugan does in the above quote (“these deplorable and illegal attacks”) isn’t exactly the American way, is it? But I think I can safely predict that, if it is proven that James O’Keefe was bugging the offices of a US Senator, Republicans and other previous supporters will be quick to condemn his actions as both illegal and stupid, and disassociate themselves from him.
As for what we know of the facts so far, Patterico (who is a lawyer) has this to say:
When I first read a news story about this yesterday, it sounded to me like O’Keefe and company were being accused of an attempt to wiretap or bug Landrieu’s phones. Indeed, that’s the way I characterized the Government’s claim in my post based on a news story. But now I have had a chance to review the affidavit. And it doesn’t say that.
The link to the affidavit is here. I challenge you to find me the language that accuses O’Keefe et al. of a “plot to bug” Landrieu’s office, or an “alleged wiretap scheme.”
It isn’t there.
Read the rest of his piece. And then let’s all wait to see how this one develops, shall we?
Free the New Orleans Four! No Justice, No Peace!
Saul, you
magnificentbastard, I read your book!I’m with you. We wouldn’t want to repeat rushes to judgement like the Christmas bomber case, the Fort Hood case, the Gates Case, or the Duke case, would we? We certainly wouldn’t want to act like Dems.
If they broke a law then they’re in trouble and they brought it upon their own heads. Then again, this may just be legal bullying, which I’m sure many of us have experienced firsthand, whether from an officer of the peace, a judge, or some other person/entity in authority.
At a traffic hearing I was waiting my turn to appeal my case, comfortably sitting with my arm around my fiancee’s shoulders. The judge interrupted a police officer who was giving testimony in a case ahead of mine and bellowed that this was not a movie theater and we needed to take the proceedings seriously. I was raised to respect the legal system so I was not even whispering in her ear but sitting quietly–even wearing a tie. 🙂
He stared at me until I caught on that he was talking to me, whereupon in my confusion I removed my arm to my side and he then allowed the officer to resume his testimony.
Is what I was doing against the law? No. Would I have broken a law if I had not given heed to the judge’s grumpy outburst? Yes. It is SO easy to make anyone a transgressor.
If there is corruption in government it should be exposed–preferably without breaking any laws. But when it is trivial to stack the odds and the laws against ordinary citizens, how much more so against those that would seek to expose corruption? Where are all the left-wing 1st amendment advocates on this issue?
Lame-R’s story brings to mind this Mae West line from “My Little Chickadee” (Mae West is Flower Belle, of course):
Judge: Are you trying to show *contempt* for this court?
Flower Belle: No… I’m doin’ my best to *hide* it!
Let’s dispense with all of this presumption of innocence nonsense.
If he weighs the same as a duck… he’s made of wood.
And therefore…
…A witch!
See? All of life’s problems can be solved by invoking Python.
One thing is for sure, the MSM will cover this one like a glove, in contrast to reporting the ACORN sting story. As if a bone head move by O’Keefe (if in fact he committed a crime) negates what he did before. I hope the President doesn’t say anything inflammatory, like the FBI acted stupidly, or we may have to suffer through another Beer Summit.
What the hell were they thinking and what motivated them to target this particular office?
Will.
Your questions are addressed by informed speculation at Patterico’s Pontifications.
Quick summary:
Presumed Landrieu’s office was artificially blocking calls–claiming their lines were “jammed”–in order to avoid having to talk to a bunch of pissed-off voters.
O’K & Co. were going to check the secretary’s phone and discover it’s okay while a confederate tried to call and didn’t get through, thus proving the office had messed with the lines.
One way to block calls is to get a blocking device in the incoming trunk (I think that was the description), which the guy with a telephony background could spot in the closet.
They didn’t claim to be from BellSouth, they didn’t have ID of any kind, fake or not, nor any bugging equipment. The WaPo has corrected their original story to reflect the lack of bugging equipment and that bugging or attempting to bug is not in the affidavit.
It is speculated that the listening device the outside confederate had was picking up conversation from a wire worn by O’K.
IOW, not much there there, if Patterico’s right.
nothing to comment on.
I haven’t read anything else but what’s written here but it sounds from what you’ve said like it was another sting video, and nothing to do with wiretapping. Most likely, the guy outside was recording video or sound that they were sending out to keep their equipment inside small and concealable. I don’t know if that’s illegal or not, but it doesn’t sound anything like what the Watergate burglars were doing.
I’m highly skeptical– this IS the same guy they’ve accused with all sorts of horrible criminal things for making them look stupid, after all….
At the rate this keeps being downgraded, I halfway expect it to end up that the guy had his phone’s camera running while another buddy made sure the offices’ phone wasn’t off the hook, and the false pretense was that they asked to use the phone….
The media reaction was exactly like Obamalinsky’s reaction to the Cambridge Police incident…too much commentary without enough facts.
Downgrading at every turn. We wonder where the bottom is.