James O'Keefe

mimi · **Posted:** Tue Jan 17, 2012 5:44 pm

So they asked for the ballot of a very much alive 23 year old man. And nothing will happen. O'Keefe, once again, fails at his task, breaking laws in the process, and will walk away with no penalty at all.

‘Dead’ voter in James O’Keefe stunt not dead yet
January 16, 2012 By Jed Lewison

Quote:

But you wouldn’t have known that if you watched the lastest undercover sting video from James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas, which featured a man with an Irish accent attempting to obtain a ballot on behalf of a Robert Beaulieu who lives on Cassandra Lane.

That’s the home University of New Hampshire graduate Robert W. Beaulieu, pictured above, shares with his parents. Robert P. Beaulieu, unrelated, died a few months back at the age of 84, and is apparently the man Project Vertitas’ investigator intended to impersonate. By all appearances, they got the wrong guy.

“I found out they were actually talking about me and not the man who passed away in October,” Robert W. Beaulieu told TPM. “The funny thing is, if they’d done any research, they would have found out the guy’s middle name is Paul and the guy specifically goes looking for William.”

Beaulieu said that he'd been in touch with the attorney general's office about the issue, "but said he was brushed off. 'I think they just want it to go away,' he said."

more:
http://govtracker.com/2012/01/dead-vote ... %C2%A0yet/

Foggy · **Posted:** Tue Jan 17, 2012 5:48 pm

Quote:

... he was brushed off. 'I think they just want it to go away,' he said."

Yep. If they just ignore O'Keefe, he'll go away. Sure he will. No doubt in my mind. [-(

June bug · **Posted:** Tue Jan 17, 2012 5:51 pm

I'm sorry but what the heck is wrong with New Hampshire? They "just want it to go away"? That's a pipe dream - it will never go away until somebody really pays a price for what is, after all, criminal behavior. :madz2:

Mikedunford · **Posted:** Tue Jan 17, 2012 6:24 pm

DrIrvingFinegarten wrote:

When somebody points out how many things you need a photo ID for and how the poor people you say don't have photo ID's actually have them because they need them for public assistance, I don't know how to respond to that.
They don't seem to think that the fact that voter fraud isn't that widepread is a reason not to require ID.
I guess I'm pretty dimwitted because I don't know how to dispute their logic.

There really are a lot of people who don't have photo ID. As others have pointed out, not all the dependents of people who are on public assistance require them. There's also the urban poor, not all of whom receive public assistance. In many cities, driving is a luxury and not a necessity. There are people who have been working in the same job for a long time, banking in the same place, and have not renewed their drivers licenses in a long time. They might still have the expired license, but not a current one. Then there are the elderly and disabled. Again, many of these people have been receiving their benefits for a long time, and have not needed to have a valid photo ID for years (or even decades).

Meanwhile, there's no evidence that there's ever been a confirmed case of widespread voter fraud caused by people voting using false identities. Not one. Even O'Keefe's video doesn't show anything substantial - a handful of people got a handful of ballots under false pretenses, with at least one of them getting caught and running for it. The problem that the proposals allegedly address does not seem to exist; people who will have their right to vote impinged upon do.

Adrianinflorida · **Posted:** Wed Jan 18, 2012 11:57 am

What is also ignored, is what party are these recently deceased voters registered as? I'm suuuuuure they're all deems, after all, registered Rethugs always make sure their names are stricken just before they pass away, and Rethugs never commit voter fraud.

BFB · **Posted:** Wed Jan 18, 2012 12:56 pm

Adrianinflorida wrote:

What is also ignored, is what party are these recently deceased voters registered as? I'm Shiites there all deems, after all, registered Rethugs always make sure their names are stricken just before they pass away, and Rethugs never commit voter fraud.

Adrianinflorida · **Posted:** Wed Jan 18, 2012 3:03 pm

Damn autocorrect.

bob · **Posted:** Wed Mar 14, 2012 2:01 pm

WND: James O'Keefe proves voter fraud this simple

Quote:

Filmmaker: 'We're going to continue to expose it in states across the country'

Last week, O’Keefe and his team went to Vermont and had no trouble getting ballots for both living and dead voters.

“They assume we are the dead person, they assume we are the living person. By the way, this is even more outrageous than the dead one because in this case they’re actually trampling on the rights of people who are living in the state. They’re giving out ballots to the wrong people.”

Who is trampling on the rights of others??

BFB · **Posted:** Wed Mar 14, 2012 2:05 pm

bob wrote:

WND: James O'Keefe proves voter fraud this simple

Quote:

Filmmaker: 'We're going to continue to expose it in states across the country'

Last week, O’Keefe and his team went to Vermont and had no trouble getting ballots for both living and dead voters.

“They assume we are the dead person, they assume we are the living person. By the way, this is even more outrageous than the dead one because in this case they’re actually trampling on the rights of people who are living in the state. They’re giving out ballots to the wrong people.”

And O'Keefe and his people are fraudulently receiving ballots in the names of others.

SueDB · **Posted:** Wed Mar 14, 2012 2:18 pm

BFB wrote:

bob wrote:

WND: James O'Keefe proves voter fraud this simple

Quote:

Filmmaker: 'We're going to continue to expose it in states across the country'

Last week, O’Keefe and his team went to Vermont and had no trouble getting ballots for both living and dead voters.

“They assume we are the dead person, they assume we are the living person. By the way, this is even more outrageous than the dead one because in this case they’re actually trampling on the rights of people who are living in the state. They’re giving out ballots to the wrong people.”

And O'Keefe and his people are fraudulently receiving ballots in the names of others.

I was kinda wondering if there was a real crime committed here. :shock:

Bob Ross · **Posted:** Wed Mar 14, 2012 3:18 pm

bob wrote:

WND: James O'Keefe proves voter fraud this simple

Quote:

Filmmaker: 'We're going to continue to expose it in states across the country'

Last week, O’Keefe and his team went to Vermont and had no trouble getting ballots for both living and dead voters.

“They assume we are the dead person, they assume we are the living person. By the way, this is even more outrageous than the dead one because in this case they’re actually trampling on the rights of people who are living in the state. They’re giving out ballots to the wrong people.”

Who is trampling on the rights of others??

Anyone else notice the date stamps on these videos being goofy? None of them match the date of the primary

BFB · **Posted:** Wed Mar 14, 2012 4:01 pm

O'Keefe is a flat-out liar. He doesn't have Breitbart to catch his back anymore. He will soon be an annoying footnote.

BillTheCat · **Joined:** Fri Jan 13, 2012 5:25 pm **Posts:** 1428

Quote:

James O’Keefe ‘Accomplice’ Nadia Naffe To Tell All

Conservative activist James O’Keefe is leaving a trail of disgruntled former associates in his wake, but the latest of these could deal a fatal blow to the ACORN auteur’s reputation. Nadia Naffe, who filed a criminal harassment complaint against O’Keefe in November

http://www.mediaite.com/online/james-okeefe-accomplice-nadia-naffe-to-tell-all/

http://nadianaffe.com/part-i-my-time-as-an-accomplice-to-convicted-criminal-james-okeefe-2/

:-bd

mimi · **Posted:** Sat Mar 24, 2012 11:21 am

O'Keefe is now suing Izzy Santa. She's been telling more of her story and has released copies of a demand letter sent by her attorney back in 2010 and the settlement agreement.

The agreement includes a confidentiality clause.

She promises to disclose all, including emails. O'Keefe's suit attempts to prevent that, but he might have hurt his case:

Quote:

O’Keefe’s suit seeks an injunction against publication of O’Keefe’s emails, and of documents related to a sexual harassment settlement with former O’Keefe employee Izzy Santa, which O’Keefe accused Naffe of leaking, and which the suit says damages O’Keefe by violating the confidentiality clause of that settlement. According to Naffe and other witnesses who saw the video in question, though, O’Keefe himself was first to publish those documents as screen shots in a video he released, and later took down, in November. One of those witnesses is Dr. Charles Seife, the NYU professor who was a subject of an O’Keefe sting. In an email to Mediaite, Seife confirms that the video contained screenshots of the Izzy Santa documents:

After some preliminary footage, which had tape of Vogel’s explaining that he wouldn’t reveal his source’s name, the video showed some screencaps of several documents. Those documents appeared to be a complaint made by Izzy Santa against O’Keefe, some correspondence, and some sort of settlement between O’Keefe and Santa.

more here:

http://www.mediaite.com/online/former-j ... complaint/

mimi · **Posted:** Mon Apr 09, 2012 5:09 pm

Can somebody tell me why he isn't in jail?

NYMagazine:
James O’Keefe Proves That Pointless Form of Voter Fraud Is Possible

Quote:

Assuming the video isn't deceptively edited — and it doesn't appear to be, but that will always be a concern with O'Keefe — it does do a good job of demonstrating how easy it is to carry out voter fraud without voter I.D. laws.

The question is whether anyone should really care. Yes, if you wanted to, you could risk five years in prison and a $10,000 fine to vote for someone else, but we're not sure why you would, since a single vote, or even a few votes, will never make a difference. (Okay, almost never.) Could a group of hundreds or thousands of fraudsters be mobilized to go around to different polling stations on election day and vote for one particular candidate or issue, possibly altering the outcome of an election? It would be difficult to organize surreptitiously, but sure, it's probably doable. But it has never happened. As the Brennan Center for Justice notes:

remainder:
http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2012/04/ja ... fraud.html

WaPo
James O’Keefe tries to defend voter ID laws by filming D.C. election workers

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/mik ... _blog.html

It's like he's Orly Taitz or something. Why is it that there is a separate set of rules for the RWNJ's?

obot 1024 · **Joined:** Mon Sep 27, 2010 2:25 pm **Posts:** 630

BTW Nadia Naffe talks bout the Barn Incident in this post from march 22nd

Quote:

Faced with the prospect of your continued verbal abuse, the discovery of your racial attitudes and perceptions about our friendship, and your insistence on forcing me, against my will, to spend the night at the barn; it was impossible for me to continue working with you on “To Catch a Journalist”.

I could not in good faith exploit the racial stereotypes you had convinced me those journalism professors held, once I recognized that you harbored racial insecurities, insensitivities and miscegenation beliefs about our friendship. Indeed, when I learned that you had used the words “filthy” and “dirty” to describe me to a colleague, I knew precisely what those code words meant. I felt like I had been the one who had been punked.

http://nadianaffe.com/part-ii-the-barn-incident/

Lots of good stuff there beyond him being a racist rapist.

obot 1024 · **Joined:** Mon Sep 27, 2010 2:25 pm **Posts:** 630

Mimi I think I duplicated your effort. O'Keefe is supposedly suing Nadia Naffe as well.

mimi · **Posted:** Mon Apr 09, 2012 6:08 pm

obot 1024 wrote:

Mimi I think I duplicated your effort. O'Keefe is supposedly suing Nadia Naffe as well.

oh yeah. But there's a wrinkle in that. He disclosed the stuff first.

idunno how that will all turn out.

mimi · **Posted:** Fri May 18, 2012 7:31 pm

O'Keefe screwed up again.

Idunno if you were aware of his latest, greatest videos that he sez proves voter fraud, but doesn't.

Quote:

DOCUMENTARY PROOF: James O’Keefe’s Latest Video Is A Fraud

By Scott Keyes on May 18, 2012 at 10:06 am

As ThinkProgress documented this week, both of the “non-citizens” shown in James O’Keefe’s latest video sting supposedly committing voter fraud by participating in American elections are actually American citizens.

Following our stories, ThinkProgress readers confronted O’Keefe with these facts on his Facebook page. The conservative filmmaker refused to acknowledge that the two “non-citizens” he smeared in his video, Zbigniew Gorzkowski and William Romero, are actually American citizens, demanding “official documentation that proves otherwise” before he’d correct his story.

Romero’s family provided this official documentation to ThinkProgress last night. Here is a scanned copy of Romero’s certificate of naturalization, issued on February 4, 2011. Redactions are ours:

To refresh, O’Keefe’s “proof” that Romero had committed voter fraud was that he refused jury duty in 2010 for not being a citizen but then registered to vote on December 5, 2011, as though there was no possible way his citizenship status could have changed in the interim year.

remainder:
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/0 ... o-citizen/

I wonder if Meroni was orgasmic over the videos? :-?

I'd kinda hate to tell her this news.

I'm not on the twitter machine today. Mebbe somebody else could do the deed?

@PatriotsHeart

GreatGrey · **Posted:** Fri May 18, 2012 7:48 pm

mimi wrote:

I wonder if Meroni was orgasmic over the videos? :-?

I'd kinda hate to tell her this news.

I'm not on the twitter machine today. Mebbe somebody else could do the deed?

@PatriotsHeart

I have it on good authority it was done a couple of days ago

And she also bit hard on the Rev Wright trial balloon before it got blown outta the sky.

mimi · **Posted:** Fri May 18, 2012 8:09 pm

Good to know she's being kept up-to-date with all things that are RWNJ FAIL. :-bd

obot 1024 · **Joined:** Mon Sep 27, 2010 2:25 pm **Posts:** 630

Nadia posted again on the 1st. Apparently Patterico (who is an asst DA) posted a deposition from a civil suit she was involved in that included her social security # and loads of other personal information including medical info

http://nadianaffe.com/a-precursor-to-pa ... s-lawsuit/

Bob Ross · **Posted:** Fri May 18, 2012 9:26 pm

obot 1024 wrote:

Nadia posted again on the 1st. Apparently Patterico (who is an asst DA) posted a deposition from a civil suit she was involved in that included her social security # and loads of other personal information including medical info

http://nadianaffe.com/a-precursor-to-pa ... s-lawsuit/

Patterico is a scumbag

Usull · **Joined:** Fri May 18, 2012 5:05 pm **Posts:** 2

Bob Ross wrote:

obot 1024 wrote:

Nadia posted again on the 1st. Apparently Patterico (who is an asst DA) posted a deposition from a civil suit she was involved in that included her social security # and loads of other personal information including medical info

http://nadianaffe.com/a-precursor-to-pa ... s-lawsuit/

Patterico is a scumbag

RB Bob Ross?

Bob Ross · **Posted:** Mon May 21, 2012 12:50 pm

Usull wrote:

Bob Ross wrote:

obot 1024 wrote:

Nadia posted again on the 1st. Apparently Patterico (who is an asst DA) posted a deposition from a civil suit she was involved in that included her social security # and loads of other personal information including medical info

http://nadianaffe.com/a-precursor-to-pa ... s-lawsuit/

Patterico is a scumbag

RB Bob Ross?

I've crossed paths with him before back on the bradblog. I posted on his site for a while but he would remove my comments. I find it weird the Assistant DA would spend his time getting involved in internet squabbles.

Falsehoods unchallenged only fester and grow.

James O'Keefe

Who is online