By now everybody knows that James O'Keefe, the anti-ACORN video stinger, is willing to lie, manipulate, and apparently break the law, in pursuit of his extremist agenda.They cite quotes from the Brooklyn prosecutors, the first folks outside of the O'Keefe network to view unedited footage, claiming that "They edited the tape to meet their agenda." They go on to chastise the New York times for continuing to report patently false aspects of O'Keefe's account:
As Media Matters columnist Eric Bohlert writes, "the '70s-era, blacksploitation pimp costume was a propaganda tool used to later deceive the public about the undercover operation." If you watched the videos you probably thought he wore that suit inside our offices. He didn't. He dressed as a professional and presented himself as a boyfriend trying to help his girlfriend escape from an abusive pimp, something also noted in former Massachusetts Attorney General Scott Harshbarger's December 2009 investigation of ACORN.And all the while, Hannah Giles is looking for funders to help her fight a multi-million dollar lawsuit aimed at her because of involvement in the stunt.
So why, then, does America's newspaper of record, the New York Times, insist in report after report -- as recently as March 1st -- that he presented himself as a pimp in our offices?