James O’Keefe is back in business

 

Nicole Silverio at The Daily Caller has good news:

Former Project Veritas CEO James O’Keefe announced Wednesday that he is launching the O’Keefe Media Group after his ousting from his previous company.

O’Keefe vowed to “build an army of investigators” to expose corruption in a video promoting his upcoming new company. The platform is set to launch July 4, 2023.

“We are going to build an army of investigators and exposers,” he said in a video. “They have awakened the sleeping giant. I’m back. Remaining by my side are a small, tight knit group of the most elite journalists in the world. Exposing corruption requires standing up to power because power hates sunlight and we are sunlight.”

“Welcome to the O’Keefe Media Group, where we will never be shut down,” he continued. “Because not only do I own it, but you own it too.” . . .

Read the full announcement here;  video of Mr. O’Keefe is at the link as well.

# # #

What Happened to James O'Keefe at Project Veritas?

 

Everyone knows that James O’Keefe and the organization he founded, Project Veritas, have parted company.  How could that possibly have happened?  Jeffrey A. Tucker published his thoughts on not only how it happened, but how it repeats an all-too-familiar pattern in the not-for-profit world.  Mr. Tucker's piece is reprinted by permission on Dr Robert W Malone's Substack page, and here’s a brief extract:

The Institutional Pathology That Took Down James O’Keefe

From the outside, it seems crazy. James O’Keefe as head of Project Veritas took the organization to new heights of fame and achievement of its core mission. His cage match with a Pfizer director—which took incredible guts—made for some of the most remarkable real-life footage in years.

. . .

One might suppose that this would be the perfect time to build on success.

Alas, James has been pushed to resign as head of the organization. How is this possible? It seems utterly crazy.

Without knowing any of the details in the complaint against him, this episode has all the earmarks of a terrible institutional problem in nonprofits we’ve seen many times before. All it takes is a remarkable public-relations success, and a big infusion of funds, plus a weak, jealous, and confused board using disgruntled employees as shields for their misdeeds.

. . .

Part of the problem traces to the legal structure of nonprofits. They are not owned by anyone. The board hires the president and the president hires the staff. The board is unpaid which usually means that they have no reason to be involved in the operations. But all the while, they have a sense that they should be controlling things even though they rarely understand anything about the operations.

Read the rest or Mr Tucker’s commentary at Dr Malone’s web page here.  This blogger spent many years working in non-profit organizations.  Mr. Tucker is spot-on.  And our household will be sending our contribution to whatever organization James O'Keefe ends up with.

# # #

More Twitter censorship

Two days ago, this blog linked to Katie Hopkins’s column at Front Page mag; her column was about the celebrations marking the UK's Brexit from the EU. It was a thoughtful and heartfelt report. And today, we read Robert Spencer’s report at Front Page that “Twitter Suspends Katie Hopkins, and you’re next”:

Twitter has suspended UK's courageous freedom fighter Katie Hopkins, who had a million followers on the platform, and one thing is certain: she will not be the last foe of jihad violence and Sharia oppression who is banned from Twitter. It’s all about silencing “hate,” you see. But the banning of Katie Hopkins illustrates yet again that for the Left, there is good “hate” and there is bad “hate.”

According to the UK’s Independent, “Twitter said that Ms Hopkins had been temporarily locked out of her account for violating the site’s hateful-conduct policy, which bans the promotion of violence or inciting harm on the basis of race, religion, national origin or gender identity.”

Twitter has erased all but a handful of Hopkins’ tweets, so it’s impossible to tell what the offending tweets were, but it is abundantly clear at this point that for Leftist guardians of acceptable thought nowadays, virtually any dissent from the Left’s agenda will be read as “the promotion of violence or inciting harm on the basis of race, religion, national origin or gender identity.” While “promotion of violence” is fairly easy to spot, “inciting harm” can be seen in any critical word. 

And then the offender has to go.

Full column is here. And of course, this is not a one-off. Many conservative voices, such as Pamela Geller, Dennis Prager’s Prager University, James O’Keefe of Project Veritas, and Michelle Malkin (article at the link includes details on de-platforming and de-monetizing), have been censored on Twitter, Facebook, on campuses, on PayPal, etc. As Robert Spencer warned: we’re next.

# # #

Project Veritas video: tactics to disrupt Trump rallies

via YouTube

If you plan to attend the Cleveland, OH Trump-Pence rally this weekend (Saturday at 7pm) at the IX Center next to Hopkins Airport, this Project Veritas video will be of interest. It’s short, less than 2 minutes. It exposes tactics intended to cast Trump supporters in a bad light. Via HotGas:

In this video, the Democratic National Committee’s Rapid Response Coördinator and associate at Democracy Partners, Aaron Black, talks about how they can use verbally abusive and antagonistic women at Trump rallies to incite a “bullying” response from male Trump supporters.

Be forewarned, especially if you are seated in the area behind the speakers, where TV cameras show the crowd. 

# # #

Media tries to discredit James O’Keefe, Project Veritas

So yesterday in prime time, Fox News ran some footage from James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas video exposé on dirty tricks implemented by various organizations supporting the Clinton campaign. Then Fox went into overdrive to discredit James O’Keefe. The dismissive remarks of course referenced O’Keefe’s 2010 arrest when he got caught impersonating a telephone company employee (the charge was phone tampering) while working to expose then-Senator Mary Landrieu (D-LA), who was allegedly avoiding any and all calls from her constituents who were upset about Obamacare. O’Keefe’s standards as a journalist were not at issue, yet the Fox narrative claims that he is known for phony and misleading editing.

O’Keefe has made enemies, to be sure. His exposés on Planned Parenthood and ACORN provoked all kinds of attacks on him, his ethics, his editorial bias, and his selective editing. Salon describes him as “best known for selectively editing undercover footage to get people fired.”

Let me say something about selective editing.

I was interviewed for a television documentary a few years ago. I was in front of the cameras for about 2½ hours and appeared in the final cut for maybe 3-4 minutes. Before the documentary was broadcast, somebody asked me how I thought I did. My reply was that if the producers wanted me to look good, I’d look good. If they wanted me to look bad, I’d look bad. Ah yes, was the reply. That ole cutting room floor.

Everything we see on TV or read in the news has been edited. The question is: was the edited final product faithful to the original report? You’ll decide if O’Keefe has/had his thumb on the editorial scale or not.

From where I’m sitting, O’Keefe is doing the investigative journalism that the mainstream media not only refuses to do, but works aggressively to suppress and discredit. Already, the progressives are claiming on Fox that the statements caught on the Project Veritas video were merely hypothetical ideas that were never implemented. Then how come two of the principal players in the undercover videos have been fired or have resigned? That would be Democratic consultant Robert Creamer (who visited the White House multiple times) and Scott Foval, national field director for Americans United for Change. (No doubt they will turn up wearing another hat in another room real soon.) 

# # #

UPDATE: Project Veritas video cited in FEC complaint

art credit: Public Interest Legal Foundation

That was fast!

J. Christian Adams, a frequent contributor to TV news, heads up the Public Interest Legal Foundation. A member of his team just filed a complaint naming the DNC (Democratic National Committee), Hillary For America, and other individuals and organizations. The complaint credits Project Veritas Action, i.e., James O’Keefe’s exposés on video of potentially illegal actions behind the Clinton campaign and deliberate efforts to rig elections. A reader at Treehouse posted a link to the pdf file with the complaint. It is addressed to the Federal Election Commission and demands an investigation. It’s a start, and it is good to see O'Keefe's undercover work forming part of the basis for the legal complaint.

For the two Project Veritas videos just released, see here and here. 

# # #

Project Veritas Video #2: HOW TO commit Voter Fraud

(accessed on YouTube)

Rigging the Election - Video II: Mass Voter Fraud

Stay with it, despite some repetition. (Some of the repetition is probably to cover the base in case the viewer did not already watch Video #1 – or just to drive home a point). You may want to take a shower after you view it. It is sleazy dirty stuff.

And after that, share it on social media, or take up O’Keefe’s request that you forward it (or link) by email or tweet to every “journalist” or “news organization” that you can.

# # #

A Rigged Election: Project Veritas- Clinton, Collusion & Criminality

James O’Keefe released the first of his undercover Project Veritas videos that capture explicit statements from personnel identified with various political organizations working to disrupt Trump and Pence events. These are the people and organizations behind, for example, the cancellation, due to security concerns, of the Trump rally in Chicago. These organizations are not supposed to coordinate with campaigns and the DNC, and you will learn how they position themselves to get around the laws to achieve their goals.

Part 1 of “A Rigged Election,” above, is 16 minutes along. It is very disturbing to watch, and you will need a strong stomach. There is obviously more to come.

Part 1, all by itself, would be a a thorough rejoinder to Greg Gutfeld’s disingenuous statement yesterday on Fox that Trump’s sounding the alarm over a rigged election is premature – sort of like challenging the referee before the game is played. Oh? 

What about the voter registration fraud we are already seeing in Colorado, Virginia, Pennsylvania, and elsewhere ? What about the actual voter fraud documented from the 2012 election. And now we have Part 1 of “A Rigged Election” that shows the individuals, organizations, and methods underlying all this disruption, fraud, and corruption.

The second video below (h/t Sundance) is James O’Keefe’s short message on what Tea Party people can do to bust through the corporate media black-out on the Part 1 video, per above.

# # #