And now to address the fever-swamp’s notion that what I said on “Hannity” last night was “blackmail.” Blackmail occurs when one party threatens to reveal an unsavory piece of information about another party, and demands money in exchange for silence. For obvious reasons, it is most often conducted in private. I, on the other hand, went on national television with a challenge to the Attorney General to do his job; unlike this administration and its justice department, what I did was fully open and transparent.
There will be consequences if there isn’t an investigation into ACORN. The videos will be shown and at a particular moment. There is nothing illegal about my proposed response to the continued inaction from this justice department, and there’s nothing I’d like more than to have my day in court and let a jury hear why I have gone to such extraordinary measures to tell a major story that the dying, partisan, leftist media has worked so hard to suppress.
The days of the Democrat-Media Complex controlling the narrative are in their end times. And if the AG wants to turn his focus on me instead of ACORN, then that day will be closer than many of them think.
I suspect that he has a lot of ammunition if the industrial government/media complex wants to escalate its war.
[Evening update]
Fox asked to inspect hen house in Ohio:
According to a report from Ohio today, a member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee has asked the ACORN-tainted Ohio Secretary of State, Jennifer Brunner, to investigation ACORN’s voter registration work in the state.
I’m sure everything will be found to be on the up and up.
Lovely, but he needs to make sure there are multiple copies around — even if that means he risks having the vids exposed before he’s ready.
Breitbart is waging asymmetrical warfare. I’d be more concerned that he has kevlar, adequate bodyguards and food-tasters.
According to a recent poll most Republicans think that ACORN stole the 2008 election. Breitbartmust be pretty brave, taking on an organization with that sort of power….
According to a recent poll most Republicans think that ACORN stole the 2008 election.
They almost certainly did in Minnesota. It’s unlikely that Franken would have won that race without all of the ballot confusion caused by ACORN.
Breitbartmust be pretty brave, taking on an organization with that sort of power….
Why would you stupidly confuse what Breitbart believes with your claims of what Republicans supposedly believe? But yes, he is a brave man, not because he’s going up against ACORN per se, but because he’s going up against its enabling thugs who currently run the Department of Injustice.
Why? He’s not running for office against an ACORN candidate.
Jim,
If you believe PPP polling about that, you are part of the fever swamp he’s talking about. That is a Dem polling outfit and they haven’t been close when it counts yet.
You can’t stop the signal, Mal.
So jim, what’s it like being a mindless drone of the PC Cathedral?
I’m sure the constant dial-tone inside his head is quite soothing.
Breitbart is correct – it’s not blackmail. It’s extortion. “Do as I want or else.”
The problem here is that nobody thinks Breitbart would be satisfied with an honest investigation. Any investigation that doesn’t produce “ACORN is evil” will be blasted by him as biased and corrupt.
Shorter Chris: “Breitbart is evil!”
Titus – no, Breitbart is not evil. He’s a political partisan who will not be satisfied unless a criminal investigation produces the evidence he wants. The man has convinced himself of “the truth” and wants that “truth” validated, whether it should be or not.
They almost certainly did in Minnesota.
The poll asked about the Presidential race. A stiff wind would have changed the Minnesota outcome, but Obama got 9.5 million more votes than McCain.
Why would you stupidly confuse what Breitbart believes with your claims of what Republicans supposedly believe?
Most Republicans say they believe ACORN committed vote fraud on a scale of millions of illegal votes, something that no organization has ever managed in U.S. history. They think this thanks to Breitbart and Fox’s hysterical reporting on ACORN (along with their own inability to believe that actual Americans would elect Obama). If there really was an organization that could coordinate millions of simultaneous felonies, Breitbart would have good reason to fear it. But he knows better, his reporting and threats are about self-promotion and stagecraft, not reality.
Just to make sure I understand your latest insanity, you are claiming that unless ACORN really did swing the presidential election, or that Breitbart really believes that it did, there is no point to him exposing its criminal behavior? And that he should have no expectations that the Department of Injustice will investigate it?
Just what it about Breitbart’s reporting that doesn’t correspond to reality (as opposed to your nutty comments)?
Any investigation that doesn’t produce “ACORN is evil” will be blasted by him as biased and corrupt.
In light of the available evidence, why should it not be?
Rand – on this very blog, you claimed that a trial with a pre-determined outcome was a “show trial,” and “unworthy of America.”
So now an investigation that has a pre-determined outcome is somehow worthy of America?
So now an investigation that has a pre-determined outcome is somehow worthy of America?
No, what I think is unworthy of America is the way that ACORN has been treated to date.
I didn’t say that it had a predetermined outcome, but if it does, it’s much more likely that ACORN will be absolved than indicted, under this administration.
So are you, but neither of you are the AG turning a blind eye to your sworn responsibilities.
I’m having a hard time seeing a credible threat here. If you are an ally of ACORN, the worst Breitbart can do is publish something more damaging to ACORN than he already has. But as an opponent to ACORN he has every incentive to publish the most damaging information he has as quickly as possible.
And if you are an ACORN ally, if he has something held back as a threat you have no way of knowing that he won’t publish it eventually in any case even if you do what he wants.
If you aren’t an ACORN ally, the threat is useless. If you are the threat is implausible.
Will, the target of the “threat” isn’t ACORN, but the Justice Department. If DOJ does what Breitbart wants done, it will avoid being embarrassed by having further revelations come from Breitbart instead of from a DJ investigation as they should be.
By your logic, so is “Obey the law or we’ll send you to prison.”
But McGehee, that’s legal extortion and hence ok.
Rand – on this very blog, you claimed that a trial with a pre-determined outcome was a “show trial,” and “unworthy of America.”
It would be a show trial Chris because that’s pretty much the definition of a show trial… or don’t you believe in innocent until proven guilty.
The point you’re ignoring is we’ve seen the guilt with our own eyes. Legal guilt is a different issue. A lawyer would have to disqualify me as a jurer. That’s our system.
Also, an organization doesn’t need to be effective to be guilty. It’s just that where they are effective the consequenses are worse.
Just to make sure I understand your latest insanity, you are claiming that unless ACORN really did swing the presidential election, or that Breitbart really believes that it did, there is no point to him exposing its criminal behavior?
No, I was just pointing out the hypocrisy in Breitbart stirring up exaggerated notions of ACORN’s influence, when he knows full well (and shows by his behavior) that they are false. A journalist would just publish what he’d found; Breitbart would rather feed (and prolong) the five minute hate.