Filmmaker Who Targeted ACORN Arrested in Alleged Senate Phone Scheme

[Coyote]

Assuming disguises and entering a secure area under false pretenses is in fact "Breaking In". You don't have to physically break locks to be performing a "break in".


breaking and entering
n. 1) the criminal act of entering a residence or other enclosed property through the slightest amount of force (even pushing open a door), without authorization. If there is intent to commit a crime, this is burglary. If there is no such intent, the breaking and entering alone is probably at least illegal trespass, which is a misdemeanor crime. 2) the criminal charge for the above.

So when they touched the door to attempt to gain access to the phone closet, they were in fact "Breaking and Entering".

They entered under false pretenses; that is not breaking in. They opened a door: this did not take force. They did not burglarize. They wore disguises to uncover what they believed was a story about a Senator refusing to be accountable to her constituency. They were stupid in how they went about it. They looked in the line closet to complete their disguise of being repairmen. They did not burgaler or even vandalize the closet. The arresting officers found NO wire tapping devices or equipment on them...does that compute? I do not believe they will be prosecuted for anything.

They won't, if they are it will be something ridiculously minor.

THey went in there because they suspected that the phone lines were rigged so that when constituents call, they are forwarded to "dead" lines.

They'd get a pulitzer for it if they hadn't been caught.

Only if it was true.

Was it?

 

[Coyote]

What criminal act, apart from them impersonating repairmen, did they participate in? I make no excuses for them with regards to that. I do defend them against false accusations and a media unwilling to act like journalists themselves.

Fraud is criminal.

I've never before heard of lawbreaking being construed as how journalists should act.

Wonder if you would be saying this about liberals....or, would it be labeled another case of nasty "gotcha" journalism?



Then what was he doing trying to get into the phone closet? Those are very complicated systems. "Observation" means jack if you aren't a professional.

Yes, I mean the story the accused claims. The story that is supported by the lack of any other kind of evidence to even HINT at what the media accused him of.

The "accused" has changed his story a number of times.

Honestly - why do you guys make excuses for this idiot? Would you if he were a liberal "journalist" (and journalist is not even the right term)?

Breaking the law is stupid and apologizing for it, even more so.

I think You are getting ahead of Yourself. O'Keefe has not really said all that much. The Media has been doing allot of back pedaling, suggesting gross misreporting of the facts. The indictment was pasted on an earlier link.

Does what O'Keefe did appear really stupid on the surface....? Yes.
Were false assumptions made in original reports.... ? Yes.
Are You making assumptions now....? Yes.

He's shown himself to be a pretty unethical and dishonest person and not too bright - not just in this, but in some of his other stunts where there is evidence of editing of tapes etc. I don't understand why people defend his actions, unless it's partisan?

 

[Intense]

Assuming disguises and entering a secure area under false pretenses is in fact "Breaking In". You don't have to physically break locks to be performing a "break in".


breaking and entering
n. 1) the criminal act of entering a residence or other enclosed property through the slightest amount of force (even pushing open a door), without authorization. If there is intent to commit a crime, this is burglary. If there is no such intent, the breaking and entering alone is probably at least illegal trespass, which is a misdemeanor crime. 2) the criminal charge for the above.

So when they touched the door to attempt to gain access to the phone closet, they were in fact "Breaking and Entering".

They entered under false pretenses; that is not breaking in. They opened a door: this did not take force. They did not burglarize. They wore disguises to uncover what they believed was a story about a Senator refusing to be accountable to her constituency. They were stupid in how they went about it. They looked in the line closet to complete their disguise of being repairmen. They did not burgaler or even vandalize the closet. The arresting officers found NO wire tapping devices or equipment on them...does that compute? I do not believe they will be prosecuted for anything.

Here's something interesting:

Criminal Trespass

Some statutes consider a trespass criminal only if the defendant has an unlawful purpose in entering or remaining in the place where he has no right to be. The unlawful purpose may be an attempt to disrupt a government office, theft, or Arson. Statutes in some states specify that a trespass is not criminal until after a warning, either spoken or by posted signs, has been given to the trespasser. Criminal trespass is punishable by fine or imprisonment or both.

Back in the 80's it was Trespass and Failure to disperse. If You tried to leave, when told to, it was only one charge, if you held Your Ground it was two charges.

 

[Coyote]

They entered under false pretenses; that is not breaking in. They opened a door: this did not take force. They did not burglarize. They wore disguises to uncover what they believed was a story about a Senator refusing to be accountable to her constituency. They were stupid in how they went about it. They looked in the line closet to complete their disguise of being repairmen. They did not burgaler or even vandalize the closet. The arresting officers found NO wire tapping devices or equipment on them...does that compute? I do not believe they will be prosecuted for anything.

Here's something interesting:

Criminal Trespass

Some statutes consider a trespass criminal only if the defendant has an unlawful purpose in entering or remaining in the place where he has no right to be. The unlawful purpose may be an attempt to disrupt a government office, theft, or Arson. Statutes in some states specify that a trespass is not criminal until after a warning, either spoken or by posted signs, has been given to the trespasser. Criminal trespass is punishable by fine or imprisonment or both.

Back in the 80's it was Trespass and Failure to disperse. If You tried to leave, when told to, it was only one charge, if you held Your Ground it was two charges.

Being arrested for Failure to Disperse....that has a nice ring to it

Kind of like Death by Misadventure

 

[Intense]

Here's something interesting:

Criminal Trespass

Some statutes consider a trespass criminal only if the defendant has an unlawful purpose in entering or remaining in the place where he has no right to be. The unlawful purpose may be an attempt to disrupt a government office, theft, or Arson. Statutes in some states specify that a trespass is not criminal until after a warning, either spoken or by posted signs, has been given to the trespasser. Criminal trespass is punishable by fine or imprisonment or both.

Back in the 80's it was Trespass and Failure to disperse. If You tried to leave, when told to, it was only one charge, if you held Your Ground it was two charges.

Being arrested for Failure to Disperse....that has a nice ring to it

Kind of like Death by Misadventure

I had 8 of those.

 

[Coyote]

Back in the 80's it was Trespass and Failure to disperse. If You tried to leave, when told to, it was only one charge, if you held Your Ground it was two charges.

Being arrested for Failure to Disperse....that has a nice ring to it

Kind of like Death by Misadventure

I had 8 of those.

You just don't disperse to well do you eh? Or was it the misadventure

 

[Intense]

Fraud is criminal.

I've never before heard of lawbreaking being construed as how journalists should act.

Wonder if you would be saying this about liberals....or, would it be labeled another case of nasty "gotcha" journalism?



Then what was he doing trying to get into the phone closet? Those are very complicated systems. "Observation" means jack if you aren't a professional.


The "accused" has changed his story a number of times.

Honestly - why do you guys make excuses for this idiot? Would you if he were a liberal "journalist" (and journalist is not even the right term)?

Breaking the law is stupid and apologizing for it, even more so.

I think You are getting ahead of Yourself. O'Keefe has not really said all that much. The Media has been doing allot of back pedaling, suggesting gross misreporting of the facts. The indictment was pasted on an earlier link.

Does what O'Keefe did appear really stupid on the surface....? Yes.
Were false assumptions made in original reports.... ? Yes.
Are You making assumptions now....? Yes.

He's shown himself to be a pretty unethical and dishonest person and not too bright - not just in this, but in some of his other stunts where there is evidence of editing of tapes etc. I don't understand why people defend his actions, unless it's partisan?

I could go to Drudge right now and find it plastered with Idiot's and Their Schemes exposed. What is Your point?

 

[Coyote]

I think You are getting ahead of Yourself. O'Keefe has not really said all that much. The Media has been doing allot of back pedaling, suggesting gross misreporting of the facts. The indictment was pasted on an earlier link.

Does what O'Keefe did appear really stupid on the surface....? Yes.
Were false assumptions made in original reports.... ? Yes.
Are You making assumptions now....? Yes.

He's shown himself to be a pretty unethical and dishonest person and not too bright - not just in this, but in some of his other stunts where there is evidence of editing of tapes etc. I don't understand why people defend his actions, unless it's partisan?

I could go to Drudge right now and find it plastered with Idiot's and Their Schemes exposed. What is Your point?

My point? Why do people defend idiots as heros, when they do dumb stuff to get themselves arrested?

 

[Intense]

Being arrested for Failure to Disperse....that has a nice ring to it

Kind of like Death by Misadventure

I had 8 of those.

You just don't disperse to well do you eh? Or was it the misadventure

That depends. When Non Violent Civil Disobedience resulting in arrest is the goal, is it a misadventure?

 

[Coyote]

I had 8 of those.

You just don't disperse to well do you eh? Or was it the misadventure

That depends. When Non Violent Civil Disobedience resulting in arrest is the goal, is it a misadventure?

Good question...

 

[Intense]

He's shown himself to be a pretty unethical and dishonest person and not too bright - not just in this, but in some of his other stunts where there is evidence of editing of tapes etc. I don't understand why people defend his actions, unless it's partisan?

I could go to Drudge right now and find it plastered with Idiot's and Their Schemes exposed. What is Your point?

My point? Why do people defend idiots as heros, when they do dumb stuff to get themselves arrested?

I don't really see Anyone defending the stupidity, be the report accurate, I'm not making O'Keefe a Hero for what He did there, though the details are really not known at this point. I do give Him credit for exposing major issues and concerns related to ACORN. I support a fair Trial.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

And the people of LA still cannot talk to Sen Mary Landrieu because she won't answer thier calls

When's the last time you tried to call her?

 

[Intense]

Fraud is criminal.

I've never before heard of lawbreaking being construed as how journalists should act.

Wonder if you would be saying this about liberals....or, would it be labeled another case of nasty "gotcha" journalism?



Then what was he doing trying to get into the phone closet? Those are very complicated systems. "Observation" means jack if you aren't a professional.



The "accused" has changed his story a number of times.

Honestly - why do you guys make excuses for this idiot? Would you if he were a liberal "journalist" (and journalist is not even the right term)?

Breaking the law is stupid and apologizing for it, even more so.

I think You are getting ahead of Yourself. O'Keefe has not really said all that much. The Media has been doing allot of back pedaling, suggesting gross misreporting of the facts. The indictment was pasted on an earlier link.

Does what O'Keefe did appear really stupid on the surface....? Yes.
Were false assumptions made in original reports.... ? Yes.
Are You making assumptions now....? Yes.

He's shown himself to be a pretty unethical and dishonest person and not too bright - not just in this, but in some of his other stunts where there is evidence of editing of tapes etc. I don't understand why people defend his actions, unless it's partisan?

Editing for Form is one thing, editing to suppress information, is another. This is mostly a Straw Man Argument.

 

[Coyote]

I could go to Drudge right now and find it plastered with Idiot's and Their Schemes exposed. What is Your point?

My point? Why do people defend idiots as heros, when they do dumb stuff to get themselves arrested?

I don't really see Anyone defending the stupidity, be the report accurate, I'm not making O'Keefe a Hero for what He did there, though the details are really not known at this point. I do give Him credit for exposing major issues and concerns related to ACORN. I support a fair Trial.

Sure. I would as well.

But...that same lack of accuracy and rush to judgement occurred over the ACORN tapes.

I find it intriguing that there isn't much of an even handed approach - like, wait until the facts come out - in either case. The was a similar rush to judgement (and a blanket acceptance of O'Keefe's videos and statements with out questioning) but when the shoe is on the other foot - as is here, there is no similar "acceptance" and many excuses and calls for accuracy.

Does accuracy really matter to these people?

 

[Coyote]

I think You are getting ahead of Yourself. O'Keefe has not really said all that much. The Media has been doing allot of back pedaling, suggesting gross misreporting of the facts. The indictment was pasted on an earlier link.

Does what O'Keefe did appear really stupid on the surface....? Yes.
Were false assumptions made in original reports.... ? Yes.
Are You making assumptions now....? Yes.

He's shown himself to be a pretty unethical and dishonest person and not too bright - not just in this, but in some of his other stunts where there is evidence of editing of tapes etc. I don't understand why people defend his actions, unless it's partisan?

Editing for Form is one thing, editing to suppress information, is another. This is mostly a Straw Man Argument.

When it comes to those kinds of videos - any editing is suspect wouldn't you say?

 

[SpidermanTuba]

[

We used to wait and have a trial, get a verdict and that kind of thing before we sent people to jail.

I have no idea what planet you are on, but people are jailed without conviction 24/7/365, its really common practice. In fact, in many cities, the primary purpose of the jail is to house people who have NOT been convicted of a crime.

 

[Vast LWC]

They entered under false pretenses; that is not breaking in. They opened a door: this did not take force. They did not burglarize. They wore disguises to uncover what they believed was a story about a Senator refusing to be accountable to her constituency. They were stupid in how they went about it. They looked in the line closet to complete their disguise of being repairmen. They did not burgaler or even vandalize the closet. The arresting officers found NO wire tapping devices or equipment on them...does that compute? I do not believe they will be prosecuted for anything.

Really? "They opened a door: this did not take force."?

You do realize that "pushing open a door" is literally part of the definition, right?

As in:

breaking and entering
n. 1) the criminal act of entering a residence or other enclosed property through the slightest amount of force (even pushing open a door), without authorization. If there is intent to commit a crime, this is burglary. If there is no such intent, the breaking and entering alone is probably at least illegal trespass, which is a misdemeanor crime. 2) the criminal charge for the above.

Since they entered under false pretenses, there is lack of authorization. Since they pushed open a door at all, it is Breaking and Entering.

It is not Burglary, which is Breaking and Entering with the proven intent of stealing something, but it is definitely breaking and entering.

 

[Vast LWC]

Seriously though, if O'Keefe had been, say, a member of ACORN caught breaking and entering the offices of a Republican Senator, all the people who are currently pooh-poohing this crime would be literally screaming for blood.

Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck would have some giant conspiracy theory all conjured up by now, involving half the Democratic party.

 

[SFC Ollie]

Fraud is criminal.

I've never before heard of lawbreaking being construed as how journalists should act.

Wonder if you would be saying this about liberals....or, would it be labeled another case of nasty "gotcha" journalism?



Then what was he doing trying to get into the phone closet? Those are very complicated systems. "Observation" means jack if you aren't a professional.



The "accused" has changed his story a number of times.

Honestly - why do you guys make excuses for this idiot? Would you if he were a liberal "journalist" (and journalist is not even the right term)?

Breaking the law is stupid and apologizing for it, even more so.

I think You are getting ahead of Yourself. O'Keefe has not really said all that much. The Media has been doing allot of back pedaling, suggesting gross misreporting of the facts. The indictment was pasted on an earlier link.

Does what O'Keefe did appear really stupid on the surface....? Yes.
Were false assumptions made in original reports.... ? Yes.
Are You making assumptions now....? Yes.

He's shown himself to be a pretty unethical and dishonest person and not too bright - not just in this, but in some of his other stunts where there is evidence of editing of tapes etc. I don't understand why people defend his actions, unless it's partisan?

What he was is stupid. plain and simple stupid. There is very little defense for stupidity. But I still doubt he'll do any time.

Still wondering;
What the hell did he plan for in that closet?

 

[Intense]

My point? Why do people defend idiots as heros, when they do dumb stuff to get themselves arrested?

I don't really see Anyone defending the stupidity, be the report accurate, I'm not making O'Keefe a Hero for what He did there, though the details are really not known at this point. I do give Him credit for exposing major issues and concerns related to ACORN. I support a fair Trial.

Sure. I would as well.

But...that same lack of accuracy and rush to judgement occurred over the ACORN tapes.

I find it intriguing that there isn't much of an even handed approach - like, wait until the facts come out - in either case. The was a similar rush to judgement (and a blanket acceptance of O'Keefe's videos and statements with out questioning) but when the shoe is on the other foot - as is here, there is no similar "acceptance" and many excuses and calls for accuracy.

Does accuracy really matter to these people?

The Acorn Tapes in some instances were as plain as day. I think You might need to take a sober look at them. People have already reprimanded and fired because of the content. That is an admission. That said, yes, there was projection and assumption. I presume ACORN to be an enemy to the Republic and decency, solely based on Their role in the fraudulent Voter Registration scheme. That was a very expensive mess to clean up, both sides of the equation at Tax Payer expense. They may be Your Knight in shining armor, to Me, They are degenerate.