"It wasn't THAT crime….it was a DIFFERENT crime"

by: Adam L

Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 02:44:27 PM EST

Right wing New Jerseyan and serial misrepresenter of facts James O'Keefe has decided that what's good for the goose is not good for the gander, and is suing the Star-Ledger for libel on the heels of his latest "operation" that just may have broken a number of federal and/or New Hampshire laws. Ironically, O'Keefe is the same person behind the heavily edited and usually recorded without consent videos used to "implicate" Planned Parenthood, ACORN, NPR and the New Jersey teacher's union (the NJEA) in acts that looked bad mainly because of the deceptive and selective editing.

His latest is a lawsuit alleging that he was defamed by the Star Ledger when it reported on the potential voter fraud and non-consent laws for recording conversations that his "sting operation" broke during the NH Republican Presidential Primary. While the Star Ledger incorrectly referred to O'Keefe's prior history as including "trying to tap the phone of Sen. Mary Landrieux" - which was a federal felony charge, O'Keefe did plead guilty to a misdemeanor for entering federal property under false pretenses, a different and lesser crime, but most certainly a crime.

The misdemeanor charge carried a sentence that included three years' probation, and it remains to be seen what the impact of the NH actions and investigation by the NH Attorney General will have on O'Keefe's probation, or his "filmmaking career". What is highly ironic here (other than the nature of his suit not even mentioning the NH investigation - just a years' old different crime that was called a crime of a different name) is that the ACORNs, NPRs, Planned Parenthoods, NH voters and NJ teachers union who were unfairly and misrepresented by O'Keefe and his videos for are really the ones damaged. The fact that O'Keefe is playing victim for what looks like the Star Ledger calling Crime B "Crime A" seems more like another stunt to get publicity than anything else.

This is classic for the right and its noise machine - to hammer away on a relatively minor and sometimes insignificant point to play the victim - all while distorting the truth in the name of whatever endgame they have at the moment. What would really make things interesting is for the Star Ledger to use its resources to fight back here - a retraction would probably be warranted to the extent it did misrepresent the crime O'Keefe pled guilty to - and maybe it teaches the folks on the Star Ledger Editorial Board to be more careful. But to push back against O'Keefe, his financial backers and take "disclosure" down a very uncomfortable road for O'Keefe would really be a good thing to see.

Adam L :: "It wasn't THAT crime….it was a DIFFERENT crime"