Archive for james o’keefe

Do You Know The Score?

Posted in blogosphere, censorship, Doh!, politics, reality check with tags , , , , , , , on March 7, 2013 by Qritiq



from:  http://www.breitbartunmasked.com/satire/one-word-scoreboard/


complainants v Bill are  HOGE, WILLIAM JOHN JOSEPH   and   STRANAHAN, LEE   and   WALKER, AARON J.

I’m not clear on why these 3 thought it was wrong for Brett Kimberlin to get a restraining order against Seth and Aaron, but that it’s ok for each of them to do exactly the same thing to Bill.

Hypocrisy much?


related:

https://qritiq.wordpress.com/2012/06/02/downright-dirty/




Voting Rights #WAR

Posted in politics with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on March 1, 2013 by Qritiq


Gee – who else (reading this right now) has received  similar emails?



Nadia,

We’re willing to book you a plane ticket to Boston to get some footage

from the SEIU busses . . .

i’ll be in new orleans causing trouble. im [sic] confident your training will take you far.

Interested in making some more video history?

James




conspirator

future inmate

from: The Pimp Stays In The Picture


“SECRET EVIDENCE”

Posted in audio, censorship, crime, do the right thing, politics, spin with tags , , , , , , , , , , , on June 4, 2012 by Qritiq

.

Patrick Frey, an L.A. Deputy District Attorney, aka the blogger and James O’Keefe supporter Patterico, posted a document produced by one Kent Gibson, who also works with the L.A. courts (presumably an acquaintance, colleague, or friend of Frey’s.) Gibson describes himself as a “Certified Audio & Video Forensic Examiner”.

Based on a test that Gibson refers to as “the gold standard” of voice identification, Gibson determined that:

“Frey Swat [911 tape of caller that perpetrated a crime] and Brynaert Known [a recording from an interview show of Ron Brynaert, former Executive Editor of a political website] cannot be shown to be the same speaker”.

.

There were a lot of other words in this document about results of methods that Gibson indicates are not nearly as  reliable or accurate (if at all) as the test Gibson says is the “gold standard”, which he used to conclude the statement above.  There were also lots of words included in the document, which described opinion rather than statements of fact.)

.

oh, and i’d like to ask y’all a personal question:

Suppose you log on, and you see that a Deputy District Attorney asked someone (presumably a friend of his) described as a “Certified Audio & Video Forensic Examiner” for the courts, to compare a sample of your voice (found on the internet) to a criminal’s, (in order to try to come up with some basis, that sounds official, to make people think that you ARE the criminal), and this D.A. publishes the resultant document, that his friend wrote up, on his blog.

You see that this posted document says your voice was used in the comparison, because you are “suspected of being the Swat caller re: Frey”. And the “Certified Audio & Video Forensic Examiner” says his opinion is that you are a criminal based on a “totality” of stuff (though we’re not privy to know exactly what that stuff may be.)  He writes this opinion even though the results of the test, that he himself says is the gold standard of testing, indicated that you “cannot be shown to be” the criminal.

The D.A.’s  readers see this document; some of them blog about it, tweet it, and get more people to do the same…, and so on, and so on. And as a result, a lot of your former colleagues, people you correspond with online, friends and acquaintances, and anyone else who happens to search on your name, can see that you are being examined by Los Angeles officials because you are “suspected of being” a criminal.  (And needless to say, you’re not a criminal, you’ve done nothing at all wrong – and you’ve never been convicted of a crime.)

So how would you feel about that?

And what would you think the proper remedy would be?

.

.

Downright Dirty

Posted in audio, censorship, crime, do the right thing, illegal, mental, politics, spin with tags , , , , , , on June 2, 2012 by Qritiq

.

.

.

.

the upshot:

.

-Judge refuses to rule on Battle of Thessalonica

-Judge has a LOT of years on the bench; sure doesn’t know much about the internet, but knows about people and their probable future actions based on what he’s seen go down in the past.

-Judge rules Aaron may not contact Kimberlin by megaphone (or any other means.)

-Judge says Aaron is inciting death threats and threats against children.

-Judge finds Aaron is doing a “downright dirty” thing.

.

.

Believe me I’m no lawyer, but I have heard that there is a difference between the letter of the law and the intent of the law, and judges consider the intent of the law in their rulings. If you listen, you’ll see that since he is ruling on a protective peace order, (a pretty common thing), the judge’s primary concern is keeping both of these guys safe, not the intricacies of constitutional law as it relates to electronic communications, conspiracy,  death threats across state lines, incitement to commit violent acts, etc., etc.

Mind Your P and Q

Posted in do the right thing, illegal, politics, spin with tags , , , , , , , , , , , on May 31, 2012 by Qritiq

.

From Slate.com comments on a Dave Weigel post:

.

qritiq
The origins of Blog About Brett Kimberlin Day – in this wordpress post: http://wp.me/p6l52-yC
– the Frey/Kimberlin stuff has a lot to do with keeping James O’Keefe out of jail and a pitched battle over voting rights
Yesterday from slate.com
.
.
Patterico
Convicted bomber and perjurer Brett Kimberlin couldn’t have put it better himself.Qritiq is a champion of a man who tweeted to me that he wanted to punch me in the nose several times and take a sh*t on my wife (he did not bleep the word) — all, apparently, because he was upset I was ignoring his evidence of Kimberlin’s innocence.Qritiq seems t0 have a very c0zy relati0nship w/ Kimbrln ass0ciate NealRauhausr. [Patrick Frey’s team google-bombed the previous phrase – that’s why the spelling changes] Her blog is a cesspool of defamation of me and other Kimberlin victims. Everything she says needs to be understood in that light. I do not find it surprising in the slightest that she is trying to convolute and misstate the intent behind the Brett Kimberlin blogburst.
19 Hours Ago from slate.com
.
.
qritiq

1. I recall he also wanted to staple the truth to your forehead.
The crude tweet dates from October ’11 or before. How many times have you and your trolls repeated it since? I wouldn’t be at all surprised if it was well over a thousand. And you are repeating a crude tweet, that mentions your wife, for over seven months … why exactly?

2. I thought the reason he said it, was because you were phoning him incessantly and menacing him after he asked you to leave him alone. (Interesting you neglect to mention: dude’s website is called “Brett Kimberlin Lies” – http://brettkimberlinlies.blogspot.com/)

3. The truth, is the only thing I’m a champion of, and that’s why you’re out here spinning so hard. You made a point of replying to a pretty benign comment imo, to try to convince people that I’m a liar and also to say things about me that are simply untrue. What are you so afraid people will find out if they give me a listen?

4. I’ve never met Rauhauser, never spoke to him on the phone (I never even heard of him until YOU brought him up), so the probability is that you and your co-conspirators are FAR cozier with Rauhauser than I am.

5. “Everything she says needs to be understood in that light.” Pat, why don’t you let people decide for themselves: https://qritiq.wordpress.com
Slate readers are not children and they don’t need you to interpret for them.

11 Hours Ago from slate.com
.

it’s no contest

.
.

Criss-Cross Double-Cross

Posted in crime, evil, politics, sockypuppets, spin, villain with tags , , , , , , , on May 31, 2012 by Qritiq

.

hey, ok – I had an idea for a B-movie, so humor me if you will with this, a fanciful first (rough (ok, very rough)) draft:

.

Remember the Tylenol killer? You know, the one who’s still out and about?

Suppose Mr. Tylenol wanted to kill his boss, a Tylenol user, without getting caught. Well, before he poisoned the boss’s Tylenol, he’d poison random bottles of Tylenol. That way, his boss would be just one of many murdered, and a particular motive or probable suspect would be obfuscated.

Let’s suppose your big-money client, probably your only client (and you got one big-ass mortgage), was maybe in some hot water to begin with, and he tells you to neutralize an editor that broke a number of problematic stories about said probationee client. You know a little something about the legal system, so you decide to use what you know, and frame this journalist for a crime. Of course the crime has to be something you have the ability to pull off. Hey,  how about a SWAT?

And maybe there’s also a high-profile guy out there talking about some political hoax you or your buddies pulled, and it would be great to try to shut him up in the process, thereby killing two birds with one stone.

So what’s the first thing you would do. Ok, so you need the high profile dude’s name and details to be out there, so it could be believed that your journalist target would easily be able to access the info needed were he to SWAT the talker. So you need someone, other than you of course, to out your talker and publish his details. And, oh yeah – since he’s revealing some things your team would rather not have revealed, why not discredit the dude and make him public enemy #1 at the same time?

But wait – how are you going to be able to sell this info to a media outlet to get it published?

Well, luckily for you, the talker has already told one of your team leaders that there’s a couple things in his past that, while not huge deals, are maybe not his most shining moments. So, since you already know the talker is a pretty nice guy, you demand from the talker his Social Security number, Driver’s License number and whatever else you can think of. With this info, now you can get the details that you need to have published and you also can use it to confirm what the talker told you, and even dig up more dirt, so you can manufacture a sale-able story that you can pitch to your buddy who works for a tabloid site.

In the meantime, you and your cohorts have long conversations with the real target; maybe you tape his voice, so you can 1. hand it off to someone you think is a decent mimic (but turns out not to be) and 2. Give it to your co-conspirator who just happens to be an audio engineer, so he can figure out the best way to alter your mimic’s voice to match your target’s voice.

Along the way, maybe some bim comes along and threatens to blow the whole operation. Wouldn’t it be great to get her on the phone and do yet another SWAT to thwart and discredit her? Hmm, that might be hard to sell – that two unrelated people asking questions about you and your buds – would both happen to be SWAT-ing people willy-nilly.

But then you get a great idea! Tell everyone that they do know each other, that they’re actually working together, oh hell – go all the way – that they’re “IN LEAGUE” together. Plus you have a bunch of weak-minded trolls on hand to spin that story, and all they require is a couple of crumbs. Aw turns out she’s smarter than she looks and you can’t get her on the phone (sad face).

.

See where this is going? I doubt you need my help to write the rest.

.

Wonkette Scratches The Surface And Misses The Boat

Posted in blogosphere, censorship, crime, divisiveness, do the right thing, illegal, politics, villain with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on May 29, 2012 by Qritiq

.

Wonkette’s Doktor StrangeZoom presents Frey re Kimberlin in a nutshell:

http://wonkette.com/473744/the-new-horrible-thing-liberals-are-responsible-for-some-bomber-dude

StrangeZoom tells of Patterico.com blogger Patrick Frey’s involvement in Blog About #BrettKimberlin Day. Kimberlin, if you will remember (not saying you’re old mind you) was the guy who said Dan Quayle bought pot from him. Kimberlin is also an ex-con and a purported terrorist. Pat Frey is also accusing those “in league” with Kimberlin, of calling 911 and saying that Pat shot his wife, resulting in a SWAT-type swarming of police and fire at Frey’s residence.

Here’s what Wonkette missed:

This story is really about Kimberlin’s non-profit, Velvet Revolution v James O’Keefe’s non-profit, Project Veritas. Both organizations deal with voting rights policy and are at loggerheads. Check out this 22-page doc by Velvet Revolution’s lawyer about O’Keefe:

http://www.velvetrevolution.us/images/OKeefe_Probation_Revocation_Document.pdf

Patrick Frey also seems to be heading up a conspiracy to spread libelous statements via social media. Their target is a harsh detractor of O’Keefe’s – Ron Brynaert – the former editor of a liberal political news website. Brynaert broke a number of incriminating stories about probationee James O’Keefe that could well have landed O’Keefe in the clink.

Frey and his associates even seem to be trying to frame Brynaert for a crime, by spreading defamatory statements indicating that he is “in league” with Kimberlin and sounds like the voice on the 911 hoax call. Of course neither of these statements are true – they are downright laughable. But right-wing extremists and Patterico.com readers are encouraged to continue to spread those lies, by Frey and his co-conspirators.

Frey even went so far as to indicate on Glenn Beck’s show, that a victim (someone Pat had been communicating with) who was SWAT-ed one week prior to Pat’s alleged SWAT, was also targeted because he also was writing about Kimberlin. Completely false! That victim had been talking about information he had regarding Weinergate, just before he was SWAT-ed. He never had anything to do with Kimberlin!

The reason Frey and his associates are ramping this stuff up now, is because (I believe) the New Hampshire Attorney General has *just* asked for 7-years worth of James O’Keefe emails. And so, there is an attempt afoot by Frey and Co. to head off a potential ishstorm, by directing the conversation away from conjecture regarding the potentially damning contents of those emails, and toward the sensational tabloid-friendly crimes committed in the 1970’s by the head of Velvet Revolution. Concurrently, there is an attempt to both menace and discredit O’Keefe’s seemingly most dangerous critic – Brynaert – who, while he is certainly known for being combative (understatement), is also respected by both progressives and conservatives for being a skilled researcher who’s like a dog with a bone when a story interests him.

I should also note, Brynaert has broken at least one story, that I know of, that proved useful for James O’Keefe; I am not trying to imply that this journo’s reporting has been biased against O’Keefe. Yet, I imagine there is some concern within Team JOK, that if the 7-year email cache were to land in this Brynaert’s inbox, he would undoubtedly read EVERY SINGLE FREAKIN email. And I think anyone who’s been following along for the past year, knows that predicting the potentiality of that outcome, is not such a big leap, and said outcome would likely not be in the best interest of Mr. O’Keefe.

Keep in mind that voting rights policy could determine the next resident of the White House. (Much in the way that those who brought you Weinergate, knew that the NYC Mayoral seat is a very viable step to the presidency.) This is not small potatoes that Project Veritas and Velvet Revolution are warring about. I’m sure there are plenty of donation dollars in both corners.

This is actually some kind-of-serious stuff – I mean a team-attempt to frame a journalist for a crime because he published the truth about someone who has access to big money?

Not. Good.

.

and a reminder –

Patrick Frey’s M.O. is to take advantage of people and manipulate them:

One of Frey’s former supporters whom Frey would not assist with petty cash to cover court costs toward his defense against plaintiff Brett Kimberlin, wrote a note that seemed utterly despondent [to this reader] that mentioned Kimberlin. Kimberlin won a case against that former Frey supporter and I believe that they were even at one point arrested.

Now there are reports that Aaron Worthing aka Walker – a Frey disciple – has been jailed ( http://www.munseys.com/technosnarl/?p=1295 , link courtesy of commenter “Saul G.”.) @rsmccain reports on his blog that Walker was taken into custody after a hearing regarding a permanent order of protection against Walker. (Walker had been bragging on twitter recently, that he always carries a gun. He had a restraining order against him at the time.)

[UPDATE: Walker has now been released from custody. A copy of this morning’s peace order ]

.

And on a more personal note:

I want to warn readers that Patrick Frey is no friend to you. If you have a family and a dog, don’t do Frey’s bidding, because he doesn’t mind getting others into very serious trouble. And if you want to be a lawyer and you wind up getting arrested in the service of Patrick Frey, well, that could actually ruin your life.

Remember – Frey, who resides in a $1.3 million home, wouldn’t even send $200 to his pawn when said pawn was sued by Kimberlin.

.

.

.

(h/t STL Activist Hub for indicating where clarification was needed)

.

I Have Amnesia

Posted in blogosphere, censorship, crime, politics, video with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on May 28, 2012 by Qritiq

.

If so many other things in the entire interview hadn’t struck me as odd, seemingly incorrectly stated, or different from my recollections of previous statements, I’m sure I never would have noticed:

In this, the first portion of the Glenn Beck interview…

.

.

…Patrick Frey tells Glenn Beck that he’s been harassed by Brett Kimberlin, because he had written a post about Kimberlin. Then Pat agrees with Glenn they “can’t directly tie” Pat’s SWAT to Brett Kimberlin.  Pat goes on to describe the SWAT. Then Beck asks if Pat has ever seen anything like this before. Pat replies by saying “Yeah – it happened to another guy [@CryingWolfeBlog], who was writing about the same story I was writing, about a week earlier.”
.
Pretty sure Pat never mentions Weinergate at all to Beck’s audience – the entire interview is about Brett Kimberlin. Yet by Pat’s statement above, listeners are led by Pat to believe that @CryingWolfeBlog was SWAT-ed because he was writing about Brett Kimberlin. Only problem is – @CryingWolfeBlog was SWAT-ed because he was talking about Weinergate and trying to find out who set him up.

.

I don’t recall @CryingWolfeBlog writing about Brett Kimberlin before he was SWAT-ed.
(Honestly, I don’t remember @CryingWolfeBlog blogging about anything at all during that time frame.)
.
Should I head to the E.R.?

.

.

Still.

Posted in blogosphere, censorship, mental, politics, spin with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on May 28, 2012 by Qritiq

.

A commenter (coughtroll) at TheCryingWolfe asks of me: “Still?”,
regarding my previous comments:
.
I don’t believe you’re [Lee Stranahan] sincere at all throwing Ron’s name in there, because I’ve heard Ron’s voice too. And that’s why I know you’re full of shit on this one.
.
I’d bet any amount of money that’s not Ron; would have no prob betting my life on it.
.
The only reason I can see for falsely throwing Ron’s name in repeatedly, is to try to take focus away from the actual caller.
.
I mean DUH.

sorry if i sounded over-dramatic – I’m just sick of this subterfuge shit.
.
.
So, my answer to this commenter is:
.

I WILL SPEAK VERY SLOWLY SO YOU CAN UNDERSTAND ME
.
THE CALLER’S VOICE IS STILL THE CALLER’S VOICE
.
AND
.
RON’S VOICE IS STILL RON’S VOICE
.
THEREFORE
.
RON’S VOICE IS STILL NOT THE CALLER’S VOICE
.
I WOULD OF COURSE BE REMISS IF I DIDN’T SAY “DUH” HERE,
BUT SINCE YOU PROBABLY CAN’T HELP YOUR CRIPPLING MENTAL DEFICIENCY,

.
I WILL REFRAIN.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.

(coughduh)
.

.

Twenty Questions

Posted in blogosphere, censorship, divisiveness, politics, sockypuppets, spin with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on May 25, 2012 by Qritiq

.

1. Why won’t Patterico reveal the truth about why he fired Aaron Worthing?

2. Why do some people continue to believe bloggers who pretend to be conservatives and are proven liars?

3. Why do some people continue to call Robert Stacy McCain a racist – is there a shred of evidence to indicate that?

4. Why did Aaron Worthing have to wait until the James O’Keefe emails were subpoenaed before posting his own story about #BrettKimberlin?

5. When you state a true fact – and someone who wants to hide that truth – broadcasts that you “support” someone that you obviously never supported – why does everyone pretend not to notice the liar’s obvious lie? (I previously wrote about this commonly used subterfuge tactic as it applied to Weinergate.)

6. About a day after another blog posted that Ron Brynaert had a “huge” amount of money, Aaron Worthing sent Brynaert a letter demanding 20K cash or he’d sue Brynaert for $66,000,000. Is the attorney that advised Aaron that this action was A-OK, trying to manipulate and use Aaron?

7. On a related note, I keep seeing @AaronWorthing state that @ronbryn is Brett Kimberlin’s “buddy”, “pal”, etc., which is a bold-faced lie. Why is it that people who claim to care about truth, never call Aaron out on it?

8. Since Aaron is known to have lied (see #7), can we trust the other things that he says?

9. Why did Herman Cain delete his facebook posting that was based on Robert Stacy McCain’s tale?

10. Why do some people become enraged when I point out that the timing of the social media anti-#BrettKimberlin campaign coincided with the subpoena of 7-years worth of James O’Keefe emails?

11. Do you think that Lie Stranahan actually believes that his caller, whom he said he believed was a jilted texter  (described as “dumb” by someone she spoke to at length) fabricated a phony California driver’s license (when she lives in Boston) as well as fake student id’s on short notice, told a stack of lies to the New York Times, impersonated at least two different real people, filed a phony police report, punked Tommy Christopher – Mike Stack  and the whole of the #BornFreeCrew, and for months scripted ALL the writings of DW – who was quite knowledgeable regarding nyc political reporting and Queens politics and issues (when “she”‘s “dumb” and from Boston), JR9 and many other socks including thousands of DM’s with GC (sorry if I left some stuff out)?

12. Who told Andrew Breitbart that Pat Frey had been SWAT-ed?

13. Why do some spend so much of their time bothering to argue with sockpuppets who consistently spout outrageous stuff that no-one believes?

14. I heard Andrew Breitbart’s last interview. His concerned and alarmed telling about his associate Pat’s SWAT seemed sincere to me, and he intimated that he (Breitbart) and his family could likely be the next to be terroristically targeted. Did the story about Pat’s SWAT, that Pat did nothing to clarify, contribute to Andrew’s stress level in the days leading up to March 1, 2012?

15. I’m told a judge clearly stated that Aaron had committed an assault. So why would some think there should not be a restraining order (that would serve to protect both parties) against Aaron – isn’t it better to be safe than sorry (I guess in the interim anyways, the ruling judge agreed with me)?

16. Did people Herman Cain trusted feed him disinformation?

17. Why are so many people being mean to @CryingWolfeBlog when it seems that, while he does defend himself against their attacks, he has never done anything to them?

18. Why was @ronbryn targeted from the get-go by those on the left AND on the right?

19. If you were trying to frame someone for a crime, and in doing so, you had to have an accomplice place a phone call during the time you were on the phone with your target, wouldn’t it make common logical sense and make it easier to coordinate the timing of your own call with his, if you told your accomplice to make his call “at midnight”, rather than at say 11:39 or 12:13?

20. How much money do you imagine has been spent all told, so far, on O’Keefe v Kimberlin?

.

.

Consider your answers, as this post will be opened up to comments in the near future.

.

Nadia And The Professor

Posted in blogosphere, illegal, politics, video with tags , , , , , , , on March 23, 2012 by Qritiq
  1. Interesting who’s interested.
  2. .
  3. Share
    @cgseife so you wrote it without proof of the racist angle, even though it doesn’t make sense. that’s what doesn’t make sense. speculation
    Fri, Mar 23 2012 07:01:04
  4. Share
    @cgseife @OwainCunedda If someone shows you a video, it is possible to have a reaction that’s reasoned, & not damned if you do or don’t.
    Fri, Mar 23 2012 09:55:28
  5. Share
    @OwainCunedda I think that’s quite possible… the damned if you do/damned if you don’t choice is a JOK standby.
    Fri, Mar 23 2012 09:03:44
  6. Share
    @cgseife @wittier I think he planned to confront u with a fact unfavorable 2 liberals. Then u either deny & look silly or confirm & validate
    Fri, Mar 23 2012 01:23:02
  7. Share
    RT @Civil_Law_Blog: Interesting news on the @NadiaNaffe front: charlesseife.com/OKeefeSei… How @cgseife caught @JamesOKeefeIII breaking the law was then targeted
    Thu, Mar 22 2012 20:58:57
  8. Share
    @cgseife How would IRS form 13909 checkbox “shield you from retaliation” if you called PV to say you filed complaint & made a public tweet?
    Thu, Mar 22 2012 20:24:55
  9. Share
    Helpful @CgSeife quietly points to falsities on website. Becomes target of wrathful @JamesOKeefeIII attack. charlesseife.blogspot.ca/2… #p2 #tcot
    Thu, Mar 22 2012 20:20:58
  10. Share
    @cgseife Are you seriously suggesting that a silly To Catch A Journalist stunt is some kind of sinister retaliation? charlesseife.com/OKeefeSei…
    Thu, Mar 22 2012 20:20:02
  11. Share
    @jayrosen_nyu Is there a class I can audit where “journos” like @cgseife learn how to file IRS complaints to “pressure” subjects of stories?
    Thu, Mar 22 2012 20:12:31
  12. Share
    @wittier A sex boat doesn’t make sense either. FWIW, several sources (including Naffe) say that I was branded as a racist, liberal or no.
    Thu, Mar 22 2012 19:59:28
  13. Share
    @cgseife As a journalist, the “next logical step” I also take when someone dodges questions is to file an IRS complaint charlesseife.com/OKeefeSei…
    Thu, Mar 22 2012 19:58:41
  14. Share
    RT @Civil_Law_Blog: Interesting news on the @NadiaNaffe front: charlesseife.com/OKeefeSei… How @cgseife caught @JamesOKeefeIII breaking the law was then targeted
    Thu, Mar 22 2012 19:57:04
  15. Share
    @cgseife I TOTALLY believe you sent certified letter to @JamesOKeefeIII Project Veritas just to satisfy your curiosity charlesseife.com/OKeefeSei…
    Thu, Mar 22 2012 19:54:40
  16. Share
    RT @cwmorrison78: How does @JamesOKeefeIII choose his victims? According to @NadiaNaffe , b/c they say mean things about him @cgseife #VetThePimp #barngate
    Thu, Mar 22 2012 18:57:48
  17. Share
    RT @cwmorrison78: How does @JamesOKeefeIII choose his victims? According to @NadiaNaffe , b/c they say mean things about him @cgseife #VetThePimp #barngate
    Thu, Mar 22 2012 18:57:18
  18. Share
    RT @Civil_Law_Blog: Interesting news on the @NadiaNaffe front: charlesseife.com/OKeefeSei… How @cgseife caught @JamesOKeefeIII breaking the law was then targeted
    Thu, Mar 22 2012 18:56:42
  19. Share
    @cgseife wouldn’t you be less likely to slip up & appear racist w/ a prospective black student if you’re supposedly a liberal elitist prof?
    Thu, Mar 22 2012 18:17:36
  20. Share
    @cgseife and why does he send black woman with TP video to get you to slip up & start talking racist. It doesn’t make sense as a sting.
    Thu, Mar 22 2012 18:16:02
  21. Share
    @cgseife say more than once that they were trying to catch you as elitist racist. If you don’t know, why do you say that at least twice?
    Thu, Mar 22 2012 18:14:47
  22. Share
    thanks for responding@cgseife . I couldn’t understand your meaning. It appears that you were being “stung” with hidden camera..but you
    Thu, Mar 22 2012 18:14:05
  23. Share
    @wittier Hard to say, exactly. I think he just wanted to get something he could take out of context to make it look bad for me.
    Thu, Mar 22 2012 17:23:15
  24. Share
    Your essay says Nadia was trying to get you to reveal elitist racism on hidden cam @cgseife. What kind of racism do you think was expected?
    Thu, Mar 22 2012 17:17:25
  25. Share
    Trying to understand your blog @cgseife. In what way was Naffe trying to get you to reveal your hidden racism? What kind of racism?
    Thu, Mar 22 2012 17:03:35
  26. Share
    WOW MT @cgseife Here’s the story about the failed James O’Keefe sting w/ me as target: charlesseife.com/OKeefeSei…
    Thu, Mar 22 2012 16:23:45
  27. Share
    the @cgseife expose piece on O’Keefe is more devastating than #barngate – charlesseife.com/OKeefeSei… #VetThePimp
    Thu, Mar 22 2012 16:12:25
  28. Anonymous RT-ed the link multiple times.
  29. Share
    .@cgseife reports on the illegal activities of @JamesOKeefeIII and of Project Veritas. Rather amazing. charlesseife.com/OKeefeSei…
    Fri, Mar 23 2012 10:01:02
  30. Share
    @cgseife When you write “It’s hard to get more transparent than that” do you mean the ganging up on @JamesOKeefeIII? charlesseife.com/OKeefeSei…
    Thu, Mar 22 2012 13:48:45
  31. Share
    @cgseife “I was so inoffensive that O’Keefe couldn’t use … creative editing … to turn my [words] into something incriminating.”
    Thu, Mar 22 2012 13:44:11
  32. Share
    @cgseife WTF??!? How strange….
    Thu, Mar 22 2012 13:33:16
  33. Share
    Here’s the story about the failed @jamesokeefeiii sting w/ me as target: charlesseife.com/OKeefeSei… @davidshuster @jayrosen_nyu @keitholbermann
    Thu, Mar 22 2012 13:30:16