[TheTruthIsOnHere]

It's just the latest shenanigans from James O'Keefe.  His pattern is to approach employees of liberal organizations under false pretenses (sometimes multiple times), have long discussions with them, and then very carefully edit the hours of footage he's recorded into a misleading video that seemingly shows his targets saying ominous and incriminating things.  I don't know what the contexts of these conversations are, but given O'Keefe's record, it's a near-certainty that they've been twisted and manipulated into appearing much more sinister than they really are.

Did you watch it? Did anything look carefully edited? I mean the dude literally spilled all the beans. That's why he's fired. Not for anything unethical he did. That is part of the job description.

They are literally paying people to make Trump supporters look like assholes. How much poking and prodding do you think it takes before anyone loses their shit. If you want to know go to a pro-choice rally talking about anything except how great abortions are and see what happens.

[George]

Did you watch it? Did anything look carefully edited? I mean the dude literally spilled all the beans. That's why he's fired. Not for anything unethical he did. That is part of the job description.

They are literally paying people to make Trump supporters look like assholes. How much poking and prodding do you think it takes before anyone loses their shit. If you want to know go to a pro-choice rally talking about anything except how great abortions are and see what happens.

Sure, it looks bad now.  And the ACORN videos looked bad when they were first released - so much so that they too fired an employee apparently implicated in them, although an investigation eventually showed that he was completely innocent and he collected a settlement of $100,000 from O'Keefe after suing him.  O'Keefe's record speaks for itself.  He is not an honest journalist, and he does not present honest evidence.  Every single exposé from him has been either outright debunked or largely discredited after further investigation.  If this turns out to be the one time that he really has uncovered a genuine scandal, then so be it, but it's not unreasonable to be highly skeptical at this early stage.

[TheTruthIsOnHere]

Did you watch it? Did anything look carefully edited? I mean the dude literally spilled all the beans. That's why he's fired. Not for anything unethical he did. That is part of the job description.

They are literally paying people to make Trump supporters look like assholes. How much poking and prodding do you think it takes before anyone loses their shit. If you want to know go to a pro-choice rally talking about anything except how great abortions are and see what happens.

Sure, it looks bad now.  And the ACORN videos looked bad when they were first released - so much so that they too fired an employee apparently implicated in them, although an investigation eventually showed that he was completely innocent and he collected a settlement of $100,000 from O'Keefe after suing him.  O'Keefe's record speaks for itself.  He is not an honest journalist, and he does not present honest evidence.  Every single exposé from him has been either outright debunked or largely discredited after further investigation.  If this turns out to be the one time that he really has uncovered a genuine scandal, then so be it, but it's not unreasonable to be highly skeptical at this early stage.

The guy literally said he gives homeless people meals, showers and hotel stays to do crazy, violent shit. He is ordered to do this by a super PAC that is in "constant rolling" contact with the DNC and Hillary's campaign.

[Rushy]

Oh, they also wrangled people in a mental institution and coached them on how to vote for Hillary.

Don't worry, though, everyone does that haha this is just politics folks, get used to it, haha

[George]

Did you watch it? Did anything look carefully edited? I mean the dude literally spilled all the beans. That's why he's fired. Not for anything unethical he did. That is part of the job description.

They are literally paying people to make Trump supporters look like assholes. How much poking and prodding do you think it takes before anyone loses their shit. If you want to know go to a pro-choice rally talking about anything except how great abortions are and see what happens.

Sure, it looks bad now.  And the ACORN videos looked bad when they were first released - so much so that they too fired an employee apparently implicated in them, although an investigation eventually showed that he was completely innocent and he collected a settlement of $100,000 from O'Keefe after suing him.  O'Keefe's record speaks for itself.  He is not an honest journalist, and he does not present honest evidence.  Every single exposé from him has been either outright debunked or largely discredited after further investigation.  If this turns out to be the one time that he really has uncovered a genuine scandal, then so be it, but it's not unreasonable to be highly skeptical at this early stage.

The guy literally said he gives homeless people meals, showers and hotel stays to do crazy, violent shit. He is ordered to do this by a super PAC that is in "constant rolling" contact with the DNC and Hillary's campaign.

Doesn't change anything I said.

[Lord Dave]

Did you watch it? Did anything look carefully edited? I mean the dude literally spilled all the beans. That's why he's fired. Not for anything unethical he did. That is part of the job description.

They are literally paying people to make Trump supporters look like assholes. How much poking and prodding do you think it takes before anyone loses their shit. If you want to know go to a pro-choice rally talking about anything except how great abortions are and see what happens.

Sure, it looks bad now.  And the ACORN videos looked bad when they were first released - so much so that they too fired an employee apparently implicated in them, although an investigation eventually showed that he was completely innocent and he collected a settlement of $100,000 from O'Keefe after suing him.  O'Keefe's record speaks for itself.  He is not an honest journalist, and he does not present honest evidence.  Every single exposé from him has been either outright debunked or largely discredited after further investigation.  If this turns out to be the one time that he really has uncovered a genuine scandal, then so be it, but it's not unreasonable to be highly skeptical at this early stage.

The guy literally said he gives homeless people meals, showers and hotel stays to do crazy, violent shit. He is ordered to do this by a super PAC that is in "constant rolling" contact with the DNC and Hillary's campaign.

So Clinton's campaign is helping to solve the homeless and jobless problem in America? 
And this is bad why?

[George]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/19/us/politics/obama-donald-trump-election.html

No, Obama, liberals are the ones who whine, not conservatives!  Trump is firm, resolute, and manly!

[garygreen]

why are these people so apparently eager to spill "secret" information?  one of the dudes even says something to the effect that "no one is supposed to know who i am."  so why is he divulging this information to a stranger?  what is the context of this interview?  who is asking the questions and under what circumstance?

how do i know that what foval says is accurate?  has it been corroborated?  he asserts that he's in regular connection with superpacs or the hillary campaign or whatever.  how do i know that's actually true?  what is the content of that communication? 

why is this footage edited at all?  why can't i watch the entire dialogue from beginning to end?

my political worldview has no trouble incorporating the notion that hillary clinton and her campaign game the fuck out of elections.  i still don't see why anyone should take this video at face value.  ffs, as far as i can tell, foval could just be trying to impress a girl at a bar.  he certainly seems stoked to tell the interviewer all about how important and devious he is (but srsly tho shhhhhhhhhh don't tell anyone ok?).

[trekky0623]

why is this footage edited at all?  why can't i watch the entire dialogue from beginning to end?

Because James O'Keefe is a liar. I mean that's really all there is to it. On ACORN, fracking, NPR, and Planned Parenthood he has been dishonest and completely wrong.

This video is no different. It is edited so that either (a) we don't get to hear O'Keefe's questions, (b) are told what questions are in post-production edits, or (c) we only get part of an answer. Out of context like this, the only thing I would say the DNC is probably doing is astroturfing, which isn't illegal.

Take the "bussing people out to Iowa" quote. Knowing O'Keefe's reputation, this could just as easily be referring to volunteers or campaign workers as it is to voters. We can't know because O'Keefe won't give us the unedited clips.

[Lord Dave]

In other news:

http://www.npr.org/2016/10/18/498449943/trump-proposes-term-limits-for-congress

[Rushy]

In other news:

http://www.npr.org/2016/10/18/498449943/trump-proposes-term-limits-for-congress

He also proposed a five year ban on  congressmen lobbying after their term as well as a five year ban on executive branch officials lobbying. To top it off he proposed a lifetime ban on any senior executive branch official from lobbying Congress or speaking on behalf of a foreign nation.

[Lord Dave]

In other news:

http://www.npr.org/2016/10/18/498449943/trump-proposes-term-limits-for-congress

He also proposed a five year ban on  congressmen lobbying after their term as well as a five year ban on executive branch officials lobbying. To top it off he proposed a lifetime ban on any senior executive branch official from lobbying Congress or speaking on behalf of a foreign nation.

Yeah... that's all in there.

Why didn't he start with this?  If he had this plus a more tame and less angry persona, he'd almost be likable.

[Rushy]

In other news:

http://www.npr.org/2016/10/18/498449943/trump-proposes-term-limits-for-congress

He also proposed a five year ban on  congressmen lobbying after their term as well as a five year ban on executive branch officials lobbying. To top it off he proposed a lifetime ban on any senior executive branch official from lobbying Congress or speaking on behalf of a foreign nation.

Yeah... that's all in there.

Why didn't he start with this?  If he had this plus a more tame and less angry persona, he'd almost be likable.

His temperament is what got him to where he is in the first place. If he didn't act like he does, we wouldn't be discussing his policies because it'd be Hillary versus #Cruzmissile

[Lord Dave]

In other news:

http://www.npr.org/2016/10/18/498449943/trump-proposes-term-limits-for-congress

He also proposed a five year ban on  congressmen lobbying after their term as well as a five year ban on executive branch officials lobbying. To top it off he proposed a lifetime ban on any senior executive branch official from lobbying Congress or speaking on behalf of a foreign nation.

Yeah... that's all in there.

Why didn't he start with this?  If he had this plus a more tame and less angry persona, he'd almost be likable.

His temperament is what got him to where he is in the first place. If he didn't act like he does, we wouldn't be discussing his policies because it'd be Hillary versus #Cruzmissile

True.
The anger in America is strong.  And I guess it's easier to hope that the angry man fixes all your problems by yelling at them then to, you know, fix it yourself.

[Rushy]

Chris Wallace: do you want open borders?

Hillary: no I do not want open borders

Chris Wallace: I have this wikileaks that says you told a banker you want open borders

Hillary: RUSSIA PUTIN RUSSIA PUTIN

lol

[George]

Quote-mining is a dishonest tactic:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/oct/12/donald-trump/trump-ive-been-proven-right-about-clinton-wanting-/

My dream is a hemispheric common market, with open trade and open borders, some time in the future with energy that is as green and sustainable as we can get it, powering growth and opportunity for every person in the hemisphere.

It's a vague piece of wishy-washy environmentalism, nothing more.  It's certainly not her laying out her immigration policies.  I wish she had made more of this fact, rather than so awkwardly changing the subject to Wikileaks.  Someone who didn't know about this quote and didn't look it up after the fact would assume that she had been caught in a lie and was frantically trying to cover it up.

[trekky0623]

So I'm assuming the answer is that, no, Trump will not accept the results of the election if he loses.

Pence probably will though.

[Lord Dave]

I only read the highlights but I hear Trump wasn't nearly as angry or interrupting as the first two debates.  Did he bitch about the moderator being biased again?  Or was he nice cause it was a fox news guy?

[Snupes]

I only read the highlights but I hear Trump wasn't nearly as angry or interrupting as the first two debates.  Did he bitch about the moderator being biased again?  Or was he nice cause it was a fox news guy?

Wrong. Wrooong. You're wrong. Wrong. You're a nasty woman. Wrong. Pff. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong.

[Lord Dave]

I only read the highlights but I hear Trump wasn't nearly as angry or interrupting as the first two debates.  Did he bitch about the moderator being biased again?  Or was he nice cause it was a fox news guy?

Wrong. Wrooong. You're wrong. Wrong. You're a nasty woman. Wrong. Pff. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong.

Ah.  So classic trump.  Taking from the school of ad homin debating.