Showing posts with label Keefe. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Keefe. Show all posts

Tuesday, November 28, 2017

NEW O"KEEFE: Hidden Cam Captures WaPo Natl Security Reporter Aghast At Anti-Trump Bias

Content originally published at iBankCoin.com


Hours after the Washington Post "busted" Project Veritas for trying to trick the paper into publishing a fake Roy Moore accusation, PV founder James O"Keefe released a new undercover video featuring WaPo National Security reporter Dan Lamothe admitting that, shocker, WaPo reporters "definitely don"t like Trump,"and that the paper"s "institutional voice," or "opinion from God" publishes hit pieces against the President that are so beyond the pale that Lamothe can"t believe he works for the paper:


PV Journalist: "So they just like, rip on him?"


 


Dan Lamothe: "Those have become critical to the point where I"ll read some of them and I"m like whoa! Like I work for this place?



Lamothe - who seems like a nice guy that"s genuinely interested in reporting facts - goes on to say that while journalists cover Trump more fairly ("they also give him credit where there"s credit"), the "institutional voice" of the paper is trying to "educate people but with a point of view." "It"s, like, a very different mission" says the National Security reporter.


Democracy Dies In Bias


When asked about the Washington Post"s bias, Lamothe says that while the paper is "right on the story," they"re "spending a lot of emphasis on this or that," meaning that the Jeff Bezos owned outlet will spend a disproportionate amount of time spotlighting stories which might make President Trump look bad, or what he"s tweeted.


"it sucks so much oxygen out of the room. It"s just so much emphasis on what he said and what he tweeted," Lamothe said, adding "I can"t tell you how many times we get an email at work: "Oh did you see what he (Trump) just tweeted? What are we gonna do about it?"" 


NYT and CNN are worse? 


When asked if reporters at the Washington Post insert individual bias against Trump in their reporting, Lamothe replied "Oh totally, and... I think the Post tries to reign it in a lot. New York Times does it less so. Some of the New York Times reporters are way over the top. CNN is always over the top."


Trump Effect


Another Project Veritas undercover operative recorded Joey Marburger, Director of Product for the Washington Post, admitting that Trump is a primary driver of traffic to the publication.


"If Trump just disappeared tomorrow, our traffic would drop by forty percent. So, yeah, we think about that." -Joey Marburger, WaPo



So what have we learned?


-Most WaPo reporters hate Trump but try to report honestly, according to Dan Lamothe, giving the President "credit where there"s credit"


-WaPo"s "institutional voice," however, is very anti-Trump


-CNN and the New York Times are way worse, according to Lamothe


-Without Trump, WaPo"s traffic would drop by 40%


Watch here: 


 


Follow on Twitter @ZeroPointNow § Subscribe to our YouTube channel

Thursday, October 19, 2017

O'Keefe Drops Part IV: 20-Year NYT Veteran Exposes "Culture Of Anti-Trump Bias"

First it was Audience Strategy Editor, Nick Dudich, who admitted to repeatedly promoting content that intentionally sought to, among other things, damage President Trump"s businesses as a means towards forcing his resignation. 


Next came the NYT"s senior Home Page Editor, Des Shoe, who described Trump as an “oblivious idiot” and Pence as “f***ing horrible” while admitting that her company"s perpetual bias and "shocking" headlines were often nothing more than click-bait designed to attract readers in a hyper-competitive industry.


Now, James O"Keefe and the team at Project Veritas would like for you to meet Todd Gordon, a 20-year veteran IT consultant at the New York Times who says the "culture of anti-Trump bias" has become so pervasive at the Times that not a single person within the organization has a positive opinion of the President.





PV Journalist: “Have you ever had anybody in New York Times’ office come up to you and say, I actually enjoy Trump?”



Todd Gordon: “No, no, no.”



PV Journalist: “Really?”



Todd Gordon: “Not one person.”



PV Journalist: “Not one person?”



Todd Gordon: “Not one, not one. Everyone hates him. They hate him like the plague dude.  I’m like, beautiful day, today. And they’re like, as good as it could be, fuck Trump. Everywhere I go, everywhere I go they’re like as good as it could be, but we’re fucked.”





Gordon goes on to say that without a voice of dissent, it is impossible to believe that The Times can be impartial towards Trump, “They unfairly, yes. I agree 100 percent. They unfairly report on him.”





PV Journalist: “How can they report…”



Todd Gordon: “They can’t.”



PV Journalist: “Without being biased, right?”



Todd Gordon: “You’re right, 100%. 100%.”



He continues to explain how a lack of real sourcing for the Russia story has resulted in a nonstop barrage of "heresay"...something we"ve noted numerous times over the past year..





Todd Gordon: “Right, it’s all been here-say. Maybe he did this, maybe he did that. You’re right, 100%. They haven’t been able to prove it.”



PV Journalist: “But 100%, that’s how I feel like Times…”



Todd Gordon: “You’re right.”



PV Journalist: “…has covered this, right?”



Todd Gordon: “Yeah, 100% you’re right. It’s all heresay.”



PV Journalist: “You’re in the office all the time, so you get to see it firsthand.”



Todd Gordon: “Yeah, heresay, it’s all heresay. And they’re like grab that heresay and let’s put it out there.”





With that intro, here is "NYT Part IV" in its entirety:


Saturday, October 14, 2017

The NYTimes Asks Reporters To Stop Being Partisan On Social Media

Days after James O"Keefe released his latest undercover video which took direct aim at the New York Times" Audience Strategy Editor, Nick Dudich, who repeatedly admitted to promoting content that intentionally seeks to, among other things, damage President Trump"s businesses as a means towards forcing his resignation, The New York Times became the latest mainstream media organization to “clarify” its social media policy for journalists, reminding them that “partisan” posts (i.e. posts explicitly bashing President Donald Trump) will no longer be tolerated.


America’s paper of record joined the Wall Street Journal and Washington Post in gently reminding its journalists that abiding by stringent standards of the “unbiased” press, while occasionally uncomfortable when reporters are forced to swallow controversial opinions, is necessary to retain what little credibility the media has left in the eyes of the public.



Interestingly, the paper’s public disclosure of its standards – which Executive Editor Dean Baquet said was done “in the interest of transparency” -  comes amid an escalating feud between President Donald Trump and NBC which began after the latter published an anonymously sourced report claiming Secretary of State Rex Tillerson called Trump a “moron, and has most recently expanded to encompass a debate about whether the FCC should revoke television networks’ operating licenses for biased or unfair coverage.


“We’ve always made clear that newsroom employees should avoid publishing anything on social media that damages our reputation for neutrality and fairness. This memo offers more detailed guidelines.


Department heads will be responsible for ensuring that these guidelines are followed by all staff members in their departments. Violations will be noted on performance review.”


Here’s a summary of the new guidelines:


  • In social media posts, our journalists must not express partisan opinions, promote political views, endorse candidates, make offensive comments or do anything else that undercuts The Times’s journalistic reputation.

  • Our journalists should be especially mindful of appearing to take sides on issues that The Times is seeking to cover objectively.

  • These guidelines apply to everyone in every department of the newsroom including those not involved in coverage of government and politics.

  • We consider all social media activity by our journalists to come under this policy. While you may think that your Facebook page, Twitter feed, Instagram, Snapchat or other social media accounts are private zones, separate from your role at The Times, in fact everything we post or “like” online is to some degree public. And everything we do in public is likely to be associated with The Times.

  • On that same note, we strongly discourage our journalists from making customer service complaints on social media. While you may believe that you have a legitimate gripe, you’ll most likely be given special consideration because of your status as a Times reporter or editor.

  • Avoid joining private and “Secret” groups on Facebook and other platforms that may have a partisan orientation. You should also refrain from registering for partisan events on social media. If you are joining these groups for reporting purposes, please take care in what you post.

  • Always treat others with respect on social media. If a reader questions or criticizes your work or social media post, and you would like to respond, be thoughtful. Do not imply that the person hasn’t carefully read your work.

And the list goes on (you can read it in full here).


  • If a reporter is still unsure about posting, the Times recommends that they first ask themselves:

  • Would you express similar views in an article on The Times platforms?

  • Would someone who reads your post have grounds for believing that you are biased on a particular issue?

  • If readers see your post and notice that you’re a Times journalist, would that affect their view of The Times’s news coverage as fair and impartial?

  • Could your post hamper your colleagues’ ability to effectively do their jobs?

  • If someone were to look at your entire social media feed, including links and retweets, would they have doubts about your ability to cover news events in a fair and impartial way?

We’re glad the Times cleared that up. Its new guidelines can effectively be summarized as “don’t publish anything on twitter that you wouldn’t publish in the Times.” That said, the standard still allows ample room for the paper"s reporters to pass off partisan rhetoric as "impartial" fact. That is, if it"s enforceed. It"s likely many of the paper"s reporters will continue tweeting partisan attacks - the default subscriber boosting position - despite the new "guidelines."

Tuesday, October 10, 2017

O'Keefe Strikes Again, Catches NYT Editors On Hidden Camera: "Targeting Trump's Buinesses, His Dumb F**k Of A Son"

In the latest of a series of undercover operations targeting mainstream media bias, James O"Keefe has just dropped a new undercover video which takes direct aim at the New York Times" Audience Strategy Editor, Nick Dudich, who admits repeatedly to promoting content that intentionally seeks to, among other things, damage President Trump"s businesses as a means towards forcing his resignation.


Here is a brief intro from Project Veritas:





While talking about being objective at the Times, Dudich replies candidly, "No I"m not, that"s why I"m here."



Dudich considers himself an important player at the New York Times, telling the Project Veritas Journalist "my voice is on... my imprint is on every video we do."



Dudich goes on to explain what he might do to target President Trump:



"I"d target his businesses, his dumb fuck of a son, Donald Jr., and Eric...



"Target that. Get people to boycott going to his hotels. Boycott... So a lot of the Trump brands, if you can ruin the Trump brand and you put pressure on his business and you start investigating his business and you start shutting it down, or they"re hacking or other things. He cares about his business more than he cares about being President. He would resign. Or he"d lash out and do something incredibly illegal, which he would have to."



When the undercover journalist asks Dudich if he could make sure that the anti-Trump stories make it to the front, he replied, "Oh, we always do."




To our complete "shock", O"Keefe also learned the Dudich worked for Hillary"s 2016 presidential campaign and Obama"s campaign in both 2008 and 2012...





In 2016, he was recruited to work for the Clinton campaign:



"So I have that background, so when Clinton in 2016... they needed a volunteer strategist to do video... well, they needed someone to help them do video, and how to make it heartfelt, for Clinton."



He even had to quit his job in journalism in order to work for the Clinton campaign: "I had to leave my job at Fusion ABC to then take a job at Upworthy where I wasn"t deemed a journalist anymore to be able to work for the Clinton campaign."



Dudich explains how his activism motivated him to re-engage in the news business: "Like, after the Clinton campaign, I"m like, no I need to get back into news and keep doing shit because, like, this isn"t going to change."




Bizarrely, Dudich also claims to have joined the Antifa movement as an undercover agent for the FBI...a request which he originally said came from his godfather, James Comey, even though he subsequently retracted that statement.





Nicholas Dudich also told the undercover journalist bizarre stories about his personal connection to the FBI and his previous excitement as part of Anti-Fa.



"Yeah, I used to be an Anti-Fa punk once upon a time." he told the undercover journalist. "So, I had fun. They"d start s**t, I"m like, I get to hit you. I"m so excited."



He also claims that James Comey, former Director of the FBI, asked him to join Anti-Fa: "I joined that stuff for them [the FBI]. I was an asset... So it was intelligence gathering, seeing if they were [sic], what their agenda was, whether they"re a threat or not."



"How"d you meet Comey?" asked the Project Veritas journalist. "He"s my godfather," Dudich explained. "My dad and mom knew him and his wife for a really long time."



"Well the Comey hearing, I should have recused myself, but I"m not ever telling anybody there [at the Times] that I have a tie with that or else I don"t know if they can keep me on."



With that intro, here is the complete video:




Why do we feel like it"s Dudich whose resignation is imminent as opposed to Trump"s?

Friday, June 30, 2017

Maria Bartiromo Slams John Podesta Over His Ties To Russia

Authored by Joseph Jankowski via PlanetFreeWill.com,


Even after James O’Keefe and Project Veritas essentially blew the lid right off the fake ‘Russia hacked the election’ narrative, Hillary Clinton’s former campaign chairman, John Podesta, doubled down on the debunked narrative when challenged by Fox News’ Maria Bartiromo on his ties to a Kremlin-backed company.



Podesta met behind closed doors on Tuesday with the members of the House Intelligence Committee as part of the panel’s investigation into supposed Russian efforts to meddle in the presidential election.


When asked what he could tell the Thursday Fox audience about the House Intel meeting, Podesta explained that the panel wanted to know “what had happened to me and the effect on the campaign … the effect of the Russian interference in our democratic process.”





“They’re probing what actually happened, whether if there was collusion and what we’re going to do about,” Podesta told Bartiromo.



“They asked me not to get into specific questions that they asked me and my specific answers but in general terms, they’re taking a bipartisan look at this stage.



Fox Host Maria Bartiromo then chimes in with a question that digs sharply into the skin of Podesta.





“Don’t you find it odd that there’s been so much attention on the Trump Campaign and the Trump associates and potential collusion with the Russians when in fact it’s really the Democrats who have deeper and stronger ties to Russia,” Bartiromo said.



“I mean John I have to ask your own situation..”



Bartiromo then goes on to break down how Podesta joined the board of the board of a small energy company in 2011 which later received $35 million from a Kremlin-funded entity. According to Bartiromo, Podesta also owns 75,000 shares in a Russian company and failed to disclose this to the Obama administration.


And this is where things got heated…


Thursday, June 29, 2017

"It Is The Presstitutes, Not Russia, Who Interfered In The US Presidential Election"

Authored by Paul Craig Roberts,


Unlike Oliver Stone, who knew how to interview Vladimir Putin, Megyn Kelly did not. Thus, she made a fool of herself, which is par for her course.


Now the entire Western media has joined Megyn in foolishness, or so it appears from a RT report. James O’Keefe has senior CNN producer John Bonifield on video telling O’Keefe that CNN’s anti-Russia reporting is purely for ratings:





“It’s mostly bullshit right now. Like, we don’t have any big giant proof.”



CNN’s Bonifield is reported to go on to say that “our CIA is doing shit all the time, we’re out there trying to manipulate governments.” 



And, of course, the American people, the European peoples, and the US and European governments are being conditioned by the “Russia did it” storyline to distrust Russia and to accept whatever dangerous and irresponsible policy toward Russia that Washington comes up with next.


Is the anti-Russian propaganda driven by ratings as Bonifield is reported to claim, or are ratings the neoconservatives and military/security complex’s cover for media disinformation that increases tensions between the superpowers and prepares the ground for nuclear war?


RT acknowledges that the entire story could be just another piece of false news, which is all that the Western media is known for.


Nevertheless, what we do know is that the fake news reporting pertains to Russia’s alleged interference in the US presidential election. Allegedly, Trump was elected by Putin’s interference in the election. This claim is absurd, but if you are Megyn Kelly you lack the IQ to see that. Instead, presstitutes turn a nonsense story into a real story despite the absence of any evidence.


Who actually interfered in the US presidential election, Putin or the presstitutes themselves? The answer is clear and obvious. It was the presstitutes, who were out to get Trump from day one of the presidential campaign. It is CIA director John Brennan, who did everything in his power to brand Trump some sort of Russian agent. It is FBI director Comey who did likewise by continuing to “investigate” what he knew was a non-event. We now have a former FBI director playing the role of special prosecutor investigating Trump for “obstruction of justice” when there is no evidence of a crime to be obstructed! What we are witnessing is the ongoing interference in the presidential election, an interference that not only makes a mockery of democracy but also of the rule of law.


The presstitutes not only interfered in the presidential election; they are now interfering with democracy itself. They are seeking to overturn the people’s choice by discrediting the President of the United States and those who elected him. The Democratic Party is a part of this attack on American democracy. It is the DNC that insists that a Putin/Trump conspiracy stole the presidency from Hillary. The Democrats’ position is that it is too risky to permit the American people—the “deplorables”— to vote. The Democratic Party’s line is that if you let Americans vote, they will elect a Putin stooge and America will be ruled by Russia.


Many wonder why Trump doesn’t use the power of the office of the presidency to indict the hit squad that is out to get him. There is no doubt that a jury of deplorables would indict Brennan, Comey, Megyn Kelly and the rest. On the other hand, perhaps Trump’s view is that the Republican Party cannot afford to go down with him, and, therefore, as he is politically protected by the Republican majority, the best strategy is to let the Democrats and the presstitutes destroy themselves in the eyes of flyover America.


What our survival as Americans depends on is the Russians’ view of this conflict between a US President who intended to reduce the tensions between the nuclear powers and those determined to increase the tensions. The Russian high command has already announced its conclusion that Washington is preparing a surprise nuclear attack on Russia. It is not possible to imagine a more dangerous conclusion. So far, no one in Washington or any Western government has made an effort to reassure Russia that no such attack is being prepared. Instead, the calls are for more punishment of Russia and more tension.


This most extraordinary of failures demonstrates the complete separation of the West from reality.


It is difficult to imagine a more extreme danger than for the insouciant West to convince Russia that the West is incapable of rational behavior.



But that is precisely what the West is doing.

Wednesday, May 3, 2017

As The Puerto Rico Lawsuits Begin "A Bankruptcy Is A When, Not An If"

Last July, Puerto Rico defaulted on hundreds of millions in debt, however under the PROMESA federal rescue law put together in the last minute, creditor litigation was put on hold - a kind of deferred debtor protection without the actual bankruptcy. The law was meant to encourage Puerto Rico and its federal financial oversight board to negotiate debt-cutting agreements with creditors. No deals were reached and on midnight of May 1 into Tuesday, the litigation freeze expired, opening the doors for creditors to take Puerto Rico to court, in hopes of blocking the next step in the Puerto Rico restructuring, namely Governor Ricardo Rossello"s plan to impose drastic repayment cuts. As a reminder, Puerto Rico defaulted on $1.3 billion of principal owed since the previous governor declared the $70 billion public debt load unpayable in June 2015.



And as expected, on Tuesday Puerto Rico and its federal financial oversight board were flooded with the first lawsuits from stakeholders, with more expected in the coming days, which could ultimately push the insolvent U.S. territory into bankruptcy.  The lawsuits, according to Reuters, include complaints from holders of Puerto Rican sales-tax-backed debt, from general obligation bondholders and from bond insurer Ambac Assurance Corp.


  • The first group, those holding sales-tax backed debt known as the COFINA bondholders, allege that the island"s debt-cutting plans violate the U.S. Constitution.

  • The second group, those holding general obligation debt which is guaranteed by the island"s constitution, are demanding payment on $242.5 million of debt defaulted upon since July, including damages and interest of more than $102 million.

  • Finally, there is Ambac which insures $2.2 billion of Puerto Rican bonds, and which filed four lawsuits, including two against the island"s government and another against U.S. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, seeking a lien on Puerto Rican rum taxes collected by the U.S. Treasury Department.

"Puerto Rico is no longer shielded from creditors rushing to the courthouse to lay claim to its assets - that includes the beaches, pieces of art, historical furniture and any assets whether they are nailed down or not. The people of Puerto Rico have had enough. The governor and the board have a moral imperative to act immediately" said Rep. Nydia Velazquez, a New York Democrat, who is calling on a federal control board overseeing Puerto Rico"s finances to seek a court-supervised debt restructuring similar to Chapter 9.


So with the lawsuits now pouring in, and with $70 billion in debt, a 45% poverty rate and near-insolvent public health and pension systems, the torrent of litigation could force Puerto Rico into a so-called Title III proceeding - an in-court debt-cutting process similar to U.S. bankruptcy. In fact, various experts cited by Reuters, see Title III as inevitable, the only question is when.





"At some point, Puerto Rico might run up against an adverse court ruling it would rather not have," said Keefe Bruyette & Woods analyst Chas Tyson, who follows Puerto Rico.



"I continue to think (bankruptcy) is a when, not an if."



Yet while the creditors can finally pursue their contractual rights, they will hardly win many supporters in the court of public opinion, as most of them are hedge funds, and who may have accumulated PR debt at prices below prevailing. For example, the COFINA plaintiffs include such hedge funds like Aurelius, Cyrus Capital and Tilden Park, best known for its founder Josh Birnbaum who in 2010 defended Goldman in the infamous Carl "Shitty Deal" Levin hearing. In a lawsuit filed in federal court in Puerto Rico, they collectively accuse the U.S. commonwealth, Rossello and other officials of "angling to repurpose the tax revenue earmarked to pay COFINA debt, which they say violates the due process clause of the U.S. Constitution."


Further, they ask the court to block Rossello from implementing a blueprint for fiscal turnaround that was approved by the oversight board in March. According to that plan, the island is forecast to only have $800 million a year to pay debt, or less than a quarter of what it owes, implying draconian haircuts for all bondholders.


Among Ambac"s lawsuits, two lodged complaints against the PR government, adding as defendants the island"s oversight board and the board"s seven members.The bond insurer, which may be on the hook should the island default, also aims to block not only the fiscal blueprint, but the filing of any Title III bankruptcy based on that blueprint. The insurer said in one lawsuit that Puerto Rico"s oversight board exacerbated the island"s abuses by "giving its imprimatur to an ongoing scheme ... that can only be called theft.”


AP puts things into perspective as follows: Puerto Rico could announce a historic, court-supervised restructuring for a portion of its $70 billion debt. By comparison, the U.S. city of Detroit had $9.3 billion of obligations when it filed for bankruptcy in 2013 in the biggest U.S. municipal bankruptcy ever. In fact, Puerto Rico"s situation is more dire than Detroit"s because the city, in part, had a firm set of rules in bankruptcy court, an option that the U.S. territory doesn"t have, said Greg Clark, head of municipal research at Debtwire.


Ahead of the May 1 deadline, the government on Saturday offered to pay 50 cents on the dollar to holders of general obligation and sales-tax bonds backed by Puerto Rico"s constitution. Bondholders rejected the offer.


But the biggest wildcard is what happens not so much to the creditors - who will be fine no matter the outcome - but to the ordinary people of Puerto Rico if the island does go bankrupt.  Puerto Rican officials have already imposed austerity measures, including cuts to worker benefits and pensions, and have said debt cuts are needed to spare the island from even more severe cuts to quality of life.


Two years ago we (and German finmin Wolfgang Schauble) joked that Puerto Rico could be the American Greece. Now with a Puerto Rico bankruptcy "only a question of when", it is unfortunately no longer a joke.

Friday, February 24, 2017

In The Police-State-Versus-Freedom Arms Race, Freedom Seems To Be Winning

Submitted by John Rubino via DollarCollapse.com,


In the past 48 hours, two stories broke that illustrate how dominant technology has become in the age-old war between freedom and control:






(Wired) – A group of researchers at Ben-Gurion’s cybersecurity lab has devised a method to defeat the security protection known as an “air gap,” the safeguard of separating highly sensitive computer systems from the internet to quarantine them from hackers. If an attacker can plant malware on one of those systems—say, by paying an insider to infect it via USB or SD card—this approach offers a new way to rapidly pull secrets out of that isolated machine. Every blink of its hard drive LED indicator can spill sensitive information to any spy with a line of sight to the target computer, whether from a drone outside the window or a telescopic lens from the next roof over.


————-



(CNN) – Conservative provocateur James O’Keefe is setting his sights on CNN.



O’Keefe said in a telephone interview with CNN on Wednesday that he has “a few hundred hours” of “secretly recorded material” from inside the network. “We’re calling it CNN Leaks,” he said, drawing inspiration from WikiLeaks’ document dumps.



He said “part one” would be published Thursday at about 10 a.m. ET. “This is all legally recorded information,” he said, declining to be more specific.



The first article illustrates the extraordinary – and increasing — power that cutting-edge tech offers governments to watch and otherwise control their citizens. Combine the above relatively-narrow-gauge application with the NSA’s existing ability to monitor pretty much every electronic signal, facial recognition software that can pick individuals out of crowds, algorithms that lip read, and tiny drones that can see without being seen, and the potential result is a police state that’s slicker, subtler and therefore scarier than anything envisioned in dystopian novels like Brave New World or 1984.


But the second story is the counterweight, illustrating how those same technologies are being used around the world to expose the secrets of the powerful. Where Daniel Ellsberg once had to spend months photocopying the Pentagon Papers and physically sneaking them out of his Defense Department office, today all that’s required for a major leak is one disillusioned or otherwise motivated insider with a thumb drive, laptop or smart phone.


In just the past few years, Sony’s emails were hacked and released, to the profound embarrassment of Hollywood; US military misbehavior was exposed by a lowly private named Bradley Manning; the Democrat National Committee’s emails – which exposed collusion between political operatives and mainstream media, among many other things — were published just in time to cost that party the presidency; and of course the great Edward Snowden, an outside contractor for the NSA, exposed the breathtaking illegality of US spying here and abroad.


Every big organization now lives with the knowledge that it’s one leak away from existential crisis — and that there is no fix. Doing big, bad things requires a lot of people with the ability to access and understand what you’re doing. And it only takes one of them with widely-available technology to expose you to the whole world.


With all the issues now dividing people – abortion, Israel, immigration, etc., etc. – this might be the most telling. Do you see Snowden and WikiLeaks’ Julian Assange as traitors or heroes? Because the worlds in which they end up one or the other couldn’t be more different.

O'Keefe Drops "Bombshell" Undercover Footage From Within CNN

As promised two days ago on the Sean Hannity radio show, James O"Keefe and his team at Project Veritas just released covertly captured, previously unheard audio footage from within the CNN newsroom.  But unlike his usual undercover sting operations, this footage was allegedly sourced from a CNN insider who apparently grew frustrated with the perpetually biased reporting of the "fake news" media outlet.


Per O"Keefe"s website, today"s release includes 119 hours of secretly recorded raw footage from an inside source at CNN with another 100 hours of footage still to be released.  Given the volume of footage to be released, O"Keefe is asking for help to transcribe and investigate the recordings and encourages users to provide tips on interesting discoveries here.





The audio was secretly recorded in 2009 by an anonymous source inside CNN’s Atlanta headquarters who we are identifying as Miss X. The tapes contain soundbites from current and previous CNN employees Joe Sterling, Arthur Brice, and Nicky Robertson, as well as numerous others. 



In order to expose media malfeasance within CNN, we need your help transcribing, investigating and connecting the dots on these 200+ hours of audio. Leave comments, upload transcriptions or contact us with your tips below.





Among other things, the audio recordings reveal CNN attempting to misrepresent polling data...





Miss X: "I read a CNN poll that was taken on June 26 and 28th, and I know that the hearing for the case, the fire fighters case was on the 29th, so the poll was done right before it, and those are still the poll results we"re reporting, so I asked someone in DC who does the poll results about why we hadn"t updated it, and said there were a few newer polls from last week and the week before and there"s CBS news polls and a Rasmussen poll, and he said we don"t use Rasmussen, and I said does CNN plan to do another poll if we"re only using that. He said we"re not going to be doing another poll, those are the results we"ll be using. So I don"t see how that"s reporting all sides because that poll said hold for release until Friday the 10th."



Arthur Brice: "Who did you talk with?"



Miss X: "Paul [CNN"s Deputy Political Director Paul Steinhauser]."



Arthur Brice: "Yeah, he"s your director. Yeah, he"s pretty high up in the food chain. I agree. I think it"s dishonest to use outdated information if new information shows something that is in variance with what you"re reporting. It"s just, it"s dishonest."



...and again with polling data related to Supreme Court Justice Sotomayor:





Miss X: "This wasn"t released until two weeks after. So can we say a newly released poll?"



Joe Sterling: "No, you can"t say that. You can"t say that at all. This isn"t a newly released."



Miss X: "But it says newly released on Friday."



Joe Sterling: "I know, how did we write about this? Did we write a wire about this? "I don"t think we stand to change how people think of her [Sotomayor]. Geez, I mean if someone picked this up it"s not going to change - it"s not going to change anybody"s opinion."



And, admitting what we all knew already, here is CNN"s former News Desk Editor, Joe Sterling, revealing his clear bias for Obama.




With that brief intro, here is O"Keefe"s latest work.




The full 119 hours of audio footage will eventually be available here, but for now PV"s servers seem to be having a difficult time keeping up with the overwhelming demand from supporters eager to hear first-hand accounts of CNN"s bias.


Meanwhile, noting that this is just the "beginning of the end for the MSM", O"Keefe also announced that he will pay a $10,000 award to anyone who comes forward with legally obtained audio or video footage exposing media malfeasance.







And apparently President Trump has now weighed in on O"Keefe"s latest project.


Wednesday, February 22, 2017

Is James O'Keefe About To Smoke CNN? Tells Hannity He's Set To Release "Hundreds of Hours" Of Newsroom Footage "Wikileaks Style"


James O"Keefe of Project Veritas is set to unleash holy hell Thursday on #FakeNews network CNN. Well, he didn"t exactly say it was CNN, but it was heavily implied. Apparently the network has a mole...


O"Keefe is known for undercover sting operations which have led to such bombshells as the DNC"s paid agitator network, the outing of "DisruptJ20" / Antifa organizers which took place comet ping pong - and netted three arrests (including a suspected pedophile), and most recently New Hampshire election fraud.


Today O"Keefe was interviewed on Sean Hannity"s radio show where he revealed that a major network has been "stung"





O"Keefe: In the next 48 hours, Project Veritas, like Wikileaks, will be releasing hundreds of hours of tape from within the establishment media. Our next target is in fact, the media.



Hannity: How long have you been working on this?



O"Keefe: We"ve had people on the inside come to us. Just like Julian Assange has people come to him, we"ve had people, sources come to us and give us information, and we"re going to be releasing it "Wikileaks Style" this week.



Moments later:





Hannity: Can you give us a hint what organizations are going to be impacted by this?



O"Keefe: It"s one that Trump has really been talking about, you can probably use your imagination.



Hannity: So, it"s CNN...



Listen here:



In other words, a closeted Trump supporter working deep inside hyper-liberal CNN just gave O"Keefe a ton of behind the scenes footage of "The Most Trusted Name In News." My guess is we"re about to hear a bunch of establishment media puppets revealing their extreme hatred for the sitting President of the United States.


Remember that time CNN employees were laughing about Trump"s plane crashing? If O"Keefe"s release is anything along these lines, popcorn sales are about to go through the roof...