Sean Hannity is a Big Fat Liar and Rachel Maddow is my hero

Link Stats

Added By: Scott

Added on: 07/12/2010 @ 10:57:45 PM

Link View Count: 704

Politics
All Categories >> Politics

Rate this Link

Yours:

Rated 0 times.

Sean Hannity is a Big Fat Liar and Rachel Maddow is my hero

This isn't a new video, but Rachel Maddow bits of it on her show tonight. The 6 to 7 minute mark are the most damning to Fox News, where she points out that they deliberately mislead and edited out the portion of the video where the ACORN employee was pressing them for some pretty specific information about time and location. In other words, Sean Hannity is a big fat deliberate liar.
View External Link [www.youtube.com]
Back to Link List

	Jeremy - Broadcast in stunning 1080i 07/12/2010 @ 11:22:57 PM
Well, always disprove incompetence before jumping to willful lying. If Fox news was just as duped as anyone then they're only guilty of not vetting a story thoroughly enough, and then maybe overhyping it on top of that, but they aren't "liars." Unless I missed something I don't think the allegations are that Fox News got creative with the editing. Though, especially with the whole "the guy immediately called the police" thing, it doesn't seem like it would be that hard to investigate. Then again, it's not like Rachel and her people were lickety-split on uncovering this, so apparently it took digging and time to get to the bottom of. So, for now I'll give Fox the benefit of the doubt, but of course if they don't recant, that's another story.		Rate this comment Yours: Total: Rated 1 times.
Jeremy perfected this at 07/12/2010 11:23:43 pm

	Scott - Get Up! Get outta here! Gone! 07/12/2010 @ 11:35:34 PM
I suppose Hannity was licking his chops too much to have any desire to do actual journalism of his own on this one. But it should clue people in to his credibility, but then again those that listen/watch him probably want just as much as he does for these people to be right. The camera man, Jame O'keefe, in his attempts at so-called journalism, has been arrested on felony charges as well as sued by people innocent people whose lives they have ruined. What has come of this is that this so called journalist goes about his business disregarding any decent standards of journalists. He has broken multiple laws in his efforts. If this ever gets addressed by Fox, which I highly doubt it will, you would think that reasonable people would question any future "ground-breaking" investigation presented by Hannity. Sadly, I think we all know that that will never happen, and he will probably never admit to anything.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.
Scott screwed with this at 07/12/2010 11:40:22 pm

	Scott - Ma'am, can you make sure your computer is turned on? 07/12/2010 @ 11:57:32 PM
In fact, if Hannity is the great American that we always wants you to think he is, he should call Juan Carlos Vera onto his show, apologize to him, champion him as the great American that he is for reporting would be human traffickers, and then agree to pay all the legal fees that for the lawsuit Vera is filing against O'Keefe.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - 6225 Posts 07/13/2010 @ 12:04:56 AM
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy Here's the clip from her show from tonight. Some of it is the same as the original video I posted, only because she is referencing the same story. Not that I am defending ACORN, because I really don't know that much about the organization, but O'Keefe's videos, and Fox News (most notoriously Hannity's showing) airing of it is what eventually led to ACORN completing shutting down. And even to that, what O'Keefe was trying to portray in the video was indeed malicious and deceitful, because he flat out lied that the people he subjected were helping them with his prostitution ring. More than one of the people he interviewed called the police shortly after he left. I'm pretty sure Jeremy isn't a Fox News apologist, but he brings up an interesting point. Fox news is either "incompetent", or they are "liars". Anyone else have any other explanation into their utter lack of investigation (and integrity) into something that MSNBC found out to be a total and complete farce? Or did MSNBC only find it to be a farce because of their liberal ways?		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jon - many posts 07/13/2010 @ 04:04:50 AM
If you ask me, heroes shouldn't be that smug. No matter what their politics. Watching Rachel Maddow is like watching those anti-smoking ads dialed up to eleven. Even on the occasions a good point is made it can't penetrate the cloud of self-satisfaction that envelops it. Mega-dittos Rachel! (OK, I'll stop before I fall more in love with my own cleverness.)		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.
Jon messed with this at 07/13/2010 4:05:30 am

	Matt - Washington Bureau Chief 07/13/2010 @ 08:47:25 AM
I have to say that considering the intro and comments by Scott, after watching the video I was a bit underwhelmed. Some of my initial thoughts after watching: 1. The fact that he didn't wear the pimp costume came out quite awhile ago if I recall correctly, and while he probably didn't do enough to keep that idea out of people's minds, he also didn't really try to hide the fact that he didn't wear it into any of the offices. 2. This was one of a series of five visits to ACORN offices across the country, and they got similar results at each. Even if everything Maddow claims is true in this case, what about the other four? Were they subjected to shady editing too and did they call the cops after, and if so, where is the proof? If she was trying to insinuate that ACORN wasn't a corrupt organization because this one guy was only playing along and eventually called the cops, well she has to do better. 3. As for the editing of the video, I'm pretty sure that the unedited audio, and possibly the video of all the visits was released by O'Keefe pretty much when he went public with each new video. Obviously, Hannity and anyone else who shows the video can't play the whole thing and are going to edit it down to the main point, which they did. The stuff that Maddow says was left out to mislead, didn't really show anything anyway other than him asking some questions that he might have asked them anyway whether he was planning on calling the police or not. Certainly nothing that proves that his actions weren't genuine. The only complaint you can make about Hannity/Fox News is that they didn't dig enough to see if the guy called the cops before showing the video, but in the news world of today, that seems to be the norm for everybody. 4. As for the California investigation report, it's worth noting that the AG is Jerry Brown, a Democrat who also happens to be running for Governor. While it doesn't mean that his finding are biased, I seem to remember criticisms that he was using his current office to pump up his candidacy for Governor. Anyway, after watching, I went to bigjournalism.com which broke the ACORN story initially. There, I found a couple of entries that dealing with Maddow's segment, which confirmed many of my suspicions (and yes, it is a conservative leaning site, so you can do with that what you will). http://bigjournalism.com/patterico/2010/04/08/maddow-okeefe-hid-important-facts-about-acorn-patterico-responds-except-that-he-didnt/ http://bigjournalism.com/sright/2010/04/09/in-exposing-acorn-lies-maddow-leaves-truth-on-the-cutting-room-floor/ In case you don't want to read them, some highlights: 1. Like I said above, in the video of the first office visit (in Baltimore), the video shows O'Keefe entering the office dressed normally. As a side note, isn't it worse that he was dressed normally anyway. I mean if he did go in with the ridiculously over the top costume on, at least the workers could have claimed that they knew it was a joke/stunt and just went along. 2. Maddow herself does some editing of the parts she shows, as the part about the worker asking about the phone number is from the beginning of the video and the other questions came later. 3. The AG report that supposedly cleared ACORN of "wrong-doing" did nothing of the sort. The report cited ACORN for showing "terrible judgment and highly inappropriate behavior", an while it cleared them criminally, this was in part because Giles and O'Keefe were ultimately only pretending to commit crimes and so the employees technically had no criminal behavior to aid/abet.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.
Matt edited this 2 times, last at 07/13/2010 10:34:31 am

	Jeremy - 9475 Posts 07/13/2010 @ 09:49:12 AM
Scott Wrote - Today @ 12:04:56 AM I'm pretty sure Jeremy isn't a Fox News apologist, but he brings up an interesting point. Fox news is either "incompetent", or they are "liars". Anyone else have any other explanation into their utter lack of investigation (and integrity) into something that MSNBC found out to be a total and complete farce? Or did MSNBC only find it to be a farce because of their liberal ways? I didn't read what Matt or Jon wrote yet, cause I don't want to color my response, so I might repeat something they said, or disagree entirely, we'll see. Yes, MSNBC found out it was BS, or at least reported that it was found out, but the impetus to run this story was probably 90% "suck it Fox News" and 10% because it's interesting. I don't know much about this story, but if the date Rachel brings up is accurate, they had almost a year. Everyone makes errors, and in today's 24/7 90 channel news media stories "have" to break immediately. It should stop, as it leads to problems like this constantly, but it's not fair (or balanced) to pretend Fox News has some sort of patent on that. (Nor is it fair to pretend that Maddow and Hannity aren't two sides to the same "this is everything that's wrong with politics and the media today" coin, where the other side is always wrong wrong wrong, and is wrong because they're evil people, and everything is 9 times (1000 fold?) the deal it really is.) Expecting stories to go through a year of vetting isn't realistic, and besides, who says there isn't more to the story that flips it back the other way if further digging is done? I think I've said this before, but I actually find Maddow and Olbermann more frustrating than Fox News. I don't get why anyone would watch Fox News, and certainly don't get how they can pretend, with a straight face, that it's not coming from a conservative angle. That said, I don't get why people would watch the liberal response to that either. Ultimately I'm more frustrated by MSNBC, and ultra liberals in general, because I often agree on the larger points they're making, and want others to agree, but the "faces" of the "movement" argue with all the logic of "George Bush liked A, George Bush is the worse human being ever born, QED A is awful." Glenn Beck could do nothing but weep for an hour and it would be a more logically sound argument than that. While the right might have raving loons at the helm it also seems nigh on impossible for the left to find anyone that isn't unbearably smug. I'm not even sure what's better: ranting for 10 minutes without breathing, or pausing to admire every 6 words that come out of your mouth. I made this point to Marty a while back when he pointed out that the right has all these shows and the left can barely keep anyone on the air: Who is that really an insult/compliment to? It's quite possible that all that is a testament to is that the left is made up of more reasonable people that are just as annoyed by the extreme end of their beliefs. Besides which, it's a pretty crappy yardstick. You could probably tell if the Packers or Vikings had a higher percentage of "die hard" fans by looking at the respective rise in domestic abuse cases following losses, but in the end that would be a pretty shitty thing to be proud of. Back on topic though, sort of. I don't know anything about acorn, or this story, it's possible that they're obligated to report anyone that reports something illegal, and remove them immediately, but I don't really have a big ethical issue with what the last woman did. Just because someone's a prostitute they can't have a place to live? Seems questionable, especially since the lack of stable affordable housing is probably why half the hookers are hookers. I'm not sure I agree with the implication that anything less than "The police are on their way, get the fuck out" as a response from the acorn workers upon hearing the word "prostitute," is corruption. I don't think the approach of "the whole point of our existence is to get people on their feet, not to judge" is patently wrong.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.
Jeremy edited this 3 times, last at 07/13/2010 9:52:52 am

	Jeremy - 9475 Posts 07/13/2010 @ 10:24:21 AM
Matt Wrote - Today @ 08:47:25 AM 3. As for the editing of the video, I'm pretty sure that the unedited audio, and possibly the video of all the visits was released by O'Keefe pretty much when he went public with each new video. Obviously, Hannity and anyone else who shows the video can't play the whole thing and are going to edit it down to the main point, which they did. The stuff that Maddow says was left out to mislead, didn't really show anything anyway other than him asking some questions that he might have asked them anyway whether he was planning on calling the police or not. Certainly nothing that proves that his actions weren't genuine. The only complaint you can make about Hannity/Fox News is that they didn't dig enough to see if the guy called the cops before showing the video, but in the news world of today, that seems to be the norm for everybody. The left out parts don't prove anything, no, but they start to tell a slightly different story, and one that seems to me would warrant following up on, either way. (Did the guy actually make phone calls to help set this up.) It doesn't take a master detective after seeing the full version to start to wonder "this is going a little too well, he seems way too interested in details, etc." It's certainly the case where the "whole clip" shows that the last woman wasn't helping them set up a prostitution business, especially since you can just as well interpret her turning to the girl and telling her to hang in there and "you can do anything" was her encouraging the girl that she doesn't have to "settle" for being a hooker either. Trying to portray this as anything less than that the flim makers or Fox News, who ever edited the package together, were making a concerted effort to portray to their viewers that this guy walked in to those meetings in full pimp garb, is at best, too lenient. It really doesn't matter what broke how soon after the fact on some website, that was clearly the intent of editing it the way it was, or for that matter, busting out the pimp costume period. Not to mention you're of course ignoring the fact that they flat out claimed, which was plainly reported on Fox News, "this is what he wore in there" Edit: Which, by the way, is sort of an odd point anyway. Ok, he wore that in....and? People should be denied services based on their clothes?		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.
Jeremy messed with this 3 times, last at 07/13/2010 11:33:56 am