(11-02-2018 03:30 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: "tppk it upon themselves"
Rogue democrats, acting against the wishes f the candidate. hard for Beto to keep those little scamps in line.
meanwhile, every thing done or said by any
Republican is attributable directly to Trump.
Hooda thunk it?
You're talking about different things here.
If you said that Beto's staffers felt emboldened to help these immigrants out based on what Beto has said, I would somewhat agree (I don't think he's said anything that indicates he would be OK with them improperly using campaign funds). Similar to how I think people feel emboldened to do things based on what Trump says.
I don't think Beto himself told them to do this, just as I don't think Trump himself tells the generic Republicans you're talking about to do whatever generic thing they do.
Just wanted to put out more info than a link.
Per the campaign they will be declaring the donation as required. Not sure what would be illegal about it, but I'm no elections law expert.
Nothing there I didn't know already. Seemed redundant.
I'm no election law expert either, but that just doesn't pass the smell test for me.
Really? Smell test is that it's likely some field managers/operatives took it upon themselves to assist some immigrants with campaign funds. Or does $300 buy a lot of influence in El Paso?
What smells smelly about this?
I don't think the amount matters. I just didn't think campaign funds were supposed to be used that way. And was it $300 in total, or was it just $300 that got caught?
(11-02-2018 02:43 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote: Yes, and your point is?
Just wanted to put out more info than a link.
Per the campaign they will be declaring the donation as required. Not sure what would be illegal about it, but I'm no elections law expert.
Nothing there I didn't know already. Seemed redundant.
I'm no election law expert either, but that just doesn't pass the smell test for me.
Really? Smell test is that it's likely some field managers/operatives took it upon themselves to assist some immigrants with campaign funds. Or does $300 buy a lot of influence in El Paso?
What smells smelly about this?
I don't think the amount matters. I just didn't think campaign funds were supposed to be used that way. And was it $300 in total, or was it just $300 that got caught?
So long as they are reported, there is no illegality (based on what the article says).
I don't see this being a potential issue for Beto, but rather his staff. Unless there is evidence that Beto has told his staffers to do this.
(11-02-2018 02:55 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote: Just wanted to put out more info than a link.
Per the campaign they will be declaring the donation as required. Not sure what would be illegal about it, but I'm no elections law expert.
Nothing there I didn't know already. Seemed redundant.
I'm no election law expert either, but that just doesn't pass the smell test for me.
Really? Smell test is that it's likely some field managers/operatives took it upon themselves to assist some immigrants with campaign funds. Or does $300 buy a lot of influence in El Paso?
What smells smelly about this?
I don't think the amount matters. I just didn't think campaign funds were supposed to be used that way. And was it $300 in total, or was it just $300 that got caught?
So long as they are reported, there is no illegality (based on what the article says).
I don't see this being a potential issue for Beto, but rather his staff. Unless there is evidence that Beto has told his staffers to do this.
Agree as to the latter. The former just seems strange.
(11-02-2018 03:18 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote: Nothing there I didn't know already. Seemed redundant.
I'm no election law expert either, but that just doesn't pass the smell test for me.
Really? Smell test is that it's likely some field managers/operatives took it upon themselves to assist some immigrants with campaign funds. Or does $300 buy a lot of influence in El Paso?
What smells smelly about this?
I don't think the amount matters. I just didn't think campaign funds were supposed to be used that way. And was it $300 in total, or was it just $300 that got caught?
So long as they are reported, there is no illegality (based on what the article says).
I don't see this being a potential issue for Beto, but rather his staff. Unless there is evidence that Beto has told his staffers to do this.
Agree as to the latter. The former just seems strange.
Per the article:
Quote:"Staff members took it upon themselves to use prepaid cards from one of our more than 700 field offices to buy baby wipes, diapers, water, fruit and granola bars, and donate them to a local humanitarian nonprofit (Annunciation House) that helps mothers and children in the community," O'Rourke spokesman Chris Evans said in a statement. "The value was under $300 and it will be appropriately reported to the FEC."
It is not unusual for campaigns to make donations to groups like Annunciation House. Campaigns are allowed to give to charity "as long as the candidate does not receive compensation from the charitable organization before it has expended the entire amount donated," according to the FEC website.
(11-02-2018 03:46 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote: Really? Smell test is that it's likely some field managers/operatives took it upon themselves to assist some immigrants with campaign funds. Or does $300 buy a lot of influence in El Paso?
What smells smelly about this?
I don't think the amount matters. I just didn't think campaign funds were supposed to be used that way. And was it $300 in total, or was it just $300 that got caught?
So long as they are reported, there is no illegality (based on what the article says).
I don't see this being a potential issue for Beto, but rather his staff. Unless there is evidence that Beto has told his staffers to do this.
Agree as to the latter. The former just seems strange.
Per the article:
Quote:"Staff members took it upon themselves to use prepaid cards from one of our more than 700 field offices to buy baby wipes, diapers, water, fruit and granola bars, and donate them to a local humanitarian nonprofit (Annunciation House) that helps mothers and children in the community," O'Rourke spokesman Chris Evans said in a statement. "The value was under $300 and it will be appropriately reported to the FEC." It is not unusual for campaigns to make donations to groups like Annunciation House. Campaigns are allowed to give to charity "as long as the candidate does not receive compensation from the charitable organization before it has expended the entire amount donated," according to the FEC website.
That's what they've admitted. How do we know that's all of it?
(This post was last modified: 11-02-2018 06:43 PM by Owl 69/70/75.)
(11-02-2018 10:29 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote: There's no doubt that there has been support and assistance for these caravans from multiple aid organizations/groups.
The question is whether the conspiracy theories that state they are being organized/funded by those orgs/groups (or the "globalists" as Trump calls them) have any truth to them.
and, ladies and gentlemen, this is what denial looks like.
Odd to see a supporter of the Russia collusion probe dis conspiracy theories.
Ah yes, the denial of asking if the caravans are being organized by some of the support groups...
I did a quick google search because I had not specifically looked into groups organizing these caravans (I've seen many references to groups helping and assisting the people). I found that a group called "Pueblo Sin Fronteras" has been helping to organize such caravans (not clear if all caravans) since 2008.
According to Sen. Ted there's some question regarding whether or not Rep. Beto's campaign is funding the caravan(s):
Ted Cruz
Verified account
@tedcruz
2h2 hours ago
More
US Senate candidate, TX
Two basic Qs every reporter should ask Beto today: (1) should the “caravan” be allowed to cross illegally into Texas? (Beto refuses to answer.) And (2) did your campaign dollars illegally fund their doing so?
Beto campaign spent less than $300 helping immigrants that were dropped off at a bus station in El Paso.
Funny. Last I saw aiding someone you know is an illegal immigrant to further their illegal immigrant status is a crime unto itself. I.e. I knowingly and intentionally give someone I know is an illegal alien a ride in order to aid them continue their status. that is itself a crime.
Staffers were caught discussing using campaign funds and materiel to knowingly and intentionally perform an act that is illegal. Two levels of issues here. Some staffers on tape admit to these actions.
Yes it is copacetic to make donations to charity. The staffers were not talking of 'making donations', they were talking of acting as carpool for people they knew or should have known were violating Federal law. The donations to charity are copacetic. Direct contributions to violators are not. They *were* talking in specifics of such direct help to individuals.
The press announcement doesnt match the video in the slightest. But I know Lad hates Veritas with a passion, so the campaign organizers discussing both their planned and past direct actions will be written off with a sneer towards Veritas.
If I were the district organizer in these tapes, I would get lawyered up pronto. Get someone that has *some* experience in Federal Campaign Finance violations.
Lad --- are you happy now? These Beto Bozos also admit on tape that the members of the caravan are planning to enter the country illegally. Good for more proof of that for you? You know, that lonely snark directed at me this morning tells me that Im not the only rube in the whole world that believes this.
(11-02-2018 03:30 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: "tppk it upon themselves"
Rogue democrats, acting against the wishes f the candidate. hard for Beto to keep those little scamps in line.
meanwhile, every thing done or said by any
Republican is attributable directly to Trump.
Hooda thunk it?
You're talking about different things here.
If you said that Beto's staffers felt emboldened to help these immigrants out based on what Beto has said, I would somewhat agree (I don't think he's said anything that indicates he would be OK with them improperly using campaign funds). Similar to how I think people feel emboldened to do things based on what Trump says.
I don't think Beto himself told them to do this, just as I don't think Trump himself tells the generic Republicans you're talking about to do whatever generic thing they do.
Good thing those scamps weren't sitting in a bar in Russia. We could have a special counsel investigation int that.
You HAVE heard about the Russia collusion case, haven't you?
(11-02-2018 03:59 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote: I don't think the amount matters. I just didn't think campaign funds were supposed to be used that way. And was it $300 in total, or was it just $300 that got caught?
So long as they are reported, there is no illegality (based on what the article says).
I don't see this being a potential issue for Beto, but rather his staff. Unless there is evidence that Beto has told his staffers to do this.
Agree as to the latter. The former just seems strange.
Per the article:
Quote:"Staff members took it upon themselves to use prepaid cards from one of our more than 700 field offices to buy baby wipes, diapers, water, fruit and granola bars, and donate them to a local humanitarian nonprofit (Annunciation House) that helps mothers and children in the community," O'Rourke spokesman Chris Evans said in a statement. "The value was under $300 and it will be appropriately reported to the FEC." It is not unusual for campaigns to make donations to groups like Annunciation House. Campaigns are allowed to give to charity "as long as the candidate does not receive compensation from the charitable organization before it has expended the entire amount donated," according to the FEC website.
Probably not a problem for anyone then. Just seems strange.
The article soft pedals the actual video.
These yahoos are *not* talking and admitting to 'donations'. They are talking and admitting to direct actions and handouts to individuals. Of campaign funds and resources.
Robert isnt 'at fault', but the staffers do face some issues.
And, I too find it fun that the people who launch into any action as being 'instigated by Trump's potty mouth' are now front and center jabbering how *this* isnt Barrio's fault. I find the hypocrisy really fun to watch....
(11-02-2018 10:40 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: and, ladies and gentlemen, this is what denial looks like.
Odd to see a supporter of the Russia collusion probe dis conspiracy theories.
Ah yes, the denial of asking if the caravans are being organized by some of the support groups...
I did a quick google search because I had not specifically looked into groups organizing these caravans (I've seen many references to groups helping and assisting the people). I found that a group called "Pueblo Sin Fronteras" has been helping to organize such caravans (not clear if all caravans) since 2008.
According to Sen. Ted there's some question regarding whether or not Rep. Beto's campaign is funding the caravan(s):
Ted Cruz
Verified account
@tedcruz
2h2 hours ago
More
US Senate candidate, TX
Two basic Qs every reporter should ask Beto today: (1) should the “caravan” be allowed to cross illegally into Texas? (Beto refuses to answer.) And (2) did your campaign dollars illegally fund their doing so?
Beto campaign spent less than $300 helping immigrants that were dropped off at a bus station in El Paso.
Funny. Last I saw aiding someone you know is an illegal immigrant to further their illegal immigrant status is a crime unto itself. I.e. I knowingly and intentionally give someone I know is an illegal alien a ride in order to aid them continue their status. that is itself a crime.
Staffers were caught discussing using campaign funds and materiel to knowingly and intentionally perform an act that is illegal. Two levels of issues here. Some staffers on tape admit to these actions.
Yes it is copacetic to make donations to charity. The staffers were not talking of 'making donations', they were talking of acting as carpool for people they knew or should have known were violating Federal law. The donations to charity are copacetic. Direct contributions to violators are not. They *were* talking in specifics of such direct help to individuals.
The press announcement doesnt match the video in the slightest. But I know Lad hates Veritas with a passion, so the campaign organizers discussing both their planned and past direct actions will be written off with a sneer towards Veritas.
If I were the district organizer in these tapes, I would get lawyered up pronto. Get someone that has *some* experience in Federal Campaign Finance violations.
Lad --- are you happy now? These Beto Bozos also admit on tape that the members of the caravan are planning to enter the country illegally. Good for more proof of that for you? You know, that lonely snark directed at me this morning tells me that Im not the only rube in the whole world that believes this.
I have no idea how anyone with a functioning brain trusts Veritas. What credibility do they have left?
Not only were two of their biggest bombshell videos proven to be a hoax due to deceptive editing (ACORN and Planned Parenthood), but they were also caught red-handed trying to peddle false allegations during the Roy Moore saga to see if the MSM would bite (they didn't). Are you buying this video hook, line, and sinker?
(11-02-2018 10:57 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote: Ah yes, the denial of asking if the caravans are being organized by some of the support groups...
I did a quick google search because I had not specifically looked into groups organizing these caravans (I've seen many references to groups helping and assisting the people). I found that a group called "Pueblo Sin Fronteras" has been helping to organize such caravans (not clear if all caravans) since 2008.
According to Sen. Ted there's some question regarding whether or not Rep. Beto's campaign is funding the caravan(s):
Ted Cruz
Verified account
@tedcruz
2h2 hours ago
More
US Senate candidate, TX
Two basic Qs every reporter should ask Beto today: (1) should the “caravan” be allowed to cross illegally into Texas? (Beto refuses to answer.) And (2) did your campaign dollars illegally fund their doing so?
Beto campaign spent less than $300 helping immigrants that were dropped off at a bus station in El Paso.
Funny. Last I saw aiding someone you know is an illegal immigrant to further their illegal immigrant status is a crime unto itself. I.e. I knowingly and intentionally give someone I know is an illegal alien a ride in order to aid them continue their status. that is itself a crime.
Staffers were caught discussing using campaign funds and materiel to knowingly and intentionally perform an act that is illegal. Two levels of issues here. Some staffers on tape admit to these actions.
Yes it is copacetic to make donations to charity. The staffers were not talking of 'making donations', they were talking of acting as carpool for people they knew or should have known were violating Federal law. The donations to charity are copacetic. Direct contributions to violators are not. They *were* talking in specifics of such direct help to individuals.
The press announcement doesnt match the video in the slightest. But I know Lad hates Veritas with a passion, so the campaign organizers discussing both their planned and past direct actions will be written off with a sneer towards Veritas.
If I were the district organizer in these tapes, I would get lawyered up pronto. Get someone that has *some* experience in Federal Campaign Finance violations.
Lad --- are you happy now? These Beto Bozos also admit on tape that the members of the caravan are planning to enter the country illegally. Good for more proof of that for you? You know, that lonely snark directed at me this morning tells me that Im not the only rube in the whole world that believes this.
I have no idea how anyone with a functioning brain trusts Veritas. What credibility do they have left?
Not only were two of their biggest bombshell videos proven to be a hoax due to deceptive editing (ACORN and Planned Parenthood), but they were also caught red-handed trying to peddle false allegations during the Roy Moore saga to see if the MSM would bite (they didn't). Are you buying this video hook, line, and sinker?
Perhaps you should observe the staffers instead of commenting on the videographer. Or, stick your head in the sand on viewing this (pretty much first hand evidence, might I add) -- your choice.
I am saying that, in this video, the staffers are making some pretty damning remarks about their own involvement. Stuff a staffer should never fing probably say with regards to campaign funds and materiel. Of course, some stuff seems to the be repetitive or misses the mark they want it to make. But, a fair amount stuff that is dead on.
I suggest you look at the staffers yourself. Make up your own mind on what *they* say. Or not.
Funny thing, this tape is the closest to 'first hand' evidence on the issue. Yet you seem knee jerkingly opposed to it without even looking at it.
To paraphrase your oh-so-mighty statement of this morning, I thought you were an 'evidence' guy. Maybe not, perhaps.
(11-02-2018 05:31 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote: I have no idea how anyone with a functioning brain trusts Veritas. What credibility do they have left?
How does Veritas's credibility change the words that were plainly captured in the video? Which statement change, and how?
And for that matter, how were their earlier efforts impacted by the editing issues you mentioned? I can see they may have altered context, but those comments were pretty much independent of context.
I'm a fairly straightforward person. If I see someone on video saying something, I believe that the person probably said those words. If context can admit a different interpretation, then I will have an open mind. But I struggle to understand how context could change what was on those videos. What else could they possibly have been talking about?
(11-02-2018 05:31 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote: I have no idea how anyone with a functioning brain trusts Veritas. What credibility do they have left?
Not only were two of their biggest bombshell videos proven to be a hoax due to deceptive editing (ACORN and Planned Parenthood), but they were also caught red-handed trying to peddle false allegations during the Roy Moore saga to see if the MSM would bite (they didn't). Are you buying this video hook, line, and sinker?
How does Veritas's credibility change the words that were plainly captured in the video? Which statements change, and how?
And for that matter, how were their earlier efforts impacted by the editing issues you mentioned? I can see they may have taken things out of context, but those comments were pretty much independent of context. Kindly indicate in what context those comments would have been appropriate.
I'm a fairly straightforward person. If I see someone on video saying something, I believe that the person probably said those words. If context can admit a different interpretation, then I will have an open mind. But I struggle to understand how context could change what was on those videos. What else could they possibly have been talking about?
(This post was last modified: 11-02-2018 08:53 PM by Owl 69/70/75.)
(11-02-2018 05:31 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote: I have no idea how anyone with a functioning brain trusts Veritas. What credibility do they have left?
Not only were two of their biggest bombshell videos proven to be a hoax due to deceptive editing (ACORN and Planned Parenthood), but they were also caught red-handed trying to peddle false allegations during the Roy Moore saga to see if the MSM would bite (they didn't). Are you buying this video hook, line, and sinker?
How does Veritas's credibility change the words that were plainly captured in the video? Which statements change, and how?
And for that matter, how were their earlier efforts impacted by the editing issues you mentioned? I can see they may have taken things out of context, but those comments were pretty much independent of context. Kindly indicate in what context those comments would have been appropriate.
I'm a fairly straightforward person. If I see someone on video saying something, I believe that the person probably said those words. If context can admit a different interpretation, then I will have an open mind. But I struggle to understand how context could change what was on those videos. What else could they possibly have been talking about?
Because they've been found to edit videos to make create misleading statements. That's what happened with the ACORN video and the Planned Parenthood video. You know what happened there, right?
But after watching more than just the clips at the beginning of the video, it seems like the Texas Tribune article hit the nail on the head. A few campaign staffers took it upon themselves to use funds to donate food, blankets, and toiletries to Honduran asylum seekers (legal immigrants). I did not watch it all, so maybe there's a portion of the video where something else happens, but I watched 10 minutes of it and that's all I saw.
These people were stupid and obviously were trying to cover up their actions from the campaign since they knew it was likely illegal (misappropriation of campaign funds).
(11-02-2018 11:31 AM)ausowl Wrote: According to Sen. Ted there's some question regarding whether or not Rep. Beto's campaign is funding the caravan(s):
Ted Cruz
Verified account
@tedcruz
2h2 hours ago
More
US Senate candidate, TX
Two basic Qs every reporter should ask Beto today: (1) should the “caravan” be allowed to cross illegally into Texas? (Beto refuses to answer.) And (2) did your campaign dollars illegally fund their doing so?
Beto campaign spent less than $300 helping immigrants that were dropped off at a bus station in El Paso.
Funny. Last I saw aiding someone you know is an illegal immigrant to further their illegal immigrant status is a crime unto itself. I.e. I knowingly and intentionally give someone I know is an illegal alien a ride in order to aid them continue their status. that is itself a crime.
Staffers were caught discussing using campaign funds and materiel to knowingly and intentionally perform an act that is illegal. Two levels of issues here. Some staffers on tape admit to these actions.
Yes it is copacetic to make donations to charity. The staffers were not talking of 'making donations', they were talking of acting as carpool for people they knew or should have known were violating Federal law. The donations to charity are copacetic. Direct contributions to violators are not. They *were* talking in specifics of such direct help to individuals.
The press announcement doesnt match the video in the slightest. But I know Lad hates Veritas with a passion, so the campaign organizers discussing both their planned and past direct actions will be written off with a sneer towards Veritas.
If I were the district organizer in these tapes, I would get lawyered up pronto. Get someone that has *some* experience in Federal Campaign Finance violations.
Lad --- are you happy now? These Beto Bozos also admit on tape that the members of the caravan are planning to enter the country illegally. Good for more proof of that for you? You know, that lonely snark directed at me this morning tells me that Im not the only rube in the whole world that believes this.
I have no idea how anyone with a functioning brain trusts Veritas. What credibility do they have left?
Not only were two of their biggest bombshell videos proven to be a hoax due to deceptive editing (ACORN and Planned Parenthood), but they were also caught red-handed trying to peddle false allegations during the Roy Moore saga to see if the MSM would bite (they didn't). Are you buying this video hook, line, and sinker?
Perhaps you should observe the staffers instead of commenting on the videographer. Or, stick your head in the sand on viewing this (pretty much first hand evidence, might I add) -- your choice.
I am saying that, in this video, the staffers are making some pretty damning remarks about their own involvement. Stuff a staffer should never fing probably say with regards to campaign funds and materiel. Of course, some stuff seems to the be repetitive or misses the mark they want it to make. But, a fair amount stuff that is dead on.
I suggest you look at the staffers yourself. Make up your own mind on what *they* say. Or not.
Funny thing, this tape is the closest to 'first hand' evidence on the issue. Yet you seem knee jerkingly opposed to it without even looking at it.
To paraphrase your oh-so-mighty statement of this morning, I thought you were an 'evidence' guy. Maybe not, perhaps.
Watched most of the video - pretty much seems to match the quality of other Project Veritas hit jobs. I don't know how you give them the time of day after they've been found altering videos (ACORN, Planned Parenthood) and trying and failing to entrap journalists (Roy Moore).
Really, why do you give them the time of the day? James O'Keefe is an unethical twat.
To tie a bow on another example of shoddy and ethically questionable "journalism," Snopes has a good summary.
Quote:...Some of the footage posted on 1 November also appeared to show campaign staff discussing the possibility of using campaign vehicles to give rides to migrants, but the video did not show anyone actually doing that or even talking about having taken that action. In response to our questions, the O’Rourke campaign asserted that no staff had used campaign vehicles to give rides to any migrants.
...The footage published by O’Keefe on 1 November did not constitute evidence of a member of the O’Rourke campaign team’s using campaign funds to give supplies directly to the migrants, as opposed to donating them to Annunciation House, a registered charity in El Paso.
We asked the O’Rourke campaign whether any of their staff had given supplies purchased with campaign money directly to any migrants. A spokesperson firmly denied this, writing: “Absolutely not. The materials were dropped off to Annunciation House … at the donation site Annunciation House had set up.”
We asked Project Veritas whether it had uncovered any evidence (not shown in their video) of O’Rourke’s campaign staff providing supplies directly to the migrants (as opposed to the charity). A spokesperson for the organization did not directly answer that question but reiterated that they had found evidence of campaign staff discussing an intention to buy supplies for the migrants and to give them rides in a campaign vehicle.
(11-03-2018 10:42 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote: Because they've been found to edit videos to make create misleading statements. That's what happened with the ACORN video and the Planned Parenthood video. You know what happened there, right?
I've heard the allegations, but nobody has ever explained to me how they changed the words spoken by the people in the videos. All I've ever heard is that things were edited to take the statements out of context. If those people actually said those words, then I have a significant problem with the words that they spoke, regardless of context.
Perhaps I don't fully understand exactly what happened, and if so then perhaps you could explain it.
Quote:But after watching more than just the clips at the beginning of the video, it seems like the Texas Tribune article hit the nail on the head. A few campaign staffers took it upon themselves to use funds to donate food, blankets, and toiletries to Honduran asylum seekers (legal immigrants). I did not watch it all, so maybe there's a portion of the video where something else happens, but I watched 10 minutes of it and that's all I saw.
These people were stupid and obviously were trying to cover up their actions from the campaign since they knew it was likely illegal (misappropriation of campaign funds).
OK, so they spoke very cavalierly about committing illegal acts and covering them up, and you're okay with it because why?
Quote:To tie a bow on another example of shoddy and ethically questionable "journalism," Snopes has a good summary.
Quote:
...Some of the footage posted on 1 November also appeared to show campaign staff discussing the possibility of using campaign vehicles to give rides to migrants, but the video did not show anyone actually doing that or even talking about having taken that action. In response to our questions, the O’Rourke campaign asserted that no staff had used campaign vehicles to give rides to any migrants.
...The footage published by O’Keefe on 1 November did not constitute evidence of a member of the O’Rourke campaign team’s using campaign funds to give supplies directly to the migrants, as opposed to donating them to Annunciation House, a registered charity in El Paso.
We asked the O’Rourke campaign whether any of their staff had given supplies purchased with campaign money directly to any migrants. A spokesperson firmly denied this, writing: “Absolutely not. The materials were dropped off to Annunciation House … at the donation site Annunciation House had set up.”
We asked Project Veritas whether it had uncovered any evidence (not shown in their video) of O’Rourke’s campaign staff providing supplies directly to the migrants (as opposed to the charity). A spokesperson for the organization did not directly answer that question but reiterated that they had found evidence of campaign staff discussing an intention to buy supplies for the migrants and to give them rides in a campaign vehicle. https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/beto-o...-migrants/
So, the film doesn't show actually giving the supplies, money, or whatever, and the O'Rourke campaign has issued a self-serving denial. On that basis you conclude tat there is no problem with the campaign staff cavalierly discussing committing illegal acts and covering them up. Got it.
Have you applied that same standard to members of the other party? Such as perhaps Donald Trump? Link?
(This post was last modified: 11-03-2018 11:22 AM by Owl 69/70/75.)
(11-03-2018 10:42 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote: Because they've been found to edit videos to make create misleading statements. That's what happened with the ACORN video and the Planned Parenthood video. You know what happened there, right?
I've heard the allegations, but nobody has ever explained to me how they changed the words spoken by the people in the videos. All I've ever heard is that things were edited to take the statements out of context. If those people actually said those words, then I have a significant problem with the words that they spoke, regardless of context.
Perhaps I don't fully understand exactly what happened, and if so then perhaps you could explain it.
Quote:But after watching more than just the clips at the beginning of the video, it seems like the Texas Tribune article hit the nail on the head. A few campaign staffers took it upon themselves to use funds to donate food, blankets, and toiletries to Honduran asylum seekers (legal immigrants). I did not watch it all, so maybe there's a portion of the video where something else happens, but I watched 10 minutes of it and that's all I saw.
These people were stupid and obviously were trying to cover up their actions from the campaign since they knew it was likely illegal (misappropriation of campaign funds).
OK, so they spoke very cavalierly about committing illegal acts and covering them up, and you're okay with it because why?
To the former, my recollection if that they asked about hypothetical situations or edited out the portion of the conversation where the employees said not to do it. In one case, an ACORN employee played along with O'Keefe and then immediately referred him to the police (https://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2...030014bd).
To the latter, they spoke about taking campaign funds and donating them to charity (not an illegal act) or using a van to help move legal immigrants around. It was stupid to not just kick it up the ladder immediately to confirm that the campaign infrastructure was OK with this. But yeah, I'm pretty much OK with them discussing assisting poor and needy people. The more I read about the campaign laws governing their actions, the less I care given the magnitude of the dollars spent.
