Accountability
James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas is a form of ‘political spying,’ judge rules
A federal judge has ruled it “fair” to describe the undercover activities of conservative activist James O’Keefe‘s Project Veritas as “political spying.”
The ruling is related to a lawsuit, filed in 2017, that will be before the court this year. An intern working at a Democratic firm, Democracy Partners, in 2016 was actually working undercover for Project Veritas, recording staffers and catching the firm’s founder, Robert Creamer suggesting that they incite violence at rallies held by then-Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump.
Creamer stepped down from his role in the Hillary Clinton campaign following this. Democracy Partners and Creamer sued over that footage. In advance of the December-set trial, O’Keefe’s attorneys filed to prevent the plaintiffs from describing the group’s actions as “political spying, but were not successful.
In an Oct. 14 court opinion, though, U.S. District Court Judge Paul L. Friedman ruled that it’s reasonable to describe O’Keefe’s group’s actions in that way. “‘Political spying’ is a fair characterization of the undisputed facts of this case,” Friedman, a Bill Clinton appointee, wrote. O’Keefe’s lawyers had argued that Project Veritas operates as journalists.
-
Human Interest5 days ago
Idaho prepares to defend its abortion ban
-
Education2 days ago
‘Grading for Equity’: Promoting Students by Banning Grades of Zero and Leaving No Class Cut-Ups Behind
-
Civilization4 days ago
Earth Day Should Celebrate U.S. Progress & Innovation
-
Family2 days ago
Idaho defends against abortion mandate
-
Civilization3 days ago
Newsom plays silly abortion politics
-
Education4 days ago
The Intifada Comes to America. Now What?
-
Civilization4 days ago
Earth Day – part of cultural Marxism
-
Civilization3 days ago
Waste of the Day: China Still Owes Over $1 Trillion to American Bondholders