James O’Keefe Defends Being A Loathsome, Cretinous, Scumbag

Fox News James O'KeefeIt’s been five days since the Fox News pimp, James O’Keefe, was caught trying to “seduce” CNN reporter Abbie Boudreau. He has finally come out with a statement on the web site of his mentor, Andrew Breitbart. And, as would be expected, it is a thoroughly dishonest exercise in self-justification.

But before we get to O’Keefe’s comments, let’s take a look at what Breitbart had to say about him:

“From what I’ve read about this script, though not executed, it is patently gross and offensive.”

That’s the view of the man who supported O’Keefe through his equally offensive escapades as a pimp. Now Breitbart thinks O’Keef’e antics are gross. He even denied in a tweet that he was associated with O’Keefe. However, he still gave him a platform to publish his response. And in that response O’Keefe begins by acknowledging the low level of ethics he and his comrades have:

“If you were to roam through my personal emails there are many outrageous plans, some parts of which I may approve of in principal [sic] with an ‘I like it’ in an email thread. But I may well object to a host of things about the plan, though I like the objective.”

Taken at his word, O’Keefe is admitting that he liked the objective of the CNN Caper. But this is someone who can never be taken at his word. He is a compulsive liar whose word has no value. Here is how he soft-peddled his version of the the plot against Boudreau:

“She would have had to consent before being filmed and she was not going to be faux ‘seduced’ unless she wanted to be.”

That is utterly false. He never sought the consent of his previous video victims. Why should we accept his assertion that he was going to start seeking consent now? If he was going to seek her consent, then why did the plan call for hidden cameras at the scene? And what would make him think that she would ever grant such consent to be filmed on his boat? And can anyone even tell me what he means by suggesting that the faux seduction would not have occurred “unless she wanted” it? What an arrogant and disgusting remark.

He goes on to assert that he was repulsed by parts of the plan and had no intention of going through with it. He offers as proof of this the fact that none of the things that were described in the script actually took place. Of course, the reason they didn’t take place is because his plan was foiled in advance by an accomplice with integrity pangs. This would be like the failed shoe bomber insisting that he never intended to blow up the plane by saying, “See? The plane isn’t blown up.”

To offer as a defense his assertion, after the plot fell apart, that he didn’t really plan to do it, is laughably absurd. He still needs to explain why his accomplice, Izzy Santa, was in the house, right where the script called for her to be, and he was still on the boat, right where the script called for him to be, and right where Santa was supposed to direct Boudreau. The plot was obviously in effect when Santa decided to pull the plug and O’Keefe cannot credibly claim otherwise.

The fact that it took O’Keefe five days to come up with an excuse this lame tells us a lot about what an ignorant slob he is. And if any media outlet gives this twerp a passing mention for whatever BS he produces in the future they should lose their license to broadcast.


4 thoughts on “James O’Keefe Defends Being A Loathsome, Cretinous, Scumbag

  1. I…..am still…..so confused about his plan…..

    • p.s. Hey Mark, how bout an article on those fire fighters watching a house burn down? I gotta wonder what they wouldn’t done if they heard screams coming from the house….

      • That’s an unbelievable story. How can people just sit and watch a neighbors home burn to the ground? Apparently pets died in the fire.

        • all over $75. that’s conservative ideals for ya, apparently writers for the national review completely agreed with it. vote republican!!

Comments are closed.