In a report that is jam-packed with falsehoods, Fox News casts sinister aspersions on the motives of the U.S. Attorney who brought the case against pimp/journalist James O’Keefe for his alleged felonious activities in the office of Louisiana Senator Mary Landrieu.
The first paragraph of the article, titled “U.S. Attorney Steps Down From O’Keefe Case,” has nothing whatsoever to do with the story as headlined. Instead, it appears to be no more than an attempt to set up an allegation that the U.S. Attorney’s office deliberately filed false charges against O’Keefe and his accomplices.
“James O’Keefe, accused of trying to tamper with the phones of Louisiana Sen. Mary Landrieu, was ‘framed’ by the media and the U.S. attorney’s office, Andrew Breitbart, publisher of BigGovernment.com, told Fox News Monday.”
The second paragraph of the article eventually gets around to the point of the story, but only after asserting a series of additional falsehoods dispensed by ultra-conservative propagandist, Andrew Breitbart.
“The same day the man who first published James O’Keefe’s explosive videos exposing wrongdoing at community organizer ACORN came to his defense Monday, claiming the conservative filmmaker ‘sat in jail for 28 hours without access to an attorney’ while the prosecutor made his case to the media, the U.S. attorney involved stepped down.”
Let’s just set aside the fact that no wrongdoing on the part of ACORN has ever been proven; and that there is no evidence that O’Keefe was denied or delayed access to an attorney, or even an allegation of that by O’Keefe; and that the prosecutor did not make a case to the media while O’Keefe was being held. The first reports in the press didn’t come out until after he was released. Now we can deal with the real issue.
In this article, ostensibly about U.S. Attorney Jim Letten recusing himself from the O’Keefe case, Fox News went to great lengths to juxtapose that news with allegations of wrongdoing from Breitbart. Those allegations were featured in the lede and repeated in the following paragraph that explicitly tied Breitbart’s charges to the recusal. The Fox News version of events was that Letten stepped down the same day Breitbart issued his defense of O’Keefe. The clear implication being that those two events had something to do with one another. Fox News is plainly and irresponsibly insinuating that Letton stepped aside because of some impropriety.
The same implied correlation occurred in the very next paragraph wherein the charge that O’Keefe was framed was repeated, followed by Fox News again connecting that to Letten’s recusal by saying that it took place “hours later.” For the record, the New Orleans Times-Picayune (in an act of actual journalism) has confirmed that Letten asked to be recused a week ago, long before the smear by Breitbart and Fox. The remainder of the article was a virtually uninterrupted platform for Breitbart’s wholly unsupported defense of O’Keefe. Breitbart was quoted extensively making allegations for which he had no foundation.
“James O’Keefe sat in jail for 28 hours without access to an attorney, while the U.S. attorney leaked the information about his arrest, helping the media frame it as ‘Watergate Junior.'”
“The panty bomber on Christmas was given — you know, this guy’s from Al Qaeda, and he’s not even an American citizen, and he’s given access to an attorney right away. I believe that this was a concerted effort, this is just my opinion, to allow for the media to frame the issue to put James O’Keefe in a very bad position.”
“It [O’Keefe’s arrest] is tied to the Justice Department. And we’ve been very aggressive in asking Eric Holder to investigate what’s seen on these ACORN tapes and he’s ignored it.”
Fox News made no attempt to verify any of these remarks, nor did they attempt to interview anyone who might have rebutted them. They let them stand unchallenged as if they were settled facts. However, they did reprint O’Keefe’s prior statement in defense of himself. A statement that had already been demonstrated to be untrue.
“The sole intent of our investigation was to determine whether or not Sen. Landrieu was purposely trying to avoid constituents who were calling to register their views to her as their senator.”
Of course, were that the case, why did he leave Landrieu’s office and try to gain access to the telephone wiring closet at another location? Fox News didn’t ask that question. Sean Hannity didn’t get an answer to that either in his exclusive fluffing interview with O’Keefe yesterday. In fact the whole interview was staged to permit O’Keefe to declare his innocence while refusing to answer substantive queries.
So who is U.S. Attorney Jim Letten whom Breitbart has accused of framing O’Keefe; of manipulating the press; of participating in a DOJ revenge plot against Breitbart?
Letten was a George W. Bush appointee who has served as U.S. Attorney since April of 2001. He is well known for his successful prosecution of former Democratic Louisiana Governor, Edwin Edwards. He has bipartisan support as a federal prosecutor with both Landrieu (a Democrat) and Sen. David Vitter (a Republican) backing his reappointment to the post by the Obama administration. In fact, Vitter was so determined to see Letten reappointed that he held up the nominations of other prosecutors until he had an assurance from Attorney General Holder that Letten would remain on the job.
Is that the profile of a man that would engage in the mischief that Breitbart alleges? Is that someone whom Fox News ought to be insinuating recused himself from a case due to some malfeasance?
To make matters worse, Fox News exploits the confidential nature of recusals to bolster their innuendos about Letten. While they tie the recusal to Breitbart’s attacks, they never entertain the notion that Letten stepped aside for legitimate reasons. For instance, he may know one of the suspects, or his family, personally. One of O’Keefe’s accomplices, Robert Flanagan, is the son of Letten’s fellow Louisiana federal prosecutor, William Flanagan.
This illustrates the lengths to which Breitbart, and his patron Fox News, will go to defame anyone they deem to be obstructing their mission to dispense disinformation and to contribute to the ignorance of their audience. The article from Fox News is so transparently biased as to be bordering on libel. It is without question knowingly malicious and false. And it is a product of Fox’s “news” division, not the primetime TV opinion mongers upon whom Fox usually likes to blame their deliberately deficient reporting.
For Fox, there is no escaping the reality that this is inexcusably unprofessional and prejudicial. And sadly, it is business as usual at Fox.
