Patterico has posted the court document filed in James O’Keefe’s criminal case bearing the title “Final Factual Basis,” signed by the Assistant U.S. Attorney representing the Government:
In the document the government acknowledges that there was NO evidence that the defendants intended to tamper with Landrieu’s phone system.
So what does the government do? They attempt to hide this fact from the press:
O’Keefe told me last night that Assistant U.S. Attorney Ginsberg summarized the stipulated factual basis in open court, but initially omitted any mention of the paragraph I just quoted. (Consistent with O’Keefe’s statement that the AUSA read the statement in open court, there is a minute order which states: “Factual basis for guilty plea provided by summarized testimony of Jordan Ginsberg, AUSA.”)
According to O’Keefe, attorneys for Stan Dai and Joe Basel then asked the court to have the prosecutor read that paragraph aloud. O’Keefe told me that the prosecutor then somewhat reluctantly read the statement to the court. O’Keefe told me: “I was concerned the reporters in the back, thinking the statement was over, would not be paying attention as the prosecutor obliged.”
Since I can find no mention of the paragraph in any reported Big Media news story, it appears that O’Keefe’s concern was justified.
Rubbing salt in the wound, the U.S. Attorney’s Office then issued a press release that summarized the facts in the stipulated factual basis — but which rather pointedly omitted the very same language that the Assistant U.S. Attorney was reluctant to read aloud in court . . . the language which shows O’Keefe and his companions never intended to tamper with the phones or commit any felony.
It doesn’t end there tho.
Not only did the government charge O’Keefe with a felony when no evidence existed to justify that charge but the judge in the case actually ordered O’Keefe’s tape to be erased prior to giving it back to him:
O’Keefe has confirmed on Twitter that the Government returned his recording equipment, but deleted the footage from inside Sen. Landrieu’s offices. The AP is now catching up to the story:
Conservative activist-videographer James O’Keefe said video he shot of conversations with staffers of U.S. Sen. Mary Landrieu was deleted when his cell phone was returned after he and three others pleaded guilty to charges in a caper he orchestrated at the Democrat’s New Orleans office.
A spokeswoman for the U.S. attorney’s office said Saturday that U.S. Magistrate Daniel Knowles III ordered the footage removed. O’Keefe made the claim Friday in a posting on his Twitter social networking site.
What the AP overlooks, however, is what the destroyed footage would have revealed.
I recently published court documents in which the Government admitted that a member of Landrieu’s staff had told O’Keefe’s companions, on tape, that there had been no problem with Senator Landrieu’s phones:
One of Senator Landrieu’s staff members (WITNESS 1) told BASEL and FLANAGAN that she did not report any phone problems and that the office was not experiencing any issues with the phone system.
I’m interested in the First Amendment implications of a court ordering the destruction of a copyrighted work with possible political relevance — with no apparent statutory authority, plea agreement provision, or national security concern to justify it.
Ace thinks maybe it was part of a plea deal but Patterico has that angle covered also:
Surrendering the footage was not part of the plea agreement, which you can read here. Nor is there any national security issue in play; O’Keefe has confirmed to me that he and his companions accessed only thepublic reception area of Landrieu’s office.
But even if it was a part of the plea deal Ace asks why the government is holding the water for Landrieu:
In that case, why did the court or prosecutors decide that protecting a Democrat from damaging information collected in a sting was a priority that rivaled dispassionate execution of justice?
Where did they get the idea that among their duties was sparing Mary Landrieu from the political fallout of the revelation of a damaging lie?
They got the idea from being raised in the partisan politics of the Democrat party. The MSM couldn’t care less about the Landrieu corruption or deceit. They only cared about the Republican actually daring to investigate this deceit. How dare he try to out a lying Democrat. Don’t ya know it’s only the Republicans who lie?
Sigh….
Landrieu said her phone system was not working, O’Keefe had evidence that it indeed was working.
Landrieu lied and now the court destroyed the evidence of this.
Where is the outrage from the MSM and the Democrats?
More here
See author page
There won’t be any – they fall under ‘the one’s’ umbrella and therefore, can do no wrong – I can see November from my house…………………………………………………
“Where is the outrage from the MSM and the Democrats?”
I was outraged that the little twit lied his way into a Senatorial office with the obvious intention of getting some footage he could subsequently edit into another misleading media presentation. The guy’s entire mode of operation has been predicated on deceipt and dishonesty.
Letting him keep the footage would have been to allow him to profit from an illegal act. What he did is illegal. He was sentenced to three years probation, 100 hours of community service, and a $1,500 fine.
As it says in my digital camera owner’s manual, the only way to be sure that the media has been deleted is to use a hammer and destroy the HDD.
Also, there is no law that says he can’t profit from this. Typical liberal touchy-feelie BS.
Please tell me he backed up his evidence before submitting it to the authorities?
This sounds very much like a kangaroo court situation. With the court’s judge ordering destruction of evidence, O’Keefe will likely win an appeal to a higher court. Bill O’Riley or Glen Beck should bring on Judge Neapolitano and present an update of this case.