James O'Keefe, OMG
I want to explain something about the lawsuits, because almost everybody misunderstands what they are actually for.
They are not trying to win.
... View MoreJames O'Keefe, OMG
I want to explain something about the lawsuits, because almost everybody misunderstands what they are actually for.
They are not trying to win.
Look at the record. AFT v. O'Keefe. Koerber v. O'Keefe, all the way to the California Supreme Court. Teter v. O'Keefe. Democracy Partners v. O'Keefe, in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals.
Every single person who has sued me has lost.
And the most recent one was not decided on a technicality. A federal appeals court in Washington threw out the jury verdict against me and held that undercover reporting like ours is protected by the First Amendment. For fifteen years I was told that what I do is not legitimate journalism. A federal court has now concluded otherwise, in writing.
The people filing these cases can read that record as easily as you can. They know exactly how it ends. They file anyway.
So ask the obvious question. If you already know you are going to lose, what are you actually purchasing?
There are three things a lawsuit buys the person who files it, and a verdict is not one of them.
The first is distraction.
A deposition consumes an entire day. Discovery consumes weeks. There are filings, motions, calls with counsel, documents to locate, and every one of them lands on my desk rather than somebody else's.
A day spent in a conference room answering questions about footage I shot three years ago is a day I am not looking at what is in front of us right now. They cannot stop the next investigation. They can absolutely make me late for it.
The second is demoralization, and this one is aimed at my people, not at me.
Within days of that federal appeals ruling, another lawsuit was filed against one of my undercover journalists. Not against me. Against a young reporter who did the field work. Somebody who never attended law school, has no legal department, and has no corporation standing behind them.
Understand the message that sends to every talented young person considering this work. We can reach you personally. We can put your name on a docket. We can make the next five years of your life expensive and frightening.
The third is time, which is the only thing in this business you genuinely cannot replace. Appeals take years. Defenses take years. And they are counting on the arithmetic that a reporter who spends five years defending old work is a reporter who is no longer producing new work.
That is the entire strategy, and it is working on exactly one front.
This guy is still in the government? I thought he was gone. What a loon, trying to pander to this. Pathetic.
https://www.bizpacreview.com/2026/09/12/dem-loon-al-green-demands-hormone-treatments-for-tr... View MoreThis guy is still in the government? I thought he was gone. What a loon, trying to pander to this. Pathetic.
https://www.bizpacreview.com/2026/09/12/dem-loon-al-green-demands-hormone-treatments-for-trans-ice-detainees-1658714/?
This is becoming the accepted norm, apparently, in our universities and colleges. Horrible.
https://www.bizpacreview.com/2026/09/12/carnegie-mellon-facing-backlash-over-nigerian-born-professors-violen... View MoreThis is becoming the accepted norm, apparently, in our universities and colleges. Horrible.
https://www.bizpacreview.com/2026/09/12/carnegie-mellon-facing-backlash-over-nigerian-born-professors-violent-white-man-post-1658691/?
Included among the content put out by Anya before deleting her X account, the self-described “Antiracist, feminist,” who researches “Blackness in multilingualism,” appeared to join the rabble of Kirk assassination celebrants — referring to it as “Kirkmas” and wishing “Eid al kirk mubarak” to followers — as she posted, “On this Kirkiversary, we humbly, curiously, surprisingly honor the most important news item of the day: Hasan Piker’s fardels.”
Further, being called out by the account Wuhan Fourth Turning Swan led her to react, “Die first, white man, then ask yourself why I’m dancing.”
Posts captured before the account’s deletion were shared on X by C3, who wrote, “Meet Uju Anya… an associate professor at Carnegie Mellon. A $120,000+ salary. She seems to hate white men. Celebrated Charlie Kirk’s assassination. She hates America but loves living in America. A nasty person. This woman should not be anywhere near young people.”
https://www.bizpacreview.com/2026/09/12/bill-maher-dropped-a-truth-nuke-on-the-young-left-with-his-9-11-take-1658726/?
Bill Mahr
“New rule, since it’s the 25th anniversary of 9/11 and since for 25 y... View Morehttps://www.bizpacreview.com/2026/09/12/bill-maher-dropped-a-truth-nuke-on-the-young-left-with-his-9-11-take-1658726/?
Bill Mahr
“New rule, since it’s the 25th anniversary of 9/11 and since for 25 years we’ve been kept relatively safe from anything close to another 9/11, how about a hand for the Americans who made that happen?” he said to audience applause. “Because it didn’t just happen. There was a war on terror and we won. And yet so much has changed since 9/11. For example, back then we were against the terrorists.”
“Really, no cap. Now, a lot of media outlets don’t even want you to say the – word. On the 20th anniversary, four American journalism associations put out guidance that said that terrorism should only be used in quotes because it’s emotionally and politically loaded. Yeah, so is the World Cup, but we don’t put soccer in quotes,” Maher snarked. “Really, we can’t anymore just say out loud who the bad guys were that morning. Those 19 hijackers, they shared something. Oh, let’s call it a worldview. And it wasn’t astrology.”
“But somehow over time, we’ve decided not to harp on that. The whole business about who wanted us dead and why, let’s not put a name on it. When it comes to terrorist attacks, please, there are very fine people on both sides,” he continued. “Canadian state TV told its reporters ‘Do not refer to the September 11th attacks as terrorist attacks.’ No? Even though the very definition of terrorism is using violence against civilians to pursue ideological goals? What should we call it then? Unruly passengers? A wrong turn taken at the Chrysler Building? Why not just say the planes and the towers got into a fight?”
page=1&profile_user_id=2653&year=&month=
Load More
