Posted on 09/12/2009 8:08:34 PM PDT by Bob Eimiller
By Noel Sheppard | September 12, 2009 - 15:26 In a shocking twist to Thursday's ACORN sting video story, the Baltimore city state's attorney is considering charging the two people that exposed the activity.
As NewsBusters has been reporting, Hannah Giles and James O'Keefe caught on video several ACORN representatives giving them advice as to how to get a loan to purchase a house to be used as a brothel whose employees would be under-aged illegal immigrants.
Despite the long list of laws possibly broken by these ACORN representatives, the Baltimore city state's attorneys office is looking into whether or not Giles and O'Keefe violated statutes concerning taping people without their consent....
(Excerpt) Read more at newsbusters.org ...
The penalty for those kids could be 5 years in prison... Over my dead body, what about you?
They need to go to a red state and dare Maryland to extradite them.
Doesn’t surprise me. Over in formerly-great Britain, they imprison the victims who fight back and transfer the victim’s wealth to the criminals.
if it was a private residence then i would have to agree. Other wise how can the government put video cameras everyplace?
I say it’s time to tar and feather tyrants and traitors! I’m with you!
An empty threat. This state attorney would be the laughingstock of the country if he tried.
Acorn takes government money they are a public place. This is no different then taping at a park.
I’m getting an itchy trigger finger.
We'll blast these imbeciles into oblivion.
“violated statutes concerning taping people without their consent”
I think there should pretty much be no expectation of privacy once you leave your house, what with today’s technology. Unless, that is, you’re in a doctor’s office, a confessional, or a lawyer’s office. Otherwise, treat it like they treat shots with telephoto lenses. If they can see you, they can shoot you. In this case, if they can hear you, they can tape you.
I knew that was going to happen. No good deed goes unpunished.
I agree, SEVERE political backlash, to say the least, if they even attempt to prosecute these two fine young Americans!
If the DA did that, that clown would make Nifong look like Clarence Darrow.
This is precisely what the State of Maryland did to Linda Tripp.
I was shocked that was allowed to stand.
This case must be stopped.
Can you imagine the legal defense fund that will be easily and quickly raised if it is needed?...........and thinking it through a step further, wouldn’t you love to see Defense Atty’s discovery and depositions work their way through the labyrinths of ACORN?
Gee, next time I rob a bank in Baltimore, I really must remember that they need my permission to film me.
Don’t buy into the red state thing, its a PR trick. These 2 need to go to a “free” state and dare the “socialist” state of Maryland to extradite them.
RED is the socialists banner, and is exactly the reason why the socialist press switched overnight after the Carter election and started calling the free states “Red” and the socialist states “Blue”.
Early on, some channels used a scheme of red for Democrats and blue for Republicans. The first television news network to use colors to depict the states won by presidential candidates was NBC.
In 1976, John Chancellor, the anchorman for the NBC Nightly News, asked his network’s engineers to construct a large electronic map of the USA. The map was placed in the network’s election-night news studio. If Jimmy Carter, the Democratic candidate that year, won a state it would light up in red; if Gerald Ford, the Republican, carried a state it would light up in blue. The feature proved to be so popular that four years later all three major television networks would use colors to designate the states won by the presidential candidates on Election Night. NBC continued to use the color scheme employed in 1976 for several years; NBC newsman David Brinkley famously referred to the 1980 election map as showing Ronald Reagan’s 44-state landslide as resembling a “suburban swimming pool”.[6]
CBS, from 1984 on, used the opposite scheme: blue for Democrats, red for Republicans. ABC used yellow for one major party and blue for the other in 1976. However, in 1980 and 1984, ABC used red for Republicans and blue for Democrats. As late as 1996, there was still no universal association of one color with one party.[7] If anything, by 1996, color schemes were relatively mixed, as CNN, CBS, ABC, and The New York Times referred to Democratic states with the color blue and Republican ones as red, while Time Magazine and the Washington Post used an opposite scheme.[8][9][10]
In the days following the protracted 2000 election, major media outlets began conforming to the same color scheme because the electoral map was continually in view and conformity made for easy and instant viewer comprehension. On Election Night that year there was no coordinated effort to code Democratic states blue and Republican states red; the association gradually emerged. Partly as a result of this eventual and near-universal color-coding, the terms “red states” and “blue states” entered popular usage in the weeks following the 2000 presidential election. Journalists began to routinely refer to “blue states” and “red states,” even before the 2000 election was settled.[citation needed]
After the results were final, journalists stuck with the color scheme, as the December 2001 The Atlantic’s cover story by David Brooks entitled, “One Nation, Slightly Divisible” illustrated. Thus, red and blue became fixed in the media and in many people’s minds,[11] despite the fact that no “official” color choices had been made by the parties.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.