Fogbow

Jenna Ellis @JennaEllisEsq wrote: If you’re not at the #ProjectVeritasExperience in the Free State of Florida right now with us what are you even doing with your life

Texas woman arrested on election fraud charges based on Project Veritas video
Jeremy Blackman, Austin Bureau
Jan. 13, 2021

SAN ANTONIO — A former campaign worker was arrested Wednesday and charged with election tampering, the state attorney general’s office announced.

The allegations surfaced last fall after the conservative activist group Project Veritas posted an edited video of the woman, Raquel Rodriguez, in which she appears to be helping an elderly person fill out a mail-in ballot form and discussing unlawful tactics, including assisting people at the polls.

The video included only snippets of what appear to be multiple conversations, and it was not clear who Rodriguez believed she was speaking to or under what context.

Attorney General Ken Paxton, a Republican, said in a statement that his office reviewed dozens of hours of unedited footage, and that Rodriguez says at one point that she knows her actions are illegal.

IN-DEPTH: Project Veritas activists release Texas video purporting to show voter fraud

The charges, all felonies, could result in up to 20 years in prison.

“This is a victory for election integrity and a strong signal that anyone who attempts to defraud the people of Texas, deprive them of their vote, or undermine the integrity of elections will be brought to justice,” Paxton said.




https://www.houstonchronicle.com/politi ... 867537.php

The conservative group Project Veritas was ordered on Thursday to pay Stanford University nearly $150,000 in legal fees after a federal judge dismissed the activist organization's defamation lawsuit against the California school.

U.S. District Judge Thomas Zilly of Seattle federal court awarded Stanford's attorneys at the firms Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman and Miller Nash the full amount they requested in June following the dismissal of the complaint.

An academic blog post in September 2020 from a Stanford-affiliated nonpartisan coalition ...

The blog post questioned a Project Veritas report about alleged "ballot harvesting" in Minnesota. Zilly's ruling dismissing the lawsuit said "the phrases in the blog post that Project Veritas challenges as defamatory are nonactionable opinions."

Judge Zilly ruled that Project Veritas is on the hook for $149,596.90, to be exact. This is the money that Project Veritas owes to pay off Stanford University’s legal fees. It is an important part of this process because the frivolous nature of the lawsuit is very specifically how shadowy-backed groups like Project Veritas try and stop free speech. In his ruling, Judge Zilly pointed out that Stanford’s accounting of what this ridiculous lawsuit cost them was clearly very fair.

Zilly also pointed out once again that Project Veritas’ legal arguments here were as vacuous as every other argument they’ve made in court. One such argument was Veritas’ disputing $20,000 worth of Stanford’s legal fees as they were accrued during research the University’s lawyers did for motions that did not ultimately find their way into the decision. “Although the Court did not ultimately rule on the issue, it would be error for the Court to treat alternative arguments that the Court did not reach as a basis for reducing an attorney fees award.”

One of the arguments Veritas’ lawyers made to try and get out of paying the legal fees was to say they didn’t believe anti-SLAPP laws (SLAPP stands for “strategic lawsuits against public participation”) could be applied federally. Opposing anti-SLAPP laws, saying that they should not apply federally, is arguably the single most anti-free speech position one can take in court.

The court documents say Kurlander texted Harris at one point, saying Project Veritas was “in a sketchy business and here they are taking what’s literally a stolen diary and info” and attempting to turn it into a story that would ruin Ashley Biden’s “and try and effect the election.”

“We have to tread even me carefully,” he added in the text, “and that stuff needs to be gone through by us and if anything worthwhile it needs to be turned over and MUST be out of that house.”

Project Veritas said in a statement on Thursday that its news gathering was “ethical and legal.”

“A journalist’s lawful receipt of material later alleged to be stolen is routine, commonplace, and protected by the First Amendment,” the statement added. It did not acknowledge the $40,000 payment.

WASHINGTON — A jury in a federal civil case on Thursday found that Project Veritas, a conservative group known for its deceptive tactics, had violated wiretapping laws and fraudulently misrepresented itself as part of a lengthy sting operation against Democratic political consultants.

The jury awarded the consulting firm, Democracy Partners, $120,000. The decision amounted to a sharp rebuke of the practices that Project Veritas and its founder, James O’Keefe, have relied on. During the trial, lawyers for Project Veritas portrayed the operation as news gathering and its employees as journalists following the facts.

“Hopefully, the decision today will help to discourage Mr. O’Keefe and others from conducting these kind of political spy operations and publishing selectively edited, misleading videos in the future,” Robert Creamer, a co-founder of Democracy Partners, said in a statement after the jury had reached a verdict.

Project Veritas said it would appeal the decision.

“Hopefully, the decision today will help to discourage Mr. O’Keefe and others from conducting these kind of political spy operations and publishing selectively edited, misleading videos in the future,”

James O’Keefe ‘Outright Cruel’ to Project Veritas Employees, Internal Memo Alleges
‘A POWER HUNGRY TYRANT’

The undercover video operation run by right-wing operative James O’Keefe is in turmoil, wracked by unhappy donors and O’Keefe’s “outright cruel” behavior towards his staff, according to an internal memo signed by a third of its employees.

Working for O’Keefe at Project Veritas can mean being “publicly humiliated” by him in what amounts to “public crucifixions,” and even being required to take lie detector tests, his unhappy employees write in the memo.

“I would describe Project Veritas’ current environment with this saying: ‘The beatings will continue until morale improves,’” one disgruntled staffer wrote in the memo.

On Monday, Project Veritas staffers presented the nonprofit’s board with the document covering his behavior, saying they were “troubled and frustrated” by O’Keefe’s management style. Later that day, the board voted to reinstate two executives O’Keefe had fired a week earlier, while O’Keefe went on paid leave.

“James will be taking a few weeks of well-deserved [paid time off],” Project Veritas executive director Daniel Strack wrote Monday in an internal Project Veritas group chat obtained by The Daily Beast.

Even though O’Keefe is synonymous with the group he founded, his fate at the nonprofit remains unclear. New York Magazine first reported on the internal dissension and O’Keefe’s leave.

raison de arizona wrote: ↑Thu Feb 09, 2023 12:04 am Sounds like he is a real asshole, he doesn’t just play one on tv.