One of Barack Obama’s first big “community organizer” jobs involved ACORN in 1992. Obama also trained ACORN employees. He represented ACORN in court. Obama worked with and protested with ACORN. His campaign donated $800,000 to ACORN this year for voter registration efforts.
And, ACORN even canvassed for Obama this year.
Now we hear this…
The New York Times had killed a story in October that would have shown a close link between ACORN, Project Vote and the Obama campaign. The Bulletin reported:
A lawyer involved with legal action against Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) told a House Judiciary subcommittee on March 19 The New York Times had killed a story in October that would have shown a close link between ACORN, Project Vote and the Obama campaign because it would have been a “a game changer.”
A former worker, Anita Moncrief, told Ms. Heidelbaugh last October, during the state committee’s litigation against ACORN, she had been a “confidential informant for several months to The New York Times reporter, Stephanie Strom.” Ms. Strom had written several stories based on information Ms. Moncrief had given her.
During her testimony, Ms. Heidelbaugh said Ms. Moncrief had told her The New York Times articles stopped when she revealed that the Obama presidential campaign had sent its maxed-out donor list to ACORN’s Washington, D.C. office. . . to “reach out to the maxed-out donors and solicit donations from them for Get Out the Vote efforts to be run by ACORN.”
“Upon learning this information and receiving the list of donors from the Obama campaign, Ms. Strom reported to Ms. Moncrief that her editors at The New York Times wanted her to kill the story because, and I quote, “it was a game changer.”’
U.S. Rep. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wisc., the ranking Republican on the committee, said the interactions between the Obama campaign and ACORN . . could possibly violate federal election law, and “ACORN has a pattern of getting in trouble for violating federal election laws.”
He also voiced criticism of The New York Times.
“If true, The New York Times is showing once again that it is a not an impartial observer of the political scene,” he said. “If they want to be a mouthpiece for the Democratic Party, they should put Barack Obama approves of this in their newspaper.”
…Two facts are certain. First: the New York Times had the ACORN-Obama story via Moncrief’s long term relationship with Strom; and second: they did not run it. They may deny that their refusal to run the story was not politically motivated. But they will also find it hard to defend what is news today, was also not news back in October.
- this, in their own words, “was a game-changer;”
- that it would potentially alter the outcome of an election,
- AND that this was an action that was potentially illegal from a group with a history of doing illegal things, and that
- it was something that would almost certainly boost their circulation at a time the newspaper itself was having substantial financial difficulty.
So here’s my Exit Question: If the New York Times Spikes a story ofelection influencing, does that not mean they are colluding with the New York Times, even if indirectly, to throw an American Election?
Does that not make this a conspiracy between the New York Times and ACORN?
And does that not make both organizations liable assets to be seized under the RICO Act?
Don’t hold your breath waiting for THAT investigation . . .