Video: Breitbart updates the Pigford story; Update: Video fixed

posted at 8:48 am on January 31, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

On Saturday while at the Americans for Prosperity conference in San Diego, I got a few minutes to talk to Andrew Breitbart about the story and the scandal of the Pigford settlements. It’s a very complicated story, as Andrew explains in this 20-minute interview just before an hour-long presentation to the conference, which has made it difficult for some to follow. His efforts at Big Journalism have turned up a slew of documents and depositions from an earlier FBI probe into the Pigford I and Pigford II settlements, and Andrew says he has evidence — on video and audio — that shows a great deal of fraud in pursuing the cl.ass action against the USDA. The people who wound up suffering were those black farmers who actually suffered discrimination and “torture” (Andrew’s word), and who are all but cut out of the money as a result of efforts to turn this into a cash cow.

Who benefits from this? Andrew explains, and also says that the story will be breaking wide open in the coming days. Be sure to watch this all the way through.

Update: Eyeblast seems to have failed to generate a usable embed. I’ve broken it into two parts and uploaded it to YouTube instead. (Dailymotion stinks on ice, where they insist on having users “CLICK HERE TO PUBLISH” and never finishing the process.)

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Fan.Ceiling.And all that.

SouthernGent on January 31, 2011 at 12:51 PM

audiculous

Do you still consider yourself to be a moderate Conservative?

What principles do you base that on?

Chip on January 31, 2011 at 12:54 PM

If you lean at all right, get over yourself if you are also in any way upset about O’keefe’s videos.

I guarantee you that if you had handed O’keefe a production team and thirty or forty K in expenses, a professional production crew, CGI time, and asked him to produce an expose on ACORN, then you would have gotten a sterile hard news “polished for prime time” story.

But these kids, essentially, went out on their own and did this with little to no resources and beat the hell out of the mass media by doing it.

I personally forgive them for putting their humorous mark on it with the pimp-suit. At the time I can only assume that they NEVER in their wildest dreams thought that their report be the most definitive expose yet produced. . . they expected the MSM to go after ACORN and produce the polished pieces. Yet, these kids got the story RIGHT! ACORN was doing exactly what they showed.

If you lean at all to the right. . . be cautious about criticizing the likes of O’keefe and Mattera. They are rough now, but they will be forces to be reckoned with in the future. We need them on our side, too.

I too am waiting to hear some “lies” from the ACORN tapes.

Jason Coleman on January 31, 2011 at 12:54 PM

Jayrae on January 31, 2011 at 10:27 AM

Hillbuzz remains friends – on a personal level – with Hillary. They do not support her politically. They purportedly support Sarah Palin and other Conservatives for office.

That said, one should be *extremely* careful about donating money for projects which may or may not ever come to fruition.

Solaratov on January 31, 2011 at 12:57 PM

Somebody ban this ‘ridiculous’ @sshole. Destroys any thread he posts his little turds on.

RickZ on January 31, 2011 at 11:31 AM

But then where would we get our giggles?

katy the mean old lady on January 31, 2011 at 12:58 PM

Isn’t ‘Pigford’ a most appropriate name? As in ‘ford’ -a place to cross, or a path. So Pigford is a path for pigs, to get rich in this case.

Mostly crooked lawyers. (sorry for the repetition)

slickwillie2001 on January 31, 2011 at 1:35 PM

Breitbart is a propagandist and thinks that lying in a good cause is righteous.

Nobody can trust anything that he says.

audiculous on January 31, 2011 at 9:16 AM

didn’t say a thing about ignoring fraud.

audiculous on January 31, 2011 at 11:53 AM

Petard—>Hoist

fossten on January 31, 2011 at 2:03 PM

Breitbart is a propagandist and thinks that lying in a good cause is righteous.
audiculous on January 31, 2011 at 9:16 AM

That would make him a liberal. I don’t believe anyone would call Breitbart a deadbeat Cloward-Piven marxist liberal.

BruthaMan on January 31, 2011 at 2:17 PM

conservative pilgrim, I suggest you educate yourself. Hillbuzz is a con job for donations. They may talk up Sarah now but are they bashing Hillary, no. Hillary’s performance now is a total disgrace. It is impossible to be a fan of Hillary and Sarah. Just more leftist con job snake oil salesman to herd more conservative sheep. Hillbuzz is for Hillbuss and that’s it. Proceed at your own risk. Wake up and smell the TEA! Chicago thugs are Chicago thugs.

Jayrae on January 31, 2011 at 10:27 AM

Uh-huh. You didn’t read the link, did you? If you did, then you (and RickZ) would know that their new site will not have Hillary on the header.

They like Hillary personally and thus are reticent to critique her, which I understand although I don’t agree with that. She isn’t above criticism. They aim their criticism, however, at the real problem: Obama.

I read HillBuzz regularly. That doesn’t mean I agree with everything they write. But for people who were life-long Democrats and have transitioned to conservative, Tea-Party Independent positions (although Libertarian on some social issues), they do more for furthering Conservatism than most in the GOP, or Cocktail Party as they like to say.

fyi-They are not from Chicago (Ohio actually), but they live there.

conservative pilgrim on January 31, 2011 at 2:24 PM

Breitbart is a propagandist and thinks that lying in a good cause is righteous. Nobody can trust anything that he says.
audiculous on January 31, 2011 at 9:16 AM

I guess that you haven’t been informed as to whom has also been working on the with Andrew. Lee Stranahan is certainly not a right-wing liar and has been working along side Andrew to get to the truth, not just splashy headlines.

Do a little more research and exercise that mush between your ears before you engage your mouth.

belad on January 31, 2011 at 2:28 PM

Kudos for the strong arm that never gets tired (I walked by as you were recording this, holding the camera up without a tripod)!

Both you and Breitbart called this a complicated story, but it’s not really all that complicated. ‘Grievance’ attorneys expanded the plaintiff pool (vastly) to enhance their fees, excluded the real plaintiffs, suborned perjury to support the grievance claim, and bilked a complicit government of billions for no reason other than collective greed.

What makes it complicated was the wealth of opportunity available to Andrew to collect the evidence that should result in quite a few indictments.

What makes it doubly egregious is the fact that the proponents (the class action attorneys and their lackeys) spoke publicly about how to benefit from the scam in order to expand the claimant pool (and thus, their fees).

What makes it triply egregious is the fact that it’s very easy to follow the footprints to observe the participation of a federal judge, the Dept of Agriculture, and Obama.

ElRonaldo on January 31, 2011 at 3:16 PM

So, what is this thread about? Something about black farmers getting screwed?

Vince on January 31, 2011 at 3:26 PM

OK, ElRonaldo, for the 4th egregious is that these scam artists, all of them, think that either they are going to get away with it OR they deserve the payday (or both).
You’re right it is really not all that complicated but it certainly is disgusting.

ORconservative on January 31, 2011 at 3:28 PM

conservative pilgrim on January 31, 2011 at 2:24 PM

Yeah, right. If Hillbuzz are such great allies of us conservatives and Palin, and are dropping Hillary from a ‘new’ masthead, then why was I banned for politely pointing out, on some thread, their sainted Hillary being on the masthead? No comment, nothing, just a Charles Johnson stealth ban. They have thin skins like any liberal retard. Can’t trust ‘em further than I can throw ‘em. They have not had a ‘Road to Damscus’ ‘Come to Jesus’ moment yet, no matter how much they talk a good game. Actions always speak louder than words.

RickZ on January 31, 2011 at 3:39 PM

So, no word from “audiculous” on what lies were in the ACORN videos? Hmm… How about the NAACP/Sherrod tape? No? Didn’t think so.

Frankly, I’m ashamed of the way many of you let him prattle on like that without confronting him. Seems the Lefties have been successful in their efforts to smear Breitbart. Well, enough so that many of you will not stand with him.

Take heart, friends. All you have to do is get the facts and then when “audiculous” and his ilk call pull their crap, ask for proof. Generally, the most you’ll get is a link full of more crap. Or, like in this case, they just shut up because they’ve got squat and try again at a later date.

Fight on.

MikeZero on January 31, 2011 at 4:23 PM

I’m really jealous, Ed. I’d rather be in San Diego.
JammieWearingFool on January 31, 2011 at 9:14 AM

Why?

Its 65 deg outside today with clear sky’s!

DSchoen on January 31, 2011 at 4:24 PM

Please ignore the unneeded “call” in that third paragraph.

MikeZero on January 31, 2011 at 4:24 PM

I stumbled across Hillbuzz because of one of their “Crass vs Class” pieces and their apology to former President George Bush. They’re definitely on our side and have a great refreshig take on things.

And as others pointed out, they’ve been covering ‘Pigford’ for a while now.

Canadian Infidel on January 31, 2011 at 4:42 PM

OK, ccan we get past the troll an dstear this back to the topic.
What happens when this “breaks wide open”?
Seriously, if the group of people implicated in this goes all the way to his highness, how does this story break?
We already know that the DOJ will only prosecute white people and I’m assuming there are not too many involved. How do they just drop it, which we know they will/try, after it becomes known.
That’s the other thing that is interesting to me, I’ll bet if you did a man on the street somewhere in flyover country no one would have a clue what Pigford is.

ORconservative on January 31, 2011 at 4:42 PM

Yes, you need to. The Hillbuzz folks still like Clinton personally, but even they will likely admit that Hillary is not the answer, at all. They are huge Palin supporters and have become firm supporters of the legacy of GWB. It has been an interesting 2 and 1/2 years following the conversion. If you’re familiar with Robin from Berkley, that explains it very nicely. You can trust me, they are no longer (D), but firmly (I) with heavy (R) leanings.

As long as the (R)’s are Conservative.

98ZJUSMC on January 31, 2011 at 10:19 AM

There are quite a few former Dems hanging out at AT & Hillbuzz. They didn’t take kindly to the kneecapping the Bamster did to Hillary. Also they are just seeing the true colors of the Dems in general. The healthcare thing, the way they just rammed it down the nations throat was enough to turn anyone that was still trying to stay loyal to the party.

wi farmgirl on January 31, 2011 at 5:01 PM

I have been hitting Hillbuzz since before the election way back when Rush mentioned it on air. They are unconventional but they are becoming pretty conservative. They have liked Sarah since the MN speech. They have no love lost for the Won and the wife.

wi farmgirl on January 31, 2011 at 5:06 PM

Breitbart is a propagandist and thinks that lying in a good cause is righteous.

Nobody can trust anything that he says.

audiculous on January 31, 2011 at 9:16 AM

Right! Because NYT, WaPo, LAT, ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, NPR, and CSPAN aren’t propagandists and therefore, everything they say is far more accurate than Breitbart.

Nobody can trust anything they say anymore either….

Doesn’t stop them from trying, though, does it? And it hasn’t stopped you either.

Subsunk

Subsunk on January 31, 2011 at 6:12 PM

RickZ on January 31, 2011 at 3:39 PM

So that’s your real beef with Hillbuzz? And your obvious dislike of Hillary. I am not a Hillary fan in the least, but I appreciate much of HillBuzz does. They are extremely proactive in exposing the Left, Democrats, and RINOs. I am able to separate my dislike of Hillary and her policies with HillBuzz though.

Were you banned or just not getting through the filter? They get a lot of spam and sometimes comments get tied up or disappear (it’s happened to me), which will be resolved with the new website.

I do wonder if your comment(s) was as innocent as you imply.

conservative pilgrim on January 31, 2011 at 6:31 PM

The central question here is:

How did 2000 legitimate claimants out of a total population of 22000 black farmers morph into a class action with 90,000+ claimants?

Liberal spinners can’t hide behind the way O’Keef is dressed or their opinion of Breitbart: they simply need to explain in simple language how this is in any way legitimate and not a HUGE SCAM!!!

And you don’t have to read the posts out loud to figure out that ‘audiculous’ means “Sounds Ridiculous”. He (/she/it) is simply a troll who keeps throwing red herrings into the discussion hoping to distract others from the subject matter.

landlines on January 31, 2011 at 6:35 PM

It is a huge scam. But will anything be done about it?
My guess is no.

ORconservative on January 31, 2011 at 6:52 PM

conservative pilgrim on January 31, 2011 at 6:31 PM

All I can say is they pulled a Chuck Johnson on a rather tame comment. They don’t like being reminded of their Hillary love, I guess.

RickZ on January 31, 2011 at 7:25 PM

All I can say is they pulled a Chuck Johnson on a rather tame comment. They don’t like being reminded of their Hillary love, I guess.

RickZ on January 31, 2011 at 7:25 PM

Mmmkay. Kevin is quite open about his fondness for Hillary. Reminding him about that isn’t a problem, but how you do so may be cause for, ahem, “banning.”

Based on your tone here, I’m thinking you may have had an ax to grind about Hillary and took it out on HillBuzz in an unfriendly manner. Just surmising.

Anywhoo….one can never go wrong with calm, reasoned discourse when we disagree. You can always try again with their new site, if you want.

conservative pilgrim on January 31, 2011 at 7:37 PM

Right! Because NYT, WaPo, LAT, ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, NPR, and CSPAN aren’t propagandists and therefore, everything they say is far more accurate than Breitbart.

Yeah, Sub, they’re all lying to you and putting the saltpeter in your mashed turnips, too.

audiculous on January 31, 2011 at 11:07 PM

How’s that report coming, Slappy?

MikeZero on January 31, 2011 at 11:24 PM

Breitbart is a propagandist and thinks that lying in a good cause is righteous.
audiculous on January 31, 2011 at 9:16 AM

retort:

That would make him a liberal. I don’t believe anyone would call Breitbart a deadbeat Cloward-Piven marxist liberal.

BruthaMan on January 31, 2011 at 2:17 PM

Radical liberals use lies as a means to an end. Audiculous is using projection as per a typical liberal. Breitbart did NOT lie about Sherrod. She said she illegally used racist sentiment to harm a white farmer, then felt bad about it. His clip demonstrated the fact that she admitted to a crime. Breitbart didn’t need to show the “felt bad about it” part. The courts can deal with the fact she “felt bad and fixed it” if she faces trial.

scotash on February 1, 2011 at 2:34 AM

conservative pilgrim, congratulations your first inclination told you that 1 + 1 = 2 but you decided to allow KDJ to convince you that it equals 3. KDJ still throws the “victim” card just like every good liberal every time he can. Conservatives are “individuals” but you are deciding to “go along with the herd” because it feels good. Sarah wouldn’t have anything to do with someone who threw the victim card. I got sick of reading about how everybody hates little KDJ. Maybe they do because all he ever does is “get in peoples faces”, want something for nothing, and screw people around just like a liberal. When he screws you too for all the money you donated you will remember the warnings. Until then continue to feel so enlightened just like all Øppressives do or get a book on developing critical thinking skills. KDJ is a con artist. That’s what he recognizes in Øbama. It takes one to know one. Once you get banned you will see the little Hitler loser for what he is.

Jayrae on February 1, 2011 at 7:31 AM

Aupreposterous is trying to get the commie scum of on a meager technicality that alters the facts, not.

Sonosam on February 1, 2011 at 9:29 AM

@Jayrae on February 1, 2011 at 7:31 AM

Your condescension and snark are duly noted. Have a super day!

conservative pilgrim on February 1, 2011 at 9:47 AM

conservative pilgrim, it’s not “condescension and snark.”

The Pigford case is regarding extortion. KDJ wrote posts during the Palin/Letterman fiasco telling lily livered conservatives how he extorted insurance companies and hotels. He advised never to let up until the companies relent and settle just to get rid of you. Extortion is extortion. Maybe this isn’t what you want to hear just because someone has lit a fire under your butt and set you in motion to do more. Just keep your radar up. All that glitter’s is not gold, remember. Conservatives run the risk of having KDJ blow up in their face.

Jayrae on February 1, 2011 at 10:10 AM

Jayrae on February 1, 2011 at 10:10 AM

Yes it is condescension and snark. I get it–you don’t like Kevin or HillBuzz.

Let it be known to you that people can read other’s opinions and websites with objectivity and discernment. I read HillBuzz regularly, but that does not mean I donate nor agree with everything on the site. (That’s your fallacious assumption.) Yet, there is a lot of good stuff they do and expose. I’ll take it.

By the way–I read WaPo editorials and Ezra Kline daily. Does that mean I’m a herder and easily swayed? Not in the least. It’s called being informed and not living in a vacuum.

You have a beef with Kevin and HillBuzz. Fine. But you can take your condescension, erroneous assumptions, and belittlement and put it where the sun doesn’t shine.

conservative pilgrim on February 1, 2011 at 10:59 AM

trying to get the commie scum of on a meager technicality that alters the facts, not.

Sonosam

really stupid. maybe you’re interested in getting off but my interest was as stated, dishonest reporting is not good.

and deliberately dishonest reporting is more not gooder.

that’s not got a thing to do with wanting to cover up crimes. left, right, up or down, a dishonest press ill serves a democracy.

audiculous on February 1, 2011 at 1:28 PM

Still nothing, eh, audi? I’m a patient man. I await your report.

MikeZero on February 1, 2011 at 10:17 PM

Comment pages: 1 2