Tag: project veritas
Fake Journalist Nick Shirley Recycles A Debunked 'Voter Fraud' Narrative

Fake Journalist Nick Shirley Recycles A Debunked 'Voter Fraud' Narrative

A new video by MAGA provocateur Nick Shirley purports to expose voter fraud in California, but in fact it’s little more than a repackaging of false narratives spread over a decade ago by right-wing operative James O'Keefe. In both cases, the right-wing influencers suggest that fraud could exist without actually exposing any, relying on innuendo and hypotheticals rather than evidence.

O’Keefe created the template for undercover videos meant to expose and embarrass liberal organizations and causes. His old videos, like Shirley’s new ones, were frequently debunked in real time, but they nevertheless served a role in providing fuel to conservative content creators hungry to stoke outrage about perceived liberal excesses. Shirley’s repackaging shouldn’t be surprising given the incentives for young, MAGA-aligned influencers to make a name for themselves in a crowded field. But the original claims didn't provoke any policy changes — reasonably so, given that they were bogus — so Shirley's repackaging has little to offer beyond a hope that new consumers take the bait.

Shirley gained prominence in recent months following a so-called investigation into fraud in Minneapolis day care centers. Although there were some real instances of fraud within the city’s social services, local news and prosecutors had already exposed and investigated many instances of wrong-doing. Still, The New York Times referred to Shirley as having “spurred the federal crackdown on Minneapolis.”

Once the right-wing’s most identifiable creator of sting-style — often deliberately misleading — exposés, O’Keefe’s star has since somewhat fallen. In 2010, O’Keefe founded Project Veritas, and over more than a decade the organization produced videos meant to discredit perceived liberal organizations, often through tactics such as manipulation and deceptive editing. According to Rolling Stone, in 2023 O’Keefe “either left or was pushed out of his own company … depending on whom you ask.” He has since tried to reestablish himself in the right-wing media ecosystem, including by creating an award in 2025 for the so-called citizen journalists who have followed in his footsteps. The first recipient was Nick Shirley.

Shirley, like O’Keefe, is promoting the possibility of fraud that he hasn't actually found

Shirley’s video is one of many from right-wing influencers, such as Benny Johnson, decrying supposedly rampant voter fraud in California, and it includes many examples and myths that have already been debunked. One of the most prominent narratives in Shirley’s video, which was already debunked when Johnson spread it, is that voters whose registrations list central locations, like an abandoned building, as an address are a clear sign of fraud. However, as Democracy Docket notes, California law “gives people experiencing homelessness the flexibility to use any location to register to vote. As long as unhoused residents can describe the place where they spend most of their time — whether it’s an address, a cross street, or a vacant lot — they can legally list it as their address on their voter registration form.”

Another one of Shirley's key examples of “fraud” in the video is a previously reported story about a woman who registered her dog to vote and cast two ballots for him in 2021 and 2022, only one of which was counted. The woman, a registered Republican, self-reported her crimes and is facing six years in prison.

The premise of Shirley’s 20-minute video is that there could be fraud in California without stricter voter ID laws and “with the state receiving millions of illegal migrants, the opportunities for fraud now are even higher.” California does require a valid ID or Social Security number when registering to vote or when voting for the first time after registering by mail, and extensive research has shown that noncitizen voting in U.S. elections is exceedingly rare and extremely unlikely to impact elections. Yet Shirley’s video has been picked up by others in right-wing media, including livestreamer Tim Pool, former FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino, and conspiracy theory website The Gateway Pundit.

Had someone just awoken from a decade-long coma, they might find these types of claims quite familiar. In 2012, O’Keefe attempted to show how easy it was to commit voter fraud in a state without strict voter ID laws via a video titled “Dead people receive ballots in NH primary,” which claims that conspirators could use the names of the deceased to cast fraudulent ballots to steal an election. But, as Media Matters noted at the time, the video “actually demonstrates just how difficult it would be to pull off such a plot.”

Although it’s true that making sure ballot rolls are accurate is important, O’Keefe’s stunt only showed that without knowing how many votes were needed, the conspirators would need to engage in a massive plot and subsequent cover-up to make sure they had covered the spread. It would be an enormous undertaking. O’Keefe provided no evidence that such a scheme existed for the simple reason that there was no such plot.

In another one of O’Keefe’s “gotcha” videos on voter fraud, a Project Veritas employee almost obtains a ballot meant for registered voter Eric Holder, then the U.S. attorney general. Project Veritas marketed the video as a slam dunk, claiming it had “proven” fraud occurred while in reality no vote was cast and no fraud occurred. The manufactured stunt, like Shirley’s escapades in California, was another senseless attempt to rally people behind more restrictive voter ID laws.

Though Shirley’s claims about California include some different details from O’Keefe and Project Veritas’ claims, the gist is the same: Both attempt to prove “voter fraud” and fail to show any actual fraud being committed. Such right-wing misinformation has been debunked for years while the truth is still that fraud is just not happening at the scale they claim.

Reprinted with permission from Media Matters

Project Veritas Undermines First Amendment, But Wants Its 'Journalism' Protected

Project Veritas Undermines First Amendment, But Wants Its 'Journalism' Protected

Reprinted with permission from Media Matters

Far-right video producer Project Veritas has been trying to undermine the careers and rights of mainstream journalists for years, but in the aftermath of FBI raids on the homes of its founder and CEO James O'Keefe and his associates, the group is now claiming that its own journalistic rights were violated.

Project Veritas is largely known for targeting and attempting to infiltrate political campaigns, nonprofits, and mainstream media outlets and releasing recordings of selectively edited video and audio from these organizations in an effort to frame its target as biased or criminal. In the past year, the far-right grifter has produced and pushed misinformation about voter fraud and the coronavirus vaccine.

In early November, the FBI raided the homes of O'Keefe and some of his associates as part of an investigation into the missing diary of Ashley Biden, President Joe Biden's daughter. The diary went missing last year and excerpts appeared online shortly before the 2020 election. While acknowledging that his group did have access to the diary, O'Keefe claimed "that he and his colleagues had been operating as ethical journalists, had turned the diary over to the law enforcement authorities last year and had sought to return it to a lawyer for Ms. Biden," according to The New York Times, before hand-written pages from it were published on another right-wing website just before Election Day.


In addition to The New York Times, Project Veritas is also suing CNN for libel. Rulings in favor of O'Keefe in either case would undermine essential protections for journalists first outlined in the precedent set by Supreme Court case New York Times Company v. Sullivan. The ruling in that case protects journalists from being targeted with frivolous defamation and libel claims by setting a higher standard for what counts as libel in coverage of people considered public figures.

For years, O'Keefe and Project Veritas have been attempting to undermine press freedoms, while insisting they are journalists themselves. Media outlets should not rush to the defense of an organization actively trying to undermine their rights -- especially one with a history of pushing misleading claims and conspiracy theories.


Since the raids were publicly reported in The New York Times, Project Veritas has been claiming its First Amendment rights were violated. O'Keefe alleged that his "reporters' notes" and source information were confiscated and suggested that as a journalist, that information is protected under the First Amendment.

Project Veritas has dedicated years to tearing down the media, attempting to undermine vital press freedoms in multiple lawsuits against mainstream news outlets. And Project Veritas itself does not operate as a news organization. It engages in unethical undercover sting operations where its operatives assume false identities in order to infiltrate Democratic campaigns, liberal organizations, media outlets, and other enemies of the right. It has reportedly sought out donors for input on the publishing timeline for stories, taken the words of its targets out of context, and pushed dangerous misinformation about the vaccine.

Meanwhile, Project Veritas has been reveling in coverage concerning its First Amendment rights from Politico and The Washington Post as well as statements of begrudging support from the American Civil Liberties Union, The Committee to Protect Journalists, and others.

At the same time, Project Veritas is actively undermining the rights of actual journalists at The New York Times.

On November 11, The New York Times published an article based on Project Veritas' "internal documents" and the FBI's search warrant for O'Keefe that "reveal the extent to which the group has worked with its lawyers to gauge how far its deceptive reporting practices can go before running afoul of federal laws." Project Veritas alleged, in an unrelated libel lawsuit against the Times, that authorities had leaked the information about the search warrant and the memos to the paper after receiving them from the raid. No evidence was presented for this, and The New York Times says they received the materials prior to the raid occurring.

Nevertheless, Project Veritas' lawyers convinced a judge in the libel case to temporarily block the Times from "publishing or seeking out certain documents related to the conservative group." (The lawsuit is over a 2020 Times article about a now-debunked Project Veritas video accusing Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) of illegal ballot collection, which the Times called a "coordinated disinformation campaign.")

This is the first attempt by a court to use prior restraint -- a court order meant to preemptively prevent media publication -- against The New York Times since the release of the Pentagon Papers in 1971. In response, some of the same groups and journalists that issued statements of concern regarding the FBI raid issued similar condemnations of Project Veritas.

Project Veritas' attempt to curb freedom of the press while also claiming to be journalists shouldn't surprise anyone. The organization has spent years undermining or attempting to undermine journalism, especially any pieces or people critical of the group's actions. It has a video series dubbed "Retracto," which appears designed to direct harassment at journalists who write unfavorable articles about the group or even a tweet about Project Veritas and then later have to partially or fully retract their statements. The "retracto" video series features the face and, if applicable, the Twitter handle of targets, enabling viewers to attack them after watching the video.

Project Veritas Retracto example 11-14

From a November 14, 2020, video by Project Veritas posted on YouTube


In addition to The New York Times, Project Veritas is also suing CNN for libel. Rulings in favor of O'Keefe in either case would undermine essential protections for journalists first outlined in the precedent set by Supreme Court case New York Times Company v. Sullivan. The ruling in that case protects journalists from being targeted with frivolous defamation and libel claims by setting a higher standard for what counts as libel in coverage of people considered public figures.

For years, O'Keefe and Project Veritas have been attempting to undermine press freedoms, while insisting they are journalists themselves. Media outlets should not rush to the defense of an organization actively trying to undermine their rights -- especially one with a history of pushing misleading claims and conspiracy theories.


Founder of Project Veritas James O'Keef

Far-Right Disinformation Outfit 'Project Veritas' Sunk By Hurricane Ida

Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos

The destructive flooding of Hurricane Ida as it hit the mainland U.S. has stretched from the Mississippi all the way up the Northeast of our country. The realities of our country's archaic infrastructure has even led to some GOP officials voicing their support for President Biden's infrastructure bill, which they've generally tried to neuter and delay for political gain. The costs in human misery and economic instability of doing nothing about climate change are far higher than the money we should be spending to upgrade our country's vast infrastructure needs.

Bad policy and unproductive political theater will not offer you immunity for defying science and forces like weather. Bad policy decisions concerning climate change and infrastructure hurt everyone. The Daily Beast reports that dirtbag conservative operator James O'Keefe and his Project Veritas crew lost their Mamaroneck, New York, home base to Ida's floods. Peas and carrots or thoughts and prayers, whichever one means less.

O'Keefe is probably best known for breaking the law and getting awards from Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas' terrible wife inside of a swampy Trump Hotel lobby for his work hiring women to create false sexual assault allegations in the hopes of discrediting real sexual assault allegations. Read that last part over to yourself again and then think about the kind of terrible hole in one's soul you have to have to be involved in that.

In a video posted to the right-wing disinformation group's YouTube channel, O'Keefe unironically says that Project Veritas' next "story" might be delayed as he works on rebuilding the organizations' infrastructure. In the video, O'Keefe calls himself and his "organization" the "most resilient organization anywhere," and then blathers on with a trite reference to the phoenix rising from the ashes. He finishes by misquoting a poem by Rudyard Kipling in sort of a perfect encapsulation of the conservative movement in our country: conjuring up an old famous imperialist, racist, and anti-Semite and then lacking the intelligence and thoroughness to even properly repeat his least offensive poetry.

Guess he'll be asking for some more of that socialist taxpayer money he and his buddies rail so hard against but love to have in the bank for a rainy day.

Bombshell Report Uncovers Right-Wing 'Sting' Plot Against McMaster, FBI

Bombshell Report Uncovers Right-Wing 'Sting' Plot Against McMaster, FBI

Undercover operatives from the right-wing Project Veritas worked with a former British spy and Betsy DeVos' brother Erik Prince to wage a smear and sting operation to discredit "deep state" federal government officials on President Donald Trump's enemies list while he was in office, including the White House National Security Adviser and unnamed FBI agents.

The New York Times broke the bombshell story, reporting that the "campaign included a planned sting operation against Mr. Trump's national security adviser at the time, H.R. McMaster, and secret surveillance operations against F.B.I. employees, aimed at exposing anti-Trump sentiment in the bureau's ranks.

""The campaign," the Times reports, "shows the obsession that some of Mr. Trump's allies had about a shadowy 'deep state' trying to blunt his agenda — and the lengths that some were willing to go to try to purge the government of those believed to be disloyal to the president."

"Central to the effort, according to interviews, was Richard Seddon, a former undercover British spy who was recruited in 2016 by the security contractor Erik Prince to train Project Veritas operatives to infiltrate trade unions, Democratic congressional campaigns and other targets. He ran field operations for Project Veritas until mid-2018."

Last year, The New York Times reported that Mr. Seddon ran an expansive effort to gain access to the unions and campaigns and led a hiring effort that nearly tripled the number of the group's operatives, according to interviews and deposition testimony. He trained operatives at the Prince family ranch in Wyoming.

The Times' extensive reporting, which runs about 2700 words, does not reveal who initiated or who bankrolled the campaign.

The Times reports the operation was run out of a Washington, D.C, townhouse that rented for $10,000 a month, and that it is not known if President Trump or his closest advisors, including family members, were aware of the operation or had anything to do with it.

"The operation against Mr. McMaster was hatched not long after an article appeared in BuzzFeed News about a private dinner in 2017. Exactly what happened during the dinner is in dispute, but the article said that Mr. McMaster had disparaged Mr. Trump by calling him an 'idiot' with the intelligence of a 'kindergartner.'"

Those allegations were never proven, although they echo what some others inside the administration, like first Trump Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, had allegedly stated.

In the end, McMaster resigned amid far right-wing attacks, but no recordings emerged of him calling Trump an "idiot."

Read the entire New York Times investigation here.




The Times' extensive reporting, which runs about 2700 words, does not reveal who initiated or who bankrolled the campaign.The Times reports the operation was run out of a Washington, D.C, townhouse that rented for $10,000 a month, and that it is not known if President Trump or his closest advisors, including family members, were aware of the operation or had anything to do with it.Last year, The New York Times reported that Mr. Seddon ran an expansive effort to gain access to the unions and campaigns and led a hiring effort that nearly tripled the number of the group's operatives, according to interviews and deposition testimony. He trained operatives at the Prince family ranch in Wyoming.

The Times' extensive reporting, which runs about 2700 words, does not reveal who initiated or who bankrolled the campaign.The Times reports the operation was run out of a Washington, D.C, townhouse that rented for $10,000 a month, and that it is not known if President Trump or his closest advisors, including family members, were aware of the operation or had anything to do with it.


Shop our Store

Headlines

Editor's Blog

Corona Virus

Trending

World