2023AprilABC News, 7th March 2023Summary published: 4th April 2023

Complaint: A complainant challenged the accuracy of an ABC Newcastle news report which stated that Anambah House in Maitland was being considered for listing on the NSW Heritage Register.

Complaint: An RN listener raised accuracy concerns in relation to a segment Anti-semitism on the rise.

Complaint: A complainant raised concerns that the online story Bruny Island land clearing unites locals in opposition, as developer fined was inaccurate and defamatory.

Complaint: An ABC News Channel viewer complained about the lack of warning prior to distressing footage.

Complaint: An ABC Radio Melbourne listener raised concern that the ABC broadcast a news report on an undercover video released by US-based group Project Veritas and described the group as an investigative news organisation.

Complaint: Two ABC Radio Perth listeners complained that an interview included inappropriate content for the timeslot in which it was aired.

Complaint: Several audience members complained about ABC coverage of a town meeting in Alice Springs. Concerns raised included that coverage unduly favoured one perspective at the meeting that it was racist and failed to fully inform the audience of the range of relevant views at the event. Some complainants also said that an inaccurate estimate of the number of attendees at the meeting was reported.

Complaint: An ABC NewsRadio listener complained that a report inaccurately made a link between Z t-shirts worn by a small number of Australian Open spectators and antisemitism.

Complaint: An ABC Radio listener complained that a news report provided an inaccurate reason as to why the Australian public will be voting in a referendum on the Voice to Parliament.

Complaint: A triple j listener challenged the accuracy of a News report about a Sam Smith concert paid for by the South Australian government.

Complaint: An audience member complained that a report from the Garma Festival in 2022 inaccurately stated that Aboriginal Australians were granted citizenship under the 1967 Referendum.

Complaint: Two listeners complained that the presenter was critical of the gifting of watches by the former CEO of Australia Post while endorsing the former Prime Minister Scott Morrison for his actions regarding the matter.

Complaint: Two viewers challenged the accuracy of a statement that Australia is the largest carbon emitter per capita in the world.

Complaint: An ABC Radio Hobart listener challenged the accuracy of statements made by the presenter in relation to the late mining magnate Lang Hancock and his daughter Gina Rinehart.

Complaint: Two online readers complained that the ABC North West Qld story Queensland kangaroo harvesters struggling to keep up with demand lacked impartiality and contained multiple inaccuracies.

Complaint: An ABC Far North listener complained that a segment included inappropriate commercial references.

Complaint: Two complainants raised privacy concerns in relation to a story about a court hearing: Gregory Roser claims he feared for his own life as he fed Bruce Saunderss body through woodchipper.

Complaint: An ABC Radio Brisbane listener expressed concern about the inclusion of coarse language in a segment.

Complaint: A Double J listener complained that a track with inappropriate content was played on a Sunday afternoon.

Complaint: An ABC Central Victoria listener complained that a court report relating to charges of sexual assault and rape included inappropriately explicit details of the alleged offences.

Complaint: A complainant said that the report Flood victims frustrated at lack of buyback detail inaccurately stated that the NSW Independent Flood Inquiry 2022 criticised the Bureau of Meteorologys rain and river gauges as not fit for purpose.

Complaint: An ABC Radio Sydney listener pointed out inaccuracies across two segments in relation to a recent overseas trip by the Prime Minister.

Complaint: A complainant raised concerns about ABC Gippsland Breakfast content, including that it inaccurately associated the East Gippsland Shire Councils Service Centre and Library Review with its Draft Budget, that the presenter expressed a biased view, and that the Council was not afforded a timely right of reply to claims made about its Draft Budget proposal to increase charges for the Raymond Island ferry.

Complaint: Two complainants raised concerns about an ABC Sport story originally published with the headline Trans womens participation in sport has been framed as an election issue. This is what the science says. The concerns included that the story inaccurately minimised performance differences in sport between cisgender and transgender women and that it lacked impartiality.

Complaint: A viewer expressed concern that a story on the heatwave in Europe included footage from Spain that showed a man on fire running from a wildfire that was gaining momentum.

Complaint: A viewer complained that a story which focussed on a violent confrontation between the Israeli police and mourners at the funeral of Palestinian American journalist Shireen Abu Akleh lacked context and showed anti-Israel bias.

Complaint: An ABC RN listener complained that a news item stated that The Palestinian Authority advised that a seventeen year old youth was shot by Israeli troops but failed to present comment from the Israeli authorities.

Complaint: A viewer expressed concern that a report on coercive control inappropriately included footage of the burning car in which a victim and her three children were murdered.

Complaint: A listener complained that a caller to the program made false claims regarding COVID-19 death statistics and vaccinations without being corrected by the program presenter.

Complaint: An online reader complained that the headline of an ABC Rural story about a cotton grower who was fined by the water regulator for stealing water inaccurately stated that the grower was fined for stealing water in drought.

Complaint: Four viewers complained that a report about an AFL players conduct that caused him to receive a fine from the Collingwood Football Club inappropriately included offensive footage of the players behaviour.

Complaint: Four viewers complained that reports inaccurately described Nick Kyrgios as having a chance to become the first Australian since Lleyton Hewitt twenty years ago to win the Wimbledon tournament.

Complaint: A viewer complained that a report inaccurately stated that millions of Russians had left Russia due to the conflict with Ukraine.

Complaint: An ABC NewsRadio listener challenged the accuracy of a reporters reference to Victorians being subject to no grounds evictions.

Complaint: An online reader complained that the story Anthony Albanese extends term of General Angus Campbell as Chief of the Defence Force inaccurately stated that the Inspector-General of the Australian Defence Forces (IGADF) Afghanistan Inquiry report found that Australian special forces murdered at least 39 prisoners and civilians during the Afghanistan war.

Complaint: An online reader complained that the story Scott Morrisons use of blessed thrust NDIS back into spotlight, raising questions neither side is prepared to answer inaccurately stated that there is no Medicare-style levy to help pay for the NDIS.

Complaint: A listener complained that a caller to the program made racist comments and that the presenter failed to challenge or correct him.

Complaint: A complainant said that a triple j newsreader misrepresented Simon Holmes Courts involvement in funding the teal independent candidates campaigns in the 2022 federal election.

Complaint: A complainant raised concerns about a discussion of the Bureau of Meteorologys operations, funding and infrastructure. The concerns included that the discussion inappropriately called into question the scientific integrity and authority of the Bureau and enabled non-experts to speculate on important matters of public safety without the Bureau being afforded an opportunity to participate. The complaint identified a number of statements expressed in the discussion which the complainant considered inaccurate.

Complaint: Several audience members complained that ABC News coverage presented across a range of programs and services inaccurately referred to a train shutdown in New South Wales as a strike.

Complaint: A complainant expressed concern about coverage of an incident in which a child was injured in a play centre. The complaint went to accuracy, impartiality, privacy and harm and offence.

Complaint: A complaint from multiple signatories raised concerns that an interview about tensions between Ukraine and Russia did not provide listeners with sufficient context about the interviewees support of the Russian leadership and its policies and repeatedly allowed him to present contestable and prejudicial opinions as facts.

Complaint: An online reader complained that the story originally headlined NT Government proposes changes that would require more builders to hold university qualifications inaccurately stated that builders would need university qualifications.

Complaint: A listener complained that a commentator made sexist comments about AFLW players.

Complaint: An ABC Radio Perth listener complained that finance reports over several days incorrectly gave the ASX figures when referring to the All Ordinaries index figures.

Complaint: An ABC Far North Queensland listener complained that an edition of Breakfast which featured coverage of the governments proposed Religious Discrimination Bill lacked balance and impartiality.

Complaint: An online reader complained that a Chinese language ABC News story was misleading and showed support for Russian aggression against Ukraine.

Complaint: A complainant raised several concerns in relation to the story Defence confirms criminal investigation into conduct of Australian commando platoon in Afghanistan, including that it contained false and misleading information.

Complaint: An ABC NewsRadio listener complained that The Hon Peter Dutton MP was inaccurately referred to as a backbencher in a news report.

Complaint: A viewer complained that a segment included misinformation in that images of US commentator Ben Shapiro were shown at the same time as reference was made to various conservative influencers in the US having made claims that the Omicron variant of COVID-19 was part of a government plan to repress unvaccinated populations.

Complaint: Two listeners complained that the program included racist and offensive content.

Complaint: Nine ABC Sport listeners complained that a cricket commentator made inappropriate and sexist comments.

Complaint: A listener complained that a story Trans lives matter: Netflix staff walk off the job included factual errors, misrepresentation, and was biased.

Complaint: An ABC Radio Perth listener complained that a segment about an anti-vaccination protest at a school included an allegation that was subsequently treated as fact.

Complaint: A viewer complained that an item about a disagreement between the commonwealth and state and territory governments over hospital funding during the COVID crisis omitted relevant context and lacked impartiality.

Complaint: A complainant challenged the accuracy of a triple j Hack website post published with the headline Why is the internet so shit in the regions? The complainant also questioned the tone of the headline and its wilful mistaking of pure political spin for established fact.

Complaint: A complainant said that a story inaccurately reported his testimony to the Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide. The complainant made a subsequent complaint that a correction to the story introduced a further error.

Complaint: An audience member complained that the story What is the Elf on the Shelf and where did the Christmas tradition come from? amounted to an advertorial for a commercial product.

Complaint: A complainant said that an ABC Radio Sydney segment included misleading and inaccurate claims and provided a platform for the promotion of illegal mountain bike riding.

Complaint: A complainant said that he was mischaracterised as a conservative Christian doctor from Idaho, who specializes in diabetes in the segment The Australians transgender coverage.

Complaint: A complainant raised concerns about a story initially published with the headline Josh Frydenberg was alerted less than three months into JobKeeper that unqualified companies were receiving support, including that it contained inaccuracies, was misleading, mischaracterised JobKeeper, lacked impartiality and sought to discredit the scheme.

Complaint: A complainant raised concern that the article After leaving her marriage Maya ended up homeless and locked out of her accounts included unverified and false claims.

Complaint: An online reader complained that an analysis piece, originally published with the headline Are climate change warriors fuelling the rise of COVID 19 anti-vaxxers?, linked support for action on climate change with anti-vaccination activism without providing evidence for such a link.

Complaint: Three ABC Radio Adelaide listeners complained about an interview with an ABC presenter about his book, which included a discussion about sex work in South Australia. Concerns raised were that the interview included inaccuracies as well as degrading and misogynistic comments.

Complaint: An ABC Far North Queensland listener raised concerns about an interview with a member of Reignite Democracy Australia (RDA), including that dangerous misinformation was broadcast without being adequately challenged.

Complaint: Two viewers complained that a presenters new book was inappropriately promoted.

Complaint: A listener complained that news updates aired on ABC Radio Brisbane incorrectly stated that hundreds of people were killed in the 11 September 2001 attacks when the toll was close to three thousand.

Complaint: An ABC Far North Queensland listener complained that a contributor to a segment made racist comments and that the presenter failed to call the contributor out.

Complaint: A complainant said that the ABC Sport story Swimming Australia faces questions after tough week, but allegations of toxic culture need backing up contained numerous inaccuracies and lacked balance.

Complaint: An ABC Radio Brisbane listener complained that during discussion of the appointment of Queenslands Chief Health Officer as that states next Governor, the presenter inaccurately stated that the Queensland constitution had been suspended during the COVID-19 pandemic and implied that the appointment was improper.

Complaint: A complainant expressed concern that during an interview with an academic on ABC Radio Newcastle, inaccurate claims were made around the use and effectiveness of ivermectin as a COVID-19 treatment.

Complaint: Former Senator Cory Bernardi complained that an edition of the program included misleading and false allegations about him and that he was not given a fair opportunity to respond to the allegations.

Complaint: A complainant raised accuracy and impartiality concerns in relation to a range of ABC coverage of issues relating to timber harvesting by VicForests.

Complaint: A complainant raised accuracy and impartiality concerns in relation to the ABC News story Superannuation changes have passed Parliament. Here's what that means.

Complaint: A complainant challenged the accuracy of an ABC Radio Sydney presenters statement that the Institute of Public Affairs was funded by Rupert Murdoch. The complainant also raised concern that the program made allegations without providing a fair opportunity to respond.

Complaint: An audience member expressed concern that the episode Women of the Revolution available on ABC iview unnecessarily included violent content and that a warning was not provided.

Complaint: A complainant said that an online video about the launch of the HMAS Supply was edited in way that falsely implied a dance group performed in front of dignitaries.

Complaint: A listener complained that radio news reports on AFL results inaccurately stated that St Kilda defeated Melbourne by eighteen points.

Complaint: Three viewers complained that a sports report broadcast on Good Friday included comments that were insensitive and offensive to Christians.

Complaint: An ABC News Channel viewer complained about the inclusion of distressing details in a report on the sentencing of a woman who killed her mother.

Complaint: Two ABC Radio Adelaide listeners complained that a news bulletin included instances of swearing by the news presenter.

Complaint: A listener complained that a report on the trial of the former police officer charged with the murder of US man George Floyd included inappropriate content without warning.

Complaint: A complainant raised concerns about the story JobKeeper payments for prisoners, the dead and other fraud cases probed by ATO, including that it was inaccurate on several counts, was sensationalised and misleading, lacked impartiality, and undermined the ABCs integrity.

Complaint: An ABC Radio Sydney listener complained that a presenter made comments that were offensive and racist.

Complaint: A viewer complained that a story about domestic violence and concussion included a dramatisation that was offensive and gratuitous.

Complaint: An online reader complained that the article The rise of Aldi: two decades that changed supermarket shopping in Australia appeared to be PR marketing for the company.

Complaint: Two complainants raised concerns about an edition of ABC Radio Melbournes The Conversation Hour titled Should Victorians eat kangaroo if its a native Australian animal? The concerns included that the program contained inaccuracies and that it favoured the consumption of kangaroo meat and the commercial slaughter of kangaroos.

Complaint: An ABC Radio listener complained that news reports inaccurately stated that a planned reduction in JobSeeker payments would affect two million Australians.

Complaint: An online reader expressed concern that the ABC Illawarra story Help escaping domestic violence, a simple bag of essentials called Escape bags included an insensitive and inappropriate subheading.

Complaint: Four complainants raised concerns about a story on the 2021 Victorian duck hunting season. Concerns included that the story contained inaccuracies, lacked balance and was biased against duck hunters.

Complaint: Two triple j listeners raised concerns about an interview with the front man for System of a Down, including that he made unsupported and one-sided claims about contemporary and historical conflicts between Armenia, Turkey and Azerbaijan.

Complaint: Three complainants raised several concerns about an ABC Science article Deforestation in Australia: how does your state (or territory) compare?. The concerns included that the article contained inaccuracies, was misleading and was biased against forestry activities.

Complaint: A viewer expressed concern that a report covering the trial of a woman accused of murder included disturbing details.

Complaint: An ABC NEWS Channel viewer complained that an edited clip was shown during coverage of the US Presidential election campaign which misrepresented remarks made by candidate Joe Biden.

Complaint: Three ABC NEWS Channel viewers complained about a banner on a story about Cardinal George Pells return to Rome, which referred to Cardinal Pell as disgraced.

Complaint: A listener complained that a commentators reference to Gorilla Grip adhesive during a game in the AFL Indigenous round had racist implications as well as being a form of product placement.

Complaint: A complainant raised a number of concerns in relation to the publication of her opinion piece on the ABC Religion and Ethics website. The concerns included that the piece she submitted to the ABC was passed on without her knowledge or consent to a lobby group which was commissioned to write a response.

Complaint: An ABC NEWS Channel viewer expressed concern that a story on unrest in Belarus included distressing images of a mans injuries without warning.

Complaint: Several listeners complained that the program host made inaccurate claims in relation to state border controls which were in place due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Some also complained that the hosts comments reflected bias.

Continue reading here:

Upheld complaints - About the ABC

James OKeefe established Project Veritas in 2011 as a non-profit journalism enterprise to continue his undercover reporting work. Today, Project Veritas investigates and exposes corruption, dishonesty, self-dealing, waste, fraud, and other misconduct in both public and private institutions to achieve a more ethical and transparent society.

Today, OKeefe serves as the CEO and Chairman of the Board, so that he can continue to lead and teach his fellow journalists, as well as protect and nurture the Project Veritas culture.

As a legally recognized and fully-reporting enterprise, Project Veritas is the most effective non-profit on the national scene, period.

Project Veritas journalists working undercover on their own or by, with and through idealistic insiders bring to the American people the corrupt private truths hidden behind the walls of their institutions.

Throughout this website, there are in-depth and honest discussions of Project Veritas success, mistakes and the lies opponents tell about OKeefe and his organization.

Mostly, there are stories about successful impacts the organization has led at the local, state and national levels: ending federal funding of the corrupt Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, or ACORN, twice forcing the New Hampshire legislature to tighten voter ID lawsthe second time overriding the governors veto, exposing political bias in the mainstream media outlets like CNN and a report led to ABC News suspending senior correspondent David Wright and taking him off all political coverage upon his return.

The biggest audience for any Project Veritas video was the release of the hot mic confession by ABC News anchor Amy Robach to her studio crew she had the whole Jeffrey Epstein story, but her network suppressed it because of pressure from the British Royal family.

Maybe better than that, the ABC News insider who gave Project Veritas the tape is still inside ABC News.

When Project Veritas takes on an investigation, the pattern is clear:

Project Veritas launches an investigation with the placement of our undercover journalists. The rollout of our findings creates a growing and uncontainable firestorm of press coverage.

Corruption is exposed, leaders resign, and organizations are shut down.

Project Veritas gets immediate, measurable and impactful results--and our return on investment is unparalleled.

There are many ways to be a part of Project Veritas from becoming an insider, undercover journalist, a video editor or contributor.

Project Veritas is a registered 501(c)3 organization. Project Veritas does not advocate specific resolutions to the issues that are raised through its investigations, nor do we encourage others to do so. Our goal is to inform the public of wrongdoing and allow the public to make judgments on the issues.

THE MISSION OF PROJECT VERITAS, INC. IS TO INVESTIGATE AND EXPOSE CORRUPTION,DISHONESTY, SELF-DEALING, WASTE, FRAUD, AND OTHER MISCONDUCT IN BOTH PUBLIC AND PRIVATE INSTITUTIONS IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE A MORE ETHICAL AND TRANSPARENT SOCIETY. ALSO ENGAGE IN LITIGATION TO: PROTECT, DEFEND AND EXPAND HUMAN AND CIVIL RIGHTS SECURED BY LAW, SPECIFICALLY FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS INCLUDING PROMOTING THE FREE EXCHANGE OF IDEAS IN A DIGITAL WORLD; COMBAT AND DEFEAT CENSORSHIP OF ANY IDEOLOGY; PROMOTE TRUTHFUL REPORTING; AND DEFEND FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND ASSOCIATION ISSUES INCLUDING THE RIGHT TO ANONYMITY.

1. MORAL COURAGE - Courage is the virtue that sustains all others. We choose to overcome our fears.

2. WE ARE ALL LEADERS - Turning people into leaders. Completed staff work. Ownership.

3. COLLABORATION - Best not to work in silos. No one individual is as smart as all of us.

4. RESILIENCE - Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent. Never, ever, ever give up. We don't let mistakes or setbacks discourage us. Pursue perfection, knowing full well you will never attain it.

5. MISSION DRIVEN - The best people are motivated by purpose. We are passionate and truly believe in our cause. We must be externally focused, not internally focused.

6. MAKE THE STATUS QUO DO THE IMPOSSIBLE - We move mountains. Failure is not an option. We do whatever it takes.

7. THE TIP OF THE SPEAR - We are a loss leader. We do not shy away from conflict or litigation.

Rule #1 Truth is paramount. Our reporting is fact based with clear and irrefutable video and audio content. Truth is paramount. We never deceive our audience. We do not distort the facts or the context. We do not selectively edit.

Rule #2 We do not break the law. We maintain one-party consent when recording someone is inherently moral and ethical. We never record when there is zero-party consent. In areas where we are required to have consent from all parties, we seek legal guidance regarding the expectation of privacys impact on our right to record.

Rule #3 We adhere to the 1st Amendment rights of others. During our investigations we do not disrupt the peace. We do not infringe on the 1st Amendment rights of others.

Rule #4 The Zekman Test. The undercover investigations we pursue are judged by us to be of vital public interest and profound importance. The Zekman Test is our baseline. Undercover investigative reporting is necessary because, ...theres no other way to get the story... Whereas the Society of Professional Journalists allows for undercover techniques, if undercover techniques are necessary to expose issues of vital public importance; we believe they are not only allowed but required.

Rule #5 We Protect the Innocent When Possible - Embarrassing private details are not to be investigated. We stay away from irrelevant embarrassingly intimate details about private citizens personal lives. We look for individual wrong-doing and judge its public importance. The irrelevant religious or sexual dispositions of our targets are not to be investigated.

Rule #6 Transparency. Our methods and tactics must be reasonable and defensible. We use the Twelve Jurors on Our Shoulder rule. The work has to be done with such a degree of integrity that it can withstand scrutiny in both law and ethics. We are comfortable with transparency. We must be willing to be ready to disclose our methods upon publication.

Rule #7 Verifying and Corroborate Stories Evaluate impact on third parties and Newsworthiness of Statements Alone.We consistently consider the probable truth or falsity of statements, examine any reasons to doubt the veracity of underlying assertions and whether the assertions are newsworthy. When possible, we will confirm with our subjects that their statements captured on video are accurate and truthful.At the very least, we will give our subjects an opportunity to elaborate and/or respond. In all matters, we rely on the 1st Amendment to protect our ability to publish newsworthy items after our internal deliberations. On whether there is an obligation to ensure the veracity of statements made on video, 1.) consider whether the remarks may potentially impact an innocent third party. (Factors in support of releasing the content) and 2.)The Newsworthiness of the statement alone by itself. (Factors against releasing the content).

Rule #8 Raw Video. In certain circumstances we may release the raw video to the press and or the public. But as a rule, we do not.

Rule #9 Subject Anonymity. We investigate and question sources before promising anonymity. Once we confirm, we will do everything in our power to protect the identity of our confidential sources.

Rule #10 Being Accountable. Admit mistakes and correct them promptly.

Rule #11 We do not manufacture content. We do not put words in our investigative subjects' mouths. We do not lead the horse to water. Our purpose is to elicit truth.

Rule #12 With Great Power comes Great Responsibility.

Excerpt from:

Overview | Project Veritas

Roberta Kaplan, a lawyer for Ms. Biden, declined to comment.

The episode has its roots in the spring of 2020, as Ms. Bidens father was closing in on the Democratic presidential nomination. Ms. Biden, who has kept a low profile throughout her fathers vice presidency and presidency, had left a job the year before working for a criminal justice group in Delaware.

She was living in Delray Beach, Fla., a small city between Miami and West Palm Beach, with a friend who had rented a two-bedroom house lined with palm trees with a large swimming pool and wraparound driveway, according to people familiar with the events. Ms. Biden, who had little public role in her fathers campaign, had earlier been in rehab in Florida in 2019, and the friends house provided a haven where she could avoid the media and the glare of the campaign.

But in June, with the campaign ramping up, she headed to the Philadelphia area, planning to return to the Delray home in the fall before the lease expired in November. She decided to leave some of her belongings behind, including a duffel bag and another bag, people familiar with the events said.

Weeks after Ms. Biden headed to the Northeast, the friend who had been hosting Ms. Biden in the house allowed an ex-girlfriend named Aimee Harris and her two children to move in. Ms. Harris was in a contentious custody dispute and was struggling financially, according to Palm Beach County court records. At one point in February 2020, she had faced eviction while living at a rental property in nearby Jupiter.

Shortly after moving into the Delray home, Ms. Harris whose social media postings and conversations with friends suggested that she was a fan of Mr. Trump learned that Ms. Biden had stayed there previously and that some of her things were still there, according to two people familiar with the matter.

Exactly what happened next remains the subject of the federal investigation. But by September, the diary had been acquired from Ms. Harris and a friend by Project Veritas, whose operations against liberal groups and traditional news organizations had helped make it a favorite of Mr. Trump.

In a court filing, Project Veritas told a federal judge that around Sept. 3, 2020, someone the group described as a tipster called Project Veritas and left a voice message. The caller said a new occupant moved into a place where Ashley Biden had previously been staying and found Ms. Bidens diary and other personal items.

Read this article:

How Ashley Bidens Diary Made Its Way to Project Veritas

The conservative group Project Veritas said on Tuesday that the Justice Department began secretly seizing a trove of its internal communications in late 2020, just weeks after learning that the group had obtained a copy of President Bidens daughters diary.

In a court filing, a lawyer for Project Veritas assailed the Justice Departments actions, which involved subpoenas, search warrants and court production orders that had not been previously disclosed and gag orders imposed on Microsoft, whose servers housed the groups emails.

The disclosure underscored the scope and intensity of the legal battle surrounding the Justice Departments investigation into how Project Veritas, in the closing weeks of the 2020 presidential campaign, came into possession of a diary kept by Ashley Biden, the presidents daughter, and other possessions she had stored at a house in Florida.

And it highlighted how the Justice Department has resisted demands by the conservative group which regularly engages in sting operations and ambush interviews against news organizations and liberal groups and has targeted perceived political opponents to be treated as a news organization entitled to First Amendment protections.

It is highly unusual for the Justice Department to obtain the internal communications of journalists, as federal prosecutors are supposed to follow special guidelines to ensure they do not infringe on First Amendment rights.

Since the investigation was disclosed last fall, federal prosecutors have repeatedly said that because they have evidence that the group may have committed a crime in obtaining Ms. Bidens belongings, Project Veritas is not entitled to First Amendment protections.

But Project Veritas, in its filing on Tuesday, said that prosecutors had failed to be forthcoming with a federal judge about the nature of their inquiry by choosing not to disclose the secret subpoenas and warrants.

This is a fundamental, intolerable abridgment of the First Amendment by the Department of Justice, James OKeefe, the groups founder and leader, said in a video.

In its court filing, Project Veritas asked a federal judge to intervene to stop the Justice Department from using the materials it had obtained from Microsoft in the investigation. The group said that federal prosecutors had obtained voluminous materials which in many cases included the contents of emails from Microsoft for eight of its employees, including Mr. OKeefe.

The group also disclosed that Uber had told two of its operatives who are under investigation Spencer Meads and Eric Cochran that it had handed over information from their accounts in March of last year in response to demands from the government.

Microsoft said in response to questions about the matter that it had initially challenged the governments demands for Project Veritass information, but the company declined to describe what that entailed.

Weve believed for a long time that secrecy should be the exception and used only when truly necessary, said Frank X. Shaw, a spokesman for Microsoft. We always push back when the government is seeking the data of an enterprise customer under a secrecy order and always tell the customer as soon as were legally able.

According to a person with direct knowledge of the matter, Microsoft had pushed back on the Justice Departments subpoenas and warrants when the company was served with them in late 2020 and early 2021. But the government refused to drop its demands and Microsoft handed over the information that prosecutors were seeking, the person said.

Because of gag orders that had been imposed, Microsoft was barred from telling Project Veritas about the requests, the person said.

Shortly after the existence of the investigation was revealed publicly last fall, Microsoft asked the Justice Department whether it could tell Project Veritas about the requests, the person said. The department refused to lift the gag orders, the person said.

In response, Microsoft drafted a lawsuit against the Justice Department to try to get the gag orders lifted and told department officials that the company was prepared to file it. Soon afterward, the department went to court and had the gag orders lifted.

A little more than a week ago, Microsoft told Project Veritas about the warrants and subpoenas, the person said.

Project Veritas paid $40,000 for Ms. Bidens diary to a man and a woman from Florida who said that it had been obtained from a home where Ms. Biden had been staying until a few months earlier. Project Veritas also had possession of other items left at the house by Ms. Biden, and at the heart of the investigation is whether the group played a role in the removal of those items from the home.

Project Veritas has denied any wrongdoing and maintained that Ms. Bidens belongings had been abandoned. The group never published the diary.

Search warrants used in raids last fall on the homes of Mr. OKeefe and two other Project Veritas operatives showed that the Justice Department was investigating conspiracy to transport stolen property and possession of stolen goods, among other crimes.

In response to the searches, a federal judge, at the urging of Project Veritas, appointed a special master to oversee what evidence federal prosecutors could keep from the dozens of cellphones and electronic devices the authorities had obtained.

Project Veritas said in its filing on Tuesday that at the time the special master was appointed the government should have revealed that it had conducted other searches that could have infringed on the groups First Amendment rights or could have been protected by attorney-client privilege.

In the final year of the Trump administration, prosecutors in Washington, who were investigating a leak of classified information, secretly obtained court orders demanding that Google, which houses The New York Timess email accounts, hand over information from four Times reporters accounts. In response to requests from Google, the Justice Department allowed it to alert The Times to the demands so the newspaper could fight the orders. A lawyer for The Times, David McCraw, secretly fought the demands, which the government ultimately dropped.

More:

Project Veritas Says Justice Dept. Secretly Seized Its Emails

Editors Note: This article is part of CT Mirrors Spanish-language news coverage developed in partnership withIdentidad Latina Multimedia.

Lea este artculo en espaol.

Attorney General William Tong opened an investigation Thursday into whether Project Veritas hidden-camera video of a Greenwich assistant principal is evidence of illegal bias on the basis of political beliefs, age or religious affiliation.

Discrimination, hate, bigotry against any person and against any religion or on the basis of age or otherwise, is reprehensible and wrong, Tong said. This video is disturbing. And if teachers, school staff or applicants for education jobs have been illegally discriminated against for any reason, I will take action.

Tong, a Democrat seeking a second term in November, said he was acting based on the publicly available video, not the calls for an investigation by Republicans, including the GOPs nominee for attorney general, Jessica Kordas.

I want to make two points absolutely clear. I do not play politics with my enforcement authority. And I do not play politics with civil rights investigations, Tong said. And I definitely do not play politics with schools, kids in schools, and teachers and students and families.

[RELATED: Project Veritas says video shows bias against conservatives and Catholics in Greenwich schools]

In the Project Veritas video, an assistant principal of the Cos Cob elementary school, Jeremy Boland, is seen telling a woman over drinks about using age and religion, among other things, to weed out conservative applicants for teaching jobs. Boland was suspended Wednesday.

Tongs inquiry is likely to be one of three: First Selectman Fred Camillo said he intends to hire outside counsel to investigate, and the Board of Education also is expected to investigate whether Boland was trying to impress a woman over drinks or actually had discriminated against applicants.

As an assistant principal, Boland plays a role on committees that screen and recommend hiring, but has no authority to make hires. Assists in the recruitment and selection of employees is an element of the job description.

In one clip, Boland said he used Catholicism and age to judge if an applicant was likely to be politically conservative. He did not say how he discerned religious affiliation.

Tong declined to comment in detail on the scope or structure of the investigation. Specifically, he would not say if his office would seek all the video recorded of Boland and not just the brief cuts used in the 12-minute report posted Tuesday.

But suffice it to say, we are going to investigate broadly the contents and circumstances of that video. And were going to assess and analyze and review all of the available evidence, Tong said.

Project Veritas, which has been accused of using video clips out of context in previous exposs, declined Wednesday to explain how Boland came to be targeted or how the woman working for the group engaged him in what appears to be at least three conversations over drinks and meals.

Tong was elected in 2018 on a promise to seek greater authority to pursue civil penalties for hate crimes and civil rights offenses, and the legislature responded in 2021 by passing a bill that gives him that authority.

I will not rush to judgment, and I will respect due process, Tong said Thursday. I am not going to do anything different just because this is a political season and people want to see me reach one conclusion or another. I also want to make very clear we will conduct a thorough investigation and review and analyze all of the evidence. This will not happen overnight.

Read the original:

Project Veritas video of Greenwich teacher prompts investigation