I had noticed an article (which I often do) on Andrew Breitbart's Big Government stating the new Congressional Research Service report regarding ACORN's alleged wrongdoing was incorrect. According to author Matthew Vadum, the CRS incorrectly exonerated ACORN stating that "there were no instances of individuals who were allegedly registered to vote improperly by ACORN or its employees and who were reported 'attempting to vote at the polls.'" Vadum's proof lies in the conviction of a cross-dressing Ohioan, Darnell Nash, known locally as a "flamboyant con artist," for voting after being registered multiple times.
As The American Spectator put it in their article, "Who conned whom? Or were both Nash and ACORN to blame?" While the case is being investigated by a Cleveland prosecutor, the prosecutor's spokesman made the statement that while they "found no criminal conduct by ACORN," Nash was registered nine times by what he described as "ACORN outreach workers" and that Nash repeatedly used different names and addresses, to which he plead guilty for in August of last year.
So essentially, Vadum's article asserts that ACORN is a criminal organization because the CRS was incorrect, but if I may point out the syntax of the CRS report, according to the CRS report, it stated that there were "no instances of individuals who were allegedly registered to vote improperly by ACORN," meaning that the illegal activity would have had to take place on ACORN's part, not the individual. Nash was the one who continually supplied incorrect information to ACORN workers. Considering the individual in this particular case plead guilty, then I think it is pretty clear that the CRS report was correct and Vadum's interpretation to be incorrect, so the question of "Who conned whom?" seems quite irrelevant.
May I also point out that much like fellow Big Government author Jim Hoft, Vadum had taken to citing his own work as proof, considering he authored both Big Government and American Spectator articles...