Did you read the article in the OP? Note THE FIRST LINE:"Officials with the revamped ACORN office in New York -- operating as New York Communities for Change" thus the TITLE of the article IS misleading. The link I furnished was an attempt to provide a more left leaning source of the transition of ACORN to NYCC and thus the link. Are they REALLY using/shreading/storing any ACORN materials and why. Also of issue is whether NYCC is receiving federal funds as ACORN did. IF so are they REALLY paying protestors as the article states?
Yes, I know they didn't quote the source but as inquired previously and HYPOTHETICALLY of others, if YOU were working at the NYCC and participated in the interview reported would YOU allow your name to be published?
Yes, I know this ALL appears to be suppostion but consider the statement 'We see FOX as the enemy to those efforts' from the article. IF this is so AND NYCC are innocent they would have a compelling legal case and would presumably JUMP at the chance to 'bring down the enemy'.
ps. NO one has yet provided any contradictory evidence that this story is false as requested other than 'this is wrong' or 'Fox lies'.
I understand where you are coming from, but seriously question whether any "wrongdoing" has taken place.
It doesn't say exactly what "status" NYCC has as a non-profit. But it does say that donations are NOT tax deductable, so its NOT a 501(c)(3) and therefore isn't forbidden to engage in political activity.
For example Americans for Prosperity. They had a STRONG presence in tea party events, actually sponsoring/directly supporting them with buses, etc.
It is a 501(c)(4) organization, and is absolutely legally allowed to do this.
So, IF NYCC is NOT a 501(c)(3) organization, as evidenced by donations not being tax deductable, then its "alleged" activities are perfectly legal.
So beyond getting rid of stationery bearing the logo of the previous "parent" organization, which they may have been using internally to simply save money, there would be no reason for them to engage in "damage control".
Being unable at this time to determine what specific "type" of non profit it is, beyond it NOT being a 501(c)(3), it IS possible that their "paperwork" may not be in order.
But paying people to attend protests is not outside the scope of their charter, if as it appears they are the same type of group as AFP. There are many pictures of AFP signage at tea party events.
These kinds of groups are ALLOWED to participate in politics.