Minutes before Rep. Anthony Weiner was scheduled to appear at a press conference to admit he sent lewd photos of himself to young women, reporters found themselves face with conservative blogger Andrew Breitbart.

Breitbart, whose website BigGovernment.com broke the Weinergate story, was prompted by reporters to take the podium after arriving to see Weiner's press conference.

Weiner's acolytes previously accused Breitbart of hacking into the congressman's Twitter account, but reporters at the press conference weren't about to vindicate him.

Instead, they used the opportunity to grill him about the ACORN scandal, questioned him about James O'Keefe's editing practices, and implied he was out for revenge.

"Give me one example of a provable lie," Breitbart challenged the reporters, after lamenting that they've accused him of lying in the past. "One. One. Journalists? One. Put your reputation on the line here. One provable lie."

Instead of providing an example, reporters continued to hammer him.

Remember Joel Pollak, the Harvard Law student who questioned a feisty Barney Frank last year? He's now a human rights lawyer and running for Congress in Illinois, and conservative media powerhouse Andrew Breitbart is hosting a fundraiser for him Wednesday in Los Angeles (yes, the page contains a typo--it's 2010 not 2009).

Pollak moved from South Africa to Skokie when he was a boy, moving back briefly to work in South African politics. His unique story can be found on his website, along with this statement on why he's running:

After being encouraged for several months by friends in the district, Joel decided to run for Congress in September 2009, after attending a town hall meeting on health care held by incumbent representative Jan Schakowsky. Joel caught paid organizers on tape as they instructed their supporters to block opposing views from being heard. The experience convinced him that the 9th district needed a new voice.

Of course, all we heard from the elite media was that town halls were attended by Astroturf activists who were manipulated by the Republican Party, but as Pollak's footage shows, they got it backwards. Breitbart picked up the story and it went national. Pollak wrote:

The HCAN video became a YouTube sensation, the "smoking gun" in the controversy over which side of the debate was "Astroturfing"--i.e. creating a false image of grass roots support. I have since discovered that the video contains clues about how the entire nationwide health care campaign was planned and executed by congressional Democrats and the White House.

But that wasn't all. Pollak also noted that his Congressional opponent's husband, Robert Creamer, authored a progressive instructional manual--while serving a prison sentence for bank fraud and tax evasion--to convince Americans to support universal health care. His plan was put into action by the Obama Administration.

The book was endorsed by leading Democrats and their allies, including SEIU boss Andy Stern--the most frequent visitor thus far to the Obama White House--and chief Obama strategist David Axelrod, who noted that Creamer's tome "provides a blueprint for future victories."

In the book, Creamer draws lessons from decades of experience on the radical left, including the teachings of arch-radical Saul Alinsky, and several episodes from Rep. Schakowsky's political career. He also lays out a "Progressive Agenda for Structural Change," which includes a ten-point plan for foisting universal health care on the American people in 2009[.]

Ah, Saul Alinsky. Creamer learned from the master, writing, "To win we must not generate understanding, but emotion--fear, revulsion, anger, disgust."

Just as the Obama Administration has applied Creamer's manifesto, so it has adopted fellow Chicagoan Alinsky.  The "founder of modern community organizing,"  Alinksy was the author of Rules for Radicals, a Machiavellian the-ends-justify-the-means tactical manual for organizing 1960s revolutionaries.

Alinksy was quite the radical himself. He told Playboy in 1972:

I knew plenty of Communists in those days, and I worked with them on a number of projects. Back in the Thirties, the Communists did a hell of a lot of good work; they were in the vanguard of the labor movement and they played an important role in aiding blacks and Okies and Southern sharecroppers. Anybody who tells you he was active in progressive causes in those days and never worked with the Reds is a goddamn liar. Their platform stood for all the right things, and unlike many liberals, they were willing to put their bodies on the line. Without the Communists, for example, I doubt the C.I.O. could have won all the battles it did. I was also sympathetic to Russia in those days, not because I admired Stalin or the Soviet system but because it seemed to be the only country willing to stand up to Hitler. I was in charge of a big part of fund raising for the International Brigade and in that capacity I worked in close alliance with the Communist Party.

In the famous campaign photo of Obama writing on a chalkboard in the classroom, he's writing an Alinsky theory. Alinksy's son thought that Obama successfully applied his father's theories when he said, "Barack Obama's training in Chicago by the great community organizers is showing its effectiveness. "

And Hillary Clinton even wrote a master's thesis on Alinksy.

What is it with Chicago? We haven't even mentioned Blagojevich or Rahm Emanuel's shower incident with Eric Massa, and I'm already horrified.

As if Chicago doesn't have a bad enough reputation for corruption, Pollak's father made things worse for the city's image when he blew the whistle on its organ allocation system, which was unfairly allocating livers in a way that prevented them from reaching the most deserving patients.

The younger Pollak apparently has a similar revulsion to corruption, having famously stood up to Barney Frank, whose scandals need not be mentioned in this post. Even if you don't agree with Pollak' politics, please read his biography to learn more about this truly interesting person.