TC has a detailed long-winded way of saying he is sorry…

No doubt that Joan Walsh and Kos are complete lying sacks of crap….

Holy Weiner Epic, Tommy! Kudos. Truth is good.

Both girls’ parents are livid that these grown men contacted their daughters in this way, knowing they were underage, and according to the girls and their parents, neither ever had any contact with Rep. Weiner, beyond that welcome DM.

Memo to the parents: If you don’t want random strangers talking to your daughters on the Twitter, keep them off the damn Twitter. It’s called social media for a reason which is that everybody can be social with each other and everybody can read (most of) it. You’re either on it or you’re not. There is no shield.

Of course libs want to find a scapegoat, that’s what good little Alinksyites do.

ps, Cordova is now saying she thinks Little Dickie meant to send the pic to his porn star friend, so she’s changing her story as well.

So, the long and the short of this is that some kid lied to Wolfe and provided him with false evidence that was never a part of the story until people found out that the information had been passed to Wolfe, who never used it.

And this changes the story how, exactly?

Curious, why did you accuse Andrew Breitbart of yellow journalism about 10+ times, when the story was first posted on BG?

@tommyxtopher
Tommy Christopher
Journalists don’t pretend they have more evidence, or withhold it if they really do. Yellow to say “we have more.” Put up. @AndrewBreitbart
http://twitter.com/#!/tommyxtopher/status/74654811345260545

@tommyxtopher
Tommy Christopher
Zero defense of Anthony Weiner. This is about a yellow presentation of his story. He needs no defense, doing fine on his own.

@tommyxtopher
Tommy Christopher
Your story isn’t “tight,” it’s as yellow as a canary driving a taxi. You present no evidence to suggest it wasn’t a hack…@AndrewBreitbart
http://twitter.com/#!/tommyxtopher/status/74652189829767168

@tommyxtopher
Tommy Christopher
Your last graf is spot-on. RT @stlactivisthub: The Problem With The Right-Wing’s Yellow Journalism on Weinergate http://su.pr/2O9bhM
http://twitter.com/#!/tommyxtopher/status/74907530127622144

The original BG story presented the facts (pic sent via Weiner’s twitter acct., to GN, including his claims of a hacking.

Curious, why did you accuse Andrew Breitbart of yellow journalism about 10+ times, when the story was first posted on BG?

@tommyxtopher
Tommy Christopher
Journalists don’t pretend they have more evidence, or withhold it if they really do. Yellow to say “we have more.” Put up. @AndrewBreitbart
http://twitter.com/#!/tommyxtopher/status/74654811345260545

@tommyxtopher
Tommy Christopher
Zero defense of Anthony Weiner. This is about a yellow presentation of his story. He needs no defense, doing fine on his own.

@tommyxtopher
Tommy Christopher
Your story isn’t “tight,” it’s as yellow as a canary driving a taxi. You present no evidence to suggest it wasn’t a hack…@AndrewBreitbart
http://twitter.com/#!/tommyxtopher/status/74652189829767168

@tommyxtopher
Tommy Christopher
Your last graf is spot-on. RT @stlactivisthub: The Problem With The Right-Wing’s Yellow Journalism on Weinergate http://su.pr/2O9bhM
http://twitter.com/#!/tommyxtopher/status/74907530127622144

The original BG story presented the facts (pic sent via Weiner’s twitter acct., to GN, including his claims of a hacking.

no sympathy at all for breitbart. he wanted the story to be true and had no problem trying to smear anthony weiner on the word of someone who may not even exist.

that what we call a severe lack of journalistic ethics.

breitbart went on CNN and implied that weiner was talking to “young girls” inappropriately, remember? so, just because he finally got spooked by his “source” and didn’t run with it, he deserves something.

GTFO.

Come on….at least give tommy some credit for correcting himself. That’s more than most of the liberal “journalists” out there would do – especially if a conservative had been the one twitting his hoo-hah..

“There is no crime in following a person you admire.” – No, so why was Weiner following a handful of high school girls?

“This is normal teen behavior. Any suggestion that it is perverse says more about the perversion of the person making that suggestion than it does about Rep Weiner or the girls.” – Normal teen behavior to have crushes, yes. Normal behavior for a married congressman to follow and engage with a handful of HS girls? not so much. He may not have DM’d privately with their daughter, but it there are a couple who have claimed to have engaged with him.

“We would also like to express our disgust at the harassment of Rep Weiner and hope that everyone remembers this man did nothing wrong.” – Nothing wrong? That’s nice of them to defend him, but the guy won’t even deny the picture is his, or call the police, or tell the truth.

Their daughter should not be harassed. but as we see from her friend Veronica – who was lying about Weiner – young girls, social media and congressmen don’t mix.

…so-called journalists bumble around posting information, with little regard for traditional journalistic processes, and the results have been disgraceful.

Two words: Joan Walsh.

Breitbart is no saint, but Markos failed to do the responsible thing and demand his diarist retract the girls private information.

lolitahaze said:
breitbart went on CNN and implied that weiner was talking to “young girls” inappropriately, remember? so, just because he finally got spooked by his “source” and didn’t run with it, he deserves something.

GTFO.

there are screencaps and tweets of the porn star and at least one girl that claimed they were DM’ing with Weiner.

Emma, what did Breitbart do that was wrong? Nothing, you libs just like to hold him up as a boogeyman because he exposes you.

lolitahaze said:
no sympathy at all for breitbart. he wanted the story to be true and had no problem trying to smear anthony weiner on the word of someone who may not even exist. that what we call a severe lack of journalistic ethics.

Uh, considering that this whole mess started with Weiner himself sending out a dick pic, that was not done by Breitbart.

Andrew aint my personal Jesus, but considering that at face value it started with a duly elected Congressman sending out a photo of his genitals to a college coed, and a mass of underaged/young girls following the guy, to not look into it would in and of itself be curious.

A point that seem to be sadly lacking in this ‘story’. Funny that the ethics charge is leveled at Breitbart but the man who really needs to be up on ethics charges is Weiner. Unless Congress thinks that sending dick pics to the public is conduct becoming a Congressman.

he didn’t send the pics. i don’t know where you’re getting that. nice try though.

lolitahaze said:
no sympathy at all for breitbart. he wanted the story to be true and had no problem trying to smear anthony weiner on the word of someone who may not even exist. that what we call a severe lack of journalistic ethics.

Wrong, he didn’t try to smear Little Dickie, he exposed what he was doing. Well technically it was Little Dickie that exposed himself.

lolitahaze said:
he didn’t send the pics. i don’t know where you’re getting that. nice try though.

Um, where is your proof he didn’t? You know he did. Why are you defending this scumbag?

Liberal Tormentor said:
Wrong, he didn’t try to smear Little Dickie, he exposed what he was doing. Well technically it was Little Dickie that exposed himself.

that’s exactly what Breitbart did when he flapped his gums on CNN about “very young girls” probably referencing this source that is now discredited.

weiner didn’t send the photo. saying that he did over and over again isn’t going to change that.

lolitahaze said:
he didn’t send the pics. i don’t know where you’re getting that. nice try though.

he refuses to call the police for an investigation. i don’t know where you’re getting that he didn’t send the pic….

Liberal Tormentor said:
Um, where is your proof he didn’t? You know he did. Why are you defending this scumbag?

he denied it, the person it was supposedly sent to denied it. what part of that is hard for you to understand?

lolitahaze said:
weiner didn’t send the photo. saying that he did over and over again isn’t going to change that.

saying he didn’t over and over again isn’t going to make it so, either.

sarainitaly said:
he refuses to call the police for an investigation. i don’t know where you’re getting that he didn’t send the pic….

he denied it, the person it was supposedly sent to denied it. what part of that is hard for you to understand?

Seriously?

You’re at the point where you’re giving Breitbart credit for NOT publishing false evidence. That’s the bar?

And the equivalency is a commenter who posted a diary on the DailyKos site? Come on. Those things are not the same. One is a community board of random people….the other is a so-called journalist who authors things himself or pays people to on his site. It is ridiculous to hold those two to the same standards.

And finally…Brietbart went on national television and implied that the Congressman had inappropriate relationships with young girls…with NO evidence. That is completely and utterly despicable.

I am a fan of your site but please stop giving this guy a microphone. It’s embarassing to your credibility and judgement.

B

lolitahaze said:
he denied it, the person it was supposedly sent to denied it. what part of that is hard for you to understand?

Actually, she now says she thinks he meant to send it to his porn star friend. Sorry, his story continues to fall apart. At what point to you acknowledge he’s a big liar?

lolitahaze said:
he denied it, the person it was supposedly sent to denied it. what part of that is hard for you to understand?

Clinton denied he fooled around with Lewinsky. She signed a sworn affidavit denying it. Edwards denied an affair. He denied his own child. What part of people lie don’t you understand?

What part of Weiner refusing to investigate who sent it don’t you understand?
What part of Weiner refusing to claim that is not a picture of him don’t you understand?

sarainitaly said:
saying he didn’t over and over again isn’t going to make it so, either.

i’m going with the fact that the people involved denied it and the fact it’s easy to spoof a yfrog / twitter account. i know you would love to see this destroy weiner’s career but it won’t. there’s no wrongdoing on his part and he is within his rights to hire a security firm, if that’s how he wants to handle it.

I think Weiner did it, but I also think that Breitbart has so damaged his credibility that if he says he loves his mother, question it. Having him weigh in on journalism (I’m talking to you, CNN) is like having the boy who cried wolf head up Homeland Security.

Lolita, You need to put away the kool-aid. He doesn’t want the FBI involved because he knows that in about 5 minutes they will be able to prove he did send the pics and that would mean he committed a crime by claiming hack.

dandelion28 said:
I think Weiner did it, but I also think that Breitbart has so damaged his credibility that if he says he loves his mother, question it. Having him weigh in on journalism (I’m talking to you, CNN) is like having the boy who cried wolf head up Homeland Security.

Wrong, that’s just the liberal line. It doesn’t make it true.

Why would Mr. Christopher make promises he has no power to grantee. If you put your personal details on Facebook and Twitter, am sorry you jeopardize your privacy by entering into such public domain. Please do not try to make them look like little Angels, Veronica action is clear maliciousness, clouding her behavior in a case of being a minor is wrong. This is not the only instance that I’ve recently seen regarding young girls accusing older males of serious offences via the internet, I’m sorry the parents have to go through this dilemma, but they should have educate themselves and their children about the consequences of the using the internet.

sarainitaly said:
Clinton denied he fooled around with Lewinsky. She signed a sworn affidavit denying it. Edwards denied an affair. He denied his own child. What part of people lie don’t you understand?

What part of Weiner refusing to investigate who sent it don’t you understand?
What part of Weiner refusing to claim that is not a picture of him don’t you understand?

i understand that you’re a parrot. i understand that you can’t think of anything for yourself. part of our system of justice is that there is a presumption of innocence until someone is proven guilty, but even then, there is nothing criminal here. edwards has been indicted, quite rightly, for campaign fraud, not for cheating on his wife. you don’t seem to understand that either.

Re Moulitsoss–

Like many liberals, Tommy is under the delusion that they are simply better human beings than conservatives. This is the conceit that animates them and it is the reason Moulitsos won’t protect the identity of these very scared girls. It’s pure malice. Moulitsos WANTS them to be scared and harm done to them (maybe not physical, but everything else–but I wouldn’t rule out that he wants physical harm done to them as well).

Lolita, It would be a crime if he reported it as a hack, which is why he refuses to do that. Come on! He’s a liar!

Liberal Tormentor said:
Lolita, It would be a crime if he reported it as a hack, which is why he refuses to do that. Come on! He’s a liar!

How about that? A Lolita defending a Humbert Humbert!

lolitahaze said:
i understand that you’re a parrot. i understand that you can’t think of anything for yourself. part of our system of justice is that there is a presumption of innocence until someone is proven guilty, but even then, there is nothing criminal here. edwards has been indicted, quite rightly, for campaign fraud, not for cheating on his wife. you don’t seem to understand that either.

you dont understand, its not the picture, its the lying about it that pisses people off

Tommy;

First of all, what a jerk Moulistas is being. Truly horrible behaiour on his part.

However, the spin you’re putting on this story is pretty bizarre. You give credit to Breibart for not going with these false stories, but;

* The fact that patriotusa and his ilk were operating at this level lends credence that they somehow posted that image on RepWeiner’s account
* You fail to mention that Breibart kind of thew this “out there” in his first CNN interview, when he hinted at behaviour with other young followers of his. How can you exonarate him when he put that out there on national media???

I mean what the heck?! Isn’t it obvious now that these guys hacked the account and put that picture out there to further their agenda?

And isn’t it clear that Breibart has acted irresponsibly by throwing his accusations out there? Specially with that shameful CNN appearance!

If lolitahaze is determined to prove she’s a rube, let her.

dandelion28 said:
I think Weiner did it, but I also think that Breitbart has so damaged his credibility that if he says he loves his mother, question it. Having him weigh in on journalism (I’m talking to you, CNN) is like having the boy who cried wolf head up Homeland Security.

i don’t think he’s guilty of sending it out. at worst, it’s probably just that he took a picture of his cock. are people unaware how many guys actually do that? if that was a crime, we’d have to put most of male america, under the age of 50, in prison.

Can any of our usual liberal trolls defend DailyKos anymore. He and his site are the lowest of bottom feeders.

lolitahaze said:
he denied it, the person it was supposedly sent to denied it. what part of that is hard for you to understand?

No, she says she never saw it, except for the retweet. Weiner had deleted it before she had a chance to see it.

The tweet came from Weiner’s account. That is not in dispute. Weiner fully admits this and insists he was hacked. GNC does not deny that it was sent, nor does Weiner. You’re not even in the factual ballpark.

lolitahaze said:
i understand that you’re a parrot. i understand that you can’t think of anything for yourself. part of our system of justice is that there is a presumption of innocence until someone is proven guilty, but even then, there is nothing criminal here. edwards has been indicted, quite rightly, for campaign fraud, not for cheating on his wife. you don’t seem to understand that either.

who gets indicted for cheating on their wife? hahah
What don’t I understand? that he didn’t lie? that he didn’t deny his own child?

he LIED about it. Clinton LIED about it. Lewinsky LIED about it.

Who is the frickin parrot here? It’s you and your Daily Kos/Salon Weiner is innocent parrots.

Yea, presumption of innocence in a court of law. Public opinion is an opinion. Only way to know for sure he is innocent is if he calls (although I heard feds can investigate regardless because a hacking is a federal offense) for an investigation – he won’t. Why? Cuz he’s guilty.

*he didn’t do it. he didn’t do it.*
Here’s your cracker, Polly.

So basically conservatives who care about their Country contacted the underage girls that Weiner Man was seducing through the twitters and told them how disgusting their behavior was? What is the big matter about that? I think it is a good thing that the concerned mothers were there to say that the things were not right.

lolitahaze said:
i don’t think he’s guilty of sending it out. at worst, it’s probably just that he took a picture of his cock. are people unaware how many guys actually do that? if that was a crime, we’d have to put most of male america, under the age of 50, in prison.

No. He probably sent it to. What guy would take a picture of his cock for his own amusement. I wonder how tense dinner is with Mrs. Weiner these days.

We now know that when Dan Wolfe emailed Breitbart the Weinergate screenshots on Saturday (The Smoking Gun has the email), he told Breitbart “We have more!”…in the course of our conversation, he talked about information that he had decided not to use because he was still trying to verify it.

Tommy, a valid question for Breitbart is why he felt compelled to say that he had information that Weiner had inappropriate relationships with young girls on CNN. Mediaite reported this, we all saw it. He offered no meaningful disclaimer; it was disgusting and untrue, and if you consider yourself professional equals, that unfortunately says volumes about your “professionalism.” Here’s the quote, from your own website:

Breitbart then made some news by stating the following: “according to Wolfe’s theory, and I don’t know him that well, he’s been monitoring relationships that Congressman Weiner has been having with women, young women, that claim to have relationships with him.” Breitbart then clarified by adding “I’m not saying what type of relationships, but people that Rep. Weiner follows are quite young, younger than the girl in question, talk openly about Rep. Weiner, who he follows.”

And while I’m sure this will not matter to the right-wing nuts on this site: I am, or was, a supporter of Weiner’s, and defended him, which is why I am so profoundly disappointed in his conduct. I don’t know what happened, but my doubts about his character and conduct in this whole scandal are solely the result of his own actions since last week. His own statements and behavior may have vindicated people like Dan Wolfe and Mike Stack, which is a terrible shame, not just because of their predatory, malignant immorality, but because what they do is exactly the kind of thing Breitbart encourages – and in fact relies upon to peddle his product. And if you don’t believe me, you need to read what he said about Weiner again.

ANDREW BREITBART RUMOR SWEEPS THE NET!

Uh oh Andrew … looks like someone’s been ‘monitoring’ you.

http://beeryblog.wordpress.com/2011/06/01/i-have-been-monitoring-andrew-breitbart-and-i-suspect-he-is-having-relationships-with-four-legged-quadrupeds-pass-it-along/

OUCH!

Breitbart is bucking the MSM and his negative perceptions haven’t been helped by his stage presence. I believe he has acted honorably. All in all, he is a valuable asset in the battle against the misinformation of the liberal lie machine that betrays the public.

Pablo said:
No, she says she never saw it, except for the retweet. Weiner had deleted it before she had a chance to see it.

The tweet came from Weiner’s account. That is not in dispute. Weiner fully admits this and insists he was hacked. GNC does not deny that it was sent, nor does Weiner. You’re not even in the factual ballpark.

how was i wrong? she denied knowing or talking to weiner, you just pointed out that she also denied even seeing the tweet. he denied sending it BECAUSE he said he was hacked.

nice try though!

Great job TC!

Rgentum, you need to reread this part:

She told him that she and Betty had incriminating Direct Messages from Rep. Weiner, a claim she now admits was false,

They LIED!!! Perhaps you would have Breitbart strap them to a polygraph.

Shorter Rgentum: “What Anthony Weiner did was wrong, and shame on you right-wing nuts for proving it.”

lolitahaze said:
and the fact it’s easy to spoof a yfrog / twitter account.

where are you getting this?

markos is a Marxist.

Rgentum said:
Tommy, a valid question for Breitbart is why he felt compelled to say that he had information that Weiner had inappropriate relationships with young girls on CNN.

No, that’s not a good question, because he didn’t say there were inappropriate relationships. You just quoted him, and there’s an important word missing: “inappropriate.” He specifically says “I’m not saying what type of relationships” which you also quoted and then characterized him as saying they were inappropriate.

Dude, open your eyes and rub the fairy dust out of them. What Breitbart said is true. When you change it into something else and argue against that, you’re not defeating Breitbart, you’re defeating a strawman of your own creation.

Lolita, if he were hacked, it would be a crime and he would’ve reported it as such. Little Dickie loves his witchhunts. Are you seriously trying to convince us that he turned down the opportunity to take down a “right wing” hacker?!! Seriously!

Rgentum said:
Tommy, a valid question for Breitbart is why he felt compelled to say that he had information that Weiner had inappropriate relationships with young girls on CNN. Mediaite reported this, we all saw it. He offered no meaningful disclaimer; it was disgusting and untrue, , again.

never was said, page 4 mediaite, and rewatch the clip

Rgentum said:
Tommy, a valid question for Breitbart is why he felt compelled to say that he had information that Weiner had inappropriate relationships with young girls on CNN. Mediaite reported this, we all saw it. He offered no meaningful disclaimer; it was disgusting and untrue, and if you consider yourself professional equals, that unfortunately says volumes about your “professionalism.”

That’s the thing, how can Tommy not even mentioned that in his article? Breibart did put this accusation out there for all of us to see on CNN, and now Tommy paints this as him acting responsibly without addressing that?!?!

How can he treat him like a real “journalist” when he doesn’t do basic research and get to know his sources a bit more? Breibart makes tabloids look like paragons of journalism!

lolitahaze said:
how was i wrong? she denied knowing or talking to weiner, you just pointed out that she also denied even seeing the tweet. he denied sending it BECAUSE he said he was hacked.

nice try though!

The girl on the receiving end hasn’t denied it. You said she has. Therefore, you are wrong.

Nice try, though!

Rep. Anthony Weiner Has asked the FBI to investgate why blogs persist in talking about this.

Liberal Tormentor said:
Rgentum, you need to reread this part:

She told him that she and Betty had incriminating Direct Messages from Rep. Weiner, a claim she now admits was false,

They LIED!!! Perhaps you would have Breitbart strap them to a polygraph.

Or he could have done some basic and responsible research on his sources before screaming about that on national TV

Rgentum said:
And while I’m sure this will not matter to the right-wing nuts on this site: I am, or was, a supporter of Weiner’s, and defended him, which is why I am so profoundly disappointed in his conduct. I don’t know what happened, but my doubts about his character and conduct in this whole scandal are solely the result of his own actions since last week. His own statements and behavior may have vindicated people like Dan Wolfe and Mike Stack, which is a terrible shame, not just because of their predatory, malignant immorality, but because what they do is exactly the kind of thing Breitbart encourages – and in fact relies upon to peddle his product. And if you don’t believe me, you need to read what he said about Weiner again.

Actually I’m impressed. I know how hard it is for me when someone lets me down. Christy let me down with the way he got to his son’s game soI understand. It was big of you to say. You have to admit Markos can’t get much lower at this point?

Markos has always been a big time douchebag, this email exchange just solidifies it.

Tommy, kudos on doing the necessary due diligence to get to the bottom of this story. Great job. On the other hand, I didn’t really need the help of a five page article to conclude that Markos Moulitsas is a worthless sack of crap.

While this reporting seems pretty conclusive that Breitbart was uninvolved and took pains to protect the young people who were, he still went on CNN and suggested that Weiner was behaving improperly with these girls. It seems fairly clear that he was not.

I find it very frustrating that there is a consistent trend of right-wing bloggers pushing a story to the media who give it massive attention only to find that there are many inaccuracies and downright falsehood days later which get little attention because the truth was boring to begin with.

ACORN video was edited to make it seem like James O’Keefe turned up in a dramatic pimp costume and that the visits were never reported to police. Neither of these things are true.
Ron Schiller resigned over a video that even Glenn Beck’s site couldn’t get behind.
And of course, we all know about Shirley Sherrod.
We can only guess what would have happened with the CNN reporter that O’Keefe tried to set-up.

Now we have Anthony Weiner. I suspect we will one day learn this photo was taken pre-marriage and sent to someone he was dating. Perhaps even sent to his wife. And when that happens, will we remember the truth or this week’s fiasco?

When will the media turn their massive attention-generating machine on the people manufacturing these stories instead of running stories without any independent investigation?

HyperboleKills said:
While this reporting seems pretty conclusive that Breitbart was uninvolved and took pains to protect the young people who were, he still went on CNN and suggested that Weiner was behaving improperly with these girls. It seems fairly clear that he was not.

I find it very frustrating that there is a consistent trend of right-wing bloggers pushing a story to the media who give it massive attention only to find that there are many inaccuracies and downright falsehood days later which get little attention because the truth was boring to begin with.

ACORN video was edited to make it seem like James O’Keefe turned up in a dramatic pimp costume and that the visits were never reported to police. Neither of these things are true.
Ron Schiller resigned over a video that even Glenn Beck’s site couldn’t get behind.
And of course, we all know about Shirley Sherrod.
We can only guess what would have happened with the CNN reporter that O’Keefe tried to set-up.

Now we have Anthony Weiner. I suspect we will one day learn this photo was taken pre-marriage and sent to someone he was dating. Perhaps even sent to his wife. And when that happens, will we remember the truth or this week’s fiasco?

When will the media turn their massive attention-generating machine on the people manufacturing these stories instead of running stories without any independent investigation?

Excellent comment.

lolitahaze said:
he didn’t send the pics. i don’t know where you’re getting that. nice try though.

He himself admitted that it came from his account.

Were this to come from a different source, we wouldn’t be having this conversation.

in the defence/excuse-making on behalf of Weiner the are stark details that are going unadressed.

The implication, or deflection, by Weiner that his account had been hacked warrants immediate investigation. As a member of congress his account being compromised is a serious issue. Who now has access to sensitive info, to governmental access, or has the ability to install damaging viruses or spyware on federal accounts?
He said he felt his govt. issued hardware and accounts were hack-proof, so this is an admission by him that he was usuing governmental resources for private and inappropriate use.
And the specter of a sex-based scandal carries a variety of personal vulnerabilities. Someone with incriminating info could be able to compromise the guy.

Those wanting to dismiss this as college-level merriment that has turned into an embarassing episode are willfully overlooking the possible ramifications.

HyperboleKills said:
ACORN video was edited to make it seem like James O’Keefe turned up in a dramatic pimp costume and that the visits were never reported to police. Neither of these things are true.
Ron Schiller resigned over a video that even Glenn Beck’s site couldn’t get behind.
And of course, we all know about Shirley Sherrod.
We can only guess what would have happened with the CNN reporter that O’Keefe tried to set-up.

like i keep saying….dogs with a bone.
or, perhaps i should change it to parrots with a cracker?

doesn’t matter how many times they are told the facts, they keep repeating the falsehoods.

JR said:
He himself admitted that it came from his account.

Were this to come from a different source, we wouldn’t be having this conversation.

Come “from his account” != (does not equal) that “he sent the pics”.

It’s been shown that it’s very easy to hack into yfrog (at least since before Wed.)

lolitahaze said:
how was i wrong? she denied knowing or talking to weiner, you just pointed out that she also denied even seeing the tweet. he denied sending it BECAUSE he said he was hacked.

nice try though!

Let’s use your logic.

At this point using those involved statements and comments. Rep. Weiner claimed he was hacked. You seem to support that theory (he said he was, it’s easy to hack twitter yfrog etc).

So at this point Rep. Weiner has alleged a crime committed. Rep. Weiner at least through comments (which you consistently take as fact because he stated as such).

OK. Rep. Weiner’s right not to pursue legally and use private firm.

OK. So that seems to be your position.

FINE. Other people can have a position that is their right to believe that Rep. Weiner has a duty to pursue a known crime he reported as happened if he has the authority to do so.

Right?

Pablo said:
The girl on the receiving end hasn’t denied it. You said she has. Therefore, you are wrong.

Nice try, though!

i guess you didn’t read this article? right?

http://www.mediaite.com/online/alleged-recipient-of-alleged-rep-weiner-photo-gennette-nicole-issues-statement/

The point I am trying to make is that, contrary to the impression that I apparently gave from my tweet, I am not his girlfriend. Nor am I the wife, girlfriend or mistress of Barack Obama, Ray Allen or Cristiano Ronaldo, despite the fact that I have made similar assertions about them via Twitter.

There have never been any inappropriate exchanges between Anthony Weiner and myself, including the tweet/picture in question, which had apparently been deleted before it reached me. I cannot answer the questions that I do not have the answers to. I am not sure whether or not this letter will alleviate any future harassment. I also do not have a clear understanding as to how or why exactly I am involved in this fiasco. I do know that my life has been seriously impacted by speculation and faulty allegations. My reputation has been called into question by those who lack the character to report the facts.

once again, nice try. also, think up your own come backs please!

ElCapitanAmerica said:
Or he could have done some basic and responsible research on his sources before screaming about that on national TV

And if the accusor is lying, how is he to know that?

MartiniShark said:
in the defence/excuse-making on behalf of Weiner the are stark details that are going unadressed.

The implication, or deflection, by Weiner that his account had been hacked warrants immediate investigation. As a member of congress his account being compromised is a serious issue. Who now has access to sensitive info, to governmental access, or has the ability to install damaging viruses or spyware on federal accounts?
He said he felt his govt. issued hardware and accounts were hack-proof

It looks like his yfrog internal email account was compromised, that has nothing to do with getting access into his computer or anything have to do with federal government information. Actually, since yfrog has permissions to post into your twitter account, what was sort of compromised was his twitter. But once you disallow that, the threat is gone (from the twitter perspective).

Let’s not blow this out of proportion. I kind hesitate this to call it a hack btw, because the yfrog system of posting via MMS / email is so stupid in the first place, it kind of works as designed as long as an attacker doesn’t know your yfrog email address.

Lolita, you need to update your info. The recipient is now saying she thinks Little Dickie meant to send the pic to his porn friend. Now I know it doesn’t fit your template, but at least be honest.

” A high school friend of Betty’s, whom I will call Veronica (she’s a minor), was also contacted, via Twitter, by a member of the group, Mike Stack (@goatsred). For personal reasons I won’t go into, Veronica saw a means of getting attention, and agreed to follow @Goatsred so that they could speak privately. She told him that she and Betty had incriminating Direct Messages from Rep. Weiner, a claim she now admits was false, and which she made without Betty’s knowledge.

In fact, she was simultaneously telling Betty that @Goatsred had tried to induce her to lie about Rep. Wiener, and to enlist Betty in the plot. Veronica now admits this was also false. Yes, @goatsred did contact her, and she did feed him false information about Rep. Weiner, but this was not at his urging. ”

According to Veronica, she never even followed Rep. Weiner, nor did he ever follow her. “I saw many other girls in the news and I wanted to be famous,” she says. “Nothing I told goatsred was true. I’m sorry to everyone for lying and for embarrassing my mom.”

Both girls’ parents are livid that these grown men contacted their daughters in this way, knowing they were underage, and according to the girls and their parents, neither ever had any contact with Rep. Weiner, beyond that welcome DM. ”

Tommy can you explain why the parents are livid that these grown men contacted their daughters when one of them lied and made it sound like Weiner was guilty of sending incriminating messages ?

You say they did not urge her to lie . It seems that were trying to protect them. I mean if the girl was telling the truth instead of lying wouldn’t the parents be thanking them ? It was not their fault the girl lied to them .
They had their suspicions when they caught the photo Weiner sent to the girl in Seattle .

Unless they sent the photo ? I think if that is the case then Weiner should call for an investigation, no ?
Either way I see Breitbart as just reporting what he could verify . His comment about Weiner and young girls was true as far as he knew because one of the girls lied .

And as your lib buddy Markos proved right and wrong mean nothing to libs just blaming conservatives no matter who gets hurt.

I happened to read a few of their diaries on this matter because it amused me to see how far they would go to twist facts to support their theories. I remember reading one of them telling the author of one of these diaries that they should not post an e-mail address of someone that may be innocent. I cant remember if it was the girl in your story. But here are a couple of comments I saved for laughs.

” I’m tired of these conspiracies. Yesterday, Anthony Weiner all but admitted the photo was his, and today we’re blaming Clarence Thomas?!

No offense, but this kind of stuff makes us look ridiculous.”

” We have been totally, fucking wrong about several things since the story broke. And when we discover we were wrong, you still have bozos even two days later calling you a RW troll or a Breitbart lover or a GOP operative (as I was called about an hour ago). When everyone is finally on board that we were wrong, we forget and are suddenly totally convinced that NOW we are correct. Until it again turns out we were wrong… ”

Oh , and if you try to think on your own they get paranoid and call you a troll and threaten ….

” Some suggest you’re a troll who perhaps hides behind innuendo, or feigned concern when called on his/her BS. I worry that this will hurt your credibility and make you look bad. You haven’t even bothered to deny being in the employ of the GOP or its organs, which many would find quite suspicious. ”

These people are nuts Tommy . I give you credit for being honest and trying to do the right thing. Good work .

Liberal Tormentor said:
And if the accusor is lying, how is he to know that?

I think Tommy Christopher gave a clear example of how a journalist would have checked this story before putting that out there.

Of course if the sources are lying you can’t read minds, but look at all the homework he did on this article to get to the bottom of it.

Problem is Breibart is NOT a journalist, and as much as we all like to make fun of reporters and “mainstream media”, real news stories still have to be written by professionals. And one would hope they do their homework (they don’t many times of course).

People like Breibart, have a website and think they’re hip on social media and see themselves as the new alternative. But they’re barely aggregators and when they create new content look at the mess they create because of their lack of professionalism and basic journalistic ethics.

Captain, you libs hate Breitbart because he exposes you. I think he wears that as a badge of honor, as he should.

ElCapitanAmerica said:
Come “from his account” != (does not equal) that “he sent the pics”. It’s been shown that it’s very easy to hack into yfrog (at least since before Wed.)

One could buy that if the guy denied everything across the board and called the FBI to deal with it.

Not my picture, I didn’t send it? Nope, he cannot even confirm or deny if that is his crotch in the photo. Tell me, as Jon Stewart alluded to, who doesn’t know what their own crotch looks like?

First he says hack, then he says prank, spends all day not answered press questions and pretty much just states that he wants it all to go away.

Someone else did it, but I’m not calling the authorities to deal with it. Even though other sensitive things on his computer/elsewhere could possibly be compromised? If you believe that nonsense, you’re incredibly naive.

HyperboleKills said:
While this reporting seems pretty conclusive that Breitbart was uninvolved and took pains to protect the young people who were, he still went on CNN and suggested that Weiner was behaving improperly with these girls. It seems fairly clear that he was not.

I find it very frustrating that there is a consistent trend of right-wing bloggers pushing a story to the media who give it massive attention only to find that there are many inaccuracies and downright falsehood days later which get little attention because the truth was boring to begin with.

ACORN video was edited to make it seem like James O’Keefe turned up in a dramatic pimp costume and that the visits were never reported to police. Neither of these things are true.
Ron Schiller resigned over a video that even Glenn Beck’s site couldn’t get behind.
And of course, we all know about Shirley Sherrod.
We can only guess what would have happened with the CNN reporter that O’Keefe tried to set-up.

Now we have Anthony Weiner. I suspect we will one day learn this photo was taken pre-marriage and sent to someone he was dating. Perhaps even sent to his wife. And when that happens, will we remember the truth or this week’s fiasco?

When will the media turn their massive attention-generating machine on the people manufacturing these stories instead of running stories without any independent investigation?

Thank you!

ElCapitanAmerica said:
It’s been shown that it’s very easy to hack into yfrog (at least since before Wed.)

again, where are you getting this? please don’t tell me Daily Kos.

Liberal Tormentor said:
Lolita, you need to update your info. The recipient is now saying she thinks Little Dickie meant to send the pic to his porn friend. Now I know it doesn’t fit your template, but at least be honest.

where is that? in twitter?

ElCapitanAmerica said:
It looks like his yfrog internal email account was compromised, that has nothing to do with getting access into his computer or anything have to do with federal government information. Actually, since yfrog has permissions to post into your twitter account, what was sort of compromised was his twitter. But once you disallow that, the threat is gone (from the twitter perspective). Let’s not blow this out of proportion. I kind hesitate this to call it a hack btw, because the yfrog system of posting via MMS / email is so stupid in the first place, it kind of works as designed as long as an attacker doesn’t know your yfrog email address.

I’m not blowing anything out of proportion, I’m saying it is foolhardy to be so dismissive about this. There is no hysteria in calling for the authorities to look into the possible security breach that could be involved. This is evidenced by the fact that I’m not the one bleating that this was a hack-job — those were the words of Weiner himself. If a congressional member declares his accounts have been hacked and compromised that certainly is cause for concern and defensive action.

ElCapitanAmerica said:
It looks like his yfrog internal email account was compromised, that has nothing to do with getting access into his computer or anything have to do with federal government information. Actually, since yfrog has permissions to post into your twitter account, what was sort of compromised was his twitter. But once you disallow that, the threat is gone (from the twitter perspective).

Let’s not blow this out of proportion. I kind hesitate this to call it a hack btw, because the yfrog system of posting via MMS / email is so stupid in the first place, it kind of works as designed as long as an attacker doesn’t know your yfrog email address.

why are they denying it was?

“Even though our email upload feature has not been compromised or broken into, we are taking this opportunity to evaluate the feature and secure it even further,” the company explained in a statement.

Skeptics of the theory say Weiner’s unique yfrog address could only have been known by someone close to Weiner, or that it could have been used by Weiner himself. They also point out the theory fails to resolve whether Weiner is the subject in the photo.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2011/06/anthony-weiner-twitter-photo-may-have-posted-via-security-loophole.html

Someone would have to know his yfrog email, and have access to the photo of Weiner.

http://www.redstate.com/absentee/2011/06/01/case-closed-leftblog-claims-definitive-proof-weiner-was-framed/

Here you go Sara:

Cordova thinks the package-hugging picture — which Weiner “can’t say with certitude” isn’t his — was meant for somebody else and landed in her Twitter account by mistake.

Cordova is one of 198 people, many of them young, beautiful women, whom Weiner follows on Twitter.

Until recently, the congressman also followed stripper and porn actress Ginger Lee, 28, who openly gushes about her “Mr. Sexy Congressman” on social-network sites.

“Her name is Ginger — it makes sense he might have mixed us up,” Cordova said, noting that two of the first three letters of their names are the same.

Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/bitter_tweet_affair_has_co_ed_worn_qCnymOy6zYIBGkdJhLyw1M#ixzz1OE9k5Hfl

Tommy: I respect your efforts in clarifying the record about Breitbart.

Documents made public yesterday by Judicial Watch describe extensive collusion by Federal Communications Commission officials with a left-wing advocacy group in a campaign to expand government regulation of the Internet.

The documents, obtained by Judicial Watch in a December 2010 Freedom of Information Act request, were created after Democrat appointees solidified their 3-2 control of the agency in March 2009…

The coordination between FCC officials and Free Press, the advocacy group, supported a proposal for the agency to regulate access to the Internet as if it were a public utility, in the interest of ensuring “Net Neutrality.”

Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columnists/2011/06/conn-carroll-documents-show-fcc-coordinated-net-neutrality-effort-outside#ixzz1OEAb2dPA

ElCapitanAmerica said:
It looks like his yfrog internal email account was compromised, that has nothing to do with getting access into his computer or anything have to do with federal government information

Exactly right ! Hacking plays no part in this. Weiner has said repeatedly that it would be a waste of FBI resources to spend a second investigating that aspect of the story.

The best use of of government (local) resources is to stop people from talking about Weiner (s) a la :
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/rep-weiner-calls-police-on-cbss-marcia-kramer-for-requesting-interview/

Get yer bail money together Tommy .

sarainitaly said:
Liberal Tormentor said:
Lolita, you need to update your info. The recipient is now saying she thinks Little Dickie meant to send the pic to his porn friend. Now I know it doesn’t fit your template, but at least be honest.
where is that? in twitter?

Seattle student: Weiner photo meant for porn star

Her name is Ginger — it makes sense he might have mixed us up,” Cordova said, referring to Ginger Lee, a stripper and porn star who follows Weiner on Twitter.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/56172.html#ixzz1OEADr2T3

@GennetteC
Gennette N Cordova
And I never said the picture was meant for a pornstar. He suggested it and I said maybe. I don’t know and don’t care @politico

I was actually wondering if the DM was meant for someone else, with a name close to GN’s. I was going to go thru and check what names were alphabetically close to Gennettes, but didn’t bother. But, that is a very good possibility. When you send a tweet, you begin typing the persons name, and the menu drops, and you select the name you want.

Very logical theory that he was DMing, and messed up on DM and name. Especially if he wasn’t thinking *clearly*. haha

Liberal Tormentor said:
Lolita, you need to update your info. The recipient is now saying she thinks Little Dickie meant to send the pic to his porn friend. Now I know it doesn’t fit your template, but at least be honest.

here’s you’re update, tex.

@AntDeRosa Anthony De Rosa

RT @GennetteC And I never said the picture was meant for a pornstar. He suggested it and I said maybe. I don’t know and don’t care @politico 5 minutes ago via TweetDeck

http://twitter.com/#!/AntDeRosa/statuses/76671865111838720

Azarkhan,
I sent that to Mediatie earlier and am waiting to see if they deem it important. You’d think they would since they claim to be a media site, but we shall see.

oh shit a typo! sounds like they asked her a leading question and she speculated. that’s not evidence either.

sarainitaly said:
again, where are you getting this? please don’t tell me Daily Kos.

I looked into it myself, the email is easy to figure out;

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/page/248742_Yfrog_doesnt_want_to_admit_the

Great article. Keep up the hard work, Tommy. Labor omnia vincet.

Tommy’s work with Brietbart’s involvement looks to be completely straight-on. Andrew’s detractors will never be able to look at him with anything approaching objectivity. What he said on CNN was that he had “information” about Weiner’s involvement with the young girls, not “proof”. This was at a time where that information involved one of those girls making claims to the positive – claims that later were shown to be falsehoods. Breitbart looked into things and BEFORE reporting on them he found a compromised source, and an admission of fabrication — and as a result he witheld reporting those details. This is in fact responsible journalistically.

ok, my comment keeps getting stuck in moderation. not sure why. This was for Lib Tormentor.

Seattle student: Weiner photo meant for p orn star

Her name is Ginger — it makes sense he might have mixed us up,” Cordova said, referring to Ginger Lee, a stripper and p orn star who follows Weiner on Twitter. from Politico.

Gennette N Cordova
And I never said the picture was meant for a p ornstar. He suggested it and I said maybe. I don’t know and don’t care – from twitter.

I was actually wondering if the DM was meant for someone else, with a name close to GN’s. I was going to go thru and check what names were alphabetically close to Gennettes, but didn’t bother. But, that is a very good possibility. When you send a tweet, you begin typing the persons name, and the menu drops, and you select the name you want.

Very logical theory that he was DMing, and messed up on DM and name. Especially if he wasn’t thinking *clearly*. haha

ElCapitanAmerica said:
I looked into it myself, the email is easy to figure out;

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/page/248742_Yfrog_doesnt_want_to_admit_the

Actually, sent you the wrong link that links talks about their irresponsible statement trying to cover up how insecure their service is.

My work on showing what patterns they use for their secret emails is here;

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/page/248630_yfrog_secret_email_addresses_a

ElCapitanAmerica said:
Come “from his account” != (does not equal) that “he sent the pics”.

It’s been shown that it’s very easy to hack into yfrog (at least since before Wed.)

BS!
From: http://datechguyblog.com

why did she previously tweet that she was his girlfriend? Was she hacked too?
The problem with that line of reasoning is it depends on too many what-ifs

Run that through your head for a second.

In the last 24 hours her facebook account has disappeared. Her twitter account have disappeared. Her byline has disappeared from college papers. This shows someone is taking great pains to remove her from the net.

The coed has recreated a new twitter this afternoon. @DTCahill
———–
It’s clear he’s guilty , he should resign, just like Foley had to over a harmless Chest Shot..
He’s a pervey Weiner

MartiniShark said:
Tommy’s work with Brietbart’s involvement looks to be completely straight-on. Andrew’s detractors will never be able to look at him with anything approaching objectivity. What he said on CNN was that he had “information” about Weiner’s involvement with the young girls, not “proof”. This was at a time where that information involved one of those girls making claims to the positive – claims that later were shown to be falsehoods. Breitbart looked into things and BEFORE reporting on them he found a compromised source, and an admission of fabrication — and as a result he witheld reporting those details. This is in fact responsible journalistically.

It was irresponsible for him to mention that before he checked his sources. How can you call that responsible journalism??? For goodness sake, he was on twitter yesterday or the day before trying to contact patriotUSA for more questions … he didn’t even seem to have a good way to contact him!

ElCapitanAmerica said:
It looks like his yfrog internal email account was compromised, that has nothing to do with getting access into his computer or anything have to do with federal government information.

Either that, or he tweeted his wiener.

tiredofbs said:
BS!
From: http://datechguyblog.com

why did she previously tweet that she was his girlfriend? Was she hacked too?
The problem with that line of reasoning is it depends on too many what-ifs

I think she’s said that about other people too. But that’s besides the point, please read this and come up with a technical argument as to why my analysis is wrong (wrt yfrog);

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/page/248630_yfrog_secret_email_addresses_a

Technical arguments please.

ElCapitanAmerica said:
I think Tommy Christopher gave a clear example of how a journalist would have checked this story before putting that out there.

Of course if the sources are lying you can’t read minds, but look at all the homework he did on this article to get to the bottom of it.

Problem is Breibart is NOT a journalist, and as much as we all like to make fun of reporters and “mainstream media”, real news stories still have to be written by professionals. And one would hope they do their homework (they don’t many times of course).

People like Breibart, have a website and think they’re hip on social media and see themselves as the new alternative. But they’re barely aggregators and when they create new content look at the mess they create because of their lack of professionalism and basic journalistic ethics.

Well said.

ElCapitanAmerica said:
It was irresponsible for him to mention that before he checked his sources. How can you call that responsible journalism???

It is a fact. His follower and following lists are public information. They are the source of the claim, and the claim is factual. You may not like that fact, but it is still a fact.

Pablo said:
Either that, or he tweeted his wiener.

BTW, based on his statements I do think it is possible the picture could be of him (but when?). I think there’s 2 issues; who posted the picture, and is that picture really of his … well you know :-)

Pablo said:
Either that, or he tweeted his wiener.

Occam’s razor ? Inconcievable !

ElCapitanAmerica said:
BTW, based on his statements I do think it is possible the picture could be of him (but when?). I think there’s 2 issues; who posted the picture, and is that picture really of his … well you know :-)

Weiner says it was a hacker. We should find out who it was. This sounds like a job for law enforcement!

Pablo said:
It is a fact. His follower and following lists are public information. They are the source of the claim, and the claim is factual. You may not like that fact, but it is still a fact.

No he said he was contacting these girls and insinuated much more than what you are saying. His source of information as now reported by mediaite are these guys who have suddenly dissapared from the internet apparently.

Liberal blogs fighting out of Weiner. Yum.

test test…

extremist

Pablo said:
Weiner says it was a hacker. We should find out who it was. This sounds like a job for law enforcement!

One possible theory why he hasn’t done that is that the picture is real and doesn’t want to confirm it (embarassing, pre-marriage, post-marriage, etc).

ElCapitanAmerica said:
One possible theory why he hasn’t done that is that the picture is real and doesn’t want to confirm it (embarassing, pre-marriage, post-marriage, etc).

Yes , his current strategy is working very well . I say stay the course .

ElCapitanAmerica said:
It was irresponsible for him to mention that before he checked his sources. How can you call that responsible journalism??? For goodness sake, he was on twitter yesterday or the day before trying to contact patriotUSA for more questions … he didn’t even seem to have a good way to contact him!

And he never quoted Patriot as a result. The most outlandish thing Breitbart was accused of doing was going on CNN and declaring he had info of Weiner and the young girls.

One of those very girls was supplying that information. She was found to be lying. Andrew then – ready yourself here – checked those sources out and decided not to run any of those details.

And I do not see where reaching out to Patriot yesterday with more questions is proof of anything. A journalistic seeking a source with questions? That never happens.

Mediaite has some interesting moderation holds, I can’t figure out how they caught this last one.

ElCapitanAmerica said:
I think she’s said that about other people too. But that’s besides the point, please read this and come up with a technical argument as to why my analysis is wrong (wrt yfrog);

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/page/248630_yfrog_secret_email_addresses_a

Technical arguments please.

Here you go.

Bottom line:

In other words, Cannon is wrong, Weiner’s innocence has not been demonstrated or proven in any way, and the hacked Yfrog e-mail theory is extremely unlikely given the facts at hand.

Joseph Cannon has no clue what he’s talking about, as he has demonstrated in several blog posts where he makes things up as he goes along, without any technical knowledge to back it up.

I say this as a web developer with a BE in Computer Engineering, and an avid Twitter user.

sarainitaly said:
Curious, why did you accuse Andrew Breitbart of yellow journalism about 10+ times, when the story was first posted on BG?

@tommyxtopher
Tommy Christopher
Journalists don’t pretend they have more evidence, or withhold it if they really do. Yellow to say “we have more.” Put up. @AndrewBreitbart
http://twitter.com/#!/tommyxtopher/status/74654811345260545

@tommyxtopher
Tommy Christopher
Zero defense of Anthony Weiner. This is about a yellow presentation of his story. He needs no defense, doing fine on his own.

@tommyxtopher
Tommy Christopher
Your story isn’t “tight,” it’s as yellow as a canary driving a taxi. You present no evidence to suggest it wasn’t a hack…@AndrewBreitbart
http://twitter.com/#!/tommyxtopher/status/74652189829767168

@tommyxtopher
Tommy Christopher
Your last graf is spot-on. RT @stlactivisthub: The Problem With The Right-Wing’s Yellow Journalism on Weinergate http://su.pr/2O9bhM
http://twitter.com/#!/tommyxtopher/status/74907530127622144

The original BG story presented the facts (pic sent via Weiner’s twitter acct., to GN, including his claims of a hacking.

Good. Don’t let Christopher weasel his way out of this. His behavior over the past 5+ days has been nearly as bad as Kos and Joan Walsh. TC needs to understand that he can’t fool tech savvy people with crap like this. WE ALL KNOW WHAT YOU WERE DOING ON TWITTER AS RECENTLY AS LAST NIGHT.

Nacho said:
Mediaite has some interesting moderation holds, I can’t figure out how they caught this last one.

i had a couple that got caught in the filter. not sure what word did it, or what happened, but they dug it out rather quickly. sometimes it is just the spam filter automatically pulling because of a word, or links, or what not.

ElCapitanAmerica said:
One possible theory why he hasn’t done that is that the picture is real and doesn’t want to confirm it (embarassing, pre-marriage, post-marriage, etc).

If that is the case, he’s not helping himself. You’ll notice that many of his longtime supporters have abandoned him.

Pablo said:
Here you go.

That’s your rebuttal? I have a Masters in Computer Science BTW if we want to flash degrees.

Nothing in that blog post refutes that you can post to yfrog via email or MMS (prior to wed) from any account as long as you know the “secret email”. And as I show here, the email is very easy to find out;
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/page/248630_yfrog_secret_email_addresses_a

It took me 27 accounts to get a repeated word, “lusion”. So in theory I could send 27 emails to one well know yfrog user with their static twitter name and append those words and be able to guess the secret word.

The scheme is so stupid, that even if we don’t expose the whole dictionary, you can see from my post the easy patterns they were using prior to wed.

Can you tell me what is wrong with that analysis? Because that link you posted doesn’t address it at all.

sarainitaly said:
ok, my comment keeps getting stuck in moderation. not sure why. This was for Lib Tormentor.

Seattle student: Weiner photo meant for p orn star

Her name is Ginger — it makes sense he might have mixed us up,” Cordova said, referring to Ginger Lee, a stripper and p orn star who follows Weiner on Twitter. from Politico.

Gennette N Cordova
And I never said the picture was meant for a p ornstar. He suggested it and I said maybe. I don’t know and don’t care – from twitter.

I was actually wondering if the DM was meant for someone else, with a name close to GN’s. I was going to go thru and check what names were alphabetically close to Gennettes, but didn’t bother. But, that is a very good possibility. When you send a tweet, you begin typing the persons name, and the menu drops, and you select the name you want.

Very logical theory that he was DMing, and messed up on DM and name. Especially if he wasn’t thinking *clearly*. haha

@AntDeRosa Anthony De Rosa

RT @GennetteC And I never said the picture was meant for a pornstar. He suggested it and I said maybe. I don’t know and don’t care @politico 5 minutes ago via TweetDeck

http://twitter.com/#!/AntDeRosa/statuses/76671865111838720

Pablo said:
If that is the case, he’s not helping himself. You’ll notice that many of his longtime supporters have abandoned him.

I think you may have a very valid point here. I’m not so interested in his media strategy (it seems ill advised), but on the likelyhood his account was hacked because the technical aspect interest me.

Personally, based on his behaviour, I tend to think it was a picture of him. But it was likely not sent by him. That’s why I’ve been focusing on the technical aspect, I can’t comment on his crotch. Identifying men’s underware to their owners is not my area of expertise!!! :-D

RT @GennetteC And I never said the picture was meant for a pornstar. He suggested it and I said maybe. I don’t know and don’t care @politico 5 minutes ago via TweetDeck

Well, that’s quite a departure from her first statement she was SURE he was hacked.

Chris Ar said:
Good. Don’t let Christopher weasel his way out of this. His behavior over the past 5+ days has been nearly as bad as Kos and Joan Walsh. TC needs to understand that he can’t fool tech savvy people with crap like this. WE ALL KNOW WHAT YOU WERE DOING ON TWITTER AS RECENTLY AS LAST NIGHT.

i just don’t know what was so ” yellow” about the original BG story, and why tommy was so mad. and here it sounds like he was supporting him all along… #confused

Liberal Tormentor said:
How come you left Nachos comment on moderation, but keep deleting mine? Hm I wonder. Knock it off Nazi’s!

They ended up deleting mine pretty quick and I was responding to you.

It wasn’t a complementing remark, btw…

sarainitaly said:
i just don’t know what was so ” yellow” about the original BG story, and why tommy was so mad. and here it sounds like he was supporting him all along… #confused

He hates Breibart and, like Kos, thought he had set Weiner up. TC is no better than Kos or Joan Walsh. He’s just trying to cover his behind with this piece. Breitbart a father….give me a break.

ElCapitanAmerica said:
Nothing in that blog post refutes that you can post to yfrog via email or MMS (prior to wed) from any account as long as you know the “secret email”. And as I show here, the email is very easy to find out;

Right, but posting to yfrog does not equal a tweet. Yes, the pic could have been posted to yfrog by an unknown person without too much trouble. That does not create this tweet, does it?

Thanks for presenting the picture of both sides.

Question: Which one would you trust to sell you a house? A car?

Or for that matter babysit your child?

LOL !

lolitahaze said:
@AntDeRosa Anthony De Rosa

RT @GennetteC And I never said the picture was meant for a pornstar. He suggested it and I said maybe. I don’t know and don’t care @politico 5 minutes ago via TweetDeck

http://twitter.com/#!/AntDeRosa/statuses/76671865111838720

uh, yea, that was in my comment.

ElCapitanAmerica said:
No he said he was contacting these girls and insinuated much more than what you are saying. His source of information as now reported by mediaite are these guys who have suddenly dissapared from the internet apparently.

He said what he said. We’ve all seen the quote right here. What he said is true. Period.

You can imagine insinuations to your heart’s content. That does not change what he said. Facts are stubborn things.

Pablo said:
Right, but posting to yfrog does not equal a tweet. Yes, the pic could have been posted to yfrog by an unknown person without too much trouble. That does not create this tweet, does it?

That’s exactly what the feature does.

That’s why when you login to yfrog the first time it can login with your twitter account and asks persmissions so you can it can tweet for you using the twitter API.

Notice that on your twitter account there’s a panel showing apps that have permissions to your account via this API.

Yukon Jack said:
Thanks for presenting the picture of both sides.

Question: Which one would you trust to sell you a house? A car?

Or for that matter babysit your child?

Well, I have daughters and the left keeps telling me that Breitbart is gay, so definitely Breitbart and not Congressman Stiffy.

Pablo said:
He said what he said. We’ve all seen the quote right here. What he said is true. Period.

You can imagine insinuations to your heart’s content. That does not change what he said. Facts are stubborn things.

BTW twitpic does exactly the same thing. It posts the picture (well a link to the pic in your feed) but unlike yfrog the text message comes from the subject header. yfrog uses the message body.

twitpic has a scheme that uses a numeric pin looking email as opposed to the phonetically pleasing yfrog approach.

George C said:
LOL !

You have to laugh or you will cry, right?

Captain and Lolita, why don’t you two just admit that even if Little Dickie came clean and admits he’s been lrying, you would still deny he did anything wrong and defend him?

Liberal Tormentor said:
You have to laugh or you will cry, right?

Have to . Pointing the finger gets your comment deleted .

I would be horrified if my daughter considered a left wing kook like Weiner her hero. His policies and politics are bad for America and would be even worse for her future.

Liberal Tormentor said:
Captain and Lolita, why don’t you two just admit that even if Little Dickie came clean and admits he’s been lrying, you would still deny he did anything wrong and defend him?

Why would I deny it? It is possible he did it himself, I doubt it (now that picture … that’s another story). However I’m more interested in the technical aspects of the thing, and it is certainly possible to do what was done by exploiting yfrog’s irresponsible post by email feature.

I’m not sure how that translates to denying reality if it turns out to be one way or the other.

Yep, happened to me too many times to count.

Mediate now carrying water for con man Breitbart. HILARIOUS!!

ElCapitanAmerica said:
That’s exactly what the feature does.

That’s why when you login to yfrog the first time it can login with your twitter account and asks persmissions so you can it can tweet for you using the twitter API.

Notice that on your twitter account there’s a panel showing apps that have permissions to your account via this API.

Does this sound to you like Weiner had given yfrog such permission? From the Blitzer interview:

And I see this thing pop up. I immediately delete it. OK? I immediately delete the photo – I thought I deleted – I mean, I’m not a hundred percent sure – I deleted the photo and then this – this – without any password or anything, I was able to get into the account where this photograph was hosted somehow. And I deleted that and other photographs in there as well, although it was nothing very controversial in there. But I deleted everything, and I immediately tweeted “my system has been hacked.” You know, darn it.

This account where the photograph was hosted somehow? Heh.

lolitahaze said:
i don’t think he’s guilty of sending it out. at worst, it’s probably just that he took a picture of his c#ck.

Well said . Nice use of language .

___________

My exact comment , quoting a posters comment , awaitng moderation . Except this time I censored the posters already accepted language.

Weiner should just turn for advice to the Republicans in Congress who were never held accountable.

P.S
Moderator, this non-stop hypocritical whining needs to be dealt with using IP bans.

In honest effort to (investigate various sources) & get as much info as possible to
arrive to a fair opinion on Weinergate, I ran into this nugget:

From:Todd Dunning@

http://pajamasmedia.com/tatler/2011/05/31/bill-oreilly-to-the-fbi-tell-us-
about-your-weiner-investigation-by-tomorrow/

(funniest ever)

So the Air Force One pic gets a pass? Unbelievable.

http://www.dunningmarketing.com/moonbattery/weiner.jpg

Great work as usual Tommy.

Pablo said:
Does this sound to you like Weiner had given yfrog such permission?

Yes, and the first time he (or his staffers) logged into it they gave it that permission.

BTW he was already posting pics on yfrog before this incident, so I’m not sure what your point is …

lolitahaze said:
how was i wrong? she denied knowing or talking to weiner, you just pointed out that she also denied even seeing the tweet. he denied sending it BECAUSE he said he was hacked.

No, she didn’t. She said there have never been * inappropriate exchanges* between them. that is not denying that she talked to him. She said she never met him – which isn’t necessary to engage in a DM back and forth with someone. Nor do I think anyone ever suggested she had met him – just that she had a crush on him.

she claims to have not seen the original tweet, but she did see the retweet, and pricture. he said he was hacked, now he said it was prank, and he won’t deny it is him.

lolitahaze said:
i guess you didn’t read this article? right?

http://www.mediaite.com/online/alleged-recipient-of-alleged-rep-weiner-photo-gennette-nicole-issues-statement/

Regardless,(and btw, thank you for sticking up for Andrew Breitbart) a great journalist s/would check out (thoroughly) the truth to a story before reporting. Am I correct? Andrew Breitbart, because of his attack on Shirley Sherrod, has lost ALL credibility. Period. i don’t care how innocent he might be in this case.

Sounds to me like Breitbart is trying desperately to cover his own butt. I can’t blame him because he just might be in a tone of trouble. He messed with the wrong one…Ms. Shirley Sherrod. He’s got to pay for that great big mistake.

sarainitaly said:
No, she didn’t. She said there have never been * inappropriate exchanges* between them. that is not denying that she talked to him. She said she never met him – which isn’t necessary to engage in a DM back and forth with someone. Nor do I think anyone ever suggested she had met him – just that she had a crush on him.

she claims to have not seen the original tweet, but she did see the retweet, and pricture. he said he was hacked, now he said it was prank, and he won’t deny it is him.

He denies he posted it and that his account was somewhat compromised.

As I showed you already, it is very easy to do this with yfrog prior to this Wednesday. I hope you read the link I sent you, which was funny how you assumed I got my info from dailykos when I’m the actual author of it.

Here you go again if you missed it;

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/page/248630_yfrog_secret_email_addresses_a

. said:
lolitahaze said:
how was i wrong? she denied knowing or talking to weiner, you just pointed out that she also denied even seeing the tweet. he denied sending it BECAUSE he said he was hacked.

Nice try, haze-but no cigar (sorry pun)

The college student, whom Weiner followed (1 of only 91) in twitter, had on April 9, 2011 tweeted “I wonder what my boyfriend @RepAnthonyWeiner is up to right now.”

Pablo said:
This account where the photograph was hosted somehow? Heh.

Pablo, no offense, but you don’t know how yfrog (or twipic) or any app that uses the twitter API works right? Be honest.

msblkwidow said:
Regardless,(and btw, thank you for sticking up for Andrew Breitbart) a great journalist s/would check out (thoroughly) the truth to a story before reporting. Am I correct? Andrew Breitbart, because of his attack on Shirley Sherrod, has lost ALL credibility. Period. i don’t care how innocent he might be in this case.

Sounds to me like Breitbart is trying desperately to cover his own butt. I can’t blame him because he just might be in a tone of trouble. He messed with the wrong one…Ms. Shirley Sherrod. He’s got to pay for that great big mistake.

attack on Sherrod? Good lord.

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/chris-matthews-its-strange-that-rep-weiner-keeps-changing-his-story/

If anyone did her wrong it was her bosses for firing her without actually listening to the tape, or asking anyone about it.

sarainitaly said:
No, she didn’t. She said there have never been * inappropriate exchanges* between them. that is not denying that she talked to him. She said she never met him – which isn’t necessary to engage in a DM back and forth with someone. Nor do I think anyone ever suggested she had met him – just that she had a crush on him.

she claims to have not seen the original tweet, but she did see the retweet, and pricture. he said he was hacked, now he said it was prank, and he won’t deny it is him.

Do you mean Cordova stated she saw the “retweet, and pricture” LINK. I THINK Cordova has stated at that time in question she did not see pic as already deleted.

ElCapitanAmerica said:
He denies he posted it and that his account was somewhat compromised.

As I showed you already, it is very easy to do this with yfrog prior to this Wednesday. I hope you read the link I sent you, which was funny how you assumed I got my info from dailykos when I’m the actual author of it.

Here you go again if you missed it;

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/page/248630_yfrog_secret_email_addresses_a

DaTechGuy has already dismissed your little fantasy, Charlie. Try again.

Pablo said:
No, that’s not a good question, because he didn’t say there were inappropriate relationships. You just quoted him, and there’s an important word missing: “inappropriate.” He specifically says “I’m not saying what type of relationships” which you also quoted and then characterized him as saying they were inappropriate. Dude, open your eyes and rub the fairy dust out of them. What Breitbart said is true. When you change it into something else and argue against that, you’re not defeating Breitbart, you’re defeating a strawman of your own creation.

Thank you for proving my point. To quote Andrew Breitbart, “context is everything.” First, what Breitbart said is a lie. As this article proves, Weiner did have a “relationship” with “Betty” or “Veronica.” He certainly did not, as Breitbart falsely claimed, “correspond” with them. One of them – singular, not, as Breitbart falsely claimed, multiple – followed him on Twitter and he sent her an automatic message. He no more has a relationship with them than I have a relationship with Amazon.com.
Second, the context: this was an interview about a lewd tweet that was reported by Breitbart, who, it’s worth mentioning, said that he had “much more” more from Weiner’s twitter feed. The only reason these “relationships” with “other women” who were “much younger” had any relevance to Breitbart’s assertion that Weiner is some sleazy guy sending out lewd pictures to young women is because Breitbart felt that they bolstered that argument. Which is why he said it. Which is not journalism. In fact, it’s probably slander. Especially since he now admits he had no idea if what he was saying is true, he suspecteed it was not, and, as it turns out, he was right – it was all false.

Ugh, need an edit button. The article proves Weiner did NOT have a relationship with “Betty” or “Veronica.”

Chris Ar said:
DaTechGuy has already dismissed your little fantasy, Charlie. Try again.

Can you summary and dispute anything that I have on my link? Be specific.

Keep spinning Rgentum! Veronica lied. Her lying doesn’t make Breitbart guilty of slander no matter how much you wish it did.

ElCapitanAmerica said:
He denies he posted it and that his account was somewhat compromised.

As I showed you already, it is very easy to do this with yfrog prior to this Wednesday. I hope you read the link I sent you, which was funny how you assumed I got my info from dailykos when I’m the actual author of it.

Here you go again if you missed it;

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/page/248630_yfrog_secret_email_addresses_a

I saw it, and replied to you with links saying that yfrog denies they were compromised.

If someone figured out his email, somehow obtained the picture of Weiner, and posted it – why did Weiner brush off the hacking for over an hour after it was posted? Why did he tweet five tweets about hockey, wait one hour, 20 minutes before tweeting a joke about being hacked?

he originally claimed he was hacked, now claim it was a prank, and he won’t deny the photo is of him.

if someone did all that, hacked to figure out his email, WHY is he refusing to have this investigated?

If it is possible to acquire the email address through the methods you used, and you stated you are a computer expert, you are making a lot of assumptions that someone else is as savvy as you are. If they are, and it was indeed a hacking, why is he lying? Why is he hiding and covering for the person who hacked his email account.

I’m sure anyone could create a theory to support any scandal…. Like, oh I don’t know…. that your assistant slept with your girlfriend, and took the blame that the baby was yours, for an example.

It’s great that you guys found a weakness in yfrog, if there was one. But that doesn’t explain any of the actions of Weiner, or the fact that he is lying about something. They would have to have had that photo of Weiner, figured out his email address, and posted it. If they did that, he should have been more outraged, and reported it.

I am not tech savvy enough to figure out what you did, and disprove it, or not.

Rgentum said:
Thank you for proving my point. To quote Andrew Breitbart, “context is everything.” First, what Breitbart said is a lie. As this article proves, Weiner did have a “relationship” with “Betty” or “Veronica.” He certainly did not, as Breitbart falsely claimed, “correspond” with them. One of them – singular, not, as Breitbart falsely claimed, multiple – followed him on Twitter and he sent her an automatic message. He no more has a relationship with them than I have a relationship with Amazon.com.Second, the context: this was an interview about a lewd tweet that was reported by Breitbart, who, it’s worth mentioning, said that he had “much more” more from Weiner’s twitter feed. The only reason these “relationships” with “other women” who were “much younger” had any relevance to Breitbart’s assertion that Weiner is some sleazy guy sending out lewd pictures to young women is because Breitbart felt that they bolstered that argument. Which is why he said it. Which is not journalism. In fact, it’s probably slander. Especially since he now admits he had no idea if what he was saying is true, he suspecteed it was not, and, as it turns out, he was right – it was all false.

You are either ignoring or overlooking a key component in your charge. When Breitbart made that statement he had one of the underage girls claiming she had evidence of an ongoing relationship with Weiner and both of them.–

“She told him (one potential source) that she and Betty had incriminating Direct Messages from Rep. Weiner, a claim she now admits was false, and which she made without Betty’s knowledge.”

This was involving the information that was being shopped to Breitbart. That is when he looked into the accuracy of all these sources. When they did not meet his vetting standards he walked away, and did not report them. You wanting to incriminate him does not follow the course of the facts.

RazorsEdge said:
Do you mean Cordova stated she saw the “retweet, and pricture” LINK. I THINK Cordova has stated at that time in question she did not see pic as already deleted.

she claimed she saw the retweet with the picture. not the original direct tweet from Weiner.

While it’s great that X has cleared AB, let me suggest stepping back a bit.

Does the underlying story – the pic itself – really matter? Compared to the fact that millions of ppl are unemployed and we’ve got two+ wars going on, obviously not.

What this story does show is that, yet again, major r/w bloggers are just witless drama queens seeking lots of views on their sites and maybe – maybe! – to one day appear on Fox. Far-lefties should be using this issue to discredit those major r/w bloggers – and others higher up the chain – as frivolous lightweights.

And, those who care about the future of the U.S. *and* who oppose Weiner should be going after him on his *ideas*. See the plan here:

http://24ahead.com/n/10712

Call out those major r/w bloggers on just hyping sleaze rather than trying to intellectually engage Weiner. Correctly point out that they aren’t capable of intellectually engaging him.

Tommy, I commend you for trying to get to the bottom of several paths this story has taken.

However, a couple notes:

1) Don’t really care what the girls names are, but I would be hesitant to take their story at face value, it’s simply a he said / she said thing, without proof either way. Not defending what appear to be dirtbags, but it could very well be that they’re all dirtbags, we don’t know. I do know that it’s virtually impossible to monitor what teen age kids do on their smart phones, and I do know that when you combine teenagers and smartphones, bad things happening are not uncommon.

2) Weiner’s still a douche.

24AheadDotCom said:
What this story does show is that, yet again, major r/w bloggers are just witless drama queens seeking lots of views on their sites and maybe – maybe! – to one day appear on Fox. Far-lefties should be using this issue to discredit those major r/w bloggers – and others higher up the chain – as frivolous lightweights.

you’re right. they should just cover the same *important* stories as the left wing.

Palin on Paul Revere

Palin’s bus has a flag on it

Palin won’t tell the media where she is going

FOX news

Donald Trump and Sarah Palin eating pizza with forks

Sarah Palin is rolling in on Romney’s announcement.

Sarah Palin wasn’t invited to Rolling Thunder event.

Sarah Palin isn’t allowed to talk to media, per Ailes

…………………………………….

ANDREW BREITBART RUMOR SWEEPS THE NET!

Uh oh Andrew … looks like someone’s been ‘monitoring’ you.

http://waronignorance.net/index.html (Scroll down)

OUCH!

sarainitaly said:
she claimed she saw the retweet with the picture. not the original direct tweet from Weiner.

Really somewhat a mute point. But MY impression thus far was Cordova stated she did not pic at the time. From her statement:

“There have never been any inappropriate exchanges between Anthony Weiner and myself, including the tweet/picture in question, which had apparently been deleted before it reached me.”

Now it says tweet, and a “retweet” originated from Patriot would have come after the original Weiner tweet. Unless you have something that she claims she saw it.

Fact: I always wondered how the last group of Neanderthals acted when the modern man came on the scene and they did not realize that they would disappear as a group. Instead of adapting to the truths around them they continued and huddled with their falsehoods until they were all gone. Unable to admit they were wrong they needed to grow in their minds and move into camps and learn from modern men but hey they are acting as the democrat of today still saying Weiner is not a sock puppet master and you just can’t get their face out of the trough long enough to see the changes of the situation has happened and all others find them amusing.

24AheadDotCom said:
Call out those major r/w bloggers on just hyping sleaze rather than trying to intellectually engage Weiner. Correctly point out that they aren’t capable of intellectually engaging him.

Yea, he’s such a great guy, willing to engage intellectually.

http://twitter.com/#!/RepWeiner/statuses/51735232298237952

http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=US&v=1os57-n9vU0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sn_P1zupIcY&feature=related

“All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.” —- Arthur Schopenhauer

RazorsEdge said:
Really somewhat a mute point. But MY impression thus far was Cordova stated she did not pic at the time. From her statement:

“There have never been any inappropriate exchanges between Anthony Weiner and myself, including the tweet/picture in question, which had apparently been deleted before it reached me.”

Now it says tweet, and a “retweet” originated from Patriot would have come after the original Weiner tweet. Unless you have something that she claims she saw it.

I don’t know what you’re getting at. your comment is confusing and not very clear.

I was correcting some falsehoods expressed by lolitahaze

http://www.mediaite.com/online/andrew-breitbart-did-not-run-weinergate-evidence-which-turned-out-to-be-fabricated/comment-page-6/#comment-494236

24AheadDotCom said:
Does the underlying story – the pic itself – really matter? Compared to the fact that millions of ppl are unemployed and we’ve got two+ wars going on, obviously not.

One of the sleazeballs that directly affects the unemployed, and the two+wars going on, is involved in a case directly linked to his character, or lack thereof. Maybe if we didn’t have sleazeballs and self absorbed schmucks in high offices of this country, we wouldn’t be involved in high unemployment and two+wars in this country that seem to bother you so much?

Not a big deal in the scope of things. Just making a distinction.

I’m stating that it’s my impression that Cordova did NOT actually see the pic. Given Cordova’s statement.

Rgentum said:
First, what Breitbart said is a lie. As this article proves, Weiner did have a “relationship” with “Betty” or “Veronica.”

If you’ve had correspondence with someone, you have a relationship. That does not mean you’re bumping uglies with that person. They’re following him. He’s following them. That is…a relationship! What kind of relationship it is is another matter, and as you quoted, Breitbart went out of his way to state that he was explicitly NOT making any determinations as to the extent of those relationships, only that they exist. That is the context. What he said is true. You can go look it up in Weiner’s following list right now.

Rgentum said:
Which is not journalism. In fact, it’s probably slander.

Breitbart was being interviewed on CNN. That is not an act of journalism. He stated nothing that was not true. If it isn’t false, it isn’t slander. Facts that might lead to something uncomfortable are just that, and it isn’t immoral to state them.

tatboy said:
Actually I’m impressed. I know how hard it is for me when someone lets me down. Christy let me down with the way he got to his son’s game soI understand. It was big of you to say. You have to admit Markos can’t get much lower at this point?

Yeah – DailyKos needs to get over itself. I’ve never been a fan of them or Media Matters – they are no better than right-wing websites that present propoganda as news. And yes, I think revealing the name of anyone who has already been victimized (and “Betty” and “Veronica” were definitetly victimized by Wolfe and Stack – if they really thought and cared that Weiner was doing something like trolling for kids, instead of thinking they were going to crack a politically advantageous story, they should have called the authorities) in the interest of “getting out the ‘story’” is terrible and shameful.

RazorsEdge said:
Not a big deal in the scope of things. Just making a distinction.

I’m stating that it’s my impression that Cordova did NOT actually see the pic. Given Cordova’s statement.

she saw it via the retweet, not the original tweet. it was deleted before she saw the original tweet. if you read her statement, she says so in the first paragraph.
http://www.mediaite.com/online/alleged-recipient-of-alleged-rep-weiner-photo-gennette-nicole-issues-statement/

It’s the thought that counts.

I just came across this again, and it kind of made me giggle. Tommy is giving props to Breitbart for not running with something before he verified whether it was true or not. But in a post discussing slopping reporting, this was reported as a possible excuse for the Seattle tweet:

“The tweet itself isn’t that difficult to explain, if anyone could get to ask Weiner to his face about it. For example, Weiner is a famously ardent Yankees fan, and his beloved team was playing in Seattle on Friday. Cordova’s retweet would be the natural reaction of a fan to a mention of her hometown.”

“Update: Rep. Weiner is actually a lifelong Mets fan. To his credit, though, he intervenes on behalf of all of his constituents, baseball-wise. The point stands, though, that there are many explanations for the Seattle reference, and his hometown team’s presence there is just one example.”

http://www.mediaite.com/online/speculation-and-sloppy-reporting-on-both-sides-of-weinergate/

Tony Weiner will be divorced by this time next year…oh, and out of a job.

Tommy Christopher, you are an absolute gem and a total credit to this site!!!!!

You are one of the few people in the online world (let alone on this site) who has anything resembling a human heart; and as a reader, I (for one) am quite grateful.

However, I DO NOT agree that Breitbart is innocent here. Not by a long shot.

But first, let me gush about you… if I may?

I have noticed that you are perhaps one of the only contributors on sites like these, who has EVER bothered to see the human faces in these online circuses…. too many of the others show no restraint in gleefully feasting on an issue’s kill-ratio, swarming around it like a pack of graveyard ghouls.

The same goes double for Breitbart and his writers.

As I have said before…. they are all less like real media analysts, and more like over-glorified couch paparazzi.

So I want to thank you for remembering that people are people, not bits or graphics or cgis on an online game that everyone can toy with, sans respect or restraint. (If only people had thought of that when the entire media accepted falsified evidence to accuse Juan Carlos Vera and Katherine Conway Russel of being child traffickers.)

You rightly state that in the virtual world, people are too willing to allow the anonymity of the medium to distance themselves from the humanity of their targets. The comment section of this very site is sad testimony to that truth.

And in this respect, Breitbart IS entirely guilty.

He may not have been the ring leader in this fiasco, but he has committed another act of criminal negligence that is just too common in his record— HE DID NOT CHECK HIS FACTS, HE DID NOT VET HIS SOURCES, and HE WRONGLY VILIFIED THE CONGRESSMAN ON THE BASIS OF THESE FALSIFIED EVIDENCE.

That he didnt create that evidence (as Wolfe actually has, eg, coachin young girls to lie about their realtionships with Weiner) does not absolve him from making its dishonest content a national issue.

He worked from very questionable material which he didnt even bother to research.

I mean, IF the best Dana Loesch can muster is to ask her twitter buddies if yfrog accounts can be copied, well obviously she did not look hard enough. (As you know the system was, until this fiasco, vulnerable to such manipulations.)

Breitbart and his staff dismissed their own obligations to reliability, and even their own integrity, by putting out something so damaging without bothering to check the facts. (Shades of the Sherrod case?)

And really, the timing WAS too convenient to not be strategic.

Anyone who could develop the “Politicized Art of the ACORN video release” (see article in Wash.Times, 9-09) obviously knows how to insert and time damaging material as political strategy.

And since there is a real twitter stream of Wolfe coaching young girls to lie for him, then obviously the guy is at least trying fabricate evidence against Weiner. Thats a fact that cant be changed at this point.

Clearly, Wolfe was creating false evidence, and even corrupting young minds, in order to take down Anthony Weiner (right at the time when the congressman was pursuing his case against Justice Thomas.)

Breitbart claims he didnt know anything about Wolfe, but if you look at what this creep writes up in his own comments, why the hell would you consider him reliable?

How is ignoring the obvious truth about your source being responsible?

(Again, the timing of this attack was just a little more than convenient, re-Clarence Thomas.)

So Breitbart is guilty of taking questionable evidence from a clearly disturbed person and using it to slander Weiner.

I mean, did you see Breitbart on CNN?

He explicitly stated that Weiner was having an “online relationship” with these young girls… an idea which continues to be pushed in the suburbs of his own web-community (hell, look at the Mediaite comments threads for confirmation.).

Breitbart did add “we don’t know the nature of these relationships”, but his overall intent was clear. He was putting out a “PARENTS, HIDE YOUR DAUGHTERS” narrative; he knows that, and he should be called out on it.

He may have been willing to keep the personal info from these young ladies private, but that doesnt change the fact that, without checking, he promoted a lie,

Furthermore, Breitbart has benefitted from an attempt to corrupt young girls. As parents, both you and him should be aware of that fact. .

He accepted contrived material and gave it legs. (Furthermore, he knows how invasive the people in the suburbs of his media kingdom are. They are ALWAYS putting out personal info on people. He HAS to know that.)

Just because he didnt outsource this project himself, doesnt meant that he acted responsibly. If he were really concerned about the safety of these young girls, he would have bothered to dig deeper before throwing out this story.

And just as importantly, there are other human faces here.

If you are accepting in good faith, information from a creep like Wolfe who has expressly made it his job to harshly harass Weiner and people on his account, and if you don’t take any of that into consideration when promoting a VERY CRUEL AND INVASIVE (and yes, dishonest) slander against the congressman, what kind of “editor” are you?

I mean, didnt the smear on Shirley Sherrod teach Breitbart anything about context, and checking your sources?

Regardless, the damage is done. “Chaos for Glory,” eh?

And looking at the feeding frenzy that has resulted, I simply can not join your swansong for poor Andrew Breitbart.

He deserves to be in court well into the next life for his own handiwork.

He says that Weiner “invited this scrutiny”… well, Andy, then what do YOU invite by your own negligent behavior?

“The truth is incontrovertible, malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end; there it is.” —- Winston Churchill

sarainitaly said:
she saw it via the retweet, not the original tweet. it was deleted before she saw the original tweet. if you read her statement, she says so in the first paragraph.
http://www.mediaite.com/online/alleged-recipient-of-alleged-rep-weiner-photo-gennette-nicole-issues-statement/

We’ll agree perhaps to disagree. I saw the 1st paragraph. But I also saw the last paragraph in her statement. 1st paragraph comments says nothing about seeing THE picture. In last paragraph Cordova seems to include in the comments in the 1st paragraph with “never ever been any inappropriate exchanges between Anthony Weiner and myself, including the tweet/picture in question. MEANING, including with the 545Seattle hashtag tweet hours earlier, Cordova was not expecting the pic

FOR ME. this statement along with the NY Post article on her this am, has ME more and more doubt she was directly involved with this.

She would have some pretty intense audacity to continue to go out and have published lies and continue to cover-up. But that’s just where I’m leaning right now.

So between Breitbart and Markos it’s Breitbart that is the more responsable of the 2. Facts are facts…..

It’s nice to see so many people here and in America are focused on really important issues like this and not the budget, multiple wars, urban and infrastructure decay etc. Breitbart has always been a cheap ideologically driven hack who knows how to gin all sorts of people up.

sarainitaly said:
you’re right. they should just cover the same *important* stories as the left wing.
Palin on Paul Revere
Palin’s bus has a flag on it
Palin won’t tell the media where she is going
FOX news
Donald Trump and Sarah Palin eating pizza with forks
Sarah Palin is rolling in on Romney’s announcement.
Sarah Palin wasn’t invited to Rolling Thunder event.
Sarah Palin isn’t allowed to talk to media, per Ailes

LOL !

Anthony Weiner is a great congressman and an articulate, eloquent liberal spokesman. Andrew Breitbart is the scum of the earth.

On “The Early Show” Thursday, CBS News Legal Analyst Jack Ford said if he’s not pursuing official assistance in this situation, it’s about not getting wrapped up official statements.

“If I’m a lawyer, and I’m representing a politician, in general, it’s not against the law to lie to the media. It’s not against the law to lie to your constituents. It is against the law to lie to law enforcement authorities,” he said. “Martha Stewart went to jail not for insider trading, but for lying. Barry Bonds gets charged, goes to trial, not for using steroids – for lying about it. So if I’m a lawyer looking at a case such as this, I’m going to be real careful before I let my clients talk to law enforcement authorities, because I don’t want to find my client, you know, jammed up here criminally because, despite what happened here, they’re not telling the truth.”

Pablo said:
I take it you didn’t read the article.

Never does, but pontificates ad nauseum and keeps smearing Breitbart. A real gem that man/woman.
Figures if he/she repeats the slander against Breitbart often enough, perhaps it will come true.

Just wish he/she would keep it a little short and pithy. Basically say – I don’t care what the evidence shows, Breitbart is guilty because I want him to be guilty. Makes about as much sense.

jakester said:
It’s nice to see so many people here and in America are focused on really important issues like this and not the budget, multiple wars, urban and infrastructure decay etc. Breitbart has always been a cheap ideologically driven hack who knows how to gin all sorts of people up.

Yes, we’ve heard. Maybe if we focus on some of the people more closely involved in the really important issues like the budget, the multiple wars, urban and infrastructure decay, etc, as Breitbart is, we wouldn’t have as many charlatan self-important sleazeballs with the power to create the problems we have with the really important issues, huh?

Maybe if we had men and women of principle and character in office, we wouldn’t have all these really important messes in our country, huh? What a concept, huh?

RazorsEdge said:
We’ll agree perhaps to disagree. I saw the 1st paragraph.

i wasn’t saying anything either way, about her involvement. i said her statements did not support lolitahaze’s comments.

how can you agree to disagree with me, about her saying she saw the photo via the retweet? she saw it when patriotUSA76 sent it in a retweet. she says so.

she saw the pic.

she denied claims that were never made, but didn’t answer questions people wanted answered.
she may not have been involved at all. but it’s not like other women haven’t ever denied involvement in scandals before. Lewinsky signed a sworn affidavit denying any involvement with Clinton….

Seek and Pablo,

Look, why do you guys insist on being so dishonest??

Breitbart is taking info from a guy who was TEACHING YOUNG GIRLS to lie about adult matters.

He says didnt know that, but he has an editorial obligation to check his sources… ESPCEIALLY IF you are going to level the very loaded allegations he put out there.

Why is that so absurd to you?

Also, Breitbart DID push false evidence on CNN (ie, the “relationship with these young ladies”… now proven false, or didnt you read?)… he just made sure to pepper in a breif, very disingenuous caveat.

Look, If PAtriotUSA came up to you online with the same damaging materials he gave Breitbart (and yes, some of that exchange is now available to the public), and then asked you to publish these for him, wouldnt you want to do just a little leg work before putting your name on it?

Seriously, thats not about being left or right,, its just being a good journalist.

But Andy’s not a journalist, he is a character assasin. And while Weiner can protect himself from this assalt, people like Alisha Ploshnick cant.

Your devotion to this man notwithstanding, he is guilty of the most irresponsible negligence.

ndanielson said:
Yes, we’ve heard. Maybe if we focus on some of the people more closely involved in the really important issues like the budget, the multiple wars, urban and infrastructure decay, etc, as Breitbart is, we wouldn’t have as many charlatan self-important sleazeballs with the power to create the problems we have with the really important issues, huh? Maybe if we had men and women of principle and character in office, we wouldn’t have all these really important messes in our country, huh? What a concept, huh?

Precisely right. In this instance we have a hard line partisan who wants to champion just about everything that has brought our economy down and Breitbart caught him on something unrelated. That’s OK with me if we can hobble Weiner’s ability to continue on his path of destruction. That makes this story important.

jakester said:
It’s nice to see so many people here and in America are focused on really important issues like this and not the budget, multiple wars, urban and infrastructure decay etc. Breitbart has always been a cheap ideologically driven hack who knows how to gin all sorts of people up.

Meanwhile, here is how your favorite president is dealing with the “really important issues”.

Top of the Ticket
Political commentary from Andrew Malcolm

Obama team unveils exciting federal logo to make you eat less of what you like and more of what you don’t

While his Administration tells us that GM has only cost us $14 Billion, http://hotair.com/archives/2011/06/03/gm-cant-we-talk-about-something-else/

and his Soliciter General tells us if we don’t like 0bama’s healthcare mandate TO EARN LESS MONEY!

http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/2011/06/obama-solicitor-general-if-you-dont-mandate-earn-less-money

Yes, we should not focus on the sleaze in office that is bringing America to its knees, right?

sarainitaly said:
i wasn’t saying anything either way, about her involvement. i said her statements did not support lolitahaze’s comments.

how can you agree to disagree with me, about her saying she saw the photo via the retweet? she saw it when patriotUSA76 sent it in a retweet. she says so.

she saw the pic.

she denied claims that were never made, but didn’t answer questions people wanted answered.
she may not have been involved at all. but it’s not like other women haven’t ever denied involvement in scandals before. Lewinsky signed a sworn affidavit denying any involvement with Clinton….

I didn’t say anything about you “saying anything either way, about her involvement”! Just in case you were insinuating I was.

I said we PERHAPS agree to disagree! Meaning I was uncertain!

I too am horrified at the thought of the two young girls (or any other minors or anyone not directly and knowingly involved) being outed. DailyKos is well known for character attacks and I’m not surprised at Markos’s reaction, as reprehensible as it is. This is certainly a big part of the story and represents excellent work by Tommy, and demonstrates once again Breitbart, while gleeful to report on failings of liberals and therefore uses slanted jounalism practices but he makes an honest effort to represent facts as facts and opinion as opinion (completely different) and has also been admirable in this regard. The question I have now is, did the harassers attempt to take advantage of Wienergate, smelling blood and going for broke? Or are they involved with acquiring Wiener’s pic and sending it along as Wiener, and if so, is there any significance to the recipient being a person of color? I myself am a conservative and abhore racism and charges of racism. Goatsred has certainly harassed at least two minors (that we now know of), if goatsred is capable and willing to do that its reasonable to question what other elements of this story he/she may be involved in.

Andrew did not induce anyone to produce evidence against Anthony Weiner, fabricated or otherwise, and treated the documentation presented to him with circumspection.

As much as I like you Tommy, do consider that if Andrew had so treated the materials given to him “with circumspection”, he wouldnt have rushed to print such damaging materials, and insinutate that Weiner is having “relationships” with young women on CNN.

500K4Sarah2Speak said:
Breitbart is taking info from a guy who was TEACHING YOUNG GIRLS to lie about adult matters.

Breitbart’s info came from Weiner’s following list. It’s still there. You can go look at it, and if you’re concerned that the source is a scumbag, you might be right. But the source is Anthony Weiner. Deal with it.

Whatever nonsense you’re babbling about is utterly irrelevant to that irrefutable fact. Better luck next time.

The White House dealing with “really important issues”. For the genius, jakester.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2011/06/tom-vilsack-my-plate-logo-michelle-obama.html

Just in time for county fair and picnic season, President Obama’s administration has unveiled a brand-new, colorful, exciting logo designed to fill what it feels is a disturbing national shortage of reminders for Americans to eat healthier.

Wow. All the smoke and mirrors to keep his corrupt pals like Weiner in office.

jakester said:
Sorry, but I don’t care about cheap scandals like this no matter who is involved, D or R.

And yet, here you are commenting on the subject.

Face the facts, Breitbart is looking smarter and smarter all the time in this WeinerGate scandal. Once again he broke a big story. And all the people who ran to Weiner’s defense — and I was one of them, I sheepishly admit — have been left hanging by the Congressman’s inability to handle even simple, straightforward questions about that matter.

Of course, Breitbart has consistently been subjected to false accusations in the past. Remember his participation in THE NEW WATERGATE (according to MSNBC and other liberal outlets) in bugging the office of a Senator. Only it turned out not to be a bugging, or a Watergate or any kind of felony. Remember the anger against him for breaking the Acorn scandal — yet his allegations have been shown to be spot on. How can one guy break huge stories that large global news agencies can’t seem to uncover? (That’s a discussion for a different day.)

The lesson here is to take Andrew Breitbart seriously. I’m sorry the same can’t be said for his liberal critics. They have jumped the gun and made sweeping criticisms of him that too often only show their own bias and lack of decency. Breitbart has clearly won more than he has lost — and you can’t say the same for the kool aid drinkers who attack him with knee-jerk mindlessness even before the facts emerge.

500K4Sarah2Speak said:
Breitbart is taking info from a guy who was TEACHING YOUNG GIRLS to lie about adult matters.

Looks like official damage control.

Liberal Tormentor said:
Dookiestix says:
June 3, 2011 at 1:48 pm Dookiestix(Quote)

I love how comments like this aren’t censored.

I am in favor of moderated comments here. But 80% of the liberal “viewpoints” (I use that word loosely) would disappear if the Mediaite started eliminating comments with obscenities.

Okay. I’ll agree, Markos might be out of line according to your account and these Twitter bullies are disgusting trash and should be investigated for intimidating and stalking teens. I’d bet 50 cents they fabricated this entire thing and/or hacked the good Rep. Weiner’s computer and stole personal data. Mr. Breitbart ran with a completely UNVERIFIED accusation from dubious sources (nothing new for Brietbart though) so saying he acted responsibly is completely off base!

RazorsEdge said:
I said we PERHAPS agree to disagree! Meaning I was uncertain!

i’m so confused.

felixw said:
Face the facts, Breitbart is looking smarter and smarter all the time in this WeinerGate scandal. Once again he broke a big story. And all the people who ran to Weiner’s defense — and I was one of them, I sheepishly admit — have been left hanging by the Congressman’s inability to handle even simple, straightforward questions about that matter.

Of course, Breitbart has consistently been subjected to false accusations in the past. Remember his participation in THE NEW WATERGATE (according to MSNBC and other liberal outlets) in bugging the office of a Senator. Only it turned out not to be a bugging, or a Watergate or any kind of felony. Remember the anger against him for breaking the Acorn scandal — yet his allegations have been shown to be spot on. How can one guy break huge stories that large global news agencies can’t seem to uncover? (That’s a discussion for a different day.)

The lesson here is to take Andrew Breitbart seriously. I’m sorry the same can’t be said for his liberal critics. They have jumped the gun and made sweeping criticisms of him that too often only show their own bias and lack of decency. Breitbart has clearly won more than he has lost — and you can’t say the same for the kool aid drinkers who attack him with knee-jerk mindlessness even before the facts emerge.

Sorry, but entering a person’s office under false pretenses then tampering with her phones is not only wrong, but illegal. Sending a picture of your underpants is wrong but not illegal.

jakester said:
Sorry, but entering a person’s office under false pretenses then tampering with her phones is not only wrong, but illegal. Sending a picture of your underpants is wrong but not illegal. Noe to see you are the usual oracle of morality and legality.

Sad to see that morality and legality don’t much matter when it comes to your people in office. As long as they’re liberals, right?

jakester said:
No, I wouldn’t really care if he was a Republican either, because I am not a petty. moralizing small minded person like you and most of the teasappers here.

Re-read that and tell me if anything is wrong. LOL!

RazorsEdge said:
We’ll agree perhaps to disagree. I saw the 1st paragraph. -

**

“When I checked one of the posts that I had been tagged in I saw that it was a picture that had supposedly been tweeted to me by Congressman Anthony Weiner. Since I had dealt with this person and his cohorts before I assumed that the tweet and the picture were their latest attempts at defaming the Congressman and harassing his supporters.
Annoyed, I responded with something along the lines of “are you f***ing kidding me?” and “I’ve never seen this. You people are sick.”

***

But I also saw the last paragraph in her statement. 1st paragraph comments says nothing about seeing THE picture. – YES IT DOES. S

In last paragraph Cordova seems to include in the comments in the 1st paragraph with “never ever been any inappropriate exchanges between Anthony Weiner and myself, including the tweet/picture in question. MEANING, including with the 545Seattle hashtag tweet hours earlier, Cordova was not expecting the pic

FOR ME. this statement along with the NY Post article on her this am, has ME more and more doubt she was directly involved with this.

She would have some pretty intense audacity to continue to go out and have published lies and continue to cover-up. But that’s just where I’m leaning right now.

George C said:
Exactly right ! Hacking plays no part in this. Weiner has said repeatedly that it would be a waste of FBI resources to spend a second investigating that aspect of the story.
The best use of of government (local) resources is to stop people from talking about Weiner (s) a la :
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/rep-weiner-calls-police-on-cbss-marcia-kramer-for-requesting-interview/
Get yer bail money together Tommy .

Nice , George .

sarainitaly said:
I saw it, and replied to you with links saying that yfrog denies they were compromised.

I don’t find it surprising they won’t admit to it. They claim there is no problem with their system, yet after all of this came out they’ve changed a lot of how it works since wed. I actually didn’t expect them to say “Hey yeah … what we came up with sucks”.

If someone figured out his email, somehow obtained the picture of Weiner, and posted it – why did Weiner brush off the hacking for over an hour after it was posted? Why did he tweet five tweets about hockey, wait one hour, 20 minutes before tweeting a joke about being hacked?

he originally claimed he was hacked, now claim it was a prank, and he won’t deny the photo is of him.

The whole time he’s claimed he didn’t post that picture, we can call that a hack a prank or whatever. It doesn’t matter. I actually wouldn’t really call it a hack for narrow technical reasons, but it doesn’t matter how he phrases it that’s what he’s claiming in the end.

Also, the fact that he was tweeting while this happened is irrelevant, as this is not an exclusive thing that would prevent you from accessing your own account. One can imagine he posted “I got hacked” after he noticed a tweet that wasn’t from him.

if someone did all that, hacked to figure out his email, WHY is he refusing to have this investigated?

I can’t really comment on that. And educated guess is that the picture is legit? I have no proof or way to know that of course.

If it is possible to acquire the email address through the methods you used, and you stated you are a computer expert, you are making a lot of assumptions that someone else is as savvy as you are. If they are, and it was indeed a hacking, why is he lying? Why is he hiding and covering for the person who hacked his email account.

What I did is reproducible by non experts. It’s really nothing sophisticated, so anybody with intent could have come up with it if they are familiar with the yfrog MMS/email posting feature.

I’m sure anyone could create a theory to support any scandal…. Like, oh I don’t know…. that your assistant slept with your girlfriend, and took the blame that the baby was yours, for an example.

What I’m doing is trying to answer if his claim that he didn’t post it, and his statements that his account was hacked or compromised, are technically doable or not. They are.Now did that happen or not, that’s another matter. I can only talk about the technical aspects of it.

It’s great that you guys found a weakness in yfrog, if there was one. But that doesn’t explain any of the actions of Weiner, or the fact that he is lying about something. They would have to have had that photo of Weiner, figured out his email address, and posted it. If they did that, he should have been more outraged, and reported it.

I actually think the bigger and more interesting story is how unsecure a lot of these social media applications are, and the risk they pose.

I am not tech savvy enough to figure out what you did, and disprove it, or not.

That’s OK. Hopefully what I wrote in the link I send you kind of explains it. If I could illustrate it in a better way, please let me know. One of my interest is making technobable sound readable and understandable to the larger public.

ndanielson said:
Sad to see that morality and legality don’t much matter when it comes to your people in office. As long as they’re liberals, right?

Once again, in case you missed it: What Weiner is alleged to have done, which he probably did do, was not illegal. Entering a person’s office under false pretenses then tampering with her phones is illegal, end debate!
So spare me your cheap accusations, “huh, right, duh?”

Markos Moulitsas is a prick. Thanks Tommy, for shaming the Daily Kos into doing the right thing.

jakester said:
Once again, in case you missed it: What Weiner is alleged to have done, which he probably did do, was not illegal. Entering a person’s office under false pretenses then tampering with her phones is illegal, end debate!So spare me your cheap accusations, “huh, right, duh?”

true nothing illegal, he got caught lying, that why people are mad

Crap, my bracelet hit the mousepad and sent the post.

RazorsEdge said:
We’ll agree perhaps to disagree. I saw the 1st paragraph. -
**
“When I checked one of the posts that I had been tagged in I saw that it was a picture that had supposedly been tweeted to me by Congressman Anthony Weiner. Since I had dealt with this person and his cohorts before I assumed that the tweet and the picture were their latest attempts at defaming the Congressman and harassing his supporters.
Annoyed, I responded with something along the lines of “are you f***ing kidding me?” and “I’ve never seen this. You people are sick.”

She saw the photo in the retweet….what aren’t you getting?
***
But I also saw the last paragraph in her statement. 1st paragraph comments says nothing about seeing THE picture. – YES IT DOES. SHE SAID SHE SAW THE PHOTO IN THE RETWEET FROM PATRIOTUSA76

In last paragraph Cordova seems to include in the comments in the 1st paragraph with “never ever been any inappropriate exchanges between Anthony Weiner and myself, including the tweet/picture in question. – MEANING SHE DIDN’T EXCHANGE LEWD PICS WITH WEINER, INCLUDING THE ONE HE SENT HER. THE ORIGINAL TWEET WAS DELETED BEFORE SHE SAW IT, BUT SHE SAW THE RETWEET

MEANING, including with the 545Seattle hashtag tweet hours earlier, Cordova was not expecting the pic
FOR ME. this statement along with the NY Post article on her this am, has ME more and more doubt she was directly involved with this. – SHE RETWEETED HIS 5:45 SEATTLE TWEET. SHE DOESN’T ADDRESS THE 5:45 TWEET IN HER STATEMENT.

She would have some pretty intense audacity to continue to go out and have published lies and continue to cover-up. But that’s just where I’m leaning right now. – SHE DENIED *INAPPROPRIATE EXCHANGES” “There have never been any inappropriate exchanges between Anthony Weiner and myself, including the tweet/picture in question, which had apparently been deleted before it reached me. ” THAT ISN’T A DENIAL OF EXCHANGES – JUST INAPPROPRIATE ONES. PEOPLE WANTED TO KNOW IF SHE EVER DM’D WITH WEINER, SHE DIDN’T ANSWER THAT.

I said earlier she seems like a very likable girl, and her statement seems believable. But people lie. Weiner could clear this all up with an investigation. He’s not. Why?

Also, I posted earlier, that I think the theory that he meant to send it to someone else he follows, and accidently picked her name is believable. Much like i just accidently hit submit on my post, he could have messed up with a *tweet* instead of a DM, and picked Genette instead of Ginger.

My original comment you replied to was correcting falsehoods made by what’s her name…

jakester said:
Once again, in case you missed it: What Weiner is alleged to have done, which he probably did do, was not illegal. Entering a person’s office under false pretenses then tampering with her phones is illegal, end debate!
So spare me your cheap accusations, “huh, right, duh?”

And he was charged and convicted, sweetpea. Huh?

ElBruce says:

How much is weiner payin’ ya?

Look at Kos’ comments again, Tommy, and it’s obvious that what we have here is a typical liberal misogynist male. You see how he’s saying those girls deserve what they get, why did they get involved if they weren’t asking for attention? Even though one of the girls did nothing more than follow a public politician on Twitter, Kos drags out the disgusting, “she was asking for it and gets what she deserved” line.

And Jakester- Breitbart didn’t have anything to do with tampering with anybody’s phones. That was O’Keefe, and he didn’t tamper with anybody’s phones or pretend to- and all felony charges were all dropped. What you have is a misdemeanor, entering a federal building under false pretenses. And he’s a young idiot and a private citizen (and not Breitbart). Weiner is an elected official who is long past the days when being young and dumb should be an excuse, who sent somebody a picture of himself in his underwear and then lied about it and made false accusations about being hacked.
He’s unwilling to call the police on this hack, but he was more than willing to call the police on a reporter from his own district who merely wanted to ask him questions. And somehow, this is all Breitbart’s fault? No, it’s Weiner’s own dumb fault.

ElCapitanAmerica said:
Also, the fact that he was tweeting while this happened is irrelevant, as this is not an exclusive thing that would prevent you from accessing your own account. One can imagine he posted “I got hacked” after he noticed a tweet that wasn’t from him.

he wasn’t tweeting when the pic was posted. four minutes after it went up, he deleted it. he then tweeted five tweets over an hour and 20 minutes, then one about being hacked.

no, what you said sounds believable. if it was a glitch, it was a glitch. and like i said, i think most scandals can be excused after the fact, if someone is desperate enough to create an excuse.

the technical stuff you stated sounds reasonable to me. it also doesn’t prove that that is what happened….

Weiner’s behavior and story, however, do not sound reasonable.

A responsible journalist, which Breitbart clearly is not, would have given Rep. Weiner a call and confronted him with the evidence and asked for a comment.

And then would have double checked before publishing libelous material.

None of which Brietbart did. Don’t excuse his outrageous behavior. If this is the least of his crimes, and they are crimes, then it is still a felony and Breitbart ought to be sitting in the hoosegow awaiting trial.

jakester said:
Sorry, but entering a person’s office under false pretenses then tampering with her phones is not only wrong, but illegal. Sending a picture of your underpants is wrong but not illegal.

if you’re referring to O’Keefe, you are wrong. They did not tamper with their phones. Yet another never ending falsehood….

Sending a pic of you in your undies is illegal if the recipient is underage, isn’t it?

sarainitaly said:

the technical stuff you stated sounds reasonable to me. it also doesn’t prove that that is what happened….

Weiner’s behavior and story, however, do not sound reasonable.

I actually sort of agree with this. My pet theory that I can’t prove at all, is that he didn’t post it but that it is a picture of him. Which to me would explain why no investigation, because it would reveal something embarassing about him (picture is from an ex girlfriend/boyfriend, or recent pic of an affair, etc). JUST A THEORY of course, that’s why I stick to the technical side, that’s the only stuff I can really talk about with more certainty.

actor212 said:
A responsible journalist, which Breitbart clearly is not, would have given Rep. Weiner a call and confronted him with the evidence and asked for a comment. And then would have double checked before publishing libelous material. None of which Brietbart did. Don’t excuse his outrageous behavior. If this is the least of his crimes, and they are crimes, then it is still a felony and Breitbart ought to be sitting in the hoosegow awaiting trial.

Why didn’t Weiner mention that what Breitbart did was illegal? You don’t think he’d be after him with bloodhounds if he thought he could pin something on Breitbart?

ElCapitanAmerica said:
I actually sort of agree with this. My pet theory that I can’t prove at all, is that he didn’t post it but that it is a picture of him. Which to me would explain why no investigation, because it would reveal something embarassing about him (picture is from an ex girlfriend/boyfriend, or recent pic of an affair, etc). JUST A THEORY of course, that’s why I stick to the technical side, that’s the only stuff I can really talk about with more certainty.

which is also very believable.

if he would tell the truth, it would go away (most likely!) haha

But, first he came out that he was hacked, then with his *right wing conspiracy* bs, then downgraded to a prank, then got all testy calling MSM guy a jacka**, and then went on his media tour from hello, and non-denial.

All the while leaving GN to suffer the consequences of being the recipient, because he won’t just tell the truth, or call the police to investigate.

I can’t wait to see weiner hanging his head in shame on the teevee. ;)

jakester said:
Sorry, but entering a person’s office under false pretenses then tampering with her phones is not only wrong, but illegal. Sending a picture of your underpants is wrong but not illegal.

You show your total ignorance. No phones were tampered with. The people in the Senator’s office didn’t even have equipment with them that could have been used to tamper with a phone. No phone tampering charges were ever pressed against anybody in this case. And for a very good reason — nothing was done to anyone’s phone.

But I am glad you raise your stupid point, because you prove what I’ve been saying. The left makes up stuff about Andrew Breitbart that later turns out to be untrue, and you never hear an apology or retraction.

The same thing happened in this WeinerGate scandal, where every liberal website in the land accused Breitbart of spreading a false story. But now, after days of fumbling by Rep. Weiner to explain — and now he falls into total silence — it looks like Breitbart was again vindicated while his critics have egg on their face.

Here, Jakester, let me hand you a face cloth to wash off the egg.

seek said:
You don’t think he’d be after him with bloodhounds if he thought he could pin something on Breitbart?

And he would have no problem using tax dollars to do just that.

Funny how the teapublican lemmings are completely glossing over the Dan Wolfe (@PatriotUSA76) And Mike Stack (@Goatsred) and unnamed “moms’ who intimidated, threatened, and coerced teens in an attempt to smear Weiner. THAT is the story here. Not a bulge in a pair of boxer briefs!

sarainitaly said:
said earlier she seems like a very likable girl, and her statement seems believable. But people lie. Weiner could clear this all up with an investigation. He’s not. Why?

Then we agree a investigation clears it up. We both have stated that. But patriot could be lying as well. As far as I can tell with their tweet stream (many vile comments), tweet behavior, initial insistence on wanting an investigation then backing down when he was offered help do write to FBI. And other stuff.

Would you agree patriot given what we know to date is also possible to have lied?

Timothy Wright said:
Funny how the teapublican lemmings are completely glossing over the Dan Wolfe (@PatriotUSA76) And Mike Stack (@Goatsred) and unnamed “moms’ who intimidated, threatened, and coerced teens in an attempt to smear Weiner. THAT is the story here. Not a bulge in a pair of boxer briefs!

And Markos….

Markos is a little bitch, which is one reason why many people are turned off about leftist politics.

Also, Weiner would be wise to implement some mechanism to screen who he friends on social media. Friending impressionable 16 year old girls not only looks bad and creates an opening for his enemies to exploit, but also creates a meme that Weiner is a pervy pedo, and that’s a hard meme to shake.

Weinergate: Porn Star’s Tweets Contradict Weiner Statements to Media
http://biggovernment.com/rb/2011/06/03/weinergate-porn-stars-tweets-contradict-weiner-statements-to-media/

RazorsEdge said:
Then we agree a investigation clears it up. We both have stated that. But patriot could be lying as well. As far as I can tell with their tweet stream (many vile comments), tweet behavior, initial insistence on wanting an investigation then backing down when he was offered help do write to FBI. And other stuff.

Would you agree patriot given what we know to date is also possible to have lied?

yes he could have lied. but i would think he would have not welcomed an investigation, asked to be contacted, etc.

Also, he could be innocent, and going through a difficult custody battle, and now caught in the middle of a story that is turning ugly for him, just because he saw a lewd tweet. he had also been told, as TC says, by Veronica, that she had ” incriminating Direct Messages from Rep. Weiner”. I went thru hundreds of his tweets, and he was warning girls that Weiner liked to follow young girls. He also saw tweets from HS girls, claiming to have had DM’s convos with Weiner. Behavior they found inappropriate.

The way people are treating him reminds me of how people attack whistle blowers. If the LEO’s would just investigate this, we would know the truth.

OxyCon said:
Weiner would be wise to implement some mechanism to screen who he friends on social media. Friending impressionable 16 year old girls not only looks bad and creates an opening for his enemies to exploit, but also creates a meme that Weiner is a pervy pedo, and that’s a hard meme to shake.

Don’t you think his staff just accepts friends and followers and so on? I should hope NO elected official has the time to sit and manage a twitter/Facebook account.

Like the story said, the girl was thrilled to follow an important politician and it is cool that kids are interested in politics and civics. I am sure there is a lesson to be learned but I don’t think it is keeping teens from following politicians and being involved in the process even though they cannot vote yet. More like stricter controls on accounts and ensuring there are plenty of firewalls.

sarainitaly said:
yes he could have lied. but i would think he would have not welcomed an investigation, asked to be contacted, etc.

Also, he could be innocent, and going through a difficult custody battle, and now caught in the middle of a story that is turning ugly for him, just because he saw a lewd tweet. he had also been told, as TC says, by Veronica, that she had ” incriminating Direct Messages from Rep. Weiner”. I went thru hundreds of his tweets, and he was warning girls that Weiner liked to follow young girls. He also saw tweets from HS girls, claiming to have had DM’s convos with Weiner. Behavior they found inappropriate.

We won’t know for sure potentially unless an investigation done. At this point, I have read more background on patriot than I have on Cordova.

Patriot from day 1 was obsessed about Weiner. Weiner and his marriage, Weiner’s sexuality, Weiner’s wife’s sexuality. It was all in his timeline. He didn’t hide it either. But seemed from the start (pardon the pun) Weiner was on his mind.

Doesn’t mean he’s lying about the tweet, just background that leads to making assessments.

Timothy Wright said:
Don’t you think his staff just accepts friends and followers and so on?

he claimed in the interview with Wolfe or Brett, that it is his personal account, not his work account…. so, doesn’t seem likely.

no one has issues with teens following Weiner. it’s that he chose to follow a handful of very attractive young girls and young women, and even DM with some of them.

felixw said:
I am in favor of moderated comments here. But 80% of the liberal “viewpoints” (I use that word loosely) would disappear if the Mediaite started eliminating comments with obscenities.

Well, I think that if you can’t make a point without obscenities, then your point is unlikely to be worthwhile. Good for mediaite for moderating comments to remove the most vile comments.

I just finally read the Daily Kos article, with the info from Veronica. Heck, how do we know she isn’t lying now, to cover up for Betty that they were DM’ing with Weiner? Because her Weiner loving parents say so? How do we know she didn’t delete her account for some other reason?

I don’t trust teenage girls. I used to be one. haha

Betty’s parents never became concerned that so many people were warning their daughter about “pervy actions” by Weiner, and warnings that he liked to follow high school girls? That would make me concerned. I would wonder why he wanted to follow my young daughter, out of 100 people….

“As a result, we forced her to shut her twitter account down. Isn’t that a shame? Bullied right off of something she enjoyed.”

Couldn’t she have just shut it down, and started a new one, and not follow/be followed by Weiner?

Nice journalism here. Good work, Tommy.

What a sick piece of human garbage Markos Moulitsas is, though. He’s willing to potentially ruin the lives of two young girls just on the chance that he might be able to hurt Breitbart at the same time. How can anyone support such a person? He is nothing short of a vile ideologue who is so blinded by his hatred of anyone and anything outside his worldvivew that he’s willing to set aside all decency to accomplish his goals. The most evil men in history are no different.

tatboy said:
Still up I see…..

not sure if you saw this. i just found it:
http://www.mediaite.com/online/look-out-mediaite-commenters-we-are-watching-you/

lane said:
Well, I think that if you can’t make a point without obscenities, then your point is unlikely to be worthwhile.

Obscenities and name-calling reveal a very small vocabulary!

sarainitaly said:
not sure if you saw this. i just found it:http://www.mediaite.com/online/look-out-mediaite-commenters-we-are-watching-you/

Yep… saw it. Just wish it applied to BOTH sides.

sarainitaly said:
he claimed in the interview with Wolfe or Brett, that it is his personal account, not his work account…. so, doesn’t seem likely.

no one has issues with teens following Weiner. it’s that he chose to follow a handful of very attractive young girls and young women, and even DM with some of them.

He chose to follow a handful of attractive young girls out of almost 200 people. Most of those people were men or non-gender accounts like newspapers. He sent out a generic DM to them and to other people he followed, thanking them for their support. These women were followed because they asked him to do so. People should stop making it sound like he only followed young girls. He had a diverse group of people and organizations that he followed and less than 5% were young women.

and while journalistic ethics prevented me from explaining further, I tried to defend him.</a? As rampant, baseless speculation ruled the week, I have been developing the story the old-fashioned way, by properly verifying facts before I release them.

So now Tommy Christopher is PART of the non-story.

Timothy Wright said:
Don’t you think his staff just accepts friends and followers and so on? I should hope NO elected official has the time to sit and manage a twitter/Facebook account.

But he has time to take pictures of his weiner and post them on the internet?

Great article, Tommy.

What’s so bizarre to me is the incessant need to defend an elected official because one doesn’t like the source that outed him. If you want to be skeptical of Breitbart, fine. But when all evidence points to the guilt of an arrogant politician acting like a creep, what’s the point of this fevered defense? You’re entering the land of crazyville here.

Liberals, it doesn’t help you to behave like insane conspiracy theorists. And when you start ragging on Tommy for reporting facts, stop and consider that he’s doing you a favor by acting rational. The rest of you are playing right into the stereotype of ends-justify-the-means-appeasers.

Tommy Christopher:
I have long been a strong critic of Andrew Breitbart (in fact, ironically, the thing I’m 3rd most famous for is having him tell me “Put your dick back in your pants!”

If only you’d passed this advice along to Congressman Weiner all of this could have been avoided.

turk281 said:
What’s so bizarre to me is the incessant need to defend an elected official because one doesn’t like the source that outed him.

Attacking the messenger is right out of the alinsky book.

Tommy Christopher,

IMO this piece was much too long.

It could have benefited from some crisp editing and a sharper focus.

Plus I think some of us were disappointed that it lends nothing to the central quesion … DID REP. WEINER DO IT?

MT

It’s strange to me that the Parents did not request an investigation!

I would have, immediately, to get the truth!

Tedderman said:
Tommy Christopher:
I have long been a strong critic of Andrew Breitbart (in fact, ironically, the thing I’m 3rd most famous for is having him tell me “Put your dick back in your pants!”

If only you’d passed this advice along to Congressman Weiner all of this could have been avoided.

Don’t BLAME Tommy!

It is interesting to read the mother’s account of what “went down”.

Several things come to mind-

First: the school teacher introduced the students to Sen. Weiner (propagating the liberal agenda in the classroom much?)

Secondly: she is protesting quite adamantly that Weiner has done nothing inappropriate and defending his innocence. Of course, in his generically automated responses from the twitter account this is absolutely true. But don’t you think that as a parent, if your child has been harassed by a group of people (even the tenacious inappropriate group of adults in this story) you may stop and think WHY? Why are they so obsessed about finding dirt on this guy- could it be that there may be some truth to their horrible words and accusations or are they just agenda driven hate mongers?
I find an unsettling parallel to the media diggers such as Mother Jones in their same zeal to “uncover” something/anything on Sarah Palin – why the goal to destroy someone, character assassins.

Weiner has yet to even confirm if the pic is indeed his, which indicates that he has in the past at least taken a photo of himself in boxers, at most it absolutely is his and he won’t fess up.
As the media continues to dig, we find from Vanity Fair that he lied to meet a 22 year about his occupation (not ever cool under any circumstances).
I feel for the parents and the underage girls but maybe the lesson to learn is that those in the media will pursue any avenue to get a scoop and whether ethically or morally relevant, they refuse to help one another out of competition. Ethics in journalism – now there is a topic.

juan said:
It’s strange to me that the Parents did not request an investigation!

I would have, immediately, to get the truth!

Weiner is negotiating with them as we speak.

Skippy said:
This is a joke? It has to be.
So now Tommy Christopher is PART of the non-story.

You only WISH it was a non- story and so does Weiner! It ain’t going away!

You see, this is why I don’t Tweet, out of fear a “Twissue” just like this might arise.

Well, “might arise” may not be the most artful term regarding this particular “Twissue.”

mlb said:
But don’t you think that as a parent, if your child has been harassed by a group of people (even the tenacious inappropriate group of adults in this story) you may stop and think WHY? Why are they so obsessed about finding dirt on this guy- could it be that there may be some truth to their horrible words and accusations or are they just agenda driven hate mongers?

Plus the girl could have been using computers elsewhere that were not monitored!

Seems the parents are covering for Weiner and their daughter!

Interesting article. At least for me it exposed a despicable under belly of partisan politics in the digital age. I feel for Betty and Veronica, but honestly I have questions about Mrs. Betty and what she knows. As the parent of two teenage boys I have very serious questions about the veracity of her claims regarding the extent to which she monitors her daughter’s internet activity. I know no one who has one tenth the access to their teenager’s digital life she claims to have. And then there is the ham-handed statement. It has the tone of someone trying a half too hard to convince the reader of her neutrality, but isnt quite smart enough to pull it off. So I’m left not sure what to think about the whole thing.

Tedderman said:
You see, this is why I don’t Tweet, out of fear a “Twissue” just like this might arise. Well, “might arise” may not be the most artful term regarding this particular “Twissue.”

that was funny

juan said:
Plus the girl could have been using computers elsewhere that were not monitored!

Seems the parents are covering for Weiner and their daughter!

Yesterday the mother was speaking out…today, not so much. The envelope must have been delivered.

Juann
Don’t BLAME Tommy!

I don’t believe I have to say this but, IT’S A JOKE!

Tedderman said:
Juann
Don’t BLAME Tommy!

I don’t believe I have to say this but, IT’S A JOKE!

Bet Weiner doesn’t think it is!

This just shows the lengths some conservatives will go to smear anyone who disagrees with them. The fact they tried to get minors to lie says a lot about them. Along with the other smears Breitbart has done, it just shows they have no sense of right or wrong.

enemy said:
This just shows the lengths some conservatives will go to smear anyone who disagrees with them. The fact they tried to get minors to lie says a lot about them. Along with the other smears Breitbart has done, it just shows they have no sense of right or wrong.

Does it show the lengths to which anonymous twitter users will go to smear someone?

Or does it show the lengths to which Marcos at the DailyKos will go to in order to protect a rich adult congressman with a full time staff and unlimited resources from a scandal. I mean, publishing info about underage high school girls, then refusing to redact is beyond shameful. But it’s expected if one is familiar with Marcos and Kos.

enemy said:
This just shows the lengths some conservatives will go to smear anyone who disagrees with them. The fact they tried to get minors to lie says a lot about them. Along with the other smears Breitbart has done, it just shows they have no sense of right or wrong.

Why didn’t the Parents request an Investigation? Until they do, your argument is MOOT!

turk281 said:
Does it show the lengths to which anonymous twitter users will go to smear someone?

Or does it show the lengths to which Marcos at the DailyKos will go to in order to protect a rich adult congressman with a full time staff and unlimited resources from a scandal. I mean, publishing info about underage high school girls, then refusing to redact is beyond shameful. But it’s expected if one is familiar with Marcos and Kos.

If the Parents request an Investigation, Marcos and Kos, and others could be involved! That would be a GOOD THING!

Since the Liberal Teacher (if she did not present a Republican, too) introduced the class to Weiner’s “Twitter” account, wonder what she and Weiner were Tweeting to each other?

It’s becoming more interesting. . .and the PLOT thickens . . .

Nacho said:
Mediaite has some interesting moderation holds, I can’t figure out how they caught this last one.

they dang sure do…..my guess is if you disagree with tommy your post gets deleted…..wingnuts demand loyality to their causes……..its not a debate when everybody agrees…..thats why republicans cant even hold a decent primary…..they ALL speak with one voice…..its the rules

Timothy Wright said:
Okay. I’ll agree, Markos might be out of line according to your account and these Twitter bullies are disgusting trash and should be investigated for intimidating and stalking teens. I’d bet 50 cents they fabricated this entire thing and/or hacked the good Rep. Weiner’s computer and stole personal data. Mr. Breitbart ran with a completely UNVERIFIED accusation from dubious sources (nothing new for Brietbart though) so saying he acted responsibly is completely off base!

None of this meshes with reality. No proof of a hack. Nothing in the past that would make you mistrust Breitbart (really, this “he’s a liar” stuff is carefully coordinated misinformation by Soros backed outlets) and the theory that this picture was “fabricated” was dismissed days ago.

Timothy Wright said:
Funny how the teapublican lemmings are completely glossing over the Dan Wolfe (@PatriotUSA76) And Mike Stack (@Goatsred) and unnamed “moms’ who intimidated, threatened, and coerced teens in an attempt to smear Weiner. THAT is the story here. Not a bulge in a pair of boxer briefs!

What on Earth are you talking about?

jakester said:
Sorry, but entering a person’s office under false pretenses then tampering with her phones is not only wrong, but illegal. Sending a picture of your underpants is wrong but not illegal.

Good lord, with liberals ever get this straight? Breitbart had nothing to do with the Landreu phone stunt, that was James O’Keefe. And no phones were tampered with. It never got that far. All the 3 guys were charged with was entering a building under false pretenses.

enemy said:
This just shows the lengths some conservatives will go to smear anyone who disagrees with them. The fact they tried to get minors to lie says a lot about them. Along with the other smears Breitbart has done, it just shows they have no sense of right or wrong.

What the heck are you talking about?

tatboy said:
So between Breitbart and Markos it’s Breitbart that is the more responsable of the 2. Facts are facts…..

Breitbart has never been shown to be deliberately dishonest. EVER. He’s been the victim of a massive disinformation campaign meant to undermine his future credibility. Go ahead and ask any liberal you know, ask them if they think Breitbart “selectively edited” the ACORN sting tapes, or the UMSL undercover sting? Despite online evidence which totally disproves these assertions (the full unedited ACORN tapes are on Youtube and have been since day #1) almost all of them will assert this as fact.

Epistemic closure is a cancer on the modern left, it will lead them to destruction.

Chris Ar said:
Good lord, with liberals ever get this straight?

rabid dogs with a bone.
they.just.won’t.let.go.

Chris Ar said:
Nothing in the past that would make you mistrust Breitbart (really, this “he’s a liar” stuff is carefully coordinated misinformation by Soros backed outlets)

Just as their Meme that Fox News lies, backfired on ‘em!

Juan
Bet Weiner doesn’t think it is!

Of this, there is no doubt.
Also, let me apologize for the language crack I made to cdj ohio in reference to your not understanding my initial post was a joke. It was insensitive and I do not appreciate others denigrating my ethnicity, even though they usually don’t know what it is.

Looks like Andrew Breitbart has learned a thing or two from his misadventures with Sherrod and Giljum.

There may be hope for him yet.

It does not matter if Breitbart exposed the Weiner or not. The real story it that the Weiner was Tweeting 168 little girls half his age, 9 months after getting married. His Priorities have been dictated by his Mr. Happy which has overridden any moral obligations and vows he has made to his new wife.

Weinergate – Major Garrett: ‘Every Indication is That He Did It’

http://www.breitbart.tv/weinergate-major-garrett-asserts-every-indication-is-that-he-did-it/

Tedderman said:
Juan
Bet Weiner doesn’t think it is!

Of this, there is no doubt.
Also, let me apologize for the language crack I made to cdj ohio in reference to your not understanding my initial post was a joke. It was insensitive and I do not appreciate others denigrating my ethnicity, even though they usually don’t know what it is.

Thanks, all is well!

Tommy has just burned his bridge with Tony ‘the fighting c*ck’ Weiner and ripped his drawers with his blodd thirsty Liberal following. What made you do it? Your ‘conscience?

enemy said:
This just shows the lengths some conservatives will go to smear anyone who disagrees with them. The fact they tried to get minors to lie says a lot about them. Along with the other smears Breitbart has done, it just shows they have no sense of right or wrong.

Actually those were the individuals on Twitter who had been following Weiner. Breitbart redacted the names of the girls so as not to implicate minors, and he did not run the posts that had turned out to be fraudulent. That would be because he recognized that they were not factual, and after investigating he never reported Weiner was involved with underage girls.

Meanwhile it was Daily Kos who revealed the identity of the underage girls and refused to remove their names when told they were minors.

So tell us who actually has a sense of right and wrong here.

More weiner less bun…LOL

Timothy Wright said:
Funny how the teapublican lemmings are completely glossing over the Dan Wolfe (@PatriotUSA76) And Mike Stack (@Goatsred) and unnamed “moms’ who intimidated, threatened, and coerced teens in an attempt to smear Weiner. THAT is the story here. Not a bulge in a pair of boxer briefs!

Yes! Stop looking at me! I said stop! I, uh, I don’t know if I’m really me! I might have been, uh…manipulated…yeah, that’s right, manipulated I tell you.

Member of Congress said:
Yes! Stop looking at me! I said stop! I, uh, I don’t know if I’m really me! I might have been, uh…manipulated…yeah, that’s right, manipulated I tell you.

Seriously — change your avatar. I get it, but it’s tacky/tasteless/crude (as an avatar).

sarainitaly said:
rabid dogs with a bone.
they.just.won’t.let.go.

What?! Oh, sorry, I misread bone…I thought you were referring to me.

I agree the Avatar is in poor taste.
Funny, but sorry, inappropriate.

Want to laugh?

http://tinyurl.com/weinerFunnies

tiredofbs said:
I agree the Avatar is in poor taste.
Funny, but sorry, inappropriate.

Better? Unfortunately, it loses all context.

“I lied to goatsred because I saw many other girls in the news and I wanted to be famous.”

Not as much fun as you thought, huh?

In case my previous post was not brutally clear, the individual who Andrew Breitbart worked with to solicit under age girls for accusations against Rep Weiner was Mike Stack who has twitter id goatsred but is also known as sinlinlin (his twitter account has gone poof!) .

This character has a reputation for stalking women.

Breitbarts and the right wing’s original plan was to allege that Congressman Weiner had been having affairs with young women and that he also was a pedophile who carried on sex chats with under age girls. These were all false accusations. That Breitbart never was able to print these fuller allegations because the plan fell apart is no commendation on him and his operation. Remember that Breitbart already claimed that there was “more” to the story and that the congressman was fond of young women.

False accusations of pedophilia against a sitting congressman by shading web porn characters ought to merit some ink somewhere right? but the previous article on this is still in moderation.

I’m sorry, Tommy Christopher — whoever you are. But, I’m calling big time BS on your headline and your central argument.

While it’s true that #BigObfuscator didn’t report “Evidence Which Turned Out To Be Fake” on one of his many blogs, everyone knows he’s spent the last week spreading these rumors (about Weiner and his involvement with young women) on Twitter and on the cable nets. There’s no doubt in my mind that Breitbart’s MSNBC appearance this week sent his drooling flying monkeys off to find these girls you pretend to protect in your piece.

Maybe Chinese Intelligence Sevices Sent The Weiner Pic!
It’s possible. After all, we know the Chinese intelligence services are very adept at hacking. And Weiner has been a critic of China’s human rights record for years, so China might have a motive. And we are being told that what is possible and what might have happened must be what happened.

But what is possible may not be what has happened.

It is now up to you to prove that we are wrong about the Chinese hacking theory. If you can’t disprove it, then we are right. And Weiner is in the clear.

Right? , right?

avoidswork said:
Seriously — change your avatar. I get it, but it’s tacky/tasteless/crude (as an avatar).

Go here and scroll down just a bit. At least I didn’t take the nickname “Big Wang Theory.” Then scroll down a little more and there is my (former) avatar, 10 times bigger. And you could have said please.

not sure what is triggering the moderation filter.
Anyway, the guy on this thread below called sinlinlin is Breitbart’s collaborator on this faux expose. His name is Mike Stack and is also known as goatsred on twitter and his email is mscart2000@yahoo.com

http://pornstarbabylon.wordpress.com/2009/01/29/is-rob-black-a-pedophile/

In case it is not clear, I don’t care if Rep Weiner mistakenly twitted his clothed package or not. If he did it was a mistake and it was bad judgement. What is more important is how a national story could be generated by Internet hoodlums and Andrew Breitbart against a sitting US congressman without once any mention being made about the very questionable and probably illegal actions of those who are orchestrating an extortion attempt against a lawmaker.

Member of Congress said:
Go here and scroll down just a bit. At least I didn’t take the nickname “Big Wang Theory.” Then scroll down a little more and there is my (former) avatar, 10 times bigger. And you could have said please.

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/jon-stewarts-9-min-skewering-shows-he-has-pretty-much-lost-faith-in-rep-weiner/
Oops, missed the link.

turk281 said:
Or does it show the lengths to which Marcos at the DailyKos will go to in order to protect a rich adult congressman with a full time staff and unlimited resources from a scandal. I mean, publishing info about underage high school girls, then refusing to redact is beyond shameful. But it’s expected if one is familiar with Marcos and Kos.

You mean Markos “Screw them” Zuniga, right?

itwasextortion said:
In case it is not clear, I don’t care if Rep Weiner mistakenly twitted his clothed package or not. If he did it was a mistake and it was bad judgement. What is more important is how a national story could be generated by Internet hoodlums and Andrew Breitbart against a sitting US congressman without once any mention being made about the very questionable and probably illegal actions of those who are orchestrating an extortion attempt against a lawmaker.

You may not care, but the rest of the country does. It seems that culturally, we haven’t yet come to the point where we really don’t care if a Member of the House of Representatives is sending pictures of his dick to college students he’s never met. We, the majority of American people, think that’s a really stupid thing to do. Some of us have serious moral objections, others of us (and I’m one of these) wonder just how drunk he was when he decided that tweeting America’s first Congressional Junk Shot was a good idea.

This is what they were talking about when they coined the phrase “getting caught with your pants down.”

itwasextortion said:
False accusations of pedophilia against a sitting congressman by shading web porn characters ought to merit some ink somewhere right? but the previous article on this is still in moderation.

More reason for Weiner and the Parents to call for an Investigation! Why aren’t they?

itwasextortion said:
In case it is not clear, I don’t care if Rep Weiner mistakenly twitted his clothed package or not. If he did it was a mistake and it was bad judgement. What is more important is how a national story could be generated by Internet hoodlums and Andrew Breitbart against a sitting US congressman without once any mention being made about the very questionable and probably illegal actions of those who are orchestrating an extortion attempt against a lawmaker.

It’s illegal for Weiner to send his Porn pics to underage girls!

itwasextortion said:
In case my previous post was not brutally clear, the individual who Andrew Breitbart worked with to solicit under age girls for accusations against Rep Weiner was Mike Stack who has twitter id goatsred but is also known as sinlinlin (his twitter account has gone poof!) . This character has a reputation for stalking women. Breitbarts and the right wing’s original plan was to allege that Congressman Weiner had been having affairs with young women and that he also was a pedophile who carried on sex chats with under age girls. These were all false accusations. That Breitbart never was able to print these fuller allegations because the plan fell apart is no commendation on him and his operation. Remember that Breitbart already claimed that there was “more” to the story and that the congressman was fond of young women. False accusations of pedophilia against a sitting congressman by shading web porn characters ought to merit some ink somewhere right? but the previous article on this is still in moderation.

Um, no. The reason the story was tilting towards the young girls was that one of the girls claimed to have incriminating evidence proving Weiner was sending them inappropriate messages. That was when Breitbart said he had more information. Breitbart looked into this and found out the girl actually had lied about this information, and thus he never reported it. Same goes for the additional messages that proved to be fraudulent — Breitbart passed on them and other sites reported them.

good to see the blogs are at least attempting to hold each other accountable

as for the major (and oh sooooooo liberal) network and cable news?

not so much.

but man, that breitbart. he’s the ultimate bummer; and his face says it all. he’s
a really angry guy, and he brings hatred and negativity with him wherever he goes.

MartiniShark said:
Um, no. The reason the story was tilting towards the young girls was that one of the girls claimed to have incriminating evidence proving Weiner was sending them inappropriate messages. That was when Breitbart said he had more information. Breitbart looked into this and found out the girl actually had lied about this information, and thus he never reported it. Same goes for the additional messages that proved to be fraudulent — Breitbart passed on them and other sites reported them.

and that breitbart has a really great history of making ethical journalistic decisions!

thank god he got it right this time (lol)

we all know mr. breitbart’s style by now. he always looks like he’s about to kill someone,
or at least get into a very heated, possibly, violent argument.

and he really, really hates liberals.

and we should all be afraid of him…..

Whoever took that screen shot of Yfrog did it!

Using the hack to pull off this attack and having the YFrog screen appear in that way means that it was taken right after the photo was sent.

Also If the girls twitter is gone then why are you bothering KOS?

darladoon said:
good to see the blogs are at least attempting to hold each other accountable

as for the major (and oh sooooooo liberal) network and cable news?

not so much.

but man, that breitbart. he’s the ultimate bummer; and his face says it all. he’s
a really angry guy, and he brings hatred and negativity with him wherever he goes.

He brings the TRUTH! Thanks, Breitbart and Tommy!

juan said:
He brings the TRUTH!

about 1/3 the time

darladoon said:
and that breitbart has a really great history of making ethical journalistic decisions! thank god he got it right this time (lol) we all know mr. breitbart’s style by now. he always looks like he’s about to kill someone,or at least get into a very heated, possibly, violent argument. and he really, really hates liberals. and we should all be afraid of him…..

Thanks for bringing zero content to the discussion. I actually do not care what opinion or interpretation you foster towards Breitbart’s “style”, I’m talking about the facts of this story. As has been proven in the past, the details and facts don’t matter in Andrew getting slammed. Most opponents of his still say he worked to get Shirley Sherrod fired.

MartiniShark said:
Thanks for bringing zero content to the discussion. I actually do not care what opinion or interpretation you foster towards Breitbart’s “style”, I’m talking about the facts of this story. As has been proven in the past, the details and facts don’t matter in Andrew getting slammed. Most opponents of his still say he worked to get Shirley Sherrod fired.

ah, yes. incredible fact-digging. amazing.

how does he do it?

MartiniShark said:
Thanks for bringing zero content to the discussion. I actually do not care what opinion or interpretation you foster towards Breitbart’s “style”, I’m talking about the facts of this story. As has been proven in the past, the details and facts don’t matter in Andrew getting slammed. Most opponents of his still say he worked to get Shirley Sherrod fired.

btw, i see you brought a lot of content to the discussion.

you mention these “facts” but i don’t see any in your post

I’ve been talking the facts of the story all along.

So you want to throw criticism at Breitbart for not checking facts, then you are shown he did check the facts, and next you have scorn at him for checking the facts. Basically you won’t be happy no matter what Breitbart does. So why even bother with this thread?

We have unemployment creeping back up to nine percent, families are being thrown out of their homes, two wars costing us billions of dollars a year and you really think a photo of some in underwear is news? Once again we are becoming one big joke for the world to laugh at!

man this place sucks….I’ve posted 3 times on this story and all of them got deleted because I think this post was pure B.S…….
so free speech is only allowed if you agree with the article right?
I’m guessing this post will be deleted in the next 2 minutes too then right….
hey thanks a lot MEDIAite….you suck balls….so suck mine then.

So liberals start anti-republican dirty hoax and try pinning it on another republican. Why am I not surprised. This sort of thing needs to be exposed and discussed a lot more. Yes, liberals do originate hoaxes, even though they’d rather have everyone believe republicans are always at fault for any hoax.

I really do like Tommy Christopher, but I have to add these caveats about giving Breitbart a pass in this situation.

Now, the Headline for Tommy’s article is misleading.

Andrew Breitbart HAD, in fact, promoted the fallacious evidence provided by this creep, Dan Wolfe.

He did so when he first appeared on CNN. Remember?

He openly and explicitly stated that Rep Weiner had all these “relationships” with “very young girls”, and fed the story with a grotesquely lecherous smile framing the most hideous insinuations.

I thought Mediaite did a spot on it? (Oh, wait, Mediaite was more interested in disecting Toobins remarks, rather than catching what Breitbart REALLY said… pretty sloppy, but you can catch it a cnn.com.)

Now, Breitbart did add a brief statement that he “didnt know the nature of these relationships” but he was totally baiting the issue.

Thats why Jeffrey Toobin reacted with such alarm that Breitbart was able to say that crap on CNN. It was false.

Even more, it was the summation of the very same false narrative that Wolfe/Patriot had given Breitbart.

So Yes, Breitbart DID run the fabricated information. And clearly, he enjoyed doing it.

Has Andrew put a disclaimer on any of his sites to redress what he said on CNN? Has he at least made some effort to be honest about that? Isnt “Retracto” interested in cleaning the filth out of his own litter box?

No. And because of that, you cant say he didnt run false evidence. He did. He gave it legs.

And doesnt that count as “speculation and sloppy reporting’?

Tommy rightly states—

In the instant-gratification landscape of the new media, so-called journalists bumble around posting information, with little regard for traditional journalistic processes, and the results have been disgraceful.

But that description not only fits Breitbarts crude behavior on CNN, or his rush to publish this story without knowing what a dishonest, creepy freak PatriotUSA REALLY is, but it also is endemic to the whole problem of method advocated by his “Big” sites, and the lack of morality it excuses.

He says he is just doing “investigative journalism.” But no. Thats not it at all.

He puts out this open call for any sneaky, dishonest underhanded shmuck to join him in his “war” against what he calls “the left”.

He holds up delinquent perverts and habitual liars like James Okeefe or Lila Rose as model reporters.

Thats an open invitation to crazy. Thats saying in big red letters “hey Crazy People, Let me Put your stuff on my site!”

I mean, since Okeefe can lie about the most atrocious things and make copy, Breitbart followers indulge a “monkey see monkey do” response, and realize that they don’t have to be honest, or even dignified, about the “reporting” they “submit” to him.

And that is precisely how Breitbart winds up getting things like—

—-The video of Sherrod which he says was edited before he got it,

— “Doctor” Kevin Pezzi, a “master sexologist” who had the deep skinny on Sherrod, as a member of his staff

—- OR FINDING DANGEROUS CREEPS LIKE THIS AS HIS SOURCES:
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/internet/mike-stack-weinergate-co-pilot-219073

Okay all ye Breitbart fans, defenders, and Weinergate-O-Philes, please do read that article from Smoking Gun.

Know that THIS is the caliber of person you see as a reliable source.

Know that THIS is what Breitbart invited when he puts up a daily call for any trash he can get his grubby paws on, in order to “destroy the left.”

PLEASE DON’T TELL ME THAT ANDREW BREITBART DOESNT ENCOURAGE THESE KINDS OF PERVERTS BY HIS APPETITE FOR ONLY THE MOST SALLACIOUS SMEARS TO VILIFY ‘THE LEFT.”

Look hard baggers, Mr. Stack is YOUR source.

You are celebrating HIS a story… a picture HE painted for you.

He is one of your own. Embrace him. You helped make him.

Ah, “family values.”

Miss Capri said:
So liberals start anti-republican dirty hoax and try pinning it on another republican. Why am I not surprised. This sort of thing needs to be exposed and discussed a lot more. Yes, liberals do originate hoaxes, even though they’d rather have everyone believe republicans are always at fault for any hoax.

Honey, please take a look at this and have yourself a LOOOOOOOONG think on it… ‘kay?

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/internet/mike-stack-weinergate-co-pilot-219073

Oh, and this too—
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/06/leaked_emails_show_tip_to_breitbart_about_weiner_t.php

500 is somehow thinking that his sources are “clean”. lol

http://cbcf.groupsite.com/post/weinergate-smearing-hoax-when-hate-disguises-itself-as-concern

If you charge Markos for being a heartless father for not censoring minors’ names, which he is correct to point out are your sources and your sources only, you should probably not follow it with the title bragging about exclusive content from these sources. I also don’t understand why you would spend so much time swearing as if you were in court to Breitbart’s proper treatment of this issue when nothing but a shady group of anti-Weiner Twitter members is providing ‘evidence’ that is currently ruining Weiner’s career. Would Weiner have to disengage from politics temporarily if this strange obsessed man not been taken up by Breitbart? If it turns out that Weiner definitely didn’t publicly tweet a pic of his covered junk, will you still think Breitbart dealt with all this responsibly and truthfully?

I’m SURE Tommy knows about this, but just in case:

http://filmladd.com/?PatriotUSA76Interview

When PatriotUSA76 made a new Twitter account and contacted me with it, I was pretty startled this morning. He wanted to do an interview. I confirmed his identity via his correctly identifying the email he used to talk to me prior to deleting his account on Twitter.

I reached out as fast as I could to get any journalist I knew to give me some questions. Ace of Spades was kind enough to send me some via email, which I tried to refer to as this interview meandered along.

http://filmladd.com/?PatriotUSA76Interview

I’ll also emphasize what others have already, rewatch that disgusting CNN interview in which Breitbart implies Weiner is a pedophile. Based on your work, it would appear this is from PatriotUSA76′s claim that he had info from those redacted girls about creepy activity. A+, great job Breitbart!

Blame Breightbart all you want. Just because he was stupid doesn’t mean he was completely responsible for the hoax. The only innocent people in this mess are Weiner and that young girl and her parents. Let’s hope Breightbart has learned his lesson about playing silly games that could backfire and get him accused by a bunch of hoaxers of committing the hoax all on his own. But really, just because some woman dresses like a slut and men will gawk, does not mean she deserves to get raped.

dorothyzbornak said:
I’ll also emphasize what others have already, rewatch that disgusting CNN interview in which Breitbart implies Weiner is a pedophile. Based on your work, it would appear this is from PatriotUSA76’s claim that he had info from those redacted girls about creepy activity. A+, great job Breitbart!

Well said Dorothy!

Also, I am a HUGE Golden Girls Fan!!!!! Just had to say that… LUV the name!

juan said:
I’m SURE Tommy knows about this, but just in case: http://filmladd.com/?PatriotUSA76Interview When PatriotUSA76 made a new Twitter account and contacted me with it, I was pretty startled this morning. He wanted to do an interview. I confirmed his identity via his correctly identifying the email he used to talk to me prior to deleting his account on Twitter. I reached out as fast as I could to get any journalist I knew to give me some questions. Ace of Spades was kind enough to send me some via email, which I tried to refer to as this interview meandered along. http://filmladd.com/?PatriotUSA76Interview

Juan,

Do you really think that these two creeps harassing girls online is just fine and okay? Their treatment of underage girls is now a matter of record. You cant change that, okay?

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/internet/mike-stack-weinergate-co-pilot-219073

Also, do you think that hollering “bring it on” at one moment, and then “I cant speak now because I will ruin everything” makes a person credible?

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/06/leaked_emails_show_tip_to_breitbart_about_weiner_t.php

Come on man… these two are perverted speedfreaks. It really, really looks like they framed the Congressman. Even Lee Stranahan is willing to accept that.

And even if you dont want to accept that, then please DO NOT tell me that you can find ANY amount of decency in ANY of their online exchanges with the young women who were fans of the congressman.

YOu do realize that child-endangerment charges arent out of the question, right?

Seriously, what do you think of tham?

Juan,

One more thing. I read the interview on Filmladd through your link.

OMG, are you kidding me? Do you honestly think those statements come from person who is credible, let alone sane?

The man is a speed-freak. And the whole shitck with IM-ing his comments in, as if he were the freaking Zodiac Killer or something… what the hell?

That whole rant was completely, pathologically and utterly certifiable.

500K4Sarah2Speak said:
The man is a speed-freak. And the whole shitck with IM-ing his comments in, as if he were the freaking Zodiac Killer or something… what the hell?

That whole rant was completely, pathologically and utterly certifiable.

that’s funny, because that’s exactly what I think about your posts….

Why is Peter Lorre in the picture with Andrew Breitbart ?

As far as I’m concerned desperate times ( Obama ) call for unconventional ( unsavory ) measures.

If these less than stellar citizens can shut down a POS, liberal flamethrower agitator like Weiner, than the end absolutely justifies the means.

As soon as Obama’s amerika is once again real America things can get back to ‘ the way they were ‘.

500K4Sarah2Speak said:
Andrew Breitbart HAD, in fact, promoted the fallacious evidence provided by this creep, Dan Wolfe.

He did so when he first appeared on CNN. Remember?

He openly and explicitly stated that Rep Weiner had all these “relationships” with “very young girls”,

For the hundredth time, genius, that isn’t info from Dan Wolfe, that’s info from Weiner’s following list. You can go look it up. Now stop spinning.

dorothyzbornak said:
Weiner is a pedophile.

Say what??? Where’s your evidence???

Breitbart is a smear master deluxe and completely undeserving of any media coverage let alone commentary.
The guy embodies everything that’s wrong with America…….Greed, salaciousness, and media stardom for being a useless POS; very similar to Ms. Palin, who thinks that the office of President of the United States can be used as a means of generating more twitter followers. The “right” wing is so pathetic that it is an ongoing joke with no punch line. At least Trump was smart enough to get out of the circus after proving that he was the ultimate ringmaster!

500K4Sarah2Speak said:
Juan,

One more thing. I read the interview on Filmladd through your link.

OMG, are you kidding me? Do you honestly think those statements come from person who is credible, let alone sane?

The man is a speed-freak. And the whole shitck with IM-ing his comments in, as if he were the freaking Zodiac Killer or something… what the hell?

That whole rant was completely, pathologically and utterly certifiable.

Heavy repetition, framing himself as a victim, incoherent thinking throughout… Very odd interview to say the least… Not sure that it clears up any facts but certainly provides the opportunity for an uncomfortable character analysis.

Pablo said:
For the hundredth time, genius, that isn’t info from Dan Wolfe, that’s info from Weiner’s following list. You can go look it up. Now stop spinning.

No Pablo, watch the whole interview.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/201105310021

Breitbart summarized EXACTLY what this pervert Mike Stack and your hero Dan Wolfe said about Congressman weiner. You cant change that.

He represted the lies of these two thugs on the air.

Yeah, there was an old pervert behaviong VERY innapropriately to the young girls who were fans of the congressman>>> AND THAT OLD PERVERT IS BREITBARTS SOURCE!

There’s your man… a coked up porn-meister who makes a practice of saying the most atrocious things to underage girls…

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/internet/mike-stack-weinergate-co-pilot-219073

Not to mention… cowardly much?
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/06/leaked_emails_show_tip_to_breitbart_about_weiner_t.php

Hmm… from “bring it on” to “IM-ing” his answers in cryptic, pathological messages like the Son of Sam reaching out. (btw, thanks for the filmladd link… that was pretty batwing crazy!)

“Air tight cases”, and “regan Era values”, huh?

What great sources Breitbart assembles for you!!!!!

This is what you get for using hatred as a calling card.

500 you think if you had it right the left media wouldn’t be “running” with it?
We know you don’t like Breitbart, but in this instance he took the high road and you still have him on the cobbled streets below ground.

Please, at least acknowledge that you are wrong and love to write lengthy posts that are factually incorrect and indicate you are not enlightened but your posts are simply hate based nonsense garnered from some blog that had no clue either.

Trust me, if you were right – it would make front page headlines in national papers.

Great line here…

“danwolfe7676 (4:48:35 PM): I thought you were trying to test my political knowledge. I never claimed to be a knowledgable guy. I just follow politics”

Frankly, Dan Wolfe is sorta moot at this point.

His prescient tweetings about an upcoming sex scandal for Weiner can be explained by the “Veronica” factor.

All that’s left in this story is whether or not Weiner sent the pic and then lied about it.

Miss Capri said:
The only innocent people in this mess are Weiner and that young girl and her parents.

What a HOOT!

We need an Investigation to find out if Weiner is innocent! Even the DEMs are running away from him!

acmuns said:
Trump was smart enough to get out of the circus after proving that he was the ultimate ringmaster!

Err – FYI:

——————————————————————————–
Trump Says ‘Door would absolutely be open’ To Late Run…

http://drudgereport.com/

Barack Must Go said:
As far as I’m concerned desperate times ( Obama ) call for unconventional ( unsavory ) measures.

If these less than stellar citizens can shut down a POS, liberal flamethrower agitator like Weiner, than the end absolutely justifies the means.

As soon as Obama’s amerika is once again real America things can get back to ‘ the way they were ‘.

Too FUNNY and YES INDEED!

500K4Sarah2Speak said:
Juan,
Do you really think that these two creeps harassing girls online is just fine and okay? Their treatment of underage girls is now a matter of record. You cant change that, okay?

Why didn’t the girls and their Parents report it if they were harrassed? I, frankly, do not believe them! They LUVED following Weiner! An Investigation will reveal the DM’s! Tha’s what they are worried about!

Try again, cause it ain’t working for ya!

500K4Sarah2Speak said:
YOu do realize that child-endangerment charges arent out of the question, right?
Seriously, what do you think of tham?

Why haven’t the parents pressed charges? Something is amiss! Why is a Congressman messing with young girls?

What do you have to say about the mounting proof that “Veronica” and “Betty” are twenty years old and graduated High School a couple years ago? http://bit.ly/mNLvpY

How could “Veronica” be a minor, when she’s a 20 year old College Student? Is this supposed letter one giant fabrication???

MAYBE they were in High School at the time when Weiner messaged them. The claim that they are still in High School, and still minors, is a LIE.

Jason Neely said:
MAYBE they were in High School at the time when Weiner messaged them. The claim that they are still in High School, and still minors, is a LIE.

Weiner should be Investigated!

sarainitaly, sounds like you’re invested in protecting the PatriotUSA67 and Goatsred (Mike Stack). And then you start posting links to child porn. Are you sick or something?

Jason Neely said:
What do you have to say about the mounting proof that “Veronica” and “Betty” are twenty years old and graduated High School a couple years ago? http://bit.ly/mNLvpY

How could “Veronica” be a minor, when she’s a 20 year old College Student? Is this supposed letter one giant fabrication???

I’d say it’s irrelevant. There’s really only one question left here: Did Anthony tweet his wiener? It’s a yes/no thing, and It’s pretty much a given that he did, or he did something similar previously.

So, of the two possibilities, there’s either Anthony doing something stupid, or there’s a felony that’s been committed. Anthony does not act like the victim of a felony, and even his friends have noticed.

Do these kids (or not-kids, as they may or may not be) change the answer to the central question? No. But at least the one who was looking for attention has gotten it. Yay! But, so what? Who cares?

500K4Sarah2Speak said:
Yeah, there was an old pervert behaviong VERY innapropriately to the young girls who were fans of the congressman>>> AND THAT OLD PERVERT IS BREITBARTS SOURCE!

What did they do to them? Did they tweet them dick pix?

Sorry, but blaming this on Breitbart and mysterious right wing hackers just won’t work. The logical assumption is that the owner of the twitter account is responsible for sending the photo until other facts prove otherwise, not the other way around. Because Weiner is a federal official, this has to be thoroughly investigated by the real police – something you’d think Weiner would want if he’s indeed innocent. Add-in that his story keeps changing, and there is reason to believe he’s not being entirely truthful about this. That’s not to say its a certainly he sent it. Perhaps he was irresponsible with his password, who knows, but it has to be investigated by real investigators not on his payroll…and of course, if it turns out some hacker turns out responsible, that person should, of course, be prosecuted to fullest extent of the law. Why are you lefties so afraid of a real FBI investigation if you think hacker(s) did this? A reasonable person would think you and Weiner would want that.

Thank God for Andrew Breitbart exposing the hypocrisy of the left leaning media. They cover for (or don’t cover news) when it is “their guy,” but ruthlessly go after conservatives. These unhinged leftwing posters, this silly article by Christopher, and MSN, Huffpo, Kos are really quite ridiculous blaming Breitbart for Weiner’s own responsibility for his Twitter account. Let the investigative chips fall where they may with a real FBI investigation of the matter.

Well, Pablo, at least you hit on the RIGHT question, which is “did Weiner tweet his weiner?” If you’ll notice, that all-important question was supplanted over the week with “is that Weiner’s weiner?” and that second question is only good for gossip fodder.

But I think the real question is, if it took me all of five minutes clicking on the top 10 Google hits for this girl’s name, to find her COLLEGE PROFILE and an article about the aspiring then-19-year-old photographer, then didn’t Tommy Christopher and Andrew Breitbart EGREGIOUSLY fail to fact check this story before going on to call Markos a “child-hating piece of shit.”

Libel laws in the past have rested upon the author’s ability to fact check the bogus stories. Failing to check on something increases one’s culpability.

The letter above is phony. You read it first here.

Jason Neely said:
Well, Pablo, at least you hit on the RIGHT question, which is “did Weiner tweet his weiner?” If you’ll notice, that all-important question was supplanted over the week with “is that Weiner’s weiner?” and that second question is only good for gossip fodder.

But I think the real question is, if it took me all of five minutes clicking on the top 10 Google hits for this girl’s name, to find her COLLEGE PROFILE and an article about the aspiring then-19-year-old photographer, then didn’t Tommy Christopher and Andrew Breitbart EGREGIOUSLY fail to fact check this story before going on to call Markos a “child-hating piece of shit.”

Libel laws in the past have rested upon the author’s ability to fact check the bogus stories. Failing to check on something increases one’s culpability.

You’re twisting. It’s not working. Breitbart has been “cleared” even by his much hated left wing media.
So, unless you want to go ask Weiner some questions he might answer (fat chance) – he’s guilty and your attempts to smear Breitbart are not working.

You’ve taken an aspect of the story that has nothing to do with Breitbart exposing Weiner. I think Ginger in Seattle hit the nail on the head. Weiner sent the pic to the wrong Ginger. simple and stupid mistake by an excited wiener.

Finally, Tommy Christopher better have ironclad proof that this statement isn’t something that he wrote himself. He better be able to produce email headers, etc. that show it came from someone other than himself or Breitbart.

ElCapitanAmerica said:
He denies he posted it and that his account was somewhat compromised.

As I showed you already, it is very easy to do this with yfrog prior to this Wednesday. I hope you read the link I sent you, which was funny how you assumed I got my info from dailykos when I’m the actual author of it.

Here you go again if you missed it;

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/page/248630_yfrog_secret_email_addresses_a

Yfrog confirms that e-mail upload feature “has not been compromised in any way”

http://hotair.com/archives/2011/06/05/yfrog-confirms-that-e-mail-upload-feature-has-not-been-compromised-in-any-way/

The Daily learns tweet originated from app that pol used the night pic was posted

http://www.thedaily.com/page/2011/06/05/060511-news-weiner-1-4/

itwasextortion said:
sarainitaly, sounds like you’re invested in protecting the PatriotUSA67 and Goatsred (Mike Stack). And then you start posting links to child porn. Are you sick or something?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNkp4QF3we8

(he’s lying, ignore him)

sarainitaly said:
Yfrog confirms that e-mail upload feature “has not been compromised in any way”

http://hotair.com/archives/2011/06/05/yfrog-confirms-that-e-mail-upload-feature-has-not-been-compromised-in-any-way/

The Daily learns tweet originated from app that pol used the night pic was posted

http://www.thedaily.com/page/2011/06/05/060511-news-weiner-1-4/

This is pretty much the nail in the coffin for those alleging a hack. Anyone with a working brain (this will excuse Breitbart hating lefties) now understands he’s lying.

Jason Neely said:
But I think the real question is, if it took me all of five minutes clicking on the top 10 Google hits for this girl’s name, to find her COLLEGE PROFILE and an article about the aspiring then-19-year-old photographer, then didn’t Tommy Christopher and Andrew Breitbart EGREGIOUSLY fail to fact check this story before going on to call Markos a “child-hating piece of shit.”

I’m not seeing how we know that the people in the Dkos story are the girls in question. As for Breitbart calling markos a piece of shit, well, he is a piece of shit and I really don’t want to hear any whining out of him because people said mean things about him. When it comes to the subject of markos, I feel about him the way he felt about Scott Helvenston, Jerry Zovko, Wesley Batalona, and Michael Teague when they were brutally murdered. His feeling about that, you might remember, was “Screw them.”

Pablo said:
I’m not seeing how we know that the people in the Dkos story are the girls in question. As for Breitbart calling markos a piece of shit, well, he is a piece of shit and I really don’t want to hear any whining out of him because people said mean things about him. When it comes to the subject of markos, I feel about him the way he felt about Scott Helvenston, Jerry Zovko, Wesley Batalona, and Michael Teague when they were brutally murdered. His feeling about that, you might remember, was “Screw them.”

they had the girls in a diary, with their names listed – the girls tommy was mad were featured in the Kos diary. Now they have the names of two girls (and I didn’t see the first diary, so i don’t know what the names were) and saying that they are 20, not 16. I keep asking tommy if those are the girls, and if they are 20 or 16. So far, no answer (in the other thread, and on twitter). Kos could very well be lying, but TC knows the names, so he could confirm.

Ah, so Tommy knows what we don’t know. Gotcha.

Tommy? What say you?

I spoke on the Phone with Tommy Christopher, and he convinced me to the tipping point that the girls I identified are different girls, despite the extremely unique spelling of the one girl’s name, and the proximity in age to that girl.

TC described the steps he took to verify the girls’ identity and I can’t say I could have verified it any better. Though there’s still a shadow of a chance that he’s being played, he says he’s spoken on the phone to the parents so I at least know this isn’t “veronica” just working him over by herself.

Article deleted. Apologies to Mr. Christopher. Breitbart is still a liar.

I would hope all of you libs who ran to his defense will now run to the folks you accused of lying and apologize. These ego driven maniacs are capable of anything, whether from the right or the left. Weiner is just that a weiner, he is on TV proving it right now and should and must resign.

I am so sorry my Children and Grandchildren have to see this kind of thing. He lied, can you ever trust him again, I say no until he has given me reason to.

The GOP demanded that Chris Lee resign, where is the authority of the Democratic Party asking for the same thing. He tweeted underage women, Mark Foley resigned, driven out of office for sending emails.

Nancy Cordes, I watched you on Howard Kurtz yesterday, I await your apology to Andrew. You ought to be sick to your stomach for what you said yesterday about why CBS did not go after the story. Oh whatever!!!!!!

FERV888

Jason Neely said:
Article deleted. Apologies to Mr. Christopher. Breitbart is still a liar.

lolwut?

Can I just
say what a relief to find someone who actually knows what they’re talking about
on the internet. You definitely know how to bring an issue to light and make it
important. More people need to read this and understand this side of the story.
I can’t believe you’re not more popular because you definitely have the gift.
peugeot 307