Patterico's Pontifications

7/20/2006

Devoted Fans of Glenn Greenwald Emphasize the Same Points About His Resume — From the Same IP Address!!

Filed under: Buffoons,General — Patterico @ 12:56 am

Read on, Gentle Reader. I promise you, this will be worth your time.

See if you see any similarities between the following comments, from three completely different people. (Or are they?)

Listen to their amazing praise for the great Glenn Greenwald . . . and note how similar all the comments sound.

First, we have this comment on Ace’s blog, from “Ellison” (scan down for “Ellison”):

Greenwald only has a New York Times Best Selling Book on the Bush Administration and its abuses of power. And he has one of the most-read blogs on the Interent, after 9 months of blogging. And Senators read from his blog at Senate hearings and his posts lead to front-page news stories in major newspapers.

Why would anyone think what he has to say matters? It’s not like anyone listens to him. It’s not like he’s Ace, or Jeff Goldstein, or Patterico, or Sister Toldjah or Glenn Reynolds, or someone who really matters.

Great advice, you super-important bloggers should only to each other and about each other. Don’t bother with anyone in the Left because if you ignore them, they’ll just go away.

and this comment on Dan Riehl’s blog, from a completely different person named “Sam Mathews”:

Greenwald’s book has been on the N.Y. Times Best Seller List for 6 weeks now or more. He is a graduate of a top 5 law school and worked at the most prestigious law firm in the country. In 9 months, he’s managed to become one of the most cited and heavily-trafficked bloggers on the internets. His posts have led to front page news articles and are read by U.S. Senators during Senate hearings.

You-by your own account are a marketing and sales manager. And your favorite movie is Something About Mary.

Can’t you just admit that you(and Patterico and Reynolds & Goldstein and the rest of your bitter insult-spewing irrelevant losers) are drowning in jealousy? It isn’t pretty to watch. But it sure is obvious.

and this comment on Jeff Goldstein’s blog, from a completely different person named “Wilson”:

Lets see, a New York Times bestselling book on executive authority. Breaks a story on his blog about wiretapping that leads to front-page stories on most major newspapers in the country. Russ Feingold reads from his blog during the Censure hearings.

Maybe that has something to do with why. Any conservative bloggers with credentials like that? All compiled in 9 months or however long its been since he started blogging?

Jeffy’s funny poems are great and everything, and im sure your anonymous lawyer friends are really smart and all, but hard to say they compare to those things.

Boy, we sure do have a dedicated Glenn Greenwald fan there.

Or should I say “fans”?

Because these comments are, after all, from three completely “different” people. Again: the first comment is from a guy named “Ellison.” And the second is from a different guy, named “Sam Mathews.” And the third is from a different guy still — one named “Wilson.”

But here’s the weird part: they all sound so very similar! All of these various fans of Glenn Greenwald seem very familiar with his curriculum vitae. And they seem to emphasize the same points. His New York Times best seller. His amazing success in just 9 months of blogging. The fact that Senators read from his blog during Senate hearings! The fact that he breaks stories that appear on the front pages of newspapers!

And here’s the very weirdest part of all: Ellison’s IP address is the very same IP address as that of one Glenn Greenwald.

The coincidences are . . . extraordinary.

But this is where I should really turn things over to Ace, who is blogging this amazing coincidence as we speak — and who has some relevant screenshots (one of which I just e-mailed to him).

Why, just compare the IP address in this Ace screenshot of a comment from “Ellison” to the IP address in this Patterico screenshot of a comment from one Glenn Greenwald.

They sure seem like the same IP address to me. And I’m guessing that the evidence will continue to roll in as the day goes on.

Dan? Jeff? Do you have anything to say?

Anyway, I’m going to turn it over to Ace forthwith. Go read his post, now. (A big tip of the hat to Ace commenter Shawn.)

UPDATE: Add a few more to the list.

First, we have “Ryan.” Dan Riehl e-mails to say that three comments from someone claiming to be “Ryan” were left on his blog using that IP address. All three comments defended Greenwald. In one of them, the commenter actually claimed to have e-mailed Greenwald for his response to certain allegations, and printed the reply as part of his comment!

That comment is here:

I e-mailed Greenwald yesterday about this, pasted BumperStickerist’s accusations, and asked Greenwald if it was true. This is what I just received in response:

“Thanks for sending that.

I worked at Wachtell, Lipton as a Summer Associate after my second year at NYU, as a pre-Bar Associate during my entire third year at NYU and once I graduated, and then as a practicing Litigation Associate once I was admitted to the New York Bar.

Anyone who says that I did not practice law there after I passed the bar is lying — and deliberately so, I would think, since nobody who says such a thing could possibly have any basis for knowing that.

In any event, I can’t imagine what point anyone thinks they’re making. Wachtell is known to be the most selective law firm in the country. What point do they think they’re making, exactly?”

You people are morons, seriously. You run around claiming things without having any idea if there true. And then when you get exposed as liars, you slink away and repeat the next lie.

Good Lord.

There’s also this comment:

What’s happening here is obvious. Instapundit is so full of frustration and anger towards Greenwald’s criticisms that he links to every loser and sicko who writes a single negative thing about Greenwald, no matter how extreme, deranged, bitter, etc.

So now they’re all trained that if they want attention and traffic from their master, they need to be good little attack poodles and write about Greenwald – the more personal and inane, the better. Insty has linked to 10 posts like this, at least, in the last week.

Dan needs attention and traffic – he doesn’t exactly have a lot of either – and this is the only way he can get it. Greenwald is his meal ticket.

and this one:

Or, better yet, head on over to Sadly No where they are mocking the utter idiocy of Xrlq’s “frisking” -

http://sadlyno.com/archives/003294.html#comments

Xrlq is exactly one of those guys I was talking about. He has been whining away in obscurity, averaging 200 visits a day. 200 a day! That’s basically his mom and her friends. But then he wrote about Greenwald, got links from everyone, and, like Riehl and others, is now trying to milk it for all it’s worth. This tells you everything you need to know about xrlq:

http://www.sitemeter.com/a=stats&s=s15xrlqcounter&r=35

He should be thanking Greenwald, just like Rehil should. Let him try not to write about Greenwald anymore and see how many people go back to reading him.

Riehl blogs it here.

Jon Henke writes to say that numerous comments from Greenwald defender “Thomas Ellers” were left in this thread using the same IP. There are too many to quote. Just go to the thread and search for “Ellers.”

Cassandra from Villainous Company has written me to confirm that Greenwald left comments on her blog using the same IP as he used on mine. And, to make it clear: the only comments ever left on my site from the IP address in question were several comments from Glenn Greenwald. Cassandra says the same is true for her blog.

UPDATE x2: Kevin Aylward e-mails to note that the IP address in question comes back to Brazil. That’s no surprise. Here’s some background from Greenwald himself:

The country in which I have now lived for a year, Brazil, is by far the largest and most populous country in South America, and Brazilians had, prior to the war in Iraq, an overwhelmingly favorable view of the United States.

(h/t Henke and Bill from INDC.)

I should note, as I did in the Hiltzik affair, that the issue here is not pseudonymity. That’s fine. But commenters should not use pseudonyms to pretend to be something or somebody they aren’t. That’s just dishonest.

Well, this is a fast-moving story, and I’m going to miss the next several hours. Keep an eye on Ace, Goldstein, Riehl, and others.

UPDATE x3: Goldstein’s “Wilson” comment matches an IP used by Greenwald at my site and “Thomas Ellers” at Henke’s. A screen shot is forthcoming.

I should note: I’m not making any claims here. I’m content to let the facts speak for themselves.

UPDATE x4: Greenwald denies the charges.

UPDATE x5 7-24-2006 4:42 p.m.: A brief summary of the IP evidence is here:

Greenwald (and nobody else) used one IP address to make five comments on my site on July 13. He (and nobody else) used the same one to make 2 comments on Villainous Company. “Ryan” used that IP address to post 3 comments at Riehl World View. And “Ellison” posted a comment using that IP address at Ace’s. And “Thomas Ellers” posted numerous comments using that IP address at Q&O.

Greenwald (and nobody else) used a second IP address to post 3 comments on my site on July 12. He used the same IP address to post as himself at Confederate Yankee. And that same IP address was used by “Wilson” at Jeff Goldstein’s site.

Ace and I plan to have much more on why we think it’s Greenwald and not the boyfriend. The basic argument is this: the evidence points either to Greenwald, or to a person who is his carbon copy in personality, writing style and verbal tics.

The suspected sock-puppet comments from Greenwald’s IP are clearly by the same person, going under names like Ellison, Ellers, and Ellensburg. The sock-puppet commenter knows intimately the details of Greenwald’s site, including Greenwald’s arguments, his commenters, and the content of his posts and updates. He knows which Greenwald commenters used to like Greenwald, and why they stopped liking him. He is savvy about the Internet and is fully conversant with the names of all Greenwald’s critics.

His English is idiomatic and quite flowing. Like Greenwald’s own comments, there are occasional mistakes of spelling and verb-subject agreement, but the English shows strong signs of someone fully conversant with idiomatic expressions. He uses phrases that Greenwald uses, like “to recap:” and “I love how . . .”

Although Greenwald often comes on to comment threads to defend himself under his own name, Greenwald and his sock-puppets don’t seem to show up in the same threads. Apparently, when a same-IP commenter shows up to defend Greenwald, Greenwald himself doesn’t feel the need to defend himself in the same threads. As Ace has shown, it has happened that the same-IP commenter says things in comments one day, and these observations show up in Greenwald’s posts the next day.

There is a motive: the same-IP commenter gets to say things about Greenwald’s greatness that would be unseemly if they appeared over his name.

The evidence goes on and on.

Is it possible it’s Greenwald’s boyfriend instead of Greenwald — as Greenwald has intimated (but has not affirmatively claimed)? Yeah, it’s remotely possible, based on the facts we know now.

But if it’s Greenwald’s boyfriend, then Greenwald participated in a charade of not knowing who the boyfriend was, and allowing him to “e-mail” him for a response that the boyfriend could have simply asked him for.

I think it’s him. And I think there’s a reason he’s not telling us more: people who know the boyfriend wouldn’t buy it. And I also wonder why a boyfriend this obsessive about protecting Greenwald’s good name hasn’t yet stepped up to the plate and taken the heat.

An explanation of how this all came about is here. And a full summary of all the evidence is still to come. Stay tuned.

While laying out the evidence is necessary, I agree with Instapundit that the WuzzaDem puppet show is the best link on this so far, followed by the poster at Ace’s.

340 Responses to “Devoted Fans of Glenn Greenwald Emphasize the Same Points About His Resume — From the Same IP Address!!”

  1. Tim Lambert turns up to decry accusations of Greenwald sock-puppetry in 3… 2… 1…

    Brett (bf871b)

  2. Looks a bit, how you say, Hiltzikian, doesn’t it? Or is it Hiltzikesque?

    Sean M. (db71f3)

  3. I don’t see what the big deal is.

    Svenn Sveenwald (c3be1b)

  4. Glenn Greenwald’s IP Address Stolen…

    Last night, I posted of Rusty Shackleford’s coming under simultaneous assualt from the Islamists and the Indian government. This morning, I learn that lefty blogger extraordinaire Glenn Greenwald–who is a famous constitutional scholar, has…

    Outside The Beltway | OTB (30d6b6)

  5. You’re all just jealous of the guy. Glenn Greenwald is so not a douche.

    Ellison (9d319c)

  6. What Ellison said. How can anybody who worked at a prestigious law firm be a douche, you douche?

    Sam Mathews (9d319c)

  7. Greenwald is so much more accomplished than you fuckwitted addlefucks. He’s also a hell of a lot more civil than you assclowns. In fact, I’ll bet that’s why he gets to you fuckwitted fucktards so much, it’s fucking civility, isn’t it? Stupid fucknozzle.

    Wilson (9d319c)

  8. Another Ellison post here.

    Ellison (5d8c7f)

  9. And a surprisingly sensible post here.

    Ellison (5d8c7f)

  10. Oh, Ellison! You’re so brave!

    Nice finds. Just how funny can all this get?

    Pablo (08e1e8)

  11. [...] If you’ve read my grand fisking (the real thing, that is, not just the Cliff Notes) you might find it hard to imagine what new kind of dirt there could possibly be on someone as serially mendacious as he. Ace and Patterico and Ace have the goods. * And if anyone other than Glenn Greenwald has recently posted a comment about Glenn Greenwald on your blog using the IP address 201.37.43.117, so do you. [...]

    damnum absque injuria » More Greenwald Dishonesty (38c04c)

  12. Maybe Hiltzik borrowed the IP for a few days …

    Don Surber (1e4911)

  13. Ok, someone, help me out. What is the significance of having the same IP address? Does that mean it came from the same computer, or just the same service, or what?

    Gotta Know (f41eca)

  14. OMG NOT AGAIN!

    Dwilkers (a1687a)

  15. I’m really looking for a way to get out of the spiral of increasingly personal, nasty, venal, inside-baseball, destructive behavior that is so typical of the Internet. – Patterico 7/13/06

    Well, that didn’t last very long, did it?

    Psyberian (dd13d6)

  16. Didn’t Deb Frisch state that some of the comments attributed to her at Goldstein’s site weren’t hers? And didn’t Goldstein say that he had the IP addresses to prove it?

    Seems to be a little bit of that going around, doesn’t it?

    Nikki (ba670f)

  17. Congratulations on a good catch. No, I’m not kidding–I do not like the sockpuppetry business. I don’t think it invalidates everything he’s ever written, but is it extremely lame? Yes, yes it is, and I’ll cheerfully condemn it as such.

    (Full disclosure: I sockpuppeted someone myself once. I felt like such dirt about it, I confessed to it promptly and swore off the practice. Still, doesn’t exactly leave my hands clean.)

    ilyka (398c3d)

  18. PLEASE HELP ME!!! What is the significance of the same IP address?

    Still Gotta Know (f41eca)

  19. “Sockpuppetry” will soon be covered by the American’s with Disabilities Act. Hence these sock puppets are really victims in need of government assistance and protection from exposure.

    Perfect Sense (af017f)

  20. #19 SGK-

    It means Greenwald is running around anonymously posing as other people defending himself – being his own ‘sock-puppet’ ala Hiltzig.

    And yes psyberian, its all about Patterico being a jerk. Its not about Greenwald being a big fat lying hypocritical sack-of-feces. That’s not it at all, so don’t even think about it.

    You might want to line up all the reasons the doesn’t matter for Sir Douche and start posting them over there because he’s obviously going to need all the inventive talent he can get.

    Dwilkers (a1687a)

  21. What is the significance of having the same IP address? Does that mean it came from the same computer, or just the same service, or what?

    It’s either the same computer, or at least the same local network. So, it’s either GiGi or a bunch of people sharing his router.

    On another note, with all this resume pimping I notice that something seems to be missing. Has GiGi ever won a notable case?

    I’m no lawyer, but it seems to me that such would be the standard for claims of lawyerly excellence.

    Pablo (efa871)

  22. So here is my remaining IP question: Could it be possible that there is in fact more than one person, using the same service? What could be the scope of a given IP address? Could it theoretically apply to thousands of users?

    Just trying to nail this down…

    Gotta Know More (f41eca)

  23. Patterico:

    Common Sockpuppetry — Cecilosis Clampettitis — appears, like AIDS, to be a disease that does not discriminate on the basis of political philosophy. Didn’t you say that Professor John Lott got caught at it, posting comments as “Mary Rosh” praising Lott’s scholarship?

    So we have Lott, Hiltzik, Greenwald… and more to come. Will this end up like the Jack Abramoff tar-baby?

    (Or does memory fail me again? They say the mind is the second thing to go; I forget what the first thing is.)

    On a slightly more serious note, this is a bizarre behavior that I simply cannot understand. But that’s probably because my ego is of the colossal, towering kind that cannot bear seeing my words in print (or phosphor) without my actual name attached.

    Drove me out of my mind when one of my Trek books was published with “by Daffyd ab Hugh” on the cover. Like Sweeny Todd, I never forgot and I never forgave.

    Dafydd

    Dafydd (6e94cd)

  24. Hi. Herbie the WonderDog here. I’m borrowing Dwilkers’s computer, but don’t worry because I’m NOT HIM!

    You guys should listen to Dwilkers because he’s smart. Plus he takes good care of his dogs.

    Herbie the WonderDog (a1687a)

  25. Could it theoretically apply to thousands of users?

    Theoretically, it could happen with a dial up service like AOL which has thousands of IP’s and assigns them as customers dial in. (This is known as dynamic IP addressing) The odds of this being the case are about the same as the odds of the dozen monkeys typing for an hour and a half and duplicating Shakespeare. From Uraguay.

    It could also happen if there were several people who used the same WiFi hotspot, which would put GiGi and the 3 sock puppets in the same physical location, ie. one on his left foot, one on his right foot and one on his…er, his…um….New York Times bestselling book.

    I believe the burden of proof now belongs to GiGi, Ellison, Sam and Wilson. However, in the interest of full disclosure, I believe that I may have located Wilson.

    Pablo (efa871)

  26. Pablo in the interest of full disclosure I note that the referenced photo of Wilson is a replica, which raises the possibility that there is more than one Wilson.

    Rick O'Shea (f41eca)

  27. Your implication that there’s some problem with Mr. Greenwald’s IP, or that he’s done ANYTHING untoward at all is vile and I condemn it.

    Furthermore, Mr. Greenwald is not a Douchebag, and that’s something I should know.

    Massengill (a1687a)

  28. Looks like we’ve found Wilson’s Johnson.

    IP Master (f41eca)

  29. Well, that didn’t last very long, did it?

    Which sock puppet are you, again…?

    Kent (005e8f)

  30. Whois.sc puts this IP address in brazil. It could be part of a Tor network. Unless glenn is there.

    actus (6234ee)

  31. Every computer must have a unique IP address in order to function. Now, a series of computers behind a proxy all have unique IPs, but the proxy / firewall will have it’s own IP which it will use to access things on the outside of its network. So, if computer 1 has an IP of 192.168.1.5, computer 2 – 192.168.1.6 and the firewall has an IP of 231.235.17.2, when both computers 1 and 2 access a site, the site will log the ip as 231.235.17.2. This happens in corporations, wifi spots, or home networks where there are multiple computers.

    It absolutely means that if you get 3 comments from 3 different people all with the same IP address that they are either the same PC or that they are being accessed through the same network. I’m not sure if AOL or other major online services proxy their connections, but 201.37.43.117 does not appear to be AOL. That IP belongs to Virtua.com.

    So, it is a safe, although not foolproof, assumption that it is the same person.

    Robb Allen (293509)

  32. Get Ready For The Latest Blog Dustup!…

    Heh. A little fancy detective work by some righty bloggers may have Glenn Greenwald looking a little silly.

    From Patterico:

    Boy, we sure do have a dedicated Glenn Greenwald fan there.

    Or should I say “fans”?

    Because these comments are,…

    Iowa Voice (075f33)

  33. Oops. My mistake. The IP does not belong to Virtua.com. I missed the .br extension which I believe is Brazil.

    Regardless, the fact is that if the same IP is used for the same 3 comments, it is most likely the same person or group of people from the same office / house.

    Robb Allen (293509)

  34. Robb-

    So far so good, they are probably the same person, but could conceivably all work for IBM Boston branch, for example.

    That in itself would be a stretch, especially given the similarities of all of the comments, but now that we know it’s a South American address, and that GG lives in South America, it looks like we’re near 100%.

    Gotta Know (f41eca)

  35. The country in which I have now lived for a year, Brazil…

    It looks like privacy devotees should start protecting themselves.

    actus (6234ee)

  36. So here is my remaining IP question: Could it be possible that there is in fact more than one person, using the same service?

    Possible, but unlikely. Some dial-up services assign different IP addresses for each session, but if Greenwald had used a service like that, his own IP address would change every time, too. Plus, while it would be odd for a Greenwald sycophant who subscribes to the same dial-up service to just “happen” upon an IP address Greenwald himself had used in prior sessions, what are the odds of three separate individuals all winning that same lottery in three separate sessions within a relatively short time frame? So I think we can easily exclude the dialup/dynamic IP option.

    That leaves us with the usual default option: the IP address is his, and every post originating from it is one that originated from under his own roof – or possibly within a couple hundred feet outside it, if the commenters are all bandwidth thieves taking advantage of an unsecured wireless router.

    Xrlq (f52b4f)

  37. Pablo,

    Glenn won a couple of decisions regarding tax status for the Hale’s religious organization, World Church, and had some defendent-beneficial evidentiary rulings in the Hale case as well.

    The problem is that Glenn wants to be all that and a bag of chips. Glenn’s got no legal bag of chips.

    .

    BumperStickerist (002671)

  38. It looks like privacy devotees should start protecting themselves.

    Why, actus, that makes sense! Congratulations, buddy!

    Next we’ll work on making links that connect to the internets. But for now, let’s just bask in the glow of that last comment, shall we?

    Pablo (efa871)

  39. [...] Patterico finds three, count ‘em three, different entities praising Mr. Greenwald over at Ace’s site, Riehl World and Jeff Goldstein’s blog, using remarkably similar language. And like Greenwald and “Ellison,” these three share the same IP address. [...]

    Hot Air » Blog Archive » Glenn Greenwald Hiltzik? (d4224a)

  40. Okay, I am so busted.

    I moved in with Glenn a few months ago. Not gay or anything, I help keeps down the expenses. During my trial we got to be pretty good friends since we share a common dislike for phonies and neocon oppression. One thing led to another, and well, here I am eating some Wheat Thins in front of Glenn’s iMac.

    The whole sock-puppet thing was my idea, so please don’t blame Glenn. He’s got enough going on what with the screeching hysterical attacks from unhinged rightwingers and hosting the cocktail party for Andy Sullivan this weekend.

    Sometimes, Glenn just gets so tense it takes me 30 minutes to rub the kinks out of his broad, tanned shoulders. So lay off, okay?

    Matthew Hale (47cd7b)

  41. I’d just like to state, for the record, that actus is NOT one of Greenwald’s near-infinite number of online sock puppets.

    He enjoys having Greenwald’s hand up his butt for entirely different reasons.

    Kent (005e8f)

  42. Matthew is such a handsome man, and I’m not GG, I swear.

    Gotta Know (f41eca)

  43. Matthew is such a handsome man, and I’m not GG, I swear.

    I’m not Glenn Greenwald, either. Although I do want him.

    Sullivan's Beagle (005e8f)

  44. Guys, don’t miss the update. There are more.

    Patterico (50c3cd)

  45. I’m not Glenn Greenwald, either. Although I do want him.

    Hit it. Two times.

    The beagle, I mean.

    Deb Frisch, No, Really, I Swear (005e8f)

  46. Actually, I am Spartacus.

    wilson (ba92b6)

  47. Okay, I’m not really Spartacus. He just lets me use his ip address.

    wilson (ba92b6)

  48. Xrlq is exactly one of those guys I was talking about. He has been whining away in obscurity, averaging 200 visits a day. 200 a day! That’s basically his mom and her friends.

    He could doubtless boots those numbers to Greenwald levels easily, were he to post under even half as many sock puppet I.D.s as The Master Prevaricator his own busted, bucktoothed self.

    Glenn Greenwald: “The Jessie Macbeth of the Blogosphere.” Heh.

    Kent (005e8f)

  49. Spartacus was also a handsome man, and not from South America, so we know he wasn’t GG.

    Gotta Know (f41eca)

  50. Next we’ll work on making links that connect to the internets. But for now, let’s just bask in the glow of that last comment, shall we?

    Oops. The actual link was supposed to go to tor.eff.org. It looks like the comment form adds in the http prefix if you leave it off, and adds in the link to the current thread. I have no idea if that is RFC compliant behavior.

    actus (6234ee)

  51. Not to carry water for Greenwald, but isn’t it possible to spoof an IP address (raw sockets and all that)? Or is the blogging system on the site in question immune to that?

    DrSteve (34e49b)

  52. I am spoofing Spartacus’s email addy. Yeah, yeah that’s the ticket.

    wilson (ba92b6)

  53. Patterico the update was hilarious. So now we’re not talking sock puppets, we’re talking finger and toe puppets, and that only gets us into the 20s. GG makes Sybil look like an amateur. Uh, amateurs. Whatever.

    Gotta Know (f41eca)

  54. Yeah, me too I’m spoofing Spartacus’s email addy.

    ellison (ba92b6)

  55. And me, so am I!

    sam matthews (ba92b6)

  56. I just emailed Spartacus and he tells me I’m spoofing his email addy too!

    ryan (ba92b6)

  57. Henke busted him too? Hoo boy! Oh, the ignominity of it all!

    Whatever will Mona say?

    Pablo (efa871)

  58. Whatever will Mona say?

    Given all the shabby revealtions of the past few hours: shouldn’t “Mona” be in exculpatory quotation marks…? ;)

    Kent (005e8f)

  59. [...] As it appears that it has happened again. Patterico has found evidence – on multiple blogs – of what very much appears to be sock-puppetry on the part of Mr. Glenn Greenwald. Boy, we sure do have a dedicated Glenn Greenwald fan there. [...]

    Blue Crab Boulevard » Blog Archive » You’d Think They’d Learn (a177fd)

  60. “revealations” = revelations (obviously).

    Kent (005e8f)

  61. I confess. It’s multiplacable personalities. I’m also M. Moore.

    fen feenwald (c27667)

  62. Oh, I forgot. And J. Carter.

    fen feenwald (c27667)

  63. Thanks for all the detective work, Patterico. It gave me a chance to repost my favorite photograph!

    Gaius (44e5d0)

  64. Not to carry water for Greenwald, but isn’t it possible to spoof an IP address (raw sockets and all that)? Or is the blogging system on the site in question immune to that?

    Yes. It’s also possible to recreate someone’s fingerprints using latext and a very, very fine Xacto blade and then put those fingerprints on a cup, throw the cup out the window, and then blame that person for littering. Which is about the same amount of effort involved in raw socket programming to frame someone for something insignificant (in the whole scheme of things) as sockpuppeting. If you were to go through that much trouble, why not just claim to be GiGi and frisch yourself into obscurity?

    Robb Allen (293509)

  65. Robb Allen:

    I understand completely what you’re saying, and I’m in agreement — especially now that it’s apparently a bumper crop of puppets, not just a couple. No, we’re well out of benefit-of-doubt territory.

    There’s feasibility and likelihood, and the two are different.

    DrSteve (34e49b)

  66. “Wilson’s” IP is 201.17.101.161

    Is that an IP Greenwald used?

    [Yes. On my blog. Also, it was used by Ellers at Henke’s. [UPDATE: I originally said by Greenwald at Henke's, but that was a misstatement.] — Patterico] [UPDATE 7-23-06: I just found the e-mail from Henke, and it was actually 201.37.43.117 that Ellers used — one that matches up with several of the Greenwald and other sock puppet comments. I’ll have a post on all this eventually. — P]

    I’ll grab a screenshot when I get a chance.

    [I’ll see if I can get Xrlq to get one of my log. — P]

    I sure hope it isn’t him. Not after Andrew Sullivan gave him such a ringing endorsement.

    Jeff G (881746)

  67. So to connect the dots:

    –Glenn Greenwald has a menagerie imaginary people hocking his credentials, defending his positions, and attacking his opponents

    –GG is sensitive to the fact that his comments generate IP addresses so he avoids that by sending comments to third-party sites

    This isn’t just ‘dishonest,’ it’s fraud, and GG is batshit crazy.

    Gotta Know (f41eca)

  68. Now we know who bought all those books.

    Pablo (efa871)

  69. Glenn is currently travelling. His response to these scurrilous accusations will be delivered upon his return — in 6 months.

    Mathew Sams (8c9e11)

  70. The use of phony IDs to post book reviews on Amazon is well known and that is what tripped up Lott. A couple of years ago, the Canadian Amazon site had a software glitch that suddenly, and for one or two days only, changed all anonymous reviews to the real identity of the reviewer. It was hilarious as lots of book reviews turned out to be written by the authors.

    There the motivation was at least clear. Authors like good reviews and, if you can’t get a few from readers, why not do it yourself. In this case, there seems to be a sick need for praise and to blast political opponents. Greenwald could truely rest on his laurels but seems driven to attack his perceived enemies. His book did sell well, although there seems to be questions about how that happened. It was similar with Hiltzik. I had a venomous e-mail exchange with him when I wrote a letter to the Times complaining about his writing on some topic. His replies got increasingly unhinged.

    These guys duplicate the loony left in miniature. They can’t debate because they cannot accept the premise that opponents have reasonable arguments. You agree with them or you are evil. Or stupid, as seems to be the theme on Bush. Now this sort of zealotry has gotten another of them in trouble. It’s well deserved. I doubt he will learn anything from it, though.

    Mike K (416363)

  71. Sir Douche is claiming he didn’t do it.

    How many identities are we up to now? He implies it is people that live with him that are posting.

    It must be damn hard to get time on that computer.

    Dwilkers (a1687a)

  72. Hey Patterico, get a load of this. Now that you’ve moved on to bigger and better things, the Sadly Nobodies at the Poor blog are feeling neglected.

    Xrlq (f52b4f)

  73. In a number of these posts the writer, whether it be eliison or wilson or any of the rest, claims that he has just emailed greenwald. Why would you have emailed someone you’re living with? And did greenwald actually receive these emails?

    corvan (ba92b6)

  74. Corvan please.

    Gotta Know (f41eca)

  75. Correction, Glenn is back from his travels and addresses everything but the I.P. Address issue.

    So, I guess we’re all done, here.

    Mathew Sams (8c9e11)

  76. Response to right-wing personal attacks
    Posted by Glenn Greenwald, 7/20/06 7:53 am

    Comments left in blogs

    A new accusation is that I’ve been engaging in so-called “sock puppetry” by leaving comments in response to posts that attack me under other names., i.e., that I use multiple names to comment and the same comment was left at several blogs by the same IP address under different names.

    Not frequently, I leave comments at blogs which criticize or respond to something I have written. I always, in every single instance, use my own name when doing so. I have never left a single comment at any other blog using any name other than my own, at least not since I began blogging. IP addresses signify the Internet account one uses, not any one individual. Those in the same household have the same IP address. In response to the personal attacks that have been oozing forth these last couple of weeks, others have left comments responding to them and correcting the factual inaccuracies, as have I. In each case when I did, I have used my own name.

    AMackoshi (b6037f)

  77. IP addresses signify the Internet account one uses, not any one individual. Those in the same household have the same IP address.

    So, this lays the foundation for his partner writing numerous posts.

    Got it?

    Mathew Sams (8c9e11)

  78. [...] With a very valuable assist from LC & IB Patterico. [...]

    Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler » Blog Archive » Queen Douchewald of Sock? (502642)

  79. They must have big honking houses in Brazil. I don’t get it, he claims that all of these people live in the same house, and all send comments parroting the same stuff to different conservative blogs?

    I am just flabberghasted by his comment. It makes no sense whatsoever. So now he’s a fraud AND a bald-faced liar.

    Gotta Know (f41eca)

  80. Amidst all this hoo-ha about IP addresses, you’ve all managed to turn away from Greenwald’s indisputably accurate point: that righty blogs routinely wish for the death, imprisonment, torture, etc., of their opponents. One of the owners of Redstate said he wished for the day when all liberals are dead and in hell. LGF is so full of racists that they had to install a wordfilter so when their Klan-loving audience joked about “ragheads” the word would be replaced with “Arabs.” And just today Cruella Coulter “joked” about sending anthrax to the New York Times to try to kill them all, a sequel to her previous endorsement of terrorist attacks against New York.

    Stop sniveling about whether there are one or two Greenwalds and admit that he (or they) called your buddies out as the violent maniacs they are.

    TTT (f75edb)

  81. Saw mention of this above, but I suspect that “Mona” is another one of Greenwald’s sock puppets.Anyone got an ip on “her.”

    Jim in Chicago (af0d82)

  82. I have never left a single comment at any other blog using any name other than my own, at least not since I began blogging. IP addresses signify the Internet account one uses, not any one individual. Those in the same household have the same IP address.

    So he obviously saying that his partner was the one posting under different names defending him.

    Nice out.

    I find it amusing that some people would snarl about the way some rightwing blogs or commenters are so vicious in their attacks. Do the guys read the #1 blog on the left??? 2 million hits a day! KOS. It doesn’t get more mean and vicious than his blog. It just doesn’t. Pretending to take the high road is laughable.

    Rightwingsparkle (e5d6a3)

  83. Go get’em T3!~

    Mathew Sams (a.k.a TTT) (78f834)

  84. Amidst all this hoo-ha about IP addresses, you’ve all managed to turn away from Greenwald’s indisputably accurate point: that righty blogs routinely wish for the death, imprisonment, torture, etc., of their opponents.

    Does Triple T’s comment qualify as a Godwin’s Law entry?

    Mathew Sams (a.k.a TTT) (78f834)

  85. Rope. Tree. TTT.

    Some assembly required.

    Thanks for stopping by. Oh, and I condemn your comment and mine.

    Pablo (efa871)

  86. Stop sniveling about whether there are one or two Greenwalds…

    BTW, isn’t it like 6 GiGi’s now? That’s a lot of douchebags!

    I also condemn this comment.

    Pablo (efa871)

  87. An Alternative Theory to Greenwald’s “Sockpuppetry”…

    I almost did not get involved in this, as it requires speculation about the semi-private affairs of an individual blogger. However, the issue here, to me, is sloppy thinking on the part of many, as well as public conclusions being drawn where evidenc…

    PoliBlog: A Rough Draft of my Thoughts (8bc707)

  88. The odds of this being the case are about the same as the odds of the dozen monkeys typing for an hour and a half and duplicating Shakespeare.

    lol, Family Guy reference.

    I would like to see Glenn at least take a stab at the IP address claim. It doesn’t help him by letting it sit out there unaddressed. Then again, maybe the “Townhouse” people sent out a scientology cease & decsist notice to all members.

    These homosexual cowards are pathetic. Offshoring their sexual identity is anti-american. These Benedick’d Arnolds are traitors to the IRS. :)

    Gabriel Sutherland (90b3a1)

  89. Woah, what difference does it make if it’s GG or his partner? It’s a distinction without a difference. One (two) person is running around to various sites posing as various people. GG obviously knows about it and condones it, and his defense is the Clintonian “IS” defense.

    And TTT, fuck off.

    Gotta Know (f41eca)

  90. Can you picture Glenn pleading with his partner right now…

    “Honey, someone’s got to take the bullet here, and I’m a highly-regarded, New York Times Best- Selling constitutional…”

    Mathew Sams (c91000)

  91. (1) This whole GG thing is an asbolute hoot. I mean, it amazes me really. How can one guy have so many boyfriends in one house! :-)

    (2) TTT, in order to claim any significant authority in your statement, you must tie the claims of the erstwhile bloggers on the left with facts that support them. Second hand crap doesn’t count. Links with supporting information, or direct quotes with attributions are necessary. If you don’t have those, don’t just walk in a say “What they said!” and expect to get any respect or acknowledgement. Geez. Your post is SO lame!

    idgit (d0267f)

  92. Anyone thought to check TTT’s ip address?

    Just sayin’.

    Slublog (6f1887)

  93. Does Glenn Greenwald like my poetry? Because if so, I'm flattered. After all, he's a NYT bestseller! And Russ Feingold reads him. All after only 9 months of writing measured, reasonable arguments of the sort lauded by conservatives Andr…

    In a post I did a last Wednesday taking Glenn Greenwald to task for being such a disingenuous hack, a chap named "Wilson" showed up and wrote the following in response to another commenter's curiosity about why so many "on the extre…

    protein wisdom (4dbdc8)

  94. [...] This is too funny! Is this the tragicomic end of the Glenn Greenwald saga? [...]

    Publius Pundit - Blogging the democratic revolution (50b0b1)

  95. “Woah, what difference does it make if it’s GG or his partner? It’s a distinction without a difference.”

    It makes all the difference in the world. The original claim is that Greenwald may be engaging in sock puppetry. It he didn’t make those posts, but instead his partner did, then he did not engage in sock puppetry.

    Now, if it was his partner who made those posts, did he ask his partner to do so? Did he know that his partner made those posts? We don’t know. But the possibility (maybe even likelihood, given Greenwald’s response) that his partner made those posts, and not Greenwald, would directly refute the claim of sock puppetry.

    unceph (ea3f1c)

  96. #98 – OK, then let Greenwald come out with an admission that his partner has engaged in this massive (at least 5 “pretend” identities known so far) sock puppetry.

    But don’t hold your breath.

    anon (e0bed0)

  97. But the possibility (maybe even likelihood, given Greenwald’s response) that his partner made those posts, and not Greenwald, would directly refute the claim of sock puppetry.

    Only if you choose to believe Greenwald.

    err (9ae6fc)

  98. It makes all the difference in the world. The original claim is that Greenwald may be engaging in sock puppetry. It he didn’t make those posts, but instead his partner did, then he did not engage in sock puppetry.

    Now, if it was his partner who made those posts, did he ask his partner to do so? Did he know that his partner made those posts? We don’t know. But the possibility (maybe even likelihood, given Greenwald’s response) that his partner made those posts, and not Greenwald, would directly refute the claim of sock puppetry.

    Greenwald has already intimated that his partner is going down for this. (bad pun)

    Mathew Sams (c91000)

  99. [...] Patterico has more. Because these comments are, after all, from three completely “different” people. Again: the first comment is from a guy named “Ellison.” And the second is from a different guy, named “Sam Mathews.” And the third is from a different guy still — one named “Wilson.” [...]

    The Real Ugly American.com » Blog Archive » This is going to leave a Mark (4e8dcb)

  100. Glenn rocks and people who live in the same house agree and defend him…….OR…..he is so computer ignorant that he didn’t know about IP adresses.

    9 out of 10 morons believe the latter.

    Ken (166b56)

  101. 5 confirmed alter egos and not one Brazilian name? What kind of Brazilian is this partner?

    Gabriel Sutherland (90b3a1)

  102. Haven’t had time to read all the comments, so not sure whether this possible explanation has been mentioned:

    Is it possible that the same IP appears from several commenters since it’s a dummy generated by IP anonymizng software?

    I have no experience with those (I didn’t even realize they existed until I read Ace), but is that plausible?

    CalDevil (4d3198)

  103. Woah, what difference does it make if it’s GG or his partner?

    Really, if Glenn has his hand up its ass, what’s the difference?

    But the possibility (maybe even likelihood, given Greenwald’s response) that his partner made those posts, and not Greenwald, would directly refute the claim of sock puppetry.

    Not unless he’s got a man harem.

    Pablo (efa871)

  104. [...] A: if he’s a Lyin’ Lefty, why yes. Yes, he would. But really, he’s way more likely to do the impugning himself, and use a fake name to hide behind while doing it. The douchebag denies it, but as Patterico says…well, read the comments to his post. They’re hilarious. [...]

    Cold Fury » Blog Archive » Busted! Uhh, again! (6f4592)

  105. CalDevil: Yep. It is plausible. But why would Glenn use a proxy if he wants to post as himself? And not just any proxy, the same exact proxy that his sock puppets are using?

    This was the correct reply to the proxy claim.

    The odds of this being the case are about the same as the odds of the dozen monkeys typing for an hour and a half and duplicating Shakespeare.

    Gabriel Sutherland (90b3a1)

  106. Glenn rocks and people who live in the same house agree and defend him…….OR…..he is so computer ignorant that he didn’t know about IP adresses.

    9 out of 10 morons believe the latter.

    well, lets review, Greenwald starts a blog war over Misha’s hyperbole about judges, in contrast his own excusing of Matt Hale’s threats as “overheated rhetoric”, Greenwald book was commisioned by a telecom company “to find ways to bring the progressive message into larger media”, not to mention his involvement in the Townhouse list, which is not a stretch to imagine was used for behind-the-scenes coordination, and now 4, 5, or so commenters are posting from the same IP address to defend him, and people are supposed to believe Greenwald is not involved? Please…

    err (9ae6fc)

  107. #103:

    …….OR…..he is so computer ignorant that he didn’t know about IP adresses.

    …….OR…..he was so computer savvy that he made sure to leave one and only one IP address under one and only one pseudonym at each web-log. And he (whichever he it turns out to be) never appears to have commented as a sock-puppet at a web-log where Glenn Greenwald had left a remark under his own name. Seemingly a good effort to frustrate the type of IP sleuthing that led to Michael Hlitzik’s unmasking at this very site.

    AMackoshi (b6037f)

  108. #105 – It would be plausible – barely – if it were maybe ONE other commentor.

    It’s certainly not plausible if we’re talking about an army of commentors, all eagerly defending Glenn in near-identical points and language.

    anon (e0bed0)

  109. Outing Glenn Greenwald…

    It appears that leftist blogger Glenn Greenwald, author of ‘How Would a Patriot Act’, might actually want to re-title the book ‘How Would An Expatriate Act’. Dan Riehl puts on his investigative glasses and gives us a look at the real Glenn Greenwal…

    PunditGuy (baa0b4)

  110. CalDevil,

    Not really. If you’re talking about 5 different people using the same software that just happens to utilize the exact same node (out of what theoretically is at least thousands of possible nodes), well you’re better off betting yellow on the roulette wheel.

    I’m not here to defend Patty or GiGi. But, as a interweb developer (I work with ‘tubes’), I’m just trying to bring some facts to the table. Technically, dynamic IPs could explain this, but the chances of it are very, very, very slim. We’re talking “Tom Cruise admitting he likes the man sausage” slim.

    As for the crazy notion that Glenn is blameless, well lets just say it could very well be the case. It is very apparent that sockpuppetry has been done. By someone in Brazil (or by an anonymizing node in Brazil). Glenn lives in Brazil.

    If I were on a jury, that would not be enough to prove Glenn did it and I’d set him free. But someone did it – That to me, is a safe enough bet.

    Robb Allen (293509)

  111. err: Can you or anyone explain this “Greenwald’s book was commissioned by a telecom company”? This is news to me.

    Are you referring to the Working Assets Phone service?

    Gabriel Sutherland (90b3a1)

  112. Gabe, I can’t speak for Glenn, but one time I was commissioned by a telco to deliver some books. Big, heavy, yellow ones.

    Not sure if it’s the same or not.

    Robb Allen (293509)

  113. I’m a big fan of sock puppetry.

    I often pose as myself just to confuse people.

    M. Simon (fcd870)

  114. Thanks for the answers. I figured that IP cloakers would use lots of different IPs, but wasn’t sure.

    CalDevil (4d3198)

  115. Glenn writes in response…

    …Those in the same household have the same IP address….

    Sounds like he is suggesting that his partner is commenting in his defense (using different alias’s)

    topsecretk9 (308e81)

  116. Here are two possible scenarios:

    #1: Glenn is angry about the attacks (his word) from the right, so he goes and makes multiple posts defending himself under various pseudonyms.

    #2: Glenn’s partner is upset that Glenn is being attacked (his word) by members of the right blogosphere. Without Glenn’s knowledge (because he doesn’t want to make Glenn mad), he posts multiple positive comments about Glenn on several blogs, using a different pseudonym each time. Glenn finds out about it when the right blogosphere points out the similar IP addresses.

    Here’s why I find scenario #2 to be more plausible: A) Glenn has plenty of supporters willing to run to his defense — why would he need to pretend to be someone else to defend himself?; B) Glenn has shown no compunction to shrink from defending himself directly, so why would he do so anonymously?; C) Glenn is likely familiar with the idea of sock puppetry, and recognizes that it is a big “no no” for prominent bloggers.

    Now, does this *prove* that #2 is right? Of course not. There are, I’m sure, an infinite number of possible scenarios. My point is simply that, given that there is no direct evidence that Glenn engaged in sock puppetry, and given that there are numerous scenarios in which he was not responsible for the posts and may not even have known about the posts, building an argument on the supposition that Glenn engaged in sock puppetry (or is somehow answerable for his partner’s actions) is not logical.

    This whole thing strikes me as a hoped-for campfire that looked like it would catch fire, but the kindling turned out to be too wet.

    unceph (ea3f1c)

  117. Wow, a real online stalker.

    Sky-Ho (86f87f)

  118. wachtell, lipton is the most selective law firm? who knew?
    200 blog hits a day is just somebody’s mother and her friends? that’s a lot of friends!
    i’ve never read glenn greenwald, but he’s starting to sound like a douchebag.

    assistant devil's advocate (169955)

  119. Aww, c’mon, Patterico. Did you consider the possbility that some of Greenwald’s friends might have been at his house, using his ‘puter to post replies?

    No, really, it could happen…couldn’t it?

    Anyway, thanks for exposing another case of sock puppet theatrics. It always makes for great blogging material.

    Regards,

    -the Canine Pundit

    http://caninepundit.blogspot.com/

    Sirius Familiaris (93f35d)

  120. #119 – And you know what would prove your #2 is right?

    If GLENN ADMITTED IT.

    Credibility starts with admitting the truth. Glenn has posted a self-pitying defense (Patterico linked above) full of straw men and refusing to admit that someone – him, someone else, whoever – has been engaging in sock puppets massively on his behalf.

    Glenn should start by just admitting the latter basic fact.

    anon (e0bed0)

  121. The last thing I want to do is address these things by writing about myself

    The real issue here is that you have forced him to respond, as much as he hates to, you know, write about himself.

    That is time he could have spent writing yet another withering post on BushCo, or even banging out a chapter for his next bestseller… Hmm, I guess that means you have done the world a favor.

    Why are those on the left so techinically ignorant? All that creative progressive thinking doesn’t leave any time for the basic understanding of how things work? Or is that they just assume they can never get caught?

    OCSteve (1eba0d)

  122. #114: Details down in this thread at QandO, by commenter which refers to here.

    err (9ae6fc)

  123. I think you need to get laid.

    urizon (f2a348)

  124. Wow! Great detective work. Especially the team effort. You guys are a cyberspace version of MI5. Next assignment: Determination of the color of the sky.

    dylan (be6d2e)

  125. I think you need to get laid.

    Mr. Urizon, are you seducing us?

    Slublog (6f1887)

  126. Aww, c’mon, Patterico. Did you consider the possbility that some of Greenwald’s friends might have been at his house, using his ‘puter to post replies?

    No, really, it could happen…couldn’t it?

    And you could get a brain.

    So what is your point?

    The Ace (b8a641)

  127. [...] More Sock-Puppetry discovered at Patterico! Three very similar comments at Ace’s, Dan Riehl’s, and Jeff Goldstein’s blogs. For the story go here. This time it’s Glenn Greenwald’s fan club – all located at the same IP. He reports, you decide. [...]

    Hang Right Politics - Archives » Glen Greenwald Glowing Over Glenn Greenwald? (ab26d8)

  128. Check unceph’s IP!

    Mathew Sams (78f834)

  129. Here’s why I find scenario #2 to be more plausible: A) Glenn has plenty of supporters willing to run to his defense — why would he need to pretend to be someone else to defend himself?;

    Because he’s Glenn “I don’t engage in that sort of behavior” Greenwald, but he had some “childish insults” he wanted to use.

    My point is simply that, given that there is no direct evidence that Glenn engaged in sock puppetry, and given that there are numerous scenarios in which he was not responsible for the posts and may not even have known about the posts

    I see two other possibilities. Either his partner is humping his CV under 5 different names (sockpuppetry), or he has a Brazilian man harem that likes to go and defend his honor on American blogs.

    Which one of those do you like?

    Pablo (efa871)

  130. IP addresses signify the Internet account one uses, not any one individual. Those in the same household have the same IP address.

    Wink, wink, nudge, nudge.
    It wasn’t Glenn, it was one of his “friends.”

    Unreal.

    The Ace (b8a641)

  131. Glenn Greenwald needs defending?! From what, the likes of you?!!

    Someone is in such desperate need of a life. I mean, really. This is the most pathetic thing I’ve ever seen, and I’ve worked voting sites in the South.

    I'd TotallyDo Glenn Greenwald (04bc52)

  132. ok, so Greenwald’s boyfriend or mom or somebody went around leaving comments supporting Glenn on blogs, and used different names. So what?

    (from #123:) refusing to admit that someone – him, someone else, whoever – has been engaging in sock puppets massively on his behalf.

    Um, it isn’t ‘sock puppets’ if someone else is doing it. That pretty much follows from the whole definition/concept of ‘sock puppet.’

    greenwald's IP address (2c0c13)

  133. Either his partner is humping his CV under 5 different names (sockpuppetry), or he has a Brazilian man harem that likes to go and defend his honor on American blogs.

    Which one of those do you like?

    Those aren’t the only possibilities. IP addresses can be spoofed, and computers can be hacked. Someone could maliciously be doing this. How likely is it that someone would want to discredit GG? I don’t think COINTELPRO exists anymore. Do people think that exists? do they want it to exist?

    actus (ebc508)

  134. THEY’RE BLOGGING FROM INSIDE THE HOUSE, actus! GET OUT OF THE HOUSE!!!

    Pablo (efa871)

  135. So pathetic.

    mantis (1fbd4c)

  136. Those in the same household have the same IP address. In response to the personal attacks that have been oozing forth these last couple of weeks, others have left comments responding to them and correcting the factual inaccuracies, as have I. In each case when I did, I have used my own name.

    THEY’RE DISCREDITING HIM BY CORRECTING THE FACTUAL INACCURACIES! FROM INSIDE THE HOUSE! RUN!!!!

    Pablo (efa871)

  137. from #133:

    Wink, wink, nudge, nudge.
    It wasn’t Glenn, it was one of his “friends.”
    Unreal.

    Closeted much?

    greenwald's IP address (2c0c13)

  138. [...] Ace and Patterico on the latest from the left. [...]

    Sadly, No! » Oh hey, we’ve got one of those. (d83a19)

  139. Maybe a bunch of Kos Kids broke into Greenwald’s house and took over. Hey, it happened to Ned Lamont…

    Paul Zrimsek (7400b7)

  140. actus, I can’t believe you get your shoes tied in the morning without somehow accidentally shutting off the circulation to your fingers when you get the words messed up to the shoe tying song.

    Again – Yes, IP’s can be spoofed at a high cost of effort. Especially in the stateless protocol world of HTTP, making these types of requests is dodgy because you wouldn’t be able to get the response stating if your request went through. It’s good for DDOS and spamming, not good for individual comments.

    As for discrediting Glenn, why not frisch him? Why not post as Glenn and say awful stuff about someone’s child? Using the same IP that Glenn used minutes before would be fairly damning evidence.

    Not that I expect logic to help you here, but seriously dude, do you do anything else in life besides reflexively post contradictions with no logical backing?

    Robb Allen (293509)

  141. Well all I know is that Glenn is a very good writer of the English language — at least he can produce perfect punctuation and sentence structure. I just find it amazing that all of those Brazilians living with him can too!

    scottyb (0a8642)

  142. Hmmm. I seem to have left a closing tag off somewhere. Damn this IP spoofing software and it’s inability to…

    Ooops.

    Robb Allen (293509)

  143. I gotta say, if all of these posts were in fact GG speaking out of various appendages, then GG is a lying liar and I’m sure he would be more than happy to lie about it again, especially since he has plausible denial, ie the reason he has provided. It was someone else in the house.

    But if this dude, Ms. Greenwald, is Brazilian, which I believe he is, there is no way it could be him. The language used in the posts is from a native speaker. In fact, to me the various sock puppet comments sound an awful lot like GG to me. It would be interesting to cross-reference the comments with everything else GG has written, people tend to use the same sentence structure and phrases consistently over time.

    Gotta Know (ba8871)

  144. Scottyb that’s exactly what I meant, you beat me to it. Or are we the same person?

    Gotta Know (ba8871)

  145. I can only wonder at how you Rightblogs missed the
    whole “no weapons of mass destruction” thing. I mean , if you’d devoted as much intellectual bandwidth to matters of actual importance as you did to this matter, perhaps today we wouldn’t be stuck in an quagmire.

    Your screen shot was of an archived SN ad – which means they no longer sell that product, correct? The threats to journalists and governmental officials is more current, and specific than these ads. A generic call to hang republicans is equated with calls to violence against specific individuals? To get Frischy, it’s like calling for the deaths of all republican children, as opposed to specifically calling for the deaths of the children of rightwing bloggers – but I suspect the difference will be lost on you.

    barfly (cf7726)

  146. Again – Yes, IP’s can be spoofed at a high cost of effort

    I think its improbable that somoeone is spoofing. Not impossible. Other than spoofing, it would take someone with authorized or unauthorized access to his IP. I don’t know what the probabilities of that are, but I would hope that someone like a prominent blogger who leaves their IP around would have good security.

    Not that I expect logic to help you here, but seriously dude, do you do anything else in life besides reflexively post contradictions with no logical backing?

    I’m trying to strenghten the logic. Claims that the only possible choices are glenn or someone he authorized are incorrect. Those are the probable choices. Not the possible ones.

    As for discrediting Glenn, why not frisch him? Why not post as Glenn and say awful stuff about someone’s child? Using the same IP that Glenn used minutes before would be fairly damning evidence.

    That might work. I can think of reasons why it would be more unbelievable than the current claim, but it might work.

    actus (ebc508)

  147. But if this dude, Ms. Greenwald,

    cute.

    actus (ebc508)

  148. 143 comments! No wonder you’re after GG patteric0-

    You’re a blogging parasite on Greenwald the way Weird Al is a musical parasite on real bands’ videos.

    Maybe you should try getting some comments for your own thoughts.

    creepy dude (57f623)

  149. Actus is right, for months I’ve been thinking of ways to ruin GG’s credibility. I just knew, knew that if I defended him on wing-nuts sights that every one would lose all confidence in what he said, expecially all us folks on the left who all love, love the right so. Therefore I spent weeks learning how to spoof another person’s ip adress. Then I put my fiendish plan into action. First, I posted messages, all of them compliemntary to Mr. Greenwald, on wingers sites. Then I ran to the grassy knoll and contacted the ghost of Jack Ruby. After that I went to lunch with Jason Leopold and discussed the top secret sealed, super duper under cover Rove indictment. Finally I secretly contacted Patterico, Ace, Henke, JG and all the rest, who are my unkowing dupes, and outed Greenwald as me. Of course now I’m wating to star in my very own Oliver Stone movie.

    ellison (0534d4)

  150. Actus GG never even denied that the stuff came from his machine, he just denied that he personally did it.

    Gotta Know (ba8871)

  151. Get a girlfriend, gentle patterico. A partner. Someone to inflate your existence with meaning.

    ruble (12416d)

  152. Ellison, what a coincidence. I did the exact same thing!

    sam matthews (0534d4)

  153. Actus GG never even denied that the stuff came from his machine, he just denied that he personally did it.

    I’m not addressing his denial. I’m addressing whats possible vs. whats probable.

    actus (ebc508)

  154. Yeah me too I did just what sam matthews and ellison did.

    ryan (0534d4)

  155. “This is the most pathetic thing I’ve ever seen,”

    No, the most pathetic thing I’ve seen was the fuss lefties were trying to make about George Bush squeezing Angela Merkel’s shoulders. That was a riot!

    sharon (03e82c)

  156. Watching Glenn’s Puppets defend him is other-worldly.

    “Glenn said he didn’t do it. Case closed.”
    “I’ve seen Glenn sign using his name before. What POSSIBLE REASON would he comment under a pseudonym?”
    “Obviously someone visitor in his home wrote the comments in defense of him.”
    “You racist! Glenn’s Brazilian boyfriend speaks perfect English!”

    It’s like watching a slow death. Which I often do in my spare time with my Rightwing co-conspirators. And Chimpy McHitler.

    Mathew Sams (2e6b16)

  157. Me too, I did just what ellison and ryan and sam matthews did. And Actus caught us all at once. Damn that man is brilliant!!!

    thomas ellers (0534d4)

  158. No, the most pathetic thing I’ve seen was the fuss lefties were trying to make about George Bush squeezing Angela Merkel’s shoulders.

    Totally, we’ve known for a while now that our president was socially retarded.

    actus (ebc508)

  159. Check unceph’s, TTT, and creepy dude’s IP’s!

    Mathew Sams (2e6b16)

  160. Congratulations! I’m sure that you have exposed the unified field theory of the VLWC. Good work! Of course, none of you on the Right have ever posted under another anonymous name, you’ve proven yourselves to be a most objective and fair-minded group of netizens. I suppose that Glen must be a pretty big target, a real threat to the grand delusion that you all continue to support without reservation.

    All in all, a good days work for the intellectual vanguard on the Right. You all deserve an extra ration of kool-aid for your brilliant detective work. Cheers!

    Innocent Bystander (f4e933)

  161. “Socially retarded?” Ok actus, now you’ve gone overboard.

    Gotta Know (ba8871)

  162. Actus is of course right to point out the other possible explanations behind this, though I think he stops short of getting to the real answers.

    I believe that it’s possible that aliens from the outer rim of the boonmat galaxy were visiting our planet, seeking signs of intelligent life. Naturally, they immediately happened upon the most intelligent man in the universe – the man who has a New York Times bestseller and who has accumulated quite a large blog following in only nine months – Glenn Greenwald.

    The aliens were immediately distressed, however, to see that the greatest intellect in the human community was being attacked by a bunch of wingnut operatives. These aliens decided to come to Mr. Greenwald’s defense. They needed a gateway to the earthly internet, however, and seeing as how they were circling over Mr. Greenwald’s house, they were able to connect through Mr. Greenwald’s IP. Now, if the movie Independence Day has taught us annything it’s that earthly and alien computer systems can easily be synced, and thus they protested on Glenn’s behalf. Several of the aliens chose to pipe in, and they scattered their comments over the wingnutosphere.

    Either that, or Glenn Greenwald is a lying sack of shit who decided to engage in a bit of sock puppetry.

    paul zummo (27d384)

  163. err: You’ve peaked my interest. Something stinks about the Greenwald book promotion. It shot to #1 on Amazon.com before it was published. The first printing, 20,000 copies, was sold entirely on Amazon.com prior to publish date?

    I’m going to make some calls.

    Gabriel Sutherland (90b3a1)

  164. “Totally, we’ve known for a while now that our president was socially retarded.”

    Or at least the idiots making a sexual harassment case out of it.

    sharon (03e82c)

  165. Watching Glenn’s Puppets defend him is other-worldly.

    More evidence to support my theory.

    paul zummo (27d384)

  166. Closeted much?

    Comment by greenwald’s IP address

    HUH?

    The Ace (b8a641)

  167. Of course, none of you on the Right have ever posted under another anonymous name

    Ace’s Axiom:
    Liberals will say anything to justify their behavior.

    So of course we must have the obligatory “you conservatives do it too” (without evidence of course) and presto, it is ok.

    The Ace (b8a641)

  168. Or at least the idiots making a sexual harassment case out of it.

    Ya that was totally not harassment. She was smiling!

    actus (ebc508)

  169. Said to self, with head bowed, eyes clenched shut, and forehead furrowed with concentration:] End the Glenn Greenwald posts, Patterico. End them. Yes, he’s a liar. Yes, he’s a putz. But he’s also not worth your time.

    Life’s too short to be pissed off all the time. It’s just not worth it.

    Remember that, Patterico? It was one week and five Greenwald posts ago. What a joke.

    mantis (1fbd4c)

  170. It all makes sense now — those damn aliens did it! The ones who secretly spirited out the WMD from Iraq right before the invasion!!

    Oh, the humanity!!!

    unceph (eb120d)

  171. Innocent “Gigi” Bystander, well done. The Unsubstantiated Blanket Guilt defense.

    That’s gonna get you far.

    Mathew Sams (2e6b16)

  172. All in all, a good days work for the intellectual vanguard on the Right.

    Perhaps you haven’t noticed, but we’ve been having a fabulous year.

    Just sayin’.

    Pablo (efa871)

  173. Okay, Actus caught me. I’m Glenn Greenwald.

    Mikekoshi (0534d4)

  174. Remember that, Patterico? It was one week and five Greenwald posts ago. What a joke.

    At least he tried. What’s your excuse for counting the number of times he’s posted about Gigi, hypocrite?

    Even better, catching a douche sock-puppeteer and forever destroying his credibility? Game, set, match.

    Mathew Sams (2e6b16)

  175. #135 – Wrong – It’s still “sock puppets” even if Greenwald isn’t doing it.

    “Sock puppets” is: anyone trying to appear as multiple independent people. That means:

    – If Greenwald is trying to appear as 6 independent people who all happen to agree with him, Greenwald is playing sock puppets.

    – If somebody else in Greenwald’s household – say, his lover – is trying to appear as 6 independent people who all happen to agree with him, then Greenwald’s lover is playing sock puppets.

    Either way, (a) it’s sock puppets and (b) to a lesser or greater degree, Greenwald is involved.

    anon (e0bed0)

  176. 179: Ok, so someone else is doing sock puppets (I mean, SOCK PUPPETS!!!) in support of Greenwald. So what?

    greenwald's IP address (2c0c13)

  177. Keep trying, guys. Can you prove they’re all me? I mean him? No way.

    And just to prove I’m not him, you scurrilous wingnuts, I will keep this comment under 500 words.

    Svenn Sveenwald (c3be1b)

  178. Either way, (a) it’s sock puppets and (b) to a lesser or greater degree, Greenwald is involved.

    Thats if assume that all access to someone’s IP address is authorized by that person. Which is not quite true.

    actus (ebc508)

  179. Thats if assume

    Did I mention that these aliens might not have complete command of the English language?

    paul zummo (27d384)

  180. Like aliens. I wouldn’t let aliens use my IP address. Unless they wliked me. Like Wilson.

    Pablo (efa871)

  181. THE ALIENS ARE BLOGGING FROM INSIDE THE HOUSE! RUUUNNNN!!!!

    Pablo (efa871)

  182. “Of course, none of you on the Right have ever posted under another anonymous name”

    Actually, no, I haven’t.

    “Ya that was totally not harassment. She was smiling!”

    Smile or no, it wasn’t harassment. But keep trying!

    sharon (03e82c)

  183. Smile or no, it wasn’t harassment. But keep trying!

    It certainly wasnt’. It was quite innocent behavior.

    actus (ebc508)

  184. Lust: Sock Puppets…

    Esteemed Lefty Glenn Greenwald (not linked as per Ace’s VRWC instructions) looks to have been involved in some sock puppetry. Wasn’t someone else fired for that recently?
    More, or actually, Real coverage:
    Ace (He has lots more)
    Goldstein…

    7 Deadly Sins (ccb13b)

  185. #186 – Nope. I personally keep a single, consistent name over a stretch of time, if that’s what you are referring to. However simple I may choose to make that name.

    anon (e0bed0)

  186. I am for believing GG. Not having been to Brazil, I think its entirely possible that gay bath houses have WIFI connections. If they do then that could explain the whole thing, including Sully recent ringing endorsement.

    gmax (c36144)

  187. Of course, none of you on the Right have ever posted under another anonymous name.

    I confess – for much of my time blogging I blogged as “paul.” It was deceptive, and I apologize.

    paul zummo (27d384)

  188. Oh my gosh… Paul? Is that YOU?!?

    unceph (eb120d)

  189. Thats if assume that all access to someone’s IP address is authorized by that person. Which is not quite true.

    I suggest you read Greenwald’s lame defense and get some common sense.

    The Ace (b8a641)

  190. I suggest you read Greenwald’s lame defense and get some common sense.

    He said he didn’t do it and added something about IP addressses coming from a household. I added more: it can come from someone with authorized as well as unathorized access to your network, and it can come from spoofing.

    actus (ebc508)

  191. Maybe this is how the Dems stole the election for governor in Washington state. This is one of the funniest stories I’ve read in a while.

    COgirl (b2d5d7)

  192. I think it was Karl Rove who stole his IP to frame him. But it’s just a theory. Or that fascist Instacracker.

    actuz (022fa6)

  193. [...] Everyone’s favorite pugnacious pontificator followed up here, with the curious fact that many different people who leave comments defending Greenwald share the same IP address(!)… [...]

    Decision ‘08 » Blog Archive » Greenwald Attacks, Is Attacked… (1b383c)

  194. He said he didn’t do it and added something about IP addressses coming from a household. I added more: it can come from someone with authorized as well as unathorized access to your network, and it can come from spoofing.

    Yes, you “added more” to try and mitigate how silly he looks.

    Isn’t it funny how he didn’t mention “spoofing”?

    Everyone reading knows why.

    The Ace (b8a641)

  195. Yes, you “added more” to try and mitigate how silly he looks.

    Actually I wrote what I wrote before reading his denial.

    Isn’t it funny how he didn’t mention “spoofing”?

    Everyone reading knows why.

    He also hasn’t mentioned that he could be hacked. I have no idea what his technical knowledge is. Lots of people here are saying the only possibility is him or someone authorized by him. Which is not technically true. So just like the people here, he could be ignorant of the technology.

    actus (ebc508)

  196. Greenwald = Sock Puppeteer?…

    James Joyner and his cobloggers round up the blogosphere kerfuffle over whether lefty blogger extraordinaire Glenn Greenwald–who is a famous constitutional scholar, has a bestselling book, is quoted by important Senators and media types alike, and ha…

    ProfessorBainbridge.com (72c8fd)

  197. Actus is right! Somebody spoofed Greenwald’s IP to… um… give fawning praise to Greenwald. Well, prove they DIDN’T!!

    Svenn Sveenwald (c3be1b)

  198. Actus is right! Somebody spoofed Greenwald’s IP to… um… give fawning praise to Greenwald.

    Oh you’ve got me wrong. I wouldn’t say someone did that. Just that its one of hte possibilities.

    Though I also wouldn’t say that the fact that the content of the comments praises the guy is what makes it benevolent. Rather, thats whats damnable.

    actus (ebc508)

  199. Just that its one of hte possibilities.

    Sure. One of.

    Abraxas (6742f0)

  200. Sure. One of.

    Although, a real easy way to figure out if it was someone from his household — authorized or not — and not him would be to check to see if the comments were made while he was in the US or outside of brazil.

    actus (ebc508)

  201. It’s a possiblity that a right-winger trained a bird (perhaps an eagle) to fly into Greenwald’s house and peck away with false messages. This way the the right-wing could frame him for “sock pupputeering” (a term I am not familer with). It’s just a theory, but probably correct.

    I also eat bugs. They are yummy.

    actuz (022fa6)

  202. If Actus is right some fiend may be out there hacking hacks, Oh the humanity!

    mikekoshi (0534d4)

  203. He also hasn’t mentioned that he could be hacked. I have no idea what his technical knowledge is.

    You are just looking sillier & sillier.

    Lots of people here are saying the only possibility is him or someone authorized by him

    Yes, and again, common sense.

    You are actually suggesting someone “spoofed” Greenwald’s IP from Brazil to comment on several conservative blogs.

    The Ace (b8a641)

  204. Comment by actuz — 7/20/2006 @ 12:05 pm

    Where there’s a will, there’s a way. Or so I’m told.

    actus (ebc508)

  205. You are actually suggesting someone “spoofed” Greenwald’s IP from Brazil to comment on several conservative blogs.

    I’m suggesting its possible. I mean, it is damnable behavior right? Its not that they spoofed it to make him look good, but to make him look bad.

    However, the most likely theory is that his partner did it, and didn’t want to identify himself. If we find a commment posted at a time that we knew glenn was not in brazil, and assume or otherwise know that glenn is not using his brazilian internet connection as a proxy server, then we know it was not him.

    actus (ebc508)

  206. Oh you’ve got me wrong. I wouldn’t say someone did that. Just that its one of hte possibilities.

    Though I also wouldn’t say that the fact that the content of the comments praises the guy is what makes it benevolent. Rather, thats whats damnable.

    Taht maeks eevn mroe sesne!

    Svenn Sveenwald (c3be1b)

  207. Another possibility which should be addressed is that Patterico, Jeff, Ace and others all flew to Brazil, broke into Glenn’s house and wrote comments to their respective blogs in an effort to frame Greenwald.

    Come on. Lets think outside the box here people.

    paul zummo (27d384)

  208. No, no, no, people, this conspirscy is too big for Goldstien, Frey and Ace. It has to be Darth Rove himself. Call Jason Leopold!!!

    mikekoshi (0534d4)

  209. I’m suggesting its possible. I mean, it is damnable behavior right? Its not that they spoofed it to make him look good, but to make him look bad.

    Actus,

    I really don’t think that they poster (and I would bet good money it was GiGi) expected to be busted on the IP addresses. A little too disingenuous, don’t you think? I have refrained from bashing you here and at PW because you don’t resort to profanity and have taken criticism well. After reading your recent posts, I have come to the conclusion that you are an idiot who will parse words to death rather than admit a liberal was wrong. Your ‘what-if’ scenarios are too ridiculous to dignify with a response. Heaven help us if you graduate law school and pass the bar. Give it up already.

    Stashiu3 (e1a65b)

  210. No, no, no, people, this conspirscy is too big for Goldstien, Frey and Ace. It has to be Darth Rove himself. Call Jason Leopold!!!

    Thankfully we don’t have any CREEPy plumbers anymore. So we can rule that out.

    actus (ebc508)

  211. If we find a commment posted at a time that we knew glenn was not in brazil, and assume or otherwise know that glenn is not using his brazilian internet connection as a proxy server, then we know it was not him.

    If you assume that he is not using his home machine as a proxy, then you can assume that it was not him. If you are making assumptions, you aren’t deriving any facts.

    Mark A. Flacy (9e6fb1)

  212. What does that prove, actus?

    Even if it was posted while GG was in Brazil, given your proposal that someone is spoofing his IP, there’s no reason to think that this spoofing didn’t happen.

    Indeed, I think what you’re really trying to suggest is that someone has the potential technical ability to spoof multiple computers with a single IP address (which happens to be GG’s), and might even be able to do so while GG is using his computer!

    After all, if one has such an ability, what better way to make GG look bad than to do it when he’s actually on the computer? As you note,

    it is damnable behavior right? Its not that they spoofed it to make him look good, but to make him look bad.

    What could be more damnable than having a comment posted to a site while GG’s on the computer?

    So, really, as long as there is even a theoretical ability for someone to spoof an IP address, especially when the IP address in question is being used, then we really cannot ever say that said IP address is in fact the source of a comment, right?

    Lurking Observer (ea88e8)

  213. However, the most likely theory is that his partner did it, and didn’t want to identify himself.

    This isn’t “the most likely theory.”
    This is what happened with about 98% certainty.
    And, it likely happened with Greenwald knowing about it after the fact.

    The Ace (b8a641)

  214. Another possibility which should be addressed is that Patterico, Jeff, Ace and others all flew to Brazil, broke into Glenn’s house and wrote comments to their respective blogs in an effort to frame Greenwald.

    Nah. He left his wireless router open and they were all sitting outside in a taxi with laptops.

    Let’s try and stick to the obvious here, shall we?

    Pablo (08e1e8)

  215. whta are you meannig here? I think it was a trained eagle, probably trained by Karl Rove to distrupt best intentoins of centrist bloggersz.

    Actuz (022fa6)

  216. Your ‘what-if’ scenarios are too ridiculous to dignify with a response. Heaven help us if you graduate law school and pass the bar. Give it up already.

    Uh. There are poeple out there being defended by lawyers because child porn came from their IP addresses. Its not such a far fetched scenario for lawyers that know about technology to consider.

    I’ve made very clear that the scenarious I gave are improbable, and they only address the question of possibility, not probability. On the question of probability, I gave the scenario that I thought most probable: that his partner did it. And I gave how to possibly disprove that glenn did it: To see if the comments occured when he was not in brazil and to assume he doesn’t use the brazilian IP address as a proxy server.

    Glenn was at the Kos convention, and has been on a book tour. I don’t have access to the logs with the IP address on them, so someone should try to match it to those dates.

    actus (ebc508)

  217. This is what happened with about 98% certainty.
    And, it likely happened with Greenwald knowing about it after the fact.

    How do you know that by better than 50% certainty?

    Pablo (08e1e8)

  218. Charles Manson was defended too. Haven’t seen much that lawyers won’t do. But wouldn’t GiGi have mentioned not even being in Brazil if that was exculpatory? This is what I really hate about defense lawyers… throw a bunch of crap up to confuse the issue and pretend it’s all believable. Give. It. Up.

    Stashiu3 (e1a65b)

  219. Charles Manson was defended too. Haven’t seen much that lawyers won’t do.

    So you see what I mean, that its not so outlandish that someone that knows technology and is in law school is aware of problems with relying on IP addresses as personal identifiers.

    But wouldn’t GiGi have mentioned not even being in Brazil if that was exculpatory

    If he had gone through all the alleged comments and cross checked them with his schedule, and then wanted to rebut the accusations besides just his denial. Perhaps.

    actus (ebc508)

  220. Why did whoever did it use multiple aliases? Why did ‘Ryan’ claim to have emailed Greenwald?

    The whole thing reeks of dishonesty.

    BlacquesJacquesShellacques (83acf5)

  221. So you’re trying to contend that it is impossible to identify, beyond any reasonable doubt, a poster’s identity from an IP address? Interesting, especially since people get convicted in those child-porn cases you mentioned.

    Stashiu3 (e1a65b)

  222. So you see what I mean, that its not so outlandish that someone that knows technology and is in law school is aware of problems with relying on IP addresses as personal identifiers.

    You would also know that this isn’t a criminal issue we’re talking about, so we’re not restrained to a standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. GiGi’s life and/or liberty is not in peril here. His punishment, if he is found to be a bunch of people, will consist mostly of mockery and derision, for which some people will pay good money.

    That being the case, I’m sure you’re also aware of the standard of proof used in non-criminal type proceedings.

    So, what does the preponderance of the evidence tell you, future counselor?

    Pablo (08e1e8)

  223. If he had gone through all the alleged comments and cross checked them with his schedule, and then wanted to rebut the accusations besides just his denial. Perhaps.

    “Perhaps”

    Too funny.

    Why not just say “I’ve been on the road for a month.”

    Again, pathetic.

    The Ace (b8a641)

  224. The Greenwald Controversy And The Bitch Of The Day…

    But, a while ago he started attacking ‘rightist’ bloggers on a daily basis. I often call it the “Bitch of the Day” routine. Almost every single day, attacking conservative bloggers. To be honest, I consider it to be a shame. I simply don’t underst…

    Liberty and Justice (a5b264)

  225. Why did whoever did it use multiple aliases? Why did ‘Ryan’ claim to have emailed Greenwald?

    Because maybe Greenwald’s partner emailed greenwald to find out something.

    So you’re trying to contend that it is impossible to identify, beyond any reasonable doubt, a poster’s identity from an IP address? Interesting, especially since people get convicted in those child-porn cases you mentioned.

    They do. However, I run an open wireless in my apartment. Should I be convicted, without any more evidence, for child porn that originates from my IP?

    However, my point isn’t to address the weight of IP evidence. But to address the fact that its not that outrageous an argument to someone who knows technology law. Its an argument and a situation we’re familiar with.

    So, what does the preponderance of the evidence tell you, future counselor?

    I told you what the most likely scenario is. His partner did the postings.

    Why not just say “I’ve been on the road for a month.”

    Again, pathetic.

    Probably because he doesn’t know when the comments were alleged to be written. When where they?

    actus (ebc508)

  226. Because maybe Greenwald’s partner emailed greenwald to find out something.

    From the same IP address?

    Probably because he doesn’t know when the comments were alleged to be written. When where they?

    Really?
    He wrote a post today on the matter. Are you suggesting he didn’t research that?

    07/12
    Tuesday, July 18, 2006 at 10:24 AM
    Monday, July 17, 2006 at 03:39 PM

    The Ace (b8a641)

  227. I told you what the most likely scenario is. His partner did the postings.

    What is the evidence that leads to that conclusion? Were all of the sockpuppets his boyfriend? What makes you think any of them were?

    Pablo (08e1e8)

  228. From the same IP address?

    Ya. They both live at the same place, and one travels. So when I email someone that lives with me but is travelling, I’m emailing them from teh same IP address.

    He wrote a post today on the matter. Are you suggesting he didn’t research that?

    I’m suggesting he saw accusations that he commented on other blogs based on IP address matches.

    actus (ebc508)

  229. What is the evidence that leads to that conclusion

    here is the argument that convinced me.

    actus (ebc508)

  230. I’m suggesting he saw accusations that he commented on other blogs based on IP address matches.

    Well, this has obviously reached a conclusion.

    As I said earlier, you are “suggesting” things to try and mitigate how poorly someone you agree with politically looks.

    And you will obviously say anything to do so.

    The Ace (b8a641)

  231. Ace:

    Well, by the standards of the MSM, I think we have enough to pillory.

    What was the basis for CBS running w/ the Burkett story? “We asked the WH, they didn’t deny it outright, so we felt it must be true.”

    What was the basis for claiming that the major US telecoms had handed over phone records to the NSA? “We asked them [unspecified who], and as of press time they hadn’t categorically denied it.” (Specific language may vary.)

    So, would the GG response be sufficient for CBS or USAToday? If not, can the court of public opinion be allowed to do its work?

    Lurking Observer (ea88e8)

  232. However, my point isn’t to address the weight of IP evidence. But to address the fact that its not that outrageous an argument to someone who knows technology law. Its an argument and a situation we’re familiar with.

    You make my earlier point exactly… there is no argument too outrageous for a lawyer. Also, I believe the courts have found wireless access operators could also incur liability to the extent that they make access available, and in doing so, facilitate activities that damage others. Meaning, if your network is open, you have some responsibility for how it is used. Correct?

    Stashiu3 (e1a65b)

  233. I question why Actus bothers bringing up these “possibilities” when the probability for them being true is so slim.

    sharon (03e82c)

  234. Ace:

    Well, by the standards of the MSM, I think we have enough to pillory.

    Certainly.

    Greenwald, Actus, et. al, hold Karl Rove and Tom Delay to these “show me the proof” standards, right?

    The Ace (b8a641)

  235. Well, by the standards of the MSM, I think we have enough to pillory.

    What was the basis for CBS running w/ the Burkett story? “We asked the WH, they didn’t deny it outright, so we felt it must be true.”

    But that standard is not met here. He did deny it outright.

    You make my earlier point exactly… there is no argument too outrageous for a lawyer.

    We do happen to see how people get screwed.

    Meaning, if your network is open, you have some responsibility for how it is used. Correct?

    I haven’t heard of this argument, but if I saw I would try a CDA section 230 defence to this sort of claim. The arguments I’ve heard of are not that a person is responsible for opening up their networks, but that the person is being accused as being the sender of the child porn when it came from their IP. Different ideas.

    actus (ebc508)

  236. here is the argument that convinced me.

    That doesn’t present any evidence. It only asks “What if?”

    Are you often convinced by people wondering, future counselor?

    What evidence makes you think it was Greenwald’s boyfriend and not Gigi himself?

    Pablo (08e1e8)

  237. way to attack the messenger. you’re funny!

    josh (ae3ebe)

  238. What evidence makes you think it was Greenwald’s boyfriend and not Gigi himself?

    Well, the fact that it came from Greenwald’s partner’s IP, and I’m convinced by the argument that it doesn’t look like greenwald’s writing (which, I guess is based on ‘evidence). Plus I’m convinced by the argument taht greenwald woudln’t need a sock puppet.

    Like I said, its the most likely scenario. Which doesn’t mean its a certainty. Although some other people said they were 98 percent sure about it. Ask them why so sure.

    actus (ebc508)

  239. Does the real Actus know this guy is spoofing his IP address and making him look bad?

    Svenn Sveenwald (c3be1b)

  240. My god, is this all you have left in your empty bag of tricks? Greenwald takes you frothing, low rent fascist types to the cleaners daily the old fashion way, not by calling you ‘douchebags’ or ‘traitors’, but by using facts and reason and extensive posts.

    This whole stupid controversy is just another minor shit storm by minor league right wing insects who need to be ‘offended’ daily by some horrible injustice committed by a left leaning blogger(happy holidays, assholes), who still to this day has never called for someone’s death simply because he disagrees with your stance.

    You guys are a class act. Really. Every morning, the bitter conservitive white men wake up besieged by all sides, if it’s not the evil, seditious NY Times, it must be some blogger who undermines the Dear Leaders Glorious Perpetual War by, gasp, writing on a blog!

    Hewwww Hewwwwwit (6c9735)

  241. Another possibility which should be addressed is that Patterico, Jeff, Ace and others all flew to Brazil, broke into Glenn’s house and wrote comments to their respective blogs in an effort to frame Greenwald.

    If they were going to conspire to frame Greenwald they wouldn’t have to travel anywhere. Blogging software isn’t deliberately designed to enable you to edit the IP address on your comments, but with a minimal knowledge of MySQL it can be done. And, sooner or later, no doubt will be, by someone.

    Xrlq (f52b4f)

  242. Credibility is integral to a blogger’s impact on his audience, and on his reputation as a good-faith commenter upon the affairs he writes.

    Mr. Greenwald’s dishonest attacks in the past against such of his ideological opponents as Patterico and Little Green Footballs have been difficult for his apologists to explain away, but they’ve been able to further the illusion of Mr. Greenwald as an honest actor by claiming “interpretation” and “context”. Indeed, Mr. Greenwald was able to do the same thing in his recent contretemps with Patterico by writing such things in his own defense as: “The point was…”. You see, it’s not what he actually *said* that’s the issue, it’s what he *meant*. Fake but accurate, indeed.

    But now, Mr. Greenwald’s credibility is shredded entirely. No one can honestly claim that he’s being forthcoming in his responses to fairly serious questions about his integrity. And the longer he waits to do so, the fishier he appears. And it can’t be explained away by some analogy to kiddie porn.

    Unless you’re Deb Frisch – and then everything’s about what you want to do to some child somewhere.

    Name-calling or assertions without evidence won’t deflect the justifiable concern that he’s dishonest, because really, what does it say when the only argument you can make in his defense is either “fu*k you” or “someone must have slipped into his house and sock-puppeted their little fingers off on his behalf”; and pointing out how “wingers” are obsessing about this issue won’t clear Mr. Greenwald’s name, because the “obsession” with this issue is actually an examination of the fundament of what blogging is all about – “Who is this person (pseudonomite* or not) and why should I trust what they say?”

    If you can’t answer either one of those questions, why would you listen to him/her/hiltzik?

    “Reputation, reputation, reputation! O, I have lost my reputation! I have lost the immortal part of myself, and what remains is bestial.”

    *Since I closed with Shkspr I thought it ok to indulge in a little neologism.

    Abraxas (6742f0)

  243. Well, the fact that it came from Greenwald’s partner’s IP,

    You mean Greenwald’s IP, right? We don’t know that he has a live in boyfriend. In fact, he’s never said his boyfriend made the comments.

    I’m convinced by the argument that it doesn’t look like greenwald’s writing (which, I guess is based on ‘evidence).

    What evidence? You guess?

    Plus I’m convinced by the argument taht greenwald woudln’t need a sock puppet.

    So, you’re convinced by “Because he says so”?

    Why wouldn’t he use a sockpuppet, but yet his boyfriend would? Or better yet, a roommate? Why wouldn’t a boyfriend be like “He’s got a book, and Russ Feingold likes him and he’s got a blog and 14″ of manmeat! And I ought to know!”

    You believe because you like the Kool Aid, actus. You’re part of the faith-based community.
    __________________________________

    Big, big ups to PW commenter topsecretk9 who brings us the Townhouse anthem, via Shari and Lambchop:

    This is the song that never ends
    Yes, it goes on and on, my friends
    Some people started singing it not knowing what it was,
    And they’ll continue singing it forever just because—

    Sing it, Brother actus!

    Pablo (08e1e8)

  244. Oh. My. God.

    Someone is spoofing Hugh Hewitt! While he’s on the air!

    Mathew Sams (52bc25)

  245. Alright, stupids, knock it off. Bin Laden is monitoring web sites like this and if he becomes too aware of the fact that most Americans are loony tunes, it’ll only embolden him.

    …Now, who’s some douche? I’m feeling unfresh.

    Pickles Bush (193139)

  246. We don’t know that he has a live in boyfriend.

    And we dont even know that the boyfriend might come over, or that he might go to his boyfriend’s house.

    You believe because you like the Kool Aid, actus. You’re part of the faith-based community.

    Ask Ace why he’s 98% convinced. I’m not all the way there, but since he’s one of the guys that dug this stuff up, maybe he’s got more evidence.

    actus (ebc508)

  247. There are so many comments that I’ll admit to not having read them all, so perhaps this has already been noted.

    If someone is going through America Online as his service provider, outgoing messages and posts are assigned one of AOL’s many “batch” IP addresses. The Liberal Avenger thought that I was doing the same thing to him, because a commenter with the same IP address was saying some things that weren’t exactly in the manner in which I normally express myself.

    Upon checking my own site, I found that seven different commenters, all using AOL, had identical IP addresses; they weren’t all even from the same time zone.

    There may be other evidence pointing to the conclusion being drawn, but identical IP addresses alone are neither solid proof, nor even persuasive, evidence.

    Dana (3e4784)

  248. “You guys are a class act. Really. Every morning, the bitter conservitive white men wake up besieged by all sides, if it’s not the evil, seditious NY Times, it must be some blogger who undermines the Dear Leaders Glorious Perpetual War by, gasp, writing on a blog!”

    If he only wrote it once and under one name, that’s life. On the other hand, “some blogger” has a crying jag when he, in turn, is criticized and sends an army of sock puppets to defend him.

    Like you, for example.

    Mike K (6d4fc3)

  249. Additionally, I comment both via AOL and ptd.net, depending how I happen to accessing the internet, from the same computer, and thus our esteemed host can see at least two separate IP addresses for me.

    Dana (3e4784)

  250. actus you are either a glutton for punishment or the world’s best sport and I salute you for it. If I ever start my own blog it’ll be to the right of Ann Coulter but you will be welcome nonetheless.

    And now I’m going to cry.

    Gotta Know (f41eca)

  251. Patterico is quite manly.

    Rocko (28694d)

  252. Patterico is all man, baby.

    Bruce (28694d)

  253. Patterico makes me swoon.

    Lance (28694d)

  254. Huh. Three fawning, favorable comments in a row about Patterico. Wonder if they’re from the same IP address? Wonder what that means?

    Violet Slandre (28694d)

  255. Gotta, I’ve been hoping actus will come over to my site: since I only get about sixty visitors a day, I need every one I can get.

    Besides, actus is to the right of my resident moonbat.

    Dana (3e4784)

  256. The problem is that too many people are using the new IBM, I mean Lenovo computers, and the surveillance chips that were placed by the Chinese are leaving footprints. The question is, are the footprints a foul up, or truely genious inspired disinformation, probably by Karl Rove himself.

    Anyway, I’d like to see more commentary and discussion on some other topic. “I think, therefore I’ve had enough” of this.

    MD in Philly (3d3f72)

  257. One of the bloggers following these matters might wanna do a brief summation, concise and clear enough so that casual onlookers understand what’s going on here.

    The problem with Greenwald is not that he’s a leftoid blogger. It’s that he’s a sleazy and dishonest propagandist, full of faux outrage, with zero concern for fairness, who began a conscious an transparent character assasination campaign apparently as a Townhouse strategy.

    I first noticed Greenwald was a blogger of low ethics when he was trying to distract from alleged corrutions in Kosland by smearing a liberal New Republic journalist as the “new Stephen Glass”. Then I saw the way he would tell lies about certain conservative bloggers he’s on an obsessive jihad against. For example, he completely misrepresented Little Green Footballs by saying LGF had said something that had zero resemblance to the actual post he linked to.

    This is what he’s been doing to even moderate/libertarian bloogers, like InstaPundit. He tries to paint Glenn Reynolds as someone who, an a daily basis, engages in “extremist rhetoric, vicious character smears, and deliberate incitement to violence.” This bears no resemblance to the InstaPundit blog so these charges will not stick, but it bears close resemblance to his smear on the New Republic journalist. For Greenwald, anything goes when it comes to people of any persuasion saying things he wishes weren’t being said.

    So, Greenwald has an M.O. of being an unscrupulous and dishonest blogger, and what’s going on now is a natural and healthy backlash.

    Patterico yesterday exposed an example of his hypocrisy. Not a huge deal in and of itself, but revealing. And the apparent sock-puppetry may not be serious in the grand scheme of things, but also revealing, and will probably be used to ridicule him forevermore. :)

    A blogger can survive even though he’s not respected outside his partisan circles. But I wonder how influencial a blogger can be when he’s damaging his credibility so serverely. Not all bloggers are obsessed with being powerful. Some just wanna express themselves. Greenwald is quite obsessed with being a “powerful blogger” in the Townhouse propaganda machine, someone Senators and journalists take their cues from (ahaha!). A legend in his own mind, perhaps, and he may find even that short-lived if he doesn’t clean up his act. More and more people are on to him, see through his B.S., and know what kind of slimy and pathetic character they’re dealing with. He can’t blame us for noticing what he is.

    LoafingOaf (71415b)

  258. Dana I will proudly visit your site. In fact if you like I will visit with 6 sock puppets per day and get your hits up by 10%. If you like.

    But I’m warning you, I will be your resident right-wing facist troll. I will not be out-conservatived, that is my pledge to you.

    Gotta Know (f41eca)

  259. Upon checking my own site, I found that seven different commenters, all using AOL, had identical IP addresses; they weren’t all even from the same time zone.

    Yeah, AOL, for all its faults, is one way to surf the Web anonymously (as far as I know, anyway).

    LoafingOaf (71415b)

  260. Ask Ace why he’s 98% convinced.

    I already did that. Haven’t gotten an answer. But that’s not really relevant.

    I’m asking you, actus. What’s your answer? Don’t try to tag out. Don’t look to (faux?) Ace to tell you why you believe. Just answer the question.

    You said you think his partner wrote (you didn’t answer when I asked, so I’m making a small assumption here when I say “all”) all of the sockpuppet posts. Why do you believe that when the far more likely scenario is that Glenn Greenwald likes to defend himself using sock puppet identities?

    ________________________________

    Bonus Question: Why aren’t you flailing around with demands for the head of the right wing blogger guilty of such sockpuppetry?

    Pablo (08e1e8)

  261. Gotta, I’ve been hoping actus will come over to my site: since I only get about sixty visitors a day, I need every one I can get.

    Please, please, please, go off to Dana’s world, please go to Dana’s world, please go to Dana’s world…ad infinitum.

    Verc (627517)

  262. Pablo:

    Actually, I expect GG is on the phone and email right now, examining ISP tags from past commentators.

    I predict that in the next day or so, SadlyNo, GG, or some other blogger on that side will hold up an example of a thread where two someones expressing conservative viewpoints will have identical ISPs, and we will go through another “cycle of metaphorical violence.”

    Never mind if they’re identical viewpoints, never mind if it’s from AOL. The point will be:

    Conservatives sock-puppet, too.

    Just as Jeff Gannon is inevitably invoked whenever conservatives question the press, because it shows that the conservative press is every bit as shabby as the Left, or as GG insisted that Deb Frisch’s comments were really no different from Misha’s in deserving (or not deserving) condemnation (although that stuff about this being ironic is kinda counterproductive in this regard), so, too, will Bob1 and Bob2 be held up as examples that the Right sockpuppets JUST AS MUCH as the Left.

    Moral equivalence, that’s the ticket.

    Lurking Observer (ea88e8)

  263. Greenwald takes you frothing, low rent fascist types to the cleaners daily the old fashion way, not by calling you ‘douchebags’ or ‘traitors’, but by using facts and reason and extensive posts.

    Really?

    You mean like his silly “response” to this post?

    The Ace (8d7f7b)

  264. I’m asking you, actus. What’s your answer? Don’t try to tag out. Don’t look to (faux?) Ace to tell you why you believe. Just answer the question.

    I gave you my answer. GG implied his housemate did it. GG doesn’t need to do this, and it’s not his writing style. Thats it. I find this more likely than him writing comments on other blogs defending himself without his name, because I can’t think of why he would want to do that.

    Why do you believe that when the far more likely scenario is that Glenn Greenwald likes to defend himself using sock puppet identities?

    See, I think he likes to defend himself using his own identity, because that helps his popularity and ego.

    actus (6234ee)

  265. actus, you didn’t answer why you think GiGi wouldn’t use a sockpuppet, but his boyfriend would.

    Why would the boyfriend want to be 5 different people defending GiGi with his resume?

    Do you have firsthand knowledge here? Are you back in Brazil right now?

    Pablo (08e1e8)

  266. Greenwald takes you frothing, low rent fascist types to the cleaners daily the old fashion way, not by calling you ‘douchebags’ or ‘traitors’, but by using facts and reason and extensive posts.

    From Greenwald’s first sentence of his reply on the matter:

    As I’ve noted several times in the last couple of weeks, my focus on the lawlessness, extremist rhetoric and violence-inciting tactics of the Bush movement and its followers in the blogosphere

    How about those “facts” without the name-calling, huh?!

    Again, you people can no longer be parodied.

    The Ace (8d7f7b)

  267. Ask Ace why he’s 98% convinced.

    Sorry, I missed this.

    Based on a ‘preponderance of the evidence’ and being fair (while holding my nose to do so) to Greenwald based on what he wrote and how it was said, I feel that confident in the “male lover did it” scenario.

    The Ace (8d7f7b)

  268. Why would the boyfriend want to be 5 different people defending GiGi with his resume?

    In thinking about it, that is a great question, and I also feel pretty confident one of them was Greenwald.

    I’m convinced by the argument that it doesn’t look like greenwald’s writing

    Wouldn’t someone as “smart” as Greenwald do that intentionally?

    The Ace (8d7f7b)

  269. [...] “Sock puppet,” hollered Patterico and Ace o’ Spades. [...]

    Mr. Peacock, in the Library, with the Laptop at The Politburo Diktat (4aa448)

  270. Wow

    Just think if my wife went on and posted some fawning praise about how fabulous I was without ever disclosing the relationship of course. Under multiple names of course too. Then you found out.

    Thats the best this can be. Or ( and more likely in my opinion ) GG was furiously burning up the keyboard signing his own praise. A lesser man would be deeply embarassed. But not GG.

    gmax (c36144)

  271. Wouldn’t someone as “smart” as Greenwald do that intentionally?

    That argument doesn’t do much, because it proves too much: Would someone as “smart” as him post from the same IP addresses using fake names?

    actus (6234ee)

  272. because it proves too much: Would someone as “smart” as him post from the same IP addresses using fake names?

    Fair point.

    Goes back to the “ignorant of technology” point.

    Could be the one-armed lover of Greenwald’s lover too I guess…

    The Ace (8d7f7b)

  273. Sorry Ace, I don’t buy it. Ditto actus. The only way that would be possible would be for Ms. Greenwald to have lived in the U.S. for all of his formative years, which I think is unlikely. The writer of the notes was a native speaker. And to go further (along the lines of Patterico’s comments on the original post), all of the arguments–all the blather about the astonishingly wonderful history of the Stupendous GiGi–are identical, and very similar to GiGi’s own self-promotions on his site.

    I’m not a language expert but I bet that a close look at the language used by the GiGi sock puppets was consistent with GiGi’s posts elsewhere.

    Now all we need is a cunning linguist…

    Gotta Know (f41eca)

  274. HE’S NOT WORTH IT…

    Glenn Greenwald has the right wing internet all atwitter today. And the only thing that has been running through my mind as I’ve perused the gleeful “gotchyas!” and astounded “ah has!” from my fellow righty bloggers has…

    Right Wing Nut House (5ada7f)

  275. “actus, you didn’t answer why you think GiGi wouldn’t use a sockpuppet, but his boyfriend would.
    Why would the boyfriend want to be 5 different people defending GiGi with his resume?”

    Yeah, that’s why I’m currently leaning towards GiGi himself having done it. I can think of a motive for him doing the sockpuppets–it makes the touting seem a little more credible and it avoids the always-embarassing tooting-your-own-horn thing. But I can’t think of a motive for GiGi’s lover to post under different names on different blogs.

    Emperor of Icecream (7e1275)

  276. Or a fellow Tio. Tio the Brazillian, that is.

    Mike K (6d4fc3)

  277. What Ace said in #272.

    And the thing that has jumped out at me over and over and over again.

    What I objected to from the beginning in Glenn’s post, and I don’t believe he has answered yet (nor did any of his defenders when I tried to ask them on another thread).

    How in the Sam Hill do you get away with exaggerating “Rope. Tree. Some assembly required” into a “death call” when Mischa does it, then I gently, without abusing Glenn, point out that this is a well-know if a bit sick joke, then when Sadly, No! does the same exact thing, with a picture of a noose and the word conservatives (arguably a bit more over the top here) and Patterico points the logical inconsistency, Mr. “Death Call” doesn’t have the intellectual honestly to either:

    1. Admit he was wrong to insist Mischa’s post was a “death call”, (come on guys: we’re talking about a site called “Idiotarian Rottweiler” do ya think maybe the guy has an over the top sense of humor?) and that “virtually EVERY RIGHT WING BLOGGER” spent the weekend fixating on whatever the hell he was writing about (ummm do you have ANY IDEA HOW MANY REICH WING BLOGGERS THERE ARE? DID GLENN COUNT THEM? HOW THE HELK COULD HE KNOW?) or,

    2. Gracefully back down and admit that Sadly, No! was ALSO engaging in the very same sick joke (which ironically is precisely the defense Glenn’s commenters employed: “Gosh: you ‘wingers are so dumb you can’t recognize a joke when you see one!!!!”

    Uh… yes we can. That was my argument the week before. The one Glenn never rebutted.

    Part of what got Glenn into trouble here is his passive-aggressive technique of pretending to be polite while accusing righty bloggers of lovely things like making death threats and then not responding when people call him on it. And he was very polite when he came to my site, but all he did was throw up a red herring and he never refuted the substantive part of my post, even when I apologized to remove that excuse.

    The thing is, there are many types of insults. Personally, I’d rather be called a ‘fucking nitwit’ than a murderer by some guy who doesn’t have the guts to say it openly. At least the former insult, if it lacks a certain elegance, is out in the open.

    Cassandra (c9069a)

  278. [...] This is in response to some bloggers claims that Greenwald has been employing the juvenile USENET trick of sockpuppetry. So, Greenwald, how many people do live at your house?  ’Cause you got a lot of people posting from the same IP address in Brazil! [...]

    justbarkingmad.com » Blog Archive » He’s Baaaaaaaaaack! Greenwald opens door into own face… (bcb8b9)

  279. Would someone as “smart” as him post from the same IP addresses using fake names?

    So he’s not tech savvy. So what?

    Pablo (08e1e8)

  280. Here is what seems to be the most logical explanation: GiGi was caught making multiple posts at other sites. He thought he would get away with it because he avoided using aliases at the main sites where he had posted as himself, namely Patterico and Protein Wisdom, which would expose the ruse due to the same IP address.

    He was then caught, so he blamed his lover. But there are three problems with that: One, his lover is Brazilian, and thus not a native speaker; two, the prose is consistent across the board, pointing to the same poster; and three, it seems strange that Ms. GiGi would not post at the Patterico and Protein Wisdom sites, implying that he knew where GiGi had been posting to avoid being IP identified. So rather than taking the rap for using sock puppets, GiGi blamed his boyfriend.

    GiGi is a sockducker.

    Gotta Know (f41eca)

  281. I saw at least one of these posts previously and thought, is Glenn Greenwald rising to to a “Howard Stern”-like level where obnoxious groupies but in at inappropriate times and scream “Howard Stern rocks” ?

    Seems I was half right.

    Neo (cba5df)

  282. Does anyone know his partners name?

    Thought not. Since he’s anonymous as it is, he didn’t really need to use so many different alias’s I guess if the goal is to leave essentially the same message on different blogs then he probably would have been better off using one alias – and still remained anonymous.

    BTW, Actus…do you remember your stance on the Duke boys denial?

    topsecretk9 (09a224)

  283. If it were Ms. GiGi doing the posting, he could easily have used his real name, or at least the same alias, but instead he used multiple aliases. And if he did it, why did Ms. GiGi avoid posting at the sites where GiGi had already posted using his real name?

    It makes much more sense that GiGi sat at his computer and came up with multiple aliases, certainly avoiding Ms. GiGi’s name altogether, and made sure he avoided the sites where he had already posted using his real name, like Patterico and Protein Wisdom.

    Think about it from GiGi’s perspective: If he was careful enough to avoid posting using his real name, and an alias (both with the same IP address), at the same site, who in the world would have thought that two separate conservative bloggers would get around to comparing IP addresses of various aliases? That was one in a million. The bloggers figured it out because the language sounded very similar. Hauntingly familiar, like they had come across it before.

    GiGi is a lying liar. He knows the sock puppeteering cannot be proven, particularly since he blamed his household and therefore has plausible denial. Plus, as some lefty has said, who cares? No laws broken, no serious digging needed.

    It’s still fraud, he’s still a liar. He has totally discredited himself, and is now vulnerable to being exposed again and again, because now we’re onto him. This is not the first time, and it won’t be the last.

    You can think aliens did it, or the boyfriend did it, or someone hijacked his IP address, or it was two AOL neighbors in Brazil, or you can look at the preponderance of evidence (as GiGi might say), and say my god man, he’s a screaming fraud, and pretty whacked to boot.

    Gotta Know (f41eca)

  284. There’s a possibility that flying monkeys might emerge from actus’ ass.

    It’s undeniable.

    N. O'Brain (9056e2)

  285. Did a whois on that IP. It’s registered to lacnic.net, AKA Registro de Direcciones de Internet para America Latina y Caribe. That Greenwald’s a wily bastard. (Oops, I mean “bastardo”.)

    motherlowman (568482)

  286. Saw someone coming out of Greenwalds place with this t-shirt on:

    “Roses are Red
    Violets are Blue,
    I’m Schizoid
    and so am I.”

    On the back it said:

    “You’re jealous ‘cuz the voices only talk to me!”

    paul from fl (464e99)

  287. Yeah, I don’t buy his denial, especially since his denial throws so much other smoke up before getting to it. Hard to believe his partner is as obsessed with the commenters of the same blogs Greenwald is. We know Greenwald spends time reading the comment sections of, for example, Protein Wisdom, because he’s blogged about them. But…he knows it can probably never be proved that it’s not his lover.

    I looked at comments again for fairly unique phrases, sorta like the way the Unabomber’s manifesto gave the Unabomber away. Don’t see anything that could be a dead giveaway. However, “insult-spewing” is a phrase Greenwald has used himself here (in the comments). “Super important” is a phrase Greenwald has used here(in the comments). That phrase was used two other times on his blog, once by Wilson, and once by an anonymous commenter who wanted to trumpet that a Greenwald post had been picked up by Newsgator Online Latest Buzz (calling it a “surpassingly rare” occurance – “surpassingly” being a word most people don’t use but Greenwald does use).

    Phrases can be contagious between close friends, I guess, and might share a fondness for words like “deranged.” And perhaps they have a relationship where all they do is talk about conservative bloggers. IMO the odds suggest he’s got a sock-puppet…or five.

    LoafingOaf (71415b)

  288. why did Ms. GiGi avoid posting at the sites where GiGi had already posted using his real name?

    Good point!

    LoafingOaf (71415b)

  289. Good job Loafing Oaf, I had intended to do that but did not know where GiGi had been posting comments. “Insult-spewing?” I would never ever use that phrase in 10 lifetimes. And yet it shows up in the comment of one of his defenders? Same with “super important.”

    I agree that friends can use the same spoken expressions, but why would friends use the same written expressions? I would never use a written expression that a friend had used, in fact I would have little reason to even read anything whatsoever a friend had written.

    You just bumped me up from 95% to 98%. GiGi is the butler. He did it in the computer room using a sock puppet.

    Gotta Know (f41eca)

  290. I’ll go you one better, I bet GiGi is a serial sock puppeteer, and that we’ve only seen the tip of the iceberg. GiGi probably uses this technique routinely for all sorts of reasons, including, I presume, hocking his book.

    Gotta Know (f41eca)

  291. Whether GG used sock puppets or not, his blogging is known to be unreliable and suspect for other reasons, right? I agree it is interesting to think about IP addresses and linguistics, etc, but I am missing why we need to perseverate on this topic.

    I wonder, does TTLB have a list of bloggers known to be of shady reputation?

    MD in Philly (3d3f72)

  292. Smells of Rather

    bummer (b58c1a)

  293. All GG has to do to embarrass the conservatives is produce the actual people (with the appropriate names) who used his IP address from his home.

    I don’t think he can.

    KSM (ccc78d)

  294. Oh shoot, I might as well go for Post #300 on this. Sock puppetry is a bad deal, but it strikes me that baying after some forlorn, useless, mendacious, little twit that has engaged in sock puppetry–Glen Greenwald, Debbie Frisch, Michael Hiltzik, you know who you are, is sort of like the packs of coyotes I hear nightly in the hills where I live. They’re working hard–but at the end of the hunt, all they’ve got is some worthless jackrabbit. I wouldn’t have bothered to comment–but a shot at being Poster #300 was just too tempting.

    Mike Myers (290636)

  295. BTW, Actus…do you remember your stance on the Duke boys denial?

    Nope. What was it?

    actus (6234ee)

  296. Bummer it DEFINITELY smells of Rather.

    Gotta Know (f41eca)

  297. GG implied his housemate did it. GG doesn’t need to do this, and it’s not his writing style. Thats it. I find this more likely than him writing comments on other blogs defending himself without his name, because I can’t think of why he would want to do that.

    Ask Hiltzik. Ask Lott.

    Svenn Sveenwald (c3be1b)

  298. Nope. What was it?

    Her statement is evidence of rape

    The IP address are evidence of sockpupperty. That you are defending for some stupid reason.

    topsecretk9 (09a224)

  299. The IP address are evidence of sockpupperty.

    Certainly. Its evidence that someone with access to that IP address made the comments. And statements from a victim are evidence of a crime.

    actus (6234ee)

  300. Is Glenn Greenwald considered so important that any of this matters?

    steve (6cbac1)

  301. Ok, Actus…but in Duke you disputed all lack of forensic and physical evidence…it was the alleged victims statement that was evidence…here you are faced with actual evidence and the denial is enough for you to doubt the claim…hmmm

    I admire your innocent until proven guilty stance now. Or when it’s ideologically convenient.

    Lack of a smoking gun doesn’t mean no crime was committed.

    Actus

    topsecretk9 (09a224)

  302. Is Glenn Greenwald considered so important that any of this matters?

    No. I suppose if he weren’t such a pompous, hysterical, reactionary jerk all the time no one would care.

    topsecretk9 (09a224)

  303. Greenwald is nailed. End of discussion. Defense of his sockpuppetry is a non-starter. The guy’s a boob. He’s been caught; hoist by his own petard, as it were.

    Damn, you would think people would learn after a while. Nice going Patterico, Ace, and Sean!

    Bill M (d9e4b2)

  304. Is Glenn Greenwald considered so important that any of this matters?

    It matters becuase it’s so damned funny.

    Pablo (08e1e8)

  305. Hear hear Bill M, this discussion was going the OJ route there for a while.

    Gotta Know (f41eca)

  306. Oh Boy…the “outrage / no big deal” specialists are out in force watering down their resident hysteric.

    Martini must have gotten the “Townhouse” email. ::wink::

    topsecretk9 (09a224)

  307. Ok, Actus…but in Duke you disputed all lack of forensic and physical evidence…it was the alleged victims statement that was evidence

    I think you and I have different definitions of evidence. Evidence doesn’t answer the question. All that evidence is is something that makes one result more probable than another. So a victim’s statement is evidence of in a criminal case. But other evidence can come in that makes us think the case for acquittal is stronger. Thats it.

    I admire your innocent until proven guilty stance now.

    But me saying a victim’s statement is evidence is not proof of guilt.

    actus (6234ee)

  308. Actcus

    it’s really OK…you don’t have to take a high-minded esoteric approach here

    You took a “statement is evidence” approach then and a -denial is evidence- of doubt pose here…

    It’s really okay, just good to know you “vogue” when you want to.

    topsecretk9 (09a224)

  309. Typical wingers. You guys want so desperately to sound smart and clever. You breathlessly think you’ve “caught” Greenwald doing something vaguely dishonest. Problem is, you don’t understand IP addresses. You can’t even use a phrase like “hoist[ed] by his own petard” correctly.
    Morons.

    minnie mouse (2aa1c2)

  310. So IIRC several years ago when I worked on a project in partnership with AOL they used to proxy everyone logged on to AOL through about 30 different IP addresses. That meant that a huge fraction of Internet traffic appeared to come from those 30 addresses. Companies often do this – everyone inside the company is configured to use the same proxy so it looks like the same IP address from the point of view of a website. Entire countries have been known to do this as well.

    I don’t know if it’s still the case, but you can’t presume that the same IP address means it comes from the same computer, let alone the same person.

    Lotharsson (25a92b)

  311. You breathlessly think you’ve “caught” Greenwald doing something vaguely dishonest.

    I’m fucking laughing my ass off…i have some funny memories of that very important point of the WAPO comment jihad…breathlessly, indeed!

    topsecretk9 (09a224)

  312. wow, this is retarded. someone commented on different blogs using different handles, therefore glenn greenwald is a sockpuppetting plant from the brazilian gay conspiracy.
    meanwhile, you get to pretend this is what matters, instead of, say, the admin breaking the law and you having no defense for your continued support of it.

    was it the smartest thing glenn’s partner and/or other friends could have done? nah, but if this is the best you can do to discredit him, and it is, you might as well retitle this post “glenn greenwald makes better arguments than me so i’ll avoid responding directly”.

    brad (d57327)

  313. Imeanitdoesn’treallymatteryouwingersareallmakingsomethingoutofnothingnobodycaresaboutthiscan’tyoufocusonsomethingimportantlikedeadbabiesorsealsorfreeranchfarmingorelectriccarsorchimpymchalliburtonorSOMETHINGELSEbutIdontcarewhatalsoGlenndidntdoititwashispartnerhismotherormaybesomebodyelseinhishouseokmaybefiveofthemandtheyallfollowedhimaroundtohisdifferentplacesofinternetaccessandusedfakenamesbutactuallynoneofhtishappenedyouwingersaremakingitallupthatsnotevenhowanIPaddressworksyoudontunderstandcomputersalsoactuallythisisreallystupidandthefactthatyouaretakingaboutitshowsyouareobsessedwhilethefactthatiamtalkingaboutshowsthatiamreallysmartplusnobodycaresaboutthisitjustshowshowdevoidofideasyouwingersaretalkingaboutoneguythismuchinsteadofhisideaswhydontyoutakethehighroadlikeusandspendyourtimeobsessingoversomeonebyrepeatedlycalinghimCountCockulaorreferringtohimasaPasteEaterhehhehhehthatsreallyclever”PasteEater”IlaugheverytimeIhearthatbutthatsSUBSTANTIVEunlikeyoustupidwingersandanyhowGlennisthegreatestideamanintheworldandyourejusscaredofhim! {Pause for breath]

    Everyone loves GG (14975a)

  314. Glenn, failing to use the shift key really isn’t much of a disguise.

    Pablo (08e1e8)

  315. Arghhh, that vast one man leftwing conspiracy to assault right wing blogs with multiple nics.

    Glenn, pretend you’re a woman next, that’ll really throw these guys into a patriotic frenzy.

    Scarypatriot (451980)

  316. Obviously, this is the much anticipated Revenge of Jeff Gannon. Glenn Greenwald, Intellectual Colossus, Man of Letters, and Svengali to Russ Feingold, is revealed to have feet of clay.

    It’s a wonderful sequel to Dan Rather’s collapse.

    Cordially…

    Rick (048868)

  317. I see it more as a digestif following the gutwrenching belly laughter brought on by L’Affaire Plame and Mr. Rove main courses, with their rich, thick truthout sauce. And Ko$ola for dessert.

    Pablo (efa871)

  318. Check unceph’s IP!

    My thought also.

    Gerald A (fe1f90)

  319. Problem is, you don’t understand IP addresses.

    Enlighten everyone then.

    Gerald A (fe1f90)

  320. Pablo,

    Then this should be perfect.

    Cordially…

    Rick (048868)

  321. [...] Heads huddled, notes were compared, and conclusions were drawn: Glenn Greenwald (say many) disguised himself under a variety of aliases to defend himself. He has engaged in sockpuppetry — and that’s the only thing that distinguishes this from the run-of-the-mill left v. right flame war. [...]

    Polimom Says » Sockpuppets and Occam’s Razor (2610c3)

  322. I’m sorry,I can’t find the post(and I’m sure it’s out there somewhere) about Glenn Grunwald’s massive rock hard organ.Does anyone know where ellison et al posted it?

    Lincoln (3c58c3)

  323. You took a “statement is evidence” approach then and a -denial is evidence- of doubt pose here…

    Ya. They’re both evidence. Whats the problem? A victim’s statement is evidence of a crime. A defendant’s statement is evidence of their innocence — if its a denial. If its a confession its evidence of their guilt.

    actus (6234ee)

  324. Actus–
    Talk to the hand. And the hand. And the feet. And that other . . . wait a minute!

    Dan Collins (eac760)

  325. [...] First, the exclamation points in my post title were ironic, as they almost always are when I use them. I’m not really a “serious exclamation points” guy. The title of my post was: “Devoted Fans of Glenn Greenwald Emphasize the Same Points About His Resume — From the Same IP Address!!” [...]

    Patterico’s Pontifications » Another Brief Greenwald Note (421107)

  326. The fact that people are coming here to defend this clown is almost as funny as the initial incident itself.

    This is the blog version of the black knight scene in Monty Python’s Holy Grail.

    But I’ve cut your leg off.

    No you didn’t.

    Jack Burton (d02bc7)

  327. [...] Jim: When I see this report on alleged sock-puppetry by a prominent lefty blogger — i.e., posting under other names in comments sections to defend and praise his arguments — it’s just sad. This mockery is accurate, but man, this is why nobody takes blogs seriously. It’s over, people. This was once an innovative and exciting medium, but now it’s been taken over by the egomaniacs and the loons. Related Posts » Capitol Police Drop Charges, Apologize, Rub Feet of Cindy Sheehan» Sen. Stabenow — Dangerously Incompentent» Reporters and bloggers» Has the Blogosphere turned sour?» Blog Survey [...]

    On Tap » ‘Sock Puppetry’ is destroying Blogs’ credibility (1b383c)

  328. I was interested in some reading that Glenn Greenwald was in the military, but his Wikipedia entry doesn’t mention it.

    As a self-proclaimed gay man I would think that his military period would be of interest, but I guess not to Wikipedia.

    Neo (f1f21a)

  329. Glenn Reynolds was against photoshopping before he was for it…

    When John Lott was caught using a sock puppet, Glenn Reynolds declared that he wasn’t going to mention it on his blog because it wasn’t “actual news”. Later he chastised Greg Beato for doing a photoshop of Lott as Mary……

    Deltoid (a83cc5)

  330. Patterico writes that the comments are a “carbon copy in personality, writing style and verbal tics” to Greenwald’s work.

    Really? I would challenge Patterico to support his assertion. I have never seen Greenwald write so carelessly, nor use idiomatic Portuguese formulations like ‘Greenwald only has a New York Times Best Selling Book’ or sentence fragments such as ‘Maybe that has something to do with why.’

    To my mind, Patterico made his accusation precisely because a comparison to Greenwald’s ordinary writing style is unsupportable, and because the boyfriend-as-hothead thesis was gaining credibility.

    [If I can cite you numerous comments where Greenwald writes sloppily, will you be convinced? Say yes and I’ll do the work. But I’m not doing the work just so you can come up with a different easily refuted argument. Ball’s in your court. — P]

    QuickSilver (d96f42)

  331. [...] Greenwald who is otherwise noted for masterful sock-puppetry understands who they’re coming for [...]

    Because This Won’t Be On The Nightly News « In Other Words (a2b447)

  332. blonde teens kings free blonde teens
    parent your here out comments free
    blonde teens kings free blonde teens
    hardcore addition visit coed ~~ ethnic

    Michael (2a3ca4)

  333. ,
    . ,
    .

    Michael (8abedc)

  334. [...] expect Greenwald to say the truth of the matter, do you really?  I halfway expected him to blame “Wilson” or “Ellison” for his lie.  David and I have attacked him and his sock puppets often enough before, but not [...]

    Nightly Ramble: Catching up from the holidays | BitsBlog (33ff78)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.7734 secs.