Patterico's Pontifications

6/23/2011

GennetteC Has The Right Idea: Who Is John Reid?

Filed under: General — Stranahan @ 9:32 am



[Guest post by Lee Stranahan]

In comments, Gennette has consistently asked the most important question that’s on the table right now – the question that the Reid Doc Dump is meant to distract from.

Who is the person behind the accounts of Nikki, Marianela, and John Reid?

They are obviously fake accounts. This has been clear to a number of people for about two weeks now. In that time…

  1. not a single piece of evidence has come forward that would establish that those accounts are anything but sock puppets.
  2. all the evidence that has come forward just adds to the sock puppet story
    1. The fake photos
    2. Reid coming forward trying to ‘protect his daughter’ when the best protection if they were real would be to stay quiet
    3. the sudden silence of Mrs. Reid replaced by John as the spokesman

The focus as this point SHOULD be on finding out who is behind the fake accounts. That will answer a lot of questions.  But the person or persons behind the fake account doesn’t want to be caught. So, when people are getting close – and people are, I believe – they throw out more nonsense. And suddenly, Gennette becomes the focus again. Or let’s attack the New York Times reporter! It’s such an obvious distraction that I’m shocked it’s working – but 200+ comments can’t be wrong.

Meanwhile, the real hard clues that might lead to the person behind the puppets aren’t even being discussed.

To repeat something I mentioned a couple of days ago – I got a PHONE CALL from the person who CREATED the Starchild account. And that call was full of contradictions, including the statements made by the woman calling that she’d gotten death threats within an hour of her name being posted…but nobody has been able to find her number or even any hard evidence she exists.

That’s significant. It could lead to finding out who is behind this and what their intent was. But somehow a puppet has managed to control the news cycle.

– Lee Stranahan

195 Responses to “GennetteC Has The Right Idea: Who Is John Reid?”

  1. In comments, Gennette has consistently asked the most important question that’s on the table right now – the question that the Reid Doc Dump is meant to distract from.

    Who is the person behind the accounts of Nikki, Marianela, and John Reid?

    Wait…. what?

    h2u (0025d1)

  2. Seriously, Lee — you think that is the most important question right now? This smacks of your silly Patriot Games approach to Weinergate. How did that work out for you?

    h2u (0025d1)

  3. 2nd to last paragraph:

    “And that call was full of contractions”

    Assuming you meant “contradictions”? Typo?

    Just asking.

    Miranda (4104db)

  4. Typo fixed..

    And the Patriot thing worked out pefectly so far — there’s still not a shred, not one iota, of evidence that they are who they say thety are.

    Lee Stranahan (708cc3)

  5. I decided that Tommy Christopher is the guy behind the Nikki/Marianela/John sock puppets.

    He got wind of the Weiner/DM/young girls story (perhaps he followed Weiner, and was aware of the #bornfreecrew) and he was doing some undercover investigating.

    Once the dic-pic was released, he went into full CYA mode, defending Weiner, and covering his tracks.

    That’s my new crazy silly theory for the day.

    sarainitaly (daf506)

  6. No.

    Lee Stranahan (708cc3)

  7. Whoever was behind the sockpuppets suspected Weiner was engaged in the exact behavior we know him to be guilty of and were trying to get proof or they were targeting him hoping to smear him and got incredibly lucky.

    Mary Sue (1dc631)

  8. Well, I disagree with you Lee. I think all this sound & fury over “John Reid”, which he has recently created, and which GC is encouraging, is designed to make us focus on JR/Betty/MA etc.

    We know they’re fake. The only way to find out who they are is to ask – who benefits? Most of us are convinced by now that they were created to benefit Weiner in some way (I’ve posted about this several times).

    That’s where we need to look – who’s pulling the strings? GC seems to be directing lately. And certainly RAW had to have been involved significantly.

    BTW, the sockpuppetry seems an amateurish production. But surely the puppets involved are concerned about possible criminal charges, or at minimum public outing – which would mean lawyers must be consulted etc. Which costs $$$. Need to be open to that idea as well.

    Weiner’s not exactly a squeaky clean Boy Scout. Lots & lots of earmarks in his history.

    Miranda (4104db)

  9. And suddenly, Gennette becomes the focus again

    But her interactions with the sockpuppet and with Weiner are a huge part of this story.
    If she would be more open about her actions with Weiner, it would be much easier to get the focus off her or at the very least understand the appropriate level of focus.

    How these people all found each other, and why Weiner did what starchild expected him to do seems equally important to me. After all, Weiner was a Congressman.

    MayBee (081489)

  10. There’s no proof that the sock puppets were created to benefit Weiner.

    Nothing in the tweets or messages pevious to the pic being sent help Weiner.

    It’s clearly an attempt to..
    1) Gather info on Weiner
    2) Show his relationships with other women,

    Lee Stranahan (708cc3)

  11. No one here is arguing that the sockpuppet is anything more than that. People want to know who it is. People are still trying to pin down Gennette and her role in this entire debacle. It was Gennette and not Nikki that started the weenie tweets between the two. And that was a week and a half after they started conversing according to Gennette. What most of us can’t understand is why Gennette takes this stroll through Twitter on her own to attempt to ensnare the bornfreecrew or whatever. Why do it, especially after the fecal matter has hit the fan. Was the Weenie involved in getting her to do it is a question on many minds.

    As to the identity of Nikki/John Reid, which I think you believe is actually P, even knowing this doesn’t change what happened with Weenie. Weenie was under surveillance based on his public tweets and got caught after he made the mistake of tweeting his weenie to Gennette. High profile political people are always under surveillance by the other side so should we be shocked that Weenie was being surveilled? I don’t think so. Nikki/John Reid isn’t what brought Weenie down. It was Weenie, himself. Even if Nikki/John Reid were doing op-research and P is Nikki/John, what does that mean in the scheme of things other than solving an internet mystery?

    laddy (c56f2a)

  12. Solving remaining questions is a valid concern. And I don’t know where it leads.

    Lee Stranahan (708cc3)

  13. Lee – exploring motivation & the key question “who benefits” is important. Your (and Patterico’s) argument that we should all just want to examine the facts only goes so far (that’s what I’ve been understanding anyway). People aren’t robots. Even scientific theory not only involves the gathering of facts, but requires a hypothesis in order to make sense of those facts.

    Love your reporting & Patterico’s btw. You guys have been real reporters, rather than stenographers. Thanks for all your hard work.

    Miranda (4104db)

  14. Yeah lets stop focusing on the lying homewrecker Genette after she admitting sending multiple DM’s that show a clear agenda to obfuscate, lie, commit fraud, place blame on other parties through entrapment, and looked to profit off her actions. Genette is clearly part of a greater conspiracy. She has already used two journalists to shift blame off her and onto others. But we should definitely look elsewhere and ignore Gennette once again. Great idea Lee.

    Name Required (e72819)

  15. Yeah, your name is required. HTF are you?

    Lee Stranahan (708cc3)

  16. Lee I generally agree with you but on #10 you’re waaaaay ahead of the facts.

    Paul (59d3fd)

  17. The Koch Brothers are clearly behind all this. Or Rupert Murdock. Or Justice Uncle Thomas. Or Kkkarl Rove. It is so confuzzling.

    JD (109425)

  18. hmm rereading #10, specifically I mean the part where you say:

    It’s clearly an attempt to..
    1) Gather info on Weiner
    2) Show his relationships with other women,

    Remember that guy who warned against starting with the motivation and working backwards… that guy made sense.

    Paul (59d3fd)

  19. ==How these people all found each other,==

    MayBee, Yes. Such an unusual cast of characters to be thrown together and interconnecting merely by fate—.

    ==What most of us can’t understand is why Gennette takes this stroll through Twitter on her own to attempt to ensnare the bornfreecrew or whatever. Why do it, especially after the fecal matter has hit the fan. Was the Weenie involved in getting her to do it is a question on many minds.==

    laddie, Yes. Gennette just does not come across as the Man of LaMancha all on her own, does she?

    elissa (80aba9)

  20. One area of consideration that I do not recall having been considered involves W’s wife.

    For example, could one of her friends/associates have been trying to confirm/disprove reports or allegations that had begun wafting up to them? Could the denouement/results have been so extreme that the person(s) now wants never to be ID’ed? (Even if the person(s) had acted at the behest of W’s wife, or maybe sought to protect her w/o her knowledge.)

    Or, even more extreme, could someone who lost out romantically have sought revenge on W, or perhaps wanted to make his wife single again?

    My point is that everything I have seen has stayed away from his (very likely) uninvolved spouse. However, someone(s) may have acted in what was thought to be her best interest, and now seeks never to be ID’ed.

    jim2 (6482d8)

  21. There’s no proof that the sock puppets were created to benefit Weiner.

    Nothing in the tweets or messages pevious to the pic being sent help Weiner.

    It’s clearly an attempt to..
    1) Gather info on Weiner
    2) Show his relationships with other women,

    Comment by Lee Stranahan — 6/23/2011 @ 10:02 am

    How do you explain how they provably helped Weiner a lot? You know, that big letter? The one that did not leave any leeway for him being a bad guy? I think that’s a difficult burden to overcome.

    Not sure why I’m responding to Lee on this anyway. He admits he’s willing to lie to get to the story or poke someone into exposing themselves (he did in his radio program).

    In other words, he will lie to everyone in his audience about what he knows about John Reid or Patriot or anyone else, if he thinks that might somehow lead to some more clues coming out. He alone gets to decide which facts are significant and which are inconsequential enough to be lied about.

    That’s pretty stunning, and that kind of journalistic malpractice will bite him in the ass. This is an opportunity for self promotion for Lee, not for integrity. Really bugs me. Frankly, this story is not that important, and if Patriot is the kind of person he claims to be, it’s worth being careful with the facts.

    Paul’s right. Lee is being damn inconsistent with his own principles. this post offers nothing helpful, asks a question everyone is already asking (while pretending 200 comments are from fooled idiots who didn’t already want to know this) and then again just leaps.

    What’s your hard information about this phone call? Did it really happen, or are you lying about it? Show us your recording of the call, or any evidence it happened. When someone is caught lying, they have to provide more than their word in the future.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  22. How do you explain how they provably helped Weiner a lot? You know, that big letter? The one that did not leave any leeway for him being a bad guy? I think that’s a difficult burden to overcome.

    It can’t be explained. That’s just one of the many problems with Lee’s consistently peculiar approach to getting to the bottom of this saga.

    h2u (c2fd64)

  23. It’s very easy to show – andIK’ve already done so. Maybe not all in one place, so I’ll do that..

    And Dustin – no. I’ve never lied about the story. What I admitted to was a purely personal interaction — related to Patriot threatening me — and I’ve 1) talked about it and more importantly 2) discussed it with Razor at length. So if you have questions, either ask him ir ask me.

    Lee Stranahan (708cc3)

  24. Also Dustin — it’s an opprotunity for self promotion, not integrity? That’s a bullshit statement.

    Lee Stranahan (708cc3)

  25. That’s fine and dandy Lee but you’re still making assumptions and speculating… while warning others not to do this.

    Just man up and say you got ahead of the facts. No biggie.

    Paul (59d3fd)

  26. Calm down, everybody. Lee’s right. We need to find out who John Reid is.

    1) If only there was someone who was known to correspond with Reid, AND

    2) If only that person would read this blog and answer questions in the comment section, AND

    3) If only we could verify whether that person’s word should be believed, PERHAPS

    4) By determining whether that person has told the truth in the past,

    We could, perhaps, find a clue to John Reid’s real identity. It’s a shame that person doesn’t exist, though. I guess we’ll never find out.

    Oschisms (473d8f)

  27. I was going to write a post about this but I ‘ll try it in comments.

    Look at the conduct of the Nikki account PRIOR to the photo being sent on May 27.

    It’s clearly about gathering evidence about Weiner. It’s done in 2 ways — 1) talking to 3 women Weiner is known to talk to (Ehtel, Gennette and Ginger) and 2) by creating an unerage girl account that gets Weiner to follow back and talk to.

    None of this benefits Weiner.

    For some reason, people are confused about why Nikki would make a positive statement to Tommy Christopher.

    It’s easy — sockpuppet is a Pro-Weiner high school girl. Of course ‘she’ would be pro-Weiner. That is consistent.

    But it has NOTHING to do with why the puppet ws created in the first place. It wasn’t CREATED to give a false statement to Tommy — it was created to gather info.

    Lee Stranahan (708cc3)

  28. To repeat something I mentioned a couple of days ago – I got a PHONE CALL from the person who CREATED the Starchild account.

    http://leestranahan.com/weinergate-what-we-know-for-sure-about-bv

    You also posted that there is someone else (Tommy Christopher) who got a phone call, and he wrote a June 3rd story on the father/daughter/mother “Reid”.

    Gennette Cordova wasn’t mentioned in that article, I don’t recall. So it makes a lot of sense that a bunch of people who have been following the story are interested in what Gennette Cordova has to say now.

    ltw (370236)

  29. So it makes a lot of sense that a bunch of people who have been following the story are interested in what Gennette Cordova has to say now.

    Yeah, it’s not like we’re crazy to want to talk about the live aspects instead of repeat to ourselves we don’t know the answer to this other question we realized was hard to answer some time ago.

    I don’t think this is necessarily a diversion. There’s nothing to divert it from. I don’t even think Lee got a phone call.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  30. Just need to think openly without any ideological prejudice. Pro or Anti Weiner. It shouldn’t matter however it turns out. As long as it’s revealed.

    We know there are sockpuppets in play. We know that Weiner Sexted multiple times. We know that Gennette and Mike Stack are still around engaging in the story (in their own manner).

    And there’s the puppetmaster. Point is we should be open to puppets/master being AntiWeiner or ProWeiner.

    az5thdstrct (118fcf)

  31. 1)Does anyone…anyone…at this point disagree that AW sent a picture of himself to GC?

    If so, what evidence is there to suggest he did not send such a picture?

    2)If, we answer the question above that he sent the picture, isn’t the most important question unanswered at the moment…why did he do so?

    Did Betty, Veronica, Archie, Ethel, Lucy, Fred, Ricky, John Reid, Donna Reed or Lew Reed force him to take that walk on the wild side?

    3)If, he sent that picture…one of two things prompted it. Either….he got some sign, some signal, some interpretation of some word, deed or act that it was invited in some way….or…

    he is just such a demented, twisted, vile and despicable cretin…that during the course of polite and cerebral discussion about politics and the weather…he peeled off his clothes, got himself engorged and snapped off a pic without provocation.

    And the most important question of the day is…who is John Reid? Hardly.

    However, let’s avert our gaze from the obvious and continuing bizarre and inconsistent tale from those still seeking to blameshift inexcusable behavior that “requires rehab” to the non sequitor suggestion that this SERIAL behavior was “causally connected” to some sockpuppets who were “following” or “tracking” his behavior.

    The issue of trying to make this about the sockpuppets needs its own examination of motive, intent and adherence to journalistic ethics.

    Why is the story being written as it has? Whose side is the recitation of those facts intended to benefit. What evidence is being presented and what is being hidden, obscured, buried, distorted and parsed.

    At this moment in time…NOBODY on the side of “let’s attack the sockpuppets” is coming across as open, honest, objective and instead…they are presenting as evasive, slick, devious, and untrustworthy.

    They won’t answer simple questions. They dodge, bob and weave on every single instance where clarity and transparency are called for and requested.

    In short, they are playing games with the truth. If you have something…spill it.

    Otherwise, don’t object when people find shifty behavior…shifty.

    cfbleachers (19e5f4)

  32. Dustin,

    You’re saying I made up a phone call?

    So — Jen Preston got a call from the same person. Is she making it up, too?

    You’re in lala land now.

    Lee Stranahan (708cc3)

  33. And Sockpuppet angle legitimately in play. They put themselves into play

    Nikki, Marianela and Nikki’s fake ID’s.

    Nikki and Marianela’s fake twitter accounts/pics

    Scrubb of girls accounts

    Proposed Nikki calling Lee

    John Reid’s Twitter rant

    John Reid’s info dump

    az5thdstrct (118fcf)

  34. There’s no proof that the sock puppets were created to benefit Weiner.

    True…

    If you ignore the fact that they were colluding to help protect him.

    Details details.

    Scott Jacobs (d027b8)

  35. Quote Lee:

    Look at the conduct of the Nikki account PRIOR to the photo being sent on May 27.

    It’s clearly about gathering evidence about Weiner. It’s done in 2 ways — 1) talking to 3 women Weiner is known to talk to (Ehtel, Gennette and Ginger) and 2) by creating an unerage girl account that gets Weiner to follow back and talk to.

    None of this benefits Weiner.

    Lee how do you know it was someone digging dirt on Weiner and not one of his staffers trying to save Weiner from himself?

    You can’t say that from “the conduct of the Nikki account PRIOR to the photo being sent on May 27.”

    Paul (59d3fd)

  36. If you ignore the fact that they were colluding to help protect him.

    Details details.

    Comment by Scott Jacobs — 6/23/2011 @ 11:35 am

    Exactly.

    If someone says what Lee did, they are either uninformed or attempting to lie to us. And Lee is informed and already admitted to lying to us in the past.

    I don’t usually take liars on the internet seriously. Lee’s always spamming his various ventures, and we all have enough sense to smell the snake oil. But I’ve been worried about Pigford fraud and Pigford’s legit black farmers for seven years, so to see such a serious issue entrusted to someone who will probably be unable to handle the issue professionally kinda ticks me off.

    We can’t know everything, and having integrity in these interactions might be frustrating when we hit a brick wall, but lying when you run out of ideas is a one way ticket to Dustin’s sh*tlist.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  37. 2) by creating an unerage girl account that gets Weiner to follow back and talk to.

    An important piece of this IMO. If puppets proWeiner, why create underage accounts? Because they already knew AW would follow underage girl (Ethel)?

    Seems likely, girls accounts were to get Weiner to follow them and making them underage added to the potential damning scandal (that never materialized except for Weiner’s own flub)

    az5thdstrct (118fcf)

  38. Seems likely, girls accounts were to get Weiner to follow them and making them underage added to the potential damning scandal (that never materialized except for Weiner’s own flub)

    Comment by az5thdstrct — 6/23/2011 @ 11:49 am

    And of course, such an effort would be as noble as those Chris Hanson entrapment shows.

    So it completely makes sense. The only part that doesn’t is how they covered for Weiner, colluding with his staff. That part doesn’t make sense unless this was a dirty trick to fool Breitbart et al that just happened to take a risk with the underage factor.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  39. It’s clearly about gathering evidence about Weiner.

    That is speculative. Consider the possibility that we have some Weiner “groupies” who are making contact with each other. How might fans of some celebrity interact with each other, particularly if they are trying to be noticed by the celebrity?

    Note that what I have said is also speculative. The point is that there can be any number of reasons for the sort of communications that went on. To assume that it was for the purpose of “gathering evidence about Weiner” may be correct but it might not be the sort of “evidence” you are thinking about. That portion might just be projection of your own conclusion onto the actions of others. That is natural for people to do and is why I like Patterico’s approach of just putting out the data without attaching any “meaning” to it at this stage.

    It could well be that someone had noticed who Weiner was following, noticed a certain undertone to some tweets and decided to try to set him up to provide his own undoing but never got that far because Weiner apparently sends an open tweet that was obviously intended to be private. If that were the case, though, I might think the behavior pattern would be a little different but people’s personalities influence what they do and a little ego getting in the way of logic can add a lot of spice to the sauce.

    The possibilities are endless and speculation can go off into twisty turny caverns. Speculation on top of speculation gets weak quickly.

    Better to stick for now with what we know until more of the picture develops, in my opinion.

    crosspatch (6adcc9)

  40. Why is JohnReid9 keeping the story alive if he’s a rightie that tried to sting Weiner? How does he win?

    East Bay Jay (2fd7f7)

  41. “Just man up and say you got ahead of the facts. No biggie.”

    Alternately, not as cleansing/redemptive – just stop digging.

    MDr (fd1f4b)

  42. #39

    One reason is to get the attention back on Gennette. Take pressure off “him/them”. Because storyline (NYT, Stranahan, others) especially since the NYT fake ID story, was too focused on B+V

    az5thdstrct (118fcf)

  43. An important piece of this IMO. If puppets proWeiner, why create underage accounts? Because they already knew AW would follow underage girl (Ethel)?

    It’s important to remember EVERYTHING we have seen this person(s) do has been pro-weiner. All a rouse? perhaps.

    But if you’re going to assign a motivation to them not in keeping with their behavior, you’re going against everything they have said and done.

    And while everything they have said and done could well be a rouse, you’re still in the uncomfortable position of throwing out ALL evidence and relying on your gut.

    And if you’re throwing out all the evidence and relying on your gut you can hardly call it obvious. QED

    Paul (59d3fd)

  44. Good point, East Bay Jay. PatriotUSA76 vanished soon after Weiner was definitely exposed as a pervert… almost as if that was his goal all along. Like he’s a smart man who accomplished his goal and had no motivation to try to spin anything.

    But that’s not how JohnReid9 is acting. He’s acting like he’s not satisfied with the conclusions we’ve reached. And some on the left do want to ‘prove’ that this was all a right wing dirty trick from Breitbart, much as they handled the aftermath of the ACORN exposes. If they can find any hint of dirty trick, they will ignore the conclusions, just as they do when they try to pretend O’Keefe lied about his outfit in his stings.

    That’s the best explanation, even before add in that these people were on Weiner’s side at the most crucial moment in a completely unambiguous defense.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  45. Gennette is a real person. We’ve seen her. We know her real name. Goatsred is a real person. We’ve seen him. We know his real name. Anthony Weiner is a real person. Same with Ginger, Broussard, Lisa Weiss and Traci Nobles. We can guess about their motives, involvement, etc. But their identities are not in question. These are real people who really exist.

    However, Nikki, Marianela, “Mr. Reid” and “Mrs. Reid”… as well as Patriot… we have no idea who these “people” (or person) really are. And as for Nikki, Marianela, and the “Reid” parents, they all went to a lot of trouble to create false identities.

    So while many may be questioning Gennette’s motives, integrity, whatever they wish… she really exists. A lot more than we can say for the Reid crew.

    scoovy (d43653)

  46. I still don’t care. Why is this supposed to be important again? Because someone lied? Every politician in america lies every day. Because someone used a fake ID? They didn’t use the fake id to gain $$ or otherwise steal, so – while maybe a technical crime, who cares? Millions of college kids are using fake IDs every night to get into bars and buy beer.

    Is it interesting b/c it could be political “dirty tricks”? Again, this stuff goes on all the time. False flag ops, shadowing politicians, trying to goad politicians into saying/doing something stupid. Again, not a big deal.

    I feel like you all are a little obsessed here. Yeah, like everyone else, I like to get to the bottom of a mystery. But, c’mon. Enough.

    monkeytoe (5234ab)

  47. One thing these accounts may have been trying to do is out PatriotUSA to give him the goatsred public shaming and smearing treatment.

    If you set out to catch a Chris Hanson style do-gooder hunting a specific degenerate, what would you do? I think you would post as an underage minor involved with that pervert. Seems really obvious to me, and thus I’m pretty sure there’s no reason to take the inclusion of underage sockpuppets as evidence they were anti-weiner. That’s the honey in the honeypot.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  48. I still don’t care. Why is this supposed to be important again? Because someone lied? Every politician in america lies every day.

    Weiner has millions in his mayoral campaign. Someone is trying to manipulate us with this JohnReid account. The NYT is spinning this as right wingers. Lee is … well, you can see what he’s doing and it speaks for itself.

    It’s relevant that we expose all the dishonesty in this case.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  49. #42

    Don’t think I called it obvious. Think I said “likely”

    If they didn’t fake ID’s, Very willing to tell their side of the story, then disappear knowing they fake accounts BEFORE story broke.

    And that at least one of the puppets tried to solicit info to Bornfree and Breitbart.

    And tried to get Weiner to take Nikki to a fake prom to a fake HS

    I would be right there with you

    az5thdstrct (118fcf)

  50. Dustin,

    You are stating that I lied about a phone call — which would be an elaborate lie, backed by me, my wife and a NYT reporter.

    This is an outrageous accusation that you have no proof of. It comes amongst other smears by you.

    I’d suggest you prove them or apologize before this escalates.

    Lee Stranahan (708cc3)

  51. Comment by monkeytoe — 6/23/2011 @ 12:12 pm

    I still don’t care and I’m going to spend 200 words telling you how little this means to me.

    Well ok then.

    Paul (59d3fd)

  52. I’m not going to apologize, Lee. I stand by my word that you are a liar. Escalate away, but I’m not afraid of that.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  53. Who is the person behind the accounts of Nikki, Marianela, and John Reid?

    My first question would be: Do all three of these “people” appear to connect to the internet from the same region/city?

    That should be able to be discovered fairly easily.

    Weiner would be a national figure. Suddenly having such a “knot” of followers from one location might be interesting.

    crosspatch (6adcc9)

  54. >And tried to get Weiner to take Nikki to a fake prom to a fake HS

    Dude… you’re REALLY going to argue that it was a legitimate attempt to get a congressman to take a HS girl to a prom?

    Really?

    Paul (59d3fd)

  55. I said prove it, Dustin. I’m not a liar — I admitted lying in a specific situation. Go talk to Razor419 and see if they accept the explanation for it and my apology to them.

    To jump from that to me lying about a phone call I recieved is, as I said, outrageous.

    Your refusal to even attempt to prove it says a lot about it you.

    Lee Stranahan (708cc3)

  56. >I’m not a liar — I admitted lying in a specific situation.

    Well that clears that up.

    Paul (59d3fd)

  57. Paul.

    No, that’s my point. The theory is they tried to get Weiner to follow her/Nikki by using a ruse of a prom.

    You know, to start a mutual twitter follow and possible Dm’ing

    az5thdstrct (118fcf)

  58. Do you have a question, Paul?

    Says I’m ‘a liar’ makes a very different statement than saying ‘Lee lied when he was being threatened by someone’ – which is what happened. And the only reason Dustin (or anyone except Razor) KNOW I lied is because I told them.

    Lee Stranahan (708cc3)

  59. Dustin — go ahead ask Jen Preston if she talked to the same women I did on the phone.

    Do that, or you’re lying — deliberately spreding false information about me.

    And I’m betting right now you won’t follow up with Jen. So — ANYBODY ELSE — you ask Jen Preston about whether she also spoke to the woman that phoned me.

    Lee Stranahan (708cc3)

  60. @az5thdstrct

    EXACTLY… but why?

    Could it be a staffer trying to get the boss to f-up with him so they could confront him about his issues? (see also Newt G)

    Why would ‘some random guy’ know what Weiner was doing?

    The most LIKELY thing here (to use the word of choice ) is that whoever was doing this KNEW what Weiner was doing on twitter.

    –So–

    Either we have an anti-weiner person who somehow knew of Weiner’s bad behavior and tried to prove it

    –or–

    we have a pal (staffer friend etc) who ‘knew’ what was going on and tried to save weiner from himself. (and or was trying to stir stuff with the crew)

    —————–

    BOTH OF THESE ARE VERY PLAUSIBLE

    So… (ok here’s my point again…) to pick one over the other is getting ahead of the facts.

    How on earth can you deny that?

    Paul (59d3fd)

  61. Gennette may be asking the right questions, but her manner and behavior since before the Weiner pic tweet is anything but on the level, unsuspecting or credible. Her myriad of twitter accounts coming and going, even her ‘sorry Pat, I your email got junked” left just minutes after his post went up after he tweeted he emailed her and inability to answer any question directly.

    Not only is it weird that she’s toying around everything, it’s that she’s STILL toying around.

    If I were a snarky NYT’s reporter I wouldn’t just parrot GC’s agenda b/c there is a real chance of egg on face.

    Topsecretk9 (3ef846)

  62. “I still don’t care. Why is this supposed to be important again? Because someone lied??

    Ok, we’ve established that the “truth” is not important to you. Do you not care that the Left has tried once again to smear the Right? Shouldn’t we be interested in who did what to whom? No matter where the chips may lay?

    MDr (fd1f4b)

  63. >Do you have a question, Paul?

    Nope, just being a jerk.

    I’m just saying you’re getting ahead of yourself on this story. Are you trying to report the story or be part of it?

    Fine line there sometimes.

    Paul (59d3fd)

  64. If I were a snarky NYT’s reporter I wouldn’t just parrot GC’s agenda b/c there is a real chance of egg on face.

    Yes, and she’s on notice that any leaps of logic will be identified quickly, so I think Ms Preston might be cautious in the future. It would still be great, even from a partisan perspective like the NYT, to hear Gennette’s best and fullest account of this whole thing. They can issue the same sorts of disclaimers Patterico has.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  65. Paul,

    I never asserted motive. In fact, I was critical of the NYT for even IMPLYING motive.

    But it’s clear that they were gathering evidence about Weiner — all of your scenarios admit this. Pro or anti — the information gathering was happening

    Lee Stranahan (708cc3)

  66. Are you trying to report the story or be part of it?

    Fine line there sometimes.

    Comment by Paul — 6/23/2011 @ 12:41 pm

    Yeah.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  67. Paul,

    Did you read my earlier comment #29

    Maybe you shouldn’t jump out in front with your own judgement???

    Your arguing with me with an argument I’ve already made.

    az5thdstrct (118fcf)

  68. >If I were a snarky NYT’s reporter I wouldn’t just parrot GC’s agenda b/c there is a real chance of egg on face.

    *Cough* Jen P call your office *Cough*

    GNC played her like a fiddle.

    And if a 21 year old [known liar] can do it, how do you think JP holds up to an experienced pol?

    Paul (59d3fd)

  69. I’m reporting the story. I’m also part of it. So is Patterico. So is Tommy. So is Preston and Breitbart.

    Stop being a jerk. It doesn’t help.

    Lee Stranahan (708cc3)

  70. Dustin — put up or shut up.

    Lee Stranahan (708cc3)

  71. And Paul — there’s no evidence GNC played anyone. Have you talked to Preston much? You know what she thinks?

    Lee Stranahan (708cc3)

  72. Two questions that have not been answered:

    1) If Weiner was aware that he was being tracked by the bornfreecrew, why did he continue such reckless behavior?

    2) Who is/are the sockpuppet Reids/ Marianela and why did they contact Weiner’s women and later TC with pro-Weiner statements?

    If you put those two questions together, perhaps you get an answer to both.

    The sockpuppets may have been set-up to keep tabs on the Weiner women and bornfreecrew in order to protect Weiner. When the Weinerman screwed up with the tweet, the sockpuppets were put into action to defame his detractors.

    Proud Kaffir (6a2a54)

  73. GNC played her like a fiddle.

    And if a 21 year old [known liar] can do it, how do you think JP holds up to an experienced pol?

    How do you know this as fact? Did Preston reveal? I thought NYT alredy wrote a piece on Gennette that Gennette was not totally forthcoming with them regarding DMs/emails?

    az5thdstrct (118fcf)

  74. @Paul
    Please please please tell me one lie I’ve told this entire time. Can you tell me one thing I’ve said that has turned out to be a lie?

    Gennettec (28d98c)

  75. #1

    It’s clearly an attempt to..
    1) Gather info on Weiner
    2) Show his relationships with other women,

    Comment by Lee Stranahan — 6/23/2011 @ 10:02 am

    #2

    Paul,

    I never asserted motive.

    Comment by Lee Stranahan — 6/23/2011 @ 12:42 pm

    #3

    I’m not a liar

    Comment by Lee Stranahan — 6/23/2011 @ 12:25 pm

    well ok then…

    Paul (59d3fd)

  76. Where did I assert motive?

    Lee Stranahan (708cc3)

  77. You are right, Dustin, it would.

    Weird observation that just ran through my mind —

    it is kind of hilarious to see the NYT’s spending resources by way of snotty Preston courting a African–American co-ed with no answers and reporting on sock puppets barely tangential to the story- yet killed the entire Project Vote/ACORN/Obama voter fraud story they had in the can courtesy of Anita MonCrief then left her high and dry.

    Topsecretk9 (3ef846)

  78. Try this Paul — give an alternative explaination that ISN’T gathering info on Weiner related to women he was talking to.

    Any alternative — go!

    Lee Stranahan (708cc3)

  79. Waiting, Dustin….can’t do it, can you?

    Lee Stranahan (708cc3)

  80. Oh come now Lee… don’t insult everyone’s intelligence.

    I just blockquoted it.

    Paul (59d3fd)

  81. Kaffir — I’ve answered this, like twice today.

    Lee Stranahan (708cc3)

  82. Dustin — put up or shut up.

    Comment by Lee Stranahan

    You don’t get to tell me whether or not to shut up. Perhaps it would be best if you handled this like a man. You used the word “lie” in your program two evenings ago to describe your own behavior, and justified it based on your Moby Dick obsession with PatriotUSA76, and someone you were utterly wrong in suspecting.

    And now you are lying again to suggest I am incorrect on this point, and demanding an apology, Andrew Weiner Faux Outraged style.

    I am indeed greatly pissed about this, but you’re not going to provoke or intimidate me. You don’t have integrity, so I have nothing to fear from a thing you have to say. Go ahead and ‘escalate’ against me, whatever precisely you meant by that. Go ahead and demand more apologies and order me to shut up. I’m not seeing anyone rise to your defense, and I’m greatly encouraged by that.

    Please be aware that I intend to bring this up at least 500 more times.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  83. Paul — you quoted nothing I said about motive.

    I said what the actions CLEARLY were. I didn’t say what the endgame was of gathering that info.

    Lee Stranahan (708cc3)

  84. Dustin — go ahead and ask Preston about the phone call. You won’t, will you? You’re afraid to.

    So bring it up all day. Someone else will ask Preston, she’ll confirm what I said and you’ll look like an idiot.

    The only thing you can say I lied about is what I SAID I lied about — because that’s all I’ve lied about. And I’ve explained it.

    You’re either too dumb or too biased to admit that. Which is it? Is it both?

    Lee Stranahan (708cc3)

  85. Hey Dustin — here’s my phone number — 505 306 9678. Be a man and dial it.

    Lee Stranahan (708cc3)


  86. GennetteC Has The Right Idea: Who Is John Reid?

    Nope: Who Is John Galt…?

    :^D

    Smock Puppet, Libertarian, Iconoclast, Sea Monkey Breeder (f749f2)

  87. Look Lee, I don’t have time to play games today.

    My original post was:

    Lee I generally agree with you but on #10 you’re waaaaay ahead of the facts.

    As I said later, you can man up and admit you got ahead of the facts or you can play word games and look like a child.

    I don’t have time today for word games.. I’ve made my point. I’ll leave it to the readers do decide which path you took.

    I need to get back to real life for a few hours.

    Paul (59d3fd)

  88. It’s not a word game.

    I factually stated the ACTIONS — not the motive.

    Here’s the difference…

    “Nikki was gathering info on Weiner as part of a right wing plot to bring him down”

    That’s an action plus a motive.

    “Nikki was gathering info on Weiner”

    That’s an action. And it’s a fact. And it’s not a motive.

    Word games does not = ‘using words properly’

    Lee Stranahan (708cc3)

  89. So, can we assume that B&V and John Reid and Mrs. Reid are all one single person? That’s my theory. One person, most likely female.

    My other theory, with no evidence, of course, is that it is a female who was (s)texting with AW, possibly felt her ‘relationship’ with AW was unique (i.e. he wasn’t having Skype/Facebook/Twitter Nasties with just anyone) and maybe happened to notice on Twitter that he had a lot of young, pretty followers, and maybe wanted to find out if he was sexting with anyone else – jealousy, maybe? Thinking she was the ‘only one’? That might explain the attacks against others, including Gennette, by this person.

    Maybe not political at all.

    Just a theory.

    RB (064bd8)

  90. Gennette:

    You are back. Let me repeat what I sttated on another thread:

    A word of advice, if you are still reading. The reason all the other women immediately came clean, despite the embarrassment, was that they realized the info would drip out anyway. Best to come clean and be able to better control the story.

    Everybody believes you are one of the Weiner women. If this is true, it is best to come clean. If for some inexplicable reason Weiner found enough self control to never sext you, with the exception of the twitter pix that was a bizarre joke, no one will ever believe it until you release all of the exchanges with Weiner and Nikki.

    Light and truth are the best disinfectants. This will always follow you around until you put it to rest. Perhaps buried somewhere in the exchanges is the lead to unmask the sock puppets you so desperately want to find.(I have a feeling you have a suspicion as to who the sockpuppets are.)

    Proud Kaffir (6a2a54)

  91. RB — one person / entity behind all accounts and a woman involved, for sure, because of the call with Tommy.

    Lee Stranahan (708cc3)

  92. It’s clearly about gathering evidence about Weiner. It’s done in 2 ways — 1) talking to 3 women Weiner is known to talk to (Ehtel, Gennette and Ginger) and 2) by creating an unerage girl account that gets Weiner to follow back and talk to.

    None of this benefits Weiner.

    Really? I don’t agree. The Twitter comments could also be about getting Weiner’s attention at a time when there was no reason to think any of this would become noticeable to the media or the public.

    I started commenting online as DRJ long before I started blogging. I knew then and I’ve always known that my identity could become public, but I would rather that it didn’t. It’s contradictory but people can want their opinions noticed on the internet without wanting their identity to become public. My sense is the Reids aren’t using their real names but that hasn’t kept them from wanting to address the story, especially if they feel they aren’t being portrayed honestly. Even the fact that the wife initially spoke and now the husband has come forward seems plausible to me.

    DRJ (fdd243)

  93. It occurs to me, and I realize this will sound off topic, but it occurs to me that we didn’t see much about that Janice Hahn video on all the websites you’d expect.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  94. Dustin — curious; what are you getting at about the Hahn video? That’s an interesting observation.

    Lee Stranahan (708cc3)

  95. I’m gonna go with the ‘suspicious’ woman theory. I know Weiner made that woman in Vegas feel like she was ‘the only one’ – how many others?

    Plus, a dude totally would have just let this go by now and disappeared. Whomever this woman is, she’s obviously pissed/hurt/jealous…

    That seems a simple enough, and plausible enough, theory. I’ll just stick with that until I see evidence of otherwise. Plus, it’s easier on me – my brain is full 😉

    RB (064bd8)

  96. My sense is the Reids aren’t using their real names but that hasn’t kept them from wanting to address the story, especially if they feel they aren’t being portrayed honestly.

    Yes, and while I guess it’s a bit of a distraction to continue harping on Lee, but he knows his behavior alone would scare the hell out of someone like the Reids or the PatriotUSA character.

    And Lee’s probably a piker compared to the rest of the Huffpo types, isn’t he? Some people will be extremely dishonest, and have been, throughout this mess, and quick to draw conclusions such as ‘I know that guy is a liar because I don’t understand what he was saying’.

    It’s not possible to keep up with it, so any sane person will at least prefer to keep their family out of it. And yet, as DRJ notes, it’s not like that means they can’t address the story.

    If it turns out this family is what they claim to be, I will be among those who were wrong, but I understand the need to be anonymous when people will, to use Lee’s term “poke” you with lies they consider inconsequential.

    When we discuss what happened here, we should focus on those whose impatience and zeal led to exaggerations and smearing. That’s the atmosphere that has scared people from wanting to be completely upfront. It even makes Gennette’s attitude seem kinda reasonable.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  97. btw, DRJ, there was another shooting on the border. I would love it if you would resume your blogging, even at a zero comments blogger site, just because it is hard for me to keep up with some of these stories.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  98. It’s contradictory but people can want their opinions noticed on the internet without wanting their identity to become public.

    It’s not even contradictory — this is how the internet has worked since AT LEAST the days of IRC and AOL chatrooms. People love espousing their opinions and creating drama, but they don’t want that internet drama infringing on their “real” lives.

    I still haven’t gotten my head around Lee’s obsession with trying to ascribe sinister motives to people wanting to remain anonymous while still contributing to a developing scandal. If I were in Patriot’s shoes I would do the same thing!

    h2u (c2fd64)

  99. It’s been interesting. Seeing the various Weinergate “reporting”. Kinda seperates the wheat from the shaft. At the top tier – Breitbart, Patterico/Patrick, and Verum Serum.

    The next levels progressively degenerate into theorizing (based upon little fact, which is OK, if clearly stated as such), supposition (often based upon a tingle down their legs? But Ok, if clearly stated as such), WAGs (just because they had to present/report something?), and of course, the Prog spin machine.

    MDr (fd1f4b)

  100. I still haven’t gotten my head around Lee’s obsession with trying to ascribe sinister motives to people wanting to remain anonymous

    Let me explain it to you: he is trying to outrage the target of his assertions of “liar” and ‘sinister’ into coming forward. Simple as that. It’s a cheesy ploy, and the reason you can’t understand Lee’s leap of logic is that he didn’t really make that leap.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  101. Lee:

    It doesn’t make sense that the sockpuppets are ani-Weiner given that they smeared Breitbart and bronfreecrew to TC. TC did not run with the smears but the sockpuppets had no way of knowing that prior to making the accusations. The smears could have saved Weiner which is hardly what a group of anti-Weiner conservatives would want.

    If they wanted to cover themselves, thye would have simply gone away.

    Proud Kaffir (6a2a54)

  102. If they wanted to cover themselves, [they] would have simply gone away.

    BIngo. They’ve stuck around because they have not achieved what they set out to do. Patriot, to use another example of an anonymous — actually, I’ll say unidentified — player in this drama, successfully exposed Weiner (pun intended) and then disappeared from the spotlight.

    Isn’t that rational behavior??? It seems like it to me.

    h2u (c2fd64)

  103. If a person wanted to be noticed by someone, or be “more noticed” by someone, and happened to see someone else that they perceived was “more noticed” by that person, what might they do?

    Or if they thought they were the only one that was “more noticed” and were somehow special but sees some conversation going on with someone else, what might they do?

    Once you start using words like “gathering evidence”, it loads up the conversation a little bit. “Gathering information” might be a better choice of words. Evidence is generally used when you want to accuse someone of something. Information can be used for a lot of things.

    crosspatch (6adcc9)

  104. h2u is making a lot of sense to me on this.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  105. They’ve stuck around because they have not achieved what they set out to do.

    Speculation. Maybe they have stuck around because they didn’t really do anything wrong and don’t have any reason to leave and are enjoying toying with people. There are a lot of people who enjoy stirring up drama just for the fun of it or it is how they get what they want or get attention. They are addicted to drama, drama follows them wherever they go. They aren’t happy unless there is some drama. It is how they manipulate people and/or become the focus of attention. Heck, I was married to a person like that once.

    crosspatch (6adcc9)

  106. “Isn’t that rational behavior??? It seems like it to me.”

    Dude. The simple explanation never works! You gotta go to that yeol/ju/shi level judo.

    MDr (fd1f4b)

  107. Dude. The simple explanation never works! You gotta go to that yeol/ju/shi level judo.

    Oh, right… So Patriot is a female cybersex associate of RAW who was overwhelmed with jealousy, Nikki Reid is a reich-wing operative looking to exploit GC, and Colonel Mustard did it in the Conservatory with a candlestick.

    NOW it all makes sense!

    h2u (c2fd64)

  108. I’m done here.

    Watch how this unfolds.

    Lee Stranahan (708cc3)

  109. I suspect many of you should be prepared to make apologies to GennetteC and Jan Preston.

    Molon Labe (dc676c)

  110. Colonel Mustard did it in the Conservatory with a candlestick.

    It’s difficult to express just how unfortunate this phrasing was.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  111. “Comment by h2u — 6/23/2011 @ 1:47 pm”

    No, I actually agree w/ you. I should have used a “/sarc”. My bad. Why look for the most convoluted answer, when a simpler one is available.

    MDr (fd1f4b)

  112. I suspect many of you should be prepared to make apologies to GennetteC and Jan Preston.

    Seriously? Why would you suspect that?

    Cordova is clearly not telling the whole story of her interactions with RAW. There is no rational basis for RAW sending out a dicpic to someone not expecting one.

    Jen, not Jan, Preston assigned motive to Nikki and Marianela with no evidence: “Now there is evidence that one or more people created two false identities on Twitter in order to collect information to use against him.”.

    And you suspect that people will owe THEM apologies? Interesting…

    h2u (c2fd64)

  113. It’s worth noting that people who have tried to make good faith analysis of this event have asked Gennette for clarification, and been treated shabbily.

    That’s not to say she’s a supervillian, but the takeaway is not that people who asked reasonable questions of her owe her an apology.

    In fact, Gennette offered an apology to Patriot, which I think was justified. We’re on the outside here.

    Ms Preston’s article leaped to a conclusion of the intention of John Reid. Even if that guess turns out to be correct, she is not owed an apology for those who noted she made a mistake in doing so.

    I’m sure someone out there has been so harsh towards one or both of these women that they owe an apology, but by and large, the people asking for Cordova’s help understanding this matter are doing so in good faith.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  114. since i was asked in another thread, i uploaded my screengrabs I had of tweets i could find from betty and veronica earlier this month. not that most of the betty’s (nikki reid/@starchild111) I could not find, I mostly found lots of responses to her.

    http://milowent.blogspot.com/2011/06/my-screengrabs-of-nikki-betty-and-mari.html

    nikki’s behavior, from what is preserved, is just kinda weird, seemingly latching onto people that AW followed starting with Ginger Lee in March, but not asking to be followed herself until May 16.

    not saying this stuff is particularly useful, but i haven’t found any good cache posting of nikki’s tweets. i bet someone will link one in 2 minutes. haha.

    milowent (bc04ac)

  115. @ Dustin

    I have to agree that Gennette’s responses have been somewhat immature, not exactly forthcoming, and seem to be designed to keep the pot stirring. But being a drama queen isn’t a crime or even worth writing about. She seems to enjoy watching the game and doesn’t really seem interested in contributing anything that would clear things up and bring it to a resolution.

    crosspatch (6adcc9)

  116. I don’t disagree, Crosspatch.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  117. Hey Lee,
    I must have missed an important detail since the Congressman resigned, but I’m not following what’s going on here.

    Simply put, do you think that John Reid was someone trying to run a “sting” on Weiner? Or was part of a cabal to do the same, and was merely acting in character when he seemed to be defending AW?

    I know I’ve lost track of things, and apolgize if I’m missing something obvious.

    Bob Reed (5f2db5)

  118. It’s clearly about gathering evidence about Weiner. It’s done in 2 ways — 1) talking to 3 women Weiner is known to talk to (Ehtel, Gennette and Ginger) and 2) by creating an unerage girl account that gets Weiner to follow back and talk to.None of this benefits Weiner. – Comment by Lee Stranahan — 6/23/2011 @ 11:11 am

    Oh, I agree the sock accounts were used to gather info about Weiner, but you’re not necessarily correct that the info gathered couldn’t be used to benefit Weiner.

    It certainly could help the Congressman if Weiner himself used “Nikki” as a cover to see how much these other girls could be trusted to be discrete about their conversations with him.

    Remember, Nikki follows all the girls AW is seen interacting with and aggressively insinuates “herself” into their confidences & asks what if anything they DM’ed with Weiner about.

    If any of those girls blabbed to Nikki the content of his early messages to them wherein he might have been testing their receptivitiy to something more sexual later, he’d know then not to risk ramping up his lewd behavior with them, wouldn’t he?

    Dude’s got a serious personality disorder, but he’s not a complete idiot. Doesn’t it make sense that he’d do at least something to try to test his marks for their loyalty and their discretion gradually before he started getting more vulgar & tweeting the full monty out of the blue?

    When the $#iT hit the fan but when there still existed the very real prospect of AW pulling his $%^& out of the fire and surviving this, “Nikki” & her bogus parents were front & center vehemently defending AW, putting out the PR-firm certified statement attesting to his stellar moral character.

    But now that he’s gone from Congress, and their utility as character witnesses is moot, the more recent stuff put out by the reincarnated johnreid9 could easily be construed as an exercising tracks covering.

    Suddenly, the SockReids who had previously been so passionate about defending the upstanding Weiner to the nation via their unusual choice of a confidante TommyXtopher – again at a critical time when it counted the most – are now overnight conservatives dissing the NYT, demonizing Gennette for supposedly slandering their fake daughter’s fictious persona’s concocted name & obliquely singing the praises of Breitbart? Say what?

    No, the one person who’s most helped by making it appear that the former defenders of all things Weiner are actually closet conservatives who’d been out to get him from the first is, you guessed it, Anthony Weiner, the newly private citizen without any immediate job prospects.

    There are an awful lot of people out there who still desperately want to believe that even though he got caught dead-to-rights sexting all these women Weiner was nonetheless the victim of a nefarious right-wing plot as they originally believed. It’s hard for those Weinerites to give up a theory they were so invested in.

    Resurrecting the SockReids now to ‘inadvertently’ out their newfound closet conservatism with the laughably advertent reference to Breitbart as being one of the good guys helps Weiner in the left’s eyes and offers Weiner the hope of a political comeback someday.

    If starchild111 is Weiner, Weiner could absolutely have benefited from all of “her” very strange, convoluted actions. It may be the only way that starchild makes any sense at all, in fact.

    Is it possible he could have gotten somebody else to call you & Jen Preston to pose as starchild111, Lee?

    leilani (ccfc7e)

  119. GC has been playing this coy act from the beginning. If she doesn’t like the speculation this leads to, then she’s welcome to be forthright and explain in detail.

    radar (b15e37)

  120. radar, I’m inclined to cut Gennette some definite slack on her intermittent forthrightness. She’s understandably wary & doesn’t know who to trust.

    Just a hunch, but I don’t think she had any idea what kind of crazy hornet’s nest she was stepping into when she idealistically thought she’d do a good deed for one of her political heroes by volunteering to keep a decoy’s eye on the #bornfree people for him. She had no idea he was a perv.

    It’s important to keep reminding ourselves that 1) she’s only 21 years old and 2) of all of all the people involved in this story, SHE is the only one who has been upfront about who she is in real life. Gennette C is a real person going under her independently established true identity at a real school. She comes from a good family, her grandparents on her dad’s side are prominent & respected members of their ethnic community, her mom & a stepdad have both high profile positions in Seattle NGO’/muni Gov circles. Even her half-brother is somewhat well-known. And moreover, all of that info’s google-able in about 3 minutes.

    So even if she hasn’t yet had enough worldly experience to be wise enough to recognize that this whole affair brings the rest of her family grief they didn’t earn and that the one person who had any control over visiting that grief upon her & her family – Anthony Weiner – is a selfish scumsucking slimebucket who exploited her idealism as his means to get his rocks off in a room by himself all the way across the country, she has much more at stake in all this now than do the fake Reids or even the relatively still anonymous #bornfreeers.

    So I don’t begrudge her at all her wish to figure out how she got roped into all of this insanity & who might still be holding the lasso and I’m thinking it’s a mistake for any of us to assume she’s any less confused by this mind-numbing whirlwind she’s found herself in the middle & looking out of than the rest of us on the outside looking in are.

    leilani (ccfc7e)

  121. Um, no, Leilani. If Genette were just caught up in something, all she would have to do, is come out with everything. Case closed. But she hasn’t, so there must be something more. She is either hiding something, or looking to gain something for herself, by acting the way she has.

    Tutu (54ce64)

  122. She is either hiding something, or looking to gain something for herself

    There you go projecting your own thought process on someone else. That is actually quite common and natural for people to do but in many cases can lead you right off base. This person isn’t you so this person may not have the same thought process you have.

    Maybe this person is simply wasting everyone’s time just for the sheer fun of it.

    Maybe seeing so many people talking about it is the real reward the person seeks. Who knows. At this point it is pretty obvious that whoever the person is, they are more interested in playing games than anything else so at this point seeking any further engagement is likely just a waste of everyone’s time. A way though this without relying on anything this person might or might not have to say will probably have to be found. In other words, this person has made themselves irrelevant to the conversation.

    She has had plenty of opportunity to address the issues, has chosen not to, isn’t like to, time to take a different tack.

    My opinion.

    crosspatch (6adcc9)

  123. Well thanks for making my point for me. When you say “reward”, that is gaining something for yourself. So my point still stands.

    BTW, resist projecting you own thought process on someone else, me, if you are so sure that that is what I was doing to Genette :-)

    Tutu (54ce64)

  124. Just a few notes: Or maybe I just need to review everything again. Bear with me while I review some familiar ground.

    We have four sockpuppets (excluding the sockdog)

    *The Marianela (sockpuppet#1 ) attempted to entrap bornfreecrew member, goatsred (Mike), with her “evidence” about Weiner and her friend “Nikki (sockpuppet #2) and convince him send it to a conservative news media-
    *Marianela urges goatsred to take her “evidence to the media”– This fails

    *Marianele also attempted to entrap AB with with evidence on Weiner. AB also turns her down. –This fails

    *Marianela’s actions appear to have the intention of harming those monitoring Weiner-which are bornfreecrew and the media most likely to receive any “evidence” they pass on. A no-brainer, it will be either AB or Fox

    * The mother of Marianela’s “friend” “Nikki” or “Nikki’s Mom” (sockpuppet #3) goes to Tommy Christopher and claims that bornfreecrew was harassing her sockpuppet daughter Nikki.
    *She also claims that AB was attempting to talk her into lying about Weiner’s actions. She provides a professional-level media release which defends Weiner’s actions. Several of us recognize the type of jargon and syntex.
    *So Moma sockpuppet had gone to some lengths to defend Weiner and harm the reputations of AB and the bornfreecrew. Creating a three false identities complete with drivers licence takes some effort.
    *Again so far, the “Nikki’s Mom” sockpuppet is trying to help, not harm Weiner.

    *TommyC accepts “Moma’s” harassment charge but rejects her “AB is trying to get me to lie” accusation and publishes a story that attacks the bornfreecrew anti-Weiner group as the harassers of young girls. TC does however, tell the public what about the accusation of lying even as he discounts it. So the charge is out there against AB anyway. TC doesn’t use the normal governmental, academic or media standards of checking IDs. (I’ve never seen a department accept a faxed ID as proof) .

    *”Moma” has succeeded in turning attention away from “Weiner the pervert”, and replaced it with the creation of the image of “goatsred the pervert”. The NYT backs up this message.

    *All of this so far is clearly aimed at undermining the conservative media by the attempt to manipulate the bornfreecrew and Tommy Christopher. They succeed with TC.

    *Do the sockpuppets attempt to use their information to harm Weiner ? NO. If this was a political opponent’s ploy why not just disappear and say nothing at all? Weiner was already toast.

    * Now johnreid (sockpuppet #4) shows up to defend “Nikki”.
    Up to this point, the sockpuppet family is supporting the innocence of Weiner and so forth.
    **But “Papa” does not echo moma’s accusations against AB. Instead he praises AB in the newest releases.
    (These people really do think we are idiots)

    *Papa reverts back to the theme of Marianela’s sockpuppet–“let’s go take it to Andrew Breitbart”.
    *Papa’s broadside’s directly compliment Andrew Brietbart and speak of going to him for justice for Nikki.
    *Now we have a pro-AB sockpuppet from the same family that attacked him earlier.

    Please note that I’ve not done the hourly/daily examination that many have done here at Patterico. Maybe I’m off on some details or I’m missing a clue.

    But this pattern does not point at an operation to harm Weiner, but rather to support him and damage his opponents.

    bmertz (d77c52)

  125. Yes, and the more they switch sides, add new socks, and generally confuse the issue,the more and more people get tired of the whole subject. Too complicated to follow, dragging on too long. That seems to be their strategy. I don’t think it will work.

    Tutu (54ce64)

  126. @Tutu

    Yes, and the more they switch sides, add new socks, and generally confuse the issue,the more and more people get tired of the whole subject. Too complicated to follow, dragging on too long. That seems to be their strategy.

    Even sympathetic people are confused. When you try to explain it they give up and roll their eyes. Unless you read all the posts and follow the comment investigation/debate on a regular basis, it’s just too much for new readers.
    It would be extremely helpful to create some visuals for the newcomers. They get lost in the comments and changing sockpuppet names.

    I wonder if anyone could create some graphics for a timeline and a web.
    Hello, Patterico, would you post visuals if a volunteer produced them?

    bmertz (d77c52)

  127. Excellent summation of the SockReid family’s strangely contradictory actions, bmertz, which don’t begin to make any sense at all en toto unless you view them as working to benefit Weiner as events unravel and the Congressman’s circumstances change.

    leilani (ccfc7e)

  128. bmertz, this calls for a slick, highly interactive app.

    I have followed this since the night it broke, and I know that I can’t keep it all straight anymore. Your recap was pretty good, thanks.

    Tutu (54ce64)

  129. I would post visuals, timelines, etc. produced by volunteers subject to editing and approval. It needs to stay strictly factual. I will not, for example, post a timeline that says “Nikki revealed to be a fake person.” I don’t even know what a “fake person” is. Is JohnReid9 a Martian masquerading as a person?

    Patterico (339da8)

  130. Lee-

    I think you need to understand that a lot of people, including myself, didn’t really start deeply looking into this whole Betty/Veronica/johnreid9 stuff until the NYT article was published. A lot of us are still trying to get fully up to speed. Saying that we should believe you or the NYT simply because you or the NYT say so without adding more background information isn’t very helpful. For example, what are these real hard clues you are talking about?

    If Gennette is taking the time to answer questions, I really don’t see the harm in respectfully asking her questions. Yes, it may be a bit of a diversion, but if she’s telling the truth, nothing is lost – those of us who are behind the curve learn something and many of those asking questions probably aren’t in any position to help find johnreid9 in any other way anyway. If she’s not telling the truth or there are major inconsistencies in her story, then it might help us find johnreid9. Even Gennette might not know what she really knows about johnreid9 without thinking about how all things fit together.

    Please let us gather the facts and try to form our own opinions. Maybe you’re right. Or maybe you’re missing something important, too.

    cinyc (b9d828)

  131. Can we say “Nikki is a fake persona”?

    Tutu (54ce64)

  132. Kudos bmertz for your 4:30 comment. You have summarized many important points from these myriad threads. And, yes, they really do think we’re stupid. Furthermore, through whispers and planted items they continue to move forward with their agenda– and know with certitude that most of the MSM will either lose interest, get confused, or give them needed cover.

    elissa (1afff9)

  133. Thanks elissa,leilani and Tutu
    I’ve been following your examination and remarks as closely as time permits. I appreciate your comments and feel relieved that you think I have hit within the factual ballpark. It does get confusing unless I chart it.

    bmertz (d77c52)

  134. 95. Dustin. nicely put

    koam (7c1f46)

  135. I would post visuals, timelines, etc. produced by volunteers subject to editing and approval. It needs to stay strictly factual. I will not, for example, post a timeline that says “Nikki revealed to be a fake person.” I don’t even know what a “fake person” is. Is JohnReid9 a Martian masquerading as a person?

    Comment by Patterico — 6/23/2011 @ 5:12 pm

    Would you be comfortable if you provided the precise text? Or a trustworthy delegate if you don’t have the time? I am embarrassed to admit that I can’t volunteer to help produce the visuals after I made the request. Starting Monday, I will be submerged in work for the next four weeks. But, I am sure you won’t lack for a boatload of talented volunteers with this determined crew. Thanks for considering the idea.

    bmertz (d77c52)

  136. Fake *person* means constructed *persona* misrepresenting key details about biographical details, a person with no legal existence.

    If you can think of a better way to describe a sockpuppet – well, that’s one way.

    SarahW (af7312)

  137. Yes, SarahW, because all personas are, by definition, fake, I think fake persona describes these entities pretty well.

    Tutu (54ce64)

  138. And, yes, I was the Chair of the Department of Redundancy Department, UoBS.

    Tutu (54ce64)

  139. 117. leilani

    Nice, but the Reids aren’t overnight conservatives just because they’re pissed off at Jen Preston, NYT and would rather deal with AB/the BIGS.

    They still vigorously defend Weiner, despite all the things he’s admitted to.

    They’re pissed at Preston because she drew the wrong conclusions about Nikki’s motivations.

    They’re cool with the Bigs because AB didn’t publish the dirt on the girls that he had in his hands.

    And they’re cool with Tommy Christopher because he protected the girls even after he found out the IDs were faked.

    They like Patterico because he called out Preston for making her assumptions read like facts and poisoning the media well further by doing so.

    The Reids are libs. Serious libs. True believers.

    koam (7c1f46)

  140. @koam. it a rare lib that praises AB.

    milowent (0f8248)

  141. I was the Chair of the Department of Redundancy Department, UoBS.

    Do you mind if I steal this line for future use? The highest form of flattery etc

    bmertz (d77c52)

  142. It’s all yours, bmertz. Thanks for the flattery.

    Tutu (54ce64)

  143. @milowent #139

    @koam. it a rare lib that praises AB.

    I know I am knew to this mystery guys but I still find their actions pointed towards stinging goatsred and AB.

    If I could repeat a point from #123 :

    Up to this point, the sockpuppet family is supporting the innocence of Weiner and so forth.
    **But “Papa” does not echo moma’s accusations against AB. Instead he praises AB in the newest releases.
    (These people really do think we are idiots)

    *Papa reverts back to the theme of Marianela’s sockpuppet–”let’s go take it to Andrew Breitbart”.
    *Papa’s broadside’s directly compliment Andrew Brietbart and speak of going to him for justice for Nikki.
    *Now we have a pro-AB sockpuppet from the same family that attacked him earlier.

    I question if whether” Popa’s” intentions are merely to recreate the first sting attempt on goatsred and at whatever conservative media he took Marianela’s “evidence”. It fits their pattern.

    bmertz (d77c52)

  144. 139. milowent.

    Assume for a moment that it’s all real people, a real family of Weiner fans, interested in protecting the daughter, as the mom’s lengthy statement and dad’s tweet rant say.

    Tommy Christopher’s first piece is glowing in its praise of Breitbart because he refused to publish info on the girls.

    The Reids liked that.

    koam (7c1f46)

  145. knew = new
    Time for a break.

    bmertz (d77c52)

  146. 123. bmertz

    Awesome work.

    Can you clarify though, where Patricia Reid claims about Breitbart “AB is trying to get me to lie” ?

    I took it that Veronica said @goatsred was trying to get her to lie.

    Where is this said about Breitbart?

    Thanks

    koam (7c1f46)

  147. KOAM

    Think it was Betty telling Tommy she made the allegation that this group )led by @PatriotUSA76)had approached her and Veronica on behalf of Andrew Breitbart and Dana Loesch to manufacture evidence against Rep. Weiner.

    This allegation was Before Tommy knew Veronica was pitching info on weiner to Mike Stake. When Tommy saw the DM caps from Veronica to Mike Stack, Tommy confronted Nikki and mother. This is where they changed their approach to say Veronica was lying.

    http://www.mediaite.com/online/mediaites-sources-on-weinergate-betty-and-veronica-turn-out-not-to-be-who-they-claimed/2/

    az5thdstrct (118fcf)

  148. Comment by bmertz — 6/23/2011 @ 4:30 pm

    Excellent summary, if only NYT’s smarty pants Jennifer Preston could bring herself to do a little critical thinking past what Gennette C spoon feeds her like you did.

    Topsecretk9 (3ef846)

  149. “This is where they changed offered their approach to say Veronica was lying.”

    az5thdstrct (118fcf)

  150. We have four sockpuppets (excluding the sockdog)

    They can’t _all_ be sockpuppets though.

    A sockpuppet has to interact with the (ostensibly indepedent) puppeteer. (It’s kind of the whole point of the sockpuppet thing really).

    You can’t have puppets without a puppeteer.

    (Yeah, okay maybe I’m just being pedantic, but this isn’t the NYT it’s a blog, so there’s kind of a higher standard).

    piglet (191cc4)

  151. just random, has anyone noticed that @starchild1111 (extra 1) is “Cindy Reid”. No tweets, perhaps no connection, but coincidental last claimed name? I noticed it a week ago but I didn’t think the Reids would be coming back to haunt us like they have.

    my current thoughts on what happened: mr. sock was trying to get dirt on weiner following young girls, suspecting weiner was doing bad stuff with somebody. so after trying to get dirt directly DMed to nikki (and failing), marianela is created to dump fake evidence on #bornfree and get it to Breitbart to publish rumors (maybe even blind items like NY post? — remember they wanted to keep their (fake) names out of it, just say they are high school girls.).

    If rumors got published by AB, Mr. Sock knew that it would likely draw out bad stuff that actually had happened about Weiner. And initial blind rumor wouldn’t go anywhere and ever be proven, but would be replaced by actual bad stuff.

    THEN however, weiner in complete carelessness actually sends the dicktweet on eve of May 27 as a public tweet. MR. Sock does not EVER anticipate this stupidity, and leading to weiner claim of hacking. All this starts inevitable internet sleutherfest in whether hack or real. Nikki/marianela also come under scrutiny (because @patriotusa76 is immediately under scrutiny, whether that persona is connected or not), and risk is rising that story might get screwed up by press if it turns out fake people are also trying to frame weiner. i mean, if press reports that fake people are trying to sting weiner, public and all will assume it really was a hack.

    so, to avoid that problem, nikki reaches out to mediaite to set up story that AB did not publish their fake rumors (because we actually LOVE weiner). And since AB did not publish their false rumor, that “proves” that dicktweet was real and not a hack.

    in the meantime, real weiner revelations continue. there is a desire to avoid exposing mr. sock until after weiner resigns.

    but weiner resigns on 6/16. Jen Preston article outing fakes drops on 6/17 online. Why does mr. sock continue to assert they are real? I have no idea, other than fact that it may expose that other socks are aiming at other targets.

    ok, too much “loose change” in that post, but so it goes.

    milowent (0f8248)

  152. Milowent, except that GC has admitted sending Nikkiperson the DMs that Marianelaperson was offering to stack.

    Gc says she made uo lies about GC’s contacts with Weiner to draw Nikkiperson out on the subject of Andrew Weiner

    Sarahw (af7312)

  153. @151 – yes, I erred there. What Marianela was offering Breitbart via goatsred were DMs where GN claimed she did dirty tweets with AW.

    i really don’t care if GC did dirty tweets with AW, its not really relevant if AW sexted with 6 or 1,000 women at this point, he’s gone.

    milowent (0f8248)

  154. ok, too much “loose change” in that post, but so it goes.

    Oh, come on man, open your eyes and see the truth, man. The Bush regime was behind this, man, because TWEETS CAN’T MELT STEEL!!!!

    RB (3a32bf)

  155. Socks provide cover for Genette, Genette provides cover for AW. Nice little game.

    Tutu (54ce64)

  156. Comment by koam — 6/23/2011 @ 7:31 pm
    koam and topsecret, Thanks

    Just stopped back in and saw your note. I’m sure I am not nearly as up on the details as you are– and I haven’t been taking strict citation notes. I made a very informal note on that quote from one of the articles I read over the last few weeks. I’ll have to run a search for it tomorrow afternoon. Sorry for being a sleep wimp but its EST here, and I have a very early and long day tomorrow. If I can’t find it or I find that I misread the article I’ll post the correction back here in a comment. That’s what I deserve for rushing through the material. Sorry for the delay but I’ve hit the wall.

    bmertz (d77c52)

  157. We have got to get some visuals made to map everything out.. timeline, web,— and Patterico said he would put it up!

    I don’t know about you, but It helps me organize the information and put the pieces together

    They have software that lets a group work together on mapping a web. I wonder if we could load it onto a site where everyone could play with it, line up the tweets, visually map out the connections. We are just using words which limit group brainstorming.

    bmertz (d77c52)

  158. 146. az25thsdstrct

    thanks. that’s helpful.

    In that article, under the bold heading “What We Know,” Colby writes “There was an effort to fabricate evidence against Anthony Weiner,”

    What does that mean? It’s passive voice with the subject unnamed. (Lousy writing and reporting)

    Do we know specifically who attempted to fabricate what evidence?

    (And Marialena / Veronica offering (and never producing) evidence to @Goatsred does not fit that bill.)

    However, it is a statement that prejudices the reader to believe that the Reids are anti-Weiner.

    koam (7c1f46)

  159. Potential answer to your IP question:

    Do a Google Groups search for the IP address in question. It comes up with a name of a poster, largely on HyperScales Forum (network54.com), but also boards5.melodyshoft.com – in Spanish. Click on name associated with HyperScales Forum to get e-mail address. Google search e-mail address – there’s at least one website it links to. You can Google or Yahoo! search the IP address, too.

    Proceed with extreme caution due to this, and the fact that IP addresses can change. Consult IP address expert for advice on how to proceed. And consult other bloggers to see if there are any posts from that IP address on their websites.

    I smell a potential setup – maybe.

    cinyc (379ad3)

  160. Does anyone recall when Nikki tweeted something like, it’s sad when your idols don’t live up to your expectations… or something like that?

    Gennettec (28d98c)

  161. Gennettec-

    Yes, I do. What about it?

    cinyc (379ad3)

  162. I just wanted to know the date.

    Gennettec (28d98c)

  163. Gennette- May 18. Via Milowent.

    MayBee (081489)

  164. It really sucks when one of your idols doesn’t live up to expectations.
    May 17 from Twitter – Comment – Like – Share

    Assuming the FriendFeed website is accurate.

    cinyc (379ad3)

  165. OK, timestamps a bit different on different screen caps. Must have been late-ish on May 17

    MayBee (081489)

  166. Also purportedly from a Google search of the first IP address you tweeted: #Hacked – allegedly. Who is the woman?

    cinyc (379ad3)

  167. Re: 156 and the idea of a master timeline — I’ve been putting together a timeline to try to keep track of the various aspects of this story over the last few days. Most comes from previously published sources. It’s by no means comprehensive, but feel free to incorporate any of it for master timeline at Patterico.com.

    Timeline

    Greg (bc8186)

  168. Dustin — put up or shut up.

    Comment by Lee Stranahan — 6/23/2011 @ 12:45 pm

    I wanted to wait until the thread was dying before I answered this ‘request’. So here. Not to be dramatic, but consider that ‘putting up’.

    Anyone listen to the link above, primarily the second half, and explain to me how I’m out of line. How is Lee’s outrage, demand that I shut up, and weird ‘I’ll escalate this’ claim a reasonable reaction to a criticism based entirely on Lee’s own terms for his own conduct.

    Hearing Christoph (???) and Lee explain to eachother (last ten minutes or so) that if they suspect some real person might be PatriotUSA76 it’s now OK to break a few rules like… telling the truth… is something I can’t just pretend I didn’t hear next time an assertion is made. As they went on about how the lie is enough to infuriate or “poke” the target (and listening to the suspected PatriotUSA76 who turned out not to be, he was very upset), but somehow “really an inconsequential lie” to Lee (which is damn convenient), it makes me worry that I’ve been lied to about God knows what else. That is hard core rationalization, and actually just nutty considering that PatriotUSA76 is a relatively low priority (shouldn’t even be a priority for Breitbart’s affiliates, given that he came to them requesting anonymity).

    Keep DRJ’s point in 91 in mind when hearing Lee’s pompous tone towards the end where he asserts ‘only Patriot would do X!’ He’s not following the facts, but trying to arrange the facts to get where he just knows they must be going. That’s why he dismisses Razor’s right to be discussed truthfully as inconsequential. He’s too worried about his mission.

    What would have pleased me would be if Lee said “I made an egregious mistake that upset an innocent person, and I realize that if my audience can’t trust me I am completely useless as a journalist. It won’t happen again, I promise.”

    If that’s too much to ask, I guess I’m asking too much of Lee Stranahan.

    Anyway, I didn’t want to post this kind of response in the middle of a productive thread, so I waited for the next big email dump.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  169. @#166 Good job Greg. I will have to read it later on, but there are people here that would be a much stronger resource than me (koam milowent and several others) for checking it over.

    But I’m reposting it to draw attention to your timeline site. A good info start for making a visual. – Thanks

    Re: 156 and the idea of a master timeline — I’ve been putting together a timeline to try to keep track of the various aspects of this story over the last few days. Most comes from previously published sources. It’s by no means comprehensive, but feel free to incorporate any of it for master timeline at Patterico.com.
    Timeline

    Comment by Greg — 6/23/2011 @ 10:48 pm

    bmertz (d77c52)

  170. The more I think of it, the more I think the person who ends up being shown at the end of the process I described didn’t do anything. Doesn’t seem to fit. But it could fit the OMG China! John Liu! meme that’s been bandied about here and there.

    cinyc (cfc8fa)

  171. Cinyc- wait, I don’t under stand you. A fake girl profile would make things connect . Why are you thinking it is nothing?

    Sarahw (af7312)

  172. Hey Dustin — have you asked Razor419 what they think? I don’t know what they’d say.

    Also — be a man. 505 306 9678.

    Lee Stranahan (708cc3)

  173. Also — ask Joe Brooks or Ezra about the threats that Patriot was making against me, which is what triggered my trying to smoke out Patriot at that moment. You keep ignoring that. Ask them.

    And you still saying I made up the phone call from JG? I just want you to be on the record about it — especially since Jen Preston went on record about it last night on Twitter.

    Lee Stranahan (708cc3)

  174. Could be a false flag. Especially because of this:

    The guy’s last name is Milliken or something like that. A Google search brings up a jrank business profile. Here’s the Google page. Notice the ads. Here’s the cache from April 30, 2011.

    Someone bought ads to make Republican and Patriot appear on the page in the cache. The question is who. The answer is follow the money.

    cinyc (472b2c)

  175. 155. bmertz

    thanks for replying regarding my question at 145.

    Can you clarify though, where Patricia Reid claims about Breitbart “AB is trying to get me to lie” ?

    I took it that Veronica said @goatsred was trying to get her to lie.

    Where is this said about Breitbart?

    Thanks

    I’m still wondering. I posted elsewhere about Colby Hall’s (Tommy’s editor) phrasing that

    “There was an effort to fabricate evidence against Anthony Weiner”

    in which I don’t understand who made that effort and what the effort was.

    (Marianela’s tweets to Goatsred are not that effort in my eyes).

    koam (7c1f46)

  176. Hey Dustin — have you asked Razor419 what they think? I don’t know what they’d say.

    Also — be a man. 505 306 9678.

    Comment by Lee Stranahan

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    This is pathetic. Your radio program sounded like you were in Mom’s basement petting a cat. I don’t care to prove my manhood on your radio show.

    HAHAHAHA.

    You owe me an apology for you ‘I will escalate!’ and ‘shut up’ comments. I was right, I showed you, and you should be man about it and admit you were wrong, explaining that you will only tell the truth in the future.

    Also — ask Joe Brooks or Ezra about the threats that Patriot was making against me, which is what triggered my trying to smoke out Patriot at that moment. You keep ignoring that. Ask them.

    How about a hyperlink, jackass? If Patriot is threatening them, that’s good information to share with people in a way where we can see the threat. And call the police.

    I ‘keep’ ignoring that? You didn’t mention it. I don’t follow your claims about Patriot.

    You didn’t lie about Patriot76, Lee. You lied about someone you were sure was Patriot76, and wanted to smoke out, but turned out to be an innocent guy who was very upset. And why shouldn’t he be? You’ve made this entire story drastically more complicated and difficult to understand. You’ve lied and been paranoid and had radical theories defining everyone from Razor to who else (some UCLA student now) as Patriot.

    And all I know about Patriot is that he exposed a criminal and his request for anonymity was rejected for no apparent reason.

    I guess because he’s threatening you? Was his threat a ‘leave me alone dammit’ type of thing? That could also cross the line, and you should take this the Dallas police department so they can see if you’re serious.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  177. Lee
    Please do not pull a “betty smears goatsred ” on some poor innocent person without solid evidence that they did something illegal or unethical. Please provide such evidence before taking actions

    bmertz (d77c52)

  178. BTW, I only listened to the one show of Lee’s I linked about, I believe three days ago. It was terrible, promising lots of information about John Reid, but being 95% Stranahan talking about himself and very vaguely mentioning a phone call he got, but I don’t believe has reproduced (and to be honest, I don’t think the call even happened).

    I’m not sitting around, phone in hand, shaking at whatever Lee is talking about. I’ll keep making my point right here.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  179. Please do not pull a “betty smears goatsred ”

    Well, somebody smeared goatsred.

    I don’t know what Lee said about Betty, but a lot of people had to know that he was being demonized unfairly. Everyone who knew better and didn’t speak up deserve to be criticized for it, starting with Anthony Weiner.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  180. comment by koam — 6/24/2011 @ 8:43 am

    I thought someone posted the article link right afterwards. Was I wrong?

    bmertz (d77c52)

  181. lot of people had to know that he was being demonized unfairly. Everyone who knew better and didn’t speak up deserve to be criticized for it, starting with Anthony Weiner.

    I still think there is a lawsuit looming over that situation.

    bmertz (d77c52)

  182. Ok, break-time is over. Things keep growing even more interesting

    bmertz (d77c52)

  183. I certainly hope so.

    I’d rather contribute to Mike getting a lawyer on retainer than to some ‘let me whine about those LGF idiots.mp4′ or ‘let me teach you how to be just like me class’.

    The thing about Mike is that he’s not some coiffed professional political person, so he’s got details people can drag out to really make him look bad if spun. Like a mug shot that is completely irrelevant and comments like ‘I’d hate to be in an alley with this guy’ or whatever they were saying.

    If someone drags details out of context and is willing to lie a little, they can really ruin an innocent person’s life. So many liars in this story.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  184. Dustin and Lee– your personal spat is both uninteresting and disappointing. I assume I am far from the only one who feels this way. It’s also a waste of Patterico’s band width and our time because we have to read around it. Please stop. (Or at least carry it on privately.)

    elissa (2ea031)

  185. Elissa, I agree. Boys, please take it outside. Settle it by fisticuffs if you must – or by a simple man-to-man phone call.

    Miranda (4104db)

  186. Dustin and Lee– your personal spat is both uninteresting and disappointing. I assume I am far from the only one who feels this way. It’s also a waste of Patterico’s band width and our time because we have to read around it. Please stop. (Or at least carry it on privately.)

    Comment by elissa —

    Everything about Lee’s speculation and lying have been boring and uninteresting, Elissa. I understand you don’t want ugliness, but I will continue to note Lee admitted to lying until he convinces me he understands what’s wrong with that.

    I just can’t sit here and let people hear this guy in the future, not knowing he’s dishonest. It actually seems pretty relevant.

    for the record, I was asked to ‘put up or shut up’, and because the thread was progressing in a direction that had nothing to do with anything Lee said, I typed up my response and then waited until something new was posted before I ‘put up’.

    Anyway, I’ll try not to threadjack, but Lee’s behavior will be documented in some future threads if I find his integrity relevant to his argument.

    I have no interest in ‘man to man fisticuffs’ or radio whining or anything like that. The fact I want to demonstrate has nothing to do with how badass I am. You don’t have to take my word for it. Lee explained his rationale for lying, and that’s my argument.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  187. Dustin –
    Lee posted his phone # on at least one thread, and it’s available at his website too.

    Have you called him & talked to him, one-on-one? If not, why not?

    Don’t bother answering here. I’ll just read around y’all’s hate-rants.

    If you’re so outraged by Lee’s “lying”, then take it up with Patterico.

    Miranda (4104db)

  188. Miranda, I don’t tell Patterico how to run his blog.

    I reject your suggestion to call his show. For Christ’s sake I do not care about that.

    Your use of scare quotes around the word lying is weird, since that was Lee’s own term for his lying when he rationalized it to Cristoph, explaining that because he thought that man was PatriotUSA76, it was OK to ‘poke’ him until he got as upset as he was in the program.

    It’s not in controversy that he lied. Or that he’s OK with it. His response has been to warn me he will escalate, to question my manhood, and to tell me to shut up. He’s acting like an idiot, in other words.

    Anyway, I don’t tell Patterico how to run his blog. I’m not trying to get him in the middle of this.

    Have you called him & talked to him, one-on-one? If not, why not?

    Why do you think? Why would I want our conversation documented for all to see? Because Lee might … “poke” me by distorting a private phone call on his program? What kind of moron would give someone he knows acts that way the opportunity to act that way? Not me.

    Anyway, Miranda, I mean disrespect to you or Elissa. I completely understand the wish to not have fights. I don’t want one. If you look, I gently criticized Lee, and he took tremendous umbrage to it. I’ve laid out specifically what I’d like from him: a legit apology that gets to the heard of the value of integrity, and a discussion of why he knows this isn’t acceptable behavior. Typed into this thread would be great.

    Then I’d consider dropping it, though I’d keep my eyes open to see if he meant it.

    That’s how it works in the ‘Army of Davids’ media. We’re keeping our eyes on eachother. There are no deciders or gatekeepers. I have a valid point and because it involves Lee’s audience’s trust, I see no reason to make a one on one phone call about it anyway.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  189. I’m done. Dustin won’t contact me. Nuff said.

    Lee Stranahan (708cc3)

  190. And really, how off topic is it?

    Sure, I want to get to the heart of this story. I think someone is conducting an amazing manipulation. I wouldn’t be surprised if Patriot is, in fact, the same as Nikki. I guess I Wouldn’t be surprised if Patriot is a do gooding right winger with a child custody issue, either.

    There’s a much bigger story here than Patriot. That story is Tommy’s distortion of the facts / or his ability to be duped, Ms Preston’s assumptions and frankly unjustified spinning, and various other media people handling this story in a way that is just plain awful for getting the facts.

    I’m certainly not alone in being tired of Lee’s seeing Patriot76 behind every bush. He’s switched from being sure it’s Razor to this UCLA lady, but it’s been a lot more than that. I actually don’t think that speaks ill of Lee. He’s got a hunch and he’s sure it’s right and he’s pursuing it to the end of the earth instead of just letting the facts lead him. OK. That’s hard to do, though, and when you’re that obsessed, your basic integrity is tested. Lee was frustrated that he couldn’t get Razor to come forward, thinking he was Patriot, and successfully drove him out by telling lies.

    And it turns out he wasn’t Patriot. Oops.

    Do you see why I’d think that’s relevant to this story? As far as I’m concerned, it’s more interesting than anything Gennette has shared with us, or what Weiner was doing with other consenting adults on twitter.

    Each of us should follow basic moral rules when we opine, speculate, describe, report, etc. One big big big rule is ‘tell the truth’.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  191. I’m done. Dustin won’t contact me. Nuff said.

    Comment by Lee Stranahan —

    Of course, Lee. You’re not man enough to talk to me in the open.

    Just kidding. That’s Lee-logic.

    But we’re in contact right here in the open. Anything you have to say to me, you better say to me right here, in print, in the open, where you can’t lie about what we say, or delete it, or just pretend it never happened.

    I’m not like you Lee. I’m not going to spend an hour trying to BS anybody. I will directly say what I have to say, and it’s going to be the truth. That’s why when you warned me you were going to ‘escalate’ I didn’t care, and when you say you’re ‘done’ I don’t care.

    Am I really asking for a lot here? Own what you did, in text, say you understand why it was a lapse of judgment, and challenge yourself to be better in the future.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  192. @koam
    Sorry for the delay. Normally I don’t blank on where I read the material- but hey it is my vacation guy.

    “she [Betty’s Mom] made the allegation that this group had approached her and Veronica on behalf of Andrew Breitbart and Dana Loesch to manufacture evidence against Rep. Weiner.

    Mediaite Explanation on Fake Betty

    bmertz (d77c52)

  193. 192. bmertz

    Thanks for responding.

    So genius Colby writes that after “knows” that the IDs were faked that he still “knows” that there was an effort to fabricate evidence against Weiner because the same people who faked their IDs said so.

    koam (7c1f46)

  194. @koam #192 You are welcome. Glad to be of help

    So genius Colby writes that after “knows” that the IDs were faked that he still “knows” that there was an effort to fabricate evidence against Weiner because the same people who faked their IDs said so.

    They know it is nonsense. They know we know it is nonsense. But they can get away with reciting the same line unless a major national voice contradicts their message with solid evidence. Pat, Ace and associates are doing an amazing job, but they don’t have a big enough bullhorn.

    I don’t see how this stand-off will change. Not while this evolving story remains largely unpublicized, and while we don’t have live body as a direct witness, Documents are not going to break through the media indifference. Even with documentation, the chances of them burying it on the back page are very high. Now, if goatreds sues the pants off them and provides some courtroom drama; that might help. I think part of this indifference (even from allies) is related to the convoluted plot-line. You and I might find this mystery fascinating. But I am seeing a widespread reaction where the eyes glaze over, and they can’t understand the implications of this situation. We need a “hook” to grab national attention. If that is a goal? If the goal is to haul the crooks into the courtroom; that end is a growing possibility.

    bmertz (d77c52)

  195. Have you ever read a sh**tier sentence by a news editor than “There was an effort to fabricate evidence against Anthony Weiner,” without any real proof, in a story that is about validating his reporter’s efforts, in spite of major gaps in his reporter’s work and logic? Colby’s citing the word of the sources who just got caught lying to Tommy…and putting that in the “WHAT WE KNOW” part of the “clarification” story. F-ing amazing reporting & editing.

    http://www.mediaite.com/online/mediaites-sources-on-weinergate-betty-and-veronica-turn-out-not-to-be-who-they-claimed/2/

    koam (7c1f46)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.7530 secs.