JohnReid9 Disappeared Again . . . But He Sent Me More Stuff; UPDATE: He’s Back
Alleged flirty stuff between Gennette and Weiner. As always, I will take no position on the validity of all of this. The reader gets to decide.
But I’m tired, so I guess I’ll put it up tomorrow. I tweeted some of it earlier. Unlike before, GennetteC is denying some of these.
I guess I’ll have to show the screenshots.
Again, I had hoped to get JohnReid9 to go on record with his explanations as well. We seemed so close . . . and then he disappeared again.
But maybe he’ll be back again tomorrow. If he is, I’ll be sure to ask him some of those questions y’all have.
Has there ever been a more interesting story than this? If you have an example of one, shut up, because you’re wrong. This one wins, hands down.
UPDATE: He came back. I’m getting more.
You guys are going to lose me, however, to work.
UPDATE x2: JohnReid9 is in the comments section of this thread right now. Go ask him whatever you want.
None of those tweets were inappropriate. She was just making that up to goad Nikki into revealing her master plan.
JD (318f81) — 6/25/2011 @ 4:32 amSome personal opinions I have about all of this:
1. if there were some “right wing” group attempting to get some dirt on Weiner and he accidentally public tweeted a dic pick, I would think they would be all “We *knew* he was doing this!” and would be bragging up their attempts to catch him at it.
2. Weiner seems to be in a mode where he was attempting to recruit “woodwork” in which to hide. He apparently wanted to get a bunch of high school kids following him. This would make it much easier to hide the ones he was “flirting” with among a whole crowd of others, provided he could keep public and private tweeting straight.
3. He could have used alternative accounts to “vet” his marks. So it could well be that Nikki was Weiner. If I were Weiner and I were doing that sort of thing, I wouldn’t bring up Weiner’s name, what I would be doing is see how eager my “mark” is to bring up my name. If they bring it up to me, they would potentially bring it up to anyone that happened to contact them. In fact, I might be willing to speculate that the only people who got pictures of Weiner were people “Nikki” or someone else like “Nikki” were following.
Who else got Weiner pics. Who started following the recpipients of them shortly after they followed Weiner?
crosspatch (6adcc9) — 6/25/2011 @ 4:46 am2. crossspatch
1. that was #bornfreecrew and I think the reports are that they were bragging before it happened…and when it did happen, they spread the news to the group and AB. So that would be bragging, right?
2. maybe
3. unclear. but you are saying if the mark mentions Weiner then the mark is a blabbermouth and doesn’t get pics? Gennette mentioned Weiner and got a pic. I don’t get it.
koam (7c1f46) — 6/25/2011 @ 5:32 amIt’ll be interesting to see what she denies. I’ll bet that as soon as you get anywhere near the truth, she’ll cut off contact with you.
Click. Check. Click.
∅ (e7577d) — 6/25/2011 @ 6:14 amIf you get a chance, I would ask JohnReid9 about the nature of the DM’s between starchild111 and GennetteC right before starchild111’s request to follow RepWeiner. The request appears to have been made 2:29am.
http://www.c-spanvideo.org/person/36182&apptype=order
starchild111
ltw (370236) — 6/25/2011 @ 6:20 am@RepWeiner i’m kind of shy to ask this but i’ve been a fan for a while will u follow me? #WeinerYes
02:29 May 16
Interesting how JR9 takes a page from AB’s book and dribbles out info strategically. First DMs that GC confirms. Builds credibility. Now more. Let’s see how it goes down. If GC ducks, they’re probably real. Cause you know she won’t be quiet if they’re fiction. GC’s been on the record as doing nothing wrong. So I expect that she’ll deal with them as they come. She has so far.
koam (7c1f46) — 6/25/2011 @ 6:35 amAnd perhaps she has an interesting explanation. Sometimes our first notions of what things mean are off and we’re greatly helped by GC’s narration. At least it’s food for thought.
Still a great story being here as it comes out, bit-by-bit. Who’s real? Who’s not? Who’s lying to who? and why?
koam (7c1f46) — 6/25/2011 @ 6:38 amOT – Doesn’t it seems like Mr. and Mrs. Weiner have disappeared from the face of the Earth?
I guess being a Dem means when you want to hide, none of our self-appointed “guardians of the public’s right to know” will look for you too hard.
sherlock (62f2cf) — 6/25/2011 @ 7:29 amGennette flirting with Weiner explains why he tweeted the dick pic.
Temper Tantrum (02fe1b) — 6/25/2011 @ 7:58 amGennette only reveals information when you catch her off guard. She stumbled the other day because the question came out of left field. I think she has a prepared script for the usual questions.
Sherlock (d77c52) — 6/25/2011 @ 8:41 amIn fact, I speculated that she might have access to a handler.
bmertz (d77c52) — 6/25/2011 @ 8:44 am________________________________________
1. that was #bornfreecrew and I think the reports are that they were bragging before it happened
I guess there is a possibility that some rightist person or persons tried to get the goods on Weiner. But that’s assuming the mystery person believed the brazen behavior of the guy wasn’t outrageous or pathetic enough in the first place. IOW, they’d have to be the type who thought the unsolicited sending of crotch shots alone wasn’t controversial enough. Such photos, in their mind, in order to really count, also would have had to been forwarded to under-aged girls.
A good percentage of people on the left do admire the notion of tolerance for tolerance’s sake and are comfortable in dumbing down standards. So dick shots would be no BFD to such folks, particularly if they had been seen by adult women only.
I’d say if any individual or group has been doing a contortionist routine in order to look like they were involved in authentic, sincere communication with Weiner and deem it necessary to create an elaborate ruse to conceal their true identity, odds are they’re of the left, not of the right. Of course, anything is possible. So I won’t be totally surprised if it turns out the twitter and email accounts actually are tied to people doing an impersonation of scroungy, clueless liberals. But, again, the smell test tells me they’re of the left, regardless of whether they truly are who they claim to be.
Mark (411533) — 6/25/2011 @ 8:52 amShe didn’t get her money’s worth, even if the handler was free.
∅ (e7577d) — 6/25/2011 @ 8:54 am“Unlike before, GennetteC is denying some of these.”
Privately or publicly? Is there a link handy?
tier (4a939c) — 6/25/2011 @ 8:59 am*not spam* 🙂
It’s looking more likely that Gen is the puppet behind the puppet
Lord Nazh (821ae1) — 6/25/2011 @ 9:00 amPerhaps
bmertz (d77c52) — 6/25/2011 @ 9:05 amHow many college students will walk into a room of older, hostile adults and allow them to interrogate her for hours? It is obvious that many commenters as well as Patterico have legal training or work in fields with related skills. She is outgunned in both experienc and training. Gennette may be ambitious and naive, but her voluntary presence strikes me as unusual for someone in her age group. Unless, she is not visiting here alone and unadvised
I followed the Weiner story and thought it more a story about the mainstream media double standard.
A lot of this post-resignation stuff seems a little bit of inside baseball.
Would someone please give a Cliff Note summary to get me up to speed, please.
Arizona Bob (aa856e) — 6/25/2011 @ 9:31 am@Arizona,
bmertz (d77c52) — 6/25/2011 @ 9:49 amI made a bullet list to argue a point earlier, and got the impression I was in the ballpark from some of the more informed people here. Unfortunately, I don’t have the means to copy the time link right now so I am reposting the whole deal. This is my version of the bare bones- but more detailed explanation can be found in Patterico’s earlier posts, and at many of the commenters’s blogs.
So:
9 TT
It would be sad to learn that GC really did flirt with RAW.
Then went to the mat for him again and again, positioning herself as a different kind of ally.
Her explanations have largely been reasoned.
koam (7c1f46) — 6/25/2011 @ 9:51 amHer explanations have been explanations.
MayBee (081489) — 6/25/2011 @ 9:57 am12. Mark
#bornfreecrew publicly tweeted prior to the photo thing that RAW was doing too much online, in their view, with younger women.
And they were right.
As soon as the pic was tweeted to GC, Patriot saw it and captured the moment…before RAW could delete that, delete all his pics, and post that he’d been #hacked.
Patriot sent AW’s slipup to AB and other bornfreecrew.
So they did think his brazen behavior was pathetic and called it that. Tried to warn the women and girls of it.
For that they were called right-wing crazies and stalkers.
But it turned out they were exactly right about it.
And RAW was doing a lot of this in public. You could see who he chose to follow on Twitter (and FB too i guess)…and it was a short list, and a large proportion of that list who weren’t political writers, etc. were young, attractive women from outside his district. That was publicly available info for anyone who bothered to go look.
All of this is true without the existence, real or otherwise, of Nikki or any socks. Just with the real harem of fangirls he had going…in various stages of grooming from straight politics, to insider familiarity, to slight flirting, to undies, to no undies, to cybersex on chat & phone.
So I don’t get your points.
koam (7c1f46) — 6/25/2011 @ 9:59 amI think I’ve seem the new York times reporter of the June 17th Article tweet to the effect that if you find out who johnreid9 is you have a story. However if the main source of the story doesn’t hold up…that would be as compelling a story. This bothers me. Hopefully the main source is thinking of that…or their parents and loved ones. Everyones future is just as important as anyone elses.
Ltw (77a7c9) — 6/25/2011 @ 10:00 amShe answers some questions, but she has not fully explained herself. Nor is she likely to explain herself, until she gets
Tutu (54ce64) — 6/25/2011 @ 10:05 amout of this whatever it is that she’s looking for.
22. tutu
Use names not She
koam (7c1f46) — 6/25/2011 @ 10:07 am@Arizona – and this says it all regarding Weinergate:
Weiner has no defense, NADA
bmertz (d77c52) — 6/25/2011 @ 10:08 amIf snooks flirted with Mr. Anthony my disillusionment will be complete.
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 6/25/2011 @ 10:10 amSorry about that, I’m trying to multi task. Thanks for the heads-up. She = Gennette.
Tutu (54ce64) — 6/25/2011 @ 10:10 amToday I am trying to decide what I think about GNC’s early objections to bloggers noticing the young girls AW followed (you should be ashamed of yourselves), and her calling Patterico’s stories about Betty, Veronica, and Ethel “deplorable”.
MayBee (081489) — 6/25/2011 @ 10:11 amGennette answers some questions, but she has not fully explained herself. Nor is Gennette likely to explain herself, until she gets out of this whatever it is that she’s looking for. Gennette is either trying to stay relevant by dripping out partial answers, or perhaps trying to stay safe
Tutu (54ce64) — 6/25/2011 @ 10:17 amToday I’m trying to decide if I might could be a more prosperous pikcahu by cutting foolish purchasings.
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 6/25/2011 @ 10:22 amGreat point. If Gennette lied to “Nikki” because she recognized her as a sockpuppet; then why criticize Patterico for attacking fake people? Either Gennette’s actions indicate a political handler or she did not want Patterico digging into a situation that would reveal her actions or motivations. Such as working towards gaining Weiner’s patronage in DC. Possibly an internship with one of the major media groups.
bmertz (d77c52) — 6/25/2011 @ 10:23 amAll of her encounters with weinertweeter were not inappropriate, especially that one that shocked her, and the one where a comely college coed got a married congressman’s private cell number and began texting him.
Note she continues to ignore all requests and questions about the content of the communications post weinertweet, and what they were discussing prior to the weinertweet. We should just all believe that despite all evidence to the contrary, weinertweeter was a perfect gentleman only with GennetteC, and never engaged in sexuaLly charger communications, despite having done so with at least 6 other similarly situated women contemporaneously. She was special, to the point where despite not having much of a relationship, GennetteC was able to convince a sitting congresscritter by leading him around by his weenis to mess with a tweeter who claimed to be a high school girl and seemed determined to talked about Rep Weinertweeter which was easily ascertained by the fact that she never brought up Rep Weinertweeter and gosh he just sent me a picture of his wenis out of the blue.
JD (306f5d) — 6/25/2011 @ 10:24 amJD, if your hypothesis is correct, then I think we’ve hit a brick wall. GNC would have deleted all of those tweets, texts, etc. that incriminated her as soon as she made the “NO inappropriate contact” declaration (Weiner’s were gone already I assume). Might also explain (if she’s lying, which I’m not concluding) why she’s confident enough to track and engage the story. The only proof is gone and she knows it.
Lincolntf (85daa5) — 6/25/2011 @ 10:30 amLincoln – since she took down multiple twitter accounts, starting shortly after the shocking weinertweet, we will never know.
JD (306f5d) — 6/25/2011 @ 10:32 ami don’t have a firm opinion regarding whether or not, Weiner exchanged sextweets with Gennette. I have a growing conviction, however, that Gennette had far larger goals than (possibly) messing around with a congressmen. Whether Gennette was using tweetsexing as leverage or rather by offering to help Weiner entrap enemies; she was after career advancement. This young women is extremely naive and lacks ethical standards, but she is not a dim bulb.
bmertz (d77c52) — 6/25/2011 @ 10:39 amDid someone say earlier that Twitter will always have a copy of those Tweets (or at least the ability to find them)? Maybe there’s a one-in-a-thousand chance that lawyers and cops get involved (vis a vis the threats, perhaps?) and end up producing them?
Lincolntf (85daa5) — 6/25/2011 @ 10:39 amDon’t want to throw everyone off, but was just wondering. If AW is sockpuppet Nikki, that could explain the following:
1) creation of sockpuppet Nikki, to “vet” GC and maybe others(as in comment 2 by crosspatch)
2) creation of Nikki’s mom sockpuppet, which strongly defends AW with professional-level media release (hmmmm);
3) creation of dad sockpuppet – but this is more complicated and requires speculation.
AW might be upset with GC and figures he has future in politics. AW also does not want anyone to know he created sockpuppets. AW finds himself in weird position of trying to prove a sockpuppet is not a sockpuppet! This would explain why it is so difficult for dad sockpuppet to prove he is real. Also, why he keeps “disappearing” according to Patterico (maybe wife Huma walks in while he was communicating with Patterico and had to cut convo short rather quickly.) Also explains initial release of docs to prove credibility first.
So why did GC get the pic (in comment 3 #3 by Koam)? Again speculation, but maybe GC spoke with AW about Nikki being a sockpuppet as GC said she did. Maybe GC and AW were working together. If so, and GC was at least flirting with AW, maybe he thought there was more there.
What do you guys think?
baldeagle2 (ef2bc3) — 6/25/2011 @ 10:41 amSo John Reid has vanished again, and Genette is incommunicado?
How interesting.
Are they consulting some mutually known third party? (Pure blue-sky theoriziing, here).
Dianna (f12db5) — 6/25/2011 @ 10:54 am#36 – baldeagle
So who actually spoke on the phone with Tommy Christopher? And, however poor the reproduction technique, where did 3 fake id’s come from?
That keeps nagging at me.
Dianna (f12db5) — 6/25/2011 @ 10:58 am“And, however poor the reproduction technique, where did 3 fake id’s come from”
Good point. Having never done it before, it would take me a while to come up with three passable fake ID’s, even considering current tech and not being a total dumbass. I wonder how crappy the ones used were? Like college drinking ID quality, or “fool immigration” quality? Maybe a novice with obvious cut-and-paste tell-tales quality?
Lincolntf (85daa5) — 6/25/2011 @ 11:07 amIf it was a fax of IDs, you wouldn’t actually have to make a fake id. Just photoshop the image of an id and print it out.
MayBee (081489) — 6/25/2011 @ 11:10 amRe: 17, bmertz, how are you making the conclusions that:
* Marianela tried to convince Goatsred to send her info on Weiner to news media
*Marianele also attempted to entrap AB with with evidence on Weiner. AB also turns her down.
While I’ve seen screencaps that show Marienela telling Goatsred that she has DMs from Weiner to Nikki, I haven’t seen any screencaps that show her suggesting what should be done with this info.
Are you saying there are screencaps showing her say, “Let’s take this to Breitbart” or something like that? Or evidence of her going to Breitbart directly?
If you have such info, can you post it or links to it here? Thanks.
Greg (bc8186) — 6/25/2011 @ 11:18 amDianna – Tommy X could help a lot on this story. But how could anyone rely on anything he says? BTW, TC was silent for days, and is now back to publishing stories at Mediaite. No accountability – whatsoever.
For you hard-core Weinergate fans who didn’t get a chance to hear the interview by Larry O’Connor of Patterico, TC and Lee S too, here it is.
http://stagerightshow.com/2011/06/15/06-14-2011-an-epic-3-hour-show-guests-steven-crowder-tommy-christopher-patterico-and-lee-stranahan/
It’s very long, obviously. And the audio isn’t great. About the 1st 1/2 hr comedian Stephen Crowder is interviewed, then Patterico calls in. Tommy C ducks & twists & turns & spins. And is his usual rude, obnoxious self.
Pay special attention to the last part of the interview – Patterico’s last question is what kind of contact did TC have with Betty et al – was it phone, email, twitter, in person. Larry repeats the questions, but leaves out “in person” – TC answers – “Um ….yeah … all three” after hesitating. It’s about 2 hrs 16 min. into the interview.
Also TC claims that the way that Betty et al found TC was through Twitter – following Breitbart’s & TC’s twitter convo’s.
Miranda (4104db) — 6/25/2011 @ 11:19 amI think (50-50) that TC said he saw a Skype image of the Id’s. Which I took to mean that he was looking at a live image, having the person hold them up, turn them over, zoom in and out, etc. That may have been conjecture that I took as fact, though. The thousands of posts are all beginning to meld together into a confused blob.
Lincolntf (85daa5) — 6/25/2011 @ 11:20 am@Lincoln — I thought all tweets were archived at the Library of Congress now?
If someone deletes their tweets and DMs, does that mean it’s deleted from the Twitter database or just from their stream?
PSUbrat (6b1f79) — 6/25/2011 @ 11:20 amPSUbrat-
Lincolntf (85daa5) — 6/25/2011 @ 11:29 amYup. Took one second looking on Bing. All Tweets are archived by the L.o.C.. Except, and this might be the crux, “those that are Private, which would remain so”. It doesn’t explicitly say they are deleted, but they “remain Private”. Until when, I wonder.
For me the final aha moment about Gennette came on a thread here late Thursday night when, in response to a question about her reaction, she actually claimed she had never read TC’s original piece about Nikki and her mother. (Gennette said she had had neither time or interest –and when she was provided the link, she basically refused to go there and said something like, “What could I learn from it?”) She blew off that line of inquiry in a huff.
This of course is after two weeks of her commenting on blogs both day and night, pretending to answer our questions, and endlessly repeating her goal of needing to find out the truth about who’s behind fake Nikki. This is after weeks of her having cruised the internet communicating both with Weiner and (allegedly) other assorted girls including Nikki while being mercilessly harassed by bornfreecrew and ultimately being the unfortunate recipient of the now world famous dick pic. But she has absolutely no interest in seeing what TC has to say about any of that? No interest in seeing the seminal article about the backstory of Weinergate? Riiiight.
This ridiculous and not believable stance from Gennette serves to make everything else she says questionable and essentially useless. It is not looking so good for Gennette and her partner/fellow hoaxer(s).
elissa (f29705) — 6/25/2011 @ 11:49 am@ Baldeagle2
That sounds a little far fetched for a guy who was sexting multiple people with little regard for maintaining their needs. Or even operating with any sort of safety net. It’s all about AW’s needs. He went silent on many of those women for long stretches of time. It was inevitable that at some point some woman was going to be offended by that and become jealous. What’s important to remember though is that these women are also progressives. That’s why they’re so wishy washy about being angry about his bad behavior. It’s why we get conflicting statements from the Reid family. (I still think the Reid’s and Marianele are all sock puppets)
Johnny 5 is alive (5ccc5e) — 6/25/2011 @ 11:50 am1. that was #bornfreecrew and I think the reports are that they were bragging before it happened…and when it did happen, they spread the news to the group and AB. So that would be bragging, right?
No disrespect,but the answer is simple. All you have to do is search my tweets. On or around May 5th, Patriot told me that he had some info from someone at a top five blogging site that AW had been embroiled/ going to be embroiled in a
goatsred (c1f2f8) — 6/25/2011 @ 11:54 amscandal with a woman/women and pictures
He asked me to tweet it first and I did.
I tweeted it as a “blind item” like in the gossip columns, with out mentioning AW’s name.
A day or two later, he started throwing in NEpols in saying such things as ” RW, Rangle,BFrank, is this you…? Then started RT’ng every time with those names involved. Then,the names of all of us who used to communicate and say “whats up” every day.
If you search my tweets with any one of those “#bornfree” members (not patriot tho)you will easily see this. You will see that right after this he disappears for a few days/is welcomed back by one member of the group.
He is the only one talking about it.
Some of my tweets recognize or acknowledge it this
rumor but contain no such bragging whatsoever.
Use snapbird dot org to trace these tweets please.
@ MayBee
That’s a good point. That’s where TC really dropped the ball and put into question his competence as a journalist. That must be what he’s the most upset about. That he got duped but it was his own fault for not doing due diligence in verifying his source. Sounds like he’s gone from big J to little j journalist.
Johnny 5 is alive (5ccc5e) — 6/25/2011 @ 11:58 am==Today I am trying to decide what I think about GNC’s early objections to bloggers noticing the young girls AW followed (you should be ashamed of yourselves), and her calling Patterico’s stories about Betty, Veronica, and Ethel “deplorable”.==
MayBee–heh. It’s been more than an hour since you posted that. So have you decided yet what you think about those statements by Gennette?
elissa (f29705) — 6/25/2011 @ 11:58 amWhy did he do that?
Obviously, the implication is he wanted you to take the fall for this. Do you have any enemies that might have motivations to screw both you and Weiner?
Dustin (c16eca) — 6/25/2011 @ 11:59 amAre you saying there are screencaps showing her say, “Let’s take this to Breitbart” or something like that? Or evidence of her going to Breitbart directly?
If you have such info, can you post it or links to it here? Thanks.
Comment by Greg — 6/25/2011 @ 11:18 am
They were just stating that they had info and messages from him that they wanted me to see.
goatsred (c1f2f8) — 6/25/2011 @ 12:02 pmRAW flirting with GC, so they claimed.
They kept up this ruse until Saturday AM of the scandal ( the night before) and when I went to DM for the files, Marianela had “unfollowed” me and would not respond.I openly tweeted her and never heard from her/him again.
I have all the caps. Now that the girls are proven to be frauds, I am willing to share one or two,depending on what your question is.DM me and we’ll see what we can do.
Goatsred, re: initially tweeting the rumor “blind” on May 5 — are you saying Patriot had already told you that it was about Weiner, and that you were just tweeting it blind, or did he give it to you blind?
Greg (bc8186) — 6/25/2011 @ 12:07 pmElissa- still trying to decide
Does anybody have a cache of Patriot’s tweets?
MayBee (081489) — 6/25/2011 @ 12:20 pmWhat day did he say something along the lines of “There may be some fun to be had today”? to the #bornfree crew?
This of course is after two weeks of her commenting on blogs both day and night, pretending to answer our questions, and endlessly repeating her goal of needing to find out the truth about who’s behind fake Nikki.
Exactly. She seems like a very nice, bright girl that is as typically liberal as most 20 year old who haven’t figured out they can’t fool all the people all the time. Anything touching on her post-packagepic contact with Weiner or his staff she either ignored or danced away from with too-clever-by-half misdirection.
The coverup is always worse than the crime, and in this case I don’t think the original acts were a crime (though extremely scummy by Weiner). I’m fascinated by this story but I do think the CYA efforts of Weiner and possibly his staff were either illegal or highly embarrassing at a minimum.
Given that Gennette was reading and posting his the second Patrick would update information, she obviously is worried about the entire truth coming out.
Kaisersoze (c86eb0) — 6/25/2011 @ 12:31 pmHe said it May 16, MayBee.
Greg (bc8186) — 6/25/2011 @ 12:32 pmTypo, should be “posting here the second Patrick posted information”.
Kaisersoze (c86eb0) — 6/25/2011 @ 12:32 pmRe: May 16, it was a busy day for all involved:
At 1:18 am, Gennette Cordova DMs the following message to Starchild111: “Hey did you say one of your friends was [Ethel]?” Then, in a subsequent DM, she writes, “Sorry. That was totally random but I just saw that this politician just started following her today and he follows me. Small world.” Starchild111 replies in some fashion, then Cordova writes, “Yeah! It is. I love him. Just ask. Maybe he will, who knows? Haha. I think I’m gonna hit the sack. I have an early class. Lame:” Then, in a subsequent DM, “Oh, I just looked. He’s doing this hashtag thing and following people I guess? Idk. I never asked him to follow me.” (Source: Patterico.com)
Missing here, of course, are Starchild111’s replies. Note that it’s apparently Starchild111 who notes Weiner by name; Cordova never actually says Weiner’s name in any of their exchanges. Note, based on Cordova’s response that includes the phrase, “Just ask,” that Starchild111 has apparently asked Cordova if she should try to get Weiner to follow her too.
At 2:29 am, Starchild111 tweets, “@RepWeiner i’m kind of shy to ask this but i’ve been a fan for a while will u follow me? #WeinerYes” (Source: CSPAN Twitter feed)
At 8:46 am, PatriotUSA76 tweets, “There could be some great fun on the agenda today…” (Source: Google Twitter cache)
Weiner starts following Starchild111. Between 9:03 am and 10:26 am, he allegedly sends her 17 DMs. In them, he makes references to “Republican trolls” and encourages Starchild111 to recruit more Twitter followers for him. (Source: Patterico.com)
Note: These messages from Weiner have not been confirmed as genuine.
At 11:49 am, Starchild111 tweets, “@RepWeiner Thank you so much @GennetteNicole!!!” (Source:CSPAN Twitter feed)
At 12:21 pm, Goatsred tweets, “@repweiner #YesWeiner.” Eight minutes later, he realizes he mixed up the hashtag and tweets again, sending the message, “@repweiner #WeinerYes.” (Sources: Twitter, Twitter)
Starchild111 tweets that Weiner is following her on Twitter, announces campaign to get him to be her prom date. One of her tweets: “Follow the best progressive Congressman @RepWeiner he is a democrat who fights for us & against Republican trolls!” (Source: Patterico.com)
At 1:21 pm, Patriotusa76 tweets: “RT Starchild111 Please tweet and follow @RepWeiner & tell him to be my prom date>>Poor girl. We should warn her.” (Source: Daily Dose)
At 3:42pm, PatriotUSA75 tweets, “Well we have a good deed planned. Really we do” (Source: Google Twitter cache)
At some point in this day, Gennette Cordova exchanges more DMs with Starchild111. A screen-capture at Patterico.com documents three of them, time-stamped 10:47, 10:51, and 11:04, but it’s not clear if it’s AM or PM. In these DMs, Cordova talks about things she’s said to Weiner, including that she’s been “pretty obsessed with him,” that he’s “[her] idea of a perfect man,” that he “looked cute” on Rachel Maddow’s MSNBC show. (Source: Patterico.com)
Gennette says in the comments section at Patterico.com that she believed Starchild111 was “fake” at this point, and that the exchanges she described with Weiner didn’t actually take place. Instead, she suggests, she was trying to “bait” Starchild111 with these statements.
The next day, four members of the BornFreeCrew tweet messages to Starchild111, telling her that he is “not as good as you think” and that they have “proof of what he does & worry.” (Source: Google cache of Twitter)
Greg (bc8186) — 6/25/2011 @ 12:36 pm***<br
thanks, Greg. Just found it.
@Merreee1@redrivergrl@goatsred@gk68@tamale102280@mikemadden59@ jihadihunter There could be some great fun on the agenda today…Mon May 16 201111:46:07 (Central Daylight Time) via Web in reply to @Merreeel
MayBee (081489) — 6/25/2011 @ 12:37 pmThe day Gennette decided to bring up Weiner to Starchild
MayBee (081489) — 6/25/2011 @ 12:39 pmAlso I’ll make a prediction that since DM’s from her are out there now, Gennette won’t post here again because she can’t refute them.
Kaisersoze (c86eb0) — 6/25/2011 @ 12:41 pmInteresting point, MayBee.
DRJ (fdd243) — 6/25/2011 @ 1:11 pm43. No, Tommy saw a skype-fax of ID images.
SarahW (af7312) — 6/25/2011 @ 1:31 pmI see az5 on Twitter saying it’s illegal to forge documents like drivers licenses.
That may be true, but I know you can go into any tourist shop on the Hollywood strip and buy fake gag CA drivers licenses. You can get one that says McLoven, Justin Bieber, Paris Hilton, etc.
Not sure if they sell Hollywood High ids.
Also, people involved on movie and tv sets have all kinds of fake ids for their characters. Fake police badges, fake drivers licenses, fake passports. They whip them up in prop rooms and I know that isn’t illegal.
MayBee (081489) — 6/25/2011 @ 1:37 pmSo the idea that it would be illegal to photoshop the image of a drivers license to show a reporter seems pretty out there.
MayBee (081489) — 6/25/2011 @ 1:38 pm48. That is a classic Bill Burkett style maneuver. BB made predictions and prognostication and speculations about a possible breaking scandal — when he himself was breaking the scandal and knew exactly what was going to break.
SarahW (af7312) — 6/25/2011 @ 1:39 pm27 Maybee Oh I remember that! It was that day I missed a flouncind.
That was an awfully bratty flounce, too. If involving the girls is so terrible, she was ready enough to use them. Also, she doesn’t even think B&V were for real.
Comment by SarahW — 6/13/2011 @ 1:41 pm
SarahW (af7312) — 6/25/2011 @ 1:45 pmSo, did the #bornfreecrew “big fun” promise come before or after
SarahW (af7312) — 6/25/2011 @ 1:51 pmGennette introduced the subject of Weiner to Nikki? I’m unclear on that point.
Thanks, #62. Seems like a waste of Skype.
Lincolntf (85daa5) — 6/25/2011 @ 1:53 pm27 maybe
I’ve heard about this. Do you have links?
koam (7c1f46) — 6/25/2011 @ 2:34 pmRight but I wasn’t talking about the #bornfreecrew, I was talking about the current sock puppet theatre. If they were some “wingers” out to get Weiner, they would really have no incentive to stay hidden. They would feel vindicated. They would be out there celebrating their “win”. But they aren’t. They are hiding, playing coy, using faked credentials, etc.
This smells to me like something some of the operatives of Media Matters would do. Maybe not MM but something of their ilk. MM would probably provide means of covert surfing to their operatives, too, which is apparently what at least one of the surfers was doing according to the IP addresses give by Stranahan. That would explain a few other things in the back of my mind, too.
This is just a “smell” mind you. Nothing more.
crosspatch (6adcc9) — 6/25/2011 @ 2:35 pm30 bmertz
VERY GOOD THINKING. this is fruitful territory
koam (7c1f46) — 6/25/2011 @ 2:36 pm31, JD
Flippin’ hysterical…and smart
koam (7c1f46) — 6/25/2011 @ 2:37 pmI am sure there are more groups than MM that would benefit from feeding a conservative outlet a phony story, but they are at the top of my cui bono list. Who else orbits in that same solar system?
crosspatch (6adcc9) — 6/25/2011 @ 2:38 pmWhy did he do that?
Obviously, the implication is he wanted you to take the fall for this. Do you have any enemies that might have motivations to screw both you and Weiner?
Comment by Dustin — 6/25/2011 @ 11:59 am
goatsred (c1f2f8) — 6/25/2011 @ 2:42 pmThere are a lot of things that happened during the smearing and having people researching it then till now.
I realize now that I was set up. But, I also felt like “why is he asking me to tweet it if he’s so sure”? wouldn’t he want the credit?
I acted foolishly and never thought about the reprocussions of my actions.
Enemies from other days on the internet come to mind and some little coincidences are starting to become very apparent to me.I know that most have read about my background and some ran with the info and posted it up everyday,everywhere that they could. But, a few have gone away from their blogs now that the mystery is going away from me and my involvement to other points of interest in this story.
So yes, I can think of a few. And these could be the sockpuppets of another sockpuppet (I hate that frikkin term). I can think of a few shining examples that may not like the sunlight shining on them.
53.Goatsred, re: initially tweeting the rumor “blind” on May 5 — are you saying Patriot had already told you that it was about Weiner, and that you were just tweeting it blind, or did he give it to you blind?
goatsred (c1f2f8) — 6/25/2011 @ 2:45 pmHe told me it was about Weenie.
38.
Dianna means to say that Tommy Christopher spoke to at least one woman on Skype, perhaps on the phone (according to Colby). The details they provide are unclear but it is at least one female voice.
Colby’s explanation of this that tommy spoke extensively via telephone with “these sources” makes us wonder if Nikki was ever on the phone.
These are among the questions for JR (who spoke to TC).
Of course it will be easier to get an answer from JR than it will be from TC or CH.
koam (7c1f46) — 6/25/2011 @ 2:47 pmWhat’s with all the cryptic bs, goatsred? Are you in fear of Alicia Pain? Have you been threatened?
∅ (e7577d) — 6/25/2011 @ 2:50 pm41. Greg
The screen caps between MA and Goatsred include demands that AB and DL keep the girls’ names out of this. That they can be called HS girls but not by name. It makes mention of Andrew and Dana.
koam (7c1f46) — 6/25/2011 @ 2:50 pm43. Lincolntf
Tommy says he saw IDs via Skype. Colby said TC used telephone and email. Jen PReston said Fax of IDs.
What someone made of this was that the Skype was voice-only talking on the computer between TC & Patricia Reid. Perhaps for anonymity of location, etc. Maybe PR was paranoid that even a *67 call to Tc could be traced. ..so she insisted on Skype..that’s conjecture…as is this: on Skype you can fax a document over to another Skype user.
So that’s how TC could have seen IDs via skype without it being a video call (in which you’d expect he’d see Patricia…and if she refused that and he didn’t tell us, he’s officially a *uck.)
So it may be safe to assume if we don’t have complete contempt for TC’s intelligence and honesty that Skype was the mode of transmission of voice and documents because (conjecture) PR was paranoid and didn’t want to use phone numbers.
koam (7c1f46) — 6/25/2011 @ 2:55 pmTrue.
However, if Starchild is Patriot and he intended to use that account to get info from Weiner, he sure managed to scare him off (as he had w/Ethel).
MayBee (081489) — 6/25/2011 @ 3:28 pmkoam- she made those particular comments on her now-deleted Twitter account.
MayBee (081489) — 6/25/2011 @ 3:29 pm_______________________________________
So I don’t get your points.
That it’s safe to assume the ambiguous background of certain people involved in Weinergate isn’t similar (at least ideologically) to James O’Keefe and Hannah Giles and their exposé on Acorn. IOW, if there is any masquerade still going on, it’s due to people of the left trying to conceal their original motive in salvaging — and not further tarnishing — Weiner’s reputation.
Mark (411533) — 6/25/2011 @ 3:49 pmLet me float a theory out there.
1) Gennette is (still) hugely pro-Weiner and here to see what is being said about her and others. She is only sharing a portion of what she knows and is giving misdirection on the key question of her coordination with Weiner and his office post-picturetweet. To which you say.. “Duhhh”
2) The JReid, et all sockpuppets are and were pro-Weiner and the dance we have seen with Patrick this week is to call attention to themselves and show others publicly that he/she/they are not going away and have information that could be released. Gennette is obviously keenly interested in this or should wouldn’t have posted so much and done so the minute Patrick tweeted that he had information.
So why this dance? Was the JReid person(s) promised something of value to cooperate initially that Weiner or his people reneged on after he resigned? Could this be the JReid way of floating the threat of exposing more information that would be damaging to Weiner? i.e. collaboration on the reaction to the scandal that bordered on a criminal conspiracy?
Kaisersoze (c86eb0) — 6/25/2011 @ 4:56 pm@bmertz #16 I’ll take that as a compliment
Gennettec (cff457) — 6/25/2011 @ 8:42 pmAnd #32 I was commenting on his handling of the Ethels story. She’s not fake.
@Gennettee
You missed the main point
#16 Unless, she is not visiting here alone and unadvised
#131
bmertz (d77c52) — 6/25/2011 @ 9:31 pmGennette lied to “Nikki” because she recognized her as a sockpuppet; then why criticize Patterico for attacking fake people? Either Gennette’s actions indicate a political handler or she did not want Patterico digging into a situation that would reveal her actions or motivations. Such as working towards gaining Weiner’s patronage in DC. Possibly an internship with one of the major media groups.
GennetteC – your response to my 32 is utterly unrelated to my actual comment.
JD (318f81) — 6/25/2011 @ 9:36 pmGennette
Why have your dropped your goal of a landing as a journalism internship and switched to working in a law firm?
bmertz (d77c52) — 6/25/2011 @ 9:37 pm@bmertz
#87 I didn’t miss your point. But I’m not being advised and you seem sure that’s the only way I’d be “walking into a room full of hostile adults”, so I said I’ll take that as a compliment.
And I never criticized Patterico for his treatment of any fake people… you must be confused.
Also, my goals concerning journalism haven’t changed. During the summer I always work as an office assistant in a law firm.
Gennettec (68b4ea) — 6/26/2011 @ 7:22 amSee what I mean, JD and Patterico?
Simon Jester (588514) — 6/26/2011 @ 7:24 amYou are not nearly as bright as you believe yourself to be, GC. Nobody is fooled by your cute/coy/naive act.
JD (d48c3b) — 6/26/2011 @ 7:30 am@JD
Gennettec (68b4ea) — 6/26/2011 @ 7:34 amOkay:)
Hey Genettec, I’m fooled by your cute/coy/naive act.
I believe whatever you type here. So keep it up!
Pious Agnostic (6048a8) — 6/26/2011 @ 7:39 am@Pious Agnostic
Gennettec (68b4ea) — 6/26/2011 @ 7:46 amThat’s a relief because it’s very important to me that I have validation from all of you.
NikkiReid can’t be real because a teenage MUST have a FB account. Yet, teh Wenis, sans flirtatious bantor, tweets a picture of his leetle friend to gennette. Incredible!
∅ (e7577d) — 6/26/2011 @ 7:56 amteenage s/b teenager
∅ (e7577d) — 6/26/2011 @ 7:57 am@Gennette
#90
You have an established relationship with a law firm and they aren’t representing you already?
You show intelligence (if not ethics) and you admit have a close relationship with a law firm. Your possible actions may have landed you in a future lawsuit. That is your ugly reality.
I’m not making wild speculations, rather I considered that your logic would have lead you to contact your employers and get help. Otherwise, you have taken a huge risk. In over your head doesn’t begin to approach this situation. The other option was that some pro-Weiner political group sent you an advisor. But no, I don’t buy that this circus is a solo act. You have the courage of a young adult, but often that is the result of lack of experience. Older people are more familiar with the end game, and therefore, show more caution. Fools rush in ..etc. That lesson has already begun to sink in. I am going to repeat this warning one last time. You are being played by Weiner and his allies, and you will be the one thrown to the wolves.
What law firm? You know people will find out anyway.
Oh, and read back through your comments in this blog. You did say that to Patterico.
bmertz (d77c52) — 6/26/2011 @ 7:58 amGennetteC – people are starting ti wise up to your look over there act, and how you refuse to address topics that may not portray yourself in the kindest of lights. The idea that you have benn honest and forthcoming in all of this is a joke. All anyone has to do is go back and lOok at the questions that you refuse to address, or make you scurry away, or give you the vapors.
JD (d48c3b) — 6/26/2011 @ 8:06 amI did not see this yesterday:
Comment by Greg — 6/25/2011 @ 12:36 pm
Very good timeline, Greg. Very interesting.
MayBee (081489) — 6/26/2011 @ 8:12 am@bmertz
You’ll have to quote it. I never once criticized his treatment of fake people (unless to say that he was taking them too seriously.) You might be talking about my criticisms of his treatment of Ethel who, again, is not fake.
Gennettec (68b4ea) — 6/26/2011 @ 8:13 amAnd I never felt that I needed representation… I still don’t. There is nothing that I’ve done that I feel could put in a position where I’d need to seek representation.
Things may change in the future but I’ll cross that bridge when I come to it.
Hmm. So why drop out of your classes at Whatcom? And what made you want to attend that institution?
You being so clever and fearless and all.
Simon Jester (588514) — 6/26/2011 @ 8:16 amSeattle Snookie’s classmates were quite wise in voting her Most Likely to be Involved in a Tabloid Scandal.
JD (b98cae) — 6/26/2011 @ 8:19 amBellingham is a pretty town, JD. But Whatcom isn’t the best place for super sleuthing journalists to attend. Maybe just for two years, then on to Columbia? Except dropping all of one’s classes seems like an odd “strategery.”
Simon Jester (588514) — 6/26/2011 @ 8:23 am@JD
Ah, right. You’re the Snooki guy. I still don’t get that but I’m sure you think it’s pretty clever.
Also, those were joke superlatives in the senior edition of the paper (unlike the real superlatives in the yearbook)… and we didn’t vote for them. I hate to disappoint you.
Question for you JD because I’ve been interested in some of your comments… I’d like to know, how old are you? It’s understandable if you don’t want to answer.
Gennettec (68b4ea) — 6/26/2011 @ 8:30 amJD, I think asking who “Gennette” is would be the better question.
Simon Jester (588514) — 6/26/2011 @ 8:33 amGreg – one question about this part of your timeline
Weiner starts following Starchild111.
What time did that happen? I could see patriot announcing “big fun” if that follow had already taken place.
Especially trollpatriot – if he were Nikki or in league, the prom date question would be in the offing.
SarahW (af7312) — 6/26/2011 @ 8:39 amI am 41, but fail to see what you obsession with age has to do with anything. I did not coinc Seattle Snookie, happyfeet did. If you were interested in some of my comments, maybe you should consider answering some of the questions contained therein. I am not at all surprised that you do not.
JD (85b089) — 6/26/2011 @ 8:41 amYou’ll have to quote it.
Too bad. That tweet was deleted, and then the whole account was deleted.
MayBee (081489) — 6/26/2011 @ 8:45 amDoesn’t it seems strange that gennette did not ask JohnRied any questions when the opportunity arose? If she was curious about his/her identity, what better way to find out than asking probing questions? Even a lie can be very informative, especially for an aspiring journalist.
∅ (e7577d) — 6/26/2011 @ 8:49 am@JD My obsession with age? Interesting… I didn’t realize I had an age obsession. I’ll assume that you’re referring to my pointing out the obvious generation gap that people keep ignoring.
Gennettec (68b4ea) — 6/26/2011 @ 8:54 amBut 41, wow. See, I assumed from some of your comments that you were younger. As it turns out you’re just a 41 yr old man who would refer to a 22 yr old as the “Seattle Snooki.” And then complains that she’s not answering your questions.
@Maybee
Gennettec (68b4ea) — 6/26/2011 @ 8:56 amIt’s irrelevant because I never made that type of criticism. Patterico, I’m sure, would agree with that.
∅ – I agree.
Gennette, here’s a straightforward question for you. Do you now know who the “real” person is behind “John Reid”? Perhaps you didn’t know before, but now you do.
Simple question – yes or no.
FYI … Weiner sighting … Huma allegedly looked “miserable” yesterday.
http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2011/06/25/2011-06-25_disgraced_former_pol_anthony_weiner_miserable_wife_huma_abedin_spotted_dining_in.html
Miranda (4104db) — 6/26/2011 @ 9:01 amFirst, you said bloggers who were retweeting the story of the young girls Weiner followed should be ashamed of themselves.
Then you criticized the story about Ethel, Betty, and Veronica as “deplorable”. Later, I believe you specified that you thought the story was based on “pseudo evidence” and found, especially, the speculation about the honey mustard tweet deplorable.
You determined the honey mustard tweet was made by a friend.
Why talking about that was deplorable, when Weiner tweeting to her about “tights and cape shit”, sending dicpics to any woman who was hot, or talking about crushes to Starchild who could have been in high school is beyond me.
You did not explain yourself better. Patterico’s timeline is full of him trying to get you to answer. Of course you only partially did before you deleted your tweets.
MayBee (081489) — 6/26/2011 @ 9:02 amGennette, can you answer my questions in 108?
∅ (e7577d) — 6/26/2011 @ 9:03 amJD is younger than Weiner, who got himself all wrapped up with a college student and her plan to use a “fake” high school student to do…..something.
MayBee (081489) — 6/26/2011 @ 9:05 am@Gennette #101
Bret schlyer (493d93) — 6/26/2011 @ 9:05 amThe last sentence of your comment confuses me. You’ve either done something to create legal jeopardy or you have not. What happens in the future cant change legal jeopardy for past actions. Can you clarify what you meant?
Very good question at 108.
MayBee (081489) — 6/26/2011 @ 9:05 am108, no, most sensible persons who believe JR is a hoax persona, not just a father hiding behind a false name, would not attempt to address him. It would be a waste of time.
The fact that I couldn’t help myself has little bearing on what is sensible and what Gennette would do..
SarahW (af7312) — 6/26/2011 @ 9:08 amDo you folks genuinely believe that the person posting as “Gennette” here is the same as the Whatcom Community College student who dropped all of her classes because of the stress of media scrutiny?
Simon Jester (8a9090) — 6/26/2011 @ 9:09 amPatterico, i’ms sure, would not agree with that, since you did make that type of criticism.
Back to that special insight of a 22 year old. Whatevs.
Let’s try again … What not inappropriate incident led to you having the private cell phone number of a married sitting congressman, and texting him? What was the nature of your discussion prior to the Weinertweet? What was the nature of your communications post Weinertweet? Did he ask you to cover and lie for him the way he did with Ginger? Why do you think that he had sexually suggestive discussions with all the similarly situated women, except you? What about Nikki not speaking of Weiner with ou made you believe she was just dying to speak of Weiner with you? That should be good, for starters. Thank you, in advance, for your anticipated mendoucheity?
JD (318f81) — 6/26/2011 @ 9:10 amSarahW- Gennette said the most important thing is figuring out who Nikki is. Yesterday, she came here looking for help.
MayBee (081489) — 6/26/2011 @ 9:10 amAbout representation – Innocent persons need lawyers most of all. It’s possible to outsmart onesself in any case.
SarahW (af7312) — 6/26/2011 @ 9:10 am@Miranda
I do not know and I never knew before. Initially I felt like I had an idea who was behind Nikki. Now I’m more confused with this whole JG thing that Lee has presented.
So, no, I don’t know. I’d like very much to find out.
#108
Gennettec (68b4ea) — 6/26/2011 @ 9:12 amI wasn’t online when John Reid was answering questions but I wouldn’t have asked him anything if I had been. I know they’re not who they say they are. I don’t really get why anyone was asking him questions.
Why would it be a waste of time? If she asked probing questions base on her inside dealing with him/her, wouldn’t that help Pat in determining whether the info provided by JR9 was worthy of belief.
∅ (e7577d) — 6/26/2011 @ 9:14 am@Maybee #113 What is your point?
@SarahW My thoughts exactly.
Gennettec (68b4ea) — 6/26/2011 @ 9:16 amIsn’t the really important thing is that even people who didn’t want to know figured out who Weiner is? Except maybe GennetteC.
Maybe she’s focusing on Nikki because it prevents focus on the latter.
No hoax or hidden agenda or nefarious plot or post-game drama can un-perv him.
SarahW (af7312) — 6/26/2011 @ 9:16 amThank you Gennette for #120 – that was a straightforward answer.
Can you tell us who you thought it might have been, and why? After all, Lee S could easily be wrong.
It would just be speculation on your part of course.
Miranda (4104db) — 6/26/2011 @ 9:17 amMayBee – I am too old to possibly appreciate a pop culture reference, but it is perfectly reasonable for a married sitting Congresscritter to be led around by his junk following the advise of a 20-something that he doesn’t know, engaging in Internet games with people who claim to be high schoolers. Perfect logic,no?
JD (318f81) — 6/26/2011 @ 9:22 am#114
Gennettec (68b4ea) — 6/26/2011 @ 9:23 amI was saying that I haven’t done anything that would cause me to seek representation and if I ever do (do something that would put me into that situation) then I would seek representation.
But as of right now, hiring an attorney is completely unnecessary.
121 I have faith Patrick needs little assistance in evaluating JR9. By nature he likes to get as much of the story out as possible. Gennette might like less, or need less, since she already knows her side.
SarahW (af7312) — 6/26/2011 @ 9:23 amJD – Weiner strikes me as immature and dopey that way. Do you disagree?
SarahW (af7312) — 6/26/2011 @ 9:24 am@Gennette
Had to take care of something hence the delay.
re#101
I think Maybee’s posted tweeter link was the comment that I originally read. The tweet link of course does not work now.
========
I have wondered if you encountered the “Ginger Lee treatment” ie. did you receive any threats and demands that you let someone else do your public statements?
You’re sparring with the big boys now. Have you ever been concerned that you might need to protect yourself against Weiner, if you didn’t keep your mouth shut? Weiner is connected to some tough characters.
You have inserted yourself into a major power game, while you lack any real power yourself. Do you feel you have the ability to actually make an independent choice or do you feel owned?
bmertz (d77c52) — 6/26/2011 @ 9:26 am@Maybee #113 What is your point?
My point is, as I said earlier, I don’t know what to make of your earlier criticisms of *other* people who noticed, as you did, that Weiner followed young girls. And of people who, like you, tried to puzzle out what was going on with him/them.
You tried to do it w/DMs…to Weiner, to (at least) one of the “girls”. I don’t know if you knew at the time of your criticism how he spoke or interacted with those girls/women (and others). You did know how he had interacted with you.
You couldn’t have wanted to protect Ethel, because you were willing to use her in your starchild scheme.
MayBee (081489) — 6/26/2011 @ 9:27 amNot at all, SarahW. Immature and dopey makes for a wonderful secproggie.
JD (318f81) — 6/26/2011 @ 9:27 am121. Not that she has nothing to conceal. At minimum she is concealing unpleasant realities from herself.
SarahW (af7312) — 6/26/2011 @ 9:28 am@bmertz
Gennettec (68b4ea) — 6/26/2011 @ 9:33 amAll of the threats that people are receiving allegedly strike me as odd because I haven’t encountered anything like that at all (which I’m grateful for).
And no, I’m not worried (as of now) that I need to protect myself from anyone. Perhaps I should be though.
@GennetteC – Let’s try again … What not inappropriate incident led to you having the private cell phone number of a married sitting congressman, and texting him? What was the nature of your discussion prior to the Weinertweet? What was the nature of your communications post Weinertweet? Did he ask you to cover and lie for him the way he did with Ginger? Why do you think that he had sexually suggestive discussions with all the similarly situated women, except you? What about Nikki not speaking of Weiner with ou made you believe she was just dying to speak of Weiner with you? That should be good, for starters. Thank you, in advance, for your anticipated mendoucheity.
JD (318f81) — 6/26/2011 @ 9:34 amThe best way to expose a liar is to keep asking them questions. The more answers, including lies, the greater the chance that you have of tripping them up. It’s been years since I took a journalism class, but I’m pretty sure that’s SOP for a journalist. YMMV.
∅ (e7577d) — 6/26/2011 @ 9:38 amLeaving aside all questions of “why?”, is there anything that would preclude the original starchild111 (UCLA student) to be the real person behind most of the sock puppets (Nikki, Marianela, Patricia, John, PatriotUSA, etc). Trying to find logical reasons/explanations could be useless if the mind behind them is not logical…
oneredquilt (a9a03f) — 6/26/2011 @ 9:38 am#130
Gennettec (68b4ea) — 6/26/2011 @ 9:39 amI stood up for Ethel because I thought she had been publicly (though under a fake name) mischaracterized by Patterico. And I didn’t criticize people for simply noticing that AW followed young women. I criticized the people who were tweeting the link about the “luscious” young females that he followed. The link went to a blog post of screenshots of the pictures and profiles of these young women which resulted in unwanted attention for a lot of them.
Was it wrong of me to have a problem with that?
@Gennette #re 126
Gennette if you are an employee of a law firm, you would not have to “hire” them.
Something happened to frighten Lee. She said someone demanded that they write her public statement. I Wonder who would benefit from that happening? Put the emotions on the shelf and use the logic.
If Weiner ever thinks you pose a threat, then you very well might be.
bmertz (d77c52) — 6/26/2011 @ 9:43 amGennette, did you feel teh Wenis’ penchant for following ONLY young women was wrong? Did you confront him about his social networking habits?
∅ (e7577d) — 6/26/2011 @ 9:44 am@Gennette
bmertz (d77c52) — 6/26/2011 @ 9:47 amI’m not implying sending out a hit man, rather something along the lines of destroying your career path.
Wrong? No.
But considering Weiner was sending pictures of himself to you and others, I don’t see how noticing what he was up to was shameful.
I just find it interesting, considering what you were noticing/orchestrating behind the scenes.
MayBee (081489) — 6/26/2011 @ 9:48 amIn the end, it brought unwanted attention to Anthony Weiner who lost his Congressional seat as a result.
I’m going to have to tie this up in a few minutes.
bmertz (d77c52) — 6/26/2011 @ 9:49 amWhat? Didn’t you comment in the thread that what JR9 was saying wasn’t true?
∅ (e7577d) — 6/26/2011 @ 9:54 am@Maybee
Gennettec (68b4ea) — 6/26/2011 @ 9:56 amLike I just said, if people had simply said, Anthony Weiner also follows other young women, I wouldn’t have found that shameful at all.
I felt like retweeting that link encouraged scrutiny of those young women who did nothing wrong.
@Gennette
I think what everyone is trying to understand is how your standards are applied in one situation but not in another similar one
So:
You saw a site with pictures of yourself and other young women that Weiner followed, and found it objectionable because it exposed them to cyber stalking by unknown men.
But you don’t find it objectionable for a older male to be following the same group of young women around. Most people consider that a form of stalking too.
What is the difference? Is because Weiner’s attention was welcomed and the others were not?
bmertz (d77c52) — 6/26/2011 @ 9:58 am#143
Gennettec (68b4ea) — 6/26/2011 @ 9:58 amThat was late last night… from what I could tell he had been there earlier in the day (I could be wrong).
As I predicted, mendoucheity. Why won’t you address questions directly pertaining to you and Rep Weinertweeter?
JD (318f81) — 6/26/2011 @ 9:59 amI felt like retweeting that link encouraged scrutiny of those young women who did nothing wrong.
How do you know?
MayBee (081489) — 6/26/2011 @ 10:06 amFWIW, in the social media era, people who do things publicly will be subject to public attention at times.
In the end, noticing who Weiner followed -hot young women who often had flattered him online- was an incredibly important part of his story.
It is not shameful to notice.
It is shameful for a married republican Congressman to be using social media to send sex chats, crotch shots, and exchange cel phone numbers.
I mean, as long as we’re making judgements.
Oop! Married Congressman.
MayBee (081489) — 6/26/2011 @ 10:06 amGennette noticed he was following Ethel. Gennette knew he was following Ginger Lee. Gennette tried to engineer it so he would follow Starchild (whose public face was a hs student) Why is it shameful for others to notice?
MayBee (081489) — 6/26/2011 @ 10:09 am@JD
Gennettec (68b4ea) — 6/26/2011 @ 10:13 amActually I have addressed those questions and more during a 2 day extensive interview with Michael Barbaro. Moreover, I addressed those questions to both Aaron Worthing and Patterico via private exchanges.
And, not that it needs to be said, I don’t know you and I certainly don’t feel like you’re entitled to any answers from me.
@Maybee
Gennettec (68b4ea) — 6/26/2011 @ 10:16 amAgain you’ve missed my point. I’ve stated twice now that I’ve never once criticized anyone for simply noticing that he followed young women.
And if I recall I was just one voice among many who found that blog post disturbing.
You’ve missed my point, Gennette.
People found that blog post disturbing because they were still pretending Weiner was hacked, and who he followed was a huge distraction.
MayBee (081489) — 6/26/2011 @ 10:19 amAlthough, I guess using the word “luscious” is incredibly offensive. I am certain their looks had nothing to do with why Weiner was following them, aren’t you?
Gennette, did you tell teh Wenis about your concern for the young women?
∅ (e7577d) — 6/26/2011 @ 10:19 am144 A guilty person is his own hangman and Weiner would have done the job eventually. But I thank Gennette for expediting it.
SarahW (af7312) — 6/26/2011 @ 10:19 amThe irony is delicious as french macarons.
Dear Anthony Weiner-
Help! I am being harassed by a bunch of right wing kooks who noticed that you follow me on Twitter. Thanks for that follow, by the way. I didn’t even have to ask for it! All I had to do is flatter you (and look cute in my picture!)
So anyway, there are these creepy stalkers who harass me because you follow me and I am young. They also harass the porn star you follow, and the other high school girl you follow.
So here is my suggestion: start following this other “high school” girl. Don’t worry, I’ve set it all up. I told her about how I flirt with you!
She follows the porn star and other high school girl you follow, too.
Just follow this other “high school girl”, send her a few messages using the f* bomb, and encourage her to talk publicly about prom.
This canNOT go wrong!
MayBee (081489) — 6/26/2011 @ 10:25 amxoxoxo,
GNC
I am entitled to nothing. I am just pointing out how selective you are in what you will discuss, and how quickly you try to divert to things that do not directly involve you and married congressmen who exchange cell phone numbers with comely coeds on different coasts. Your honesty and desire to be forthcoming seem to be inversely proportional to how close the questions are to your involvement.
JD (318f81) — 6/26/2011 @ 10:26 am157 Maybee Perectly put. . It was all so wrong because Weiner was hacked! and it was wrong! to notice the kind of little girlies he preferred.
Lie in a ridiculous way and expect to draw attention to the circumstances of your life.
It’s Weiner’s fault and you better grow up and realize it. The “salacious” copy was the natural result of his vicious habits.
SarahW (af7312) — 6/26/2011 @ 10:27 am@Maybee
Gennettec (68b4ea) — 6/26/2011 @ 10:29 amNo, people found that blog post disturbing because it was drawing attention to specific girls who did absolutely nothing wrong and it created unwanted attention for them.
@160 – even though I do not know you, I am totally down with that wonderful plan to foil Andrew Breitbqrt and the rightwing trolls. I am friending that high schooler, as you suggest. While we are at it, here is a picture of my junk.
Rep Weiner (318f81) — 6/26/2011 @ 10:30 am@JD
Gennettec (68b4ea) — 6/26/2011 @ 10:31 amI’ve been very forthcoming just not in the comment section of a right-wing blog, for that I apologize.
You do not strike me as being sorry for anything, therefore, your apology rings quite hollow.
JD (318f81) — 6/26/2011 @ 10:34 am@JD
The apology was intended to be sarcastic.
Gennettec (68b4ea) — 6/26/2011 @ 10:35 amI am too old to appreciate sarcasm as expressed by younger generations.
JD (318f81) — 6/26/2011 @ 10:37 amWhat difference would it make if you were forthcoming on a right-wing, left-wing or chicken-wing blog?
∅ (e7577d) — 6/26/2011 @ 10:37 amGennetteC,
1) Someone mentioned you having dropped all your classes at Whatcom. Did you? Are you still attending there?
2) When is the last time you spoke/texted/communicated with Rep. Weiner?
Patterico (135ea8) — 6/26/2011 @ 10:38 am3) How have your grades been there? I assume quite good. You seem intelligent.
Patterico (135ea8) — 6/26/2011 @ 10:39 am@ Gennettec
So, you were concerned about the ladies’ portrayal in the blog site, and you launch your own investigation into who might be behind it?
As part of that “investigation”, why did you bring Starchild111 into it when you did? Was there a reason for the timeing?
cap'n john's nephew (28dda5) — 6/26/2011 @ 10:44 amPat, have you drawn any conclusions regarding the autheticity of JohnReid9?
∅ (e7577d) — 6/26/2011 @ 10:45 am168 LOL
SarahW (af7312) — 6/26/2011 @ 10:50 am*timing*
cap'n john's nephew (28dda5) — 6/26/2011 @ 10:50 amOh no. Gennette didn’t fake being a Whatcom student, did she?
SarahW (af7312) — 6/26/2011 @ 10:51 am@Gennette
Think about all this please. It is never the easy way to let your conscience be your guide to make the right choices. This breaking point is that you tell everyone the full story. There are innocent people that deserve that from you. You’ll be glad later on. I’ve watched the fallout happen from taking both directions, and somehow things work out when you choose the truth. In contrast, I’ve worked with people who used lies to rise to power, only to to have all that falsehood collapse under their feet. “Building on sand etc.
One other note: Ask around your campus and you will always find a trail of young women with dead careers. They had a lethal affair with an older, tenured professor. Guess who survived the scandal?
I am not going be able to visit here extensively for quite awhile, so I won’t be able to trade comments often. But I’ll be stopping in occasionally to find out how all this plays out. Eventually we’ll all find out the entire story of your role and the identity of John Reid, or the mysterious puppetmaster..
( If we don’t SarahW will surely have a coronary– i mean that as a compliment sarah)
Later
bmertz (d77c52) — 6/26/2011 @ 10:52 amDear Gennette-
Those right wingers noticing who I am following are just such creepy stalkers. Oh, by the way, thanks for calling me your boyfriend. I noticed that right away!
I think your plan for me to follow another high school girl is an excellent one. I can use her to get more high school aged followers. I need more young followers. I can get 40 year olds to follow me in real life, you know what I mean?
Anyway, that right wing posse obviously doesn’t respect women. They probably like Michelle Bachmann, who is an idiot.
Yours,
Rep Anthony Weiner
PS. Sometime after 545, look on twitter for a very special package from me!
MayBee (081489) — 6/26/2011 @ 10:53 amI know that my heart will go on. Apoplexy is possible, though.
SarahW (af7312) — 6/26/2011 @ 10:55 amDear Gennette-
PPS. Oh, these old people today do not get how we young people talk! It’s like they really think we young people troll the internet looking for people who call us “hot”, and then try to strike up online sexual relationships with them.
What is that?
We young people know it’s all just playful fun, right?
yours,
Anthony Weiner
Gettin’ ready(.jpg) for a good night!
MayBee (081489) — 6/26/2011 @ 10:57 am178 I’m having “Do not open any suspicious package.jpg’ flashbacks LOLOL
SarahW (af7312) — 6/26/2011 @ 11:01 amGennette –
We knew you’d fly the coop once Patterico asked you some hard questions. But we know you’re still reading the comments.
Chickadee, you might want to read this article & contemplate your future:
“The Federal Trade Commission has approved a controversial firm which scours social media sites to check on job applicants.
It means anything you’ve ever said in public on sites including Facebook, Twitter and even Craigslist could be seen by your would-be employer.
The Washington-based commission has ruled the firm, Social Intelligence Corporation, complies with the Fair Credit Reporting Act – even though it keeps the results of its searches on file for seven years.”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2008231/How-youve-EVER-said-internet-seen-employers-government-approves-Social-Intelligence-Corp.html#ixzz1QPIIBILS
I asked you before if you’ve had any job offers from non-profits like Think Progress or Media Matters or other “progressive” non-profits, all of which, without a doubt, are funded in part by the billionaire George Soros, who made his filthy money by destroying the lives of senior citizens (use Google, dear, to research Uncle Georgie).
Have you ever thought about what happens if Obama & the progressives are out of power in 2013? What if all that crony capitalism stuff just doesn’t work anymore, and the $$$ dries up for the politically motivated organizations that push progressivism/socialism in this country? If Google & GE etc lose their special tax loopholes, there won’t be so much $$$ to toss to their political causes.
So where will you be in 2013? Any thoughts?
Miranda (4104db) — 6/26/2011 @ 11:18 am==And, not that it needs to be said, I don’t know you and I certainly don’t feel like you’re entitled to any answers from me.==
Good call Gennette. Trust no one. It’s smart to be cautious. JD could in fact be much younger than his claimed 41 (as you said you suspected). Or, “he” could be a 60 year old woman. Or he could be with the CIA. You just never know anymore who anyone is, or whom you can trust. I mean, what with this wireless stuff and the internet, and anonymity, and socks, and all.
elissa (c3a242) — 6/26/2011 @ 12:19 pmElissa, gennette is social media savvy, and obviously knows stuff about protecting herself legally(she claims to work in a law firm). Although, she did say she couldn’t/wouldn’t be forthcoming on a reich-wing blog. Elevanty!!1!1
∅ (e7577d) — 6/26/2011 @ 12:23 pmBoth the seattle545 supposed screen caps, and the latest johnreid9 screencaps and transcripts (which don’t seem to come from the same universe)
…have Anthony Weiner:
1) Starting the whole prom-beg – in the seattle545 ones as a suggestion to GN (who is running the Nikki Reed account) and in the Johnreid9 ones directly to Nikki.
In spite of the fact that he’s skeptical she really has a crush on him, he strategizes with her. The only thing that could make that make sense is that Nikki also apparently tweets a line like that of Ethel, that she was interested in being on a national ticket – and that works with him.
He tells her that after starting the prom-beg the next thing for her is to start up a Facebook page.
2) Is very interested in getting to 50k followers.
3) Calls some twitter users “trolls” (apparently referring to the #bornfreecrew)
One question I had was: Did Anthony Weiner use the word troll anywhere else
There seems to be some evidence that he did, according to an article in the New York Post of June 10, 2011, but he uses the word “troll” with a totally different meaning than in either the seattle545 or JohnReid9 screen caps.
“If you’re sleeping with your Twitter followers, that would make for a way cooler headline that if you were trollin’ for folks in the bathroom at an airport or something,” Lee wrote, according to TMZ.com.
Weiner responded: “Yeah, the joke’s on me. Some of my Twitter followers hang out in airport bathrooms apparently. That’s where the trolls troll.”
Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/weiner_made_fun_of_larry_craig_scandal_XEbtuUszlS2T9sSAF9pn5L#ixzz1QPZOh7B9
TMZ (where the New York Post gets its story from) seems to say there is a preceding sentence where Weiner says a “conservative blogger/troll” – TMZ’s quotes – “is trying to contact his female Twitter followers to do a story about them.” (quote from TMZ)
This exchange supposedly took place on May 12.
To the real Weiner, I think, a troll is someone looking for personal contact with someone, usually of a sexual nature (trolling, trying to find people of a certain hard to find nature,) and it is a verb that can turn into a noun, and it does not mean someone trying to get electronic exchanges going (trying to provoke a reaction -> which then leads to the meaning, troll, n. person leaving insincere electronic messages, probably with some kind of goal in mind.
Sammy Finkelman (994435) — 6/26/2011 @ 12:33 pmThere is something bothering me here, and I wonder if anybody else has noticed, and please
let me know if I am wrong.
Early on, I seem to recall Gennettec saying that she had all of her files on this. Later she says she didn’t actually have them, because she gave them to a NYT reporter who was not Jen. Now she is saying that she has been working at a law firm during the summers.
Considering her apparent “brightness”, as well as her exposure to law practice and record keeping, why would she turn over all of her documentation to a reporter without keeping the originals or copies for herself?
cap'n john's nephew (28dda5) — 6/26/2011 @ 1:05 pm@cap’n john’s nephew
Gennette’s been talking out of both sides of her mouth throughout. I haven’t been completely on top of this. Frankly, I’m confused on some things. But from reading Gennette’s comments here and other places, she says one thing and then when she’s called on it she either disappears or backs down. Gennette has answered some questions, but ignored other really good ones including ones from JD. Her actions just haven’t made sense, in my opinion.
Another thought: Gennette’s activities were online (to my knowledge), thus there aren’t originals like there would be with paper documents. I mean, online records aren’t finite, thus forwarding emails and screenshots doesn’t mean she no longer has the records (Am I making sense?) She should still have at least some of the emails (and she has claimed she still does on other threads). But, I recall reading an article where Gennette said she was upset about pictures of her that her family saw, so it is perfectly reasonable that if she wouldn’t want them to see pictures that at worst seemed only PG13, then she surely wouldn’t want anyone like her family and boyfriend seeing R/X rated texts.
Discard if my ramblings don’t make sense
rogerthat (f5aad4) — 6/26/2011 @ 2:08 pmGennette is lying through her teeth about a lot of this. She had to have a much more extensive relationship with teh weiner, if he’s going along with her little “sting” operation of the “fake” teens.
And, honestly, I’m not sure the Gennette that’s communicating here is the same Gennette that weiner tweeted the dicpic to.
Every bit of this story leads right back to Gennette Cordoba. Figure out the truth behind her, and everything will unravel.
Susie Q (653074) — 6/26/2011 @ 2:22 pm