@Weinergate: The Death Threat Black Hole
[Guest post by the ever popular Lee Stranahan]
When a woman named Jenny G. contacted me on the phone, she told me that she’s gotten two death threats and that she had no idea what was going on. She repeated this claim to the Boston police in two forms; first, saying that I was the one who made the death threats and later telling a detective that it was one of my ‘followers’.
Here’s what she said when she called me; she claims to have been innocently living her life when out of the blue, two death threats came in to her answering machine. In a panic, she did some quick internet research, found me and then phoned me up. She said repeatedly that she had no idea what was going on and told me she wasn’t political at all and knew almost nothing about the “Weenie story’ except what she’d seen on shows like inside Edition and Access Hollywood.
I don’t believe there were any death threats. At all.
So – what are we left with? A giant hole in her story.
Don’t forget that Jenny claims to have no knowledge about the Weiner story. Even though she readily admits she started the @Starchild111 account, she claims to have no idea about the Nikki Reid sock puppet who was following at least three women connected to Anthony Weiner. She wasn’t following it online, she said. She didn’t have a Twitter account anymore, she said.
Is there any proof that Jenny G. is lying and that she was following the Weiner story closely?
There sure is – since there were no death threats, how did she find out that I’d mentioned her name?
Cue: Sound of a dog not barking.
– Lee Stranahan
People who are afraid to back their comments on the internet with their real identity cannot ever be trusted in any other part of their life. It’s as simple as that. Use that rule, and you can ignore 95% of the crap on the internet.
dfbaskwill (c021f2) — 6/29/2011 @ 10:14 amObviously there were death threats and I don’t want to hassle Lee at all when they are being discussed. It’s just too serious a topic.
What if whoever is behind this was smart enough to frame her?
Dustin (c16eca) — 6/29/2011 @ 10:18 amA claim to be verified…. was Weiner story covered on Access Hollywood & Inside Edition ?
koam (62b38e) — 6/29/2011 @ 10:21 amLee,
Did caller describe claimed threats to you?
Did detective describe claimed threats to you?
Answering machine…did she save these for detective?
koam (62b38e) — 6/29/2011 @ 10:24 amOr someone who knew her recognized her name and told her or she otherwise found out. Maybe she googled her own name.
Just sayin’ I just worry.
Dustin (c16eca) — 6/29/2011 @ 10:26 amLee, I’ve said this from the beginning… you only referred to her as JG.
LET’S PRETEND the two death threats were real. If she googled her name and weiner she would not have found you she would have found STLAH…
Your name is not on that page until it was updated to reflect the phone call FROM HER
I’ve wondered this from the beginning.
Paul (5305b3) — 6/29/2011 @ 10:31 amDustin, nope see my post above. He only called her JG.
If she wanted to contact anyone to make the story die she would have contacted STLAH
Paul (5305b3) — 6/29/2011 @ 10:33 amI was about to ask actually. Good point. I stand corrected.
Dustin (c16eca) — 6/29/2011 @ 10:35 amYou have to understand, if it’s not been said on this page, and even half of the stuff on this page. I just haven’t been following it. This is an interesting story, but I really come here for the discussion and the commenters anyway.
So some of these important premises that I seem to be missing could perhaps be highlighted for those who haven’t understood the relevance of this call, etc. Or not, if this is meant to be a bit more mysterious than it has to be.
Dustin (c16eca) — 6/29/2011 @ 10:37 am5. Dustin
You have me thinking of other ways she would’ve learned her name had come up (Google alerts set to her own name, etc)… but why, then, call Lee with a story about threats?
If it’s really JGMA who called Lee (seems to be), then she either got threats and is clueless (telling truth on phone), or is the culprit and made up the threats.
I don’t see where she learns independently (from a friend, etc.), is not involved, then makes up threats & phones Dallas.
Before her call to Lee, we know that the name JG was out there…but it’s a common name. What else was out there that would’ve narrowed it to this one JG? (I’m forgetting the sequence of what was on the table prior to Lee receiving the crying call. I know the other innocent namesake was being discussed, but what else?)
koam (62b38e) — 6/29/2011 @ 10:38 amI RTd the STLAH post which had her name…
But there were no death threats, for a bunch of reasons and prime among them — how did they get the phone number of a person in Boston? A number that I haven’t found.
The person mentioned by name in the STLAH post — the JG in California – did SHE get a death threat? Nope. But somehow one of the 8 JGs in Boston got two of them?
So – no no no. No death threats.
And therefore; why lie about them?
Why would a friend call THAT JG in Boston? Who is that friend? Why did the friend connect her?
Simple answer – very simple. Jenny George was watching MY Twitter feed. She saw her name and FREAKED. Then called me. Remember — this all happened in about 20 minutes after I started tweeting. Very quickly.
Why was she watching my Twitter feed? Well, c’mon.
Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 6/29/2011 @ 10:41 am6. Paul
Yes Lee had been saying JG but he had referenced STLAH and the full name was out there. So it still would have been easy with internet searches to come upon Lee as he was actively discussing the finding that the name JG was associated with @starchild111. And Lee’s phone # is easy to find.
koam (62b38e) — 6/29/2011 @ 10:42 amI think Paul and you are right.
I could probably come up with some retarded convoluted theory that makes that happen, but it’s practically impossible. Unless someone is manipulating her or the hoax is more expansive than we’re aware of.
I think there is a detail about JG we’re not privy to. I have no reason to say that but just a hunch.
Dustin (c16eca) — 6/29/2011 @ 10:42 am6-8. Dustin Paul
Just because Lee was trying to be discreet and only used her initials in his podcasts, etc., Lee’s name gets mentioned around this story about 1000 times more frequently than STLAH. Lee is a person with a picture of himself on his masthead (not the pic I’d want to see if I’d just received 2 death threats and was trying to figure out what was up, but I digress..) and a radio show and a phone number.
STLAH’s web site has 52 facebook shares, 137 followers.
On Twitter: STLAH 2,000 followers. Lee, almost 20,000 followers.
koam (62b38e) — 6/29/2011 @ 10:49 amLee- you’ve seen this, right:
ronbryn Ron Brynaert
MayBee (081489) — 6/29/2011 @ 10:51 amBoston woman called @nytjenPreston from real # who didn’t even bother to check it as last as Monday. Meanwhile bloggers got death threats.
15 hours ago
Just to be clear, I wasn’t talking about the ones she received. I have no idea if she got any, but I know it’s pretty ridiculous to say she got any from Lee. Lee and I were having a very angry conversation in public and private and he’s just not the threatening type. It was also obvious to me before that happened.
But someone out there threatening her? A slight possibility. What if PatriotUSA76 isn’t her, and is some crazy, and somehow has more info than the rest of us do? That isn’t impossible.
My point is just that we should reserve at least a little room for alternative possibilities.
Dustin (c16eca) — 6/29/2011 @ 10:51 amExactly. I’m not communicating this precisely enough. And I agree about the pic, not that this is a criticism, but I understand what you’re saying.
If someone wanted to manipulate JG, or even manipulate Lee and were extremely clever and already knew she had something to hide, they might spoof him.
But why did she say Lee threatened her and then back down and say it was his supporters? Please correct me if I’m in error on this point, as I’ve tried to follow that aspect and have read a few conflicting versions. Seems the backoff is not a serious approach to someone getting a threat, after all. They would call the cops and get the details straight.
Dustin (c16eca) — 6/29/2011 @ 10:54 amI asked Jen Preston if JG had ever once said that JG has suggested that either me or one of my followers has threatened her — answer was a clear no.
Again — think of the implications of no death threat.
It means that JG was watching my Twitter feed herself.
Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 6/29/2011 @ 10:59 am16. Dustin
A theory on the police report…she has Lee’s name, is afraid of him, she goes into PD and tells duty officer who fills out perfunctory data collection form for real detective to follow up on later. She mentions Lee is chatting about her name online prior to her receiving calls. Lee’s name gets put down. According to Lee, she’s prone to panic, tearfulness (perhaps understandably).. The story is a jumble..she doesn’t know why this is happening to her..it’s not crystal clear on the paper.
When Detective follows up at her home, she tells story and he understands more clearly the sequence….why she thinks Lees’s work may have driven the calls to her answering machine. They surmise that anyone who reads/listens to Lee “followers” could have been the one who called her.
And if she’s telling the truth about the calls, then Lee’s work is probably how the caller would’ve learned about her.
How the caller finds her number is truly a problem to figure out. Was Boston on the table in the public discussions before Lee received the call from JG? (need help here).
koam (62b38e) — 6/29/2011 @ 11:04 am17. Lee
koam (62b38e) — 6/29/2011 @ 11:06 amPreston has spoken to JGMA? What do we know about that? I saw just a tweet from Ron about it…Are there links to more info?
That seems like the real question. And hopefully Jenny can see that too. Jenny, I know Lee is a bit difficult sometimes, but if you’re telling the truth… and I hate to admit this, but you need to work with him and figure out who knew enough to set you up like this.
My guess, though, is that Jenny has a lot of issues, perhaps was involved with Weiner, and for some reason got furious with him. If that’s the case, Weiner should have extended a hand to help her, IMO. She’s ruining her life if all these accusations about her are true, and if this is just a jilted ex girlfriend I think the former boyfriend would know who the crazy one was.
Again, I am speculating. Anyway, if Jenny’s telling the truth, someone with a lot of special knowledge is doing all this. It’s hard to see this being the answer, IMO.
Dustin (c16eca) — 6/29/2011 @ 11:11 amKoam,
I’ve talked about Preston talking to JG a number of times.
Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 6/29/2011 @ 11:18 amHe has. This is the basis behind him being angry I didn’t buy the phone calls for a while.
Dustin (c16eca) — 6/29/2011 @ 11:20 amI find it a little crazy that now with twitter “followers” the time honored word followers can be used and viewed in several different contexts. By “Lee’s followers” do we think that means Lee’s official twitter followers, or in the more traditional sense of someone who follows an opinion leader or celebrity informally and anonymously from afar?
elissa (3f799c) — 6/29/2011 @ 11:22 amKoam 12
>it still would have been easy with internet searches to come upon Lee as he was actively discussing the finding that the name JG was associated with @starchild111
No it would not. and ok.. prove me wrong… tell me what she would have googled to find that?
She called him Rep Wennie so I doubt she knew who starchild111 was. (you know, supposedly)
If she googled her name she lands on STLAH.
How -after the supposed threats which is how she supposedly learned of this- did she find Lee and not STLAH?
AND Riddle me this Batpeople. (one and all) Why did she only call the POlice after the 3rd supposed death threat and not the first two….
Remember this all happened in 24 hours.
If you’re some happy go lucky person who doesn’t read the news and you suddenly get two death threats in one night, do you go looking for a blogger to call or do you call the police?
And again, even if she did turn to google first, tell me what she typed in to find Lee as of that date?
Paul (e625b8) — 6/29/2011 @ 11:31 am23. elissa
Interesting point on the migration of the language. Lee has a lot of followers but very few “followers” in the sense followers of charismatic leaders who go unquestioned (think Obama & the media & the academy, etc., 2008).
Lee’s followers ask questions, for the most part.
koam (62b38e) — 6/29/2011 @ 11:32 amKoam
>Preston has spoken to JGMA? What do we know about that? I saw just a tweet from Ron about it…Are there links to more info?
Lee has spoken about this probably 10 times that I have heard… and if you count every time he mentioned this in his radio show you can easily double that.
Paul (e625b8) — 6/29/2011 @ 11:33 am24. Paul
She called Lee and told him that she had been starchild111 in 2009.
koam (62b38e) — 6/29/2011 @ 11:34 amHas there been any publication of the supposed threat to JG? Has anyone seen it and described it with any detail?
Dustin (c16eca) — 6/29/2011 @ 11:35 amSomeone was making errors that made no sense at the beginning of this. I think the name was ‘Tifosa’ on this blog’s comment section. Jamming in blatant errors seems like a clumsy but deliberate and defensive way to demonstrate you aren’t closely involved. Tifosa called Weiner a Senator, for example, replying to people who said he was a Rep.
My point isn’t to cast an aspersion onto that commenter, but to suggest certain degrees of error are too ridiculous to accept at face value.
Dustin (c16eca) — 6/29/2011 @ 11:37 am27 Koam – HA ok good catch… my point was she would hardly know the back story (betty veronica et al) I used starchild as an example but you get my point… how does she even know they are talking about her… REMEMBER she supposedly deleted the account. If you got two death threats do you google up the account name you (as she claims) deleted a year earlier? um no, you gogole your name. (or you know, call the cops)
But I see you missed a BIG hunk of the story:
This was the crux of Lee’s argument. (as per his radio show) He gave JG JP’s phone number. JG called JP and they spoke for I think he said 90 minutes. It was JG who then gave JP the fact she lived in MA and gave JP the name of a collage professor to prove she was real.
And as LS says “all that checked out.”
So the original caller was indeed JG from Boston… BUT REMEMBER we (the universe) did not know she was from Boston until after she supposedly got the threats.
AND AGAIN. If anyone wanted to threaten a JG they would have found the one in CA not the one in MA. Nobody can track her down even now that they know it is her.
Paul (e625b8) — 6/29/2011 @ 11:47 amGah, I acted like the threat to JG was in print and not a phone call. Sorry.
That’s a strong point.
Dustin (c16eca) — 6/29/2011 @ 11:49 am24. Paul
if I google “Weiner starchild111,” the first 2 results go to leestranahan.com (with a + button to click to see a lot more) the 4th and 5th go to patterico.com.
June 20th Lee does radio show… announcing he received the hysterical JG call
Betty Veronica Solved?
He was on Twitter discussing it as well on the 20th…but Lee was out there discussing Weiner, starchild111, Jenay, etc before that. His blog post on June 18 names Jenay.
Anyone looking into Weinergate would find Lee as one of the top blogs. I asked earlier if there are any details JG revealed about the content of the threats. That would drive what she had been searching for.
koam (62b38e) — 6/29/2011 @ 11:51 amThe day she called Lee the cache of the starchild account found by AZ5thdstrct was the talk of the day with tweets flying back and forth. Anyone reading Lee’s tweets would have all the info needed to call Lee & discuss what she did with him.
RocksEm (e1d29d) — 6/29/2011 @ 11:56 amKoam:
>if I google “Weiner starchild111,” the first 2 results go to leestranahan.com (with a + button to click to see a lot more) the 4th and 5th go to patterico.com.
One big problem. All the links that show up were published AFTER the supposed threats. (even if she googled starchild)
Paul (e625b8) — 6/29/2011 @ 11:56 am30 31. Paul Dustin.
But now we know that Preston was supposedly working with an assistant doing freelance research. And assistant tweets that he knows about calls. So JP isn’t the only one involved. Who else knew?
koam (62b38e) — 6/29/2011 @ 11:57 am33 which is Lee’s point. He got the call minutes after he tweeted it. (see 11)
Paul (e625b8) — 6/29/2011 @ 11:59 am1) why not call the assistant?
2) How on earth would she find THAT?
Paul (e625b8) — 6/29/2011 @ 12:00 pmkoam, I admit, I am just not following this story well enough. All these little details keep making it difficult to understand.
I worry that anyone can make this look like 100% certainly Jenny, and 100% certainly a frame up, if they just report the details that help frame it that way.
Any time I try to piece together a claim either way, it’s shot down.
Raw Story’s involvement, as well as the very tangential association with Breitbart, leaves open the possibility this is an elaborate attempt to screw people who assume just a little too much. I’m not asserting that’s what happen, but it’s an open possibility. Hell, Jenny could be in on it. It wouldn’t be difficult to fabricate some Lee supporter threatening her, too, so we need to be wary.
I am reminded of when the Sherrod video came out, wondering who sent that along and then… suddenly there was much more context. Breitbart handled that as well as I an imagine anyone handling that, but it looked to me like someone possibility was hoping he’d go too far.
Dustin (c16eca) — 6/29/2011 @ 12:01 pmoh sorry misread you… (1 and 2 above)
Who else knew about the call? (I guess you are asking)
He talked about it on his show ove3r a dozen times. (not sure what that last comment was asking)
Paul (e625b8) — 6/29/2011 @ 12:01 pm34 Paul.
We can’t tell what she searched for. Lee’s name is all over this case and was before the call he received.
Yes we’d like to know the content of the alleged 2 calls JG received. Clearly they included Weiner and starchild111.
No one has told us if the messages were terse or not.
When I receive 2 messages on an answering machine (she uses an answering machine?…just noticed that)…it’s because the mf babbled so long that the machine cut him/her off and had to call back to finish the message. No one told us if that’s what happened or not.
Lee, when someone calls you with something like that, do you take notes?
koam (62b38e) — 6/29/2011 @ 12:03 pmhahaha. I keep calling a pod cast a radio show, so perhaps she makes a similar mistake?
Dustin (c16eca) — 6/29/2011 @ 12:05 pmAnd I’m not criticizing any of you. Lee’s conclusion makes sense if you believe certain things to be true, but there are gaps that are unproven.
If take JG’s POV and follow her story (what we know of it, which comes from Lee), then what can we prove that she is lying about?
If she got calls, she could have found lee using Google. Anyone could have found Lee and his phone number using Google if they had a few search terms to go to about this case. (If I search for between 5/29 and 6/20, to eliminate everything after date of call, 6/20, on google for “weiner nikki reid”, Patterico is #1 Lee is #2)
koam (62b38e) — 6/29/2011 @ 12:12 pmhttp://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ie=UTF-8&ion=1&nord=1#q=weiner+nikki+reid&hl=en&authuser=0&nord=1&prmd=ivnso&sa=X&ei=0XgLTry5BYaFtgft_Oxf&ved=0CA0QpwUoBw&source=lnt&tbs=cdr:1%2Ccd_min%3A5%2F29%2F2011%2Ccd_max%3A6%2F20%2F2011&tbm=&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=121ef657ec85e72a&ion=1&biw=944&bih=1087
koam (62b38e) — 6/29/2011 @ 12:13 pmkoam, you don’t come across as critical. Just trying to discuss the story. And you and Paul are both much more informed than I am, so it’s helpful to look over your arguments.
Dustin (c16eca) — 6/29/2011 @ 12:19 pmMy arguments are solely, what is known to have happened vs. what is believed to have happened? Who knew what when?
I enjoy the podcasts…but when the facts are in the podcasts, without a transcript or accompanying writeup, it’s hard to scan back for details. You have to listen to the whole show again, carefully, which isn’t practical.
Is there software we can use to automatically generate transcripts of the podcasts?
koam (62b38e) — 6/29/2011 @ 12:27 pmKoam, why on earth would she be goolging Nikki Ried (well you know unless she WAS Nikki Ried)
No I take you as an honest broker… look every word from JG’s mouth may be true. I also might win the powerball tonight.
I guess it goes to the old ‘reasonable doubt’ thing. I’m a VERY skeptical person by nature. And while PERHAPS she might be telling the straight up truth,I think at this point it is -unreasonable- to think her story holds water.
Paul (e625b8) — 6/29/2011 @ 12:28 pmI don’t know if this has any relevance whatever, but I’ve been thinking about it. A couple years ago, someone I know received a wrong number call in which the caller left a rambling, threatening message for someone else entirely. The person was a long way from sober, clearly, so it was hard to tell who the message was intended for, aside from not the recipient.
The recipient played the message over my office’s answering service, so I could save it to a digital file in case the recipient somehow erased it.
Nothing ever came of it, but something about it makes me think that, no matter how idiotic it sounds, yes, people leave death threats on answering machines, and sometimes, not even the right ones.
Dianna (23319c) — 6/29/2011 @ 12:29 pmP.S. (and I don’t mean this as a knock) If you had kept up with the JP phone call / screenwriting professor thing, I think you’d be more convinced than you are today.
SOOO many pieces of the puzzle fit it’s hard to conceive they could ever go together in a different way.
Paul (e625b8) — 6/29/2011 @ 12:31 pmListening now.
Lincolntf (85daa5) — 6/29/2011 @ 12:35 pm46 Paul
Just because Lee and lots of others don’t believe JG, doesn’t mean it’s true. We have to prove that. It hasn’t been proven.
Remember from the 6/20 podcast, someone was 90% sure it was someone who had called. Made perfect sense, right?, because someone had just emailed someone. Turned out to be a coincidence.
Weiner sent his pic to the world instead of DM while the Meghan B and Nikki & Gina things were brewing elsewhere. Coincidence.
I’ll leave it at that.
BTW, who else do we know who uses “Why on earth…?” I’m teasing.
So the real gap in JG’s tale of receiving calls is how anyone found her. But Lee had been saying that the top press outlets were out there with big resources searching. Preston may have had a crafty research assistant. Who knows how someone may have found her? I found 2 JGs in Boston on facebook. Could be a lot of info on their pages there and other places which would help get to a phone number.
koam (62b38e) — 6/29/2011 @ 12:45 pm>It hasn’t been proven.
OK to the extent I’ve been following this story, this is mostly all I am following… and here’s why:
If you think about it, PUSA76 brought down Weiner…. I mean yeah Weiner brought down Weiner but if PUSA doesn’t RT that, the story dies.
So for me finding out who PUSA was and WHY he was tracking Weiner is (again in my world view) the most interesting part of this story.
I’m telling you this for this reason…
I’ve followed everything that has been written on this and done a bit of research of my own. (have a good friend in Boston) And while I am the most skeptical person I know… I think this has been proven beyond what anyone should consider reasonable.
However note that I am not calling you unreasonable. I think it is quite reasonable to doubt everything you hear in life…
My point to this ramble is that I think if you followed it as close as I have (it being my single interest) I think you would agree that believing her would be -unreasonable- in your mind.
—————–
p.s. for the record I’m, nowhere near convinced JG = PUSA but I do believe 1) JG= The Reids 2) JG was watching Lee and 3) she never got any death threats.
Paul (e625b8) — 6/29/2011 @ 1:14 pmPatterico, do you think there is proof that JG who called did not receive the threats that she claims? I mean proof, not inference.
Here’s an inconsistency in the caller’s story.
– According to Lee, caller says she doesn’t follow politics.
– According to Lee, according to the caller’s personally selected verification Professor, he says she’s very liberal.
That’s building an argument. We’d want more specifics of what was said by JG and the Prof.
The theorized motive is that she’s both liberal and was somehow involved with RAW, but is now pissed at him and Nikki was about getting revenge.
Do we know if anyone has done the legwork of looking at the short list of Twitter accounts that Weiner had followed at earlier dates for clues to see if this JG had a different account with which she communicated with Weiner when they were supposedly friendly? He followed just a few people and some of them can probably be eliminated because they were reporters, pols, men, etc.
Would Mike know something about the list of Weiner’s online friends?
koam (62b38e) — 6/29/2011 @ 1:27 pmI am on this boat too.
PUSA76 just sounds too much like me when I’m drunk to be a fake conservative crank. No, I don’t particularly want to hang out with him, and no, I don’t think those saying he’s Jenny too are crazy, but I wouldn’t be surprised if he is a different person entirely and just happened to know some things or even make some lucky guesses.
Dustin (c16eca) — 6/29/2011 @ 1:42 pm51. Paul
Fortunately, we’re at the prosecutor’s house. So maybe he’ll weigh in on what is proven vs. what is plausible or likely regarding the caller.
But for people to argue that it would be so hard to find Lee… I’ve proven that to be not true. (Search “Weiner Nikki Reid” up to 6/20 and Lee’s #1 (here) & #2 (at lee’s place) in results.)
PatriotUSA76 did catch that allegedly errant tweet and retweet it. True. But didn’t the Congressional Tweets site also catch it? And didn’t Dana Loesch NOT even use PatriotUSA76’s screen caps in reporting this on Breitbart? I believe Patriot says this …that Dana got the
koam (62b38e) — 6/29/2011 @ 1:43 pmscreen caps of the tweets from the Congressional sites. Other eyes were on Weiner already. So it wasn’t only Patriot, if Dana can get the screen caps. And if Weiner hadn’t made that tweet, we still had Meaghan B in the wings with her photos already sent to Breitbart, right? And then Ginger and Nikki, etc brewing. So even if GC didn’t exist, he was going to be found out some other way.
Btw, lee, sorry to knock your post off the top position so fast, but it had just happened and i wanted to get something up, quick.
Aaron Worthing (e7d72e) — 6/29/2011 @ 1:45 pm51 and 53, Paul & Dustin
I agree that Patriot/Dan isn’t JR9, if that’s what you’re getting at.
I did a long analysis of that. Plenty of similarities, but also plenty of differences, not all of which I think could have been scripted. Overall, I think the differences win out.
And sometimes it’s the little details, like in a Sherlock Holmes or Poirot story, that tug at your curiosity.
Here’s one little detail: they both have moments when they are hopping mad and lashing out.
JR9 in his tweet outburst (pissed at GC & Preston).
http://badjournalist.blogspot.com/2011/06/johnreid9-tweets.html
Patriot, for example, in his interview with Ladd (pissed at Weiner).
http://filmladd.com/?PatriotUSA76Interview
• John Reid repeatedly uses “Lol” always initial cap
• Patriot repeatedly uses “LOL” always all caps
Every time. 100% consistency.
You’d have to be a pretty great method actor to consistently type “LOL / Lol” two different ways as two different characters in a Twitter tirade or IM interview. Ladd’s interview was interactive. I watched and participated in JR9’s tweet rant. Sure, the tweets, except for the many that were answers to our questions, could have been pre-scripted. But really?
Can it be done? Sure. By an evil genius with a meticulous plan.
But by a girl who calls the cops when she’s the criminal and even though no one can find her, including the country’s top journalists and bloggers?
koam (62b38e) — 6/29/2011 @ 1:58 pmAgain…how would someone who did not follow this story know to google Nikki Reid when they were threatened? — BEFORE HER OWN NAME?
Come now.
I’ve considered you an honest broker before this but you’re getting out on a limb here….
Besides, it’s not just 1 or 2 improbabilities you have to believe to believe her, it’s more like 20.
Paul (e625b8) — 6/29/2011 @ 2:04 pmLol
(just wanted to say that because I also do the all caps version and don’t want to get into trouble). Just kidding, btw.
Dustin (c16eca) — 6/29/2011 @ 2:04 pmI don’t think he’s saying he knows for sure or anything.
We’re all basically forced to go out on limbs. That’s the draw of this story. From the very first moment Weiner tweeted his penis out in the open this hasn’t been a very logical story.
But anyway, maybe Jenny is just lying about not following the story? That’s something one might say to Lee if they want to be left alone.
Dustin (c16eca) — 6/29/2011 @ 2:07 pmgreat catch on the lol (all lower case although I vary lol)
But on to this:
>But by a girl who calls the cops when she’s the criminal and even though no one can find her, including the country’s top journalists and bloggers?
Lee nailed this last night. Arsonists are often who reports the fires. Often when there is a search for a missing kid in the woods, one of the searchers is the one who took the kid.
BTW is she a criminal? Well, before the fake police report… I’d have to think (and I have given it no thought) but did she break any laws?
Paul (e625b8) — 6/29/2011 @ 2:09 pmgoing out on a limb?
>But for people to argue that it would be so hard to find Lee… I’ve proven that to be not true. (Search “Weiner Nikki Reid” up to 6/20 and Lee’s #1 (here) & #2 (at lee’s place) in results.)
To my mind he didn’t prove a thing. In fact he proved that you’d HAVE to be following the story to run into Lee.
Paul (e625b8) — 6/29/2011 @ 2:12 pmDoes any of this have anything to do with his “I’ve been pranked”, “this is like someone throwing a pie”, “I’m hiring a private investigator” responses?
In other words, I guess my question is…those seemed to be such odd analogies at the time to my ear.
“Throwing a pie”? Is one of the sockpuppets Soupy Sales? Or Curly Howard?
Did Weiner actually know more, much more…about how this all went down? Was he conversing by phone or through intermediaries, with any, all…some…of the sockpuppets?
How much of this “understory” does Jen Preston know? Tommy Christopher?
Is the media taking an active role in burying material evidence….much like the LA Times and the Rashid Khalidi tape?
Is there anything in this story that even merits a death threat? I’m not connecting the dots to gangs, violence, mob actions, ….what in heaven’s name connects this sexting thing to violence?
It’s very hard to follow, like walking into the middle of a Russian novel. But I can’t help but feel that “journalistic ethics” are at the bottom of it someplace. Journalistic ethics are at the bottom of most places you find them, especially at places like the Daily Duranty.
cfbleachers (19e5f4) — 6/29/2011 @ 2:31 pm57. paul
Since we don’t have any details on the 2 answering machine messages we don’t know if the threats mentioned Nikki Reid. I don’t see why they wouldn’t and Nikki Reid was definitely the hot topic in this case. The calls would have made some reference to starchild111 which easily links to Nikki Reid.
The question we’re asking here is: could JG have found Lee as one of the proponents of discussing starchild111 & JG? Answer is: very easily. Why?: He was one of the most prominent people discussing it.
koam (62b38e) — 6/29/2011 @ 2:53 pmI’ve been taking a nap.
Paul has nailed this in the comments, though.
koam, Dustin, etc — tell me the scenario that explains how JG in Boston got any death threats.
Start with this…
How did the threatener find her number?
Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 6/29/2011 @ 3:14 pmHow did they connect HER to the Starchild111 account?
# 62
“It’s very hard to follow, like walking into the middle of a Russian novel.”
You jogged my memory, and while doing a search, this page caught my eye.
http://www.sherdog.net/forums/f7/russian-spy-pretty-cute-1257803/
cap'n john's nephew (28dda5) — 6/29/2011 @ 3:16 pmA diversion.
cap'n john's nephew (28dda5) — 6/29/2011 @ 3:20 pmYeah — a real person who started the Starchild account is a TOTAL diversion.
Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 6/29/2011 @ 3:24 pmI bet the number was found in the phone book.
cap'n john's nephew (28dda5) — 6/29/2011 @ 3:24 pmFind it.
And tell me why you picked someone in Boston.
Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 6/29/2011 @ 3:25 pmWas the person threatened the same person you had previously talked to?
cap'n john's nephew (28dda5) — 6/29/2011 @ 3:27 pmThe Lol LOL thing can come from auto correct on different devices. That is, the machine makes the consistency.
Tutu (54ce64) — 6/29/2011 @ 3:28 pmYou discussed the Boston connection in a post yesterday morning. I commented in the discussion.
cap'n john's nephew (28dda5) — 6/29/2011 @ 3:30 pmYes — the woman I talked to on the phone lives in Boston. She lied about living in Los Angeles. She revealed some of this lie to a reporter and it was confirmed by the Boston Police.
Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 6/29/2011 @ 3:37 pmLol vs. LOL could be an idiosyncratic character quirk a writer might try to be conscious of. How about the fact that they both used LOL? (I’m not honestly arguing that as evidence, just saying)
One character uses short punchy sentences.
Like this. Do you doubt me?
Another character elucidates using a tone that emanates education, civility, nay, breeding.
How’m I doing so far?
jeffeneff (707f3d) — 6/29/2011 @ 3:41 pmPatriot has claimed that they got online for the first time in January, too. LOL indeed.
Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 6/29/2011 @ 3:47 pmThere’s some illuminating stuff here: http://prudencepaine.com/2011/06/29/for-weinergate-addicts-only/
and much more, I’ve just started reading.
jeffeneff (707f3d) — 6/29/2011 @ 4:02 pmEvery time I see Prudence it reminds me of that book that my daughter read that helped with potty training. “I did just like Prudence, Daddy”
JD (306f5d) — 6/29/2011 @ 4:13 pmThe “get close to” strategy is what I thought was going on with the Weiner girlies, but I hadn’t considered a Lopez stalk. Brrr.
–But poor “Max” isn’t stuffed, just fake. 🙂
SarahW (af7312) — 6/29/2011 @ 4:24 pmWhat happened to the “random quotes to chew on” I’m just wondering. Did I miss a resolution or a consensus?
Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c) — 6/29/2011 @ 4:28 pm…
To be sure, I have no idea. I can come up with extremely strained theories, though. They may require some people to be lying about some of their claims. For example, if JG were one of Weiner’s sexting fangirls and PatriotUSA (or someone else) tracked her down, perhaps if Starchild111 said ‘Hi MOM’ to another tweeter (or on another social network service) or otherwise had some clue to find her name and town. Or yet another jilted girlfriend knew her. Or someone who just hates Jenny G and doesn’t give a crap about Rep Weiner in particular, but is using this opportunistically?
Why would such a person try to screw Lee? Well, either they knew Lee would react very strongly to being targeted, or they dislike both Lee and JG (the Patriot example does work well here).
Do I think this is what happened? Hell no. It’s out on a limb. I think it’s either 1) two people, Jenny, with the various sockpuppets and dishonesty about threats, and PatriotUSA76, a right winger who just had a few clues we don’t understand how he obtained yet or 2) JG being Patriot as well.
See why I terminated my twitter account? I was worried I was clouding the threats and confusion, and that’s a lot more serious than just saying ‘I’m spartacus’ for an anonymous tipster.
Dustin (c16eca) — 6/29/2011 @ 4:31 pmGood link jeffeneff. Thanks.
DRJ (fdd243) — 6/29/2011 @ 4:31 pmDustin (or anyone),
Come up with a scenario where JG is who she claims to be — a person that has nothing whatsoever to do with this story.
Anything else actually proves my point – that she is connected to the case.
Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 6/29/2011 @ 4:34 pmLee, you aren’t drawing distinction with the necessary precision there.
Your Caller is a terrible liar and involved in the socking and perhaps responsible for all of it, including patriot.
But that person may only be purporting to be Jennifer George.
SarahW (af7312) — 6/29/2011 @ 4:40 pmI heard you say police had visted her apartment. Did she sign a statement? Or did he just take one? Did she provide identification of any kind? Does the address line up with a person bearing her name, or is she just someone’s “roomate”?
SarahW (af7312) — 6/29/2011 @ 4:42 pmBy police, I mean a detective known to you…
SarahW (af7312) — 6/29/2011 @ 4:44 pmShe went in and filed a police report.
A detective went to her house.
But if she’s a crazed roommate who pretended to be Jennifer George, guess what? We STILL found Nikki Reid.
The goal isn’t to prove someone named ‘Jennifer George’ did it.
The goal is to find the person behind Nikki.
And she’s been found.
Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 6/29/2011 @ 4:46 pmLee,
You think PatriotUSA76 might be Jenny, right? Isn’t it also possible that a number of people — including people he followed, people who followed him, and people who stumbled on the story — might have noticed who was tweeting to or about Weiner and kept screenshots or notes about them? (Frankly, it seems like some of Weiner’s followers were as involved with each other as they were with Weiner.)
In other words, you found Jenny, so how can you be so sure that someone else didn’t find her, too — including the possibility they found her before Weiner sent his photo?
DRJ (fdd243) — 6/29/2011 @ 4:50 pmI didn’t find Jenny.
Jenny found me.
Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 6/29/2011 @ 4:51 pmOkay, sorry. Nevertheless, isn’t it possible someone else found her?
DRJ (fdd243) — 6/29/2011 @ 4:52 pmBlackburnsghost,
Yesterday, I felt more confidence this thing was approaching the end. Now, I’m not so sure. Lee’s
news is an unexpected twist.
To a certain extent, I see this issue as a convergence. A traffic accident caused by the pursuit of differing motives. Had the accident not happened, it’s probable nobody would have noticed.
cap'n john's nephew (28dda5) — 6/29/2011 @ 4:52 pmLee, oh well, I agree with THAT – Nikki is found.
I think it’s more likely that she is the JG interested in screenwriting.
However, I would like that nailed down. An impersonator of that one Jennifer George is possible though.
SarahW (af7312) — 6/29/2011 @ 4:53 pmI concede that much. I can’t work out a way this isn’t correct.
Dustin (c16eca) — 6/29/2011 @ 4:54 pmAnd it does appear you’ve found the person who set up the starchild111 account, but I thought Jenny claimed she abandoned it. Perhaps that’s not a credible claim, but please tell me again why you are sure her claim is not true.
DRJ (fdd243) — 6/29/2011 @ 4:54 pmLike SarahW I hope the detective verified the mole on the side of her nose with the same one shown on her picture on her state issued drivers license. (Not literally saying she has a mole, but using that as an example of an identifying feature to ascertain he was visiting and speaking with the real person.) Also, did Lee ask the professor and his wife for any physical description of the nutty girl whom they said was a former student?
elissa (3f799c) — 6/29/2011 @ 4:55 pmKoam,
EVEN IF I GIVE YOU the (rather implausible) argument that she might could have found Lee… You still have to explain away about 20 more highly implausible facts not the least of which is how two people found her in minutes -and knew she was the right Jenny George- but nobody else has been able to find her.
Paul (e625b8) — 6/29/2011 @ 4:56 pmBy the way, on what date did Jenny call you? Without that information, I don’t see how we can respond to the question(s) in your post.
DRJ (fdd243) — 6/29/2011 @ 4:57 pm92 DRJ
>And it does appear you’ve found the person who set up the starchild111 account, but I thought Jenny claimed she abandoned it. Perhaps that’s not a credible claim, but please tell me again why you are sure her claim is not true.
The last nail in that coffin was nailed about 3 (+/-) posts below this one…The post were someone (az5 or agcon I think) found a google cache her twitter page from April. .. go look.
Paul (e625b8) — 6/29/2011 @ 5:02 pm==I didn’t find Jenny.
Jenny found me==
Yes, Lee— and “the Reids” also found Tommy Christopher. And Patriot found Filmladd. How does all this finding occur? ( Personally, I find all the finding to be interesting if not peculiar.
elissa (3f799c) — 6/29/2011 @ 5:03 pmSo we found something, but have nothing, is that about right?
Tutu (54ce64) — 6/29/2011 @ 5:05 pm95 By the way, on what date did Jenny call you? Without that information, I don’t see how we can respond to the question(s) in your post.
Comment by DRJ — 6/29/2011 @ 4:57 pm
——————–
Dude, it is not HIS responsibility to retell the same story with every post. In fact it is his responsibility to NOT do that lest he bore us to tears.
If you want to comment on someone’s thread it is YOUR responsibility to freaking know what you are talking about.
The information you ask for has been told and retold dozens of times. Look a bit before you ask to be spoon fed.
/end rant (sorry)
Paul (e625b8) — 6/29/2011 @ 5:06 pmPaul, no reason to be impolite to DRJ. She’s probably the nicest commenter here.
And it’s difficult… practically impossible to keep up with every aspect of the story.
In fact, I think it is Lee’s responsibility to remind us of the crucial facts in each post. Optionally, he could have a very discrete bullet list of the facts, linking to his original post discussing them, and then link that as his ‘facts I’m relying on’ in each new post.
Dustin (c16eca) — 6/29/2011 @ 5:08 pmAnd yes, that makes me a hypocrite. I know. But still.
Dustin (c16eca) — 6/29/2011 @ 5:09 pm97 Don’t forget John Reid found Patterico.
They just keep finding people to tell their story too… but never anyone who will meet them face to face.
(I loved the part where ‘he’ asked “You any of you have a blog” as if ‘he’ had no clue who Patrick was.)
Paul (e625b8) — 6/29/2011 @ 5:10 pmI’ve been reading all the posts, Paul, and I concede Jenny’s ownership of the account is suggestive. Nevertheless, I submit Lee has posed a theory but hasn’t proven his case. For example, as pointed out by jeffeneff’s comment above, Prudence Paine’s comparison of starchild111’s tweets reveals similarities and differences. It’s fine to be convinced by the similarities but that doesn’t make the differences, or the questions, disappear.
DRJ (fdd243) — 6/29/2011 @ 5:11 pmLee has never made his case, Paul, but I’m happy to leave. Again.
DRJ (fdd243) — 6/29/2011 @ 5:12 pmDustin you beat me to the punch. DRJ is one of the longest tenured and most respected bloggers and commenters on Patterico’s site. Not every person who is interested in the Weinergate story has the time to follow it 24/7 or to read every single comment on every Weiner related thread over the last month, so there is going to be some unavoidable duplication of effort.
elissa (3f799c) — 6/29/2011 @ 5:16 pmCap’n John elaborate if you have time please. I’m so confused now.
Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c) — 6/29/2011 @ 5:17 pmI’m getting caught on unfinished old things
I haven’t listened to the radio show will do now.
btw nice to see a fellow descendant of (hopefully) fisherman or perhaps cereal.
Dustin, have you ever worked a big story on a big blog? The amount of effort -just to type, link and proofread- can be enormous even before we get to the writing, explaining and researching part.
Lee has a nice list of all the facts he relies on. I think he calls it leestranahan.com.
KnowhatImean?
And let me be clear why I went into rant mode.
It really bothers me when someone says “I haven’t followed the story, I don’t know any of the facts, but since I don’t know the what your proof is, you must be wrong.”
That bothers the piss out of me. Mostly because I have been there.
Don’t blame a blogger because you have not kept up with a story… that’s not his fault.
/end another rant 😉
Paul (e625b8) — 6/29/2011 @ 5:18 pm>Lee has never made his case, Paul
You are simply wrong. Very Very wrong.
Paul (e625b8) — 6/29/2011 @ 5:19 pmWell, as I’m sure you know, I also have a propensity to get pissed off. I’m not even willing to visit blogs that reveal the IP addresses of commenters suspected (or even known) of being PatriotUSA76, btw.
Anyway, Lee is making part of his case here. I assume because he would like people who read this blog, and not that blog, to grasp the story.
I’m not suggesting the bullet point list to be an ankle biting jerk. I think it’s a helpful suggestion that would help Lee do what he wants to do in making his argument.
And if DRJ is asking for clarification or details, you can take it to the bank someone has not made the case clear enough.
I don’t hear Lee complaining about how hard his job is, actually, so I’m going to resist the urge to make a quip about what he could do if he had.
Dustin (c16eca) — 6/29/2011 @ 5:23 pmAnyway, I will happily grant that it would be extremely challenging to cover this story fairly and completely. Herculean.
Dustin (c16eca) — 6/29/2011 @ 5:25 pmDRJ, If Lee never made his case, how come I (and many others) know all of the facts surrounding the case?
Did we all read Lee’s mind? No we read his posts and listened to his show.
JUST BECAUSE YOU DID NOT READ IT DOES NOT MEAN HE DID NOT PUBLISH IT.
Paul (e625b8) — 6/29/2011 @ 5:25 pmI really think you owe the man an apology.
You know, DRJ just asked for help. She’s not really accusing anyone of having a fault, aside from saying she needs more evidence.
Dustin (c16eca) — 6/29/2011 @ 5:26 pmAnyway, if DRJ leaves because of the shit tenor of this comment section, I’m probably partly to blame for my negative contributions that indirectly have made this an uglier discussion.
So I apologize.
Dustin (c16eca) — 6/29/2011 @ 5:27 pmPaul, you are pretty much in weinernozzle territory now. Apologize.
JD (b98cae) — 6/29/2011 @ 5:27 pmDustin my 111 also answers your 109..
Keep up man or quit yer whining. 😉
Paul (e625b8) — 6/29/2011 @ 5:28 pmPaul, I know you well enough by now to know you’re not intending to be rude, actually. Just understand that DRJ’s request is not whining.
Dustin (c16eca) — 6/29/2011 @ 5:28 pm113 JD
Paul (e625b8) — 6/29/2011 @ 5:29 pmhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_bdMecxias
I think Mr. “Johnny-come-lately” Paul should check himself before he wrecks himself. Let Lee get offended beyond recognition for himself if he likes. He doesn’t need you to nuke long-time, respected residents of the blog.
In other words, get stuffed Paul.
Stashiu3 (44da70) — 6/29/2011 @ 5:30 pmI’m also sorry for subjecting you to that link 😉
OK… going swimming. catch up to the debate later.
Paul (e625b8) — 6/29/2011 @ 5:30 pmPaul is kind of a weinernozzle.
JD (d48c3b) — 6/29/2011 @ 5:36 pmAny scenario theorizing a general setup of JG has to be plausible. Even if you can make a case that someone else could have discovered her identity to threaten her, there are giant hurdles to any theory calling her a patsy. The next step in your theory has to be that “they” happened on to an abandoned account of a screenwriter, how convenient! And they then whispered “Stranahan” in her ear as they were threatening her… I haven’t really taken it past this point, the theory keeps falling apart on me. I’ve been working trying to find holes in Lee’s basics here, and I can’t.
jeffeneff (707f3d) — 6/29/2011 @ 5:37 pmDid you hear that episode where he said he had a secret about me proving I was a horrible person and a liar and a punk? I didn’t. A member of my family heard it, and it was damn embarrassing. Note when asked to back that up in print or apologize I have been ignored.
So excuse those of us who prefer this format to that one.
Dustin (c16eca) — 6/29/2011 @ 5:38 pmAlso, I think Paul needs to apologize for linking John Denver.
jeffeneff (707f3d) — 6/29/2011 @ 5:38 pmwhoever is moderating, delete my 123. It’s not worth it today.
Dustin (c16eca) — 6/29/2011 @ 5:39 pmWhat day did Jenny call Lee? I think it was June 20.
I just went over the last couple of weeks on Lee’s blog and did not see the date mentioned, but I think June 20.
Lee, consider using this entry on your blog and add that date and other important details.
Dustin (c16eca) — 6/29/2011 @ 5:52 pmI think many people whether or not they are lawyers (as many Patterico commenters are) like to see a case laid out as simply as possible with clean exhibits, as if it were going to a grand jury or be presented at trial. In this context (Weinergate) at this point I’m speaking specifically about process–not any assignment of criminality.
A really good writer has to do the same thing, too. Proactively address questions such as a reasonable person/juror might have. Connect the dots for the reader, not just mention the dots and assume the reader draws the same conclusions. Otherwise, the story is all over the place and the reader gets confused and frustrated. Maybe the Jenny case Lee has is proved 100% on evidence he has, but clearly, based on many comments here– as its prosecutor Lee has not yet gotten his case’s presentation to be sufficiently courtroom ready for the Patterico.com jury to render a verdict. And perhaps he is perfectly fine with that.
elissa (3f799c) — 6/29/2011 @ 5:56 pmHow about similar names on Facebook?
ltw (370236) — 6/29/2011 @ 5:58 pmElissa, that’s well said. And I think Lee doesn’t necessarily want to present his story that way. And that’s obviously his perogative. I think he wants to present the story in a way that makes it more fun and mysterious. I’m trying hard to say this charitably, btw, but I think you see what i’m meaning.
Dustin (c16eca) — 6/29/2011 @ 6:01 pmJust thinking outside the box and don’t want involve people that shouldn’t be. Help Lee.
ltw (370236) — 6/29/2011 @ 6:01 pmI’m reprinting this comment in full because it’s so ironic. Yes, Paul, I know what it’s like to post. I also know about logic and making cases, and Lee hasn’t made his. If he had, he could easily explain his theory and provide documentation. But all he’s done so far is ask us to take his word for facts and agree with his conclusions.
I tend to believe that Lee can back up his facts — such as he got a phone call from Jenny George in Boston, and he verified her identity by calling a UCLA professor and his wife — but I’m doing that because he posts here and, to me, that means he has Patterico’s confidence. Absent that, I wouldn’t believe anything Lee says. However, I don’t know if Lee has correctly stated the facts and neither can you. The most you can say is that Lee has convinced you, but the real issue is whether Lee’s conclusions are correct. I know I can’t agree with his conclusions based on what he’s provided so far. (And, once again, I’ve read every word and listened to every interminable podcast.) Furthermore, if you’ve really read all of Lee’s posts and Koam’s comments, you know Lee tends to mix facts with conclusions.
But I do want to thank you for one thing, Paul. I can’t believe I ever came back but thank you for taking my place.
DRJ (fdd243) — 6/29/2011 @ 6:06 pmjeffeneff – Too many plausible scenarios to write it off without linking ID for certain to caller.
These may be less likely than the linear linking of name to caller, certainly the simplest solution.
But plausible scenarios are so numerous it’s hard to think how to list them, with motive for using that account and pretending to be JG to lee, ranging from opportunistic to malicious directed revenge, and everything in between.
All that is necessary in addition to creating or gaining access to the account, is some notion of who JG is and a wish to misdirect.
Stolen identity is not rare. The people who do that are various amalgamations of liar and nutcase. A disgruntled friend, an evil twin, an ex-lover, a trickster who is just taking advantage…this is a person who steals and invents biographies, presents false ID..
It ought to be a simple matter to confirm the caller is the same person who took the classes. I think someone ought to do it, though it won’t be me.
SarahW (af7312) — 6/29/2011 @ 6:09 pmin·ter·mi·na·ble
adjective /inˈtərmənəbəl/
Endless (often used hyperbolically)
(I learn something new every day).
Dustin (c16eca) — 6/29/2011 @ 6:10 pmBy the way, Paul. If it’s true that Jenny George (who as I understand it is also known as Jenay) called Lee on June 20, 2011, maybe it’s because she Googled and found her name linked to the Weiner story here. Perhaps she also noticed Lee’s post. Is that possible?
DRJ (fdd243) — 6/29/2011 @ 6:15 pmPaul,
DRJ does not deserve insults. She is also living proof that pseudonymous commenters should not always be ignored.
A comment section where someone like DRJ does not feel comfortable is not a comment section I want to run.
Think very carefully before posting your next comment.
Patterico (3b3c39) — 6/29/2011 @ 6:18 pmDustin….”makes it more fun and mysterious”. Fun, I understand, but more mysterious? That’s some funny shit right there.
Tutu (54ce64) — 6/29/2011 @ 6:19 pmkoam’s “lol” observation is inaccurate.
Patterico (3b3c39) — 6/29/2011 @ 6:28 pmJenay as Jenny. Search for Jenay George in Boston? Help Lee.
ltw (370236) — 6/29/2011 @ 6:31 pmStashiu3
I dont mean any disrespect with this:
Paul has fallen into DRJ’s passive aggressive way of arguing while accusing someone basically of being wrong – which in the blogging world is clling someone a liar or stupid or both
You took offense to my asking her to look at my links and info after she posted a retort to months of research, court documents, audited financial statements with a opinion piece totally erroneous written in Sarah Palin’s hometown newspaper authored by one of the MOST DISCREDITED liberal liars in alaska who was actually sued by the Republican party for posing as a republican and was forced to be a democrat.
and I find it dubious that someone who has been known to be a careful researcher used such an article because a simple google of this author’s name would have revealed all that – but she linked it anyway and tried to say – gee eric you are wrong
And I didnt handle it correctly and for that I am sorry but I cant unring the bell – but It made Pat disgusted – rightfully so – you were outraged – undertandably – and I wished I had handled it better and I should have
But the fact still remains – thats what she linked an liberal opinion piece to defend the indefensible
And compounding it further is her continued astonishing claim that big oil bribed legislators for oil leases – when in fact a lobbiest who owned a sub contracting company was trying to influence the legislators to NOT raise taxes even more after they had just accepted an historic massive tax increase and were facing confiscation of their investments in Alaska by an out of control governor who quit and the democrats in Alaska – this again is a fact
Oil leases are worth tens if not hundreds of billions of dollars EACH over the 30 to 50 years of production and ownership is conveyed once by the state and encroachment on leases is a dirty highly litigated area and these oil companies do not like each other, so since bribery claimed by her as the reason for Palins horrible actions?
All it confirms is that DRJ – like everyone else here – makes up their opinion and is rarely swayed by anything – if she disagrees with lee then disagree with evidence – something concrete
But if you are there if force the politeness rule towards DRJ and who you think deserves it – how about to lee, to me and others who disagree but are treated pretty nastily – even by DRJ at times
EricPWJohnson (d84fb0) — 6/29/2011 @ 6:33 pmI am embarrassed to admit that I have not read through much of the Patriot material until today. Thanks to whoever posted the link to filmladd’s interview with Patriot.
This is my first reaction to reading through the filmladd interview with Patriot. Please keep in mind that I don’t twitter like many of you, and therefore, my reaction is limited to less resource material. Ok, my two cents:
*Patriot struck me as authentic on the first take.
Very angry, frustrated and alarmed that he might lose visitation rights. I found myself caught up with his grief over his daughter’s sexual abuse and the fear of losing his children.
*At this early point, I was leaning towards believing that Patriot could not be the hand behind all this cyber-puppeteering or the alter-ego of JohnReid.
I agree with parts of earlier evaluations:
*He uses simple words
*He’s gruff, blunt, sounds like some guy sitting at the bar during an episode of Friends or mix of stereotypes: Archie Bunker and “Bubba the good ol’ boy”
*He’s not well-educated or very intelligent ( He doesn’t recognize 10th-grade world history terms such as collectivism- you don’t have to be a political science major to cover that material)
Other Notes:
*Projects his feelings of protection toward family
*Projects his feelings of guilt and responsibility for his daughter’s attack/the ex-wife thinks he is responsible as well
*Project fear of the ex-wife’s ability to remove the children
*owns a business
*Projects anger that he blew it in some fashion which allowed his wife to restrict his time with his children
*Projects violence- or at least threatening violence to protect his children ( I don’t know if I would call this reaction usual for fathers)
*States approves of Ewok (well on that point he has good taste)
*Projects contempt for everyones’ intelligence
*Projects that he is in control
*Hates Weiner but expresses admiration for his political skills
Language:
*Has a northern way of expression but uses the word “You all” which is southern expression
“that” “this” for a noun
*Repeats himself- Fools!
*He “writes like he talks”. A Voice to text program?? Or a dialogue?
Things that disturbed me
Patriot doesn’t make the usual mistakes that you find with that low level of vocabulary and syntex. For example: Patriot doesn’t confuse the use of your and you’re, its and it’s or doesn’t use double negatives or many of the grammatical mistakes you would find with a novice. *The use of “that” and “this” for a noun is something that pops up in college students essays.
I found the lack of mistakes a contradiction in his delievery. I also found the sentence breaks in his responses similar to a script.
At this point, I find my opinion of Patriot unresolved. His excuses made sense at first glance. Who would want to put their children under the microscope or themselves? I am torn between feeling that he expressed real anguish over his children but braking over that odd discrepancy in his writing style. Then I have to ask, why even do the interview?. Why expose the topic of his daughter’s abuse to the world in order to excuse his own actions?
I have to consider that a puppeteer/screenwriter might decide to use a story of child abuse to trigger great sympathy. It would be a powerful form of manipulation on his readers and certainly diverts the attention away from suspicions over his authenticity.
Is Patriot someone who talks big, fires the cannon, but runs for cover leaving his friends to face the music when danger comes? Is he just joe average trying to survive life? Or is he a right-wing caricature of some left-wing sockpuppet master?
I am still processing this interview and will re-read it. Fascinating stuff.
bmertz (d77c52) — 6/29/2011 @ 6:34 pmPaul is right, again — blogging a story is a lot of work.
And I’ve complained openly about it.
I’ve been attacked fairly relentlessly from day one on this story; first on the left, then on the right. That’s no fun.
I’ve been threatened — read the Patriot interviews. I’ve had a false police report filed against me.
And — I’ve made my case. The responses now are literally nutty — a Jenny George impersonator? A PLOT to impersonate Jenny George? Really? Are you serious? THAT is the response?
Guess what — when those unproven, fictional, totally far-fetched solutions are all that’s left — I win.
But look – some people still think OJ is innocent. There is no such thing as 100% consensus. Whatever. Can’t say I didn’t tell you.
Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 6/29/2011 @ 6:43 pm130. Sarah W I am saying that while it could be tough to prove JG’s two threats weren’t real absent court-opened phone logs, unless you demolish the (I think tight) case for her being a sock, it is most highly improbable that she’s being used by another sock, just due to Occam’s Razor.
jeffeneff (707f3d) — 6/29/2011 @ 6:43 pmJeff
If she can’t prove they happened — and can’t even PROVIDE A PLAUSIBLE EXPLANATION OF HOW THEY COULD HAVE HAPPENED — that’s it. No calls.
You don’t have to disprove an unfounded assertion.
She has to prove the calls DID happen at this point — especially since she’s been shown to be a liar on things like signed police reports.
Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 6/29/2011 @ 6:48 pmObviously there were death threats
How is this even remotely obvious?
Enigmaticore (491183) — 6/29/2011 @ 6:49 pmLee, I’m not talking about her case, I’m talking about your case vs. alternate scenarios.
jeffeneff (707f3d) — 6/29/2011 @ 6:50 pmfor those of you trying to connect dan wolfe to “nikki reid” or JGMA or anyone else involved in the recent developments, let me refer you to a quote of his early on…
“if the FBI – not Stranahan, not you, not anyone else wants to look at my life, I would be pleased.”
i’ll let those of you who have been following this story closely figure out when this statement was made. do you not believe he feels the same way now? not only that statement, but read everything he said in the next 20 minutes. i still believe dan, and nobody on this board will convince me otherwise.
btw, i’m not here to bash stranahan, despite our now well-documented differences. of all the people involved in this story, dan wolfe remains the most fascinating… i get it. what i don’t get is why, despite dan’s welcome of an investigation of him from the beginning, so many now refuse to believe him.
razor419 (04364e) — 6/29/2011 @ 6:55 pmJeff — I wasn’t aiming that whole comment at you. I started by addressing you and then it turned into another thing.
Sorry.
Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 6/29/2011 @ 6:56 pmOne way to limited the complaints is to reduce what you ask of your audience.
And no, Paul is not right. Not about what really matters. And not about the date Jenny called you, which he claimed to know, but did not tell us.
But I like Paul.
Still, when someone asks or doubts, jumping down their throat reminds me of this.
And my meaning is that it makes people a little uneasy and suspicious. It makes them ask more questions. Sure, I’m sure there is a blog post where Lee has already noted the date. Or one where he is concretely down on details. Every detail. So he can’t change the details later when a theory is shot down.
But I didn’t find it in my admittedly cursory attempt to find it. That makes it difficult to answer Lee’s challenges, which I do think I can do mainly because I’ve tried theorizing many times and had someone shoot them down, and via this quasi gauntlet of discussion, gotten an idea of what the established facts are.
DRJ is not going to bother with that, I can tell you now.
And if you don’t have DRJ on your side, it’s worth wondering if you could make the case easier to find.
Sometimes you have been mistaken, so it’s not much vindication for you if you eventually do find a PatriotUSA76 or a hacker who isn’t an innocent third party.
You win my concession that you are probably right. And you are probably right. But when you use terms like unproven and fictional interchangeably, it’s clear you do not understand what constitutes fact and what constitutes an induction.
Every solution is far-fetched. Your theory is so far fetched that your argument is ‘explain an alternative that isn’t far fetched’.
I do believe your theory, but let’s not react to doubters harshly. I mean, sure, when they doubt the way I did about the phone call, they probably have some harshness coming to them. No problem (and note I’ve never complained about the things said in reaction, on the discussion thread where I’ve been a doubter, to demonstrate that I am mistaken or even out of line, because that is clearly the right way to respond.
But how many DRJs read this thread and didn’t even bother to comment the undemonstrated or even unstated premises?
Dustin (c16eca) — 6/29/2011 @ 7:01 pmI was being imprecise, and explaining why I was trying to be more serious and direct in this thread, because while there may not have been threats to Jenny, there obviously have been what I consider death threats. I’m refering to what Ace and Patterico received.
I did note this lack of precision, which I admit is a pretty bad one, quickly after that comment.
Dustin (c16eca) — 6/29/2011 @ 7:03 pmEPWJ,
…
Sincerely.
Stashiu3 (44da70) — 6/29/2011 @ 7:03 pmhey, razor! You make a good point, and Dan is either unafraid of a real investigation or he’s just confident he’s covered his tracks well enough.
And I’m not sure an FBI investigation is realistic.
Dustin (c16eca) — 6/29/2011 @ 7:04 pmThe name Jennifer George is out there in at least 1 search site as associated with nickname Starchild111
If we accept the caller’s claim that she’s JG and she started the starchild account. Then the name Jennifer George is likely attached to Starchild111
in the twitter records and perhaps in other associations. Perhaps this person used starchild111 or starchild in other contexts.
When we all learned that JG is a name to watch is immaterial. If someone wanted to find out who was behind the starchild account, they may have been searching for JG for longer than we all have. The world doesn’t revolve around what we know and when we know it.
And if this were bigger than “angry ex-girlfriend”…corporate or governmental, then greater research resources may have been put against the search.
koam @wittier (62b38e) — 6/29/2011 @ 7:07 pmEPWJ, DRJ isn’t being passive aggressive. She directly said what she thought, what she needed and answer to, and didn’t get in the mud with the rest of us.
There is a difference between being passive aggressive and being direct and nice.
Dustin (c16eca) — 6/29/2011 @ 7:08 pmdustin –
i don’t believe an FBI investigation is likely at this point either. but when that was said by dan? at that point i would have said it was likely.
razor419 (04364e) — 6/29/2011 @ 7:09 pmPatterico I did not insult anyone. And for someone who continually excoriates others for jumping to conclusions, I would think you would know that.
I simply lamented the fact that people want to come to a comment section -having not kept up with a story- and whine that the author did not spoon feed them.
I don’t think that is fair to the author nor do I think it is fair to the other commenters.
As for your veiled threat at the end of your comment, no need Patrick, I can leave too.
See ya
Paul (e625b8) — 6/29/2011 @ 7:11 pmWell, he’s not showing much fear of being proven to be Nikki/John/Jenay/Moondawg/Starchild, that’s for sure.
I cannot intelligently say what he is, but if he’s a fake, he’s the most convincing fake I’ve seen.
Dustin (c16eca) — 6/29/2011 @ 7:12 pmLee,
I’ve liked your work here so far. I think you make some leaps of logic, based on knowledge you have that others don’t, so I don’t think asking you to connect the dots is unreasonable.
Btw, if you think DRJ doesn’t understand how to blog a big story, I hope you educate yourself quickly. Look at the archives here or talk with Patterico.
Stashiu3 (44da70) — 6/29/2011 @ 7:12 pmHe just favors DRJ, which let me tell you, is very reasonable of him. Stick around, Paul.
Dustin (c16eca) — 6/29/2011 @ 7:13 pmOne more thing before I beat feet….
(Because he deserves it)
Thanks Lee for all your effort. If you’re right, you’ll have the last laugh and if by chance you’re wrong, there’s at least one guy who thinks you did your level best with the information at hand.
Either way good luck to ya.
Paul
Paul (e625b8) — 6/29/2011 @ 7:14 pmI did note this lack of precision, which I admit is a pretty bad one, quickly after that comment.
My apologies. I admit, I did not read all of the comments before hitting submit. I should have.
Enigmaticore (491183) — 6/29/2011 @ 7:16 pmWas I talking to DRJ? Nope. I wasn’t.
Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 6/29/2011 @ 7:16 pmNo apology necessary. Your reaction was a smart one.
Hence my plural. At least that’s what I intended, but I type like a drunk chimp. Anyway, let’s all work on how we deal with doubters. Which you have to admit, you’re ‘don’t say I didn’t tell you’ isn’t exactly the perfect solution to.
Dustin (c16eca) — 6/29/2011 @ 7:18 pmRazor,
Quick question — how can the FBI look into Dan’s life?
Because — I bet they’d like to at this point.
But seriously — how? Because since Dan is a big fat fakey faker, that statement is just blowing smoke. It’s meaningless.
Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 6/29/2011 @ 7:19 pmNope, you just stated Paul was right in his comment to DRJ. This logic-thing is a pattern I guess? Oh well, good luck to you. Back to lurking.
Stashiu3 (44da70) — 6/29/2011 @ 7:23 pmEpwj is a f@cling imbecile. DRJ has toenail clippings that are smarter and more honest than epwj could ever dream of being.
JD (0d01eb) — 6/29/2011 @ 7:28 pmStashiu3
….
whatever you were going to say I missed it
EricPWJohnson (c5f1fc) — 6/29/2011 @ 7:29 pmWHAT DAY DID THE PHONE CALL HAPPEN?
Dustin (c16eca) — 6/29/2011 @ 7:35 pmNote: I’m not saying it didn’t. But jeeeeeeeeez why all this drama instead of a date?
Dustin (c16eca) — 6/29/2011 @ 7:38 pmare you asking how the FBI would have cause to look into dan’s life? or are you asking how they would have the ability? because if you are asking the latter, you are
naive. LOL Lol lol
razor419 (04364e) — 6/29/2011 @ 7:45 pmIf she can’t prove they happened — and can’t even PROVIDE A PLAUSIBLE EXPLANATION OF HOW THEY COULD HAVE HAPPENED — that’s it. No calls.
The logic that no one could have found her number is circular though. It assumes that she’s lying when she says she stopped using the account.
Assume for a moment that she’s telling the truth. Then someone must have taken over the twitter account. Maybe they hacked it. Maybe they guessed her password. (And judging from the original “Jenay” tweets, she doesn’t necessarily seem like the most technically sophisticated person on the planet. She may have used an obvious password -or just told it to someone).
So the person who takes over the account then has access to the personal information associated with it. This is information no one else has, and could be sufficient to track her down.
If we assume that person is also the one who has sent the other threats, then it’s not unreasonable to think that he (or she) may have threatened her too. Is it the most likely of all possible scenarios ? Maybe not. But it’s not completely implausible either.
Dumbledore (ae38dd) — 6/29/2011 @ 8:21 pmDumble,
What are you talking about?
She told me and the police she got threats.
There’s no evidence of them.
And why would the person who ‘took over her account’ threaten her?
And — what?
Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 6/29/2011 @ 8:44 pmDustin — I’ve said this any number of places — Sunday before last
Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 6/29/2011 @ 8:45 pmIt seems a very obvious point that typing “I’m open to the FBI investigating me” is a meaningless indicator of veracity when typed into etherspace. If you can’t agree with that, there’s little point in further discussion.
jeffeneff (707f3d) — 6/29/2011 @ 8:45 pmDRJ is an angel. She just is.
MayBee (081489) — 6/29/2011 @ 9:03 pmLee, stop it. Stop calling it silly to want to nail down a very loose end. Your caller is a liar who fakes biographies and ID, it’s no stretch to think such a person is capable of pretending to be someone he is not.
I don’t “believe” anything except that it is possible to rule this out, and it has not been ruled out.
Identity theft, again, for emphasis, IS NOT RARE, especially by liars with a track record of fakery who want to conceal their true identity.
If I can post occasionally as my husband BY ACCIDENT, do you think a determined liar could never do such a thing on purpose ?
Why are you so stubborn about it being “confirmed” the Jenny George the Writing prf talked about with you is the same person who called you, when all he did is conffirm such a person as Jenny George exists
Sarahw (af7312) — 6/29/2011 @ 9:12 pm57 Paul.
She got 2 calls. Caller could have said more than, “you’ll be dead before sundown.”
koam (62b38e) — 6/29/2011 @ 9:17 pmThat said there are indication, tal ked about at length by Prudence, that the account was always held by the same person; the account originator seems to follow similar pattern of sidling up to a bigger ” tweet object” by attempting to ingratiate himself with satellites of the big planet.
This person is your caller, and is probably the Jennifer George described by the writing professor. but be careful. Your cat has an account on Twitter, an I am starting to believe someone else might be behind setting up that account.
Sarahw (af7312) — 6/29/2011 @ 9:26 pm64 Lee
Both her name and location were on Twitter’s files.
Pay someone with access to Twitter internals.
Enough details to narrow it down to her.
Perhaps she used the nickname elsewhere.
Perhaps she’s registered on Natalie Martinez fan pages..or any of the other celebs.
123People had her full name with the nickname. Other locations could have an archive of that too.
koam (62b38e) — 6/29/2011 @ 9:30 pmWhile considering important facts, just sayin, Gennette, you are a courageous woman.
ltw (370236) — 6/29/2011 @ 9:30 pmThat’s June 19, 2011, DRJ. If you’re even still lurking.
Dustin (c16eca) — 6/29/2011 @ 9:36 pmThere are zero mentions of the call on June 19 2011 on Leestranahan.com.
There are zero mentions of the call on June 20 2011 either.
He describes his audio program thusly on June 20. I assume he described the call during this show, but ‘deep in the weeds’ is an odd way to describe a pivot.
Dustin (c16eca) — 6/29/2011 @ 9:51 pm139 SaraW
JG is a sock too?
OK, now I’m confused.
koam (62b38e) — 6/29/2011 @ 9:55 pm145 Dustin
You have trouble finding the date because the all-important call wasn’t written up.
It was put on the radio show under the title
Betty & Veronica Solved?
The story is told aloud, with callers, and cats, and the like. And it’s a great story. And you know the call came in like 15 minute after Lee emailed someone, so she was the caller. Forget that last part, that was only 90%.
But the problem is there’s no writeup to refer to. Every commenter here has to go back and listen to the hour of radio to check on the wording of what he remembers from the crazy lady’s call.
And I’m not complaining. I love the radio show. Lee makes it very exciting. But a week later we’re not going to have good conversations that are based on facts presented in audio. It’s just too tough for everyone to go back and listen to an hour over and over again. I listened to it again a day or 2 ago…but it’s hard to remember all the details. On other days, I have even written up a little summary, like here on 6/25 where Lee posted a show titled “Nikki revealed, for real” My writeup on the radio show. I tried to sort out the facts from the conclusions/conjecture drawn from the facts presented.
We need software that will transcribe the audio into text. I know google has that stuff. …my Google voice does it, but not too well for some voices. Lee speaks loudly and clearly so perhaps software could do a good job.
koam (62b38e) — 6/29/2011 @ 10:36 pmIf JG is starchild and Patriot what was the freakin’ point? Isn’t JG a leftist from MA? Someone please connect the dots, because I’m seriously confused about that. If I’ve missed that connection somewhere I apologize, but I don’t understand how that makes sense in the whole weinergate saga.
Susie Q (d82f3c) — 6/29/2011 @ 10:38 pmDustin. The date of the JG call to Lee is 6/20.
koam (62b38e) — 6/29/2011 @ 10:40 pmThat’s why I did the google searches ending on 6/20 to emulate what JG would have found if she googled “Weiner Nikki Reid” or “Weiner Starchild111” etc. …and she’d have found Lee easily.
Oh, and if JG is starchild/Nikki, but not Patriot, just what the heck was JG trying to accomplish in all this? She;s a leftist, right, so what was the motive regarding teh weiner?
Susie Q (d82f3c) — 6/29/2011 @ 10:42 pm167 Dumbledore
I agree.
koam (62b38e) — 6/29/2011 @ 10:49 pm181 Dustin.. or the radio show was in the wee hours of 6/20 and the call came the prior afternoon. In the show he says, “call was today.” Lee says above that Sunday was the call.
koam (62b38e) — 6/29/2011 @ 10:52 pm172 SarahW
Agree. Need further confirmation that caller was the same person prof knew…otherwise caller could just be someone who knows OF prof’s former student.
koam (62b38e) — 6/29/2011 @ 10:55 pm“She told me and the police she got threats.
There’s no evidence of them.”
Lee – Did the police confirm to you that there was no evidence of any threats after visiting Jenny at home?
Why did they call you if they did not believe there were any threats?
How exactly do you arrive at this “fact”, the lack of anyone else tracking down Jenny = proof of no threat?
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 6/29/2011 @ 10:57 pm180 Susie Q
You’re right. It makes no sense.
koam (62b38e) — 6/29/2011 @ 10:59 pm182 Susie Q
She’s a liberal. Weiner fan.
But this thing has destroyed Weiner…so how does it make sense, you ask?
One theory goes that she creates these accounts to establish relationships between Nikki, Marianela, two teens, and Weiner. Then with a scandal brewing, she offers supposed dirt on Weiner to #bornfreecrew and Breitbart, who publishes it in his plot to get rid of Weiner. Then she lets it out that the girls are fakey fake fakers and the dirt on weiner is just as fake. Weiner is inoculated from further damage from bimbo eruptions…and simultaneously shown to be the targed of a psycho right-wing conspiracy. It becomes the last nail in Breitbart’s career’s coffin as he’s shown to be an idiot who’ll distribute the most scandalous stuff just to achieve a political vendetta. And that’s just one theory.
koam (62b38e) — 6/29/2011 @ 11:07 pmI want to echo DRJ’s position. I think Lee sometimes confuses what are his opinions or conclusions and calls them facts or things that have been proven (they may well have been privately proven to Lee, but not publicly). Paul made the same mistakes during his obnoxious rants above.
I sincerely appreciate Lee’s tremendous efforts in sticking with this fur ball of a story. I don’t think it’s over.
I think he’s glossing over Gennette’s “dance Nikki dance” routine to get her revved up over Weiner. That was by no means innocent and smacks of direction from another party.
I would also like to hear from Mamma Reid, since Patterico is so friendly with JR9, let’s get the Mrs. on here to speak her mind.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 6/29/2011 @ 11:08 pm186, Daleyrocks.
good thinking. Don’t the cops listen to the threat calls before calling suspects?
koam (62b38e) — 6/29/2011 @ 11:08 pmEricPW – Stop whining, you pussy.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 6/29/2011 @ 11:14 pmDetectives don’t close a case without talking to the person being accused, I assume — even when the case seems to have no merit, as the detective indicated to me.
Again – if someone has a question for me, great. This is proven 100% — to me. It’s not really my job to prove it 100% to everyone in the world, especially since I’m working long hours for free.
Paul got it right. He’s my audience. Yay, Paul.
If anyone else has a question, ask it. But the idea that this the issue of the girl in Boston isn’t settled — you’re just wrong. So rather than babbling, ask something.
This is actually too darn real to a few of us, you know. It’s not just the fun diversion.
Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 6/29/2011 @ 11:40 pmWell, if she’s so ingenious why would she go through Gennette to get hooked up with teh weiner? Seems she would have been able to figure out a way to get teh weiner to follow her without that step. Well, unless Gennette was aware of and part of the plan?
So, she/they do all this and teh weiner screws it all up by sending his little weiner pic?
Susie Q (d82f3c) — 6/29/2011 @ 11:42 pmLee, can you answer my questions @ 180, 183 & 193? The issue of starchild/Nikki/JG may be resolved, but there are questions that still have no answers. The biggest is why?
Susie Q (d82f3c) — 6/29/2011 @ 11:45 pmIf you’re gonna lie about receiving death threat calls, why say they were on your answering machine unless you’re going to give them to the cops? If you’re gonna lie and are skilled enough to be doing all this other stuff, wouldn’t you say that you took the calls and that they weren’t recorded?
koam (62b38e) — 6/29/2011 @ 11:45 pm“Again – if someone has a question for me, great.”
Lee – I asked three in #186 and you are not directly answering any of them.
“even when the case seems to have no merit, as the detective indicated to me” – No merit related to you or no death threats? Big difference. Surely you see that. Also why not say earlier that the detective indicated no merit. Why do you keep doing this coy BS?
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 6/30/2011 @ 12:35 am“Detectives don’t close a case without talking to the person being accused, I assume”
Lee – You weren’t being accused, one of your followers was, right?
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 6/30/2011 @ 12:37 amNo – Daley. Jenny George walked into a Boston police station and filed a complaint saying that I made death threats against her.
Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 6/30/2011 @ 12:50 amSusie – discussed this multiple times.
My theory — pure conjecture, but fits all the facts — is that the person behind this is obsessed with Weiner and his love life. Possibly an ex of some kind.
Pariot, Nikki and so on are character — designed to get info on him or taunt him, as needed.
Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 6/30/2011 @ 12:53 amCorrelation does not equal causation. One can come up with any number of scenarios that “fit all the facts”, Mr. Stranahan, but that doesn’t make any single one of them true.
What I know according to data you have provided:
Apparently the Patriot account used two IP addresses that come from a “cloaking” service (WiTopia). One from Atlanta and one from Seattle. Interestingly, there is an author named Jenny George who lives in Atlanta but probably has nothing to do with this. But I find the notion of the connections coming from both Atlanta and Seattle interesting. There was a third IP address you provided that does not come from WiTopia. It comes from a server that hosts a porn site in the Washington DC area.
There is that interesting porn industry connection again.
Seattle is interesting as we see a connection to Seattle in this mess. But why Atlanta unless that is the PoP (point of presence) for WiTopia on the East Coast. This is where I get the notion that there might be two different people using the same account or a person who travels between coasts.
I am mostly interested in the Jenny/Nicky account, though. But I am guessing there is no IP address information associated with that account.
crosspatch (6adcc9) — 6/30/2011 @ 1:02 am“No – Daley. Jenny George walked into a Boston police station and filed a complaint saying that I made death threats against her.”
Lee – I understand that.
From your 6/26/11 Post:
“I received a phone call at about today from a police detective. He told me that a woman named Jennifer George had come into the station in the past few days and filed a police report claiming that she had received death threats, telling her that she’d be dead before sundown and that she should watch out for her family.”
When did the detective tell or infer to you the report Jenny filed was without merit or that there were no death threats? Do you know whether it was before or after the detective had visited with Jenny in person? I do not recall mention of those details in the comment thread. They were not in the post. Did you glean any other information from your conversation with the detective worth sharing?
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 6/30/2011 @ 1:29 am“Paul got it right. He’s my audience. Yay, Paul.”
Lee – Yay, skeptical Paul is the one who got very snippy with JR9 a few days ago (FOR THE FOURTH TIME!!!!) inviting him to dial into your podcast. The doofus couldn’t see what a fool he was making of himself by repeating the same question/demand that had no chance of occurring.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 6/30/2011 @ 1:44 amWhen did I get that impression from the Detective? When he talked to me, of course.
But further — there’s no way the death threats COULD have happened the way Jenny George told me they did.
And further further — there’s no rational explanation for how they COULD have happened.
Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 6/30/2011 @ 3:46 amI’m glad Lee could prove his story to his “audience”. Yay, Paul! But the real standard is to prove it to someone not in his audience, as he should know from all his hard work as a “volunteer” bulldog reporter. By the way, now that we’ve introduced the idea of the “Detective’s impression”, what exactly does that mean? Did the Detective overtly state there was absolutely no truth in JG’s report? Or was it a nudge and a wink, “We both know this girl is nuts.”
Birdbath (19803d) — 6/30/2011 @ 5:20 amLook who just can’t seem to stay out of Weinergate – none other than Nasty Neal:
from neal rauhauser nrauhauser@gmail.com
to jennifer.e.george@gmail.com
date Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 1:28 PM
subject Researching Weiner stalking, not interested in you
Jennifer,
So, I am researching the Weiner stalking, I have a short list of people I know were involved, a few more that I think were involved, and I might spend another month or three watching and gathering info. You’re not on my list at all. I do like Ginger Lee, Meagan Broussard, Mike Stack, and I think I know where to find the person who posed as Dan Wolfe.
I see this tiresome Stranahan fellow bothering you, and maybe this Patterico creature would like to get into the act, too. Sorry to hear you’re facing this – they pulled something similar to Weinergate with me last fall, but I’m not a big fish like Weiner so it didn’t go anywhere. But that’s why I take this stuff so seriously.
Maybe you’ve been told things that would help me solve the puzzle. Feel free to whisper in my ear if that’s the case, either from this one or anonymously – my email is quite public. If you’re sick of it all and just want it to stop I can understand that, too …
Neal Rauhauser
http://www.jennifergeorge.com/weiner.html
Obviously this JG has allegedly made all correspondence re Weiner publicly available on her website. Also obviously, the correspondence she’s made available is not in the format of screen caps, etc.
Note Neal’s language – he has a short list of people he KNOWS were involved.
Now did he know that she posts correspondence online, or was he a dunce?
Miranda (4104db) — 6/30/2011 @ 5:44 amBirdbrain,
I didn’t know Paul was my audience. But he clearly followed the facts that I’ve laid out. Pay more attention and maybe you can be in my audience, too!
And I said what I said about the Detective. Make up your mind as to what it means.
Miranda — I think Neal’s goal is pretty clear. He was so completely humiliated, he’s searching for some scrap of victory — and when the reality hits him that the stalker was a ‘very liberal’ women…that’s gonna be rough.
Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 6/30/2011 @ 6:14 amAlso — two vital new Weinergate articles over at http://LeeStranahan.com
Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 6/30/2011 @ 6:15 am“I didn’t know Paul was my audience. But he clearly followed the facts that I’ve laid out. Pay more attention and maybe you can be in my audience, too!”
Lee – A lot of people have followed the evidence you have painstakingly assembled on this story, but do not necessarily share your convictions or conclusions as to what that evidence proves. I just spent a day and a half catching up on the threads I missed from being out of town for over a week and I by no means share your certitude. Perhaps incomplete information or my poor comprehension is the problem.
For example, your statements to Birdbrain:
“When did I get that impression from the Detective? When he talked to me, of course.
But further — there’s no way the death threats COULD have happened the way Jenny George told me they did.” – You assume JG told you the truth and the story she told you was consistent with what she told the police, or something. We have not heard that from you that I recall.
“And further further — there’s no rational explanation for how they COULD have happened.” – More realistically, that should read there is no rational explanation you can think of. You ID’d JG on a podcast on 6/20 and were twittering about her. According to the timeline presented in your 6/26 post, the death threats came in later. Saying there could be no rational explanation is silly.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 6/30/2011 @ 6:34 amGood article and good insights, Lee.
bmertz (d77c52) — 6/30/2011 @ 6:40 amI see what you did with my screen name! Clever! Not only are you our intrepid reporter, but you are an insult comic too! It’s become obvious to me, the little I actually do pay attention, that your reaction to criticism to your story telling is to diminish to critic. I’d also venture that there are MANY people confused by your narrative. At what point does it stop being the audience’s fault, Lee?
Birdbath (19803d) — 6/30/2011 @ 6:45 amLee, re the “threats” that JG/Boston allegedly received …
Did you not receive a copy of the police report that was completed by the investigating officer? As a party involved, are you not entitled to a copy?
Would you post a PDF copy online, with of course the name & address blocked out?
Just saw your latest re the JG call – thanks for the update.
Re Neal … yes, he knows that these tactics are what his side would employ. Now why would he stir up more controversy & encourage more digging, if he wasn’t confident what would be found? Something smells “set up” ….
Miranda (4104db) — 6/30/2011 @ 6:54 amLee, I really do not understand you dancing around this subject when a clear and direct answer would settle it, leaving no ambiguity on the point.
Do you know the physical location of your caller, and if so, to what specificity?
(State? Town? Neighborhood precinct? Street? Apartment?)
You said she went into the station. Another time you said the detective went to her apartment. Did both of these events happen, or just one or the other?
Did the detective reveal anything about traits or characteristics of the person who came to the station and/or the person who was visited at an apartment?
****************
Lee’s caller misdirected him to the UCLA directory.
It confirmed the existence of a JG, but had no tie ever discovered to the caller, other than the obvious suggestion the caller had some idea there would be a JG to find in that directory.
Why wouldn’t a fat liar who is covering her identity misdirect him to the writing professor, who confirms the existence of a JG?
Lee’s caller is the socketeer, of at least one, probably many, and maybe all the sock characters.
But is that caller who she avers she is, now? Would there be any reason to misrepresent herself as “Jennifer George” when she is not?
Yes. Opportunity and/or desire to use someone else’s identity to misdirect people from her own identity, when trying to get information or advantage over others, are reasons enough.
There are more discernible links in the second case. The caller has a MA accent, and visited police in MA, and police visited an address she gave and she was there and a detective spoke to that complainant.
Where is the original written report? Where is the revised report?
SarahW (af7312) — 6/30/2011 @ 7:06 amDid she sign it, or did she just talk to the officer?
The NYT and other media outlets (including Fox) have a pattern of lifting and not citing the the online work of bloggers and journalists.
Reporting online without the protection of a major news company presents risks to any journalist. Often Big media will simply use the material to recreate the same research steps, and then claim the story as their own without crediting the original author.
In this situation, I would keep my cards close to my chest too.
On the other hand, eventually, the known facts must presented in a fashion that will hook a national audience.
bmertz (d77c52) — 6/30/2011 @ 7:26 am…because starchild111 account original follow was of the Writers Program at UCLA….and their happened to be a JG that fit that particular requirement. From Lee’s new list on his site…most of the questions the caller got right were the ones that would yield direct information of the 1/1/2011 webcache which Lee had prior linked on his site before the caller at this post http://leestranahan.com/weinergate-what-we-know-for-sure-about-bv
ltw (370236) — 6/30/2011 @ 7:36 am208 daleyrocks
agreed
koam @wittier (62b38e) — 6/30/2011 @ 7:38 am212 SarahW
What I think Lee has said:
Caller location, Boston, MA or a jurisdiction that may be covered by BPD detectives (dunno if Alston, Brighton, Brookline are…easy to find out)
She went to station and filed report, presumably with duty officer. Detective follows up on written report by visiting her apartment.
Lee has intimated that the detective may have intimated that the complaint may not be worth consideration and that detective’s talk w/ Lee was perfunctory. We’d like to know more.
As for them alleged misdirection by the caller to the other JG, I think that’s just a coincidence, unless I’m not understanding what Lee’s details are related to the writing Professor offered up as a verifier. I think the writing Prof was confirming the existence of the JG in MA who called Lee (JG in MA is supposedly early 20s and the other one is not, for example)…though lee has said that there is some lie related to her UCLA status. This is unclear. What part of it is a lie, Lee?
Lee marks these as lies:
both are vaguely worded (she lived in LA in the past or live there now?, was attending means currently attending, off for summer, formerly attended? need to know those tenses so we understand what Lee is saying are the lies.)
Thankfully lee did this post of some notes from 6/19 JG call to Lee.
but he doesn’t want to say which lies he knows are lies for specific reasons at this time. OK. So the red items on list are a combination of proven lies and believed lies, for now. that’s OK too. just to know what we’re lookin’ at.
What’s not on the list is the discussion of the UCLA Professor who she offered up as proof she’s a real person. I thought I got that the Prof talked to Lee and he said the JG who had studied with him (in what context? ) WAS from MA.
Oh wait, fortunately I made notes of that Radio Stranahan show. Very convenient. Lee can let us know if I got the notes wrong.
Here they are:
So SarahW, from my notes, it doesn’t appear that JGMA is trying to point Lee to another JG. The Huge University (Admin. staff 26,139
koam @wittier (62b38e) — 6/30/2011 @ 8:06 amStudents 38,476) + Commmon name = coincidence, right?
214 – THis is a simple matter easily settled. Tommy level verification is no longer good enough for me, his vouching caused errors in interpretation of facts and I’m not doing that again when it is easy to settle a point of ambiguity.
JG in the directory had a link to that program, and was not lee’s caller.
It is possible to have an interest in that program, and NOT be Lee’s caller, and there is one example. We all know lee’s caller is in the business of misdirection.
Having a link to the program still allows for lee’s caller to be someone associated with her, to use the “jennifer George” name in vain to start a twitter-stalking account. It is possible for the screenwriting student to exist, and for lee’s caller not to be her.
In fact, it allows for a stranger or acquaintance who knows of her to do the same.
Your second point, that the caller claimed to have set up the original account, and the caller knew what was in the cache, sheds ZERO light on the identity of the caller.
Lee’s caller is a liar. Lee’s caller is Nikki.But Lee’s caller is not necessarily the screenwriting hobbyist Jennifer George who was described by the writing teacher.
If the person is using (or even has always used) that account as a “JG” but is not her, OF COURSE SHE WOULD KNOW WHAT’S IN THE ACCOUNT.
And furthermore, that information is and WAS in the Google cache, available to anyone. ANYONE with an interest in finding it could, and anyone with a will to cause mischief could claim it as personal knowledge.
I could have called up Lee and said, Hello, I’m Jennifer George, why are you talking about me and this account? Yes that Starchild account was mine but I abandoned it. Yes> this is what I put in my tweets…. Makeup and Kardashians… I could not have directed him to the writing professor, but someone else who knew of MA Jennifer George could.
Anyone in that writing program or attending one of the seminars could have done that, or anyone close to that writing student, or for heaven’s sake, some random person who stole her laptop could.
It’s not that any of these are likely, let alone MORE likely that the person who called Lee is straight-up Jenny George, only that it is possible and any liar who fake id’s to cover her tracks is capable of such a deception. And also, this less-likely scenario is EASILY ruled out.
So rule it out, already.
SarahW (af7312) — 6/30/2011 @ 8:31 amPut another way, I think Lee’s caller is Jennifer George of MA (who has an interest or hobby in screenwriting and character development, and knows the professor).
But I would like someway to match Lee’s caller with that person besides a confirmation that such a person as Jennifer George of MA (who has an interest or hobby in screenwriting and character development, and knows the professor) EXISTS.
I want to see something that shows they are one and the same. I think they likely are. But if this connection can be made unassailable, it should be.
Do they look alike? I mean, is that possible to confirm?
SarahW (af7312) — 6/30/2011 @ 8:41 amI don’t appreciate Lee’s dancing around and fussing against such a straighforward point.
If there is something to connect JG MA besides her personal assurances (including her claiming of the account), and a professor’s claim that such a person exists, what is it?
SarahW (af7312) — 6/30/2011 @ 8:44 am@Comment by bmertz — 6/30/2011 @ 7:26 am
I see that Aaron has now run into this problem with Fox “borrowing” his publication without citing him.
bmertz (d77c52) — 6/30/2011 @ 8:47 amI am assuming there is nothing beyond those two things:
A. The personal word of a liar who steals or fakes ID
B. The professor who says there is such a MA girl who has been in his screenwriting courses.
I want to get to point
C. The liar who steals or fakes ID’s is not only using the same name but is the SAME PERSON the professor described.
All I’ve got is a shared accent and locality.
I don’t know if the detective thought she was 22 or 52. Are they the same age?
I mean Come ON! If you know this stuff just say so.
SarahW (af7312) — 6/30/2011 @ 8:51 amPosted in Aaron’s thread:
@lizbuddie
Liz Buddie
Pretty sure someone used @AaronWorthing ‘s excellent post on Time’s piece abt Constitution at @Patterico as a cheat sheet for Fox segment.
This a good example of my earlier comment
bmertz (d77c52) — 6/30/2011 @ 8:54 amWow!, Koam, that is some piece of investigation. Not bad. Reminds me of those great Columbo episodes from the seventies. The intrepid detective, following each significant “bread crumb”, invariably “always” leading to the culprit. I used to fancy myself a bit of a sleuth, (still do). I sometimes feel I missed my true calling, being a detective with the LAPD. The LAPD is still the “rolls royce” of metropolitan police forces in the U.S. Thats what I’ve been told, and thats what I believe.
The Tamandua (4de175) — 6/30/2011 @ 8:55 am217 – I don’t think the caller had to set up the account , I was simply pointing out a caller could get the questions “correct” or “use” information in a misdirecting way that were available from the cache. I am guessing that the caller to Lees show looked at his website before the call and the post that included a link to the cache that was posted at Lees site on June 18th in his post. June 19th was the podcast date in question. However, I see that the date Lee seems to think that person stated that starchild111 account started is 2009, and I that I don’t see as able to come from the cache. It is possible that it did start in 2009…just don’t know. Lee indicate firmly that that is 2009 is not true. I don’t have an opinion on what the caller’s motivation was. Keeping an open mind.
ltw (370236) — 6/30/2011 @ 8:58 am221 I see where you are going. Interesting.
ltw (370236) — 6/30/2011 @ 9:01 amYou can take the UCLA extension program classes online and communicate with others taking the online extension courses.
MayBee (081489) — 6/30/2011 @ 9:03 amclarification: Lee had JG talk to Preston. Preston got prof name and gave it to Lee. Both Preston & Lee talked to Prof.
koam @wittier (62b38e) — 6/30/2011 @ 9:36 amIf someone contacted one of my past professors and asked about me the prof might remember something about my work, and my demeanor in class. Possibly, through personal informal interaction, my dialect, or a recollection of my class enrollment record the prof could also have knowledge of where I lived. But, as far as I can see that professor would have no idea whether I had actually called Lee or had been the one who talked to the MA police. That professor would have no idea if I were involved in a plot or in an internet sting research project– unless I had perhaps laid it out as a “proposed” class project and submitted it to that professor for acceptance toward getting course credit. That professor would have very little knowledge of me as a person if most of my work was submitted through online/extension study, and in that case even a photo ID would not serve to verify.
I am also interested in the fact that both Mr. and Mrs. professor seem to have been interviewed to corroborate Jenny. Again, using a personal example: someone who contacted an actual professor of mine would likely get some insight about me. But I am almost sure that the spouse of that professor would not even know I existed. Either Jenny had made herself very obvious and memorable–or that part of the story verification is also seems kind of weird.
elissa (f08e75) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:22 am228. elissa
Professor and wife co-host writing retreats twice a year. …in their home.
explains how JG MA would be known to wife.
also explains how JG could know prof & wife without being at UCLA (now or prior). i’m not clear on this but that could be it.
Lee says JG MA at UCLA is a lie.
koam @wittier (62b38e) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:58 amElissa — koam has it exactly correct.
Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 6/30/2011 @ 8:38 pmWould also explain how another participant (not named JG) in said retreats would know about JGLA.*
*I say this to satisfy SarahW
MayBee (081489) — 6/30/2011 @ 8:43 pmLee,
bmertz (d77c52) — 6/30/2011 @ 9:00 pmIs the interview with Neal still on? I just read Patterico’s new post.