Patterico's Pontifications

6/30/2011

Weinergate: Someone Smarter Than Me: Explain Why This Is Not Possible

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 8:49 pm

The person claiming to be “Jennifer George” who called Lee was a hoaxer.

There really was a person who threatened the real Jennifer George, and that person pretended to be Lee Stranahan.

That person hates Lee, and Breitbart.

I have been very busy and probably don’t know all the reasons why this couldn’t possibly be the case. So tell me.

UPDATE: Point #1 could be wrong, and the theory still holds.

UPDATE x2: I’m feeling better about the theory with each passing second.

Hi, Neal!

3,765 Comments

  1. Maybe Neal Rauhauser could come explain to me why this could not be possible.

    Comment by Patterico (135ea8) — 6/30/2011 @ 8:51 pm

  2. It seems like you are poking a very vile cretin.

    Comment by JD (318f81) — 6/30/2011 @ 9:00 pm

  3. Vile cretins sometimes poke others and assume they will not be poked back.

    Comment by Patterico (135ea8) — 6/30/2011 @ 9:01 pm

  4. “Vile cretins sometimes poke others and assume they will not be poked back.”

    Patterico – I seem to recall several examples of such behavior here.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 6/30/2011 @ 9:04 pm

  5. Neal does have all kinds of charts at his disposal.

    Comment by goatsred (b20383) — 6/30/2011 @ 9:04 pm

  6. So what about this theory?

    Comment by Patterico (135ea8) — 6/30/2011 @ 9:04 pm

  7. He is a pox on Champaign Urbana. And just generally a pox. A festering rectal fistula on the cornhole of humanity.

    Comment by JD (318f81) — 6/30/2011 @ 9:07 pm

  8. Very nice profile of vile cretin

    http://theothermccain.com/2010/10/09/twittergate-update-neal-rauhauser-switches-account-to-protected-status/

    Comment by goatsred (b20383) — 6/30/2011 @ 9:07 pm

  9. Could hear a pin drop.

    Comment by bmertz (d77c52) — 6/30/2011 @ 9:08 pm

  10. No one could find the real JG to threaten her.

    Comment by Molon Labe (cd5a15) — 6/30/2011 @ 9:11 pm

  11. Is it just me, or does Neal look like Q in Star Trek the Next Generation?

    Comment by bmertz (d77c52) — 6/30/2011 @ 9:13 pm

  12. Is there a specific reason to suspect Rauhauser? Don’t get me wrong, I wouldn’t put this past him and his colleagues in the “Beandog” troll posse, but I’m just asking if there is any specific reason to suspect him.

    Comment by Robert Stacy McCain (04f24a) — 6/30/2011 @ 9:14 pm

  13. Interesting post, Patterico, But…

    What does this mean:

    “The person claiming to be “Jennifer George” who called Lee was a hoaxer.”

    Was a hoaxer means that that the person calling Lee was not Jennifer George? How do you know this? Do you know who this person is?

    “”There really was a person who threatened the real Jennifer George, and that person pretended to be Lee Stranahan.”

    Regarding the “real Jennifer George” you refer to here; Is this the jenny George in Boston? Is this the Jenny George that set up the starchild111 account?

    Oh yeah, do you know this as a fact? How?

    Comment by lamchopsl (a91fe8) — 6/30/2011 @ 9:16 pm

  14. “No one could find the real JG to threaten her.”

    Molon Labe – Correction – Nobody has admitted to finding the real JG to threaten her. A big difference that you and Lee cannot seem to grasp.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 6/30/2011 @ 9:16 pm

  15. Isn’t Neal the one that proved that Weiner was hacked by goatsred?

    Comment by JD (318f81) — 6/30/2011 @ 9:17 pm

  16. 12. He’s been very interested in Weinergate, Stacy.

    Plus note his email to the California JG:

    http://www.jennifergeorge.com/weiner.html

    (scroll down … )

    Why’s he so interested in what is a dead story, according to him?

    Comment by Miranda (4104db) — 6/30/2011 @ 9:19 pm

  17. Is there a specific reason to suspect Rauhauser?

    Who said they suspect Rauhauser? I just thought he might want to explain this all to me.

    Comment by Patterico (135ea8) — 6/30/2011 @ 9:21 pm

  18. If I were a betting woman I’d bet that someone who knows something (like maybe a known expert on Weinergate) is ratting out Neal.

    Comment by elissa (f08e75) — 6/30/2011 @ 9:22 pm

  19. Elissa – he is a Weiner expert.

    Comment by JD (318f81) — 6/30/2011 @ 9:25 pm

  20. Everyone is getting threatened these days. What’s the world coming to? :( ((((

    Comment by Ms. Alicia Pain (4f8afb) — 6/30/2011 @ 9:26 pm

  21. 18. elissa

    Like maybe Ron Brynaert?

    Ron has been accusing Neal Rathauser of threatening his family as of late.

    Comment by lamchopsl (a91fe8) — 6/30/2011 @ 9:26 pm

  22. Preston called the CA JG a week before anybody else noticed the Jenay thing, right?

    Comment by MayBee (081489) — 6/30/2011 @ 9:26 pm

  23. elissa
    Especially if that person had been receiving threats from Neal

    Comment by bmertz (d77c52) — 6/30/2011 @ 9:26 pm

  24. Elissa,
    Threats like these from Neal: Ron’s tweets

    Ron claimed Neal was threatening his family.

    Comment by bmertz (d77c52) — 6/30/2011 @ 9:28 pm

  25. I absolutley love the detective work you guys! In fact, I just got through watching an episode of Columbo with my wife. It was the episode with Richard Kiley, who plays the police chief who kills his wife after he covers for another neighbors murder. It was interesting in that most of the episode was filmed in downtown LA and Hancock Park, very little sound stage stuff. Coincidentally, it was directed by Ben Gazzara, one of Peter Falks(R.I.P.) best friends. What precisely are you trying to uncover with the emails?

    Comment by The Tamandua (4de175) — 6/30/2011 @ 9:29 pm

  26. Lots of threats going around in this non-story. I wish we could find out who threatened Ginger Lee.

    Comment by MayBee (081489) — 6/30/2011 @ 9:29 pm

  27. 15.Isn’t Neal the one that proved that Weiner was hacked by goatsred?
    JD and Mr.McCain—Yes, and he proved ,or ,put me on the “short list, of people who he knows,stalked Rep.Weiner.

    Comment by goatsred (b20383) — 6/30/2011 @ 9:30 pm

  28. Does Weiner still have people working on this story?

    Comment by MayBee (081489) — 6/30/2011 @ 9:30 pm

  29. Doesn’t Neal have Ginger Lee on his list too?

    Comment by bmertz (d77c52) — 6/30/2011 @ 9:32 pm

  30. 28.Does Weiner still have people working on this story?

    Comment by MayBee

    No MayBee, his people are trying to figure out where the hell HUMA went to.Antonee cant buy gwoceries without her check.

    Comment by goatsred (b20383) — 6/30/2011 @ 9:34 pm

  31. Wonder who threatened Patterico and Ace?

    Comment by Ms. Alicia Pain (4f8afb) — 6/30/2011 @ 9:35 pm

  32. @goatsred Who leaked all that stuff to the Smoking Gun about you? Patriot?

    Comment by Ms. Alicia Pain (4f8afb) — 6/30/2011 @ 9:36 pm

  33. Hey guys, gimme a little taste(a brief rundown) of all this “intrigue”. I am coming into this a little late, but I am genuinely enthralled. Sometimes I feel like a sly little elf, who should be sitting under his own private little toad stool. C’mon indulge me!

    Comment by The Tamandua (4de175) — 6/30/2011 @ 9:39 pm

  34. So what about this theory?

    Comment by Patterico

    I’m so confused I don’t know what I think.

    It all stopped making sense after Weiner resigned. I can’t figure a coherent strategy for the sock puppets, even with three layers of mis-direction laid on top.

    Since you propose a coherent theory for at least the answering machine death threats, I shall fall upon it with a glad cry and clutch it to my bosom.

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 6/30/2011 @ 9:40 pm

  35. Is there a specific reason to suspect Rauhauser? Don’t get me wrong, I wouldn’t put this past him and his colleagues in the “Beandog” troll posse, but I’m just asking if there is any specific reason to suspect him.

    Comment by Robert Stacy McCain

    An excellent question, addressing my deep confusion.

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 6/30/2011 @ 9:43 pm

  36. 29. bmertz, yes, Ginger Lee, Meagan Broussard Mike Stack & the real person behind Dan Wolfe – if you’re referring to NR’s email to JG.

    What Neal did on Twitter yesterday was refer to Ron’s family – as if they’d been talking to him:

    “Your judgment is impaired, Ron. Friends & family have said as much to you.” and
    “Your family is well aware of your distress, Ron.”

    I didn’t see any threats. Just sounded to me as if Simon Sinister was deliberately screwing with Ron. I was reading his tweets after seeing his email to JG on her site.

    Now he’s been tweeting about Twitter etc – he’s not his usual obnoxious self. Interesting.

    Comment by Miranda (4104db) — 6/30/2011 @ 9:43 pm

  37. Miranda Neal or Ron is tweeting ?

    btw, if anyone is interested about the nickname for Neal aka Simon Sinister

    Comment by bmertz (d77c52) — 6/30/2011 @ 9:49 pm

  38. There is no need for that.

    Comment by JD (318f81) — 6/30/2011 @ 9:52 pm

  39. Miranda

    What do you make of this claim? Could Neal pull that off?

    ronbryn Ron Brynaert
    @NealRauhauser blocked his tweets trying to make it harder for world to see the multiple indirect threats he made regarding my family.
    29 Jun

    Comment by bmertz (d77c52) — 6/30/2011 @ 9:52 pm

  40. Tamandua–see, it’s like this. Patterico has a lot of different sandboxes that people can choose to play in (or not play in) at his site. Not everybody is interested in every topic. You pulled this snarky crap on another thread yesterday, and trust me, you’re not as subtle or clever as you may think you are. You are welcome to avoid the “detective” threads you find so annoying. Nobody is forcing you to read about Weinergate if you find it all so terribly, terribly silly and amusing, you know. Or, is it an act to hide that you’re actually very interested in Weinergate?

    Comment by elissa (f08e75) — 6/30/2011 @ 9:54 pm

  41. #38 – Nasty. That’s just sick and stupid and wrong.

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 6/30/2011 @ 9:54 pm

  42. Breitbart tweeted to Neal that he knew he was Dan Wolfe and that Neal should just go ahead and admit it.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 6/30/2011 @ 9:55 pm

  43. ah ha

    Comment by bmertz (d77c52) — 6/30/2011 @ 9:57 pm

  44. #41 – elissa – lovely smack down.

    I’m reading as much as I can, and have decided that all I can do is plaintively ask if there’s a coherent story, yet. I wish I had any clues.

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 6/30/2011 @ 9:57 pm

  45. I think Neal is trying to make his presence known

    Comment by bmertz (d77c52) — 6/30/2011 @ 9:57 pm

  46. Breitbart tweeted to Neal that he knew he was Dan Wolfe and that Neal should just go ahead and admit it.

    Comment by daleyrocks

    Whoa! Really?!

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 6/30/2011 @ 9:58 pm

  47. Hey, my friend, I am curious. I don’t enter this blog “bad-mouthing” people because they have an opinion different than my own. I try to practice charity, and though you may not approve of my somewhat off center posts, I like to think I am an interesting fellow, with something to share. I know you may not approve of me(for whatever reason) as you see everything as so dire, but trust me, lighten up just a little my friend, you may cultivate some friends down the road, (as difficult to fathom as it may seem, in your case).

    Comment by The Tamandua (4de175) — 6/30/2011 @ 9:58 pm

  48. #38 – Nasty. That’s just sick and stupid and wrong.

    It is a public record. It’s not sick, nor stupid, nor wrong.

    Comment by Ms. Alicia Pain (4f8afb) — 6/30/2011 @ 9:59 pm

  49. Ron must have outed Neal

    Comment by bmertz (d77c52) — 6/30/2011 @ 9:59 pm

  50. 37. bmertz, those were Neal’s tweets, about 2 pm or so yesterday.

    http://twitter.com/#!/NealRauhauser

    You can read twitter msg’s even if you don’t have a twitter account, bmertz. I don’t have one either. I think you had mentioned before that you didn’t have one.

    Comment by Miranda (4104db) — 6/30/2011 @ 9:59 pm

  51. I think this is more germane question, is the Jen George in Boston who got the death threats, the Jenny George who set up the starchild111 account, used as Jenay for some time, and then changed the moniker to Nikki to punk A. Weiner’s twitter followers?

    As far as I can remember the only evidence connecting the Boston Jen George to the Jenny George= Jenay=Nikki account is the Massachusetts accent Lee noted. I just checked Lee’s notes and there wasn’t anything else that tied the phone call to the Boston Jen George? It certainly is possible that the Call to Lee claiming to be Jenifer George was someone else trying to divert and discredit Lee. And to that end Lee’s caller may have also called the Boston Jen George and threatened her.

    So I guess it is possible that the Boston Jen George is not associated with the starchild111 account, but for some reason was threatened by someone wanting to hurt Lee.

    When Lee heard of the police report from the Boston Jen George, he appears to have jumped to the conclusion that she was the person who called him and was trying to derail his investigation by falsely accusing him.

    Comment by lamchopsl (a91fe8) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:00 pm

  52. Oh, you may not think that was not wrong, but you would be wrong.very wrong. Aggressively wrong.

    Comment by JD (318f81) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:00 pm

  53. No Elissa, the only people in this hemisphere that are as remotley enthralled with the “tragic and pathetic” mumbo-jumbo you call “Weinergate” are you and a few other cybernerds!

    Comment by The Tamandua (4de175) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:01 pm

  54. Tamandau – nobody is forcing you to read or comment, no?

    Comment by JD (318f81) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:02 pm

  55. #48

    It’s none of your business, you nasty little perv, nor anyone not needing to have the information for law enforcement or credit purposes, come to think of it!

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:03 pm

  56. Miranda
    Thank you. I think that is the link you gave me earlier. I did go to the link you gave me. Ron sounded so frantic that I copied all his tweets into one list, and posted them onto one of the threads here. He was also offering to give a tell-all DM to any major blogger that contacted him. It looks as though he contacted Patterico.

    Comment by bmertz (d77c52) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:06 pm

  57. It’s none of your business, you nasty little perv, nor anyone not needing to have the information for law enforcement or credit purposes, come to think of it!
    Comment by Dianna — 6/30/2011 @ 10:03 pm

    It is my business, the guy is tweeting some pretty outrageous stuff, his criminal record is a public record. I did leave out the address.

    Comment by Ms. Alicia Pain (4f8afb) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:07 pm

  58. #48 Many things will be public record soon.

    Comment by Crispian (70c05e) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:07 pm

  59. I can and will comment, the fact that YOU don’t approve of me is irrelevant JD. Your friend Elissa took it upon herself to start taking swings, so she gets a “haymaker” back. Quid pro quo..

    Comment by The Tamandua (4de175) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:07 pm

  60. You can read twitter msg’s even if you don’t have a twitter account, bmertz. I don’t have one either. I think you had mentioned before that you didn’t have one.

    yes, thanks for explaining (elissa too). I was missing most of the conversation happening off the blog. I appreciate the explanation.

    Comment by bmertz (d77c52) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:08 pm

  61. Alicia- what is he tweeting that you find outrageous?

    Comment by MayBee (081489) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:08 pm

  62. “Alicia” is yet another sick twist. Just like Rauhauser.

    Comment by JD (318f81) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:09 pm

  63. #48 Many things will be public record soon.

    Comment by Crispian — 6/30/2011 @ 10:07 pm

    Your point being?

    Comment by Ms. Alicia Pain (4f8afb) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:09 pm

  64. Thanks for removing #38. Clearly posting stuff like that doesn’t help…but I suppose that’s the point.

    Comment by Dana (4eca6e) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:10 pm

  65. Dianna and bmertz – I think I got Breitbart’s reference mixed up in #46 above. He was referring to Ron:

    AndrewBreibart Andrew Breibart
    @
    @NealRauhauser @ronbryn robyn, we already know ur dan wolfe, enough with the sock charade.
    29 Jun
    in reply to ↑
    Neal Rauhauser
    @NealRauhauser Neal Rauhauser
    @AndrewBreibart Beauty! Do another!!!

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:11 pm

  66. Alicia = Neal

    Comment by bmertz (d77c52) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:11 pm

  67. I neither approve or disapprove. Elissa nailed you, and now you are predictably lashing out at everyone else. If you don’t like the topic, go on to the next one.

    Comment by JD (318f81) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:12 pm

  68. I deleted a comment that purported to post personal information for Ron Brynaert.

    For some reason the whole thing reminded me of the way The Smoking Gun treated Mike Stack.

    All public record to be sure.

    Hi Neal!

    Comment by Patterico (135ea8) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:15 pm

  69. daleyrocks

    AB is not sending it to Neal? It reads as though he is receiving it too. Or both?

    Comment by bmertz (d77c52) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:16 pm

  70. The Tamandua – Did you just follow your anteater nose to this blog? What brought you here?

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:16 pm

  71. JD, I have caught your pathetic, mealy-mouthed little act on this and other blogs, you are a blight and crap stirer from way back. The only reason you hack on Yelverton so much is because he has twice the education and smarts than you will ever have. Your pathetic jealousy of him is almost embarassing to witness.

    Comment by The Tamandua (4de175) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:17 pm

  72. Pat,

    There’s nothing inherently impossible about your line, but it does seem a far less likely explanation. Why? Because it postulates unknown additional people, whereas Lee’s theory goes to one known person who had a motive to act as Lee suspects she did.

    The most powerful piece of evidence on the table is Lee’s history of the starchild111 twitter account. That history demonstrate or strongly suggest:

    (1) That the original creator of the account was the same person who later gave herself out as Nikki Reid

    (2) That the creator changed the account’s appearance in an attempt to get to Weiner, including using the fake avatar.

    (3) That the creator is older than Nikki gave herself out to be (due to early celebrity follows that are out of the era of a 16-year-old girl).

    (4) That the conversations with Marianela only began after the account’s purpose had been shifted to Weiner-seeking and therefore are suspect.

    That much is established.

    Now, Jenny G. filed the police report as it became evident that Lee was closing in. So there is an actor and a motive.

    Your line, other the other hand, while it does preserve the independence and integrity of John Reed, falls short by postulating additional actors with speculative motives.

    Look Pat, if Lee’s right, this person is big time into misdirection. Wasn’t it convenient that the whole John Reid twitter war with the NYT came up when it did, just as Lee was announcing his grand unified sock puppet theory? What better to discredit the theory than a real live John Reid?

    If there’s one puppeteer, all the motives and actions fit – Reid’s outburst, Alicia Pain, Jenny’s police report – they’re all increasingly desperate attempts to evade a closing net.

    What have you got? No good explanation for the starchild111 history, and a bunch of hypothetical actors driven by highly speculative motives.

    John Reid’s integrity is already suspect, why fight so hard to preserve it?

    Comment by Nathan Wagner (01c83e) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:19 pm

  73. Neal was attempting to make a point and a threat of course.

    Comment by bmertz (d77c52) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:19 pm

  74. “AB is not sending it to Neal? It reads as though he is receiving it too. Or both?”

    bmertz – I found it in Neal’s twitter stream. Andrew addressed it to both Neal and Ron, Neal first. What I missed before was the second reference to Ron, or Robyn, as Breitbart misspells Ron’s handle.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:19 pm

  75. Comment by The Tamandua — 6/30/2011 @ 10:17 pm

    Geez, is anyone surprised? Very unoriginal, pedestrian and just as boring as ever.

    Comment by Dana (4eca6e) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:19 pm

  76. Gee Daley, I didn’t know it was your and JD’s personal blog.

    Comment by The Tamandua (4de175) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:20 pm

  77. I’m assuming the twitter account with Andrew’s picture on it was real. Andrew may have just been kidding around with the message. Who knows.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:20 pm

  78. It is my business, the guy is tweeting some pretty outrageous stuff, his criminal record is a public record. I did leave out the address.

    Comment by Ms. Alicia Pain —

    Nonsense. And, though (fortunately!) your nasty little post is gone, the address was there.

    Nasty little perv!

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:21 pm

  79. Anyone who likes Yelverton is an abject jackass. He has an education in the piccolo or some crap like that.

    And JD is a very smart and funny guy, and it’s challenging to debate him if he is inclined to take you seriously. The reason lefties think he’s unserious is simply because he doesn’t take trolls very seriously.

    Tam, were all your other comments just fabrications? Is that what all the stupid quotations marks and effusive compliments were about?

    Because you weren’t satirical or witty there, if so.

    Comment by Dustin (b7410e) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:21 pm

  80. “Gee Daley, I didn’t know it was your and JD’s personal blog.”

    The Tamandua – I have made no such claims. For a Truman Democrat you have very thin skin. Are you short as well?

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:22 pm

  81. Nonsense. And, though (fortunately!) your nasty little post is gone, the address was there.

    Nasty little perv!

    Comment by Dianna

    This is the truth. I recall it as well. I don’t know what this Alicia is, or if it’s the same one or merely a diversion, or if it’s Neal or yet another diversion. All I know is that it’s desperate for attention and unable to work up a better way of getting any.

    Comment by Dustin (b7410e) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:23 pm

  82. Look Daley, I likened myself to an elf. You tell me..

    Comment by The Tamandua (4de175) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:23 pm

  83. I’m getting an idea where this is going… oh boy

    Comment by bmertz (d77c52) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:25 pm

  84. #81 – Dustin – much calmer than my response. Sorry about getting a bit over-wrought. Bad day, and way too much drama.

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:26 pm

  85. m getting an idea where this is going… oh boy

    Comment by bmertz —

    Please, tell me! I’m completely at sea.

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:27 pm

  86. I think Neal was trying to jerk our chain. How old is this guy?
    17?

    Comment by bmertz (d77c52) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:27 pm

  87. Nathan Wagner,

    This theory need not *necessarily* relate to JohnReid9 in any way. That may have been a sting operation, or it may be a real person who is what he says. I offer no opinion, as is my habit.

    But everything you said about the timing can be explained by hoaxers. Everything.

    This theory does something I have seen no other do: explain the political motivation part. Because that part has confused me up until now.

    Comment by Patterico (135ea8) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:28 pm

  88. I missed where I claimed this was my blog. But that comment at 10:17 was epic funny.

    Comment by JD (318f81) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:29 pm

  89. “Look Daley, I likened myself to an elf. You tell me..”

    The Tamandua – So you are Yelverton!

    What brought you here?

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:30 pm

  90. #81 – Dustin – much calmer than my response. Sorry about getting a bit over-wrought. Bad day, and way too much drama.

    Comment by Dianna — 6/30/2011 @ 10:26 pm

    I think you were fine. Whoever did that is a nasty person. Sorry you had a bad day. I’ve had a few lately, but today was great.

    Comment by Sock#3 (b7410e) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:30 pm

  91. Patterico, how many hoaxers are we talking about?

    To categorize, are we talking “internet fun” or “Holy Blood, Holy Grail”?

    Granted, that’s one to ten, but I’m trying to set some mental boundaries.

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:30 pm

  92. Diana.. go read Ron’s tweets and his offer
    Could be..

    Comment by bmertz (d77c52) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:31 pm

  93. Dustin, your credibility is as vapid as JD’s when you resort to hacking on this guy Yelverton the way you do. I have yet to hear “him” say the outrageous and uncharitable things that you two hurl at him, and many others. Are you so incapable of having a spirited debate without attempting to humiliate this guy, and everyone else. Anyone who reads these posts, would think that you both are consumed with envy toward this man. It is totally disproportianate man!

    Comment by The Tamandua (4de175) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:31 pm

  94. Patterico, how many hoaxers are we talking about?

    Who knows? Could be one. Three. Five.

    Why do you ask?

    Comment by Patterico (135ea8) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:34 pm

  95. Tammy, I don’t know why in the blue hell you want to talk about that complete nutcase, Yelverton. No one on this planet cares about that loser. He trolls blogs a lot. I got him to slip up once and admit he was the troll.

    But stop talking about how much you hate JD, me, Elissa. No one gives a crap about that. Come on. Is this the best thing you can think of to contribute?

    Comment by Dustin (b7410e) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:34 pm

  96. Dia(n)na.. go read Ron’s tweets and his offer
    Could be..

    Comment by bmertz

    OK, I’ll try to follow the link and make sense of it. He seems even more over-wrought than I am, though.

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:34 pm

  97. Patterico,

    Quote:

    1. The person claiming to be “Jennifer George” who called Lee was a hoaxer.

    2. There really was a person who threatened the real Jennifer George, and that person pretended to be Lee Stranahan.

    3. That person hates Lee, and Breitbart

    Well,

    1. Lee was not leaning that way based on the timing of the call he received from the person claiming to be Jenny and owning the Starchild111 account but claiming no knowlege of the Weiner story. I would have to look back at the timing but I thought Lee felt it was the correct person based on the timing of her call in relation to an email that he sent.

    2. This one is still open since we don’t know yet if Jenny is still claiming it was Lee that make threats or one of his “followers”. The whole police report needs to be confirmed. Did Lee get a copy since it involves him?

    3. Not clear that this matters since I have not seen the alleged threats against Jenny tied back to Breitbart. Well, unless we want to assume that Breitbart is a “follower” of Lee’s :-)

    Summary, follow the sockpuppet trial until we get some additional facts on Jenny and the police report.

    Joe

    Comment by Joe Smith (54c0c1) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:34 pm

  98. Patterico,

    I get the sense that whoever is at the center of this is now circling the drain and will be apprehended soon. And then any rats in his ship will happily squeal rather than be charged as accessories. It would certainly behoove those people to step forward now rather than face that situation.

    Comment by Crispian (70c05e) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:36 pm

  99. Why do you ask?

    Comment by Patterico

    Pure, hopeless confusion. If I can start to whittle the player down to a nice, coherent list (lacking at this point, possibly because I’m reading too many sources with slightly conflicting views of events), I may begin to feel I have some sort of handle on this tale.

    Presently, it’s like a very bad post-modernist novel, complete with mis-spellings and random occurences one is supposed to regard as amusements.

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:38 pm

  100. Rave on Dustin, the only people who would believe or subscribe to your juvenile diatribe is JD and a couple of other sycophants on this blog. Look in the mirror ..

    Comment by The Tamandua (4de175) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:39 pm

  101. You are clearly trying to threadjack.

    Comment by Dustin (b7410e) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:41 pm

  102. Why are you apparently so obsessed with me?

    Comment by JD (318f81) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:41 pm

  103. ____________________________________________

    That person hates Lee, and Breitbart.

    I’ve long suspected that the hoaxers or sock puppets were leftists who got into the Weinergate game in order to poke at, aggravate or mock Republicans/conservatives. Or perhaps the hoaxers got involved because they wanted to create a diversion or smokescreen for Weiner so that he’d come out of the scandal looking as good as possible.

    The possibility they were of the right didn’t seem as likely to me, if only because they, unlike many liberals, probably perceived the basic misbehavior of Weiner as being so trashy — or already pathetic enough — that any piling on wouldn’t have been considered necessary. IOW, they wouldn’t have felt a need to create additional “gotcha!” moments.

    Comment by Mark (411533) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:42 pm

  104. it’s like a very bad post-modernist novel

    *snicker* nailed it!

    Comment by bmertz (d77c52) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:43 pm

  105. Spoken like a true narcissist JD.

    Comment by The Tamandua (4de175) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:45 pm

  106. And then any rats in his ship will happily squeal rather than be charged as accessories.

    BINGO

    Comment by bmertz (d77c52) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:45 pm

  107. Like I said before, this moved beyond surreal when Rauhauser got involved. Add that to the ronbryn meltdown …

    Comment by JD (318f81) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:45 pm

  108. There has been a blizzard of asshattery recently.

    Comment by JD (318f81) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:47 pm

  109. JD – The Anteater sounds similar to Christoph to me. He was on a couple of Lee’s recent podcasts stirring sh*t about Dustin and there is no love lost between you two. He sounded like a young, fast talking, weenie boy, not like his tough commenting persona. I LOL’d.

    One of Christoph’s favorite tactics is to accuse you of what he was actually doing.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:48 pm

  110. @ 65 that Twitter account is AndrewBreibart (minus the T). It is someone trolling around not the real Andrew B.

    Comment by Noodels (3681c4) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:49 pm

  111. He sounded like a young, fast talking, weenie boy, not like his tough commenting persona. I LOL’d.

    Heh. I think I heard his voice on one of those.

    I’ll check.

    Comment by Patterico (135ea8) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:50 pm

  112. OK, I am going to bed in aid of my goal of being a good worker in the morning.

    If anything really great breaks overnight, here’s hoping it shows up as a “breaking!” headline somewhere.

    Thanks, Patterico, for putting up with my chatter.

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:50 pm

  113. Daley, you are either delusional or pathetically trying to save face for Dustin and JD. Which is it?

    Comment by The Tamandua (4de175) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:51 pm

  114. Daley – it is sad that the likes of whoever it is simply must continue to hide behind multiple names, changing ID’s, etc … They are cowardly and pathetic.

    Comment by JD (318f81) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:51 pm

  115. The @andrewbreibart account was started on May 15. It is designed to fool people into thinking outrageous things were said by Andrew Breitbart.

    Check out the followers and following.

    Yuh-huh.

    And the style? Getting normal people angry at someone on the right by pretending to be someone on the right, and doing something outrageous.

    Now what was the theory of my post again?

    Yuh-huh.

    Hi Neal!

    Comment by Patterico (135ea8) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:52 pm

  116. Noodels – Thanks. Missed that. I heard somebody was faking an account for him. I did not pick up the spelling error.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:52 pm

  117. Your politically motivated actor hates Lee and Breitbart. So he calls in a death threat to Jenny pretending to be Lee? That’s awfully late in the game to do that as a first action, and it explains very little of this whole saga, so you must suspect more of him – running the sock puppets as a sting. That puts us back to one actor with some misdirection by a hoaxer phoning Lee.

    Okay, that’s better.

    I’m still inclined doubt it, though, and here’s why. It’s provable Lee didn’t make that call. Trying to get at Lee that way is a boneheaded thing to do, because if you’re caught, you’re in trouble. But if you threaten yourself, the worst (practically speaking) is that you’re taken as a metal case. Less risk, greater payoff if the misdirection succeeds.

    As long as we’re speculating here, I’ll run with another line, but in a separate comment.

    Comment by Nathan Wagner (01c83e) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:53 pm

  118. JD,
    I think the guy was really scared of Neal.

    (Now speculating on the possible post-modern plot bunny) :

    Ron was drawn into some sort of plot (probably the sockpuppets) and then ended up being discarded by Jen Preston. Ron blows up on twitter, threatens to talk ,and then Neal tells him to shut up or face the consequences. Ron goes to Patterico

    Comment by bmertz (d77c52) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:54 pm

  119. “Daley, you are either delusional or pathetically trying to save face for Dustin and JD. Which is it?”

    The Tamandua – Your style is familiar and your mask is slipping. What names have you commented under here before. You can tell us. Lighten up, we’re your “new” friends after all.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:55 pm

  120. I’m still inclined doubt it, though, and here’s why. It’s provable Lee didn’t make that call. Trying to get at Lee that way is a boneheaded thing to do, because if you’re caught, you’re in trouble.

    Yeah. True enough.

    And I hope whoever did it DOES get in trouble. If they did.

    I have to say I find your reasoning highly, highly unpersuasive, for reasons I can’t get into right now.

    To me, this theory is highly satisfying on several levels.

    Comment by Patterico (135ea8) — 6/30/2011 @ 10:58 pm

  121. “Daley, you are either delusional or pathetically trying to save face for Dustin and JD. Which is it?”

    The Tamandua – The above is not a denial. Nice try.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 6/30/2011 @ 11:00 pm

  122. Daley – it’s attacks on Dana were way out of proportion, and show a complete lack of character and basic awareness on it’s behalf.

    Comment by JD (318f81) — 6/30/2011 @ 11:01 pm

  123. So here’s the other speculative line, developing the theory Lee’s hinted at.

    Politicians attract acolytes. Some of them can be obsessive and dangerous. Suppose the woman behind starchild111 was so to Weiner long before Weinergate started. Suppose she was rebuffed. Unable to follow him in her own person, she goes for the avatars, hoping to meet him for an affair or to exact revenge.

    Can we find out whether there were restraining orders against anyone following Weiner, or if security knew of any such person?

    Comment by Nathan Wagner (01c83e) — 6/30/2011 @ 11:02 pm

  124. So Patterico,

    The new working assumption is that someone on the left was running a sockpuppet honey pot to catch Breitbart but it turned out the Rep Weiner really was engaging in risky internet behavior and got caught up in the honey trap?

    So then the sockpuppets had to switch plans and run a cross to drag Lee into some accused / alleged threats against someone that he appeared unable to find?

    I am truly lost on this holiday weekend. I was hoping for your latest data dump that might provide us some additional data on the who / what / when / where / why of the Reids… ;-(

    Joe

    Comment by Joe Smith (54c0c1) — 6/30/2011 @ 11:04 pm

  125. All right, Pat. I’ll defer to your greater evidence.

    Comment by Nathan Wagner (01c83e) — 6/30/2011 @ 11:04 pm

  126. Unable to follow him in her own person, she goes for the avatars, hoping to meet him for an affair or to exact revenge.

    That one was on my top of the list ie The 800 pound lady that goes into a romance chat room

    Comment by bmertz (d77c52) — 6/30/2011 @ 11:05 pm

  127. Nathan, I think the identify of restraining order ‘victims’ is often confidential.

    Comment by Dustin (b7410e) — 6/30/2011 @ 11:06 pm

  128. Gleen Grenwald talked about himself in third person better than Yelverton the Whiner does in his thread-jacks here. Even John Hitchcock knows that.

    Comment by John Hitchcock (9e8ad9) — 6/30/2011 @ 11:06 pm

  129. This situation is too fascinating. I can’t leave

    Comment by bmertz (d77c52) — 6/30/2011 @ 11:07 pm

  130. Hitch – it is always amusing when it goes all gender-bender too.

    Comment by JD (318f81) — 6/30/2011 @ 11:09 pm

  131. Okay, I have followed this from the beginning but had never heard of this Neal guy except I had read some of his tweets lately on Twitter.

    After much internet sleuthing (see Google search)he sure seems to fit the MO of someone who would be involved in something like this (see paid internet troll).

    Comment by Noodles (3681c4) — 6/30/2011 @ 11:11 pm

  132. Was Dustin right? Is it a piccolo? For some reason my recollection is that it was a flute of some sort.

    Comment by elissa (f08e75) — 6/30/2011 @ 11:12 pm

  133. “Daley – it’s attacks on Dana were way out of proportion, and show a complete lack of character and basic awareness on it’s behalf.”

    JD – Exactly. If anybody’s gonna attack our womynfolk it should be us. Not that they can’t defend themselves. Heh.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 6/30/2011 @ 11:12 pm

  134. Where is Underdog when you need him?

    Comment by bmertz (d77c52) — 6/30/2011 @ 11:14 pm

  135. I’m taking notes for Maybee and Sarah daley!

    Comment by bmertz (d77c52) — 6/30/2011 @ 11:14 pm

  136. Goodnight, racists.

    Comment by JD (318f81) — 6/30/2011 @ 11:15 pm

  137. Goodnight, racists.

    I resemble that remark!

    Comment by John Hitchcock (9e8ad9) — 6/30/2011 @ 11:17 pm

  138. #129, me too, bmertz!

    It is ‘funny’ that because of the internet, a handful of crazed individuals can have such an effect. They would otherwise be so irrelevant. I suppose that is exactly the kind of person that desperately lashes out on the internet – the otherwise irrelevant.

    Comment by Crispian (70c05e) — 6/30/2011 @ 11:19 pm

  139. Wow. I feel kind of dumb for not knowing about “Twittergate”. I will have to read more on that tomorrow.

    Comment by Noodles (3681c4) — 6/30/2011 @ 11:20 pm

  140. Crispian
    The nature of the net changes status, just as it changed elections, and fortunes. The net magnifies the power of the few.

    Comment by bmertz (d77c52) — 6/30/2011 @ 11:23 pm

  141. Surreal

    or is it more like a Séance? I’m waiting for the rapping on the table to begin.

    Comment by bmertz (d77c52) — 6/30/2011 @ 11:26 pm

  142. Will Neal choose someone to start channeling to us?

    Comment by bmertz (d77c52) — 6/30/2011 @ 11:27 pm

  143. Patterico
    Was Wagner =Neal too?

    Comment by bmertz (d77c52) — 6/30/2011 @ 11:36 pm

  144. Neal Rauhauser’s tweets are now protected, I suspect his blender to be the culprit.

    Comment by Crispian (70c05e) — 6/30/2011 @ 11:38 pm

  145. The haunted blender? oh the horror

    Comment by bmertz (d77c52) — 6/30/2011 @ 11:40 pm

  146. well, this has been fascinating. But i have a life tomorrow. Goodnight all.

    Comment by bmertz (d77c52) — 6/30/2011 @ 11:41 pm

  147. Perhaps. I don’t want to libel his blender. Not after the way Weiner’s blender was accused. But Weiner’s blender appears to have been the only innocent party implicated in the whole affair.

    Comment by Crispian (70c05e) — 6/30/2011 @ 11:43 pm

  148. Night, I’ll be in search of one as well.

    Comment by Crispian (70c05e) — 6/30/2011 @ 11:43 pm

  149. Crispian,

    The blender was never guilty. It was only accused of being the next likely failure.

    Tivo shot. FB hacked. Is my blender gonna attack me next? #TheToasterIsVeryLoyal
    28 May

    Joe

    Comment by Joe Smith (54c0c1) — 6/30/2011 @ 11:59 pm

  150. “Was Dustin right? Is it a piccolo?”

    elissa – It’s definitely smaller than a normal skin flute. His inbreeding, doncha know.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/1/2011 @ 12:00 am

  151. Just a warning, we are about T-minus 18 hours before we hit then next weekend to have a Twitter Hack, Hoax or what not as we head into the July 4th weekend.

    Place your bets early for your favorite Sockpuppets NOW.

    Joe

    Comment by Joe Smith (54c0c1) — 7/1/2011 @ 12:19 am

  152. I suspect the answer to your post is that it is eminently possible and there aren’t any good arguments, given what little I’ve seen of the details so far, to show the theory is not possible.

    But statement one and statement two don’t necessarily require any coordination or relationship between the actions. They are incidents that may or may not be related (other than a similar name being involved) but assuming a relationship without more information may well be misleading. The alleged threats against “the real Jennifer George” could be based on little more than the information on Lee’s site and this site, possibly with the sole purpose of smearing Lee, Breitbart and Patterico. By allegedly naming Lee in such a threat, the smear would have wide-ranging effects.

    Comment by Sue (24e46b) — 7/1/2011 @ 12:21 am

  153. please note that the AB listed is misspelled and is a sock in those tweets. Notice no “t” in Brei”t”bart.

    Comment by freedom_costs (51c21c) — 7/1/2011 @ 2:06 am

  154. 109. JD

    One of Christoph’s favorite tactics is to accuse you of what he was actually doing.

    That is Ann Coulter’s definition of a Democrat.

    Comment by lamchopsl (a91fe8) — 7/1/2011 @ 4:46 am

  155. This theory is stupid.

    The woman calling lee were lying, an innocent JG wouldn’t do that.

    So assume that the caller was a hoaxer, why not lead Lee directly to JG in MA?

    Why would an innocent JG in MA first accuse Lee for the threats and then change it to “Lee follower”.

    Was the police report also filed by the hoaxer?
    That’s a crime, and now the hoaxer has showed herself to the police.
    And why tone it down just to “lee follower” if it was a hoaxer doing the filing?

    This is like the first weiner defense “Breitbart hacked me”.

    Breitbart was the one asking for a full investigation.

    If there’s someone that really threatened JG , Lee is the person who’s the most interested to see who’s behind that.

    If there’s a third person or group out there threatening people , every honest person want them caught.

    Comment by Temper Tantrum (02fe1b) — 7/1/2011 @ 4:49 am

  156. 32.@goatsred Who leaked all that stuff to the Smoking Gun about you? Patriot?

    Comment by Ms. Alicia Pain — 6/30/2011 @ 9:36 pm

    Things that were leaked lead to me to certain people.But that’s a thing of the past.

    Comment by goatsred (b20383) — 7/1/2011 @ 4:52 am

  157. Having just read through these comments, flame wars, misattributed quotes and conflicting recaps I’m more confused than ever. When did Ron Brynaert get involved in this?

    My gut says:

    NH = AP. Possibly more. NH seems to be the guy who pointed Smoking Gun at DW and Mike. It fits his MO.

    This post-Weiner saga will be tied up by the end of next week IMO. Certain previously-involved-in-sock puppet-Twitter-scandal people aren’t as smart as they think they are. That’s their undoing. I’m calling it now.

    Comment by coondawg68 (5fad4e) — 7/1/2011 @ 4:58 am

  158. simple neal marry
    his sister aunt pain and mom
    marry his uncle

    Comment by ColonelHaiku (e761c8) — 7/1/2011 @ 5:20 am

  159. Drat
    Definitely on the wrong schedule for this but it makes great coffee reading
    Tarantella ? Tarantula?tabula rasa? They make pills for that.
    A pain? Rock. On. Don’t forget to use the kiddie scissors

    Comment by Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c) — 7/1/2011 @ 5:34 am

  160. John Hitchcock @ 11:06 pm wins the thread, I think.

    Comment by Chris Chittleborough (34e482) — 7/1/2011 @ 5:48 am

  161. Lee on Stage Right w/ Larry O’Connor. Lee starts after minute 100

    http://www.blogtalkradio.com/stage-right/2011/07/01/dick-fking-according-2-msnbc-hate-2night

    Comment by koam @wittier (62b38e) — 7/1/2011 @ 6:21 am

  162. 157 coondawg68

    who is NH?

    Comment by koam @wittier (62b38e) — 7/1/2011 @ 7:14 am

  163. http://oi54.tinypic.com/fdt3yg.jpg

    Comment by Max Henry (9347d9) — 7/1/2011 @ 7:21 am

  164. 97 Joe

    1) The timing of the call Lee received was 15 to 20 mins after Lee had sent an email with his phone number to the other JG in CA saying “please call me about @starchild111.” He soon gets a call “Hi Lee, this is JG and I started @starchild111″ He first took that to mean that JG in CA had received his email and called him, a logical conclusion at the moment. He said this on the radio. post hoc ergo propter hoc. He then went into detail about why this proved (90%) it was JG CA…. but that was all mistaken. He has clarified that it was not JG CA afterward a number of times. But you have to listen to his radio shows a number of times to figure out what he thought at one moment and how that changed over time.

    Turns out to have been a coincidence.

    Comment by koam @wittier (62b38e) — 7/1/2011 @ 7:29 am

  165. If anyone can provide a soup-to-nuts time line or cast list for this melodrama? I’d appreciate it.

    Comment by RCJParry (625550) — 7/1/2011 @ 7:31 am

  166. “The woman calling lee were lying, an innocent JG wouldn’t do that.”

    Temper Tantrum – Why make those assumptions?

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/1/2011 @ 7:51 am

  167. coondawg68 – You are thankfully unaware of our serial sockpuppeting visitor who has been a plague to this site.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/1/2011 @ 8:04 am

  168. 166. Deception indicates…a deceiver.

    Comment by SarahW (af7312) — 7/1/2011 @ 8:09 am

  169. We can explain anything with “that one was a fake person” (without proving that assertion) and “here’s what s/he said: these things that were true (because they fit my theory) and these things that were obviously lies (because they don’t fit my theory)”

    Thing is, truth and lies are things to be confirmed with evidence, testimony, contrary facts, conflicts, corroboration, etc., not merely with whether they fit the analyst’s current beliefs or not.

    Comment by koam @wittier (62b38e) — 7/1/2011 @ 8:14 am

  170. koam @wittier – Are you suggesting we should modify Lee’s proof by proclamation or it’s true because you can’t prove me wrong standards? Seriously?

    That’s crazy talk!

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/1/2011 @ 8:18 am

  171. I know no one’s seen the BPD report filed by JG MA.

    But in the conversations with the detective, or on the call from JG to Lee, is it evident that the 2 messages left on JG’s answering machine were from a male?

    Lee, when detective calls you, do you discuss what JG’s story at her home was relative to the “answering machine” messages left for her?

    Comment by koam @wittier (62b38e) — 7/1/2011 @ 8:19 am

  172. A few questions of my own:

    Where is the police paper work, has there been any attempt to retrieve it.

    There would be reports, plural – the original, attached to the follow up interviews.

    At what stage of progess is the investigation into threats against P., threats against Ace, and Mike Stack (an perhaps others unknown to me).

    Do these investigations provide any additional standing to affected persons to collect information about threats received by others?

    *************
    The report would have some description of the woman making the complaint.

    I’m not sure how redacted the reports would be – but to a detective or attorney or prosecutor seeking relevant information that could pertain to similar threats they are investigating, perhaps the reports would be available in their entirety and the Detective (Thornton?) would be willing to discuss the particulars.

    *****************

    The UCLA professor who runs writing seminars has been used as a sort of reference by Lee’s Caller/report-maker He has spoken to him, and so has Jan Preston.

    It seems logical to me that if the prof were kind enough to speak to Lee about his student JG, that he would be glad to help rule out a poser.

    Has Lee attempted to re-contact the professor?
    (I doubt)

    Has anyone asked Jan Preston if the prof more clearly established his pupil and the Boston caller are one and the same person that the information Lee has given us?

    She shouldn’t be trusted to be telling the truth on that point, ever, until there is more solid confirmation.

    Even if she is innocent and lying without need of lying, she IS a liar. So, no trust.

    Comment by SarahW (af7312) — 7/1/2011 @ 8:22 am

  173. Temper Tantrum – I believe Lee is Dan Wolfe. I have seen no direct evidence to contradict this fact therefore it is proven.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/1/2011 @ 8:22 am

  174. Also, who has an answering machine anymore? Most people use voicemail.

    Younger people usually don’t even have landlines.

    Comment by SarahW (af7312) — 7/1/2011 @ 8:23 am

  175. 170 daleyrocks.
    I enjoy all that as part of the mix. It’s part of our challenge to discern facts & testimony from enthusiasm for theories. It’s all good. Gives us something to do. But you’re right, “it’s true because you can’t prove me wrong” is what we grapple with.

    But when there’s a list of notes on a particular event, you have to take each item and either support or refute it with other actual evidence from stated sources. This analysis may also be flawed but at least you’ve done the work.

    Comment by koam @wittier (62b38e) — 7/1/2011 @ 8:24 am

  176. “The report would have some description of the woman making the complaint.”

    SarahW – If somebody is actually in touch with that woman, perhaps she could be persuaded to release a copy of the police report.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/1/2011 @ 8:25 am

  177. “Also, who has an answering machine anymore? Most people use voicemail.”

    Guilty!

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/1/2011 @ 8:27 am

  178. 165. If anyone can provide a soup-to-nuts time line or cast list for this melodrama? I’d appreciate it.

    Maybe we can set up a wiki. One person starts, lists a few things and other people add or correct things.

    Find old messages and posts.

    Reading this over and over leads to new insights, and that should be done. It is important to go over and over all of this again and again. If you missed something after 100 times, you might gain an insight on the 101st time, especially if you now have new information.

    While doing this, you might want to temporarily assume various things and see where this gets you.

    Maybe you could get a Talmudic scholar or a Ph.D in history to take a shot at solving this.

    One thing:

    There have to be at least 3 hoaxers, for two separate reasons:

    1> At one point, Nikki, Marianela, and John2487 (whi was renamed to Juan_Dodgers) held a twitter conversation about a baseball game. (This needs verification)

    Q. What baseball game and who else was talking about that baseball game at the same time?? Does anyone have them?

    As a start, my speculation would be that JANE AUSTEN (the person who originally established the starchild111 account, but turned it over to LILY sometime around the time OPERATION WEINER SCHNITZEL was conceived) keyboarded Marianela, LILY was Nikki, and I would guess that REMBRANDT (aka seattle545?) was John2487.

    REMBRANDT was the “painter”, but not necessarily the uploader, and certainly not the original author, of the fake twitter messages between RAW (Weiner) and SNOOPY.

    SNOOPY is the person now trying to find out the true identity of John Reid, whom she thinks is the RED BARON, but may really only be SOCKREID.

    Earlier, before the scandal broke, SNOOPY was trying to uncover who really was starchild111 and in general, determine what was going on.

    2> The second set of screencaps that seattle545 posted (on June 20) don’t make too much sense unless you assume at least three people were involved:

    1) An original author – who wrote and emailed in or faxed the dialogue.

    2) A screen painter, who got started the wrong way.

    3) The screen painter’s boss, or his bosses’s boss, who got the screen painter to post them before they were ready and while they were in a completely wrong and mixed up order (which he did not know.

    I can’t think that all this has been done by one person, and there is at least one female voice involved. Could one person have done both the JG threat, and Mrs. Patricia Reid? Did anyone speak to both of them?

    Perhaps any males may be afraid their voice(s) might be recognized, especially if taped and widely circulated.

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (907727) — 7/1/2011 @ 8:30 am

  179. 174 SarahW

    (I get my voice messages transcribed by google voice into emails and text messages, so I hardly have to even listen to them, unless I need to clarify something that the transcription got wrong)

    Yes I agree and we were discussing “who still has answering machines?” earlier. Someone who lives with mom & dad, maybe?

    It could have been a paraphrase by JG or Lee. “Playing Telephone” as it were. If JG’s early 20s then maybe the term “answering machine” is more hardwired into Lee’s brain (device that came of age in his generation) and it’s just his default term for anything that records messages. But it could be either or neither.

    Or maybe there’s an answering machine (or voicemail). If so, a record. We need that.

    If she got 2 death threats and deleted them and then went to cops, well then she deserves not to be believed. But no one has told us if that’s what happened or not.

    Comment by koam @wittier (62b38e) — 7/1/2011 @ 8:31 am

  180. koam @wittier – There you go with that generation bashing stuff. I’m just too old to understand this stuff, I guess. Heh.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/1/2011 @ 8:38 am

  181. daleyrocks, you’re just BS:ing right.

    If someone really were threatening JG why would she call Lee first before she even called the police, and lie to him.

    Comment by Temper Tantrum (02fe1b) — 7/1/2011 @ 8:39 am

  182. Points to note – who has talked to people on phone?

    Tommy (real person) talked to female(s). He still hasn’t said if it was both Patricia and Nikki or not. (Were there two voices that Tommy believed to be two people? Did TC talk to Marianela?)

    Lee & Preston (real people) talked to female JG MA.

    JG MA (real person who filed BPD report) claims answering machine messages received, presumably from a male threatener.

    JG MA who called Lee, same as above or not, presumably got message from male threatener

    Who else has talked to people on phone? (Pat?, Mike?…not to our knowledge. Ron? anyone?)

    Comment by koam @wittier (62b38e) — 7/1/2011 @ 8:44 am

  183. More:

    Professor & Wife (real people) know JG MA, a female

    BPD desk officer & BPD Detective (real people) both met face-to-face with JG MA a female

    Comment by koam @wittier (62b38e) — 7/1/2011 @ 8:47 am

  184. “daleyrocks, you’re just BS:ing right.”

    Temper Tantrum – Using established Stranahan standards of proof, I believe Lee is Dan Wolfe. There is no direct compelling evidence proving otherwise. Prove me wrong.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/1/2011 @ 9:01 am

  185. Koam , didn’t Tommyx just talk to the “mother”?

    Comment by Temper Tantrum (02fe1b) — 7/1/2011 @ 9:05 am

  186. Lee, what is the timing of these events?

    – the 6/19 teary call you received from a JG
    – That same has JG call(s) with Preston
    – your 6/20 radio show in which you describe call details
    – any internet posts, comments, tweets etc. that you made regarding receiving call from JG
    – A real JG from Boston files police report at BPD precinct.

    In short, how much info, if any, was out there on your radio show and online from you regarding the JG call you received before the real JG MA filed the report at BPD?

    Comment by koam @wittier (62b38e) — 7/1/2011 @ 9:20 am

  187. Which lies that Lee attributes to his JG MA caller are concretely lies, supported by facts?

    - The caller says she’s not following politics, doesn’t recognize Weiner story other than through entertainment TV shows, but the prof says she’s very liberal. Someone can be very liberal and not follow politics or watch news over entertainment. The prof’s assessment is subjective and this area doesn’t amount to a concrete lie.

    - Lee says that JG MA said she is/was in LA and is/was a student at UCLA. Did the prof say that JG MA only attended his retreats and she never attended UCLA? Did he say he only knows her from his out-of-state retreat home? That would be a factual conflict from her very own “proving I’m a real person” contact. But we don’t have the specifics on that.

    So which are the JG MA lies that are proven by facts rather than assertions?

    Comment by koam @wittier (62b38e) — 7/1/2011 @ 9:22 am

  188. I have an answering machine! It just seemed easier when we moved to deal with that than to figure out who to do what for whichever phone bundle we were going to purchase. I hardly get any calls on my landline that are worth any effort.

    Comment by MayBee (081489) — 7/1/2011 @ 9:26 am

  189. 185. Temper Tantrum

    Tommy did describe talking to the mom, Patricia Reid. In supposedly clarifying follow up articles, Colby Hall, Tommy’s editor, says that Tommy had extensive email and telephone contacts with these sources (Patricia, Nikki, & Marianela).

    I don’t believe that it clear from the phrasings in the Colby/Tommy “we were fooled, but that’s ok, we’re not stupid” articles whether Tommy feels like he talked to more than one female or not,

    Comment by koam @wittier (62b38e) — 7/1/2011 @ 9:30 am

  190. 181. temper

    We need a more solid timeline of those events. The sequence in which we all learn of events isn’t necessarily the sequence of when they happened.

    The Detective called Lee some days after the report was filed at the precinct.

    Comment by koam @wittier (62b38e) — 7/1/2011 @ 9:35 am

  191. Gaaah!

    I spent some time yesterday trying to draw the scenario that if a professor of mine was called long distance by a policeman or by a journalist and was asked if he had ever had an elissa as a past student–the prof would say truthfully, “why, yes I did”. But in no way would the prof’s statement prove that the person standing in front of the policemen, or the person who had called the journalists claiming to be elissa was the same real elissa person the prof actually had taught in class.

    Ergo, unless a picture identification of some sort was shared and compared between the policeman and the prof (or better yet with the school’s repository of student ID photos), then the prof’s statement is utterly meaningless. If such an ID comparison DID take place then that needs to be stated as fact–as evidence. Was it? I think this point is a question many people have but is a question that never quite seems to get answered. Knowing this would surely help in determining with more certainty what lies “JGMA” is/is not telling.

    Comment by elissa (961c7a) — 7/1/2011 @ 9:44 am

  192. koam, I think one reason Lee got this “single person sock puppet master” theory is because he only heard about one woman talking to Tommyx, the “mother”.
    If there were many women ( real ones on phone ) behind those twitter identities , it would falsify his theory.
    It would also make it less plausible that it’s a conspiracy.

    Comment by Temper Tantrum (02fe1b) — 7/1/2011 @ 9:48 am

  193. Koam…

    Tommy only spoke to Patrica Reid by phone according to John Reid’s answer:

    “There were phone calls with Tommy and my wife, there were emails with Tommy and Nikki andTommy and my wife, There were twitter DM’s with Tommy and Nikki. Other media tried to contactNikki but Tommy was a good hearted person, we trusted him.”

    Which correlates to NYT fake ID story
    http://nyti.ms/iGUfHt

    Comment by az5thdstrct (e76e6a) — 7/1/2011 @ 9:50 am

  194. elissa- I agree

    Comment by MayBee (081489) — 7/1/2011 @ 9:53 am

  195. “koam, I think one reason Lee got this “single person sock puppet master” theory is because he only heard about one woman talking to Tommyx, the “mother”.”

    Temper Tantrum – Exactly why it would be helpful to diagram who has communicated with whom and via what medium, phone versus electronic. Saying the same person talked to Jen Preston adds nothing if we don’t have verified ID.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/1/2011 @ 9:53 am

  196. Throwing out an idea:
    Could Neal be the Sockpuppet master?
    What about the possibility that the different sockpuppets were members of the Bean Posse Trolls? J in MA could be a member. Records show that NR had women among his attack troll staff. He could still be the Sockpuppet Master playing personalities, but he had minions to draw from as well. At least to provide a female voice.

    Comment by Sherlock (d77c52) — 7/1/2011 @ 9:55 am

  197. Temper Tantrum – Lee may get upset with people here questioning his conclusions, but I don’t think he has been writing here long enough to understand that among the regulars, and certainly I see it with some of the newcomers, there are people with experience and skills with which he is unfamiliar in investigating fraud and other activities or just logical ability that are not convinced he’s got everything pinned down.

    It’s not a slam on Lee, it’s a function of experience. Lee has been incredibly doggedf and patient in pursuing this story.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/1/2011 @ 10:02 am

  198. daleyrock, my feeling is that Tommyx and Jen aren’t very cooperative, or worse. They hoped for the VRWC to show up.

    Comment by Temper Tantrum (02fe1b) — 7/1/2011 @ 10:04 am

  199. Elissa, and Maybee it is a loose end and one that’s been driving me to distraction, not because I’m set on some theory that JGcaller is not JGstudent.

    All I get in response to questions about it is “who would do that” and circular logic as proof.

    Comment by SarahW (af7312) — 7/1/2011 @ 10:09 am

  200. #195

    From what I can recall:

    Eliminating JG-CA phone calls and regarding phone calls

    - LG with MA accent spoke with Stranahan and preston
    - Patricia Reid Spoke with Tommy

    Personally, more revealing at this stage for me to keep track of those “involved” that have not spoken on the phone:

    -Nikki
    -John Reid
    -Marianela
    -Marianela’s parents (don’t recall ANY contact)
    -Alicia Pain (obviously)
    -Seattle545
    -Patriot

    May have missed some

    Comment by az5thdstrct (e76e6a) — 7/1/2011 @ 10:17 am

  201. SarahW , the reason I think JG caller is JG student is because she was making evasive lies talking to Lee, because she got something to hide.

    Comment by Temper Tantrum (02fe1b) — 7/1/2011 @ 10:19 am

  202. Agreed, Sarah. It’s an excellent thing to be distracted about.

    “Who would do that?” always seems like such a logical way to think, except people do really nonsensical things all the time.

    Comment by MayBee (081489) — 7/1/2011 @ 10:20 am

  203. Of Course, also Gennette has spoken on phone and “interviewed” in person

    And of course the weiner sexting woman that have come forward have as well

    Comment by az5thdstrct (e76e6a) — 7/1/2011 @ 10:21 am

  204. Temper Tantrum @198 – Agreed. Lee is also being overly defensive of JP and Tommy X IMHO.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/1/2011 @ 10:24 am

  205. Maybee and SarahW–thank you. Yes, we (and others too) have been bringing up this issue in various ways and on multiple threads for days now. Part of what has been so frustrating about it for me is that I still cannot tell if the question/concern/logic about ID verification is just not getting through–or whether it is purposely being ignored for some reason.

    Comment by elissa (961c7a) — 7/1/2011 @ 10:24 am

  206. I know I keep harping on this, but for all the deviousness there really didn’t seem to have been much of a strategy.

    Comment by MayBee (081489) — 7/1/2011 @ 10:24 am

  207. Maybee, but the person who called Lee had some very specific information.It would make the story even more complex.

    Comment by Temper Tantrum (02fe1b) — 7/1/2011 @ 10:25 am

  208. Elissa, the police who filed the report should have a verified identity.Dont know if that’s public information.

    Comment by Temper Tantrum (02fe1b) — 7/1/2011 @ 10:27 am

  209. 208. TT
    presumably 1 of at least 2 police who met JG MA in person confirmed that she is who she says she is via license or address info, etc.

    Comment by koam @wittier (62b38e) — 7/1/2011 @ 11:02 am

  210. 199 SarahW

    see my 187. I’m not saying “who would do that?” I agree with you: we need to know what lies are proven in JG call. Lee labels half of conversation as lies. But we need harder evidence that some of them are actual, proven lies.

    Comment by koam @wittier (62b38e) — 7/1/2011 @ 11:05 am

  211. “I know I keep harping on this, but for all the deviousness there really didn’t seem to have been much of a strategy.”

    MayBee – That is the strategy.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/1/2011 @ 11:10 am

  212. On Lee’s Blog talk Radio show last nite he said:

    ‘NY Times reporter Jen Preston talked by phone with the Boston Jenny George and got the name of the screen writing professor from her. Preston called him and talked to him and his wife. At that point Preston tried to shut down the whole investigation, claiming the professor’s website was faked and he may have been related to the Sockpuppet posse and possibly the Yessmen or Anonymous. So Lee decided to call the professor and claims “everything checked out,” relating to the professor’s legitimacy and what he said about the Boston Jenny George. Lee believed Preston’s decision to not follow up was the result of contact with Ron Brynaert and, “A bunch of other people.”’

    To me, the important information here, which I had not heard before, is that Preston called and talked to the Boston Jenny George. That discussion is where Lee got the contact info for the UCLA Professor. Many of the facts garnered by Jen Preston in her conversation with JG coincide with the information provided by the person claiming to be Jenny George that called Lee. Such that the accent Lee noted and her claim that she was originally from Massachusetts was consistent with the fact that Preston called a Jenny George in Boston; the spelling of the first name, Jenny; the connection to the UCLA screenwriting program.

    To me, it is very likely that the person who called Lee claiming to be the Jenny George who set up the starchild111 account, is the same person that Jen Preston called in Boston- Maybe Lee can provide even more corroborating evidence. This makes Patterico’s first hypothetical- The person claiming to be “Jennifer George” who called Lee was a hoaxer- very unlikely. I think it is very reasonable to conclude at this point that the Boston Jenny George set up the starchild111 account and is Jenay=Nikki=JohnReid9 , among others (The Sockpuppet posse).

    Lee also appeared last nite on Larry O’Connor Stage Right Show. O’Connor said, ” … that Content of death threats to Jenny George sounded almost identical to death threats to Patterico.” This I had not heard before. The threats to the Boston Jenny George were reported to Lee by her in her call to him, but not detailed, yet the threats to Patterico were made after JG’s call to Lee. There was no public knowledge of the details of both threats until JG filed her police complaint. If O’Connor is correct in his characterization that both threats sounded almost identical, that means the same person made both threats. At this point I believe that there is not enough evidence available to this forum to even suggest whetehr JG made the threats to herself and to Patterico, or someone else made the threats to both Patterico and JG- of course there seems to be other facts floating around that people have not yet disclosed.

    If it were JG making threat to herself and Patterio, that would tie things up into a nice neat package. If it were someone else, that creates the problem, noted earlier by Nathan Wagner, of introducing an additional actor. It also creates a motive problem. That is, Patterico and the commenters on his forum seem to be moving towards unmasking the Boston Jenny George as the Sockpuppre Posse. That makes JG and Patterico antagonists. Why would someone be threatening them both?

    Comment by lamchopsl (a91fe8) — 7/1/2011 @ 11:10 am

  213. “To me, it is very likely that the person who called Lee claiming to be the Jenny George who set up the starchild111 account, is the same person that Jen Preston called in Boston”

    lamchopsl – I don’t believe anybody has been disputing this. Did not Lee encourage Boston Jenny to call Jen Preston? It proves nothing. Same person or hoaxer talked to both Lee and Jen. So what?

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/1/2011 @ 11:16 am

  214. I concur with daleyrocks.

    So far about the JGMA person it sounds like we only have Stranahan’s say-so. I am absolutely not saying he is lying. But until that person’s identity is independently confirmed – not via phone without reference to a face by both sides – I don’t treat it as the unadulterated truth.

    And we have Preston apparently saying the professor is fake? Have we confirmed that not to be the case? I don’t think Preston would need to make that up merely to get out of investigating.

    Again, all due respect to Stranahan, but we need to get concrete verification. At the moment, the identity of JG does not conflict with Patterico’s theory.

    Comment by Crispian (70c05e) — 7/1/2011 @ 11:34 am

  215. I haven’t followed comment threads closely enough to be sure no one has proposed this, but wouldn’t a simple explanation be that there are two separate sock-puppet masters, each with different agendas?

    1. JG in Mass creates Starchild account to follow and try to get attention from various celebrities. She becomes interested in Weiner because she sees him on television, changes Starchild to Nikki account to try to get his attention just because he’s a minor celebrity and she likes him. She fishes for Genette, who, being more internet savvy, realizes Nikki is fake but goes along (normal way to try to get attention from someone on Twitter or FB is to try to work up ladder of friends). She’s not trying to get Genette to give away anything about sexting, because she doesn’t suspect it, but just wants attention from minor celebrity Weiner.

    When scandal hits, she wants to help out “her” guy and realizes that a high-school girl who can testify to Weiner’s being a gentleman is useful. She invents the whole Reid family, etc., and is trying to support Weiner until she realizes she is in over her head.

    2. Patriot is a sock for someone who is wants to trap the “right” into something stupid. He’s hoping to get Breitbart to bite on a manufactured story about Weiner that can then be turned into an embarrassment.

    Why Weiner? Because people reading his tweets / following on FB realized he followed attractive young women. JG (as Nikki) wants to be one of them. The bornfree crew thinks he’s a sleaze. Patriot thinks that the right wing has gone overboard and sees an opportunity to set a trap for overzealous right wing.

    This all gets so complicated because it turns out the Weiner actually _is_ sexting people.

    (maybe Weiner’s tweet to Genette wasn’t because he mistook @ for D, but rather that he was chatting with 2 people at once and put the dick-pic in the wrong tweet. The tweet to Genette was intended to be public but include no pic–just letting everybody know he’s on TV, but in “modest” way. The dick-pic was intended to go into a different chat window to other sexting partner).

    I’m sure there are flaw with this line of reasoning, but it does seem like a simpler story line than some being proposed.

    Comment by Wondering (cf5138) — 7/1/2011 @ 11:35 am

  216. Well said, Crispian.

    Comment by Dustin (b7410e) — 7/1/2011 @ 11:36 am

  217. 213. daleyrocks

    It was my understanding that Jen Preston called and verified Jenny George’s identity separately. Keep in mind that the JG who called Lee claimed she lived in CA and the JG Preston spoke with was confirmed to be in Boston.

    Comment by lamchopsl (a91fe8) — 7/1/2011 @ 11:38 am

  218. I think that’s possible, but doesn’t change how to proceed in confirming that theory. The most dangerous thing would be to assume veracity of facts that would limit how to proceed (eg assuming JG is exactly who she is claimed to be).

    Comment by Crispian (70c05e) — 7/1/2011 @ 11:39 am

  219. daleyrocks , if the police has verified an Id and address, it should be possible to unravel this.
    If JG MA is innocent , it should be possible to trace the threats.

    Comment by Temper Tantrum (02fe1b) — 7/1/2011 @ 11:40 am

  220. Who sent the gym photos to the NE?

    Comment by SusanT (355042) — 7/1/2011 @ 11:44 am

  221. lamchopsl,

    I missed that part where Lee said Jen Preston tried to shut down the investigation, she was looking for the VRWC so she probably didn’t like what she heard.

    If Preston verified JG MA:s ID, I understand how Lee can be so sure.

    Comment by Temper Tantrum (02fe1b) — 7/1/2011 @ 11:46 am

  222. 215. Wondering

    Re: #2., if Patriot was trying to punk the right, why did he send the dicpic to Breitbart, destroying A. Weiner?

    Comment by lamchopsl (a91fe8) — 7/1/2011 @ 11:46 am

  223. lamchopsl,

    Might depend on Gennette’s honesty in this affair. Perhaps the “best laid plan” wasn’t realistically conceived.

    Comment by Crispian (70c05e) — 7/1/2011 @ 11:50 am

  224. 221. Temper Tantrum

    Lee seems to be insinuating that Preston has ulterior motives. I think he said as much on O’Connor’s show. He’s suggesting that the NY Times and Preston don’t want to let the story get out if it shows that A. Weiner was done in by a liberal woman. Plus, preston and the NY Times have already declared the Weiner grinders to be part of the VRWC.

    Comment by lamchopsl (a91fe8) — 7/1/2011 @ 11:52 am

  225. Number 212:

    On Lee’s Blog talk Radio show last nite he said:

    ‘NY Times reporter Jen Preston talked by phone with the Boston Jenny George and got the name of the screen writing professor from her. Preston called him and talked to him and his wife. At that point Preston tried to shut down the whole investigation, claiming the professor’s website was faked and he may have been related to the Sockpuppet posse….

    Well, it is an obvious suspicion that the Profeessor could be a KAOS agent. Now Jennifer Preston is saying that.

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (d3daeb) — 7/1/2011 @ 11:57 am

  226. The professor isn’t fake. She thought his writer-colony website might have been a phony.

    Hoax websites have bindun so, the obvious questions is what might Jan Preston know that I don’t that tipped her to a hoax site.

    The profs site is old though. Really old, at least ten years old, and in the wayback, and the contents have evolved very gradually and it is still essentially the same (with updates) as it has been in recent years.

    In other words, the only way it is fake is if it has been hijacked, and there is no sign of that. The prof is still living. He can be contacted through UCLA for confirmation, too, (which I wish someone would do – though I won’t be doing it) and his phone numbers haven’t changed over the years

    His website is an external source on his wiki page, and just a cursory check of Wikipedia updates show that same site was linked on the wiki at LEAST as far back as 2006 when an update to its formatting on the wiki page was done.

    The who is conceals the owner of the site, and it was recently updated, but one is common and the other necessary to keep the domain name. And the site hasn’t changed in any significant way, not that I can detect.

    So he’s real and his website it real.

    Someone should talk to him in person, in the flesh, or through UCLA, just in case he’s in Europe and has mischievious house sitter taking his calls.

    Comment by SarahW (af7312) — 7/1/2011 @ 11:57 am

  227. Re: #2., if Patriot was trying to punk the right, why did he send the dicpic to Breitbart, destroying A. Weiner

    Outside of Lee’s jilted lover theory- and going back to the theory on Weiner’s future NYC democratic opponent . Some democratic group could be ridding themselves of their future opponent, OR someone in the Democratic party saw Weiner as a future MESS that would eventually explode and hurt their party. The info on Weiner was already out there, so there was going to be some sort of scandal. So why not do a controlled explosion before the NYC election for mayor?

    Comment by bmertz (d77c52) — 7/1/2011 @ 11:58 am

  228. ==It was my understanding that Jen Preston called and verified Jenny George’s identity separately==

    Lamchops–Do you have any insight you can share with us as to exactly how and who Jen Preston called and “identified Jenny Goerge’s identity separately”? If so, please share it.

    Comment by elissa (961c7a) — 7/1/2011 @ 12:03 pm

  229. lamchopsl,

    Ulterior motives explains tommyx and Jen Prestons behavior. Why dont these “big J jornos” follow up on this story , it’s intriguing, but they just dropped it.

    Comment by Temper Tantrum (02fe1b) — 7/1/2011 @ 12:05 pm

  230. @Sarah

    Someone should talk to him in person, in the flesh, or through UCLA, just in case he’s in Europe and has mischievious house sitter taking his calls.

    When professors leave town for a sabbatical to go out of the country they will often do a house trade with another professor needing a temporary house. Sometimes they just switch houses from their different locations while they conduct research,
    OR
    They ask a graduate student to house-sit for them.

    Trivia info if you are interested.

    Comment by bmertz (d77c52) — 7/1/2011 @ 12:05 pm

  231. Crispian – Thanks. Remember, Boston Jenny called Lee on a blocked number and the big deal Lee and others have made about nobody being able to track her down. JP did not call Boston Jenny. It was the reverse at Lee’s suggestion if I am recalling correctly. If Boston Jenny kept her story straight between the two calls, it adds nothing to our body of information.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/1/2011 @ 12:05 pm

  232. 201. TT, that doesn’t follow. Yes, JGcaller/threatreporter is a liar. It does not then follow that she is JGstudent, one does not suggest the other.

    In fact, the lying and sock-tropes employed by JGcaller are what makes the claim of identity even more suspect.

    A poser, who lies, and forged bios and even ID, would not have a lot more compunction about using someone else’s identity as a screen.

    Comment by SarahW (af7312) — 7/1/2011 @ 12:07 pm

  233. It was my understanding that Jen Preston called and verified Jenny George’s identity separately.

    lamchopsl – Remember the PROOF nobody can find Boston Jenny? No sale.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/1/2011 @ 12:07 pm

  234. “Lee seems to be insinuating that Preston has ulterior motives.”

    SHOCKA!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/1/2011 @ 12:11 pm

  235. “They ask a graduate student to house-sit for them.”

    bmertz – Yup, you had to there. Hahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/1/2011 @ 12:13 pm

  236. 228. elissa

    None, other that the way Lee characterized the conversation between Preston and JG. But…

    Lee had no way of knowing JG lived in Boston, in fact she told him she lived in CA.

    Comment by lamchopsl (a91fe8) — 7/1/2011 @ 12:22 pm

  237. 233. daleyrocks

    It is my understanding that the Boston police department took a complaint and interviewed Jenny George, in Boston.

    Comment by lamchopsl (a91fe8) — 7/1/2011 @ 12:26 pm

  238. lamchopsl,

    Yes, that is all of our “understanding.” But our understanding is not proof.

    We’re still waiting on verification of JG’s identity.

    Comment by Crispian (70c05e) — 7/1/2011 @ 12:30 pm

  239. 238. Crispian

    This is Lee’s description of his interaction with the Boston Police detective:

    http://leestranahan.com/jenny-george-files-police-report-accusing-me-of-making-threats-against-her

    What exactly do you consider to be, “verification of JG’s identity”?

    Comment by lamchopsl (a91fe8) — 7/1/2011 @ 12:36 pm

  240. Who else has talked to people on phone? (Pat?, Mike?…not to our knowledge. Ron? anyone?)

    Nobody…Tried to get Patriot on the phone many times to no avail.

    Comment by goatsred (c1f2f8) — 7/1/2011 @ 12:43 pm

  241. I mean, who she is, not just that she exists. We can assume that the police confirmed her identity. Sounds like a reasonable assumption. But beyond that we really don’t know. She is appparently not the JGCA with a background as described by JGMA on the phone to Lee. So who is she? Beyond a name on a police report?

    Comment by Crispian (70c05e) — 7/1/2011 @ 12:46 pm

  242. daleyrocks,

    We dont know what type of information Preston got from JG to ID her. Lee’s challenge to find her was very early , there was a blog where her name was published , I dont remember what’s it called.

    Comment by Temper Tantrum (02fe1b) — 7/1/2011 @ 12:48 pm

  243. 240. goatsred

    My hypothesis is that the reason Patricia Reid spoke with Tommyx on the phone is that the Sockpuppet Posse Master is a woman. She couldn’t represent herself as John Reid. If the person behind Dan Wolfe is a woman, then she cannot talk with anyone on the phone with out revealing her gender.

    Comment by lamchopsl (a91fe8) — 7/1/2011 @ 12:51 pm

  244. I am sorry if it looks like I’m singling out specific individuals who I’m sure are commenting here in good faith just so I can try to make this point–again– but statements like:

    “Lee characterized…”

    “…it was my understanding that..”

    “the police who filed the report should have a verified identity”

    presumably 1 of at least 2 police who met JG MA in person confirmed..”

    just are not all that helpful in moving the story forward at this stage of the game when actual, irrefutable facts are what people are really looking for.

    Comment by elissa (961c7a) — 7/1/2011 @ 12:57 pm

  245. 232 SarahW. But I dont see the need for a ID thief to be evasive. Why lie you’re in CA if you’re a sock but give the real professor?

    Comment by Temper Tantrum (02fe1b) — 7/1/2011 @ 1:02 pm

  246. 244. elissa

    I understand your frustration, but there are no irrefutable facts. period. Not in this universe. There are only degrees of certainty.

    Maybe Lee made that Boston detective story up from whole cloth. Even if it was confirmed by someone else, maybe they are conspiring with Lee. It happened to Tommyx. Someone created the JohnReid9 account and the Mark Alecia account 30 minutes apart and 24 hours after the Weiner story broke. Within a few hours these two accounts were used to punk Tommy by seemingly confirming each other’s story.

    Comment by lamchopsl (a91fe8) — 7/1/2011 @ 1:09 pm

  247. neal is from iowa. the fbi just raided the home of another iowan, suspected of being a lulzsec member. that person, laurelai bailey also goes by wesley baily and is a pre-surgical transgender. could neal know laurelai? laurelai is a male going female and may sound female on the phone. just a weird iowa coincidence perhaps.

    Comment by nancydrew (448ba9) — 7/1/2011 @ 1:14 pm

  248. nancy drew–

    interesting. link?

    Comment by elissa (961c7a) — 7/1/2011 @ 1:17 pm

  249. Last Night’s Radio Stranahan
    you can skip the first 20 mins to get to the Jen Preston discussion.

    According to Lee, Preston calls the professor to verify JG’s identity. Preston then calls Lee and says

    “I had mentioned that JP had gotten the name from JG in Boston of the screenwriting Prof. who she’d studied with so she contacted the prof and as i mendtioned before she (JP) talked to him talked to his wife, they both knew because she’d (JG MA) taken classes w teacher not at UCLA but elsewhere. THye said that they knew who she was and I thought that ended it.

    “So here’s the part that i’ve hinted at but haven’t talked about it. I thought next step was NY Times would track down this Jennifer George person and we’ll get at the truth. So what happened was, I got a message from Jen Preston saying:

    ‘I think that we’ve been punked by the UCLA professor and I think it’s been a huge waste of time’

    Lee continues, “I was very curious about this of course because she talked to the prof and I thought some important new fact had been gleaned. Something new and big was going on. So I called her (JP) and I said

    ‘What’s going on? What’s happening? What did you learn?’

    And Jen Preston said: ‘Lee, I just think we’ve been punked on this whole thing.’

    And I said ‘Ok, really? well, why?’

    Because I thought she’d learned something. Like “oh it didn’t check out or the number was wrong.” (this is what Lee imagines Jen P was gonna say)

    And she says: “You just have no idea how deep this goes.

    And I said, “What actually happened?”

    And she said, “I don’t know that his (the prof’s) website is real.”

    [ His website that Preston "suspects" may not be real.

    Google search for Lew Hunter Screenwriting]

    Lee: “And I was like, well, what do you mean? Because I’ve been to his website and it was real (chuckles) It was, it was real (chuckles more).”

    And she was like

    “I don’t even know if it’s real. I don’t even know who who I’ve talked to. These groups that are doing this sockpuppet stuff, you have no idea what they’re capable of. They can fake entire sites. The can get people… “

    Lee: “And I’m just like whoa, whoa, wait a minute, what are you talking about? why do you think that this has happened? do you have some proof?”

    And she’s like: “Lee, you have no idea how deep these things can go. Groups like Anonymous or the Yessmen, they are really capable, they could fake identities.”

    And I say “but YOU called the professor. Right? You looked up the number yourself and you called him and talked to him and his wife, correct?”

    And she’s like, “yeah”

    Lee: “well how could that be fake? (laughs) how could…”

    And she goes, “Look, this goes much deeper than that. “

    Lee: “Well, do you care if I call?”

    She says: “Go ahead; feel free to call.”

    Lee: “I hadn’t wanted to call in because I didn’t want to impose on the person because they’re teaching classes..etc…. so I called in and it checked out. But it made me feel like…and this is why I brought this up…because I like Jen in a lotta ways and I like working with her in a lotta ways and then when I saw this stuff that Ron Brynaert was saying the other day, I thought ‘well, this is sorta beyond the pale.’ Like obviously she’s been talking to Ron and a bunch of other people and rather than tell me she like “I’m talking to different sources and some of them think this and some of them think that…” she had
    bought into this idea to the point to where she wasn’t pursuing things with Jennifer George.
    Even she knew there were lies that Jennifer George had told. And I think that this happening has caused real problems for people. This lack of follow-up caused problems for people. ’cause I think that after that probably, right around that time, Jen George went into the police station and filed a report that I was the person who left death threats. So to me there was a level of credulity (sic) that had been dropped. And my wife was like “this is a reporter from the NYTimes? Why are they buying into this? ” So that’s part of the explanation. Part of what led up to it. …

    “The reason the info about the prof was dropped was there was this belief that the entire website may have been faked. And I tried to tell Jen (Preston) “there’s no way this web site is faked. I’ve heard who this is. ” but even now there’s this theory being floated by some people that there’s some big conspiracy going on that’s much deeper than what it is. and that’s why I say when I heard that the police had visited Jen George in Boston, and that/had confirmed a bunch of things,including that she was in MA, which the screenwriting prof had told us, I was like “well that really sorta changes things.” so anyway, that’s that bit of the story . I’ll probably write it up at some point.

    (Please do, Lee.)

    The part about Preston having Lee’s radio show edited by the CEO of Blog Talk Radio (related to the conversation in which Lee learns from Jen Preston that Prof may have thought JG could be “troubled”)

    “She was like, ‘Oh, you can’t have that up there.’ Asked me if I could and would take it down. I say I dunnow how. She calls CEO of BTR and gets it done.” (paraphrased) Lee says to CEO “I don’t think it needs to be taken down but I’m not arguing at this point.” Preston selects 20 seconds to delete and CEO gets it done.

    So the question is does Jen Preston really entertain the idea that Lew Hunter is a fake person with a fake website? Or has she crafted this excuse just for Lee in hopes that he’ll bite at the story? (To his credit, Lee laughs at the contention.) Does it say what she thinks of Lee? Is Jen Preston spinning false tales to the bloggers now (we’ve seen how she schmoozes her interview candidates) …or does she really buy into the conspiracy theories? (Not that there couldn’t be some conspiracy…but Lee is correct that Lew Hunter isn’t a fake person with a fake website, a fact that should be very obvious to the “NY Times reporter on Technology, Social Media in Politics, Government – and real life”) Did Lee get her drift or not get her drift…was she giving him codewords and hints for his safety?
    Why did she want him to back off so badly?

    Comment by koam @wittier (62b38e) — 7/1/2011 @ 1:24 pm

  250. @daleyrocks

    Comment by daleyrocks — 7/1/2011 @ 12:13 pm

    Right. They have been hit up to walk dogs and serve the bar too. lol

    Or, help them set up their web pages

    I caught part of a discussion about hijacking web pages /kidnapping?? theory. I didn’t read enough to understand the entire meaning, so I may have misunderstood. It triggered this thought ( you’ll have to forgive me, I have a tendency to toss ideas around ) :

    In that sort of trading houses/house-sitting situation, not only would another professor or a grad student have access to the home, if they are hackers they could also gain access to the desktop computer left at the house. A number of older professors still use desktops and are not computer or web savvy. There is well-known dinosaur that still uses a typewriter and hand writes his notations.

    Ok getting back to the point, if the UCLA professors were out of town, that would also allow their house-sitter to answer the phone to speak to a reporter.

    Comment by bmertz (d77c52) — 7/1/2011 @ 1:26 pm

  251. http://gawker.com/5816291 Here’s just one link. I googled both neal and laurelai bailey and discovered the iowa links. they are both in the same business, both ruthless, both extreme leftist and seems like a “fixer” might be in sync ideologically as someone who is part of anonymous and the more militant lulzsec. they see themselves as fixers too. Iowa isn’t that big to have so much internet hacking talent on such an epic scale as these two.

    Comment by nancydrew (448ba9) — 7/1/2011 @ 1:38 pm

  252. daleyrocks
    #250
    That was in reference to SarahW’s comment that someone needed to verifiy if the UCLA couple were actually in town and at their home. It is summer.

    Comment by bmertz (d77c52) — 7/1/2011 @ 1:43 pm

  253. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/06/02/981419/-Bringing-Breitbart-%28And-Thomas%29-To-Justice-%28Action-Alert!%29

    Speaking of Neal- he does love him some hacker stories…

    Comment by surreal (7a67da) — 7/1/2011 @ 1:44 pm

  254. after reading the lee/jen convo, my suspicions of a link grow more credible. Neal is a very bad and dangerous man. he’s worked on many democrat campaigns and refers to himself as a fixer. maybe he’s part of anonymous too.

    Comment by nancydrew (448ba9) — 7/1/2011 @ 1:46 pm

  255. 249. koam @wittier

    Great job with that transcript. I was way too lazy to do that. You are a better man than I- even if you happen to not be a man.

    It’s possible Preston is dumb enough to think she could convince Lee that it was a “fake” website, but I consider it unlikely. I consider it much more likely that she was told to back of by her editor. And not for some vast death-hacker threat to the safety of the solar system, but because the editor and the Times do not want to spend any resources pursuing a story that will refute a previously made perfectly good smear against the Right, while at the same time show that A. Weiner was laid low by a liberal woman. I think the editor told her to back off, and like a good little minion, she backed off.

    Comment by lamchopsl (a91fe8) — 7/1/2011 @ 1:47 pm

  256. read up on neal as much as you can. i think he’s the guy making all of the threats and has told jen to shut it down or else. he’s always referring to his connections. go read RonBryn’s twitter. Wow….

    Comment by nancydrew (448ba9) — 7/1/2011 @ 1:48 pm

  257. @surreal#253 re: Neal’s Hitlerian Rant

    Congressman Anthony Weiner was stalked, set up, smeared, and this was coordinated to protect Clarence Thomas from scrutiny…Brietbart’s criminal activities

    LMAO Is he serious?

    Comment by bmertz (d77c52) — 7/1/2011 @ 1:50 pm

  258. I mean..if hillary and bill are as close to weiner as has been described, don’t you think they are the best folks to know a well known democrat fixer like neal, to fix weiner’s problem? Maybe thats why weiner was reported to have called bill – to apologize to bill??? Hah! think not…it was to get a fixer hired. Wallah! the fake story to tommy xtopher, the fake story to jen and the NY times…Bill and Hill know a lot of fixers and lots of democrats are on record as having hired neal. Hmm? Perhaps? that would be pretty dangerous to unearth wouldn’t it?

    Comment by nancydrew (448ba9) — 7/1/2011 @ 1:53 pm

  259. 255 lamchopsl

    GenderAnalyzer said that i’m 93% man, fwiw.

    Comment by koam @wittier (62b38e) — 7/1/2011 @ 1:57 pm

  260. I encourage you to read the link to the daily kos above. that article was written by neal. he included language that anonymous uses to threaten. It is their code. neal said he was given this language to pass along. Then, look at the picture attached. It’s anonymiss, as in female. Is that laurelai bailey helping neal write that aricle?

    Comment by nancydrew (448ba9) — 7/1/2011 @ 2:07 pm

  261. that article makes it clear that at least neal was following weiners project to destroy justice thomas. were they working together? looks like neal was trying to create plausible spin, to FIX weiners problem. i hope lee does not back down on this. could be another big scandel worthy of a book. very spy novelish.

    Comment by nancydrew (448ba9) — 7/1/2011 @ 2:09 pm

  262. Could that article at Kos be what JP@NYT is running scared from/by?

    Comment by surreal (7a67da) — 7/1/2011 @ 2:15 pm

  263. 251. nancydrew

    Iowa isn’t that big to have so much internet hacking talent on such an epic scale as these two.

    LOL! best laugh I’ve had today. Although I hope for your sake that the intrepid Iowahawk does not get wind of your sentiments.

    On a related topic, I noticed that Neal RAThauser (AKA Simon Sinister) made his twitter feed protected this morning. it was not so last nite.

    http://twitter.com/#!/NealRauhauserhttp://twitter.com/#!/NealRauhauser

    How delicious it would be if the FBI swooped in and arrested him for all these death threats. But alas, life never seems to turn out so perfectly.

    Comment by lamchopsl (a91fe8) — 7/1/2011 @ 2:15 pm

  264. oh and then you get to the bottom and see that neal ratted by lying on the innocent goatsred. he gives himself away as a fellow traveller of anonymous. i think this is a very big deal. what else is neal up to? he’s close to weiner which puts him close to hillary, the secretary of state, and bill, a former, yet discredited president, who likely still can be blackmailed over post whitehouse behavior. just speculatin..not good. The real scandal on weinergate was the potential to compromise the secretary of state.

    Comment by nancydrew (448ba9) — 7/1/2011 @ 2:18 pm

  265. 257.LMAO Is he serious?

    Comment by bmertz — 7/1/2011 @ 1:50 pm

    Truthfully, I have no idea. But I think *he* takes it seriously, for whatever that’s worth.

    There’s a thin line between dedication, and obsession, IFYWIM.

    Comment by surreal (7a67da) — 7/1/2011 @ 2:20 pm

  266. I read iowahawk. He’s hysterically funny…I’m one myself. That’s why the iowa connection between the two caught my eye and I decided to see if some dots could be connected. I think those dots are now pretty well connected.

    Comment by nancydrew (448ba9) — 7/1/2011 @ 2:20 pm

  267. His level of hate raises the eyebrow:
    DK:
    Neal’s Rant on Punishing Breitbart’s Enablers

    When you read this, Ms. Loesch, and I know you will, I have a personal request for you. Go get with discredited, disorganized dullards @SwiftRead and @GregWHoward of Twittergate fame, and then show me those pretty, pouty lips of yours saying my name on PJTV again

    I read about what Sinister did to those poor guys on the article link someone posted today. How did he not end up in jail? No one did anything about it?

    His hate/lust relationship with danaloesch is rather disturbing too. Stalker material in fact. Move over Voldermort, you have competition

    Comment by bmertz (d77c52) — 7/1/2011 @ 2:26 pm

  268. His level of hate raises the eyebrow:
    DK:
    Neal’s Rant on Punishing Breitbart’s Enablers

    When you read this, Ms. Loesch, and I know you will, I have a personal request for you. Go get with discredited, disorganized dullards @SwiftRead and @GregWHoward of Twittergate fame, and then show me those pretty, pouty lips of yours saying my name on PJTV again

    I read about what Sinister did to those poor guys on the article link someone posted today. How did he not end up in jail? No one did anything about it?

    His hate/lust relationship with danaloesch is rather disturbing too. Stalker material in fact. Move over Voldermort, you have competition

    Comment by bmertz (d77c52) — 7/1/2011 @ 2:26 pm

  269. “We dont know what type of information Preston got from JG to ID her. Lee’s challenge to find her was very early”

    Temper Tantrum – By very early do you mean 6/24 or later, the date of the Nikki Revealed BTR show?

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/1/2011 @ 2:26 pm

  270. I don’t know how that double posted, My apologies. My server has been refusing to refresh and to post since yesterday.

    Comment by bmertz (d77c52) — 7/1/2011 @ 2:33 pm

  271. I don’t really understand all the different theories you all have but I thought it important to add that my Twitter account was hacked back around 6/11. (which is why I closed my Clay_Arts account)Not only were people being randomly unfollowed, messages that I had deleted more than a year prior were showing up as originating in the wrong accounts. Someone else was controlling my account.

    Comment by Stillconfused (786412) — 7/1/2011 @ 2:35 pm

  272. goatsred – Serious question. I understand why you are PO’d at PatriotUSA, but in the time you guys were fooling around together as bornfree or whatever, did you ever have any indication that he was not a conservative or that he was a sock.

    I ask, because I find most liberals cannot successfully impersonate a conservative for any length of time because they just don’t understand how we think. You see it with liberal trolls on blogs attempting to fool people. They invariably slip up because they are idiots or too indoctrinated with liberal Kool Aid about conservatives they put their feet in their mouths.

    Did you see any hints of that with your interactions with Patriot to justify all the suspicion being cast his way?

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/1/2011 @ 2:35 pm

  273. I should clarify…. DM’s were showing up that had been deleted more than a year ago.

    Comment by Stillconfused (786412) — 7/1/2011 @ 2:36 pm

  274. live by the sword, die by the sword. Delicious karma on it’s way to neal. hoisted on his own petard. two clever by half? reading his own words in so many different forums you get the idea that he’s the smartest guy out there so you better watch out…and then he ends up leaving too many clues behind and he’s done. Not so smart afterall eh? Anyway, did they ever find the white house travel office manager that disappeared??? I always wondered what happened there.

    Comment by nancydrew (448ba9) — 7/1/2011 @ 2:42 pm

  275. clay arts…i read about you in some twitter posts on ronbryn…different accounts and things. can you refresh my memory so I dont’ have to go read through them again? One of the things neal is really good at, it seems, is finding idle twitter accounts and taking them over. He talks about handing over control of various twitter accounts to someone else. It looks like his speciality is creating sock puppets and then working them like sockpuppet sim city. I wonder if one of the JG’s was just an innocent person with an idle twitter account that got hacked by neal or laurelai and they took it over for a while. maybe? Allegedly?

    Comment by nancydrew (448ba9) — 7/1/2011 @ 2:51 pm

  276. I think i decided during my research today that patriot usa is likely neal. thus, goatsred got really had. I hope he pursues some legal remedies. I’m thinking you may have a case, goatsred. Ask Patterico.

    Comment by nancydrew (448ba9) — 7/1/2011 @ 2:53 pm

  277. @nancydrew Do you want my whole story? Or just from the unfortunate day I read one of Ron’s tweets?

    Comment by Stillconfused (786412) — 7/1/2011 @ 2:53 pm

  278. nancydrew, I will disagree about Patriot. I have talked to him, and I think he is exactly who he says he is. Just my opinion.

    Comment by Stillconfused (786412) — 7/1/2011 @ 2:55 pm

  279. @251 nancydrew.
    Interesting story about Laurelai Bailey and the revenge of her ex-hacker associates. I see what you meant about why JenP might be afraid of Sinister – re: the article’s description about that hacker group forging a document about LB’s involvement. End Game, she loss her job. Real life but another potential movie plot.

    Comment by bmertz (d77c52) — 7/1/2011 @ 2:57 pm

  280. http://the-classic-liberal.com/democratic-consultant-neal-rauhauser-pedophilia-themed-tea-party/ An example of the charm of neal, who I am sure is a graduate of the Bill Obama school of Civility.

    Comment by nancydrew (448ba9) — 7/1/2011 @ 3:06 pm

  281. Neal is trying to scare people that HE is ‘Anonymous’. He is trying to use their rep as his own personal army. Anonymous is not coordinated. It is any one who says they are. Maybe JP is scared of all that but no one investigating this should be.

    Yes, he might have some trolls helping him etc. but he the funny thing he isn’t even anonymous in the regular sense of the word never mind the group.

    Comment by Noodles (3681c4) — 7/1/2011 @ 3:06 pm

  282. People have accused me over and over of being this person or that person but the last straw was being accused of being the person who sent death threats. I guess if I had jumped on the “hate Dan” bandwagon, no one would have said a word to me. As it is, I am guilty just because I believe what Dan has said. I am a friend to someone who desperately needed one. That’s it. This should have been investigated by law enforcement from the beginning and we really don’t know that it isn’t. I hope so because the things being written as fact are hurting innocent people.

    Comment by Stillconfused (786412) — 7/1/2011 @ 3:08 pm

  283. how do you know?

    Comment by nancydrew (448ba9) — 7/1/2011 @ 3:09 pm

  284. Sorry for that poorly written post! =/

    Anyway, my main point it Neal is a troll. It would make sense why all this hasn’t ended yet (if he is involved) and why the socks didn’t just disappear into the night. Trolls live for this sort of drama (never mind if there is money involved).

    Comment by Noodles (3681c4) — 7/1/2011 @ 3:10 pm

  285. If someone really were threatening JG why would she call Lee first before she even called the police, and lie to him.

    Comment by Temper Tantrum

    I keep reaching this point, and realizing that we do not know that the woman who called Lee and the woman who filed the report were the same woman.

    The timing appears to be very close.

    However, if the woman who called Lee was related to the person who called in the threats, then she would know about the threats, and could muddy the waters, thoroughly, with that phone call.

    I am not saying this is what happened. I am saying that if the scenario is played this way, then the woman who filed a police report is not a liar, or even involved in this increasingly murky matter.

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/1/2011 @ 3:13 pm

  286. Noodles
    Certainly, commenters are too small of fish to worry about it. We aren’t a big threat. But Jen Preston would become one if she went after the story. Lee has made himself into a threat as well. Captain Obvious says: hence he got the phony phone call. You would not think that he would be dumb enough to threaten Patterico and Ace, but apparently his ego is bigger than common sense.

    Comment by bmertz (d77c52) — 7/1/2011 @ 3:17 pm

  287. Why does The New York Times want bloggers to stop looking into the Weiner case?

    Comment by koam @wittier (62b38e) — 7/1/2011 @ 3:19 pm

  288. 266. nancydrew

    Neal does fancy himself a computer-network expert, and if he really believes that nonsense he writes, it is so far left he borders on anarchism- which is where those cyber-warfare groups habituate. BTW, I think he does believe it because of the obsessive compulsive nature of his style. Neal, in his mid 40′s, is a bit older than Laurelai Bailey, who is 29, and they hark from Davenport and Graettinger which aren’t that proximal, though I suspect Neal left Iowa for Chicago many moons ago.

    If Neal is connected to these hacker groups, his political connection may save his hide- I remember Andrew Sullivan having his marijuana possession case dropped by prosecutes over the objection of the presiding judge- but if he is behind the death threats the weight of evidence collected at the lower levels of the FBI may be so great that political intervention is too risky and he may be cut lose by the political powers in the justice Department.

    Comment by lamchopsl (a91fe8) — 7/1/2011 @ 3:19 pm

  289. 280. Comment by nancydrew — 7/1/2011 @ 3:06 pm

    Just watching this vid, and something popped out at me- at 5:09 into the vid, one of the tweets says “@GregWHoward my clients, only 10% of which you see are delighted ;-)

    Didn’t the threatening letter to Patterico include the term “clients”?

    I’m reaching, I know, I know…

    Comment by surreal (7a67da) — 7/1/2011 @ 3:22 pm

  290. Stillconfused..

    Clarify please: I will disagree about Patriot. I have talked to him,

    On the phone, twitter?

    Comment by az5thdstrct (e76e6a) — 7/1/2011 @ 3:23 pm

  291. I know I keep harping on this, but for all the deviousness there really didn’t seem to have been much of a strategy.

    Comment by MayBee

    Spot on! (Ahem! Sorry for the Britishism – it just fits.)

    Part of why it’s so confusing is that none of this seems to be aimed in one direction!

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/1/2011 @ 3:24 pm

  292. @az5, Twitter but I don’t ask him any questions. I am just there to be his friend.

    Comment by Stillconfused (786412) — 7/1/2011 @ 3:25 pm

  293. I lol @ his association with ‘hacker groups’. The public buys into this fear and nonsense. He is a troll. That is all. Maybe a good one. Maybe a paid one. But just a troll.

    I could make a YT video calling Neal out as Anonymous if I wanted to. I could start trolling him if I wanted to. Anonymous would then be trolling Anonymous (or someone who paints an association with them) . My point is guys like him use the rep of some members of Anonymous to scare people from even getting involved.

    Comment by Noodles (3681c4) — 7/1/2011 @ 3:27 pm

  294. Stillconfused

    You changed your twitter accnt at least 3 times correct? from clay_arts to _clayarts to current? Or not correct?

    Comment by az5thdstrct (e76e6a) — 7/1/2011 @ 3:27 pm

  295. Take that back, I did ask him why in the hell he was talking to Ronbyrn. I tell you one thing, I wasn’t find of journalists before this, but I will never trust another one after this. They will sell their souls for a story.

    Comment by Stillconfused (786412) — 7/1/2011 @ 3:28 pm

  296. lamchops!

    I noticed he put CNN on the hit list of enemies of the people for the crime of hiring DanaL. Sinister does strike me as someone with the POV “I am a god”, generalized contempt, and so on.. I’m not claiming the training to determine what precisely is the nature of his problem. But, I think there is a serious one. His focus on DanaL is nothing short of creepy.

    His personality flags remind me of two of our sockpuppets.

    Comment by bmertz (d77c52) — 7/1/2011 @ 3:29 pm

  297. Az, see my above post. Yes, I changed again because my account was doing the same thing it was before. Not immediately, but it did. After I realized someone was trying to find out my name, this whole thing changed to me. I have done nothing wrong and I have especially done nothing to warrant anyone trying to find me. I have had a stalker once. I do not want another one. Before all this, I didn’t hide my name. Now, I don’t trust that some insane person won’t knock on my door. People took my protecting my safety as my being guilty. I will say, I have never experienced such blind-hatred. This has changed me.

    Comment by Stillconfused (786412) — 7/1/2011 @ 3:34 pm

  298. Stillconfused

    Just asking to understand if the current is really original clay_arts and why change accnt the 2nd time.

    Comment by az5thdstrct (e76e6a) — 7/1/2011 @ 3:36 pm

  299. On the phone at the Nordstrom cafe andhubs wants his phone back…… Pardon twit speak if I lapse into it.
    Thanks loam for giving us context of jan prestons convo with lee. Makes a heck of a lot more sense now.

    Prestons caution to Lee is just that, a caution and not a dismissal. Anon style punks can go deep and she is trying to check things out. She is not declaring the website fake but allowing it might be until confirmed otherwise. I made a similar cautionary plea around the same time , and had a devil of a time making it clear this was not a preferred alternative theory, but one that needed proper consideration when evaluating personas , claims, methods and motives.

    Follow up and nailing down loose end will push the case in The right direction whatever the reality is

    Comment by Sarahw (d233ce) — 7/1/2011 @ 3:40 pm

  300. AZ. I would like to change my name back to _ClayArts but I don’t dare because I know how you will all react.
    I have seen the worst in people.

    Comment by Stillconfused (786412) — 7/1/2011 @ 3:40 pm

  301. People took my protecting my safety as my being guilty. I will say, I have never experienced such blind-hatred. This has changed me.

    Do you mean people here confused? Or on twitter ?

    Comment by I'm Getting a Headache (d77c52) — 7/1/2011 @ 3:53 pm

  302. testing

    Comment by koam @wittier (62b38e) — 7/1/2011 @ 4:01 pm

  303. Headache, I don’t comment here enough to feel a lot of hatred but there are people who comment here who state suspicions as fact. People will take your words and use them against you not matter how innocent you are. I learned the hard way that if someone wishes you to be guilty, they will find a way. I see Ronbryn compare Dan to Jared Loughner, tell him how horrible I thought that was, he pretended to be my friend then the next thing I know, he is accusing me of horrible things that shocked me. I got involved to be a friend to Dan. I will follow that through as long as he needs me to but after that, I will leave politics in my past.

    Comment by Stillconfused (786412) — 7/1/2011 @ 4:08 pm

  304. Thinking out loud:

    Assume JG MA is a real person who created @starchild111 in 2009 or 2010.

    She used it as a fan of celebs because she heard that you can directly get response message by celebs on Twitter. (& you can…people used to write fan mail and hope for a reply, same thing.)

    She didn’t keep using it because none of her friends used it and she didn’t get much satisfaction from celebrities she tracked, primarily the Kardashians and some Latinas, including J-Lo. Mostly about pretty actresses & models.

    She was also a fan of the UCLA writers program. She either attended that program or knew of it because she’d taken one of the writing retreats with Lew Hunter, a UCLA prof, in the past.

    To clarify, while it’s been reported as a lie that she went to UCLA, the Writers Program is an extension program. You can take courses online.
    http://twitter.com/#!/writersprogram
    http://www2.uclaextension.edu/writers/detail.php?sID=aboutwr
    It’s not only for screenwriting, and Lew Hunter isn’t listed as one of the instructors. Lew is a professor emeritus at UCLA in screenwriting.
    http://www.tft.ucla.edu/faculty/lew-hunter/

    Also if she were studying at UCLA on campus, she could be home in Boston for the summer. Who knows?

    So if she dropped her Twitter account, who’s to say that one of the bad guys (I won’t name names but you’ve been discussing them) couldn’t have just picked up her Twitter account after noticing that it was girly and evidently abandoned…and she’s a patsy? Why not? Maybe she just had a guessable password – we read that most people use “password” “123456″ “qwerty” and similar stupid things as passwords..why wouldn’t the Kardashian fan be one of them? Twitter’s not important, why use a strong password that’s hard to type and remember?

    She knows nothing about Weiner, has nothing to do with Nikki, etc.

    She gets 2 threatening calls out of the blue.

    Who made the calls?

    The calls are either made by people who want to put a stop to “the Reids” …and researching the starchild111 account find that it was opened by Jenny George. (it was, so it must be a findable fact one way or another…on twitter records…how much money would it take to get someone inside twitter to give up or confirm her identity?) They assume she is behind all this (like many do) and try to scare her.

    Or

    The person/people behind The Reids makes the call to her to make it seem like she’s the one behind the socks.

    She gets the calls, she looks up what is this about, finds Lee and calls him, scared and worried. She has now seen his lovely, comforting pictures and heard his soothing voice and the cat of satan in the background. Do you think he calmed her down much? No. She think’s he or his fans could be behind this. (Look at some of the wackos we have commenting here.)

    She’s still panicked and goes to the BPD.

    She’s a patsy.

    Just thinking out loud.

    Comment by koam @wittier (62b38e) — 7/1/2011 @ 4:14 pm

  305. So it’s Friday, and I’m not going out shooting with my boyfriend.

    This being the case, does anyone think we’re going to get this solved tonight? Is more information coming?

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/1/2011 @ 4:14 pm

  306. Thinking out loud:

    Assume JG MA is a real person who created @starchild111 in 2009 or 2010.

    She used it as a fan of celebs because she heard that you can directly get response message by celebs on Twitter. (& you can…people used to write fan mail and hope for a reply, same thing.)

    She didn’t keep using it because none of her friends used it and she didn’t get much satisfaction from celebrities she tracked, primarily the Kardashians and some Latinas, including J-Lo. Mostly about pretty actresses & models.

    Comment by koam @wittier (62b38e) — 7/1/2011 @ 4:15 pm

  307. Thinking out loud: part 2

    She was also a fan of the UCLA writers program. She either attended that program or knew of it because she’d taken one of the writing retreats with Lew Hunter, a UCLA prof, in the past.

    To clarify, while it’s been reported as a lie that she went to UCLA, the Writers Program is an extension program. You can take courses online.
    http://twitter.com/#!/writersprogram
    http://www2.uclaextension.edu/writers/detail.php?sID=aboutwr
    It’s not only for screenwriting, and Lew Hunter isn’t listed as one of the instructors. Lew is a professor emeritus at UCLA in screenwriting.
    http://www.tft.ucla.edu/faculty/lew-hunter/

    Also if she were studying at UCLA on campus, she could be home in Boston for the summer. Who knows?

    Comment by koam @wittier (62b38e) — 7/1/2011 @ 4:15 pm

  308. She was also a fan of the UCLA writers program. She either attended that program or knew of it because she’d taken one of the writing retreats with Lew Hunter, a UCLA prof, in the past.

    To clarify, while it’s been reported as a lie that she went to UCLA, the Writers Program is an extension program. You can take courses online.
    It’s not only for screenwriting, and Lew Hunter isn’t listed as one of the instructors. Lew is a professor emeritus at UCLA in screenwriting.

    Also if she were studying at UCLA on campus, she could be home in Boston for the summer. Who knows?

    So if she dropped her Twitter account, who’s to say that one of the bad guys (I won’t name names but you’ve been discussing them) couldn’t have just picked up her Twitter account after noticing that it was girly and evidently abandoned…and she’s a patsy? Why not? Maybe she just had a guessable password – we read that most people use “password” “123456″ “qwerty” and similar stupid things as passwords..why wouldn’t the Kardashian fan be one of them? Twitter’s not important, why use a strong password that’s hard to type and remember?

    Most Common Internet Passwords

    She knows nothing about Weiner, has nothing to do with Nikki, etc.

    She gets 2 threatening calls out of the blue.

    Who made the calls?

    The calls are either made by people who want to put a stop to “the Reids” …and researching the starchild111 account find that it was opened by Jenny George. (it was, so it must be a findable fact one way or another…on twitter records…how much money would it take to get someone inside twitter to give up or confirm her identity?) They assume she is behind all this (like many do) and try to scare her.

    Or

    The person/people behind The Reids makes the call to her to make it seem like she’s the one behind the socks.

    She gets the calls, she looks up what is this about, finds Lee and calls him, scared and worried. She has now seen his lovely, comforting pictures and heard his soothing voice and the cat of satan in the background. Do you think he calmed her down much? No. She think’s he or his fans could be behind this. (Look at some of the wackos we have commenting here.)

    She’s still panicked and goes to the BPD.

    She’s a patsy.

    Just thinking out loud.

    Comment by koam @wittier (62b38e) — 7/1/2011 @ 4:16 pm

  309. Yes, koam? Go on.

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/1/2011 @ 4:16 pm

  310. confused,
    This blog has a number of unfriendly and even malicious
    sockpuppets visit it, no? It is not personal, you are just an unknown.

    So you meant people were attacking you on twitter? Do you know Ronbryn that well? he was getting aggressive and accusing you..?That sounds like a personal attack.

    Ronbryn does sorta lose it, frequently :)

    Comment by I'm Getting a Headache (d77c52) — 7/1/2011 @ 4:21 pm

  311. I had the worst time posting that…the system was not showing my full post..evidently the links I had related to the UCLA program and Prof Lew Hunter were being rejected. In any case they show that the Writers Program is an extension program and that Lew is Prof Emeritus and that the WP is still on Twitter, I follow it.

    So…Why not accept that JG in Boston is a patsy? Some bad guys found her abandoned twitter account and it seemed opportune to make into a teen girl’s as a fake Weiner fan?

    Comment by koam @wittier (62b38e) — 7/1/2011 @ 4:22 pm

  312. You’ll have to ask him Headache. I didn’t know he existed until I saw that Loghner statement.

    Comment by Stillconfused (786412) — 7/1/2011 @ 4:27 pm

  313. I don’t know him confused. But I don’t understand why he would go after you

    Comment by I'm Getting a Headache (d77c52) — 7/1/2011 @ 4:29 pm

  314. Nor do I headache. As I said, you’ll have to ask him that.

    Comment by Stillconfused (786412) — 7/1/2011 @ 4:29 pm

  315. Don’t know him. I don”t tweet, and if I did I don’t think I’d be sending tweets to guy I didn’t know without a good reason.

    I think everyone in the known universe read his tweets this week. He’ll never them down. Another reason to not tweet. Sooner or later youll lose your temper and show your underwear in public. Whoops that was Anthony not me.

    Comment by I'm Getting a Headache (d77c52) — 7/1/2011 @ 4:34 pm

  316. I don’t know why he lost it unless he was pissed that I REALLY DON’T know anything about all of this.
    Have a good night

    Comment by Stillconfused (786412) — 7/1/2011 @ 4:37 pm

  317. Sure confused. take care and don’t take everything so hard. It’s not your fault he’s lost it. k?

    Comment by I'm Getting a Headache (d77c52) — 7/1/2011 @ 4:39 pm

  318. 308. koam @wittier

    So far, all the evidence indicates that JG Boston is Jenay=Nikki= etc.
    At this time none of the evidence indicated JG Boston is an innocent bystander.

    Other than that, the theory that JG Boston is a Patsy is rock solid.

    BTW, Why not accept that JG Boston is Elvis Presley, having returned on his flying saucer from a distant galaxy to retrieve Lee’s cat?

    Comment by lamchopsl (a91fe8) — 7/1/2011 @ 4:41 pm

  319. “So far, all the evidence indicates that JG Boston is Jenay=Nikki= etc.
    At this time none of the evidence indicated JG Boston is an innocent bystander.”

    lamchopsl – Those conclusions are as firm as the evidence that Lee is not Dan Wolfe.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/1/2011 @ 4:53 pm

  320. WWOD?

    Comment by Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 7/1/2011 @ 4:56 pm

  321. Interesting tidbit that popped out at me from neals smear of me at KOS from link posted (#253, surreal)
    Hushmail account mentioned–”And one final thing … the person or persons behind the hushmail account that knew so much about Mike Stack?”

    Comment by goatsred (b20383) — 7/1/2011 @ 5:01 pm

  322. The left hate the truth like they hate bush.

    Comment by DohBiden (15aa57) — 7/1/2011 @ 5:05 pm

  323. Comment by nancydrew — 7/1/2011 @ 2:18 pm

    Yes,he certainly was cocky to ascertain that the FBI would swoop in on me because he said I tampered with AW’s social accounts.
    It was also against the law to utter a false document and to post it there making it seem like I had committed a felony.

    Comment by goatsred (b20383) — 7/1/2011 @ 5:06 pm

  324. if someone was presurgical transgendered, would that make more or less likely that the person had some emotional issues….like JG from Boston perhaps? Just askin…don’t know.

    Comment by nancydrew (448ba9) — 7/1/2011 @ 5:18 pm

  325. 318. Interesting tidbit that popped out at me from neals smear of me at KOS from link posted (#253, surreal)

    When I listened to Mr. Stranahan’s radio show talking about JP@NYT and how she was trying to deflect away from the topic, this whole Kos diary came back to me- so I hunted it down. Re-reading it, it amazed me at all the dots it could potentially connect.

    All of this made me break down and get a twitter acct, for the love of…*sigh*. Not that I know what to *do* with it lol

    Comment by surreal (7a67da) — 7/1/2011 @ 5:25 pm

  326. The calvary to the rescue!!!

    Lee, I have been defending your sorry arse for the better part of this afternoon.

    There seems to be an element here that believes the Jenny George in Boston may not be the person who called you.

    Did Jen Preston independently confirm that the Jenny George she talked to lives in Boston? Did that person Preston talked to admit that she set up the starchild111 twitter account?

    From reading your blog, and listening to your broadcasts, it appears to me that you take this as fact.

    You could certainly cut through a whole bunch of chatter here if you could just definitively clear up this one question.

    Comment by lamchopsl (a91fe8) — 7/1/2011 @ 5:27 pm

  327. @Mike#318, 320
    Playing fair does not seem to be in his vocabulary. He has judged and convictedslandered you in front of a huge crowd of people. I think you need to talk to Patterico or some of the other lawyers here about that action. He can get away with it when its directed at Breitbart, but you are not a public figure. He’s raising up a vigilante gang.

    What made this guy so angry? You can be committed to a cause without wanting to burn the world down.

    @surreal
    I am glad that you found it. It tends to make the picture snap into focus. It may not answer all the questions about Jenny but it certainly makes me believe neal has his hands in this mess somewhere.

    Comment by bmertz (d77c52) — 7/1/2011 @ 5:28 pm

  328. 318. goatsred

    I noticed that also. I had never heard of Hushmail before these death threats, but then I am not a professional blackmailer.

    Comment by lamchopsl (a91fe8) — 7/1/2011 @ 5:30 pm

  329. @nancydrew #321

    if someone was presurgical transgendered, would that make more or less likely that the person had some emotional issues….like JG from Boston perhaps? Just askin…don’t know.

    Where did you get that rumor?

    Comment by bmertz (d77c52) — 7/1/2011 @ 5:35 pm

  330. 320. goatsred

    If Neal Douchehauser has publicaly defamed you, can’t you sue him for libel? Discovery in a civil lawsuit could be a bitch for him. I’m sure there are Right leaning lawyers who would be tripping over themselves to handel such a case, pro bono.

    Comment by lamchopsl (a91fe8) — 7/1/2011 @ 5:36 pm

  331. “There seems to be an element here that believes the Jenny George in Boston may not be the person who called you.

    Did Jen Preston independently confirm that the Jenny George she talked to lives in Boston? Did that person Preston talked to admit that she set up the starchild111 twitter account?”

    lamchopsl – To be fair, there are a number of claims which you have been attempting to defend, not limited to the above, which are not actually supported by evidence apart from statements by one or more players involved at this point. With no disrespect, your difficulty seems to be in comprehending what constitutes independently verifiable evidence as opposed to hearsay.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/1/2011 @ 5:38 pm

  332. Lamchopsl, I am wondering if the Jenny George who called Lee is the same Jenny George who filed a police report.

    If I understand the timing (and I’m not sure I do), it is possible (not at all a certainty) that the woman who called Lee and identified herself as Jenny George knew of the threats because she’d been part of making them.

    Which would at least cut out one tangle in this mess of action and interaction, people, threats, puppets and possible lies.

    Again, this is not certainty. It’s a possibility, and one which makes the field a little less messy.

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/1/2011 @ 5:43 pm

  333. I’ve yet to see which alleged lies in the JG call to Lee are proven by actual evidence.

    Comment by koam @wittier (62b38e) — 7/1/2011 @ 5:44 pm

  334. 326. no rumor. Laurelai is a self confessed transgenered person who is presurgical. Don’t get the reason for your question.

    Comment by nancydrew (448ba9) — 7/1/2011 @ 5:44 pm

  335. Oops, I left out the rest of it – the woman, JG, who received the threats and went to the police, is a bystander.

    It cuts the risky behavior factor quite sharply.

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/1/2011 @ 5:45 pm

  336. We still don’t have the times of these events:

    – The 6/19 teary call Lee received from a JG
    – That same JG has call(s) with Preston at Lee’s suggestion
    – Lee’s 6/20 radio show in which he describes call details (probably right after midnight)
    – Any internet posts, comments, tweets etc. that Lee or others made regarding receiving call from JG
    – A real JG from Boston files police report at BPD precinct.

    Comment by koam @wittier (62b38e) — 7/1/2011 @ 5:47 pm

  337. Are we going to have another Séance to contact Neal tonight? I’m still waiting for the rapping on the table and rattling of pans to begin. Another document flash of somebody’s driving records.

    Comment by bmertz (d77c52) — 7/1/2011 @ 5:49 pm

  338. lamchopsl – Have you also been commenting as Temper Tantrum today?

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/1/2011 @ 5:49 pm

  339. Nancydrew, because before you mentioned this person, no one had mentioned him/her at all.

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/1/2011 @ 5:50 pm

  340. “Are we going to have another Séance to contact Neal tonight?”

    bmertz – I think I still have a Magic 8 Ball around someplace if that would help.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/1/2011 @ 5:50 pm

  341. bmertz, if we do, do you want to sit next to me?

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/1/2011 @ 5:51 pm

  342. daleyrocks, we could probably create a makeshift ouija board out of random tweets, or something.

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/1/2011 @ 5:52 pm

  343. “So it’s Friday, and I’m not going out shooting with my boyfriend.”

    Dianna – Have him tweet you his junk instead. Anthony Weiner told me chicks dig that stuff.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/1/2011 @ 5:53 pm

  344. Comment by nancydrew — 7/1/2011 @ 5:44 pm #331
    We had a miscommunication Nancy. I thought you were referring to Jenny. Obviously to have access to that sort of knowledge would be rather significant here. :)

    Your article is the first time I have been introduce to Lorelai. I don’t know a great deal about her outside of what I read.

    Comment by bmertz (d77c52) — 7/1/2011 @ 5:54 pm

  345. 328. daleyrocks

    Thanks for clearing this point up for me. Since I had no reason to believe otherwise, I was assuming that your questions regarded facts, evidence and logical conclusions.

    But you make no counter arguments nor cite no evidence, you merely make general personal accusations against me.

    When I ask Lee to clear up one of your central objections, you, before even hearing Lee’s response, reject as insufficient to clear my reputation.

    Now that it is clear that you seem to want to simply attack me personally, I will henceforth ignore you.

    Comment by lamchopsl (a91fe8) — 7/1/2011 @ 5:55 pm

  346. Dianna
    Yes, I’m scaaarrred of ghosties

    Comment by bmertz (d77c52) — 7/1/2011 @ 5:55 pm

  347. goatsred – Serious question. I understand why you are PO’d at PatriotUSA, but in the time you guys were fooling around together as bornfree or whatever, did you ever have any indication that he was not a conservative or that he was a sock.

    I ask, because I find most liberals cannot successfully impersonate a conservative for any length of time because they just don’t understand how we think. You see it with liberal trolls on blogs attempting to fool people. They invariably slip up because they are idiots or too indoctrinated with liberal Kool Aid about conservatives they put their feet in their mouths.

    Did you see any hints of that with your interactions with Patriot to justify all the suspicion being cast his way?

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/1/2011 @ 5:56 pm

  348. Anyone want to volunteer to start channeling Neal? anybody? anybody? No volunteers?

    sigh

    Comment by bmertz (d77c52) — 7/1/2011 @ 5:58 pm

  349. Yes, I’m scaaarrred of ghosties

    Comment by bmertz

    There, there! You can hold my hand, then.

    G. K. Chesterton, when asked if he believed in ghosts, replied, “No; but I’m scared of them!”

    An eminently sensible answer.

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/1/2011 @ 5:59 pm

  350. “But you make no counter arguments nor cite no evidence, you merely make general personal accusations against me.”

    lamchopsl – Please point out a personal attack or accusation other than what I tried to explain in #328.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/1/2011 @ 5:59 pm

  351. Anyone want to volunteer to start channeling Neal? anybody? anybody? No volunteers?

    sigh

    My brain is quite an odd enough place already, thank you.

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/1/2011 @ 6:00 pm

  352. “nor cite no evidence”

    lamchopsl – If there is no evidence to cite, that’s a problem, isn’t it? You are really not paying close enough attention to what I have actually said.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/1/2011 @ 6:02 pm

  353. JG from Boston and Laurelai? Hmmm….just curious.

    Comment by nancydrew (448ba9) — 7/1/2011 @ 6:03 pm

  354. “I will henceforth ignore you”

    Does that count as a flounce? Anybody?

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/1/2011 @ 6:03 pm

  355. I think everyone is so stressed out and tired from working on this investigation (for weeks) that it is beginning to take its toll between people who normally have a lot in common. I’ve noticed that people sound frustrated and appear worn to the bone. I think this mystery will be cracked if we can be patient with each other. Meanwhile some of you need to get away from the computers and go do something fun to kick off the stress. Insight breaks lose with you aren’t so wound up.

    ========End of bmertz’s unsolicited advice ========

    Comment by bmertz (d77c52) — 7/1/2011 @ 6:10 pm

  356. 335. daleyrocks

    lamchopsl – Have you also been commenting as Temper Tantrum today?

    347. daleyrocks

    lamchopsl – Please point out a personal attack or accusation other than what I tried to explain in #328.

    Since you don’t seem to grasp what I am talking about here, let me make this as clear as possible:

    Fuck You.

    Got it?

    Comment by lamchopsl (a91fe8) — 7/1/2011 @ 6:12 pm

  357. Dianna
    I am glad to know that when times are truely dark, you will be there to stand beside me

    I am honored and touched
    sniff

    Comment by bmertz (d77c52) — 7/1/2011 @ 6:13 pm

  358. Does that count as a flounce? Anybody?

    Comment by daleyrocks

    No, it wasn’t “goodbye, cruel blog! You have abused me for the last time! You will regret it, when I am gone, just see if you don’t!”

    It was purely someone who’s not happy with you, today.

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/1/2011 @ 6:14 pm

  359. @Nancydrew
    Who was that interesting visitor earlier. She/he made some Very intriguing comments about patriot in the thread.

    Comment by bmertz (d77c52) — 7/1/2011 @ 6:19 pm

  360. Lamb — I gave a long answer. It’s here.

    http://leestranahan.com/weinergate-where-in-the-world-is-socky-puppet

    Comment by Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 7/1/2011 @ 6:25 pm

  361. daley-Excuse me for inserting myself into the fight. I was trying to help calm everyone down, not upset you more. I have noticed an increase of tension among all the commenters and it concerned me.

    Comment by bmertz (d77c52) — 7/1/2011 @ 6:26 pm

  362. From Lew Hunter’s website:

    This coming summer from June 11th – 24th, Lew Hunter hosts his Superior Summer Screenwriting Colony. This is an intense program for serious writers of all levels.

    In North Dakota.

    Comment by MayBee (081489) — 7/1/2011 @ 6:30 pm

  363. 329. Dianna

    I hear you. I think Lee has been kind of sloppy as he tries to flesh out this story. His use of language is somewhat imprecise, he tends to jump around and digress onto tangents and he either intentionally or unintentionally doesn’t put out all the facts, even when they aren’t any kind of big deal.

    He does, however, seem to be responsive to the comments on this site. I’ve found he often address these these questions on his radio blog. Here’s to hoping he clears up these simple points.

    Comment by lamchopsl (a91fe8) — 7/1/2011 @ 6:31 pm

  364. Sorry. In Nebraska.

    Comment by MayBee (081489) — 7/1/2011 @ 6:31 pm

  365. MayBee – Hunter lives in Nebraska, where the N on the Cornhusker football helmets stands for Nowledge!

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/1/2011 @ 6:37 pm

  366. Lee has been more than responsive, and I’m not criticizing him or anyone.

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/1/2011 @ 6:38 pm

  367. MayBee? That is…interesting. Have you put it over on Lee’s blog? He has a new post up, and it might make it easier for him to see it.

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/1/2011 @ 6:39 pm

  368. So….

    There’s a real UCLA prof’s website, and a sock UCLA prof for JP and LS to speak to on the phone? Why is the same not true for JG– a real person, but not the person who’s spoken to LS and JP. Who else is real but faked? The Boston detective?

    This is not normal sockpuppet stuff. They are being careful to find somebody real they can co-opt before putting themselves out there. Doing so gives them cover for a while before everyone sorts out the mess. That implies the availability of resources to employ for this purpose.

    Comment by CausticConservative (b29599) — 7/1/2011 @ 6:40 pm

  369. koam started to talk it out.

    Suppose JG, a real person, has an unused starchild111 account that gets co-opted and contains some personal information that makes it possible for an identity thief to impersonate her.

    Is it possible no one has spoken to the ACTUAL JG who created the account yet? To ask if her account has seen activity unknown to her?

    Comment by CausticConservative (b29599) — 7/1/2011 @ 6:45 pm

  370. 357. Lee Stranahan

    Thanks for taking the time to make this clear.

    It seems to me that the detective’s reference to the Mrs. Hunter means the Jenny George he spoke with is the one both you and Jen Preston talked to.

    The Dan Wolfe Massachusetts connections are one more weight toward the Jenny George=Patriot conclusion. That seems to be getting closer every day.

    Comment by lamchopsl (a91fe8) — 7/1/2011 @ 6:48 pm

  371. The site for Lew Hunter’s intensive course says he’s in Nebraska.

    For some reason, I was thinking Prof. Emeritus Hunter was in Southern California.

    Having read the site at least once before, how come I didn’t notice that?

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/1/2011 @ 6:49 pm

  372. Maybe I’ve been watching too many spy thrillers. It’s obvious we are being screwed with, just would be nice to know who and why.

    Although we might discover that the who and why to be totally unsatisfying in the end.

    It’s been interesting to follow.

    Comment by CausticConservative (b29599) — 7/1/2011 @ 6:50 pm

  373. I phoned Lew Hunter in Nebraska.

    Who is Caustic Conservative? Can anyone vouch for them?

    Comment by Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 7/1/2011 @ 6:52 pm

  374. We have four people who are real and identified beyond any reasonable doubt — Jenny George, Lew Hunter and his wife, and Detective Thornton.

    But Caustic Conservative seems to want to convince people that these real people are (somehow) fake.

    So I ask — who is CC and why do they want to foist this lunacy on people?

    Comment by Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 7/1/2011 @ 6:55 pm

  375. 345. Comment by bmertz — 7/1/2011 @ 5:58 pm
    Anyone want to volunteer to start channeling Neal? anybody? anybody? No volunteers?

    I’ll have to take a pass. I may be from the Lunatic Lair, but, there are some flavors of lid flippage that go beyond Beyond, right smack into Over Yonder. Ol’ Sinister lands square in BFE.

    Comment by surreal (7a67da) — 7/1/2011 @ 6:56 pm

  376. #370 – Lee – It’s more that we’ve started to doubt the reality of anyone who isn’t sitting in the family room with us at this exact instant.

    I’m not entirely kidding.

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/1/2011 @ 7:01 pm

  377. WHO ARE YOU, Caustic Conservative!!!

    All who doubt must be outed! All who doubt must have aspersions cast upon them!

    Comment by The Freaking Mob (b7410e) — 7/1/2011 @ 7:02 pm

  378. Who is ‘The Freaking Mob’?

    Comment by Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 7/1/2011 @ 7:05 pm

  379. “We have four people who are real and identified beyond any reasonable doubt — Jenny George, Lew Hunter and his wife, and Detective Thornton.”

    Lee – Respectfully, I disagree.

    We have a person claiming to be Jenny George that you and Jen Preston have spoken with.

    We have a Jenny George that Det. Thornton interviewed in response to her complaint.

    Where is the hard evidence establishing they are the same person? We have no physical descriptions. We have professors remembering a JG but no assurance it is the same person. Could they have taught more than one JG? Was that question asked?

    I’m not asking to create “lunacy”. Just remember that TommyX got punked with fake ID. I’d rather have it nailed down than leap to conclusions.

    I’m also missing that Nikki/Patriot connection you see lurking.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/1/2011 @ 7:05 pm

  380. LOL.

    I’m nobody.

    Just a random Patterico reader who seldom posts.

    I don’t read the entire threads all the time. I don’t follow twitter at all, so I am missing a bunch of details apparently.

    Didn’t mean to throw you off the trail!

    Comment by CausticConservative (b29599) — 7/1/2011 @ 7:07 pm

  381. OMG.

    It just occurred to me that maybe…

    I’M

    NOT

    ME!

    Comment by CausticConservative (b29599) — 7/1/2011 @ 7:10 pm

  382. 371. Lee Stranahan

    Gennette Cordova

    At least knowing she is real separates her from the Sockpuppet Posse, making it one less problem to solve.

    Comment by lamchopsl (a91fe8) — 7/1/2011 @ 7:11 pm

  383. I think Lee’s theory is probably the most accurate. Plus, he he has the most solid leads (police report) to follow up on.

    This Neal guys possible involvement is troubling but maybe he is just trying to be a headache to those trying to break the story wide open.

    Comment by Noodles (3681c4) — 7/1/2011 @ 7:12 pm

  384. Neal is an idiot.

    But Neal is not Nikki / Patriot.

    Comment by Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 7/1/2011 @ 7:17 pm

  385. Daley,

    The evidence is in commonality of the statements from the woman who I spoke to and the woman who the police spoke to.

    Comment by Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 7/1/2011 @ 7:18 pm

  386. Lee,

    From what I’ve seen the threatener may be a completely separate story. She could be JG threatening herself and everybody else, but s/he could also be somebody else? Any insight?

    Comment by lamchopsl (a91fe8) — 7/1/2011 @ 7:23 pm

  387. Lee? Is the commonality more than Prof. Hunter and his wife? And UCLA? (Which, by your account, is a lie).

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/1/2011 @ 7:25 pm

  388. 384. Dianna

    If I may presume to interject.

    The fact that JG mentioned the Hunters to Jen Preston and to the detective is the argument. What are the chances that the real JG would mention the hunters to the detective and someone else falsely claiming to e JG would mention the Hunters to Jen Preston?

    Comment by lamchopsl (a91fe8) — 7/1/2011 @ 7:34 pm

  389. lamb is correct…

    Plus other elements of the story — the mention of me. Of ‘followers’ — a fake JG would change her story to ‘followers’, why exactly?

    Seriously — this isn’t rocket science. It’s not weird. The simple answer is simple — the woman on the phone filed the police report.

    Has anyone contacted me to clear it up?

    Just think this stuff through…what are the logical consequences?

    Comment by Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 7/1/2011 @ 7:38 pm

  390. Also — the detective is closing the case as ‘unfounded’ he told me.

    What does that tell you?

    I mean — “nothing” if you want to believe the exceptionally complicated conspiracy theory.

    But it’s sure consistent with the story I’m telling.

    BTW – has anyone asked Patterico if he heard the hoaxster theory from Reid or Wolfe?

    Comment by Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 7/1/2011 @ 7:40 pm

  391. Lee says John Reid is fake and JG is real.
    Pat says JG is fake and John Reid is real.

    Any wonder why random comments thread readers might get a little confused?

    Comment by CausticConservative (b29599) — 7/1/2011 @ 7:49 pm

  392. It seems to me that unless JG decides to come clean the only way this whole intrigue will be resolved is if JG is the threatener and law enforcement unravels it with subpoenas of twitter and ISPs. If it turns out that someone else is the threatener, we may never definitively know who Dan wolf is,

    Comment by lamchopsl (a91fe8) — 7/1/2011 @ 7:50 pm

  393. “The evidence is in commonality of the statements from the woman who I spoke to and the woman who the police spoke to.”

    Lee – I agree there is wicked commonality, I am just looking for more than commonality. The AGW fanatic believe correlation equals causation. I think they’re full of sh*t because they don’t fully understand our climate system and expect more evidence before sending our economy back to the stone age.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/1/2011 @ 7:52 pm

  394. Anybody know if Pattero or Ace have filed criminal complaints over the threats. Once it goes across state lines the FBI comes in, if I am not mistaken. Then it becomes a federal case.

    Comment by lamchopsl (a91fe8) — 7/1/2011 @ 7:54 pm

  395. “Also — the detective is closing the case as ‘unfounded’ he told me.”

    Thanks. More new information.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/1/2011 @ 7:54 pm

  396. You are taking Preston’s remarks to Lee out of context if you think she was trying
    to persuade
    him Hunter’s website was fake. that’s not what she said or meant at all.

    She was warning him of the possibilites of an anonymous- style punk. She didn’t say the website was fake or appeared to be fake, she said she did not [at that moment] take for granted it was genuine. A prudent reservation that was, considering what has been going on with socks and the natural history of Encylopedia dramatica hijinks. This is not the stuff of black helicopters, it’s more a suspicion that silly drama is afoot.

    Lees caller is a liar, check; lees caller is or is not a Jenny George known by lew hunter, claimed but not double checked.

    That checking needs to happen

    Comment by Sarahw (af7312) — 7/1/2011 @ 8:10 pm

  397. “The fact that JG mentioned the Hunters to Jen Preston and to the detective is the argument.”

    lamchopsl – Can you please refresh my memory where the Hunter/Detective connection was discussed?

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/1/2011 @ 8:11 pm

  398. “Lees caller is a liar, check; lees caller is or is not a Jenny George known by lew hunter, claimed but not double checked.

    That checking needs to happen”

    SarahW – I don’t understand why that is such a stratospherically difficult concept for some people to understand, but it apparently is, because they accuse you of fomenting lunacy when you raise it.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/1/2011 @ 8:14 pm

  399. “Once it goes across state lines the FBI comes in, if I am not mistaken.”

    I think it gets even worse if a telephone was used. And with people being able to use telephones to send email/tweet, they have to be really careful. A lot of people don’t realize that the laws can be different if a phone is involved.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/1/2011 @ 8:32 pm

  400. 393. Sarahw

    The Boston detective spoke to JG.

    Lee said, “The Detective also mentioned to me that he had spoken to Mrs. Hunter”:

    http://leestranahan.com/weinergate-where-in-the-world-is-socky-puppet

    During their phone call, the person claiming to be JG referred Jen Preston to the Hunters. Jen later gave the hunters number to Lee and he called them also.

    What are the chances that the real JG would refer the detective to the Hunters and that a person falsely claiming to be JG would refer Jen Preston to the Hunters?

    Ergo: JG Boston set up the starchild111 account as she claimed and as was indicated by the account name.

    Comment by lamchopsl (a91fe8) — 7/1/2011 @ 8:38 pm

  401. This isn’t really anything but there is a starchild111 Youtube account. Looks abandoned.

    There is also a one for user/jennifergeorge subscribed to UCLA but I think that is the wrong ones channel.

    No user/jenaygeorge

    Comment by Noodles (3681c4) — 7/1/2011 @ 9:00 pm

  402. Out of all the people in all the world she could have picked–why do you suppose Boston JG chose the Hunters–the out of state Hunters– to be the ones that she referred several perfect strangers to for an endorsement? Did she warn/alert the Hunters ahead of time I wonder? And what arrangements had she made with them to give them permission to discuss her, or what explanation did she give the Hunters for needing this service, I wonder.

    Comment by elissa (961c7a) — 7/1/2011 @ 9:08 pm

  403. “The Detective also mentioned to me that he had spoken to Mrs. Hunter, so I believe that reference must have come from Ms. George.”

    Thanks. Unless I am mistaken, this is more new information revealed today. That establishes a good connection.

    Again, stuff like this would have made a stronger case earlier. Why hold back on it?

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/1/2011 @ 9:12 pm

  404. I’m just sleuthing (see Google) and see she won some MA film thingie. Says she’s from Quincy, MA.

    Comment by Noodles (3681c4) — 7/1/2011 @ 9:13 pm

  405. “And what arrangements had she made with them to give them permission to discuss her, or what explanation did she give the Hunters for needing this service, I wonder.”

    elissa – More interestingly, why was it necessary to have the police call anybody on her behalf?

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/1/2011 @ 9:14 pm

  406. Idk, maybe that’s the one with the Twitter account maybe? Is she the suspect or some other Jennifer George?

    Comment by Noodles (3681c4) — 7/1/2011 @ 9:17 pm

  407. Noodles — I saw that but there are 8 Jennifer Georges around Boston

    Comment by Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 7/1/2011 @ 9:17 pm

  408. No, Preston clearly thought that the website and Lew Hunter and his wife were all possibly fake. We argued about this point, which I was stunned by.

    Comment by Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 7/1/2011 @ 9:19 pm

  409. ==there are 8 Jennifer Georges around Boston==

    Oh good allah.

    Comment by elissa (961c7a) — 7/1/2011 @ 9:20 pm

  410. New Braintree and Andover, MA look like the closest in age (if that is correct).

    Comment by Noodles (3681c4) — 7/1/2011 @ 9:25 pm

  411. I’m not going to hypothesize on women who live in or near Boston.

    The Police have her address. That works for me.

    Comment by Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 7/1/2011 @ 9:49 pm

  412. Radio show — 1e 12c 11m 10p

    So, 10 minutes from now.

    http://tobtr.com/s/2050777

    Comment by Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 7/1/2011 @ 9:51 pm

  413. Lee,

    I have to agree with you on the recent odd behavior of Jennifer Preston. It should be very easy to verify the Lew Hunter aspect. Just a quick look at his web site provides lots of clues that he appears to be a real money making individual.

    He just completed a retreat on June 24 so maybe we can get someone to verify that he was seen there in Superior NE.

    JP should have the resouces to verify Lew in less than 30 minutes.

    With your latest Blog Talk show, I am now updated on your views concerning Jenny George. I still don’t see the upside to her or anyone filing a Police report in Boston. It just up’s the story rather then hoping it just dies quietly on the internet.

    So that leaves me with the question: What is the next step when you turn on your phone after a good weekend rest?

    Joe

    Comment by Joe Smith (54c0c1) — 7/1/2011 @ 11:13 pm

  414. As long as a bunch of commenters I never heard of before agree, that is what matters.

    Pay no attention to the way an alternate theory explains everything.

    Hi, Neal!

    Comment by Patterico (5e9aee) — 7/1/2011 @ 11:24 pm

  415. Patterico , how does your theory explain everything?

    Comment by Temper Tantrum (02fe1b) — 7/2/2011 @ 12:17 am

  416. Lee left us a rabbit hole to search based this tweet:

    Stranahan Phil Johnson
    Look-a-likes? « Qritiq http://bit.ly/mdNe6X Can anyone figure out who this site belongs to?
    2 hours ago

    Is this the face of Qritiq?

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/28747007@N00/

    Joe

    Comment by Joe Smith (54c0c1) — 7/2/2011 @ 2:07 am

  417. There is a real ball of socks in this dresser drawer!

    Patterico’s theory is that 1) Lee’s hysterical caller was a hoaxer claiming to be Jennifer George (MA). This hoaxer may or may not be in league with 2) A male hoaxer who threatened the real JG MA and claimed to be Lee.

    Real JG MA calls the police and Lee gets a call from them.

    Points against #1 seem to be that Lee is fairly certain that hysterical caller is the same as JG MA, due to “commonalities” that seem indicative but not dispositive. But as Patterico says, even if #1 is wrong, #2 is not dependent.

    #2, that somebody actually threatened JG MA and claimed to be Lee (or one of his “followers”…all hail Lee!!!) is a hypothesis that yields a lot of good areas of thought.

    First off, if there had been no threats made against JG MA, and yet she still filed a police report (which I assume Patterico has verified), then she’s engaging in very risky and stupid behavior. I think it makes much more sense that a threat was actually made.

    If a threat was made, we know it wasn’t Lee (all hail Lee!!!) so it must have been an imposter, some sort of political shit-stirrer. And the primary suspect seems to be “Neal”, a shit-stirrer with a long reach and a short stick.

    The email threats to Ace and Patterico made by Alicia Pain may be related, of course, but Ace and Patterico are wisely maintaining radio silence on what is an ongoing police investigation, so lets leave this out for now.

    Now, on its face, this is two or three levels removed from the dicpic, but considering all the socks it may not be. These two narratives (hysterical caller is a phony / real threats by phony Lee) are just two pieces in the puzzle.

    Patterico, have I restated your post back to you correctly?

    Comment by Pious Agnostic (6048a8) — 7/2/2011 @ 4:22 am

  418. The date on that post was intentionally wrong.

    Comment by Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 7/2/2011 @ 4:38 am

  419. Pat says JG is fake and John Reid is real.
    Comment by CausticConservative — 7/1/2011 @ 7:49 pm

    Patterico has not said that John Reid is real.

    Comment by slp (f9a160) — 7/2/2011 @ 4:59 am

  420. 404

    Yes, Lee, she thought them all possibly fake, as she should have with the amount of information she had. Failing to check would be inexcusable, but circumspection at first very reasonable.

    You were certain all was resolved, she was not. Some loose ends remain.

    If you really spoke to the person who took classes from Lew hunter, I will think it.ll but reolved myself, but I don’t know whether the woman in Boston is actually a foamier screenwriting student.

    Comment by Sarahw (af7312) — 7/2/2011 @ 5:35 am

  421. This story has now officially transcended the realm of the mundane political conspiracy theory tinged with sinister overtones of of death-hackers like Anonymous and the Yes men. It is now firmly ensconced in bizarre and inscrutable hyper-real metrocosm of Van Nuys:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Van_Nuys_Boulevard_Street_Scene.JPG

    My proof, you might ask? Consider the fact that Lee ‘s twitter account has been co-opted. By a banker!

    http://twitter.com/#!/Stranahan

    Be afraid. Be very afraid, my friends.

    Comment by lamchopsl (a91fe8) — 7/2/2011 @ 5:50 am

  422. That’s putting too dark a facetious spin on it, Lamchop1.
    Lulz can be “deadly” I guess but mainly its just making fools of people.

    Comment by SarahW (af7312) — 7/2/2011 @ 6:12 am

  423. “Foamier screenwriting student”

    I hate you, Ipad auto-correct.

    Comment by SarahW (af7312) — 7/2/2011 @ 6:13 am

  424. Please take a look at this blog post that Lee posted earlier today.

    http://qritiq.wordpress.com/2010/06/30/look-a-likes/

    I don’t know yet how he came across it.

    The top photo is a match for a Jennifer George, Boston facebook profile
    http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1104744369

    While the 2nd and 3rd are Nikki Reed the actress (it says) and J-Lo, both of whom have rich histories with @starchild111.

    The home page for the qritiq blog has a weather widget with ZIP 11576, Roslyn, NY (a suburb of NYC on Long Island). Other stories in the blog are related to NYC and Long Island.

    The page notes: “Look-alikes?” (sic) “Is it just me or do these ladies look somewhat similar?” (for Jennifer George, Boston and Nikki Reed, actress) and “Maybe more like this:” for Jennifer Lopez.

    This is dated June 30, 2010 and filed under “politics.”

    How darn odd is all that?

    Thoughts?

    Comment by koam @wittier (62b38e) — 7/2/2011 @ 6:20 am

  425. 418. sarahw

    Too dark a facetious a spin?!??

    This from the author of, “Foamier screenwriting student”?

    Comment by lamchopsl (a91fe8) — 7/2/2011 @ 6:22 am

  426. 414. Lee
    What do you mean by that and how do you know?

    Can wordpress dates be faked?

    Comment by koam @wittier (62b38e) — 7/2/2011 @ 6:29 am

  427. Update: WordPress dates can be modified.

    So this qritiq is possibly just someone spoofing.

    Comment by koam @wittier (62b38e) — 7/2/2011 @ 6:32 am

  428. #344. Daleyrocks I did not see anything to make me believe that he was anyone other than who he said he was. Of course, I have always used Twitter to post political stuff and my opinions so I only interacted with people on that basis.
    I only noted one strange thing: He would never post articles/links. It would always be Weiner news or a reply to something I tweeted.Or a “hello” to everyone RT’d a million times.
    So, I guess the answer is no. I took him at face value, considering that I had no interaction with him in “real life”. And I never studied his “act” then. Now I’m more discreet,obviously.
    I was very ignorant to this world up until this event took place. It never seemed to be a place where this stuff happened,or somewhere I could get myself embroiled into a scandal like this.
    There was a person in our group for awhile, and I’ll leave his name out for right now,who followed our group and RAW. I told Patriot and passed word around to block him. We did but this person does not appear to be a sock,because he still posts and doesnt follow me.If he follows the rest of the group,I do not know but will check.
    You can DM me , or I will email Sarah W with the name and you can check him out yourself until we think it’s right to post his name here.
    Hope that adds some clarity. If not, fire away .

    Comment by goatsred (b20383) — 7/2/2011 @ 6:34 am

  429. goatsred@423 – Thanks for the response. Some people just don’t know how to post links, but who knows. Hopefully my question my sense to you.

    I’m not on twitter, but thank you for the offer.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/2/2011 @ 6:46 am

  430. 396 – You presume too much. lchop.

    First, I do not dislike Lee’s theory at all and think it is a simple explanation for convoluted shenanigan. If it even matters, I’ve been saying so for some time. However, I think a solid case stands all the kicking you can give it.
    Checking would only strengthen, if all is as it seems.
    If all is not as it seems, checking could reveal it.

    I am saying something different about JG than you seem to be hearing, I think.

    I’m saying Lee’s caller, the report-maker, could be a poser.
    A poser who refers people to Lew Hunter.

    The value of a Lew Hunter reference depends on the strength of certainty that she hasn’t directed people to an accomplice(s)
    and that she is actually the student, not jut someone purporting to be.

    It means little for [verified] Lew Hunter to say “yes, I know a Jenny George of MA. She has attended my seminars” unless he provides information that Lee’s caller is THAT PARTICULAR Jenny George, as opposed to someone pretending to be that former student.

    I would do two things to cross-reference and double-check.

    I would contact (If I were going to contact anyone, which I am not) Lew Hunter through his UCLA contact information.

    If he were willing to provide himself as a reference for Lee’s caller, (which he might not be) he CAN provide more than information that JG exists.

    He might confirm anything from an address from his records to a birthmark on her shoulder; basically any kind of detail that would tie Lee’s caller to Lew’s student.

    If LewH is verifiably the speaker and his student verifiably Lee’s caller, then Lee I believe has got at least one party to the hoaxing and probably all of them- all the socks.

    If LewH turns out to have been in Argentina the day of Preston/lee’s calls I think that might be significant and imply another hoaxer is in on the game.

    At this point it is more difficult to establish that Lee’s caller is really Lew’s student and not just posing as the Jenny George who went to his seminars. Jenny might have cooperated with a request for identifying detail ( if really the student), and the professor might have cooperated more readily before being exposed and worried about implying a student is a fruitcake.

    Now, general physical description, sending him a picture, matching up of addresses, the sort of thing available from the detective or the police report, is all that will be obtainable.

    But it ought to be checked.

    You might think it absolutely outlanding that Lee’s caller would be bold enough to fake being someone else to the point of filing a police report, and meeting an officer at the address she gave.

    Take nothing for granted, though, trust no one, because even if it isn’t, the situation has all the hallmarks of an Encyclopedia Dramatic magnet, especially confused and hidden and faked identities. These have already happened, be on your guard for more.

    Doesn’t mean there are any, just that double checking is prudent.

    Comment by SarahW (af7312) — 7/2/2011 @ 6:49 am

  431. SarahW – Stop personally attacking lamchopsl. Heh.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/2/2011 @ 6:59 am

  432. I don’t post much because you guys are just much better at this than I. That said.
    Goatsred and daily rocks
    I’m sure you had no reason to doubt patriot until this why would you. So please DO NOT take this next comment as questioning that. You have been through more than enough.
    Just a thought I had yesterday after reading the old DM btwn Patriot and that film guy.
    As conservatives or whatever do any of you rant like that? I mean he used the word hate like 50 times? I don’t know it just sounded like someone who thinks they know that conservatives are filled with hate. Patriot wasn’t even in AW district right? I lived in NY, I’ve met his wife (very nice) and I never hated him. More like an annoying fly.
    I thought it sounded much more like Simon Sinister.
    haha how funny is it every time Patterico says “Hi Neil”

    Comment by Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c) — 7/2/2011 @ 7:09 am

  433. Lambchopsl is smart and cool.

    Comment by SarahW (af7312) — 7/2/2011 @ 7:18 am

  434. Blackburnsghost – Your powers of observation seem strong enough to me.

    No it is not normal. It’s a tell – a put-on of rage. Overdoing it, protesting too much, is a feature of the sockwriter and one reason the sockwriting sucks so badly.

    Comment by SarahW (af7312) — 7/2/2011 @ 7:24 am

  435. @Stranahan It just occurred to me that you and @JohnReid9 now agree about Preston. She’s as bad as JR9 says. Interesting.

    Comment by koam @wittier (62b38e) — 7/2/2011 @ 7:31 am

  436. Blackburnsghost – That conversation just looked to me like somebody who was accustomed to communicating by IM or tweet.

    Also you have to remember the insulting crazy crap personal theories floated about him by people like Stranahan and how he could not possibly been in a position to have been in a position to see Weiner’s tweet which turned out to be absolute BS. Yeah, so I understand the rage.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/2/2011 @ 7:39 am

  437. lamchopsl – Lee admitted on BTR last night that he had not documented things in this story because he had wasted time going down rabbit holes and getting yelled at. It’s a piss poor excuse, but the lack of documentation is what the bulk of bitching is about in this thread and Lee fans it himself when he asks questions people if you think there’s a problem, what’s an alternate explanation. You have a persistent inability as SarahW and I have both pointed out to understand this concept.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/2/2011 @ 7:44 am

  438. Lee – Since you mentioned it on BTR last night, can you be specific about anything that the Reid personas have done that is anti-Weiner? How does that fit with Jenny in Boston being Nikki and being very liberal?

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/2/2011 @ 7:47 am

  439. 426. SarahW

    I’m saying Lee’s caller, the report-maker, could be a poser.

    OK, so you are acknowledging that Lees caller, the person that Jen Preston talked to and the person who filed the police report and later spoke to the Boston detective are the same person? Do you acknowledge that this person is named Jenny George?

    Comment by lamchopsl (a91fe8) — 7/2/2011 @ 8:29 am

  440. Lee,

    I’m listening to your extended Blog Talk Radio show from last night and have reached a point of confusion on what you’re saying that Preston’s position on why to not pursue the person behind the call you received from Jen George in Boston (who Preston has talked to several times):

    1) You said earlier that Preston said that Prof Lew Hunter’s site may be a phony and the prof may have punked Preston/you.

    – You disagree. You think Hunter is real and was truthful.

    2) You said last night that Preston said that Jen George in Boston’s @startchild111 twitter was hacked so that JG is not responsible for the Weiner activity of Nikki. Preston: “Lee there’s nothing to tie JG into that Nikki Reid account.”

    – You disagree. (I don’t think Pru proved that the account was hacked or not hacked. Either could be the case) but you say it was not hacked. You say that Preston buys JG’s story that the account was hacked, “absolutely, hook,line and sinker.”

    So in case 1) you say Preston is saying that JG’s evidence (the prof) is fake….so Preston won’t pursue (this goes too deep, she warns you)

    And in case 2) you say Preston is saying that JG’s story is true….so Preston won’t pursue.

    So I don’t understand how you say Preston both incorrectly disbelieves JG’s story and simultaneously incorrectly believe’s JG’s story.

    The only consistent parts are 1) you disagree with Preston on the conclusions to be drawn from the evidence, and 2) Preston is not pursuing the case, no matter what excuse she gives.

    Isn’t that a bit messed up?

    Comment by koam @wittier (62b38e) — 7/2/2011 @ 8:29 am

  441. Thank you SarahW. I don’t know who the heck Patriot is but it just sounded so “over the top”. Not unlike JReid was so “under the top” *trademark BGhost :)
    For example I have a legitimate reason to be pissed as hell because my community is being systematically
    destroyed RIGHT NOW, I literally cried at a recent local parade and I still have never spoken like that. I just went and checked some sites/commentors I follow just to double check the temperature and people are incredulous about various issues but they have a fantastic sense of humor and they are intelligent. Not “I’m not a bright guy” slobber/burp that Patriot also said about 50 times. Ewww I just remembered he kept going on and on about his daughter being a victim even AFTER the film guy told him to stop. Twice.Ugh what? I’m sorry if you are a real person patriot I really am but I can’t help wonder.

    Comment by Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c) — 7/2/2011 @ 8:30 am

  442. Daleyrocks like I said just thinking out loud. I don’t communicate via DM or IM or whatever so I don’t know.
    This whole thing is nuts and again if he is a real person I’m sorry for his trouble.

    Comment by Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c) — 7/2/2011 @ 8:32 am

  443. I am dubious about Lee’s theory of separating motives between the personal and the political. For the left, the personal and the political are inseparable, they define people. Just try to have a rational discussion about politics with a liberal and see how personal it becomes for them.

    I think it is also a mistake think Lee has been correct or even consistent on his thinking about Dan Wolfe during the course of this story. He has not. I’ll be happy to document it when I return later.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/2/2011 @ 8:41 am

  444. Comment by lamchopsl — 7/2/2011 @ 8:29 am

    Who doesn’t acknowledge that the hoaxer(Lee’s Caller) claims to be Jenny George?

    Or that (assuming he really spoke to the real Lew Hunter) Lew Hunter had a student named Jenny George?

    Comment by SarahW (af7312) — 7/2/2011 @ 9:01 am

  445. 440. SarahW

    I am not asking if she claimed to be Jenny George. I am asking you if you acknowledge that that person is named Jenny George. That is, did she identify herself to the detective an Jenny Goerge and the detective confirmed that he was speaking to the person named Jenny George that filed the complaint?

    Comment by lamchopsl (a91fe8) — 7/2/2011 @ 9:11 am

  446. Koam, I can’t speak for Preston, but I do think she was misunderstood by Lee (as I was).

    My read: She was saying she’s not ready to make any declaration of what’s going on based on the information she has.

    Not following up with the prof would be inexcusable.

    Not getting hold of her personal info from the Police report and checking in to see if the [verified] prof to see if matches his records is another.

    Not speaking to the detective would be inexcusable.

    Maybe Preston knows something we don’t, and it shapes her opinions. If she doesn’t, maybe general interest in the story has faded so ar he doesn’t want to put in the effort.

    Is she the only person in the world who can investigate and gather information and report it?

    No. So find out if the story is dropped like a hot potato, if so, stop worrying about what she thinks or does.

    Comment by SarahW (af7312) — 7/2/2011 @ 9:11 am

  447. Lamchopsl, I don’t know if she is Jenny George or someone posing as her.

    Comment by SarahW (af7312) — 7/2/2011 @ 9:13 am

  448. “they define people. Just try to have a rational discussion about politics with a liberal and see how personal it becomes for them.”
    Truth

    Comment by Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c) — 7/2/2011 @ 9:17 am

  449. Could we not take that link to the qritiq blog that Lee posted earlier (top photo,unlabeled is same photo as a Jen Preston from Boston on a private Facebook profile) and send it to Prof. Lew Hunter and ask,

    “Dear Prof. Hunter,
    Sorry to bother you, but do you recognize the person in this photograph? If so, what is the name of the person?
    Thank you and Happy 4th.”

    And send the same thing to the Detective in Boston?

    well, I guess we cannot because that page has now been removed from qritiq. http://qritiq.wordpress.com/2010/06/30/look-a-likes/

    but we could use the photo from the facebook profile page (woman in business attire, yellow blouse, under dark jacket, leaning forward into camera, hands on desk)

    Comment by koam @wittier (62b38e) — 7/2/2011 @ 9:27 am

  450. lamchopsl,

    I don’t understand your insistence upon treating “understandings” and “acknowledgments” as truth. In pressing SarahW to “acknowledge” certain propositions you are merely insisting she has the same “understanding” as you when the facts are not iron-clad.

    As SaraW points out, nobody is saying a police report wasn’t filed or that the person Lee spoke with didn’t claim to be Jenny George. It’s a matter of corroboration. And no, the professor’s phone acknowledgment is not good enough.

    We all know who JGCA is. She has a website, a twitter, can be easily contacted, and has a work history that can be verified. And the only reason she is caught up in this is because of the ghost of JGMA (beyond a name, we do not know who she is). How do we know the professor didn’t have JGCA in mind when he verified her existence?

    Comment by Crispian (70c05e) — 7/2/2011 @ 9:33 am

  451. koam,

    I still see the picture in google cache. Was that page created by Ms. Lipton? Despite the nearly exactly one year ago date on it, the picture caption is “JG?” and is tagged as “politics.”

    Comment by Crispian (70c05e) — 7/2/2011 @ 9:35 am

  452. Anybody out there please correct me if I am wrong, but when you walk into a police station and say, “Hello, my name is Daffy Duck, and I’d like to file a complaint against Lee Stranahan for threatening to kill me.”

    The Desk Sargent politely replies, “We’d be happy to take your complaint Mr. Duck, if you would please just fill out this form. Oh, and by the way, may I see your identification?”

    And when the decetive goes out to interview the person making the complaint, he also asks for identification to ensure he is talking to the person who made the complaint.

    So here’s my next question: if you believe the person who called Lee and Jen Preston and filed the police complaint and then spoke with the detective isn’t really named Jenny George, then isn’t it reasonable to assume that this person has some sort of serious identification, such as a drivers license or passport, that identifies her as Jenny George?

    Comment by lamchopsl (a91fe8) — 7/2/2011 @ 9:36 am

  453. lamchopsl,

    It’s reasonable to assume, but I’m sure one doesn’t need identification. (“Sorry ma’am, I don’t care what crime you want to report, no ID, no investigation.”)

    But again, it’s a matter of knowing it was the same person that Lee spoke with and if it was, then determining who that person is beyond a mere name.

    Comment by Crispian (70c05e) — 7/2/2011 @ 9:42 am

  454. At work bored.
    Just read this http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/06/28/989469/-Disingenuous-Chart,-Dishonest-DA-(Weinergate)?via=search
    Stranded Wind=Marooned Fart? High and dry gas bag?
    Again just thinking out loud…whistling minding my own business.

    Comment by Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c) — 7/2/2011 @ 9:56 am

  455. 446. Crispian

    There are no iron-clad facts. There are only degrees of certainty. JGCA could be an elaborate hoax also. You cannot be 100% certain that the person standing in front of you in the grocery store check out line isn’t a visitor from another space-time continuum.

    The reason I am using words like acknowledge is I am trying to find out the level of certainty that is required for someone with whom I am talking to say something is, as you say, an iron-clad fact.

    If the guy in line behind me in the grocery store check out line starts asking me to prove that I am not a visitor from another space-time continuum, I might rightfully expect that men in white coats toss a butterfly net over him. And if people on this forum start contacting people to exclude extremely unlikely conspiracy hypotheses, they might expect the same response.

    If you read JGCA’s Weinerpage she seems to think everybody on this forum is a crazy conspiracy theorist. I would argue that she is wrong, some people on this forum are not.

    Comment by lamchopsl (a91fe8) — 7/2/2011 @ 10:04 am

  456. 448 lamchopsl

    that sounds right.

    Comment by koam @wittier (62b38e) — 7/2/2011 @ 10:07 am

  457. 447 Crispian

    You’re referring to my 445.

    I don’t know who Ms. [redacted] is.

    The qritiq blog page was, Lee says, intentionally mis-dated a year earlier. I tested and you can mis-date posts on wordpress.

    So its value is much less if it was just posted yesterday with some photo found online by searching “jennifer george boston” ( I found same photo a week ago that way). If it had really been posted a year ago on same page with Nikki Reed and J-Lo then that was gonna be big news. Lee spread it, not sure why. but he was asking who owned the blog…so perhaps the blogger was up to a little misdirection because of that fake date.

    The blog has a weather widget with the ZIP for Roslyn, NY (long island).

    The photo I would consider entirely random, one of many candidates. It could be emailed to Prof and Detective for some level of corrobroation…so if another photo of same lady shows up elsewhere we will know we are looking at the one who took courses and/or filed police reports. That would be real information.

    But in the interim

    Comment by koam @wittier (62b38e) — 7/2/2011 @ 10:13 am

  458. Please take a look at this blog post …http://qritiq.wordpress.com/2010/06/30/look-a-likes/

    Geez, all this time, and no one ever once mentioned that she was a babe. I might have actually paid attention.

    Jenny, if you’re out there, I’ve got Sox tickets. We’ll get some Fenway franks and forget about the whole Weinie thing. Later we can help Norm tweet random body parts to strangers. It’ll be fun.

    You know where to find me. (The place where every one knows – oh wait, never mind that part).

    Cheers,
    Sammy

    Comment by Sam Malone (f24ed2) — 7/2/2011 @ 10:24 am

  459. witter,

    You mean this picture?

    http://profile.ak.fbcdn.net/hprofile-ak-snc4/23073_1104744369_8766_n.jpg

    The link for this FB page was sent to Lee on June 27 by @lanelipton on twitter

    Joe

    Comment by Joe Smith (54c0c1) — 7/2/2011 @ 10:27 am

  460. 420 kill me now.

    Comment by SarahW (af7312) — 7/2/2011 @ 10:31 am

  461. Name goes with the blog. Was she just guessing? Seems so. Wouldn’t be terrible to show the detective, however.

    Comment by SarahW (af7312) — 7/2/2011 @ 10:32 am

  462. This is a bit of an aside but has anyone looked at RBrynaert twitter today? So weird
    also I’m not getting the connection with this picture?

    Comment by Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c) — 7/2/2011 @ 10:36 am

  463. If you don’t think some caution about JGMA’s identity is necessary in a context where it is supposed the hoaxer (lees caller) is a liar, and a liar who fakes identities and identification documents, you are silly.

    Comment by SarahW (af7312) — 7/2/2011 @ 10:39 am

  464. If you don’t think some caution about JGMA’s identity is necessary in a context where it is supposed the hoaxer (lees caller) is a liar, and a liar who fakes identities and identification documents, you are silly.

    Yes, it’s entirely possible that JGMA is just a victim. And if that’s the case then JGCA’s point about “veering into potential vigilantism” is really not that far off the mark. In any case, caution certainly can do no harm.

    It’s entirely possible that JGMA is:
    1) The person in the writing class
    2) The person who filed the police report

    But is NOT:
    1) The person who called Lee
    2) The SockPuppeteer
    3) Alicia Pain, (et al.)

    It’s also possible that she could even be the SockPuppeteer (which may be marignally unethical, but is certainly not illegal) and still be in no other way involved.

    Comment by piglet (1bb7dc) — 7/2/2011 @ 11:03 am

  465. A)I believe the woman who called Lee on 6/19 claimed to be Jenny George. I do not believe Lee lies.

    B)I believe the woman filing a police report in Boston some time between 6/19 and 6/26 claiming she had received death threats from Lee Stranahan also claimed to be named Jenny George.

    lamchopsl A therefore = B

    Daley, SarahW, koam show your work to prove claim A=B

    Stranahan on BTR radio last night – I have been too busy going down rabbit holes and getting yelled at to document my work.

    lamchopsl A=B

    Shoot me now.

    Stranahan – If you don’t think I’ve proved my conclusion, suggest an alternate rational explanation.

    Stranahan – Why are you people suggesting crazy alternate scenarios?

    Stranahan

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/2/2011 @ 11:06 am

  466. The order at the end got a little garbled there.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/2/2011 @ 11:07 am

  467. 458. Blackburnsghost

    I noticed the same thing earlier but got sidetracked. Pure paranoia, plus it looks like people are eschewing him. That’s understandable given his recent strange behavior. He seem to be lashing out at everybody trying to get anybody to contact him. If it isn’t drug induced, it’s classic clinical.

    Comment by lamchopsl (a91fe8) — 7/2/2011 @ 11:12 am

  468. Any metadata in those pics that might offer clues?

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/2/2011 @ 11:12 am

  469. Well, one obvious sign that the blog post dated 6/30/2010 is suspect relates to the filename of the Jennifer Lopez image:

    http://www.hotnewsonglyrics.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Jennifer-Lopez-Put-On-You-Hooked-On-You-Lyrics.jpg

    But all that dated filename proves is that the post has been edited after or around April 2011. Has anyone else found any other indicators for that post’s actual date?

    Comment by h2u (0025d1) — 7/2/2011 @ 11:20 am

  470. h2u

    It is a blatant misdate. Most probably only the year is changed from 2011 to 2010. Biggest clue as to the lacking merit is that the person used “JG?” as the picture’s title (when you hover over it). Clearly the person isn’t sure and may have just found the picture in the same manner as koam a week ago.

    Comment by Crispian (70c05e) — 7/2/2011 @ 11:26 am

  471. Crispian, I am absolutely convinced you’re correct — but this whole investigation has been marred by the lack of convincing proof for a significant amount of “known facts.” The more clear-cut evidence we have, the better.

    Comment by h2u (0025d1) — 7/2/2011 @ 11:28 am

  472. I have been following this story more closely in the last few weeks than I’d admit to anyone outside the circle of this readership. The story and sleuthing by Lee et al brought me to this blog which I didn’t read otherwise. I am intrigued as much by the characters and dynamics as the motivation and actions. I can’t wait to get home and see what happened while I was gone. “Yes,” I whisper, “I am a weineraholic.”

    I’ve spent the last few days trying to get the story and mystery clear in my head—no easy task when post comments hit the 400+ mark. I am sketchy on some of the conversations and who did what as weinergate was unfolding so perhaps amid work this holiday weekend, I’ll jump back and refresh myself. I am not sure there are answers there but I fear my addiction will force me to return. Until then.. I have defined for myself what I care about.. and what I don’t.

    Here are the questions that I don’t find relevant to my understanding:

    1.Is the professor/Lew Hunter real? – or more accurately is he who/what he’s presented as. First of all, I find it odd that a character (or real person) would offer up a professor as verification of his/her authenticity. I was pretty close with a handful of my professors and advisors—in very small schools/programs and never would it occur to me, even while enrolled, to use a professor to say I am who I say I am. When I need to prove I am who I say I am, I use proper ID– a DL, a passport. My bank isnt likely to take the word of my professor, my friend or my own mother. They want real identification to link my person to my action.

    Secondly, he’s not really provided any real information. Perhaps some insight—but even if he is real and does know the same JG who is believed to have been operating the Nikki Reid accounts, who contacted Lee and who reported death threats to BPD, his impression is still subjective and based on limited interaction. We’re not talking an old family friend here—we’re talking a professor—a leader of a workshop. Where he would be of great value is if someone had a photo of the JG who made the police report—or of screen capture of a skype convo JG as she was talking to Lee. That photo doesn’t exist as far as I know. It’s in the “wouldn’t it be great if we had … “ bucket. Without it– LH serves no purpose.

    OK.. there was only one. It feels like there should be more that doesnt matter.

    Comment by eman (0c693d) — 7/2/2011 @ 11:35 am

  473. I agree h2u. I think every bit of evidence needs to be taken with a grain of salt as any piece can be misdirection by a troll. That is why so many of us are skeptical about the identity of JGMA. Even assuming Lee is absolutely right that JG is JG is JG…is she relevant to the story or not? Why aren’t we finding that that out if we know who she is?

    I think there is a split between those who think this mystery can be solved in a linear fashion, taking evidence at face value; and those of us who are happy to leave everything up in the air until it all snaps into place, letting any extraneous bits of information then fall away.

    I’m a mere spectator but it does seem wise to follow the latter route. But in any event, both Poirot and Scooby Doo solved mysteries in their own way – even though the latter sometimes involved pulling off mask after mask.

    Comment by Crispian (70c05e) — 7/2/2011 @ 11:44 am

  474. 461. daleyrocks

    Would be great to have the actual timing of the list of events that I posted earlier.

    Evidence that A=B might include that JG gave JP the name of Prof Lew Hunter and also gave that to Detective (perhaps to desk sergeant?) but without timing, we don’t know if she could have learned of the Lew Hunter referral from Lee online before naming Lew Hunter to BPD.

    Same goes for other things Lee said JG said on phone, all learnable online and coulda been parroted by a 2nd JG who went to police.

    However we believe the JG who went to police is very likely the real JG as it’s been deduced that she must have had to verify her identity to BPD more than once and that they likely do independent verification on claimants.

    We need the timing.

    Comment by koam @wittier (62b38e) — 7/2/2011 @ 11:45 am

  475. 465 h2u

    why does date of post matter now? as long as it’s not really a year ago, then we know that it was intentionally mis-dated to mislead us. And now it’s gone.

    Comment by koam @wittier (62b38e) — 7/2/2011 @ 11:48 am

  476. The JGMA who went to Boston PD is real. No question. I just wonder if it is necessarily true that the JG that called Lee is the same person.

    If JGMA had an old twitter account that included personal information, and it was co-opted by someone who later contacted her making threats as “Lee’s follower,” wouldn’t the person making the threats to JGMA be able to impersonate her well enough in a call to Lee?

    1. They would have enough personal information about her to identify themselves as that person on a call to Lee.

    2. They would have the details about the threatening call, since they were the one that made it, including what JGMA would likely report to police.

    If I don’t have all the details and there is more to it, fine, but from what I have read here, just because a JGMA says similar things to the Boston PD as Lee’s caller doesn’t necessarily make them the same person.

    Considering we have been dealing with fake personalities for weeks I think better verification is necessary.

    Comment by CausticConservative (b29599) — 7/2/2011 @ 11:54 am

  477. That is why so many of us are skeptical about the identity of JGMA.

    I’m skeptical of just about every single “fact” asserted by Stranahan or Preston… There has not been nearly enough verification to warrant many of the statements uttered by both.

    Comment by h2u (0025d1) — 7/2/2011 @ 11:55 am

  478. 474 eman

    the reasoning wanders from “Is Lew Hunter real?” to “why would she use Lew Hunter as reference?” to “it doesn’t matter what Lew Hunter says.”

    1) Lew Hunter is real. It’s possible, but very unlikely that both Lee and Preston talked to a fakey Lew Hunter and Mrs. Lew Hunter.

    2) To students, famous professors are the most prominent people they deal with on a regular basis. Just because you wouldn’t use a professor as a reference, doesn’t mean this woman in her early 20s wouldn’t. I certainly used professors as references all the time at that age. The professors liked me and their prominence added credibility for me.

    3) Lew Hunter can confirm that there is a real JG and some factual and subjective info about JG. It doesn’t prove that the caller was the real JG. The caller could have been someone with knowledge of JG’s life pretending to be JG and also running the starchild account. But it’s more likely that she is just JG.

    Comment by koam @wittier (62b38e) — 7/2/2011 @ 11:57 am

  479. why does date of post matter now? as long as it’s not really a year ago, then we know that it was intentionally mis-dated to mislead us. And now it’s gone.

    I’m honestly just interested in cementing down as many facts as possible regarding the timing involved in this entire affair. In this particular instance, I’ve seen numerous assertions that the post is misdated but I’d really like to see the evidence verifying that.

    Right now the only factual evidence I’ve seen is the date of the J-Lo photo. And all that can actually prove is that the post was *edited* sometime after April 2011. There are other clues that suggest the post was created with the back-date of June 30, 2010, but I’d like to see the facts.

    What else do we have?

    Comment by h2u (0025d1) — 7/2/2011 @ 11:59 am

  480. h2u,

    I have to run, but I saw that “Hover” as well. I thought it an interesting notation of some kind.

    Gennette was/is claiming to be searching for the identities. It is still not clear if she was working with others. Some suggest RAW himself.

    Could the people here be covering ground that someone else has aready covered?

    Comment by cap'n john's nephew (d29614) — 7/2/2011 @ 12:06 pm

  481. “Yes,” I whisper, “I am a weineraholic.”
    hahaha I think I peed my pants…so.funny.

    lambchps
    It’s scary and sad

    Comment by Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c) — 7/2/2011 @ 12:11 pm

  482. Just thinking out loud. I found it intriguing.
    That is all.

    Comment by cap'n john's nephew (d29614) — 7/2/2011 @ 12:12 pm

  483. Oh, and Blackburnsghost, I haven’t forgotten your questions to me. I havn’t been ignoring you.

    Not sure of branches, but the connection would have to be long before.

    Ok, I’m leaving for now… Really!

    Comment by cap'n john's nephew (d29614) — 7/2/2011 @ 12:16 pm

  484. koam 477

    1. I am not asking the question is LH real. I am saying I dont think the question is relevant. I have no reason to doubt he’s real.. however, some here have questioned whether he’s who we think he is. JP definitely questioned that according to Lee.

    2. While I surely used professors as references for jobs, credibility in my field, applications to grad schools, I wouldn’t have offered one up to the police. I surely wouldn’t have used a professor who ran an out-of-state WORKSHOP. He wasnt her advisor.. or even someone she took many classes with. She stayed at his home while taking a seminar. Perhaps they are now best buds. Perhaps that would change my mind. The fact remains, I find it odd.

    3. Agreed. LH did provide some facts and some subjective info about a woman who took his workshop. He can’t, however, confirm the link from his student to the JGMA who is starchild111 or who called Lee or who filed a BPD report. LH can’t prove anything of value.

    Comment by eman (176a86) — 7/2/2011 @ 12:17 pm

  485. So now Lee is trolling everyone following this to prove a point? Great.

    Comment by Noodles (3681c4) — 7/2/2011 @ 1:58 pm

  486. The arguments are getting more ridiculous each hour.

    Comment by koam @wittier (62b38e) — 7/2/2011 @ 2:00 pm

  487. 326,27,28,29…I do not know why he has a problem with me. He wants a sacrificial lamb and figures that I will sit back and take it. Posting that he knows that I ” did this and that and he knows it” just makes him look stupid. Based on his history and him calling Greg Howard’s children ” F–k–le”during “Twittergate”proves that he has some issues.
    Im just sitting back and watching him self destruct.

    Comment by goatsred (b20383) — 7/2/2011 @ 2:29 pm

  488. ==There are no iron-clad facts. There are only degrees of certainty==

    Congrats Crispian– you just received the same sermon I got 24 hours ago. In fact (as you are acutely aware) a few of us have been discussing the same basic issue about proof and verification on this same thread for almost 36 hours now. Crazy!

    As an aside, most everyone (I think) recognizes that good people can have different mental processes that guide their lives and thought patterns. Some us us are detail oriented–some are more oriented to the big picture. Some tend to be more trusting, some people even can be considered gullible– others are more leery by nature, some people are suspicious to a fault. Some people are convinced through linear logic–other folks are inspired by stream-of- consciousness creativity. Some people see humor almost everything–others have just had a more serious and sensitive side probably since birth. All of these traits have been exhibited at various times by various commenters on this blog. Great. Shows we’re human and are engaged in this story.

    That said, what I just don’t get is this, though: As far as I can see from reviewing the comments nobody really is telling lam (or Lee or Temper) to change their minds about their theories or demanding they accept other storyline possibilities. Yet lam, for instance, seems focused, intent, dare we say obsessed, in trying to get other commenters (including daily, SarahW, you, me, Maybee) to accept his (Lee’s) version exclusively without respecting whatever verification any of us individually might feel we need in order to comfortably do so. Why? Even if lam is satisfied and does not himself feel any need for more background verification, why is he apparently so personally offended if others see loose ends they’d still like to tie down?

    Bottom line–What is the end game? What if every single commenter here in unison said of Lee’s (not fully fleshed out in writing) Weinergate sock theory, “The Science is Settled!” Then what would happen next? Is there a next step? Does it involve light bulbs and energy credits?

    Comment by elissa (27a5d6) — 7/2/2011 @ 2:58 pm

  489. I cant know if Lee’s theory is the right one, but it’s the most or only plausible one right now in my view.

    Time will tell.

    The contradiction between Lew H “She’s very liberal politically” and the JG who called Lee “I’m just into reality shows, I know nothing about politics” tells us they’re not coordinated/co-conspirators.

    Comment by Temper Tantrum (02fe1b) — 7/2/2011 @ 3:13 pm

  490. “Why?”

    elissa – [Using my James Earl Jones voice] What are you trying to say, my dear?

    I just figured we have new bunch of Obama voters commenting, which is a good thing, but that we have not dumbed down the content of comments far enough to where they can comprehend them.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/2/2011 @ 3:28 pm

  491. Why would some hoaxer use a real identity ( JG ) behind the twitter starchild , to later change it to Nikki reed?
    Why would that hoaxer be prepared to release very specific information on JG ( Lew H connection ) ?
    Was this planned by the hoaxer that someone would track back the starchild account to JG by first finding out the jenay name and the connection to JG?
    When did the hoaxer plan to frame JG?

    Comment by Temper Tantrum (02fe1b) — 7/2/2011 @ 3:30 pm

  492. 487 elissa.

    “Conjecture is over.”

    Comment by koam @wittier (62b38e) — 7/2/2011 @ 3:40 pm

  493. Elissa , someone could ask Lew H what JG looks like ,and ask the same to the police who saw JG MA and filed the report.

    Comment by Temper Tantrum (02fe1b) — 7/2/2011 @ 3:46 pm

  494. 487. elisia

    I am not personally offended by others’ opinions. I am typically responding to other people who are challenging mine. I usually don’t comment on the comments advocating extreme due diligence. That’s OK by me. I do feel when everybody is doing it on this fourm, it starts to make it look a little kooky. But I don’t feel I have to advertise my point of view, or continually harp on the subject. And I have not accepted Lee’s conclusions as facts. But i do think he has a reasonable approach to distinguishing the sublime from the absurd.

    Comment by lamchopsl (a91fe8) — 7/2/2011 @ 4:06 pm

  495. We need to refute questioned testimony with specific evidentiary facts.

    That someone’s statements don’t fit the popular theory isn’t what makes them lies.

    We also have to remember that we are getting a lot of testimony second-hand. Someone saying what someone else said or meant. This can be misleading.

    Comment by koam @wittier (62b38e) — 7/2/2011 @ 4:41 pm

  496. When Patterico was pushing on JR, the walls started shaking, ghosts flew out of the closets, and the Devil himself appeared. Everody ran to the rabbit hole, while Pat stayed with the source.

    Comment by cap'n john's nephew (28dda5) — 7/2/2011 @ 4:58 pm

  497. “The Science is Settled!” Then what would happen next? Is there a next step? Does it involve light bulbs and energy credits?

    Oh how I love this comment. With my entire stash of incancesdents.

    Comment by Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c) — 7/2/2011 @ 5:14 pm

  498. “The Science is Settled” That’s hilarious.

    First it was the Koch brothers circle of crazy fun and now we’ve got AGW. That’s two awesome loops in leftie craziness. Bulging briefs cause global warming AGW Anthony’s Global Warming. We might be on to something here as the conspiracy heads out for another lap.

    Comment by Johnny 5 is alive (5ccc5e) — 7/2/2011 @ 5:31 pm

  499. Comment by Blackburnsghost — 7/2/2011 @ 9:56 am

    I took your lead and went over there and looked at all of those articles and my name being in all of them.It has just made me more aware of all of the defamation that Neal “Stranded Wind” is causing to be attached to my name I want to thank you for pointing this out to me. I have been staying away from the Commie Rag he spews his hate in because I have just experienced his lies and slander for two months now.
    He is an evil organism.

    Comment by goatsred (b20383) — 7/2/2011 @ 6:08 pm

  500. Do you think he’s Sourshoes’ brother?

    Comment by koam @wittier (62b38e) — 7/2/2011 @ 6:19 pm

  501. A question here as to motive for followers of Patterico’s theory. It is at least the case that the starchild111 account owner who, writing under a false avatar, went to lengths to get Weiner to follow him/her is the same person who tried to have it reported that Breitbart was asking him/her to lie.

    Clearly this person does not like Breitbart, but how does obsessing over Weiner under false pretenses fit the theory of a sting on Breitbart? All of that effort just to be able to seem to have the goods? And the seeking Weiner campaign began when Weiner was following fewer than 100 people. Weiner does not look like a means to an end for starchild111 – he looks like the end itself.

    So again, what motive do you see behind the sweep of starchild’s actions from the start of his/her pursuit of Weiner?

    Comment by Nathan Wagner (39d8fb) — 7/2/2011 @ 7:28 pm

  502. “Clearly this person does not like Breitbart, but how does obsessing over Weiner under false pretenses fit the theory of a sting on Breitbart?”

    Nathan – If the purpose of the sting is to embarrass Breitbart by getting him to bite on a false smear of Weiner, I don’t follow the rest of your comment. The account was only speaking with Ginger and Gennette about politics for a couple of months before Weiner outed himself with the dic pic.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/2/2011 @ 7:37 pm

  503. @500 Nathan Wagner

    Love for Weiner and hatred of Breitbart isn’t mutually exclusive nor do I think starchild111′s initial motives were to destroy Breitbart, but rather, to get close to Weiner. Breitbart was only accused when starchild felt that a politician he/she beloved was being brought into negative limelight unnecessarily by Breitbart. Only when Weiner confessed and Breitbart was vindicated did the Reid’s story begin to change.

    Comment by rogerthat (f5aad4) — 7/2/2011 @ 7:47 pm

  504. The account was speaking with ginger and genette precisely because they were being followed by Weiner. I want you to tell me how you read the motive for that.

    Comment by Nathan Wagner (2d2146) — 7/2/2011 @ 7:51 pm

  505. Rogerthat, I agree. But in that case the starchild Weiner seeking was not part of a sting on Breitbart. Isn’t that contrary to the theory Pat hints at?

    Comment by Nathan Wagner (2d2146) — 7/2/2011 @ 8:03 pm

  506. #487 – elissa, you wrote:

    a few of us have been discussing the same basic issue about proof and verification on this same thread for almost 36 hours now. Crazy!

    It’s been a busy day, but coming in where I left off last night, you seem to have it right.

    At some point, there has to be a way to settle if JG who called Lee is identical to JG who filed the police report (investigation dropped, I see) or not. Just as a for-instance.

    It’s gotten crazy, all right.

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/2/2011 @ 8:13 pm

  507. Nikki was following GC, GL AND Ethel. All three Discussing weiner. All initiated by Nikki

    Comment by az5thdstrct (e76e6a) — 7/2/2011 @ 8:26 pm

  508. wow.

    Patterico is still on this?

    The Wingularity is near.

    Comment by wheeler's cat (e1af5e) — 7/2/2011 @ 8:29 pm

  509. @506 – Yes, precisely. Motive?

    Comment by Nathan Wagner (bc92ce) — 7/2/2011 @ 8:31 pm

  510. “The account was speaking with ginger and genette precisely because they were being followed by Weiner. I want you to tell me how you read the motive for that.”

    Nathan – To me, the DM’s speak for themselves – How did you get Weiner to follow you?, etc. Build credibility before the sting. No mystery. TommyX bought that they were real people.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/2/2011 @ 8:31 pm

  511. daleyrocks, let’s talk about this. I realize these are basic questions, but (1) what credibility? and (2) how is the sting intended to go down?

    Comment by Nathan Wagner (bc92ce) — 7/2/2011 @ 8:35 pm

  512. #508

    Should be fairly obvious. Nikki’s twitter account as it went from starchild in name to Nikki Reid in name was GL. (march)

    March is when GL started DMing with wiener. Nikki followed GL and tweeted GL about weiner.

    Comment by az5thdstrct (e76e6a) — 7/2/2011 @ 8:35 pm

  513. Left out…

    Nikki’s FIRST NEW twitter FOLLOWER on her account as it went from starchild in name to Nikki Reid in name was GL. (march)

    Comment by az5thdstrct (e76e6a) — 7/2/2011 @ 8:37 pm

  514. az5thdstrct,
    Okay, so are you saying the purpose of the account was to establish a relationship with Weiner – or was the purpose something larger?

    Comment by Nathan Wagner (bc92ce) — 7/2/2011 @ 8:40 pm

  515. Gennette, while doing an investigation, felt something was up with Nikki, then conversed with Nikki for a considerable period of time. Gennette claims that during those conversations, Nikki never brought up Weiner. So, Gennette brought up Wiener to Nikki first, eventually encouraging Nikki to contact Weiner and ask him to follow.

    Comment by cap'n john's nephew (28dda5) — 7/2/2011 @ 8:41 pm

  516. #513

    I’m saying to gather info on Weiner. With the info dumps from JR9, there’s info on weiner, right?

    Much of it not positive. Supposed GC/AW flirting that GC explains. More DM’s with cursing to Nikki etc

    Comment by az5thdstrct (e76e6a) — 7/2/2011 @ 8:47 pm

  517. Okay, az5thdstrct, gathering info on Weiner for what purpose?

    Comment by Nathan Wagner (bc92ce) — 7/2/2011 @ 8:49 pm

  518. #516

    I have my theory. If you want to continue to discuss yours, I’ll read it

    Comment by az5thdstrct (e76e6a) — 7/2/2011 @ 8:50 pm

  519. My point, here, is that I have a hard time with Pat’s theory – which I understand to be that the account was intended as a sting to get Breitbart.

    But if Pat’s theory is correct, it seems to me that the Weiner obsession tail is wagging the Breitbart sting dog.

    Comment by Nathan Wagner (bc92ce) — 7/2/2011 @ 8:54 pm

  520. 2. While I surely used professors as references for jobs, credibility in my field, applications to grad schools, I wouldn’t have offered one up to the police. I surely wouldn’t have used a professor who ran an out-of-state WORKSHOP

    Yes, the idea of JG having offered her workshop professor as a reference to the police really makes no sense at all. (And on all kinds of different levels).

    Surely the police would not normally ask for references from someone reporting a crime (especially in the South End of Boston).

    And surely if the victim of an alleged threat were to give the police the name of someone to vouch for their credibility, the police would not normally give that person’s name to anyone they called in the course of their investigation.

    If the professors name was mentioned by JG, the only thing that makes sense is that it was mentioned as part of the events surrounding the incident. For example, she may have mentioned (if she was aware of it) that the twitter account opened under her name had been connected to her via the fact she was following the professor Hunter’s writing program. Or perhaps (if she was aware of it) that LS had contacted this professor about her.

    Of course, not everything in this story _does_ make senses, so who knows – maybe she just mentions his name to everyone she meets. It would certainly be odd for the police to do to same though.

    Comment by Johnathan Creek (1bb7dc) — 7/2/2011 @ 8:56 pm

  521. Nathan – Motive – Sting Breitbart with false Weiner smear. Am I going too fast?

    I sting going to be more credible coming from admitted Weiner fans and correspondents who are disappointed in his conduct or from rabid conservatives? Am I going too fast?

    “Much of it not positive.”

    az5thdstrct Lee kept making references to negative info. Can you elaborate?

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/2/2011 @ 9:00 pm

  522. #487 elissa,

    Well said!

    Comment by Crispian (70c05e) — 7/2/2011 @ 9:05 pm

  523. daleyrocks, your pace is just fine. So the account owner’s plan is supposed to go down like this:
    (1) Establish account under false pretenses (i.e. pretend to be high school girl)
    (2) Develop relationships with women Weiner follows in order to find out how to get Weiner to follow the account.
    (3) Get Weiner follow.
    (4) Go to Breitbart with fake dirt.
    (5) Reveal it was a farce after Breitbart publishes.

    Is that it?

    Comment by Nathan Wagner (bc92ce) — 7/2/2011 @ 9:08 pm

  524. DaleyRocks

    Not stating all negative, but some. If you have time, go back thru the info dump with negative in mind. Maybe you’ll see more/less than I did. IMO, it’s masked at times because it was presented with a focus towards GC.

    JR9 did not have a context of the GC/Weiner DM’s that “appear” to be flirty DMs. GC claims she was suspicious of Nikki, so she presented flirty in that context.

    without that context via JR9, flirty was flirty and a supposed DM convo with GC/AW flirting. At least via GC with multiple DMs

    There was the discovery of more than just two DMs between AW/Nikki. In fact, many more. Including cursing to a supposed minor.

    There was JR’s answer regarding wife’s statement:

    Unfortunately my wife does not stand by her letter. It was actually Patterico’s story on Ethel that causedus to question our daughter’s claim of only 2 DM’s between her and Rep Weiner. After Patterico’s story uncovered the discrepancy of Ethel saying there were 2 DM’s when later on itturned out to be 5 or 6, my wife and I questioned this.Thanks to Patterico, we realized we were in the same situation as Ethel and her parents. There weremore DM’s that Nikki did not want us to see. We gave Rep Weiner the benefit of the doubt at the time when my wife wrote her statement.Now we are disturbed about some of the content. Although we don’t want to jump to any conclusions.Since so many people have jumped to conclusions throughout this ordeal, it wouldn’t be fair.

    Comment by az5thdstrct (e76e6a) — 7/2/2011 @ 9:26 pm

  525. Nathan @522 – Did not 1-4 happen, with an intermediary in #4?

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/2/2011 @ 9:31 pm

  526. az5thdstrct – I completely discount JR9 statements since they were made after dic pic appeared.

    I don’t really care about GC’s impression of Nikki either.

    I’m looking for negative stuff about Weiner from Reids prior to dic pic appearing. Dic pic was a game changer. I’m not recalling negatives but will look.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/2/2011 @ 9:38 pm

  527. Mistakes were made.

    And possibly the single biggest mistake (except, of course for the actual dic pic tweet) was whoever had the brilliant idea for the bizarre pro Weiner-anti Breitbart contact by “Betty’s mom” which resulted in the first Tommy Christopher article on June 3. That was both a huge mistake and a big tell as to motive. At that point you will recall that Weiner was still denying all, was swinging from interview to interview and was getting strong support from the progressive blogosphere. So, for a couple of days it looked like Betty’s mom had further shored up AW’s reputation as an innocent, involved, misunderstood social media aficionado who had somehow gotten pranked. So far, so good. Right wing internet “harassers” and Breitbart are still in the bullseye even though Tommy did play down that angle.

    But all that fell apart just a couple days later. When Weiner tearfully admitted much (but not all) on June 6, the Betty mom story suddenly started to look ridiculous and kind of hokey to just about everybody– people started sniffing around–and Tommy eventually had to admit he’d been had. Then, even more damaging pictures came out and Weiner finally announced his resignation.

    From that point on almost all that has happened has revolved around the mysterious starchild and its relationship with Gennette and others. It appears to be about backpedaling and finessing to cover or explain away its role in the whole Betty mom fiasco with Tommy, including the falsified documents and false personas. The death threats add drama when people start digging too deep.

    Just think. Had “Betty’s mom” not voluntarily come forward with her crazy “IT’s all lies–LIES I tell you!”story, Tommy would probably not have written his infamous story. Or, if he had done basic journalistic research which might have taken a few more days, his Betty mom story might have still been in his computer, and would not already have been out there to cause trouble when Weiner confessed.

    Would very many of us, besides Lee and Goatsred, still be talking about multiple socks and hacks and fake dogs and sinister theories and twitter meltdowns and ancient professors had “Betty’s mom” just kept her damn mouth shut? I kind of doubt it. Good job there, Mrs. Reid whoever you are.

    Happy fireworks and picnics and freedom, everybody.

    Comment by elissa (27a5d6) — 7/2/2011 @ 9:38 pm

  528. Daleyrocks

    If you look at #515, I’m making it clear I’m referring to info dumps

    Comment by az5thdstrct (e76e6a) — 7/2/2011 @ 9:45 pm

  529. daleyrocks, thanks for your patience. I’m going to let loose with my thoughts, now.

    In direct response to your #524 – If (4) happened, it happened only after Weinergate broke.

    But more broadly, I wanted to hear you actually lay the theory out and think about the motives, both so that I was clear on what you believed the plan was and so that we could discuss some of the steps directly.

    I find the theory to be far-fetched. I think that the theory’s Breitbart-sting tail is wagging the evidence’s Weiner-obsession dog. A few points:

    (A) If the bait is to be ostensible inappropriate DM’s between Weiner and a young woman, you need to set things up to protect Weiner. If Weiner falls into this and he believes the girl to be in HS, then, even if Breitbart is stung, it can still look bad for him – all the more so since his other follows will be examined closely. To protect Weiner, you need at least to chose a more innocuous persona. starchild111 did not.

    (B) Because some of Weiner’s behavior is already questionable – following GL – a sting on Breitbart will shine a spotlight on it. There’s too much uncomfortable truth in the matter to make this a politically wise sting operation.

    (C) starchild111′s interest in the women Weiner followed seems well beyond the purpose of the proposed plot. She wanted details of what they were talking about – real, not fake, dirt. But for the sting, the only thing starchild111 would have needed to be interested in is how to be followed by Weiner.

    (D) Just generally, the starchild111 pattern looks like the pattern of someone obsessed with Weiner. It does not look to me as if Weiner was merely a means to end for starchild111 – it looks to me like Weiner was the main event. To make Breitbart the focus of all of this is, it seems to me, to take the evidence of starchild111′s purpose in a direction it does not point.

    Take that for what it’s worth.

    Comment by Nathan Wagner (bc92ce) — 7/2/2011 @ 10:13 pm

  530. “If you look at #515, I’m making it clear I’m referring to info dumps”

    az5thdstrct – I was not trying to be critical. Sorry if you interpreted tone that way.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/2/2011 @ 10:15 pm

  531. “In direct response to your #524 – If (4) happened, it happened only after Weinergate broke.”

    Nathan – Thanks for the replies. #4 did happen and is documented. I need to refresh myself on the timeline.

    We will have to disagree on the rest.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/2/2011 @ 10:21 pm

  532. I have a new post up about not making assumptions.

    I’m seeing a lot of careless assumptions lately. And a lot of “I don’t need to see the evidence because I know everything” sort of attitudes.

    I happen to be trained in sticking to the evidence. So if you see anyone making a claim about what I supposedly think, I ask you to consider: does Patterico ACTUALLY think that? Or is someone simply CLAIMING that he thinks that?

    I have been quite clear about what I think. There have been sock puppets mimicking me and people trying to put words in my mouth. Don’t believe them. Be skeptical.

    For example, I hear that Neal Rauhauser is shopping around claims about me based upon the word of Brett Kimberlin, a convicted bomber who blew off a man’s leg who later committed suicide.

    Well, you might be inclined to disbelieve Neal, but you might be inclined to believe someone else who says: “Oh, I privately heard Patterico say x, y, or z.” Because maybe you think that person is trusted by me.

    Well, you don’t know who I trust. So please. Don’t make assumptions.

    Hi, Neal!

    Comment by Patterico (f724ca) — 7/3/2011 @ 1:11 am

  533. I have one thing to add.

    Even hackers are “real” people.

    They may impersonate people on the Internet. They may lead a shadowy existence. They may mimic others; provide fake identification; tell lies; spoof phone numbers . . . all sorts of things.

    But they are real people. They are not Martians. If they commit crimes, and you catch them, there will be a flesh and blood person behind bars.

    I would caution anyone interested in this story (and public about their interest) to exercise caution. Assume there may be hackers who want to target you. This is not paranoia. It is basic safety.

    Comment by Patterico (f724ca) — 7/3/2011 @ 1:17 am

  534. Okay helping a bit along the way to 1,000.

    Comment by Mike Myers (0e06a9) — 7/3/2011 @ 3:22 am

  535. An update to my previous post:

    UPDATE: Lee Stranahan may be completely right about his theory that a woman with the initials “JG” is behind everything that has happened. He really may. But I have been reading his posts, and listening to his radio show with the yowling cat, and I know he has been saying and implying things about me that are simply not accurate. I have tried to remain silent about this, but I am listening to his radio show from last night and hearing how he misrepresents my position on all of this, and I can remain silent no longer.

    I disabled his account here at patterico.com on Thursday night, after I read this post of his, in which he ridiculously accused me of providing JohnReid9 with an uncritical platform to spout lies:

    Patterico has uncritically posted information from (drum roll) John Reid . . .

    . . .

    Publishing this sort of lie – totally unchallenged — from a person confirmed to be a fake seems very questionable on Patterico’s part. This is especially true about someone who has been so critical of Tommy.

    The implication that I have been somehow supportive of JohnReid9 is totally false. I have been publicly agnostic on JohnReid9 for my own reasons. For Lee to insinuate that I am a dupe, in the manner of a Tommy Christopher, was absurd and false. I was shocked and appalled to see such an accusation from someone with access to post on my blog. So I disabled his account.

    I decided to remain silent about it, until I fully listened to his latest radio show, where he discussed private communications with me, and continued to portray my positions in a misleading fashion.

    I’m not going to say more, as I have a feeling that I would regret anything else I said.

    Comment by Patterico (f724ca) — 7/3/2011 @ 3:51 am

  536. It’s bad enough to have a Neal Rauhauser go around acting like I am “falling for” something that I EXPLICITLY DISCLAIMED any vouching for. To have it said by someone who was a guest blogger here — it just didn’t work.

    Comment by Patterico (f724ca) — 7/3/2011 @ 3:54 am

  537. I’m still listening to this show. This, compared with some other things that happened tonight . . .

    Yeah, I’m really tempted to say something I regret. So I won’t.

    Some people think they’re really, really smart, and don’t realize how they have been played. We’ll leave it at that. There will be documentary proof at the appropriate time.

    Comment by Patterico (f724ca) — 7/3/2011 @ 3:59 am

  538. Lee clearly doesn’t understand the concept of giving someone enough rope to let him to hang himself with.

    Comment by Andy (6ba927) — 7/3/2011 @ 4:34 am

  539. I’ve been following this site everyday since the wiener scandal but this is my 1st time to comment. I have listened to Lee’s show and found it interesting but I also feel he is “locked into” his own theory. Things seem to be changing everyday and I am impatiently waiting to see what comes about with the police reports. Let’s get this thread to 1,000.

    Comment by Happy Trails (f63b95) — 7/3/2011 @ 4:41 am

  540. lamchop@451-

    And when the decetive goes out to interview the person making the complaint, he also asks for identification to ensure he is talking to the person who made the complaint.

    I can’t speak for larger agencies, but in small towns an ID is requested just to make taking the report easier to initially fill in all of the little boxes (i.e. it is easier to copy info from the ID rather than keep asking, “How do you spell that?” and, “What is your…?”). Reports can and have been taken when ID is unavailable for some reason or another (otherwise you’d never be able to report your wallet stolen).

    In the 35 yrs I worked for a small town agency, we never initially demanded an ID before a report was initiated. Identities were confirmed through law enforcement computer systems if nothing else was available.

    Comment by roy in nipomo (bca582) — 7/3/2011 @ 4:49 am

  541. Elissa–I am a little slow, and all due respect, I cannot totally grasp the context of this sentence. Can you just explain my part in it??

    “Would very many of us, besides Lee and Goatsred, still be talking about multiple socks and hacks and fake dogs and sinister theories and twitter meltdowns and ancient professors had “Betty’s mom” just kept her damn mouth shut? I kind of doubt it. Good job there, Mrs. Reid whoever you are?”

    Comment by goatsred (b20383) — 7/3/2011 @ 5:35 am

  542. Stranahan’s petulance has become obvious in the past few days.

    Comment by Birdbath (19803d) — 7/3/2011 @ 5:36 am

  543. (540)Because I am far from “sockpuppeting” anyone.
    I know the very real people that I am dealing with. Believe me.

    Comment by goatsred (b20383) — 7/3/2011 @ 5:38 am

  544. Oh boy, is this great! -Flounder

    Comment by Tutu (54ce64) — 7/3/2011 @ 5:43 am

  545. Lee is somewhat of a loose cannon.

    As many have noted, he is disorganized and has difficulty identifying for the reader and listener the difference between established facts and his speculations.

    I am still very interested in the story. I am just waiting for Pat, Lee, and others provide credible evidence concerning the identities of Jennifer, Nikki Reid, JohnReid9, Marinela Alicea, @PatriotUSA76, Dan Wolfe, Alicia Pain, et al.

    Comment by slp (f9a160) — 7/3/2011 @ 5:44 am

  546. I’m beginning to think that this entire opera is being orchestrated by the guys who produce and direct Damages. Quirky characters, great scripts, and some of the best acting I’ve ever seen on television.

    Comment by Old Coot (b14047) — 7/3/2011 @ 5:50 am

  547. Regarding rift between Pat & Lee:
    Sad news. I think Lee accused Pat of saying things Pat didn’t say. Lee has way of turning his own theories into hard facts in his own mind. There is real value in having a neutral platform where the John Reid documents can be exposed and roundly investigated, and criticized, as each one has been, and, as many have said, including Pat, that Reid can be given enough rope. What could be more valuable than the open interviewing thread mode for John Reid, including the chorus of criticism in the comments? Pat deserves credit for obtaining that. I have been posting for a long time that it’s valuable to have both Lee’s impassioned take on this and Pat’s methodical take and to have critical and productive interaction between them. Both have done very hard work on this. The record shows that Lee escalated the accusations and emotions, as is his way of doing things. I’ve asked Lee publicly in many comments not to estrange Pat in this way as it could remove that great “two-sides-of-the-same-coin” dynamic that we’ve enjoyed. Pat being so busy with his job and not posting as much has left a vacuum in which Lee has kept thinking that Pat is against him, like when the wife goes to Vegas with the girls and doesn’t return phone calls, the imagination wanders. Pat’s not against Lee and he’s not against finding the real truth, backed by evidence.

    Let’s hope this is temporary and they can work it out.

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/3/2011 @ 5:52 am

  548. Typical Lee post: I’m right, I know stuff that you don’t, which I’m not going to tell you about, and you’re wrong.

    Sorta pointless after a while.

    Comment by Tutu (54ce64) — 7/3/2011 @ 6:03 am

  549. 547 Tutu

    You noticed that ?

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/3/2011 @ 6:05 am

  550. koam @wittier – I think I can also point to at least three socks in these threads pushing Lee’s POV.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/3/2011 @ 6:06 am

  551. There’s no evidence that the very smart Patterico entertains Ron’s thoughts for one second. That would be totally out of character for Pat.

    I don’t buy the Patterico theory at the top of this thread that the JG who called Lee was a hoaxer. Lee would have a better sense for that and Lee’s not saying she was a hoaxer. It seems to me like it’s the real JG MA who called Lee and talked to Preston several times.

    I also don’t buy Lee’s theory that the JG MA who called him is the sock puppet mistress, because I don’t think it’s proven with facts. (It might someday be, but has not been at all yet.) I question the components of that call that Lee has labeled as lies because he doesn’t distinguish between factual lies (proven wrong by evidence, not opinion) and “it doesn’t fit my theory” “lies” (which aren’t lies by my standard).

    I think we still need to consider an innocent JG scenario and then try to poke holes in that based on facts.

    So if an innocent and truly scared JG called Lee, fearing for her life, do you think she hung up feeling better about the situation, or a whole lot worse? And after talking to Preston, does an innocent JG, who is scared of Lee, feel safer regarding Lee or Lee’s followers? Lee with the blogs and radio show saying JG is guilty every day because he’s known it all along and the story has leaked that JG may be “troubled”? Do you think Preston made an innocent JG feel better about Lee? We know now how the Lee-Preston relationship has turned out.

    And then what does the scared JG do? She goes to the cops.

    So we need to take that JG story and see what just cannot be true (based on hard facts) about it and whether those issues make us not believe her at all. Then, in that case, is she a fake or is she behind some or all of the alleged socks.

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/3/2011 @ 6:22 am

  552. Yeah, koam, if it’s 2 sides of the same coin, Pat’s is worth 23¢ and Lee’s side is worth 2¢. For what it’s worth.

    Comment by Tutu (54ce64) — 7/3/2011 @ 6:25 am

  553. Well, there is evidence Patterico is buying into Rons theory .. Read the theory here and read Patterco’s entusism for it .

    Then, go talk to Ron about it.

    Same theory. QED

    Comment by Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 7/3/2011 @ 6:26 am

  554. It is very hard for me to keep track of the facts as opposed to the speculations and those offering the false trails and rabbit holes.

    I would ask that all the sock puppets who have posted in this thread identify yourselves and state your real name.

    Comment by slp (f9a160) — 7/3/2011 @ 6:26 am

  555. See, when you explicitly state that you’re not presenting a theory, just making some true statements or asking pointed questions to let others draw conclusions or discuss… that means you are buying into and espousing a particular theory. Logic is not what some people believe it to be.

    Of course, disagree with Lee or ask for proof and you’re told you don’t know what it’s like to work a big blog story. I gave Lee the benefit of the doubt in my earlier comments on another thread. I assumed he was making valid connections based on knowledge I didn’t have and just couldn’t/didn’t want to share at the moment. My bad. Won’t happen again.

    Comment by Stashiu3 (44da70) — 7/3/2011 @ 6:51 am

  556. This very post has Patterico espousing a theory.

    Comment by Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 7/3/2011 @ 6:54 am

  557. 552. Lee

    I haven’t called Ron. Don’t need to open that can. You’re braver than I am.

    But I would think that Ron’s current ranting suggest that he thinks there’s a real JG who’s scared. I think his assertions about you are vastly overstated and largely unfounded. In Ron vs. Lee, I’m with Lee, if that makes you feel any better. But if there’s a real JG who’s scared and innocent, I can see why she’d find you scary. If she’s fake, then to hell with her.

    But are you, Lee, saying that Ron is saying that the real JG never called you on 6/19, Lee? That she never talked to Preston?

    Because that’s point #1 of the trial balloon that Pat has at the top of this (that Pat’s not saying is true but is asking us to poke holes in)

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/3/2011 @ 6:59 am

  558. This is getting very tiresome.

    Lee,

    Give us the facts and the evidence to back up those facts.

    Comment by slp (f9a160) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:01 am

  559. Ask Ron. read his tweets

    Comment by Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:04 am

  560. I have a theory: smoke from Alder wood, when applied to pork, makes for some seriously good BBQ. I am currently testing this theory with 6 slabs of ribs, and 3 pork butts. If this doesn’t sound good to you, remember, I know some things about BBQ that I can’t tell you right now. Later in the day, though, you will discover that I am right, and you are wrong. Gotta crack open a beer…suggest you all do the same.

    Comment by Tutu (54ce64) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:15 am

  561. Espousing
    1. to make one’s own; adopt or embrace, as a cause.
    Synonyms
    1. support, champion, advocate.

    Reading comprehension is your friend. Embrace it.

    Comment by Stashiu3 (44da70) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:16 am

  562. UPDATE x2: I’m feeling better about the theory with each passing second.

    Comment by Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:17 am

  563. Goatsred@540–

    I don’t quite know how to respond to your question. I can tell you feel dissed and for that I feel very bad as that was certainly not my intent. As I reread the quote I don’t quite see why you thought I dissed you or where you thought I accused you of sockpuppeting. But if you read it that way then perhaps others did too. That suggests my late night writing was unclear and for that I heartily apologize–and I welcome the chance to try to clear it up.

    My intended point in the whole overly-long comment I posted was to say what a clusterfark the Betty mom/Tommy chapter was, and how it had (probably unintentionally on the part of the perpetrators) called big attention to slimy behind-the scenes aspects of the case which continue to intrigue a lot of people who might otherwise have just stopped caring once Weiner confessed and resigned. By mentioning your name I meant to show that as someone who had skin in the game because of the way you had been used, you would likely have been one of the very few people still front and center asking questions and seeking answers after most others of us had fallen away and moved on to other things.

    Comment by elissa (fe7129) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:23 am

  564. 560 Stashiu3 – Yesss!

    Comment by Tutu (54ce64) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:25 am

  565. “someone-smarter-than-me-explain-why-this-is-not-possible” – Pat’s title

    most of the comments think this trial balloon doesn’t fly.

    the facts of the call and the facts before and after the call are not consistent with the 6/19 JG caller to Lee being a hoax.

    What’s more likely is that the calls JG reportedly received are a hoax, if she did receive calls, intended to falsely implicate and confuse.

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:28 am

  566. “feeling better” falls far short of espousing or embracing.

    Take a step back, a deep breath, and collect yourself. Jumping is good exercise, jumping to conclusions… not so much. Credibility is a difficult thing to recover when you ignore the first rule of holes.

    On a tangent (to revisit your comments on that other thread I mentioned), did you ever get more information about who DRJ is to this site? If so, feel free to look at her comments again and see if you might reconsider your responses. Or you can continue to blindly stumble from conjecture to conjecture, claim others just don’t get it or would agree if they had your special information, and essentially complete your beclowning. Your choice.

    Comment by Stashiu3 (44da70) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:29 am

  567. Congrats to MAYBEE…Nice shoutout here from PajamasMedia.com

    http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/07/the_community_organizer_who_would_be_king.html#disqus_thread

    Comment by goatsred (b20383) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:29 am

  568. “with each passing second.”

    If you want to pretend that’s not advocating a theory, go ahead.

    Comment by Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:32 am

  569. Comment by elissa — 7/3/2011 @ 7:23 am

    I did not fell dissed in any way whatsoever…I did not understand the context. After reading all of these comments, sometimes my mind just freezes.It then goes into anti-Weinergate mode. Thanks for the explanation and please understand that this group here has never inferred or outright stated one negative thing about me.
    It’s hard for me to follow all thats going on here.

    Comment by goatsred (b20383) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:35 am

  570. Is feeling comfortable with a theory the same as advocating a theory? I don’t think so.

    Comment by Tutu (54ce64) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:37 am

  571. It’s not pretending, it is called reading what is written. You’re still not exercising, despite all the jumping.

    Friendly advice of the day: Give up trying to spar with me and consider what people are saying instead. Hard-headed and hysterical is a bad combination. Besides that, you’ll lose. Trust me, I have special information.

    Comment by Stashiu3 (44da70) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:41 am

  572. Who are you?

    Comment by Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:41 am

  573. And if you have special information, present it or STHU.

    I believe you have special information like I believe John Reid doing a video chat.

    Comment by Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:42 am

  574. Just shows you haven’t gone to the archives as I suggested. Pity.

    Comment by Stashiu3 (44da70) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:43 am

  575. Blah blah. Pity.

    Comment by Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:45 am

  576. 572 Lee – Ditto

    Comment by Tutu (54ce64) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:45 am

  577. Stashiu3 and Tutu, various numbers,all have good words to say here today.

    Pat’s not a liar. Disagreeing with someone or misunderstanding someone doesn’t make someone a liar. It’s time to walk it back and say that there are disagreements on 1) theories, 2) process, 3) some reported facts, but that doesn’t make either of you or most of the commenters here liars. You’re both very valuable and both are more valuable with each other in the discussion, challenging each other, constructively, entertainingly. Walk it back. Sleep on it. Come back another day and reconcile.

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:46 am

  578. Ask a question, Tutu. Waiting…

    Comment by Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:46 am

  579. Where did I say he’s a liar?

    Comment by Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:47 am

  580. Tutu, he was saying the theory had yet to be exposed as wrong. which was his way of goading people to work harder on seriously debunking it. At the time he posted it, a lot of comments were just saying ‘prove it right! Of course it’s wrong!’ instead of seriously looking at it.

    When you’re initially told you’re obviously completely wrong, and over time no one is able to actually show that, of course that’s going to lead to a ‘I’m feeling better’ type statement.

    However, it’s dishonest to claim Patterico isn’t also saying things like

    Lee Stranahan may be completely right about his theory that a woman with the initials “JG” is behind everything that has happened. He really may.

    He’s got an open mind. It’s that simple. That’s all there is to it, and if you take some of his statements of open mindedness and omit others, I can make Patterico look like he’s 100% on board with one side or I can make him look 100% on board with the other side.

    Selective reporting is the very heart of how media mistakes happen. Everyone reporting Patterico’s statements about how he’s not disclaiming one direction should be willing to report the converse statements. If they aren’t, it’s going to get on everyone’s nerves eventually.

    Comment by Dustin (b7410e) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:48 am

  581. btw, my comment isn’t critical of Tutu. Quite the opposite.

    Comment by Dustin (b7410e) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:49 am

  582. Stashiu,
    Finally have some time today to catch up on the post-resignation Weiner stuff here (which am looking forward to being less confused about) but could you just point me to the thread you’re referring to where DRJ and Lee had the conversation you mention above. Thanks much–

    Comment by no one you know (136b86) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:49 am

  583. I’m “feeling better” about the Yanks winning the World Series. I’m also not betting my life on it.

    It doesn’t make anyone who says “Phillies” or “Sox” a liar, no matter the outcome in October.

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:50 am

  584. I spoke to Patterico a few hours ago and he was arguing adamantly for this theory, with no evidence whatsoever. It’s what he believes.

    Does he say that the obvious truth MIGHT be right? Sure.

    And that’s the problem. He believes a wacky theory. He believes it MORE than a simple, provable theory. And when challenged, he bans people.

    Comment by Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:52 am

  585. 581 no one you know

    Is this it?

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:54 am

  586. Geez Lee, I liked it better when it was just Gennette getting pissed at me. I really started out liking all your reporting on this, and still am OK with you, but my question would be simply…when will you give us all the information that you have, so that we can support, or refute your claims?

    Comment by Tutu (54ce64) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:54 am

  587. Quick question, Lee. Have you released all the information regarding weinergate? If not, why?

    Comment by ∅ (e7577d) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:55 am

  588. Ahh… the magic words “STHU”. I don’t think so bub.

    I don’t have anything on Weinergate, if that’s what you’re assuming I meant. On this site however, different story. Special information is sort of a hobby. The only one who can tell me to shut up here and make it stick is Patterico.

    Comment by Stashiu3 (44da70) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:55 am

  589. Lee, did you give Pat evidence that the JG who called you was also the real JG who went to police?

    If so, what evidence? Did you pick the most persuasive concrete evidence?

    (And I’m on your side on this question)

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:56 am

  590. No, I just told you. See — I’ll do it. You’re blowing hot air. STHU. (That means ‘heck’ btw.)

    Comment by Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:57 am

  591. Comment by no one you know — 7/3/2011 @ 7:49 am

    Here is it noyk… glad to help.

    Lee, who got banned for challenging Patterico? Doubt it. Strongly.

    Comment by Stashiu3 (44da70) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:01 am

  592. 581 no one you know

    Is this it?

    Comment by koam @wittier — 7/3/2011 @ 7:54 am

    It sure does look like it, and thanks very much. (PS I really don’t think “Paul” on that thread is the same Paul who used to post here a few yrs ago. Wow.)

    Comment by no one you know (136b86) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:02 am

  593. And when challenged, he bans people.

    Comment by Lee Stranahan — 7/3/2011 @ 7:52 am

    I’ll eat Patterico’s hat if this is true.

    Don’t pretend Patterico is viewpoint discriminatory.

    Comment by Dustin (b7410e) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:03 am

  594. Comment by Stashiu3 — 7/3/2011 @ 8:01 am

    Whoops, we cross posted. Thanks to you too. *goes to read a buncha posts with Diet Coke in hand*

    Comment by no one you know (136b86) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:03 am

  595. I chose to ignore Paul that day. Others didn’t. I say, “don’t feed ‘em.”

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:04 am

  596. No, I just told you. See — I’ll do it. You’re blowing hot air. STHU. (That means ‘heck’ btw.)
    Comment by Lee Stranahan — 7/3/2011 @ 7:57 am

    See? That reading-comprehension problem will get you every time. The key words were “and make it stick“. Try that on for size.

    Comment by Stashiu3 (44da70) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:06 am

  597. When responding to questions or posts, it helps to use the post number and commenter’s name in the first line. That way the readers know which question is being answered or which comment is being replied to or commented on. (as we approach #600)

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:07 am

  598. Stashiu3 – 1
    Lee – 0

    (I’ll keep a running score. We’ll start there or you’d already be down too far to ever make it back.)

    Comment by Stashiu3 (44da70) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:08 am

  599. Of course, you already are and just don’t know it.

    Comment by Stashiu3 (44da70) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:11 am

  600. @ 577 asked my question, Lee…waiting…

    Comment by Tutu (54ce64) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:13 am

  601. (PS I really don’t think “Paul” on that thread is the same Paul who used to post here a few yrs ago. Wow.)
    Comment by no one you know — 7/3/2011 @ 8:02 am

    It’s not. Good call.

    Comment by Stashiu3 (44da70) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:16 am

  602. Tutu,

    What information do you think I’m holding back?

    Answer is — nothing that Patterico isn’t holding back. In fact, I’m holding back a LOT less than Patterico is.

    Comment by Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:17 am

  603. Hmmm… I can still comment. Guess I’ll keep that point. Heh.

    Comment by Stashiu3 (44da70) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:18 am

  604. Answer is — nothing that Patterico isn’t holding back. In fact, I’m holding back a LOT less than Patterico is.
    Comment by Lee Stranahan — 7/3/2011 @ 8:17 am

    Yet Patterico is not making assertions without evidence like you do. Want to bet there’s a connection there?

    Comment by Stashiu3 (44da70) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:19 am

  605. Now, who got banned for challenging Patterico? Or were you just blowing hot air there?

    Comment by Stashiu3 (44da70) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:22 am

  606. I am still waiting for someone to back up the claim Patterico banned people merely for challenging him, Charles Johnson style.

    Do we get to just assert whatever the F we want and then refuse to back it up with evidence?

    Also, why would someone boast they are holding back a ‘lot’ of information? Seems like something to be ashamed of.

    Comment by Dustin (b7410e) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:23 am

  607. Cross posted with Stashiu. But yeah, that’s a serious accusation against a blogger.

    Comment by Dustin (b7410e) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:23 am

  608. Your claims are much more assertive, Lee. In any case, if anyone is holding back info, don’t expect that I shall believe your claims, because you say I should. And, seriously, you are holding back a lot less…does not make you a lot better.

    Comment by Tutu (54ce64) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:27 am

  609. No worries Dustin. Lee succeeded in (slightly) annoying me and destroyed most of his credibility with me in the process. If he wants to dance, set the music.

    “I’m your Huckleberry”

    Comment by Stashiu3 (44da70) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:28 am

  610. He’s no daisy, Stashiu3.

    Good to see your posts, even if the reasons are due to irritation.

    Comment by Simon Jester (e07fe9) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:34 am

  611. Patterico is the one holding back a lot of info — not me.

    Comment by Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:34 am

  612. Comment by Simon Jester — 7/3/2011 @ 8:34 am

    I still read every comment on every thread and occasionally work behind the scenes when things are hectic. Got a lot of other things going on IRL right now though, so following through with conversations is usually spurred by passion. Unfortunately, annoyance is a passion. ;)

    Comment by Stashiu3 (44da70) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:38 am

  613. the facts of the call and the facts before and after the call are not consistent with the 6/19 JG caller to Lee being a hoax.

    Sorry, I’m totally missing this one. What’s inconsistent in facts with the call being a hoax ? The fact that the caller got some of the information wrong (such as claiming a CA address seems supportive of it being a hoax). So does blocking the number.

    JP – who talked to the same person- seemed to think the caller was, if not a hoax exactly, at least of questionable veracity. (Yeah, she thinks that about everyone, but still).

    The only information I’ve seen that supports the JG caller being the same as police-report-JG (who we assume is real) is the alleged mention of the professor in both cases. But I don’t think that indicates they are the same person at all. The only reason she would mention the professor to the police is if he was part of the story connecting LS and her. (I.e. someone claiming to be her called LS who called her professor).

    Comment by Johnathan Creek (1bb7dc) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:39 am

  614. In fact, I’m holding back a LOT less than Patterico is.

    Comment by Lee Stranahan

    Yeah, I stand corrected, Lee. I apologize.

    /see how easy that was for me?

    And I think Patterico should explain what he is holding back, or at least tell us if it’s ‘a lot’ as you say and some generalized explanation for why it’s being held.

    Same for you. Whatever you’re holding back should be revealed at some point. Whatever you know or don’t know should come out.

    If we throw it all out there my guess is we’ll be forced to admit we don’t know the answers for sure right now. Maybe we never will.

    Anyway, I’m not comfortable with everyone but Patterico vaguely painting a picture of what P knows. For all I know, it’s just enough to punch a whole in our preconceptions.

    Comment by Dustin (b7410e) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:39 am

  615. 99 bottles of weinergate on the wall, 99 bottles of weinergate. You take one down, pass it around, 100 bottles of weinergate on the wall.

    Comment by oneisnotprime (c491ed) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:40 am

  616. I meant “HOLE” ARGH

    Comment by Dustin (b7410e) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:40 am

  617. Patterico is the one holding back a lot of info — not me.
    Comment by Lee Stranahan — 7/3/2011 @ 8:34 am

    He’s also not making assertions based on that info. Take a lesson young man. Learn how it’s done from someone smarter and wiser.

    Comment by Stashiu3 (44da70) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:40 am

  618. Is the goal to garner 1,000 comments, or do the comments have to be pertinent to the subject?

    Comment by Alan Kellogg (43c76b) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:42 am

  619. “And when challenged, he bans people.”

    This seems particularly strange as it is made in the comments of the site that is said to have banned him? Perhaps I have a different meaning for the word.

    Lee,
    I don’t really care about these theories but when you question Patterico’s integrity you lose all benefit of a doubt with me. He has earned an enviable reputation on that score over years of exposure on this site. Stashiu3 and DRJ are two of the most respected contributors on this site and again have earned that respect over years both here and on other sites, so you just kind of double down on fail with that.

    You don’t know me so this means nothing to you but I have known Stashiu3 for years online and in real life and while we don’t always agree, his honor and honesty are well established and he has earned and deserves the high esteem in which he is held. Good luck telling him to shut up.

    Comment by Machinist (b6f7da) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:42 am

  620. Dustin,

    Have you learned nothing from Breitbart my friend? Hold your cards close to your chest and never interrupt someone making a mistake. Be patient or you’ll tip the mark.

    Comment by Stashiu3 (44da70) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:42 am

  621. Is the goal to garner 1,000 comments, or do the comments have to be pertinent to the subject?
    Comment by Alan Kellogg — 7/3/2011 @ 8:42 am

    Yes. ;)

    Mac!!

    Comment by Stashiu3 (44da70) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:44 am

  622. Stashiu3, you are one of the good guys, as I know from experience.

    Lee, you should keep that in mind. Stashiu3 is honest, and has (for the several years I have followed his posts here) always stood up for what is right.

    He’s like Patterico that way.

    Comment by Simon Jester (e07fe9) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:44 am

  623. What Machinist wrote.

    Comment by Simon Jester (e07fe9) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:46 am

  624. Have you learned nothing from Breitbart my friend? Hold your cards close to your chest and never interrupt someone making a mistake. Be patient or you’ll tip the mark.

    Comment by Stashiu3 — 7/3/2011 @ 8:42 am

    I wish I had the ability to play things out like that. If P is playing that kind of card game, I guess he’ll have to withstand my impatience until things reveal themselves.

    But it’s been ongoing for a while. And while I realize most didn’t take it seriously, I felt a lot of people were suspicious of me for really quite unfair reasons, so I have an additional interest in the truth being completely exposed at some point.

    At any rate, thanks for the hint as to what’s going on. And it’s great to see you comment once in a while. Hopefully DRJ will return when the dust settles too.

    Comment by Dustin (b7410e) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:47 am

  625. Good to see you my friend.

    Comment by Machinist (b6f7da) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:47 am

  626. I’m out.

    Not my site and I’m outnumbered.

    I’ll answer questions on Twitter or my site or the radio show or wherever. I’ve answered more questions than anyone on what they believe and I’ve answered them honestly.

    Comment by Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:48 am

  627. goatsred @566 – Thanks for the link. Clarice and MayBee are both great. The movie of that Kipling story, with Sean Connery and Michael Caine, was great, IMHO.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:48 am

  628. He’s like Patterico that way.
    Comment by Simon Jester — 7/3/2011 @ 8:44 am

    Nobody puts Baby in a corner!

    (I’m in old-movie mode I guess.)

    By the way, more than one person has said that Patterico and I sound almost exactly alike too. First time I talked to him on the phone was weird. Then I heard him on an online radio show and it was even worse. He sounds better though somehow.

    Comment by Stashiu3 (44da70) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:50 am

  629. I’m out.

    Not my site and I’m outnumbered.

    I’ll answer questions on Twitter or my site or the radio show or wherever. I’ve answered more questions than anyone on what they believe and I’ve answered them honestly.

    Comment by Lee Stranahan

    It’s like rain on your wedding day.

    Comment by Dustin (b7410e) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:51 am

  630. Comment by Lee Stranahan — 7/3/2011 @ 8:48 am

    Notice no mention of who got banned. Shall I take a point? I shall!

    Stashiu3 – 2
    Lee – 0

    Comment by Stashiu3 (44da70) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:52 am

  631. Stashiu3 and Machinist – Good to see you.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:53 am

  632. Answer is — nothing that Patterico isn’t holding back. In fact, I’m holding back a LOT less than Patterico is.
    Comment by Lee Stranahan — 7/3/2011 @ 8:17 am

    Alright, now that you’ve admitted to holding back information, can you tell us why?

    Comment by ∅ (e7577d) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:53 am

  633. “…I’m outnumbered.”

    What’s that saying about sitting down when everyone tells you you’re drunk?

    Comment by Machinist (b6f7da) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:55 am

  634. I haven’t followed this whole thing as closely as many others on here have, but I was always suspect of Lee’s suddenly believing the left was wrong about anything, even before the Weiner escapade. Hasn’t he proven the liberals is always right and will never accept another opinion? I didn’t listen to any of the radio shows, but my question about the cat yowling: was it for real or part of the act to make it sound like he was actually at home?

    Sorry, I’m too fearful of liberal wolves suddenly in conservative sheep’s clothes.

    Not much of a comment but hope it helps your goal.

    Comment by PatAZ (efd43b) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:55 am

  635. Mentions of “giving someone enough rope to hang themselves” understandably makes me a bit nervous, but no one can dispute it’s appropriateness in this context. Just sayin’

    Comment by ropelight (8ea8ac) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:55 am

  636. Stashiu3, and I’ve missed you too my friend.

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:55 am

  637. Lee,

    Your problems don’t have anything to do with the site you’re on bub. At least you finally admit it’s what you “believe”, not what you “know”. That’s progress. Look back and you’ll see that nearly every challenge you received was based on you making assertions of fact without evidence. Asking you for evidence is not calling you a liar. We’re a “trust, but verify” crowd here.

    I gave you the benefit of the doubt for a long time, even though you were getting snippy about being challenged. I believe you’re honest. Now, I also believe you’re stupid. Don’t let the door…

    Comment by Stashiu3 (44da70) — 7/3/2011 @ 9:00 am

  638. Thanks guys… as I said, I’ve been around. I just get caught up in chunks rather than following in real time now. Too tiring otherwise. Good to see y’all too. :)

    Comment by Stashiu3 (44da70) — 7/3/2011 @ 9:04 am

  639. Heh, he said chunks.

    Comment by Machinist (b6f7da) — 7/3/2011 @ 9:06 am

  640. That was a pre-submit edit. Not sure you want to hear the word I first used. Heh.

    Comment by Stashiu3 (44da70) — 7/3/2011 @ 9:07 am

  641. Sparing my tender sensibilities. What a gentleman!

    Comment by Machinist (b6f7da) — 7/3/2011 @ 9:10 am

  642. Tried to post something and it wouldn’t “take.”. Hmmm

    Comment by Simon Jester (e07fe9) — 7/3/2011 @ 9:13 am

  643. Seriously though, I hinted and then flat-out told the man he should check himself. No insight whatsoever. Believes what he believes, no matter what. I don’t expect him to have a prosecutor’s mindset, but how many times can you tell a person their logic is faulty before you have to conclude they’re just too stupid to understand? What’s really sad is that the left will never accept him back, and the right will if he can just keep his facts separate from his opinions. So far, I haven’t seen anything to indicate he can do that.

    Comment by Stashiu3 (44da70) — 7/3/2011 @ 9:13 am

  644. Patterico is very lenient with commenters, so accusing him of banning for an opinion is just crazy.

    Stashiu3: love your smackdowns. You say so much in so few words.

    Comment by PatAZ (efd43b) — 7/3/2011 @ 9:13 am

  645. I think I understand the pressures that Lee is under and so I’m a bit sympathetic.

    But its a shame that he decided to be antagonistic to Patterico.

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 7/3/2011 @ 9:19 am

  646. Comment by PatAZ — 7/3/2011 @ 9:13 am

    Now I’m blushing… no really, redness in the face. Fact, not opinion. Looked in the mirror, took a picture, showed it around to several folks to see if they agreed it looked like a blush, verified the definition of blushing in the dictionary, then compared photos tagged as blushing on google to ensure consistency.

    Well, maybe it is just opinion since I didn’t really do all that. (What were you saying about “so few words”? lol)

    Comment by Stashiu3 (44da70) — 7/3/2011 @ 9:22 am

  647. I went to bed confused. I am waking up discombobulated (I like that word). I haven’t yet listened to Lee’s shows, so I don’t know what he said.

    Summary version, please? Or shall I read all the comments?

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/3/2011 @ 9:22 am

  648. Wow, I go to the store, and when I get back, Lee has taken his ball and gone home.

    Comment by Tutu (54ce64) — 7/3/2011 @ 9:22 am

  649. Stashiu3, I don’t know you, but I love you, man.

    Comment by Tutu (54ce64) — 7/3/2011 @ 9:25 am

  650. Patterico, is it true that you got the information for your story on “Ethel” from John Reid?

    Secondly, if this is true, shouldn’t you have disclosed this?

    Thirdly, again, if true, doesn’t that mean when you said that you were not being used by John Reid to disseminate information, that you were not being truthful?

    Comment by Woodshedder (44e97d) — 7/3/2011 @ 9:26 am

  651. Comment by Stashiu3 — 7/3/2011 @ 9:22 am

    Just for verification: it’s not blushing till at least one side of your neck turns red. /evidentiary

    PatAZ’s comment reminded me of the smackings you used to give Emperor/love2008. Wonder what happened to him/her that he lost interest (still not convinced Emperor wasn’t female).

    Comment by no one you know (136b86) — 7/3/2011 @ 9:26 am

  652. But its a shame that he decided to be antagonistic to Patterico.
    Comment by SPQR — 7/3/2011 @ 9:19 am

    I think it stopped being a shame when he shared behind-the-scenes information that Patterico was not sharing publicly. Correction: the shame just changed location.

    Comment by Stashiu3 (44da70) — 7/3/2011 @ 9:27 am

  653. Stashiu3, I was trying to be understanding but that is a major judgment fail.

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 7/3/2011 @ 9:29 am

  654. Lovey was/is female. Along with her socks from Nigeria and elsewhere.

    Comment by Stashiu3 (44da70) — 7/3/2011 @ 9:30 am

  655. Comment by Dianna — 7/3/2011 @ 9:22 am

    Discombobulated is a fantastic word. Practically an onomatopoeia since even sounds disorganized. ;)

    Have been busy w/ IRL stuff lately so after Weiner resigned I didn’t follow much of any of it. But I’ve liked Lee’s stuff and was surprised today to see that his account has been disabled. So am going to review the post-resig posts, and probably some comment threads too, to see what’s going on w/ the calls and death threats (!) etc. It’ll probably make sense after that but it sure doesn’t now.

    Comment by no one you know (136b86) — 7/3/2011 @ 9:31 am

  656. I know SPQR, but Lee has torpedoed all credibility with me. You’re kinder than I am in this.

    Comment by Stashiu3 (44da70) — 7/3/2011 @ 9:33 am

  657. “Thirdly, again, if true, doesn’t that mean when you said that you were not being used by John Reid to disseminate information, that you were not being truthful?”

    Woodshedder – Lee took a phone call from lying liar Jenny George in MA. Is he being used by her? Just askin’.

    Who are you?

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/3/2011 @ 9:38 am

  658. Real-life beckons… be well.

    Comment by Stashiu3 (44da70) — 7/3/2011 @ 9:39 am

  659. I’m just here to help us get to 1000.

    Go Patterico!

    Comment by Pious Agnostic (6048a8) — 7/3/2011 @ 9:41 am

  660. “Lovey was/is female. Along with her socks from Nigeria and elsewhere.”

    Stashiu3 – That was always my take.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/3/2011 @ 9:41 am

  661. 1st!

    Comment by Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c) — 7/3/2011 @ 9:45 am

  662. Patterico, is it true that you got the information for your story on “Ethel” from John Reid?

    Sounds like a very particular bit of info. And I know what it’s like when someone gets a very very specific bit of info that has been ripped from context, so I’m very suspicious how you heard this.

    Did Patterico verify the Ethel bit? I mean… you know, how Fox News and the police confirmed some contact between them, and there was online records of it? If John Reid fed Patterico a host of information, and Patterico reported the aspects he was able to verify as verified, and the aspects he couldn’t verify as unverified, what’s the problem, anyway?

    Comment by Dustin (b7410e) — 7/3/2011 @ 9:45 am

  663. #653

    It’ll probably make sense after that but it sure doesn’t now.

    Comment by no one you know — 7/3/2011 @ 9:31 am

    So far, this post-Weiner story has made very little sense.

    I was fond of one theory – that the manipulator of sock puppets had been involved in the threats, and a by-stander (JG in MA) had gotten involved by accident – but since the police seem (according to last night’s information?) to have dropped the investigation, I may be wrong.

    I ran across comments between Daleyrocks and someone else (sorry for not remembering!) somewhere back in the 500′s in which Daley laid out a theory I thought was pretty convincing, but the other party pointed out its main problem – “the ‘Breitbart sting’ tail wagging the ‘Weiner obsession’ dog.” (That really is a quote).

    The thing everyone would like to know is Who is Who?

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/3/2011 @ 9:48 am

  664. holy hellacious
    posts batman colonel leave for
    day all hell break loose

    Comment by ColonelHaiku (822dce) — 7/3/2011 @ 9:48 am

  665. Dianna – I don’t view it as a problem with the theory. Think it through again ignoring the post dic pic distractions which derailed it.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/3/2011 @ 9:52 am

  666. who are you, who who, who who, I really want to know!

    Comment by Tutu (54ce64) — 7/3/2011 @ 9:53 am

  667. Dianna – It’s par for the course with progressives inserting plants at tea party rallies, which I have witnessed first hand, fake videos from Think Progress, and other vile disinformation campaigns.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/3/2011 @ 9:55 am

  668. I am Spartacus!

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/3/2011 @ 9:56 am

  669. #663 – Daleyrocks

    I like your theory. It’s been my working assumption from the start.

    However, the behaviors displayed by the ‘starchild111′ and ‘Nikki Reid’ accounts in the six weeks to two months before the infamous tweeted dicpic don’t quite fit.

    And who – unless we’re going to posit some disturbed person with absolutely no connection to any of our real people, sock puppets, investigators or anyone at all – is issuing threats?

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/3/2011 @ 9:58 am

  670. #664 – Tutu – LOL! Right! Rock on!

    #665 – Daleyrocks – I know. Which is why I said that your theory matches my working assumptions.

    Maybe it’s all gotten bogged down in the undergrowth of misdirection and sock puppetry.

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/3/2011 @ 10:00 am

  671. Here is yet another comment on the way to 1000. It is sad when we can’t get along and agree to disagree without being disagreeable. I did not read all the comments, but sometimes it feels like we’re going down a rabbit hole after the rabbit has been eaten by a stoat.

    Comment by Jeff Mitchell (481f2a) — 7/3/2011 @ 10:02 am

  672. @ 506 Nathan Wagner

    My apologies for the late reply. My point is that I don’t believe Weiner was used as a set up for Breitbart, but rather starchild wanted to get close to Weiner. But once everything hit the fan, starchild used that opportunity to protect Weiner and throw Breitbart away. Perhaps starchild was set up as a high school girl because of the success of Ethel. That still makes point 2 and 3 valid, I think. But is anyone sure at this point? I’m not, unfortunately…

    On Patterico and Lee

    I was surprised when I’ve seen the posts from Lee the past few days. They were disrespectfully critical of Patterico and I assumed (my fault on making assumptions) that the two had agreed to disagree. But, Lee crossed the line when speaking for Pat. Pat has been very clear from the beginning that he is neutral on a lot of this until more facts come out which is a position that a lot of commenters here have also taken. I think most of us agree that we have theories, but until the facts come out we don’t know for certainty. As for Pat giving JR his time here, I thought Pat was being fair and allowing JR to give his side (but not endorsing him or discrediting him). We allowed GC to give her case, but vetted her when flaws appeared. JR was also vetted and rightfully so. Pat and the commenters here deserve kudos for still investigating this when others have abandoned it.

    Comment by rogerthat (f5aad4) — 7/3/2011 @ 10:06 am

  673. NO JUSTICE, NO PEACE!!!!!!!!

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/3/2011 @ 10:25 am

  674. For the love of God and all that is holy, give it a rest.

    Country goin down the tubes- discuss

    Comment by Jones (0a69fd) — 7/3/2011 @ 10:27 am

  675. It’s like rain on your wedding day.

    “It’s the good advice that you just didn’t take”.

    (Ironically, just helping to get to 1,000)..

    Comment by piglet (1bb7dc) — 7/3/2011 @ 10:32 am

  676. Patterico, I don’t think you know the definition of “uncritical”. Hint: it does not mean “supportive”.

    Comment by Molon Labe (dc676c) — 7/3/2011 @ 10:42 am

  677. (Prefaced before I put this out there – I have only read this thread up to comment 600 or so, so if there is evidence that contradicts this I have not seen it.)

    In response to some comments about the “@Weinergate: The Death Threat Black Hole” post I went back and read that post and its comments in one sitting (for the first time.)
    Some brief thoughts on that thread and its dynamic.

    Did any one else find interesting the fact that Paul and one other major contibutor to the conversation never posted at the same time period?

    That this other contributor made an unnecassary and odd reference when rejoining the conversation after Paul had been extremely active?

    That Paul unflinchingly supported this contributors every comment and theory?

    That this contributor referenced Paul several times but never directed a comment to him?

    That Paul effusivly praised the contibutor and his theories but never addressed a comment to him directly?

    That Paul shared several times this contributors typing gaffes: leaving out words, leaving extranous words in after editing statements, etc.?

    That Paul and this contibutor seem to have shared (sometimes irrationally) feelings and opinions toward and about other commentors?

    That Paul attacked commentors who questioned this contributor as though he himself had been attacked, and this contributor attacked those who questioned Paul (even going after a blog stalwart (who admittadly had not been around lately))when that person questioned Paul?

    I am now more than a half hour late leaving for work so I will have to let that be that.

    I bring up these questions with no feeling of vindication as I have supported this contributor and his unique work in the past.

    (Sorry for typos- I have less than no time to go back and proofread.)

    Comment by Have Blue (dbbcd4) — 7/3/2011 @ 10:45 am

  678. The fact is, some people just don’t get it and just don’t have it. It = integrity.

    Comment by Anitabusch (a025dd) — 7/3/2011 @ 10:49 am

  679. It’s been always clear to me that Patrick is using a Socratic method in his posts. He’s trying to draw the participants out and assemble the stories so he can compare them. When he asks why a certain scenario can’t be true, he’s acting in that fashion. He wants to hear all the arguments.

    Patrick did this a while back with global warming climate change climate instability, although I missed what he thought of those arguments.

    Comment by Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (62e76d) — 7/3/2011 @ 10:53 am

  680. I think that both Lee and Patterico have made good points as this story unfolds.

    It was my understanding that John Reid proivde the context on the tumbler post. However there was a screen cap of “Ethel’s” tumbler page posted by goatsred on yfrog quite some time ago.

    Patterico also did not just post the informtion / lead from JR but was able to verify the information from at least one additional source or sources.

    Lee has also focused on the motives of the various sockpuppets and players in this very odd story of how Twitter has become relevant!

    Joe

    Comment by Joe Smith (54c0c1) — 7/3/2011 @ 10:56 am

  681. Have blue – Oh, There are commenter socks all over the place. I suppose it is part of the entertainment value of this to spot them, a kind of Where’s Waldo, although more conspicuous than Waldo.

    Comment by SarahW (af7312) — 7/3/2011 @ 10:57 am

  682. SarahW – Commentor socks are one thing (especially if they are inended only to be funny or insulting), this is a whole ‘nother animal entirely!

    Comment by Have Blue (dbbcd4) — 7/3/2011 @ 11:01 am

  683. SarahW, Shari Lewis would be so proud of this thread.

    Comment by Tutu (54ce64) — 7/3/2011 @ 11:06 am

  684. UPDATE x2: My decision has been vindicated by Lee’s latest post at his site, in which he displays in spades his recent tendency to a) disclose private conversations that he should know good and damned well I would not want him to discuss, and b) get what I said in those discussions wrong.

    Again: Lee seems to be unable to distinguish between a theory and a fact. He is also apparently unable to distinguish between someone advancing a theory and claiming a fact as true. This leads him to put words in my mouth that I didn’t say, or to misunderstand what I have said. Asking someone to consider evidence, and to consider how that evidence might support a possible theory, is not the same as declaring that possible theory is true.

    Lee is again portraying me as gullibly accepting the views of people whose views (I assure you) I am not gullibly accepting. Neither am I publicly denouncing those people. I am taking in information. Lee used to understand that.

    Incidentally, I have not “banned” him but simply disabled his account to “no role on this blog.” He still has the ability to comment, although if he comes on here and misrepresents the nature of our private communications, or even discusses them, that may change. There is simply too much at stake to dick around.

    I do not want to be in a fight with Lee, but I strongly encourage him to stop spilling the private details of every conversation he has with people onto the Internet. There is a reason I feel I cannot talk to him any more, and why I consider it a huge mistake that I even tried last night.

    You may comment on this post here.

    Comment by Patterico (f724ca) — 7/3/2011 @ 11:07 am

  685. Tutu – I thought ShariLewis was having a Temper Tantrum?

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/3/2011 @ 11:16 am

  686. Patterico: I feel that there is a subtext here that most of us don’t “get” (I know: duh!). I can’t wait for the real story to emerge from all of this. As for Mr. Stranahan, the situation reminds of the story I tried to post this morning…which the site wouldn’t “take.” It was in reference to Stashiu3′s attempts to get Mr. Stranahan to not act reactively.

    My father spent many years working in the oilfields of Southern California among Texans, who had a wide variety of pungent and evocative aphorisms. My father picked them up, and often used them. For a good taste, check out the long out of print “Texas Crude.” Not all of the sayings are family friendly, as you might imagine.

    Anyway, I used to play poker with my father fairly often. I would try to bluff him, and he would grin, move his ever-present toothpick from one side of his mouth to the other, and drawl “Son, you don’t want to let your mouth write a check you ain’t prepared to cash.”

    Patterico understands this. I have this feeling that Mr. Stranahan doesn’t “get” that what he is doing now works against what he would like to achieve.

    But that’s his business, not mine.

    Patterico, hang in there. It sucks to trust someone and find out that you shouldn’t.

    Comment by Simon Jester (2df2ee) — 7/3/2011 @ 11:18 am

  687. The most mysterious thing to me is why Patrick wants this thread to reach 1,000 comments. He normally goes for quality, not mere quantity. Regardless, I’m happy to help out.

    Comment by Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (62e76d) — 7/3/2011 @ 11:21 am

  688. I can’t help it. When Lee first started posting on PP, I kept getting somewhat of a queasy feeling. It was strangely similar to reading posts on Huffpo. That, and his inability to string several sentences together in a post without spelling or grammar problems, even though he supposedly was a “professional” journalist.

    I have mostly been a daily lurker here for many years. Lee just did not appear to have the sufficient ethical capacity for this site.

    Comment by Leonardo DaFinchi (29a763) — 7/3/2011 @ 11:23 am

  689. Poor story, killed by the death of a thousand hits.

    Comment by Cmate (525edc) — 7/3/2011 @ 11:27 am

  690. I spoke to Patterico a few hours ago and he was arguing adamantly for this theory, with no evidence whatsoever. It’s what he believes.

    See? There you go.

    How many problems are there with this?

    Arguing for a theory does not mean I believe it. Refusing to listen to a person’s evidence does not mean the person has “no evidence whatsoever.” Talking about private conversations without permission is never great; doing so and getting them wrong is worse; doing so and getting them wrong in an environment when threats have been made and law enforcement is involved is reckless.

    I can’t talk to Lee Stranahan again until all this is sorted out. Until then, as I have said, if he makes a claim that I said something, do not assume his claim to be true.

    Comment by Patterico (f724ca) — 7/3/2011 @ 11:28 am

  691. The most mysterious thing to me is why Patrick wants this thread to reach 1,000 comments. He normally goes for quality, not mere quantity. Regardless, I’m happy to help out.

    The answer is simple: we’re getting closer!

    I’ll take the quality too.

    Comment by Patterico (f724ca) — 7/3/2011 @ 11:30 am

  692. Mrs. P. says I haven’t explained it well enough.

    If it reaches 1000 comments, I can say: hey, look at that! A thread with 1000 comments!

    Comment by Patterico (f724ca) — 7/3/2011 @ 11:31 am

  693. I suspect perhaps the drive to be the first to solve the great mystery and have the feather in his cap might be a strong motivating factor.

    Unfortunately, this can cause writers/reporters to become sloppy, and play fast and loose with necessary rules for maintaining integrity.

    Eventually if the need to have the recognition become so great, small compromises make themselves known. And worse.

    Comment by Dana (4eca6e) — 7/3/2011 @ 11:33 am

  694. And some Scooby Snacks. Lots of Scooby Snacks.

    Comment by Scooby-Doo (b29599) — 7/3/2011 @ 11:38 am

  695. One thing I don’t want to have happen is for this to turn into the “pile on Lee” thread. I still want to like him and I don’t want to burn bridges.

    Comment by Patterico (f724ca) — 7/3/2011 @ 11:39 am

  696. #687 Patterico –

    OK.

    BTW, I get a feeling that Lee is sleep deprived (or, more accurately, looking at times of posts and so on, I’m not sure when he’s sleeping). No one thinks clearly in that condition.

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/3/2011 @ 11:42 am

  697. Have I missed a step? I was skimming the comments since I signed off yesterday evening, and I didn’t see anything explaining “Dan Wolfe” (and I will not type “Worf” any more).

    Has that discussion point been set aside as not productive?

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/3/2011 @ 11:44 am

  698. Someone smarter than me, please explain why this is not possible:

    Patrick and Lee’s rift is actually a carefully planned maneuver to expose the true conspiracy.

    *Lee, breaking off with Patrick, will be able to infiltrate circles closed off to our esteemed host.

    *Lee will secretly relay information to Patrick, and they will co-author a damning post exposing the machinations.

    *The post will be published here, on Lee’s site, and on Breitbart’s site, because this has been a Breitbart investigation from the beginning.

    STUNNERS: Preston will be revealed as starchild111; Pinch Sulzberger as Betty, and Veronica as Eric Boehlert.

    The aim of the conspiracy was to entice as many conservative politicians as possible into compromising relationships with transvestite, transsexual Transylvanians. They also tried to get the Koch Bros. with a superspy clone of Ayn Rand.

    Instead, a lot of lefty politicians took the bait. (The expose will name names). Soros is mad and won’t write any more checks for these stings by Media Matters.

    Comment by Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (62e76d) — 7/3/2011 @ 11:45 am

  699. Since I have family in the Los Angeles attorney world, albeit not in the criminal side of the business, and used to live there, I have been following Patterico’s blog quietly for some time now. Always interesting; often controversial. Thanks for taking the trouble to maintain it!

    Comment by No Mutant Enemy (6e23c7) — 7/3/2011 @ 11:46 am

  700. Patterico @#693,

    I was not attempting to pile on Lee w/#691, but rather was making a larger observation about basic human nature, its weaknesses, and certain temptation. All of us are susceptible, all of us stumble, and all of us have to figure out how to get back up when those times happen. My best wishes for Lee.

    Comment by Dana (4eca6e) — 7/3/2011 @ 11:47 am

  701. I’ve been a regular reader and sporadic commenter for many years. I was pleased to see Lee begin posting here, as I think he brings a useful and interesting perspective.

    I’ve followed the Weiner story since it broke, and have read most of the posts and comments. It’s mind blowing and interesting and puzzling and fun.

    Every time I think I might have something to offer, I realize that someone else has made the point better than I could, and I refrain.

    And in this current contretemps between Lee and Pat, well, neither needs me to jump in and be a white knight. Pat has his reasons and he’s the boss around here. So, there’s really no reason for me to comment on that either.

    Then I think, how does this attitude get us to 1000 comments on this thread? It doesn’t.

    Comment by Pious Agnostic (6048a8) — 7/3/2011 @ 11:47 am

  702. I have no quality to add, so I’ll just add quantity. I read daily, but comment (very) rarely.

    Comment by Darin H (07889f) — 7/3/2011 @ 11:48 am

  703. Patterico, is it true that you got the information for your story on “Ethel” from John Reid?

    Secondly, if this is true, shouldn’t you have disclosed this?

    Thirdly, again, if true, doesn’t that mean when you said that you were not being used by John Reid to disseminate information, that you were not being truthful?

    1. I am not going to say where I got anything from anyone. Where did you get the idea that your assertion #1 was true?

    2. The information I published about Ethel was based on publicly available information.

    3. Clearly JohnReid9 has used this site to disseminate information. Have I ever claimed otherwise? He/she/they sent me a bunch of information; I stated about 1000 times that I don’t vouch for it but it’s news whether it’s genuine or coming from a sock puppet; and then I published it. What I deny is that I ever vouched for anything he said.

    Comment by Patterico (f724ca) — 7/3/2011 @ 11:48 am

  704. And just where is GennetteC of late? She being the one out of all of us who most wants to find out who is behind the socks. Curious time to disappear, hmmm?

    Comment by Tutu (54ce64) — 7/3/2011 @ 11:50 am

  705. A cold slice of watermelon has long been a Fourth of July holiday staple. But according to recent studies, the juicy fruit may be better suited for Valentine’s Day. That’s because scientists say watermelon has ingredients that deliver Viagra-like effects to the body’s blood vessels and may even increase libido.*

    science yay

    Comment by happyfeet (3c92a1) — 7/3/2011 @ 11:51 am

  706. A cold slice of watermelon has long been a Fourth of July holiday staple. But according to recent studies, the juicy fruit may be better suited for Valentine’s Day. That’s because scientists say watermelon has ingredients that deliver little blue pill-like effects to the body’s blood vessels and may even increase libido.*

    science yay

    Comment by happyfeet (3c92a1) — 7/3/2011 @ 11:51 am

  707. I vouch that Patterico never vouched for anything that Lee Stranahan vouches is false. 299 to go!

    Comment by starboardhelm (e93080) — 7/3/2011 @ 11:52 am

  708. “I spoke to Patterico a few hours ago and he was arguing adamantly for this theory, with no evidence whatsoever. It’s what he believes.”

    I am patiently awaiting the evidence on the spurned lover/sexter theory, which I am reliably informed is not at all bizarre, but in the interim, I do like the Boston song “More Than A Feeling.”

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/3/2011 @ 11:56 am

  709. Hopefully, GenetteC is off doing something nice and completely non-Weinergate related for her Fourth of July weekend.

    Or better yet, studying.

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/3/2011 @ 11:56 am

  710. “Ethel” was publically exposed, re Weiner, on May 30, I believe. She wasn’t ID’d as “Ethel” at that time, that “nom” came later, but ….. A quick look at her facebook, given other info that came to light, …..

    Comment by MDr (fd1f4b) — 7/3/2011 @ 11:56 am

  711. If eating a slice of watermelon causes an erection lasting more than four hours…

    Comment by Tutu (54ce64) — 7/3/2011 @ 11:57 am

  712. Eating too much watermelon has a laxative effect as well. For what that’s worth.

    Comment by Simon Jester (0f751a) — 7/3/2011 @ 11:58 am

  713. And in this current contretemps between Lee and Pat

    I don’t want it to be a “contretemps.” I really don’t.

    Comment by Patterico (f724ca) — 7/3/2011 @ 11:58 am

  714. I am patiently awaiting the evidence on the spurned lover/sexter theory, which I am reliably informed is not at all bizarre, but in the interim, I do like the Boston song “More Than A Feeling.”

    Comment by daleyrocks

    Indeed – it’s got at least some plausibility, but I’m not seeing solid evidence, either.

    Aside from the particularly horrible Steely Dan video, I’ve liked most of the Weinergate music. I don’t believe I’d heard “Christine” since I stopped listening to alternative radio back in the 90′s some time.

    One more comment to the 1,000 total!

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/3/2011 @ 11:59 am

  715. Er, “towards” the 1,000 total.

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/3/2011 @ 11:59 am

  716. I’m hoping for that double-punk fake fight theory.

    That would be too much fun, a surprise pony, champagne spray and confetti everywhere at the denouement.

    When everything is all over, pretend that’s what happened, I insist. I will be your willing dupe. We can invite Tommy to report on it.

    Comment by SarahW (af7312) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:00 pm

  717. Stranahan’s cat favors dance music I see.

    Comment by SarahW (af7312) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:03 pm

  718. Mr. Feets – How about eating some Official Fish of Patterico’s Pontifications, the tasty sammin which comes in number of different varieties pleasing to the palate, in honor of our humble nation’s founding tomorrow?

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:03 pm

  719. “Sooner or later, whether consciously or subconsciously, a man will always bare his true character.”

    Comment by Anitabusch (a025dd) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:03 pm

  720. I spent many a day here a while back. Never once have I even thought that Pat was inclined to be unfair or that he would ban someone for presenting an opposing viewpoint.

    He is among the best and the brightest on the blogosphere.

    This other character I don’t know much about. I find Pat trustworthy and a very solid critical thinker.

    This other character, I don’t know much about.

    Pat has a proven track record on a number of issues, a very stable hand on the rudder of his opinions, does not leap to conclusions and usually carefully crafts his point of view.

    This other character, I don’t know much about.

    Pat has shown he has enormous character. Therefore, I stand behind him completely from a guy with an amount of character…I don’t need to know much more.

    Comment by cfbleachers (fb9900) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:04 pm

  721. Is this why we came down from the trees?

    Comment by Machinist (b6f7da) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:06 pm

  722. Patterico, I don’t think you know the definition of “uncritical”. Hint: it does not mean “supportive”.

    He criticized me for allowing JohnReid9 INTO COMMENTS without calling him a liar.

    That would be like if I allowed a leftist on here to praise Obama, and someone said I had provided an “uncritical” platform for someone to support Obama without challenging them whatsoever.

    I have no duty to challenge commenters, including those who are at the center of a story, and whose words are of great interest to many people. If I wish to invite them on, and let the COMMENTERS be critical, I have every right to do that without having someone imply I am agreeing with that person.

    I never vouched for JohnReid9, but in giving Lee a platform here, I could be seen as vouching for him generally. When I saw him misrepresenting my position, I decided I could no longer give him that position, where someone could claim I was vouching in some sense for what he was saying — including about me.

    Comment by Patterico (f724ca) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:06 pm

  723. Stranahan’s cat favors dance music I see.

    Comment by SarahW — 7/3/2011

    Does that mean we’ll get “All that she Wants (is another baby)”? I hope so! It’s got a great beat.

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:06 pm

  724. Mr. Feets – You could whip yourself up a nice, cold, healthy, sammin shake, uses the whole fish, no wasted parts. I saw Mr. Dan Ackroyd demonstrate this wif a bass in the 1970s. Looked delicious.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:07 pm

  725. Keep fighting the good fight, Patrick.

    Comment by Anitabusch (a025dd) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:07 pm

  726. cfbleachers – It’s nice to see you back here. I was out of town when you returned.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:09 pm

  727. Is this why we came down from the trees?

    Comment by Machinist

    No, that was so we could invent pedicures with parrafin and hot basalt massages.

    Or maybe it was barbeque.

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:09 pm

  728. ___________________________________________

    Incidentally, I have not “banned” him but simply disabled his account to “no role on this blog.”

    I hope Lee is brought back here. It’s always interesting seeing POVs from various angles, although I am puzzled why people after a certain age (say, around 30 to 40) remain tied to a philosophy they probably favored in their younger years.

    As for reaching 1,000 posts, whoever designed this forum interface needs to have their eyeballs examined and then poked out. I don’t know of any other message board on the internet whose format lacks horizontal lines that separate one poster’s text from the other. It’s like looking at huge chunks of sentences that lack paragraph breaks.

    In regards to the players in Weinergate, I admit to being curious less about the specifics and details of such people, real or phony, than whether they were or are shills for the Democrats/left and the ex-Congressman. But to help this blog entry reach that 1,000 mark, here’s my contribution.

    Comment by Mark (411533) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:10 pm

  729. Patterico,

    Aren’t you supposed to tell us all what to think???

    Letting us hear other points of view is so tiring and dangerous.

    Comment by Machinist (b6f7da) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:11 pm

  730. Doing my part to get to 1,000 …

    IMO Patterico’s John Reid posts have tried to develop new facts — not push an opinion regarding what’s true or what the facts are — and he has repeatedly said he can’t vouch for John Reid.

    I know Lee understands the difference between theories and facts because he made that distinction in this June 1, 2011, post he wrote early in the Weinergate story:

    A new possibility has come up that explains ALL the strange facts in this story…here’s the theory.

    1) Weiner didn’t send the photo – it was a frame-up
    2) Weiner is hiding something – and the photo is of him (he didn’t deny it today) – and that’s why he doesn’t want a law enforcement investigation OR he knows how sent it.

    Here’s a theory on the the photo.. – the photo could have been sent from a phone. (Not sent from a computer.)

    I am going out on a limb here and I’d like emphasize this is a THEORY – but one that explains a lot.l. If this happened, I believe the most logical person to have done it is @PatriotUSA76 –a person that we actually know almost nothing about, by the way. For example, I don’t know for sure that their name is Dan Wolfe or even their gender. Like Weiner, I think there’s been some strange behavior on their part as well.

    As I recall, Lee pushed this theory hard during the early days of Weinergate, but at least he seemed to realize his theory wasn’t the same as fact. What I don’t understand is why Lee can’t seem to make that distinction when it comes to Patterico’s discussions and posts as the post-Weinergate sockpuppet story has unfolded.

    I’m not saying this to pile on to Lee. Instead, I wish he would try harder to do what he did in the beginning of this story: Distinguish between what he thinks is true and what he can prove is true. Because, frankly, he’s been known to guess wrong.

    Comment by DRJ (fdd243) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:11 pm

  731. daley@705,
    Here you go!

    Comment by Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (62e76d) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:12 pm

  732. Dianna,
    Nobody gets near my feets with hot anything.

    I don’t like BBQ (but don’t tell my fellow Texans!!)

    Comment by Machinist (b6f7da) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:14 pm

  733. DRJ,
    Would you please email me at bradleyfikes (at) gmail (dot) com?

    I’ve been working on a Texas-related journalism/political post that has gotten lost in this kerfuffle. It’s got some timeliness.

    Thanks,
    Bradley

    (And another comment toward the 1,000 mark!)

    Comment by Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (62e76d) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:15 pm

  734. When Pattrico’s on the prod, he’s like a one-eyed cat peepin’ in a seafood store.

    Comment by ropelight (8ea8ac) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:16 pm

  735. ___________________________________________

    That’s because scientists say watermelon has ingredients that deliver little blue pill-like effects to the body’s blood vessels

    Definitely an appropriate tidbit in light of a thread about a guy like Weiner who apparently was obsessed with the size and condition of his package.

    Comment by Mark (411533) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:17 pm

  736. Comment by DRJ — 7/3/2011 @ 12:11 pm

    A great treat to see you here, Ma’am.

    Comment by Machinist (b6f7da) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:17 pm

  737. “Is this why we came down from the trees?”

    Machinist – Have you been spying on me?

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:18 pm

  738. Is this why we came down from the trees?

    Comment by Machinist — 7/3/2011 @ 12:06 pm

    What a piece of work is man

    Comment by SarahW (af7312) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:18 pm

  739. Another in a sad history of firsts for this blog over this whole pathetic saga

    Violating Pats privacy is a deal breaker regardless of your stance on issues privcy is universally regarded as an issue of trust

    oh well, bye Lee. You should apologize to Pat, hire a lawyer, and

    Comment by EricPWJohnson (2921b6) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:19 pm

  740. How did 135 more comments get posted while I was staring at TweetDeck? This is crazy.

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:19 pm

  741. Patterico@710–

    I’d much rather have a denouement than a contretemps today. Perhaps some fromage and a glass of Bordeaux would help.

    Comment by elissa (fe7129) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:20 pm

  742. http://prudencepaine.com/2011/07/02/more-for-weinergate-addicts/

    Comment by Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:20 pm

  743. sorry hit send before I was finished

    hire a lawyer, and review with them all your legal exposure to reassure yourself you are fine, perhaps then you will be more at ease

    Also report any and all death threats to police immediately

    Comment by EricPWJohnson (2921b6) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:20 pm

  744. make that #712. darn numbers keep achangin’

    Comment by elissa (fe7129) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:22 pm

  745. Tutu,
    I’ve found GennetteC’s disappearance weird, especially given that her last comment was telling JR that she was going to email Nikki. Her supposed exit comment was hilarious, though. Credit where it is due.

    Comment by rogerthat (f5aad4) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:25 pm

  746. My previous comment should say

    @ 703 Tutu

    Sorry.

    Comment by rogerthat (f5aad4) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:26 pm

  747. I feel like I’ve gotten to the party late. We’ve almost got a full blown blog war going on. Almost that is.

    Why does everyone keep talking about “high stakes?” What are the stakes here?

    Someone further up mentioned what I’ve been wondering all along if Patterico was providing a venue of “rope” for many of the participants to go and try and “hang themselves” with. I never mentioned it before because it seemed to be working pretty well on both GC and JR.

    Comment by Johnny 5 is alive (5ccc5e) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:26 pm

  748. elissa@740,

    Excellent suggestion, and it inspired me. I don’t have any fromage or Bordeaux handy at the moment, but I do have a Charles Shaw Merlot that I’ve just uncorked.

    It helps pass the time while reading this thread and watching my NiMH batteries cycle in my smart charger.

    Comment by Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (62e76d) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:28 pm

  749. I noticed “Paul” used the words, “might could” in a sentence . That combination is found in areas such as eastern Kentucky and somewhat in western Virginia.

    Comment by Meh (f72fb5) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:29 pm

  750. Does that mean we’ll get “All that she Wants (is another baby)”? I hope so! It’s got a great beat.

    Comment by Dianna — 7/3/2011 @ 12:06 pm

    Love that song. So here’s another excuse for a comment toward 1000.

    Comment by no one you know (136b86) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:30 pm

  751. Perhaps some fromage and a glass of Bordeaux would help.

    Comment by elissa

    We’ve got a nice little spread out, including a domestic camembert and a zippy little petite sirah. Lots of fruit and both red and white sangria, some mac salad, bbq’d pork, and green salad for the sit-down portion of the meal. We are certain this will refresh us and our neighbors.

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:30 pm

  752. I was fond of one theory – that the manipulator of sock puppets had been involved in the threats, and a by-stander (JG in MA) had gotten involved by accident

    For what it’s worth, I’m still quite fond of that theory. And for those who alternatively think that JGMA is the lone sockpuppeeter, doesn’t it seem odd that the puppeteer seems to operate on west coast time ?

    For example, in the new bunch of captured starchild tweets Prudence Paine posted, the puppets are still tweeting at 3:52 AM EDT. Sure, it’s _possible_ that someone in Boston could stay up all night generating inane tweets. On the other hand could someone in MA have done the May 14th tweets about the Dodgers game ? While the Redsox were playing the Yankees ? That I find that hard to believe.

    Comment by piglet (1bb7dc) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:32 pm

  753. And another dance tune, in happyfeet’s honor (I know he likes the artists and this is a great song)

    (applicability to current situation only semi-intended)

    Comment by no one you know (136b86) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:32 pm

  754. “…some mac salad…”

    0.0

    Comment by Machinist (b6f7da) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:32 pm

  755. #749 – Whee!

    Dancing!

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:33 pm

  756. Good points, piglet. I tend to agree.

    Comment by DRJ (fdd243) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:33 pm

  757. When you lay down w/ dogs …..

    Just sayin’

    Comment by MDr (fd1f4b) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:34 pm

  758. @744- rogerthat I still think she holds a lot of the keys to the puzzle. When her BS stopped working, she disappears.

    Comment by Tutu (54ce64) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:34 pm

  759. **separated comment to add to total count**

    BTW have liked Lee’s stuff since he’s come here and am happy to see Patterico not wanting this to turn into burnt bridges. I truly hope it can end in, as elissa put pretty well, a denouement instead.

    Comment by no one you know (136b86) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:36 pm

  760. It will all come to brawling and requests to lower volume

    Comment by SarahW (af7312) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:37 pm

  761. #751 – piglet

    For what it’s worth, I’m still quite fond of that theory. And for those who alternatively think that JGMA is the lone sockpuppeeter, doesn’t it seem odd that the puppeteer seems to operate on west coast time ?

    Indeed, and thank you! I’ve been wondering if I’d fallen off the roof (gone irrational) with that theory.

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:38 pm

  762. #744 roger
    She still reads and pops up to fuss a to make a short fuss.

    Comment by Meh (f72fb5) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:40 pm

  763. It will all come to brawling and requests to lower volume

    Comment by SarahW

    Probably. Unless someone proclaims an open-flame-war thread. Though that doesn’t always work, either.

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:42 pm

  764. Typing from phone and I can’t catch edit mistakes . Arghh

    Comment by Meh (f72fb5) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:42 pm

  765. Stolen from Stranahan’s cat

    SOCK PARTY! (Anthem)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8MUAnfEaqug

    Comment by SarahW (af7312) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:43 pm

  766. Tears before bedtime!

    (More towards 1,000 comments)

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:43 pm

  767. #748, Meh, “might could” can also be found in current use both in Oklahoma and among the State’s peripatetic brethren relocated to California’s San Joaquin Valley.

    Comment by ropelight (8ea8ac) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:44 pm

  768. summer solstice!

    here you click you see is beautiful!

    happy floating polish lanterns!

    Mr daley did you not hears????

    I am boycotting the tasty tasty sammins cause of America’s fascist and anti-science sammin policies

    all that’s about is Alaska’s corrupt representative Don Young preventing competitions – he’s a sick sick anti-American loserdouche

    Comment by happyfeet (3c92a1) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:45 pm

  769. ________________________________________

    he’s like a one-eyed cat peepin’

    Speaking of one-eyed, here’s a fitting tribute to Anthony Weiner, symbolizing about all the seriousness and respect he deserves.

    BTW, the character of “son” or “Johnson,” referring to actor Clint Howard (aka Ron Howard’s brother), is a rarity in Hollywood: He’s a conservative.

    Comment by Mark (411533) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:45 pm

  770. 631 ∅

    Lee says he has law enforcement involved and being helpful but can’t say more about that yet. Don’t know what else, now that he’s cut confidences with Preston (a good thing!)

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:47 pm

  771. Time to pump up the jam!

    Comment by Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (62e76d) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:48 pm

  772. oooh piglet EXCELLENT catch!

    Comment by Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:48 pm

  773. 633. PatAz

    I took Lee’s frustration with the left’s positions on this story to be evidence of thinking, change, and generally positive. I’m not at all skeptical of it as it makes total sense. I think he’s a straight shooter & I disagree with him on lots of things, and agree on lots of others.

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:49 pm

  774. #769 koam – Well, he was accused of making (or inspiring) threats. I’d want my name cleared PDQ.

    I still don’t quite understand what’s up with Ms. Preston.

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:50 pm

  775. Rope, Did not know that speech pattern had spread . Lucky them. :D

    Comment by Meh (f72fb5) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:54 pm

  776. The whole situation is easy to understand: Karl Rove is behind it to totally discredit the Democratic Party.

    Cheney helped.

    Comment by roy in nipomo (bca582) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:54 pm

  777. Of course koam, you asked the one question that Lee could not answer. Amazing, that.

    Comment by Tutu (54ce64) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:54 pm

  778. That little Weiner dude thinks he’s got a big rod? He don’t know what big is!

    Comment by Tachyglossus aculeatus (62e76d) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:56 pm

  779. Not clicking that for anything!

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:57 pm

  780. Not having paid attention to the extended version of the Wiener twitter story I can’t comment on it. I will say my money is with Patterico. Not because I am trying to win a Patterico poney or anything. Patterico is one of only a few sites I have the linked or read on a daily basis. The storys are alway well reasoned, insightful and painstakingly detailed. If only our ‘real’ news sites could have the same standards. There I did my part for the 1,000.

    Comment by deadserfs (bb89f9) — 7/3/2011 @ 12:59 pm

  781. Dianna@778,
    Relax, it’s not a David Ehrenstein-type link. But it is animal porn – specifically, monotreme porn. That’s the best kind!

    Comment by Tachyglossus aculeatus (62e76d) — 7/3/2011 @ 1:02 pm

  782. Now interrupting your regularly scheduled programming.

    FYI grilling wieners isn’t green.
    http://michellemalkin.com/2011/07/01/4th-of-july/

    Comedy gold

    Comment by Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c) — 7/3/2011 @ 1:07 pm

  783. Is this the best representation of the tweet timeline?

    http://www.soundbitten.com/

    Comment by CausticConservative (b29599) — 7/3/2011 @ 1:10 pm

  784. @cfbleachers … couldn’t agree with you more about Patrick’s character. A man of high integrity and very fair.

    Comment by Anita Busch (a025dd) — 7/3/2011 @ 1:12 pm

  785. Unlike the Los Angeles Times.

    Comment by Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (62e76d) — 7/3/2011 @ 1:15 pm

  786. “Mr daley did you not hears????”

    Mr. Feets – No I had not heard. Thanks for the heads up. Go with the bass shake instead.

    Damn Luddites!

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/3/2011 @ 1:16 pm

  787. #781 – Ha!

    And the plum and ricotta tart is cooling, while I’ve set a bottle of muscat to chill.

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/3/2011 @ 1:16 pm

  788. Is watermelon a racist fruit?

    Comment by PatAZ (efd43b) — 7/3/2011 @ 1:16 pm

  789. Happyfeet
    Spectacular! Thanks for sharing

    Comment by Meh (f72fb5) — 7/3/2011 @ 1:16 pm

  790. Bass-A-Matics are very reasonable these days.

    Comment by PatAZ (efd43b) — 7/3/2011 @ 1:18 pm

  791. Ok Dianna now you’re getting just mean.
    Torture me no more.

    Comment by Meh (f72fb5) — 7/3/2011 @ 1:19 pm

  792. Ok Dianna now you’re getting just mean.
    Torture me no more.

    Comment by Meh

    I sponsor a household of gustatory evil. If I weren’t watching my cholesterol, I’d be in a coma from eating by now.

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/3/2011 @ 1:22 pm

  793. Dianna: Your meal sounds absolutely delicious, but is it approved by Michelle’s food police?

    Comment by PatAZ (efd43b) — 7/3/2011 @ 1:23 pm

  794. My contribution to a 1000 posts.

    I tend to think Lee’s theory is the most plausible. (omg! omg! some sock account thinks Lee might be right!)

    That doesn’t mean I think Patterico’s strategy is for not. I actually can’t wait to read Pat’s theory on all this when it’s laid out.

    I kind of thought they were just playing good cop/bad cop. Who knows? It will be fun to finally find out what really went down.

    Comment by Noodles (3681c4) — 7/3/2011 @ 1:26 pm

  795. Patterico, at comment 649, I asked this: Patterico, is it true that you got the information for your story on “Ethel” from John Reid?

    You asked where I got that idea from (I think, I’m lost with almost 800 comments to peruse). Well the idea came from Lee’s post where he says this:

    “A few days ago, Patterico told me that the source of that information. Sock puppet “John Reid” told Patterico about the Ethel Tumblr page and the “Large. In Charge” comments.”

    Comment by Woodshedder (44e97d) — 7/3/2011 @ 1:26 pm

  796. And the plum and ricotta tart is cooling…

    Dianna,

    Do you have proof of your FLOTUS pie waiver for this?

    Comment by Dana (4eca6e) — 7/3/2011 @ 1:27 pm

  797. Dianna: Your meal sounds absolutely delicious, but is it approved by Michelle’s food police?

    Comment by PatAZ

    No; in fact, it’s so incorrect that I’m thinking of writing it up and sending it to her office.

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/3/2011 @ 1:30 pm

  798. If I eat Dianna’s tart in the Internet, but no one hears it. Does it exist?

    Comment by Meh (f72fb5) — 7/3/2011 @ 1:32 pm

  799. Do you have proof of your FLOTUS pie waiver for this?

    Comment by Dana

    If I had one, I’d ceremonially hand it over to one of the grill-meisters for fire-starting duty.

    Did I mention that there’s also gourmet ice cream? Two flavors: chocolate cherry and coconut.

    I can’t have ‘em, but they’re there for everyone else!

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/3/2011 @ 1:33 pm

  800. You BAKED. A. PIE. In an OVEN. Shame on you
    crying/laughing
    My mom called yesterday when I was reading that and she said “So I’ve got hot dogs and sausages I made potato salad and baked beans and I think your grandmother baked a pie”
    “gustatory evil” indeed. It’s time to stop the madness.
    I’ve put my foot down and told my 92yr old grandmother that I cannot sponsor her pie in my home.

    Comment by Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c) — 7/3/2011 @ 1:34 pm

  801. Remember the good old days? When Patrick was 24/7, fisking LAT? Wait! Did I say that? Why yes, I did.

    I condemn myself. It’s much, much better now, ie Patterico’s posts.

    Comment by MDr (fd1f4b) — 7/3/2011 @ 1:34 pm

  802. If I eat Dianna’s tart in the Internet, but no one hears it. Does it exist?

    Surely it must because my mouth is watering already!

    Comment by Dana (4eca6e) — 7/3/2011 @ 1:35 pm

  803. Faithful reader. I have never commented before. Just trying to help out and get to the magic number of 1000.

    Comment by Constance Bartl-Luthi (0f2e6e) — 7/3/2011 @ 1:39 pm

  804. I can’t believe I’ve mentioned baking tarts, and no one’s quoted Lewis Carroll yet!

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/3/2011 @ 1:39 pm

  805. Whoo-hoo! We’ve broken 800!

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/3/2011 @ 1:39 pm

  806. Enjoy your Independence Day watermelon without undue concern. It’s and equal opportunity fruit which originated in Southern Africa and quickly spread throughout the African continent, to China, Europe, and eventually to the New World. (Slave traders packed stores of local foods like black-eyed peas and okra with which the slaves were already familiar to help keep them calm on the long voyage across the Atlantic.)

    Incidentally, archaeologists found numerous watermelon seeds in King Tut’s tomb.

    Comment by ropelight (8ea8ac) — 7/3/2011 @ 1:42 pm

  807. All this pie talk reminds me of that Obama speech about pies. You would think I would have forgotten about that but it was so weird I still think about it sometimes.

    Comment by Noodles (3681c4) — 7/3/2011 @ 1:43 pm

  808. Question. Do we get another post after 1000. Pwease?

    Comment by Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c) — 7/3/2011 @ 1:44 pm

  809. I am the original Alice, but I was attempting to be modest. Have some tea?

    Comment by Meh (f72fb5) — 7/3/2011 @ 1:46 pm

  810. 806 #
    yes He was beyond strange. I kept wandering if he wS speaking in code

    Comment by Meh (f72fb5) — 7/3/2011 @ 1:49 pm

  811. Lift and load. Lift and load. One for little Adolph. And one for the road.

    From a movie on WWII, very under appreciated. Not the movie, but the effort of those, without which, the War in Europe, may have taken a decided turn for the worse.

    Rememeber all our veterans on the Fourth.

    Comment by MDr (fd1f4b) — 7/3/2011 @ 1:50 pm

  812. @809

    I agree. It was another weirder than weird thing he has done that no one explains. I swear this guy does the weirdest stuff and no one says a word about it.

    Of course if Sarah Palin had…ah…you get the picture. =)

    Comment by Noodles (3681c4) — 7/3/2011 @ 1:55 pm

  813. Sadly, I have lost so much respect for Patterico in this. I am a relatively new reader and after this a former reader. The non weiner posts are well done and interesting. (Thank you Aaron Worthing, I hope you find a site that is worthy of you!) I do find the weiner story interesting but all the nonsense surrounding it has become ridiculous. I don’t for a second believe that Patterico isn’t sure of exactly what happened and who everybody is. Finishing the story and putting it all out there would result in a lot less attention for him now, wouldn’t it? All a lot of dramatic nonsense to get you all worked up. Go Go 1000 posts. Ick!

    Comment by Amanda Lynn (d3e2bd) — 7/3/2011 @ 1:56 pm

  814. Thank you, MDr. We always do, here.

    I read a suggestion that a reading of the Declaration is an appropriate start to dinner.

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/3/2011 @ 1:58 pm

  815. The WeinerGate plumbers.

    Think about it.

    Comment by MDr (fd1f4b) — 7/3/2011 @ 1:59 pm

  816. We have seen entirely too much of Weiner’s plumbing.

    Comment by Machinist (b6f7da) — 7/3/2011 @ 2:02 pm

  817. Coming in at 812 with a bullet, Amanda Lynn.

    Comment by Tutu (54ce64) — 7/3/2011 @ 2:06 pm

  818. I remember when Congressmen mailed out pictures of themselves shaking hands with the President and such rather than sending pictures of their genitals or of themselves naked in the House showers to young women.

    Does that date me?

    Comment by Machinist (b6f7da) — 7/3/2011 @ 2:06 pm

  819. “We have seen entirely too much of Weiner’s plumbing.”

    Hmmmmm. Most “plumbing” I’ve seen is a wee bit bigger. Now maybe if Swift is the standard, ie lilliputian …..

    Comment by MDr (fd1f4b) — 7/3/2011 @ 2:09 pm

  820. #802

    Faithful reader. I have never commented before. Just trying to help out and get to the magic number of 1000.

    Comment by Constance Bartl-Luthi — 7/3/2011 @ 1:39 pm

    Ditto. I must add, I’m totally lost on weinergate, and have lost many hours reading about tarts and anteaters!

    Comment by Amy Shulkusky (f1ee33) — 7/3/2011 @ 2:11 pm

  821. Having read both Stranahan and Patterico, I have two points to make, one long, one brief.

    Long point. It is very hard to take Stranahan seriously. He cannot present a narrative clearly; indeed he sometimes seems unable to write English. He (perhaps legitimately) withholds information, but then expects people to accept his only partially suppported arguments. He does not reason; he pronounces.

    I must admit that, based on what I have read so far, what seems most plausible is that JG MA is the one and only puppeteer. But I have not seen proof. Stranahan seems to believe that his failure to threaten JG MA proves that she is lying so desperately that she must be the arch-deceiver. As Patterico, however, points out, it is possible that someone did threaten her (just not Stranahan).

    It is also possible that JG MA may in fact have subjectively felt threatened by Stranahan. His recorded conversation with the JG CA was very odd. He bugs JG CA to communicate with him, says virtually nothing after communications are established, asks her if she wants to ask him anything, and then intimates that she must prove to him a negative and that she is guilty in his eyes until proven innocent. That conversation was odd enough to create an impression of threat that was not intended.

    JG MA’s subjective feeling that Stranahan threatened her might have been (probably was) wholly made up, but it might possibly have been true, particularly if she is indeed the puppeteer. I simply cannot assign any probative value to the conjunction of the two facts that (1) she alleged being threatened, and (2) Stranahan did not intentionally threaten her.

    Short point. Lay off Stranahan’s cat. I have never heard a cat do a better broadcast. If your cats are superior performers, let’s hear them.

    Comment by JeffM (d78fd0) — 7/3/2011 @ 2:13 pm

  822. All I know is, I used to read this blog religiously–checked it several times a day. After Lee Stranahan showed up, I just quit reading it. I’d check every great once in a while, but that was all. It was like the character of the blog changed, and not for the better. It sounds like the blog will be going back to the way it used to be–I like that, and will be checking it more often again.

    Comment by Barbara Oakley (a19e30) — 7/3/2011 @ 2:14 pm

  823. Okay, I need to finish getting the yard ready, etc. for tomorrow. When I get back I expect Lee or Patterico to have broken this case wide open!

    Comment by Noodles (3681c4) — 7/3/2011 @ 2:16 pm

  824. I am stepping out for some time with boyfriend and guests. And to evict the cat that’s hanging out in the kiddie pool I set up for my dogs; the dogs won’t go near it.

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/3/2011 @ 2:22 pm

  825. “All I know is, I used to read this blog religiously–checked it several times a day. After Lee Stranahan showed up, I just quit reading it.”

    I was just as shocked, ie giving a leftist, keys to the car. Yet one more example that, the enemy of my enemy, is a friend, doesn’t always work out so well.

    Comment by MDr (fd1f4b) — 7/3/2011 @ 2:24 pm

  826. Just helping to get to 1000.

    Oh, an observation…Lee is still much too close to the left side of the political sphere to trust anything from him as fact. Of course, that’s just my opinion, because I never trust anything from anyone on the left. They lie with much too much ease.

    Comment by Susie Q (a6955c) — 7/3/2011 @ 2:25 pm

  827. 676 have blue

    just say what you mean. who has time to go figure out your riddle?

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/3/2011 @ 2:25 pm

  828. When did Weiner announce he had legal counsel, and a security firm to investigate? How many days before that announcement had he procured same? When did the sock puppets and threats start to escalate/grow?

    What we need – an investigation headed by Ben Veniste

    Comment by MDr (fd1f4b) — 7/3/2011 @ 2:31 pm

  829. This is getting a little in the weeds, maybe a new thread, re Volokhs’ analysis of Judge Graham,

    Comment by ian cormac (d380ce) — 7/3/2011 @ 2:32 pm

  830. Will a glittery ball drop at 1000?
    I sure hope so or else I’m going to feel like a fool with this top hat and noisemaker.

    Comment by Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c) — 7/3/2011 @ 2:36 pm

  831. Speaking of cats, and to add my one-thousandth, let me pose a question. Is a single man with a cat a turnoff to potential dates, as in not very manly?

    My boss (a woman) says it is, but she is a dog-lover. I also love dogs, but am considering getting a cat because they are easier to leave alone when I am at work or traveling.

    I wonder what others think.

    Comment by norcal (c37272) — 7/3/2011 @ 2:38 pm

  832. @Amanda Lynn: Since you are relatively new reader, let me tell you that you are mistaken. Patrick is not one to jump to conclusions or head into anything with a pre-conceived notion. He gathers information and looks at it and let the evidence itself lead to the conclusion.

    Comment by Anita Busch (a025dd) — 7/3/2011 @ 2:38 pm

  833. I’ve been trying (unsuccessfully) on Twitter to get someone to lay out for me a unifying theory of what’s going on here. My guess is that it’s just too complicated for that venue, so I thought I would try here. The closest I can come is the idea that this whole thing is masterminded and created by a single entity as a screenplay/performance art piece. Maybe that’s what Lee is proposing, although he never really comes out and says it. If so, who is the real person behind it all? And if this isn’t the best/most reasonable/most widely held theory, then what is.

    If nothing else, this will help get to 1000.

    PS – I admire Patterico for bringing Lee on. The idea clearly was that Lee was seeing things from a different perspective, but that he saw that the right wasn’t as nasty as the left. I believe Lee was correct (although I am guessing he doubts it now). In any case, this feels like one of those “It seemed like a good idea at the time” things. The issues that I (and I think Patterico as well) have with Lee have nothing to do with his political positions. Sometimes things just don’t work out the way we want them to.

    Comment by Jan (fd5949) — 7/3/2011 @ 2:38 pm

  834. Sometimes I get the impression that Stranahan is part of the very smokescreen is claims to be trying to cut through.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/3/2011 @ 2:39 pm

  835. Please cancel my subscription to Sports Illustrated.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/3/2011 @ 2:40 pm

  836. #824, MDr and #825, Suzie Q: My thoughts exactly from both of you. I felt at the beginning of the whole Weiner escapade, Lee seemed to want Weiner to be innocent and set up by his enemies so badly. Even after Weiner confessed, Lee still didn’t seem to be satisfied. Lee may be able to see bias from the left, but he is nowhere near changing sides.

    Comment by PatAZ (efd43b) — 7/3/2011 @ 2:41 pm

  837. Jan @832

    Maybe there ISN’T a grand unifying theory. Maybe we have a case of really different individuals doing different things for different reasons. Or maybe more than one person can use an account so maybe for some sock puppets, it isn’t just one person tweeting in that name. To assume anything at this point is the road to folly.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/3/2011 @ 2:44 pm

  838. 829 – @RepWeiner is arranging for the glittery ball(s).

    Comment by Jan (fd5949) — 7/3/2011 @ 2:46 pm

  839. 834 – Cancel your own damn subscription! (HT to William F. Buckley)

    Comment by Jan (fd5949) — 7/3/2011 @ 2:48 pm

  840. “Sometimes I get the impression that Stranahan is part of the very smokescreen is claims to be trying to cut through.”

    Which sparks, a completely unrelated, cross neuronal, contamination.

    All the original Journolistas were never identified. Who believes they haven’t resurrected themselves? Who are they? Any doubts they may have insinuated themselves into this very negative Dem story. To salvage what they can.

    Comment by MDr (fd1f4b) — 7/3/2011 @ 2:50 pm

  841. #830 norcal –

    I take to guys with pets. Or I used to, anyway. Cats are perfectly acceptable in a single guy in an apartment, and anything but unmanly.

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/3/2011 @ 2:52 pm

  842. General feelings:

    I never knew who Stranahan was before the Weiner scandal led me from Ace’s site to Patterico. Stranahan does appear to have difficulty clearly explaining what he knows and why. That was my impression when he first declared certainty about JG (“Conjecture is over”). The proof was that he talked to her on the phone and he talked to her alleged professor. But the proof wasn’t enough to show it was not a hoaxer, especially after what happened with Tommy Christopher.

    In a recent post, Stranahan wrote: “Alicia Pain and John Reid have been working behind the scenes trying to get other people to reveal (alleged) information on Rep. Weiner and underage women.”

    Okay. Um, how does he know this? Or is it conjecture?

    I think most of Stranahan’s theories and conjectures are reasonable. But he does seem to go overboard and submit them as verified fact.

    Patterico’s theory could be totally off the wall but I have never taken his theories as his definitive conclusions. I thought giving JR a platform was a good idea. But it was clearly never an endorsement by Patterico.

    In my view Patterico is more Poirot and Stranahan more Scooby Doo. Patterico is more methodical and uncertain, testing his theories. Stranahan declares the identity of the monster based on gut feeling and a handful of facts (the problem is that there is often another rubber mask yet to be removed).

    Comment by Crispian (70c05e) — 7/3/2011 @ 2:53 pm

  843. Crosspatch 836 – I didn’t mean to suggest that there was just one. I’m trying to understand what Patterico, or Lee, or somebody else actually thinks happened. I’m not assuming anything. I do believe tho that some people have a picture in their mind of what transpired, by whom, and for what purpose, but nobody seems to want to lay it out for “peer review”. I don’t want anybody to put their reputation on the line. I’d just like to get an understanding of what they think the overall picture is based on what they know at this point.

    Comment by Jan (fd5949) — 7/3/2011 @ 2:54 pm

  844. Maybe you need a homicide detective to solve this.

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (6f74ae) — 7/3/2011 @ 2:54 pm

  845. #832 – Somewhere in the early hundreds of this monster thread, I asked Patterico if we were talking about a Glenn Greenwald-style “fun on the internet” hoax (a sock puppet or two) or “Holy Blood, Holy Grail” scale hoax. I’d still like to know.

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/3/2011 @ 2:55 pm

  846. You know, Weiner was blackmailed – in 2009. The New York almost flatly reported it then.

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (6f74ae) — 7/3/2011 @ 2:56 pm

  847. Weiner was blackmailed? For what? Did an errant wiener pic show up in someone’s inbox?

    Comment by Mike Myers (0e06a9) — 7/3/2011 @ 2:58 pm

  848. Weiner was blackmailed? For what? Did an errant wiener pic show up in someone’s inbox?

    Comment by Mike Myers

    Ditto.

    And why would he not say, “Publish and be damned!”? He wasn’t married, then, and it would take more than some sexting by a single guy to make a serious scandal.

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/3/2011 @ 3:01 pm

  849. “Maybe you need a homicide detective to solve this.”

    You’re a little too late with your request.

    Columbo RIP

    Comment by MDr (fd1f4b) — 7/3/2011 @ 3:02 pm

  850. Lee seems to be unable to distinguish between a theory and a fact. He is also apparently unable to distinguish between someone advancing a theory and claiming a fact as true.

    Absolutely true. I noticed this during his discussions with Ace. He’s got no sense of the difference between possibility and probability; thus, anything that is possible is regarded as probable depending upon utility in the moment.

    Comment by rdbrewer (f628a1) — 7/3/2011 @ 3:02 pm

  851. Anyone know if Weiner’s blackberry was confiscated while he is in rehab?

    Comment by PatAZ (efd43b) — 7/3/2011 @ 3:05 pm

  852. #840 Dianna

    Thank you for your response. I have a house rather than an apartment, but I’m assuming that wouldn’t change your answer about a single guy with a cat.

    Comment by norcal (c37272) — 7/3/2011 @ 3:07 pm

  853. rdbrewer, I have asked him questions, and I thought his responses indicated that he’d made up his mind.

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/3/2011 @ 3:08 pm

  854. #851 norcal – Not at all.

    I’m a fanatic, which is why I could have dogs and cats while single. It’s hard. Single people usually stick to a cat, and I don’t blame them.

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/3/2011 @ 3:09 pm

  855. Folks what you have here is two people who go about this in very different fashions. I am dismayed by Lee posting that article the other day about Pat putting JohnReid9 on this site. I never once felt pat was giving Reid a pass. In fact I go the feeling that Pat was giving US the chance to grill JohnReid9. Many of you asked some great questions. Now go back and look how many REALLY tough ones he did not answer. Also compare his writing style to others in this scenario, like Patriotusa76 and any other of the purported Sock Puppets. Plenty of tweets out there on scribed and such. As far as the feud. Not sure who pissed on whose cornflakes first but accepting the method of investigation should be the priority. I don’t think Pat feels Lee is right and up until now he has never said that. But Lee did Publicly.

    As for me. I find Lees analysis interesting. But much of what he does is supposition and in the world that Pat lives in supposition can get you hammered. Fact is what matters.

    I am a trained interviewer and without giving away too much I will say I knew EXACTLY what Patterico was doing letting JohnReid post freely.

    As far as Lee’s assumptions they too serve to challenge the reader to dig deeper. Lee is begging people to look into things.

    Everyone is a suspect until they can be rules out. That is done by questioning and evidence gathering. But without a subpoena we only have what we have on Twitter and these few pages that still talk about this story.

    Who got hurt?
    Who benefited?
    When did they give information?
    How did they know it?

    These are the questions I am trying to answer.

    What are yours?

    Comment by mikemadden59 (3cb7fd) — 7/3/2011 @ 3:10 pm

  856. Even someone not at all involved in journalism knows you don’t prove you cannot be trusted then wonder why people stop talking to you.

    Comment by StillConfused (786412) — 7/3/2011 @ 3:15 pm

  857. Hey Still do I know you?

    Comment by mikemadden59 (3cb7fd) — 7/3/2011 @ 3:33 pm

  858. Totally understand why Patterico gave the floor to JR9, don’t understand why that was a problem in anyones mind. I get Lee’s assertion that fake people are spreading lies behind the curtain and those lies should not be promulgated but Patterico lifted the curtain. Didn’t write the script and was clear he was “agnostic”
    I don’t know sometimes I think Lee confuses me lately more than anything in this entire drama. sorry?
    Just so I can be even more cheesy and theatrical
    “Me thinks thou doth protest too much”

    Comment by Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c) — 7/3/2011 @ 3:37 pm

  859. #837 Jan. Shiver, Gag

    Comment by Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c) — 7/3/2011 @ 3:37 pm

  860. Hey Still do I know you?

    Comment by mikemadden59

    My statement was a general one mikemadden59. I don’t know you.

    Comment by StillConfused (786412) — 7/3/2011 @ 3:37 pm

  861. I hope we get to 1,000 soon and Patrick publishes his magnum opus that explains everything Weiner.

    Comment by Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (62e76d) — 7/3/2011 @ 3:37 pm

  862. Obsession is not just a perfume.

    Comment by Huey (ddf1a4) — 7/3/2011 @ 3:38 pm

  863. Isn’t Obsession a cologne? And what’s the difference?

    *Doing my bit for 1,000 comments!

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/3/2011 @ 3:42 pm

  864. JeffG, LGF, and now Patterico. You will respect my authority!

    Comment by Boogity Boogity Boogity (b12543) — 7/3/2011 @ 3:43 pm

  865. Remember when this was just about a perv with a God-complex?

    Comment by StillConfused (786412) — 7/3/2011 @ 3:48 pm

  866. #851 norcal
    I have a dog however cats are not at all feminine for a single guy to have. Unless you have a lot.
    Frankly I think people who HATE cats are a little irrational. Although this attachment makes me question that.

    http://ace.mu.nu/archives/getoverit.gif

    Comment by Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c) — 7/3/2011 @ 3:48 pm

  867. 864 Yeah, good times.

    Comment by Sarahw (af7312) — 7/3/2011 @ 3:55 pm

  868. I think cats are marvels of nature, but they don’t really serve the kind of functional and companionship role that a dog can. My dog guards my house. She protects my home and family.

    Can she gracefully fall to her feet? No. Cats are amazing. But boy do I wonder how a person could choose a cat over a dog for a pet, unless they don’t really want the work of a pet.

    Plus dogs don’t use the facilities in your home unless you are a failed owner.

    Talking about private conversations without permission is never great; doing so and getting them wrong is worse; doing so and getting them wrong in an environment when threats have been made and law enforcement is involved is reckless.

    Admittedly, my episode was minor, but the similarity is impossible to miss.

    Comment by Dustin (b7410e) — 7/3/2011 @ 3:58 pm

  869. I prefer drakkar noir. Whatever happened to Canoe? As far as obsession goes, I’ve read shrink babble explaining that Nobama is a classic narcissist. Cracks me up so many Jewish people here in Palm Beach co. continue to think he is god and weiner’s internet play was his own private life. But of course the evil Bushitler remains the cause of all our present woes because Obama needs more time. One twat even insists we should re-elect duh won in 2016. God save us from idiotic bastard’s children assclowns.

    Comment by Calypso Louie Farrakhan (40c5f4) — 7/3/2011 @ 3:59 pm

  870. @Crispian #841 … “In my view Patterico is more Poirot and Stranahan more Scooby Doo.”

    Great analogy. I have felt the same way.

    Comment by Anitabusch (a025dd) — 7/3/2011 @ 4:01 pm

  871. Oh yes, it is just lovely to listen to some little yapping mutt carry on at all hours of day and night incessantly barking. That said, just watched episode of Sleeper Cell wherein dirtbag Muslim terroists kills a bunch of dogs while testing some deadly gas phosgene. He says next time we test it on two-legged creatures. Would love to see it used on terrorists. can some libtard here tell me why I should have any sympathy for the religion of peace or the permanent widdle refugees Palistineans? Israel could nuke Iran’s nuke facilities or even Mecca and I would say good on them. Of course the UN and Euroweenies would be upset but why should I care?

    Comment by Calypso Louie Farrakhan (40c5f4) — 7/3/2011 @ 4:05 pm

  872. Anita, You’re strong and brave, and I’m glad to see you’re still standin’ up and talkin’ back.

    Comment by ropelight (8ea8ac) — 7/3/2011 @ 4:06 pm

  873. While we’re on the road to 1,000 comments, here’s a PSA for those of us in California:

    Some CA retailers still charging repealed sales tax
    . . .On 1 July (the date the lower rate became effective), my son Steve and family went to lunch at “On the Border,” a nationwide restaurant chain with about 15 locations in CA. When the bill arrived, it included the outdated 8.75% San Diego sales tax. My son (at spouse Ingrid’s insistence) informed the manager of the change. The manager quickly contacted the regional office, and apparently this resulted in the entire chain becoming aware of the update. Steve scored a free meal out of it, and the restaurant was definitely pleased he brought it to their attention.

    In the only retail transaction I made on 1 July, I found that I had to correct an auto shop bill that included the wrong 8.75% sales tax. The garage was an independent — not a chain. As always, caveat emptor. . .

    Comment by Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (62e76d) — 7/3/2011 @ 4:07 pm

  874. Bradley have you sent your story to Aaron, too? Unfortunately, DRJ doesn’t blog here (Though I’m sure she could if she wanted… and I know I’d love to read her stuff).

    Comment by Dustin (b7410e) — 7/3/2011 @ 4:10 pm

  875. I hope we get to 1,000 soon and Patrick publishes his magnum opus that explains everything Weiner.

    Comment by Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. — 7/3/2011 @ 3:37 pm

    Pat: When we hit 1,000 will you post the final, comprehensive explanation of the Weinergate sockpuppet universe?

    Comment by slp (347e33) — 7/3/2011 @ 4:10 pm

  876. Now Patterico feuds with Jeff Goldstein, Radley Balko, and Lee Stranahan. At some point Patterico should think whether the problem is with all of these other people or himself.

    I knew it wouldn’t last between him and Stranahan. Patterico is as thin skinned as they come…he can’t take any criticism no matter how light. And despite him talking a good game about being civil, he still flings out unprovoked attacks against those like Balko and Goldstein.

    With all the talk of bannings and sock puppets, this place reads more like 4chan than a respectable conservative blog. Just Sayin.

    Comment by JustinSayin (9eb0fa) — 7/3/2011 @ 4:12 pm

  877. “You know, Weiner was blackmailed – in 2009. The New York almost flatly reported it then.”

    Mike “The Big Nanny” Bloomberg apparently threatened to expose what a major horndog Weiner was if he threw his hat in the mayoral race. I believe the Post wrote about it.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/3/2011 @ 4:12 pm

  878. Dustin,
    DRJ emailed me immediately afterwards, and it’s in her capable hands. My issue isn’t as huge as Weinergate, but it’s still worth some attention, I think. I had emailed Patterico and Aaron earlier, but Weinergate has pre-empted everything else with their blog time.

    Comment by Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (62e76d) — 7/3/2011 @ 4:13 pm

  879. JustinSayin – That.Is.Exactly.What.Happened.

    Outlaw!

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/3/2011 @ 4:15 pm

  880. Patterico provided a forum for Lee JohnReid to say what he wanted to say and present what evidence he wanted to present.

    Patterico has been pretty scrupulous to say that he didn’t necessarily agree with what Lee JohnReid had to say, nor that he endorsed what Lee JohnReid said as true.

    It seems to me that if Patterico, after making honest attempts put aside any biases and disagreements with what Lee JohnReid said on his blog, feels that he is being misrepresented by Lee JohnReid, he has every right to stop allowing Lee JohnReid access to post information on his blog.

    Just a thought.

    Comment by Pious Agnostic (6048a8) — 7/3/2011 @ 4:18 pm

  881. JustinSayin:Did someone make you come here to read? JustAskin

    Comment by PatAZ (efd43b) — 7/3/2011 @ 4:21 pm

  882. When we get to posting 999, nobody make a post. Lets just let it hang there for a while.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/3/2011 @ 4:22 pm

  883. When is JohnReid9 going to show up and do a video chat with Patterico?

    He answered some questions in comments for several days and then disappeared.

    He needs to keep his promise to Pat and do the video chat.

    Comment by slp (347e33) — 7/3/2011 @ 4:25 pm

  884. crosspatch,
    You’re just trying to set up a prisoners dilemma, aren’t you?

    Comment by Machinist (b6f7da) — 7/3/2011 @ 4:26 pm

  885. #880 crosspatch
    Sockkk!

    Comment by Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c) — 7/3/2011 @ 4:26 pm

  886. re: comment 871:

    Here’s a very handy document for determing your updated local tax rate:

    http://www.boe.ca.gov/pdf/pub71.pdf

    Comment by h2u (0025d1) — 7/3/2011 @ 4:27 pm

  887. It seems to me that if Patterico, after making honest attempts put aside any biases and disagreements with what Lee JohnReid said on his blog, feels that he is being misrepresented by Lee JohnReid, he has every right to stop allowing Lee JohnReid access to post information on his blog.

    I do.

    You might ask yourself: when is the last time JohnReid9 posted on this blog? When is the last time I stated that JohnReid9 had misrepresented my private communications with him? These are questions you might want to ask yourself.

    Comment by Patterico (f724ca) — 7/3/2011 @ 4:28 pm

  888. With all the talk of bannings and sock puppets, this place reads more like 4chan than a respectable conservative blog. Just Sayin.

    Comment by JustinSayin

    And as a concerned Christian conservative, you just had to speak up?

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/3/2011 @ 4:29 pm

  889. You might ask yourself: when is the last time JohnReid9 posted on this blog? When is the last time I stated that JohnReid9 had misrepresented my private communications with him? These are questions you might want to ask yourself.

    Funny you should say this. I was sitting here wondering if JohnReid9 was in moderation or something….

    Asking myself isn’t working; there’s only a handful of people who could answer this question.

    Comment by Pious Agnostic (6048a8) — 7/3/2011 @ 4:34 pm

  890. #874, JustinSayin, Patterico’s not all that thin skinned. He takes his share of hard knocks here, some on target and some wide of the mark, and he doesn’t pull rank.

    But, yes, he can also be prickly at times. On balance though, for the most part, he’s hard working, fair, and patient.

    Check out the most recent Sockpuppet Friday post, there are several shots aimed directly at him.

    Comment by ropelight (8ea8ac) — 7/3/2011 @ 4:35 pm

  891. On the contrary, Dustin, cats CAN use the facilities indoors, and that is a distinct advantage, even when they forget to flush.

    What’s the saying? Dogs have owners, cats have staff. I guess that is true, but hey, free mice.

    Comment by Sarahw (af7312) — 7/3/2011 @ 4:36 pm

  892. “I know SPQR, but Lee has torpedoed all credibility with me. You’re kinder than I am in this.

    Comment by Stashiu3 — 7/3/2011 @ 9:33 am

    I’m sure its a phase that I’ll grow out of in a minute or two, returning to my usual asshole self … and sure enough, I just did.

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 7/3/2011 @ 4:37 pm

  893. Interesting that JustinSayin lumps Jeff, Lee, and Radly in the same group. I don’t think Patterico ever said such a thing.

    Patterico has been very tolerant of disagreement on his blog for years, but he debates in a principled manner and he does take exception to his positions and arguments being misstated and distorted and to private discussions being published without permission and in many cases without much attention to accuracy. Is that what JustinSayin is saying these people have in common?

    I don’t think that reflects badly on Patterico.

    Comment by Machinist (b6f7da) — 7/3/2011 @ 4:38 pm

  894. Cats rule!!

    Comment by Machinist (b6f7da) — 7/3/2011 @ 4:40 pm

  895. I would not be surprised if Lee or others have asked people to comment on here against Patrick.

    Those of us who know Patrick, know better. The rest is just an ill attempt at defamation of character by people who have an agenda … and very transparent.

    Comment by Anita Busch (a025dd) — 7/3/2011 @ 4:45 pm

  896. I think we should start taking bets on what time 1000 will appear. (although I suppose someone could take the fun out of it and type “I Win” a hundred times.
    I’m taking 6:59 pm

    Comment by StillConfused (786412) — 7/3/2011 @ 4:45 pm

  897. norcal 830, 851

    IMO a man who does what he wants despite what “people” will think is most attractive. Less attractive is thinking that we women all think alike. ;) Get a cat if that’s what fits your lifestyle best. If you lose out on a date because of it … well, aren’t likely missing out on much.

    Dustin, 867 Agreed.. although I had a 120 lb rottweiler who could (until I caught her) jump into the kitchen sink to perch in the window with the grace of a cat. Straight up– without a running start.

    Comment by eman (0e848b) — 7/3/2011 @ 4:46 pm

  898. This site is starting to remind me of LGF, unfortunately.

    Comment by oldirishpig (e7adde) — 7/3/2011 @ 4:46 pm

  899. This site is starting to remind me of LGF, unfortunately.

    Comment by oldirishpig — 7/3/2011 @ 4:46 pm

    When your comment disappears, I’ll believe you.

    Comment by Pious Agnostic (6048a8) — 7/3/2011 @ 4:49 pm

  900. Machinist – JustinSayin mentions Patterico and JG have gotten in spats. JG has pissed everybody off over the years. For some reason JustinSayin feels this reflects more on Patterico.

    I know, I know, Intentionalism!

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/3/2011 @ 4:51 pm

  901. Comment by Pious Agnostic — 7/3/2011 @ 4:49 pm

    Good point! Nicely put.

    Comment by Machinist (b6f7da) — 7/3/2011 @ 4:54 pm

  902. This might be good time for me to bring up my new product line.
    THE SOCKPUPPET 2000! ©
    It’s truly the most innovative product that you simply must HAVE! If you call now for just 19.95$ plus s/h
    You too can own your very own SOCKPUPPET 2000! ©
    The SOCKPUPPET 2000 © is 100% GREEN! it eats garbage! It spews garbage! All for the low, low cost of just 19.95$ Plus s/h
    Call now for very own ECO FRIENDLY SOCKPUPPET 2000!

    Comment by Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c) — 7/3/2011 @ 4:55 pm

  903. “But, yes, he can also be prickly at times. ”

    Just don’t make him have to repeat himself.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/3/2011 @ 4:56 pm

  904. 901?

    Comment by slp (347e33) — 7/3/2011 @ 4:56 pm

  905. daleyrocks,
    The people he mentions tend top take disagreement as attacks and fly off the handle. I would resent being lumped with some of those.

    Comment by Machinist (b6f7da) — 7/3/2011 @ 4:57 pm

  906. I meant to be 901 when I wrote “901?”

    Will this post be 902 or a later post?

    Comment by slp (347e33) — 7/3/2011 @ 4:58 pm

  907. 902 – I have see a few “don’t make me have to repeat myself” comments here and on twitter. I thought it was interesting at the time.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/3/2011 @ 4:58 pm

  908. Approximately 93 comments to go! Excelsior!

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/3/2011 @ 5:00 pm

  909. Millenarianism can be fun!

    Comment by Mokum (20a906) — 7/3/2011 @ 5:03 pm

  910. Boxers or briefs?

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/3/2011 @ 5:05 pm

  911. Millenarianism can be fun!

    Comment by Mokum

    Back in high school, I started a great fight by laying out the argument for post-tribulationism, nearly provoking a fist-fight between two of the youth.

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/3/2011 @ 5:05 pm

  912. Here’s another 0.1%

    Comment by Pious Agnostic (6048a8) — 7/3/2011 @ 5:10 pm

  913. Speaking of the various tribulationisms, what if that idea was planted on purpose so we won’t be all that afraid when some alien race comes to collect us for food? Lee, thoughts?

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/3/2011 @ 5:15 pm

  914. Ok, gonna take the kids to the pool. Have fun!

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/3/2011 @ 5:15 pm

  915. @ #900

    Will there be a special om Sockpuppet Friday?

    Comment by Bill M (25d866) — 7/3/2011 @ 5:16 pm

  916. I had to look it up. Apparently, “post-tribulationism” is the belief that after this thread reaches 1000 comments, there will be a period when loyal Patterico readers will remain, wandering about aimlessly, until such time when another post is, uh, posted.

    Comment by Pious Agnostic (6048a8) — 7/3/2011 @ 5:17 pm

  917. Tempus fugit.

    Comment by roy in nipomo (bca582) — 7/3/2011 @ 5:24 pm

  918. EDF scares children and small animals.

    Comment by StillConfused (786412) — 7/3/2011 @ 5:24 pm

  919. Pretty accurate, Pious Agnostic!

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/3/2011 @ 5:28 pm

  920. “When your comment disappears, I’ll believe you.

    Comment by Pious Agnostic — 7/3/2011 @ 4:49 pm”

    It isn’t so much a case of you believing me, because I do feel that way, but more a question of your agreement, wouldn’t you say? But once the disappearances start (not saying they will, mind you), it will be too late, lol.

    Still, I take your point. Well said.

    Comment by oldirishpig (e7adde) — 7/3/2011 @ 5:29 pm

  921. 776. Tutu

    thanks

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/3/2011 @ 5:30 pm

  922. SOCKPUPPET FRIDAYS! © Why didn’t I think of that!

    Comment by Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c) — 7/3/2011 @ 5:33 pm

  923. What’s the topic again?

    Comment by Mrs. Ed (a91fe8) — 7/3/2011 @ 5:34 pm

  924. it’s “smoked sausage”…

    Comment by ColonelHaiku (822dce) — 7/3/2011 @ 5:36 pm

  925. 820. JeffM

    Excellent points about how JG MA may have perceived Lee interaction.

    I asked Lee to list everything he said to JG MA and he hasn’t responded. I don’t know if he saw my question or not.

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/3/2011 @ 5:37 pm

  926. nuttin’ from nuttin’
    but Barry the Destroyer
    he just gotta go

    Comment by ColonelHaiku (822dce) — 7/3/2011 @ 5:38 pm

  927. this just in to desk
    weiner caught snortin’ some tweet
    off his blackberry

    Comment by ColonelHaiku (822dce) — 7/3/2011 @ 5:41 pm

  928. Ponder the meaning of post No.925

    Comment by Cmate (525edc) — 7/3/2011 @ 5:41 pm

  929. #926 – I am awestruck.

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/3/2011 @ 5:42 pm

  930. I’m not going to go back and re-read all 900+ comments.

    Did we decide that Patterico’s theories, (you remember, the topic of this post) were plausible and/or realistic?

    Patterico said in UPDATE X2 that he was feeling better “with each passing second.” A lot of seconds have passed since then. I note, also, that good feelings can be generated by having a disturbing theory disproved, so don’t assume, as some have done, that this means he really likes these theories.

    I seem to recall that #1 was generally not supported, while #2 was generally rebutted with “meh.”

    Right? Wrong? Indifferent?

    Either way, closer to our true goal.

    Comment by Pious Agnostic (6048a8) — 7/3/2011 @ 5:45 pm

  931. colonel’s lost brain cells
    come back to haunt him BIGTIME
    but he got rhythm

    Comment by ColonelHaiku (822dce) — 7/3/2011 @ 5:46 pm

  932. PA,
    Patterico wrote: “I’m feeling better about the theory with each passing second.” (emphasis added)

    Comment by Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (62e76d) — 7/3/2011 @ 5:47 pm

  933. Come on 1000…

    (Just trying to help)

    Comment by RB (382560) — 7/3/2011 @ 5:49 pm

  934. Patterico’s theories

    1. False

    2. True

    3. True

    Comment by slp (347e33) — 7/3/2011 @ 5:51 pm

  935. On the other hand, the evidence to date supports the following answers:

    1. False

    2. False

    3. False

    Comment by slp (347e33) — 7/3/2011 @ 5:53 pm

  936. #930 Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R.

    Ah, good point. I guess that an average person would interpret that to mean that the course of the discussion made him more inclined to think the theory sound.

    I’m hardly an expert of Intentionalism (what I know I’ve learned here) but I know that an average person’s interpretation is a powerful argument, absent any other way of determining what an author intended.

    Comment by Pious Agnostic (6048a8) — 7/3/2011 @ 5:54 pm

  937. Pious Agnostic,

    That’s what I think as well. It may also be a goad to those who think the theory wrong to speak up. He’s carefully withheld an ex patterica pronouncement on the theory’s validity.

    Comment by Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (62e76d) — 7/3/2011 @ 5:58 pm

  938. ex patterica

    LOVE it! :)

    Comment by Pious Agnostic (6048a8) — 7/3/2011 @ 6:02 pm

  939. Is this the ONT?

    Comment by MDr (fd1f4b) — 7/3/2011 @ 6:06 pm

  940. Very clever, Bradley, and I think your theory may be right, too.

    On another topic, did John Reid ever explain how Jennifer George’s Twitter account changed into Nikki Reid’s? I’ve read so much stuff that I can’t remember if that’s been answered.

    Comment by DRJ (fdd243) — 7/3/2011 @ 6:10 pm

  941. Dragging this thread across the 1000 comment line is like going to Branson. It isn’t all that interesting or enlightening, but when it’s over, you can say you did it once.

    Comment by CausticConservative (b29599) — 7/3/2011 @ 6:13 pm

  942. #938 – I cannot recall, either, and it’s a good question.

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/3/2011 @ 6:13 pm

  943. Patterico=Patrick Frey=Idiot Prosecutor

    Once this post is deleted, it will screw up whoever gets Post 1000!!

    Comment by mr mister (3eb1d0) — 7/3/2011 @ 6:14 pm

  944. When you’re transitioning from dyed in the wool “Crooks & Liars is teh bomb” to neo-conservative (a la neo-neocon), there are bound to be stumbles along the way, and a great many growing pains. It is possible Stranahan stumbled painfully.

    But I have also found times where I felt the need to fire my 16-inch main battery at Patterico. (What can I say? I’m a former member of the Teufel Hunden.)

    Comment by John Hitchcock (9e8ad9) — 7/3/2011 @ 6:16 pm

  945. Oh, and mr mister is just a moron sock for some other moron who has been here before and got banned for being a moron.

    Comment by John Hitchcock (9e8ad9) — 7/3/2011 @ 6:17 pm

  946. Mr. Mister … assassinate character much? And anonymously, too. Means you have an agenda to defame. What a despicable act.

    Comment by Anita Busch (a025dd) — 7/3/2011 @ 6:20 pm

  947. This comment thread is running on fumes now. It’s going to be an empty victory for Patterico!

    Comment by CausticConservative (b29599) — 7/3/2011 @ 6:26 pm

  948. Take
    These Broken Wings
    And Learn To Lie Again
    Learn to Live Unfree.

    Comment by Pious Agnostic (6048a8) — 7/3/2011 @ 6:26 pm

  949. Throw us a bone so we can go for 2K!

    Comment by CausticConservative (b29599) — 7/3/2011 @ 6:28 pm

  950. 16 inch guns are sweet.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-5ATYPrZnSQ&feature=related

    Comment by Machinist (b6f7da) — 7/3/2011 @ 6:30 pm

  951. Throw us a bone so we can go for 2K!

    Comment by CausticConservative

    Bite your tongue! Or rap your own knuckles with a pencil!

    I can blather with the best, but that’s too much to ask.

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/3/2011 @ 6:30 pm

  952. When we get to 1,000 do we get Teh Rapture or Teh Zombie Apocalypse?

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/3/2011 @ 6:31 pm

  953. There is a story that I hate.
    It is this thing called “Weinergate.”
    We always knew he was a loser.
    Why must he dominate my Google newser?
    Wouldn’t want to speculate*
    But maybe he’s a boozer.*

    http://hotair.com/archives/2011/06/02/a-poem-my-take-on-weinergate/

    Comment by MDr (fd1f4b) — 7/3/2011 @ 6:33 pm

  954. Four dozen doughnuts.

    Imagine four boxes of doughnuts, somebody brought them into the office.

    Everybody takes one. They, they are all gone.

    That’s how many comments we have left. Take one.

    Comment by Pious Agnostic (6048a8) — 7/3/2011 @ 6:34 pm

  955. Sock puppets and threats,
    Pictures we don’t want to see,
    A dirty business.

    Comment by Machinist (b6f7da) — 7/3/2011 @ 6:38 pm

  956. Like some arguments,
    Those doughnuts have holes in them.
    And they are messy.

    Comment by Machinist (b6f7da) — 7/3/2011 @ 6:40 pm

  957. A cinnamon roll,
    Is better than two doughnuts,
    But counts only once.

    Comment by Machinist (b6f7da) — 7/3/2011 @ 6:42 pm

  958. Quantity from me,
    Quality from other folks,
    With more agile minds.

    Comment by Machinist (b6f7da) — 7/3/2011 @ 6:44 pm

  959. I think we all should understand that there is a or several criminal forces at work here … People have gotten threatened for looking into a news story.

    I experienced this myself first-hand.

    The criminal/s behind these threats is/are domestic terrorists and should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

    These tactics are not unfamiliar. They are similar to what “Sineater” pi Anthony Pellicano (who worked to discredit Gennifer Flowers and Monica Lewinsky for Bill and Hillary Clinton) worked — threaten and defame.

    FACTS: Lesbian rumors surfaced in Sept. 2007 about Huma and Hillary and the very next month, the NY Post posted a gossip item about Huma’s romantic interest in Anthony Weiner. Bill Clinton officiated at their wedding.

    Pellicano was thrown in prison for 15 years. I can only hope whomever is behind these criminal threats ends up with a similar fate.

    They are the scum of the Earth.

    Comment by Anita Busch (a025dd) — 7/3/2011 @ 6:45 pm

  960. It’s late for me, so this’ll be my last until tomorrow.

    Take it on home, Machinist!

    Comment by Pious Agnostic (6048a8) — 7/3/2011 @ 6:46 pm

  961. Pious Agnostic,
    Good night and sweet dreams to you,
    We will carry on.

    Comment by Machinist (b6f7da) — 7/3/2011 @ 6:49 pm

  962. Comment by Anita Busch — 7/3/2011 @ 6:45 pm

    I could not agree more, but it will be hard to make progress with this. The left is too dependent on it as a tactic.

    Comment by Machinist (b6f7da) — 7/3/2011 @ 6:51 pm

  963. Neal Rauhauser’s Linked-In profile says “Hitman for the Lesbian Mafia” underneath his name.

    Comment by Anita Busch (a025dd) — 7/3/2011 @ 6:52 pm

  964. @Machinist — Politics is a dirty business and has been throughout history, but don’t kid yourself. It goes on on BOTH sides. Remember Watergate?

    Comment by Anita Busch (a025dd) — 7/3/2011 @ 6:54 pm

  965. Pellicano was thrown in prison for 15 years. I can only hope whomever is behind these criminal threats ends up with a similar fate.

    They are the scum of the Earth.

    Agreed. But let’s hope they’re not thrown in a California prison, or “15 years” might well turn into 90 days, measured as 5 8-hour days a week, making a calendar week turn into 4 weeks and a day of prison time.

    Comment by John Hitchcock (9e8ad9) — 7/3/2011 @ 6:58 pm

  966. Gratuitious shot at post 1000!

    Comment by Kaisersoze (c86eb0) — 7/3/2011 @ 6:59 pm

  967. On another topic, did John Reid ever explain how Jennifer George’s Twitter account changed into Nikki Reid’s?
    Comment by DRJ — 7/3/2011 @ 6:10 pm

    That is one of gaping holes in JohnReid9′s story. As Lee demonstrated, it was simple for Jennifer George to change the name on the account from starchild 111 to Nikki Reid. His demonstration is on his site.

    http://leestranahan.com/

    Comment by slp (347e33) — 7/3/2011 @ 6:59 pm

  968. This still going on? Perhaps Patterico play the Palin Card; that’s good for at least 40 PDS-inspired comments.

    Hope you get to 1K, seriously.

    Comment by Simon Jester (2df2ee) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:01 pm

  969. Lee Stranahan has a new post up saying he will stop commenting on Weinergate, as it is in the hands of law enforcement. I am in total agreement, as I say here.

    This is still the relevant comment thread and will remain so.

    Comment by Patterico (f724ca) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:01 pm

  970. You guys are lagging, my post 964 should have been 1000.

    A couple of random thoughts –

    I like Lee but he lost me when he posted that we had all “gone off the rails on the crazy train” by “pretending” JReid was real.

    On the big picture, I still think the story is coordination by Weiner and his staff to cover things up and we still have some big trees that shouldn’t be missed for this forest –

    1 – Gennette was involved and was frantically trying to gather information here.

    2 – The blizzard of sockpuppetry by the various players

    3 – The appearance of Dem Operative Neil, who could conceivably be exactly the type of guy a Dem congressman would bring in for sub rosa work and then deny knowing later.

    Comment by Kaisersoze (c86eb0) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:02 pm

  971. Lee has stopped talking publicly but I’ll be on TMZ tomorrow. Stay tuned, lots of news to come!

    Comment by Strahahan's Cat (c86eb0) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:05 pm

  972. That Jennifer George in Massachusetts created Nikki Reid, JohnReid9, Marinela Alicea, Mark Alicea, PatriotUSA76,and Alicia Pain is more likely scenario than starchild111 was hacked and taken over by someone else.

    Comment by slp (347e33) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:07 pm

  973. I like the way you think KaiserSose.

    Comment by CausticConservative (b29599) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:07 pm

  974. Alicia Pain is not necessarily in the same category as the rest.

    I mean nobody is NECESSARILY in the same category, but she especially is not.

    Comment by Patterico (f724ca) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:08 pm

  975. 951.When we get to 1,000 do we get Teh Rapture or Teh Zombie Apocalypse?

    Oooh, tough choice. Canz I haz both please?!?

    Hopefully, Pat will have the updated post he has been hinting at.

    Comment by Bill M (25d866) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:09 pm

  976. “It’s in the hands of law enforcement at this point.”

    Is there an active investigation by law enforcement?

    Comment by oldirishpig (e7adde) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:09 pm

  977. I don’t plan to do a post about this, but I have a couple of rhetorical questions:

    1) Who first mentioned JG to Lee?

    2) Who first brought Marianela Alicea tweets to Tommy Christopher’s attention?

    3) What is the relationship of this person to Andrew Breitbart?

    Chew on all that for a while and get back to me.

    And yeah: I came up with that ALL ON MY OWN! So don’t ask me who tipped me off.

    Comment by Patterico (f724ca) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:10 pm

  978. Where is JohnReid9?

    When is he going to do the video chat with Patterico?

    Comment by slp (347e33) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:10 pm

  979. Is there an active investigation by law enforcement?

    No comment.

    Comment by Patterico (f724ca) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:11 pm

  980. Dang. Lee’s big book/movie deal must be on hold then. *cry (ugh)

    Comment by StillConfused (786412) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:13 pm

  981. It looks like Lee is taking a break from the story, that’s probably wise. This story seems to carry with it a Mummy like curse. The more involved you get the madder you become.

    Comment by Johnny 5 is alive (5ccc5e) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:13 pm

  982. At post 1000, I don’t have to worry about putting gas in my car anymore or paying my mortgage. At post 1000 Obama does it for me!

    Comment by Kaisersoze (c86eb0) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:15 pm

  983. I’ve been wondering who brought up the JG name in general I believe the story is that St. Louis Activist Hub brought up the name Jenny George in CA initially. Beyond that I don’t know where the name came from.

    Comment by Johnny 5 is alive (5ccc5e) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:15 pm

  984. “It’s in the hands of law enforcement at this point.”

    It could be worse.

    TSA

    Comment by MDr (fd1f4b) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:15 pm

  985. Alicia Pain is not necessarily in the same category as the rest.

    I mean nobody is NECESSARILY in the same category, but she especially is not.

    Comment by Patterico — 7/3/2011 @ 7:08 pm

    Sorry. I am not paying close enough attention to all the players.

    Comment by slp (347e33) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:17 pm

  986. Does the TSA CHeck SOCKS?

    Comment by mikemadden59 (3cb7fd) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:17 pm

  987. I was way off. I said #1000 would be 6:59pm

    Comment by StillConfused (786412) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:17 pm

  988. I can’t believe I’m sitting here refreshing my screen until the magic number appears.

    Comment by Bill M (25d866) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:17 pm

  989. This is still the relevant comment thread and will remain so.

    Comment by Patterico —

    I am now officially laughing until I cry. I have no idea what’s going on, I cannot make head nor tail of which sock puppet belongs to whom.

    I don’t even know if John Reid9 explained anything or not.

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:18 pm

  990. This whole episode should put to rest how in lockstep conservatives are. Contrary to popular leftie myth most people on the right for better or for worse think for themselves.

    Comment by Johnny 5 is alive (5ccc5e) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:18 pm

  991. FACTS: Lesbian rumors surfaced in Sept. 2007 about Huma and Hillary and the very next month, the NY Post posted a gossip item about Huma’s romantic interest in Anthony Weiner. Bill Clinton officiated at their wedding.

    Comment by Anita Busch — 7/3/2011 @ 6:45 pm

    Anita – Weiner’s behavior would make a lot more sense if he was a beard for Huma. Very good point.

    Comment by Kaisersoze (c86eb0) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:18 pm

  992. I agree 100% with what Johnny 5 said.

    Comment by mikemadden59 (3cb7fd) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:20 pm

  993. The true sockpuppet is Clinton’s dead caat, Socks.

    And it lives with Lee.

    Comment by Bill M (25d866) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:20 pm

  994. ba-da-bing!

    Comment by MDr (fd1f4b) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:20 pm

  995. Patterico do threats that cross state lines necessarily involve the FBI?

    Comment by Johnny 5 is alive (5ccc5e) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:20 pm

  996. Lee should dedicate his Weinergate book to Shari Lewis.

    Comment by slp (347e33) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:20 pm

  997. I’ve been wondering who brought up the JG name in general I believe the story is that St. Louis Activist Hub brought up the name Jenny George in CA initially. Beyond that I don’t know where the name came from.

    You answered #1.

    On to #2!

    Hint: you answered #2.

    Comment by Patterico (f724ca) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:20 pm

  998. So who the heck is Dan Wolfe anyway?

    Comment by CausticConservative (b29599) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:21 pm

  999. #1000 FTW!

    Comment by Johnny 5 is alive (5ccc5e) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:21 pm

  1000. For all of the socks out there. Your official mantra:

    http://www.hark.com/clips/wvqgqrzhrx-if-im-not-me-who-the-hell-am-i

    Comment by goatsred (b20383) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:21 pm

  1001. What 991 said. I’m down.

    Comment by MDr (fd1f4b) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:23 pm

  1002. Oh my. History

    Comment by MDr (fd1f4b) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:23 pm

  1003. So then who is St. Louis Activist Hub? My only knowledge of it is from the mentions by Lee.

    Comment by Kaisersoze (c86eb0) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:23 pm

  1004. Should old acquaintance be forgot,
    and never brought to mind ?
    Should old acquaintance be forgot,
    and old lang syne ?

    CHORUS:
    For auld lang syne, my dear,
    for auld lang syne,
    we’ll take a cup of kindness yet,
    for auld lang syne.

    And surely you’ll buy your pint cup !
    and surely I’ll buy mine !
    And we’ll take a cup o’ kindness yet,
    for auld lang syne.

    We two have run about the slopes,
    and picked the daisies fine ;
    But we’ve wandered many a weary foot,
    since auld lang syne.

    We two have paddled in the stream,
    from morning sun till dine† ;
    But seas between us broad have roared
    since auld lang syne.

    And there’s a hand my trusty friend !
    And give us a hand o’ thine !
    And we’ll take a right good-will draught,
    for auld lang syne.

    Comment by StillConfused (786412) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:23 pm

  1005. Sorry. I am not paying close enough attention to all the players.

    Comment by slp

    “Alicia Pain” is the name/pseudonym attached to threats made to Patterico, Ace, and possibly others.

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:23 pm

  1006. Hey, look, a thing!

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:24 pm

  1007. Adam Shriver was the guy Tommy Christopher credited with bringing details about Veronica (Marianela Alicea.)

    Comment by CausticConservative (b29599) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:24 pm

  1008. I know I said I don’t plan to talk about it, but . . . well, I might. A bit.

    Like just now.

    But mostly not. Is what I meant.

    Comment by Patterico (f724ca) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:25 pm

  1009. Where’s the kaboom? There was supposed to be an earth-shattering kaboom!

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:25 pm

  1010. Has anyone figured out where St. Louis Activist Hub got the name Jenny George? To me, if the name is correct, somebody who knows Jenny George threw her under the bus. Which would mean somebody knew what Jenny George was up to. Which leads to the idea that she could possibly have an accomplice. dun dun dun DUN!

    Comment by Johnny 5 is alive (5ccc5e) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:26 pm

  1011. Adam Shriver

    Is who on Twitter?

    Comment by Patterico (f724ca) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:26 pm

  1012. This is all still quite rhetorical.

    Comment by Patterico (f724ca) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:26 pm

  1013. On to 2000!

    Comment by Patterico (f724ca) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:27 pm

  1014. Well that was rather anti-climatic. Shall we go for 2000?

    Comment by StillConfused (786412) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:27 pm

  1015. So who the heck is Dan Wolfe anyway?

    Comment by CausticConservative

    I sure don’t know. Sometimes, it seems to me that he’s just a sensible person keeping his head down; other times, I wonder if he isn’t the perfect sock, the instigator of trouble and all our current evils.

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:27 pm

  1016. You can keep talking, I suppose, if you want. Just please don’t attribute opinions or theories to me, thanks.

    AArrgh! Does this mean no Zombie Apocalypse?

    Comment by Bill M (25d866) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:27 pm

  1017. Dammit, Janet! I missed it!

    Comment by Tutu (54ce64) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:29 pm

  1018. Where’s the kaboom? There was supposed to be an earth-shattering kaboom!

    Comment by crosspatch

    Bless you! I love it!

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:29 pm

  1019. I do like mysteries,but was hoping we would get the answers at 1,000.

    Comment by PatAZ (efd43b) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:29 pm

  1020. Second # 1016

    Comment by Bill M (25d866) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:31 pm

  1021. On to 2000!

    Comment by Patterico

    I’ve done my bit.

    My confusion is only slightly less, mostly because I’ve more or less given up.

    Oh, well, Happy 4th of July, Patterico!

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:31 pm

  1022. St. Louis Activist Hub posted on his blog a search he had done on 123 dot com. Using Jennifer George as search criteria. Vaguely, described how he found Jennifer George tied to 1/2011 “Jenay” starchild cache page revelation.

    On 123 dot com, there is a reference to “Jennifer George” associated with starchild111 accnt

    Comment by az5thdstrct (e76e6a) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:32 pm

  1023. How can this caper ever be solved with Columbo dead?

    Comment by Johnny 5 is alive (5ccc5e) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:33 pm

  1024. So, comments to 1000 was used as an incentive to what? Say nothing else is going to be written about any of this?

    Well, that’s teh suck.

    Comment by Susie Q (a6955c) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:33 pm

  1025. The issue with Starchild111 and how it could get from JG to a fake Nikki Reid is still a major item that needs furher discussion.

    Lee and Patteric need to continue to focus the Sockpuppets.

    Joe

    Comment by Joe Smith (54c0c1) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:35 pm

  1026. Here’s the link where Shriver introduces the world to Jennifer George:

    http://stlactivisthub.blogspot.com/2011/06/is-starchild111-actually-jennifer.html

    Comment by CausticConservative (b29599) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:36 pm

  1027. “AArrgh! Does this mean no Zombie Apocalypse?”

    Keep the faith. Rumors has it that Mila already has it in the can, and Patrick will be showing a sneak preview after #2000

    Comment by MDr (fd1f4b) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:38 pm

  1028. People have abandoned my questions.

    Hint.

    I don’t know what any of it means, but I find it interesting.

    Comment by Patterico (f724ca) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:38 pm

  1029. Enough for now. Gonna celebrate the 4th by participating in a 4th of July Parade and help turn more youngsters into vile Republicians. Always a worthwhile endeavor.

    Happy 4th to one and all.

    Comment by Bill M (25d866) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:38 pm

  1030. Patterico,

    Both you and Lee were so deep into the weeds on this twitter-fake-ID thing, reaching the 15th level of self-referentiality while simultaneously speaking of pseudo-pseudo-fake characters, all the while portentously telling us that something BIG was just around the corner – and the whole time, maybe 3 people knew what the hell you were talking about.

    And now you somewhat pompously act like we were the ones with the problem, and you’re moving on, but we can keep talking about it if we want. But it’s you and Lee who were the super-freaks on this, not us. Maybe you were adopting fake identities and threatening each other the whole time!

    Comment by Brian (01bc92) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:39 pm

  1031. Read through the activist hub and you see that Shriver has big issues with Dana Loesch, including a number of confrontations. Loesch works for Breitbart’s Big Journalism. I don’t know if Shriver has had any interaction with Breitbart, however.

    Comment by CausticConservative (b29599) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:41 pm

  1032. 1009, my guess would be stlactivisthub

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:45 pm

  1033. And now you somewhat pompously act like we were the ones with the problem,

    Comment by Brian — 7/3/2011 @ 7:39 pm

    He says in a thread with a thousand comments….

    Comment by Kaisersoze (c86eb0) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:45 pm

  1034. @ Patterico,

    I haven’t abandoned your questions I’ve tweeted Brietbart to find out how he feels about Adam from St. Louis Activist Hub.

    Comment by Johnny 5 is alive (5ccc5e) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:49 pm

  1035. Anyway, yesterday, someone tweeted an interesting
    link that showed that one of the girls, @starchild111, who throughout #weinergate was thought to be named “Nikki”, originally had the name “Jenay.”

    Who tweeted Shriver’s “interesting link?” I cannot access itwith the link provided. It does read like a set-up in hind sight.

    Comment by CausticConservative (b29599) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:51 pm

  1036. Shriver. 31. doctoral student. At 31! Still. Professional student. Wash U. Starting to make sense.

    Comment by MDr (fd1f4b) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:53 pm

  1037. Hmm, never saw this blog before:

    http://danabusted.blogspot.com/2010/09/adam-shriver-pwns-dana-loesch-stl.html

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:55 pm

  1038. Does anyone else have posts disappear into the ether here from time to time? I’ve had two that after posting never showed up. Perhaps the comment section is feeling a little taxed today.

    Comment by Johnny 5 is alive (5ccc5e) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:55 pm

  1039. 820 JeffM

    And I’m a fan of Lees and interact with him all the time, and while I’m not in fear of him, per se, I do consider how I’m going to approach him so as not to rub him the wrong way.

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:56 pm

  1040. poor lee stranahan
    he try to leave leftwing Hell
    keep pulling him back

    Comment by ColonelHaiku (822dce) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:57 pm

  1041. http://danabusted.blogspot.com/search/label/Adam%20Shriver

    so yeah, looks like Shriver tweets under stlactivisthub

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:58 pm

  1042. #1031

    That was me. “Anyway, yesterday, someone tweeted an interesting”

    I had sent the 1/2011 Jenay cache page to Stranahan. I guess STLA saw my tweet/mention to Stranahan. Or, Lee had nearly immediately posted the Jenay page find and STLA may have seen it that way. Don’t know for sure.

    When STLA made initial post on JG 123 dot com find. He tweeted it out and copied me on his tweet. He did because the original post included my actual handle name on post as submitting the Jenay cache page (which I did to Stranahan only).

    I had no idea of the 123 dot com reference before STLA has posted. When STLA updated his post, he redacted some names including my handle.

    Comment by az5thdstrct (e76e6a) — 7/3/2011 @ 7:59 pm

  1043. 825 Susie Q.

    I’m relatively new here and only know of Pat & Lee re: Weinergate revelations.

    I never got the liberal vibe from Lee on this story.

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:01 pm

  1044. So, comments to 1000 was used as an incentive to what? Say nothing else is going to be written about any of this?
    Well, that’s teh suck.

    Comment by Susie Q — 7/3/2011 @ 7:33 pm

    It does feel like a let-down but I think we need to keep in mind that both Patterico and Lee have agreed to stop blogging because “It’s in the hands of law enforcement at this point.” That strikes me as significant.

    Comment by DRJ (fdd243) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:04 pm

  1045. So LE is now involved because of the threats I take it? Good. Hopefully they can help get to the bottom of this.

    Comment by Noodles (3681c4) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:10 pm

  1046. We are practically to the point of this episode where someone emerges in handcuffs and exclaims, “And I’d have gotten away with it too. If it weren’t for you meddling kids!”

    That’s the payoff I’m looking for here. Anything else will be a disappointment.

    Comment by CausticConservative (b29599) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:10 pm

  1047. So LE is now involved because of the threats I take it?

    It is just impossible for people to write about this without making assumptions, isn’t it?

    Comment by Patterico (f724ca) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:13 pm

  1048. 841 Crispian

    Well-said.

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:13 pm

  1049. 842. Jan.

    I could be mistaken, but I think Lee thinks all socks (all the Reids, Marianela, very probably Dan/Patriot, and possibly more characters according to lee) could be one person, the JG MA who called him, and the motive is she was into Weiner, but then turned on him. Ex-lover/crush revenge. JG MA started Starchild and kept it all along. It was never taken over by anyone else. She’s a very liberal person, who will play any part to get the ultimate revenge on RAW.

    Apologies to Lee if I got this wrong.

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:18 pm

  1050. “Come, Watson, come!” he cried. “The game is afoot.”

    Comment by slp (347e33) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:22 pm

  1051. 854 mikemadden59

    Great thinking.

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:23 pm

  1052. 1044 Koam

    “Ex-lover/crush revenge.”

    Of Huma or Anthony?

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:25 pm

  1053. Patterico, what else is worth law enforcement’s interest? I am not a lawyer, or anything like one, but I don’t see what else is of the vaguest interest.

    I know I could be missing something, and you may think I’m thick, but really, how is an internet hoax of much interest to the law?

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:29 pm

  1054. @ Patterico

    Good God man. Is this a comment section of a blog or are we all detectives/socks/and suspects? My statement was my own opinion of what I think is going on.

    Comment by Noodles (3681c4) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:29 pm

  1055. Posted below the headline for the Overnight Open Thread over at Ace’s HQ:

    Got your nick, tracing your ip address…

    Perhaps closure is actually….close.

    Comment by CausticConservative (b29599) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:31 pm

  1056. @ Patterico

    My last post may have come out as harsh (not how I intended it). I just don’t get why everyone gets this feeling that everything we type is part of the story or whatever. I see it as commenting on a blog.

    Comment by Noodles (3681c4) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:39 pm

  1057. Okay, I’ve compiled this to make it easier (for me, at least). Patterico asked the following questions, albeit rhetorically…

    1) Who first mentioned JG to Lee?

    #981 Johnny 5 is alive answers that it is St. Louis Activist Hub. #1020 az5thdstrct finds that they found this information through a people search website and #1023 CausticConservative gives the link to Adam Shriver’s post which explains his findings.

    2) Who first brought Marianela Alicea tweets to Tommy Chris?

    #1009 Patterico says Adam Shriver who is a blogger at St. Louis Activist Hub wrote the post for the link I gave above. Patterico gives further proof in #1025 that Adam is an author for St. Louis Activist Hub by linking here.

    3) What is the relationship of this person to Andrew Breitbart?

    #1028 CausticConservative determines a Dana Loesch connection. Loesch is the editor for Breitbart’s Big Journalism.

    #1033 and #1036 crosspatch gives links to the DanaBusted blog here and here, which show the animosity between Adam Shriver and Dana Loesch. Both the liberal Shriver and conservative Loesch are involved in St. Louis politics and are apparently rivals.

    My question: is Adam Shriver trustworthy or is he leading us down the rabbit hole? I can see how this would fit with the possibilities Patterico outlined in this blog post.

    Comment by rogerthat (f5aad4) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:42 pm

  1058. IP address traces often don’t mean much these days.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:43 pm

  1059. Dianna,

    You’re just going to have to trust me.

    Comment by Patterico (03ef17) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:48 pm

  1060. You’re just going to have to trust me.

    Comment by Patterico

    To comment 2,000 and beyond, I guess.

    I’m curious. Very, very curious.

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/3/2011 @ 8:54 pm

  1061. 957, 989.

    Very interesting, along my way of thinking. I’m very critical of timing of pregnancy news, plus the ho-hum reaction for a young bride (with strong Muslim upbringing) subjected to international humiliation. I wouldn’t be shopping with him or eating with him. And I wouldn’t accept those crummy, ugly flowers. Would anyone but me be not suprised if the Mrs. returned from her trip to the spa sans baby? Very evil thought, but I wouldn’t put anything past the Clintons, et. al.

    Comment by gobblemom (706d9f) — 7/3/2011 @ 9:00 pm

  1062. “Where’s the kaboom? There was supposed to be an earth-shattering kaboom!

    Comment by crosspatch”

    You mean it wasn’t as good for you as it was for me?

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/3/2011 @ 9:08 pm

  1063. “My question: is Adam Shriver trustworthy or is he leading us down the rabbit hole.”

    rogerthat – I don’t know anything about rabbit holes, but a quick glance at the absolute bilge and propaganda that fills his blog posts shows he is not trustworthy.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/3/2011 @ 9:11 pm

  1064. 1057 – Well, let me just say that I didn’t need a cigarette after.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/3/2011 @ 9:12 pm

  1065. “So, comments to 1000 was used as an incentive to what?”

    Susie Q – I got a new toaster. Didn’t you register for a prize?

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/3/2011 @ 9:13 pm

  1066. 1058 daleyrocks:

    What disturbs me more than the content of the postings is the people who follow him. I mean, are some of these people *really* interested in that vitriol?

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/3/2011 @ 9:14 pm

  1067. 1008 J5A

    The name Jennifer George appears on 123people.com search tool with the twitter nickname “@starchild111″

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/3/2011 @ 9:28 pm

  1068. Okay, so Adam Shiver did those & is antagonistic to Andrew Brietbart. What does it mean? Also how the hell did Shriver get Alicea’s DMs anyway?

    Comment by RocksEm (5241c6) — 7/3/2011 @ 10:25 pm

  1069. Hmm, Charles Johnson seems to pop up a lot as I dig around.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/3/2011 @ 10:33 pm

  1070. I believe someone got the screenshot out of Stack’s yFrog account, where he had placed them by mistake.

    Comment by Patterico (f724ca) — 7/3/2011 @ 10:34 pm

  1071. Back to the initial propositions:

    1. The person claiming to be “Jennifer George” who called Lee was a hoaxer.

    2. There really was a person who threatened the real Jennifer George, and that person pretended to be Lee Stranahan.

    3. That person hates Lee, and Breitbart.

    Along with 200,000 other people, Adam Shriver fits items 2 and 3.

    Comment by slp (347e33) — 7/3/2011 @ 10:48 pm

  1072. Which of those 200,000 other people first ID’d Jennifer George as the owner of the starchild111 account, and tipped off Tommy Christopher as to alleged DMs from Weiner to Nikki Reid (per Marianela Alicea DMs to Mike Stack).

    The answer is zero of those 200,000 people.

    But thanks for posing the question so fairly!

    Comment by Patterico (f724ca) — 7/3/2011 @ 11:18 pm

  1073. Rauhauser’s post calling me a “Dishonest DA” is no longer available to anyone without permission.

    Good thing I screenshotted the whole thing before he took it out of public view.

    Hi, Neal!

    Comment by Patterico (f724ca) — 7/3/2011 @ 11:21 pm

  1074. “But thanks for posing the question so fairly!”

    Hey, slp has been nothing if not fair in helping to achieve the 1,000 comment goal if you ignore the content of the comments.

    “Sorry. I am not paying close enough attention to all the players.

    Comment by slp”

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/3/2011 @ 11:27 pm

  1075. Other than koam at 826 and SarahW at 680 no one else picked up on my questions in 676.
    I will do a more in depth analysis if anyone is interested. (Talking about internal as opposed to external sock puppets.)

    Comment by Have Blue (dbbcd4) — 7/3/2011 @ 11:28 pm

  1076. “Along with 200,000 other people, Adam Shriver fits items 2 and 3.”

    slp – I think Lee claims to get along well with Shriver, contradicting your #2.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/3/2011 @ 11:29 pm

  1077. Is is POSSIBLE that once conservatives found out about Weiner’s inappropriate sexual comments with adult females (long before it was published) that someone on the right tried to set Weiner up to show that he would ALSO do the same with underage females and created fake underage girl or girls?

    I mean it wouldn’t be a stretch.

    Comment by quickquestion (a025dd) — 7/3/2011 @ 11:37 pm

  1078. 1020 Az

    123people.com
    and the image he used was from
    123people.fr, though I don’t know why the French site’s screencap was used.

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/3/2011 @ 11:50 pm

  1079. “Sorry. I am not paying close enough attention to all the players.

    Comment by slp”

    Comment by daleyrocks — 7/3/2011 @ 11:27 pm

    I have been following Weinergate fairly closely, but doing my comments from memory without having made any charts or notes.

    At the time of the post, I recalled Alicia Pain had made threats and assumed that she was part of the Nikki Reid sock puppet cabal.

    I am eagerly waiting for Patterico to lay out the facts and the supporting evidence.

    Comment by slp (347e33) — 7/3/2011 @ 11:54 pm

  1080. Comment by daleyrocks — 7/3/2011 @ 11:29 pm

    Just because Lee claims to get along well with Shriver, does not exclude Shriver from being the person who threatened the real Jennifer George and pretended to be Lee Stranahan.

    Since Lee has been posting Weinergate stories on the Bigs, it may be that Shriver has taken Lee off his good guy list.

    Comment by slp (347e33) — 7/4/2011 @ 12:01 am

  1081. So what is the other Jennnifer E George ( the one that did NOT call Lee) doing tracking Jennifer Preston’s twitter cleanup using searchtastic.com?

    Joe

    Comment by Joe Smith (54c0c1) — 7/4/2011 @ 12:19 am

  1082. “Just because Lee claims to get along well with Shriver, does not exclude Shriver from being the person who threatened the real Jennifer George and pretended to be Lee Stranahan.”

    No sh*t?

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/4/2011 @ 12:27 am

  1083. Patterico,

    Yes, for example the goatsred aka Mike’s yFrog link was visible in a screen cap that was posted in a couple of blogs early in the Weinergate story.

    It was very easy to find the “real” names for Betty / Veronica and even Ethel.

    It even happened yesterday over on Lee’s blog where a screen shot was posted that showed Ethel’s twitter name before it was redacted on his blog post.

    Joe

    Comment by Joe Smith (54c0c1) — 7/4/2011 @ 12:43 am

  1084. 1079 1081 slp daleyrocks

    IIRC, Lee clearly states that he and Adam Shriver do not like each other at all. But Lee is proud not to let that fact get in the way of reporting on info. He doesn’t not listen to people just because he doesn’t like them.

    Of course this was in audio somewhere on BTR, not written up. Thanks, Lee.

    Correct me if I’m wrong.

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/4/2011 @ 12:43 am

  1085. “He doesn’t not listen to people just because he doesn’t like them.”

    koam @wittier – He also claims he doesn’t hold grudges, likes old people and puppies.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/4/2011 @ 1:07 am

  1086. Wittier,

    Jennifer George aka JG first came up based on a 123.com search and a refernce to Jennifer George and Starchild111 just like was posted.

    Joe

    Comment by Joe Smith (54c0c1) — 7/4/2011 @ 1:09 am

  1087. 1084 daleyrocks

    Yes, but in this case what I wrote is what Lee said and did.

    The implication is that perhaps his unbiased policy didn’t serve him well in this case?

    Lesson: If you know someone’s an a*#*##, maybe don’t listen to them?

    Not that I really understand the insinuations about what STLAH posted from 123people and if it’s right or wrong.

    We know “Jenay” was the name on @starchild111 in its earlier days.

    Question: When did the full name Jennifer George first come up?

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/4/2011 @ 1:13 am

  1088. It was posted on June 19 and that is what lead to everyone being an internet detective and reaching out to any and all Jen… Georges that they could find.

    This led to the Jennifer E George in CA being contacted by many individuals so she started posting the communictions.

    One or more Jennifer Georges contacted St. Louis Activist Hub and asked for their data to be removed from the blog.

    Excuse me could you please provide a contact number? I am Jennifer George from Los Angeles and I am getting calls now because of your blog. I’d like you to take this down. I have nothing to do with your ridiculous story. I will be calling the police as I am getting threats due to this. What is your number?

    June 19, 2011 5:11 PM

    Joe

    Comment by Joe Smith (54c0c1) — 7/4/2011 @ 1:15 am

  1089. 1085. Joe

    Wittier,

    Jennifer George aka JG first came up based on a 123.com search and a refernce to Jennifer George and Starchild111 just like was posted.

    Joe

    Comment by Joe Smith — 7/4/2011 @ 1:09 am

    That’s different from what I remember.

    We had the name “Jenay” and “@starchild111″

    I don’t recall having the name “Jennifer George”

    But at the STLAH post, Adam Shriver says he learned of the name “Jenay” and then revisited some search results.

    Anyway, yesterday, someone tweeted an interesting
    link that showed that one of the girls, @starchild111, who throughout #weinergate was thought to be named “Nikki”, originally had the name “Jenay.”

    This prompted me to reexamine some of the search results for @starchild, and it appears that the account @starchild111 is actually associated with the name “Jennifer George”

    http://stlactivisthub.blogspot.com/2011/06/is-starchild111-actually-jennifer.html

    The example of a search he posts from 123people is a search for “Jennifer George” on the UK site. He also attaches a screen capture of the search results for “Jennifer George” from the French version of 123people. In the image, you can read the URL which shows that he searched for “Jennifer George”

    http://www.123people.co.uk/s/jennifer+george

    http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-d57nb8yrDqM/Tf5qieK4CdI/AAAAAAAACOo/oyflKI4PUOg/s1600/jennifergeorge.png

    So the search is “backwards.”

    I’m asking where the name Jennifer George came from in the first place.

    If he had searched for “Jenay” and “@starchild111″ and the result was “Jennifer George” I would understand the direction of the information flow.

    But he didn’t do that. And I can’t get to “Jennifer George” as a result by searching for “Jenay” and/or “starchild” or “starchild111″

    He started with the name Jennifer George.

    Where did the name Jennifer George first come from?

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/4/2011 @ 1:37 am

  1090. I didn’t realize the name Jenay was short for Jennifer either. I thought Jen was short for Jennifer.

    Hopefully LE can get to the bottom of this at some point. I guess we’ll find out when the search for the threat makers reaches it’s conclusion. Have a great Independence Day everyone!

    Comment by Johnny 5 is alive (5ccc5e) — 7/4/2011 @ 2:20 am

  1091. I figured out a path to the 123people results without knowing the full name “Jennifer George”

    We knew “@starchild111″ and “Jenay”

    Make the guess that “Jenay” is a “Jennifer.”

    Google “@starchild111 Jennifer” and, to be fair, set the search dates to end 06/18/2011, the day before we think the Jennifer George name went public (so that search is hopefully not influenced by our chatter, post-STLAH)

    I got to http://www.123people.de/s/george+jennifer

    the German site for 123people

    If you don’t put the date params in, you can get to the UK 123people site for the search for “Jennifer George”

    Note that I didn’t use the name “George” in my Google searches (I “didn’t know George” and I guessed “Jennifer” from “Jenay”), but that searching for “@starchild111 Jennifer” took me to 123people pages as if I had searched for “Jennifer George”.

    And this fits with what I now recall from that day.

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/4/2011 @ 2:31 am

  1092. So, I’m guessing that STLAH made the same guess that I had to. You have to drop Jenay and guess Jennifer to get to Jennifer George in 123people by way of Google. STLAH just didn’t say what he’d done (at least in the version shown as of today…maybe he did in an earlier version).

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/4/2011 @ 2:45 am

  1093. Witter,

    It started with the Jenay name attached to @Starchild111. I think we then had the George part based on a Jenay George in FB which when entered in Google, Google offered a possible search of Jenny George.

    Once you entered Jenny George, you also got results of Jennifer George and then when you add UCLA you got JG for Los Angeles who everyone started emailing….

    That also resulted in the Jennifer George and Starchild111 hits in 123people.ca, 123people.uk, 13people.fr…. yet another rabbit hole looking for the sockpuppets.

    Joe

    Comment by Joe Smith (54c0c1) — 7/4/2011 @ 2:55 am

  1094. If you look at the time stamps, I think you will see that Adam got his clue from this site, Patterico.com.

    That was another very busy weekend.

    Joe

    Comment by Joe Smith (54c0c1) — 7/4/2011 @ 2:57 am

  1095. Opps, forgot to mention that UCLA clue came from the follow of the UCLA writting group by the @Starchild111 twitter id that showed the Jenay name.

    Joe

    Comment by Joe Smith (54c0c1) — 7/4/2011 @ 3:04 am

  1096. Koam , that is good lead to trace down.

    It would be very important to know how and when 123people search engine associated the name Jennifer George with the starchild111 twitter.

    Was it a slip up by the creator of the account?

    That would support lee’s theory

    Was it injected by a hoaxer in some way?

    Comment by Temper Tantrum (02fe1b) — 7/4/2011 @ 4:25 am

  1097. 1092 Joe

    Your “George” appears without explanation. You don’t say where “Jenay George” in facebook comes from.

    I laid it out in 1090.

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/4/2011 @ 5:29 am

  1098. 1095 TT.

    If Jennifer George created @starchild111 on facebook, as the caller Jennifer George from MA says, then it’s not much of a mystery. I’d expect some kind of internet search to find that info if the 2 names were associated in the past. We don’t have cached screen caps, but maybe the account was labeled “Jennifer George” prior to it being labeled “Jenay”.

    A web crawler at some previous time might have taken every twitter name it could find and associate each with a first & last name on the account and made a note of it.

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/4/2011 @ 5:33 am

  1099. Hai Guyz! What’s happening on this thread?

    Comment by Pious Agnostic (6048a8) — 7/4/2011 @ 6:35 am

  1100. “What’s happening on this thread?”

    Uh, well, it looks like koam @wittier does not sleep. AT ALL.

    Comment by Anita Busch (a025dd) — 7/4/2011 @ 6:43 am

  1101. az5thdstrct, I came across your work. Highly respected.

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/4/2011 @ 7:02 am

  1102. 1099. Anita Busch

    Tell me about it.

    Are you following on Twitter?

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/4/2011 @ 7:06 am

  1103. Jim, I think it’s dead.

    Comment by MDr (fd1f4b) — 7/4/2011 @ 7:08 am

  1104. #1102 Mdr

    Don’t count on it. Once people wake up and have their 2nd cup of coffee, those neurons and Google-searches will be firing on all cylinders.

    Suppositions! Assumptions! Allegations! Implications! Inferences! Sly remarks! Knowing winks!

    Ooh boy, there will be fireworks on this thread, I assure you!

    Comment by Pious Agnostic (6048a8) — 7/4/2011 @ 7:20 am

  1105. The “Jenay” cache is old. Wouldn’t that tend to point to an old association of a Jennifer with the starchild111 account? – I realize that is not dispositive, but it is suggestive.

    Comment by SarahW (af7312) — 7/4/2011 @ 7:37 am

  1106. 1092, that’s exactly right.

    Comment by SarahW (af7312) — 7/4/2011 @ 7:41 am

  1107. “Hai Guyz! What’s happening on this thread?”

    Pious Agnostic – G’day. Happy 4th!

    What’s happening? Pushing for 2,000 comments.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/4/2011 @ 7:43 am

  1108. 1105. SarahW

    1090 explains where “George” came from using Google search.

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/4/2011 @ 7:52 am

  1109. “If you look at the time stamps, I think you will see that Adam got his clue from this site, Patterico.com.”

    Joe Smith – Shriver’s post was on 6/19.

    Stranahan’s BTR on Betty and Veronica Mystery solved was on 6/20.

    I don’t know the date az5thdstrct claims to have tweeted his key info to Lee which he believe Shriver used to write his post.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/4/2011 @ 7:56 am

  1110. Do me a favor? Someone please tell me: Beyond all the sock puppetry, fake accounts, death threats and whatever else may or may not have been going on…

    What was the point? Who was the target?

    Comment by oldirishpig (e7adde) — 7/4/2011 @ 8:01 am

  1111. claims to have

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/4/2011 @ 8:02 am

  1112. 1109. oldirishpig

    Hard to say, but I still think that the target could have been #bornfreecrew directly, and right-leaning journalism, indirectly.

    Several people see Weiner being cyberstalked (to put a bad spin on it) or observed (to neutralize) as he actively engages with attractive women who are his political fans online.

    Those who empathize with Weiner see this as right-wing dirty tricks against a guy on their side. So they create a sting operation. Create some girls with whom Weiner can interact — of course he won’t do really anything wrong with them, these people think. But we know he’s being watched and it will be noticed if he “follows” them, etc. Then we’ll trump it up to make it look like maybe he’s crossed the line.

    The evil right-wingers will seize on that and publicize it by going to Fox or Brietbart, Bloggers or other outlets. Then, after the media have committed to it, we’ll whisper to someont to reveal that the interaction was harmless (embarrassment #1) and that the girls weren’t real (embarrassment #2). Making #bornfreecrew and any media that picked up the story look like total idiots who were persecuting the innocent Weiner.

    The thing no one bet on was that Weiner was way more guilty than anyone could have guessed…and he mistakenly sent that pic to everyone.

    And that’s just one theory. I’m not saying its true.

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/4/2011 @ 8:12 am

  1113. koam @wittier

    That was me. “Anyway, yesterday, someone tweeted an interesting”

    I had sent the 1/2011 Jenay cache page to Stranahan. I guess STLA saw my tweet/mention to Stranahan. Or, Lee had nearly immediately posted the Jenay page find and STLA may have seen it that way. Don’t know for sure.

    “When STLA made initial post on JG 123 dot com find. He tweeted it out and copied me on his tweet. He did because the original post included my actual handle name on post as submitting the Jenay cache page (which I did to Stranahan only).

    I had no idea of the 123 dot com reference before STLA has posted. When STLA updated his post, he redacted some names including my handle.

    Comment by az5thdstrct — 7/3/2011 @ 7:59 pm”

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/4/2011 @ 8:20 am

  1114. Open quotes were mine and in wrong place in 1112.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/4/2011 @ 8:21 am

  1115. koam @1111 – That is my theory. The wild card was nobody counted on Weiner self-destructing.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/4/2011 @ 8:23 am

  1116. 1109 That is the mystery that identifying the real actor(s) might resolve.

    Comment by SarahW (af7312) — 7/4/2011 @ 8:24 am

  1117. “That is the mystery that identifying the real actor(s) might resolve.”

    SarahW – I have information that would help crack that mystery wide open, but sacred honor prevents me from revealing it.

    I just wanted to say that, you know, to see how it felt. It makes me feel like a BLOG GOD, but not a Capital J journalist.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/4/2011 @ 8:30 am

  1118. 1114 daleyrocks

    And that “meddling” Gennette, who was watching the watchers and suspicious of Nikki, tipping off Weiner, while lying to Nikki & pretending to be her pal. She may have inadvertently helped to botch a plan by those who actually were on her side, because she suspected they might have been working for the other side.

    Why was Gennette also the intended target of the DM dic pic that went out as a public tweet instead? Just ironic? What could have been going on there?

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/4/2011 @ 8:37 am

  1119. Justsayin, you seem to be willfully dishonest.

    Comment by Dustin (b7410e) — 7/4/2011 @ 8:44 am

  1120. And happy Independence Day, everyone.

    Comment by Dustin (b7410e) — 7/4/2011 @ 8:47 am

  1121. Happy independence day, all, alright can we move onto another conspiracy, th rabbit chased the gopher into the tunnels under the NY subway

    Comment by ian cormac (d380ce) — 7/4/2011 @ 9:02 am

  1122. I came on to check if the 1000 was reached and what the answers to Weinergate were. Reread and saw that I had made an assumption that at 1000 I was going to get something. (Good lesson about assuming) Thanks for the toaster, LOL!! Have the last documents been dumped? I haven’t found them. Anyway here is my part towards the 2000 and above. Thank you Patterico for your continued work, I must say that I agree with you about your commentors. Time to get the bbq up and running, so to all Happy Independence Day!!!!

    Comment by freedom_costs (51c21c) — 7/4/2011 @ 9:13 am

  1123. Was there even a “bornFreecrew” to meddle with before the Weiner-watching began, at Patriots instigtion?

    Comment by SarahW (af7312) — 7/4/2011 @ 9:42 am

  1124. Obviously this whole law enforcement thing is just misdirection by Pat and Lee. They’ve been tag-teaming with different theories designed to get the various shadowy players sucked in – you know, the old good cop, bad cop routine – and now they’re playing up the LE angle to scare the Reds into damaging counter moves. I fully expect the conspiracy to break under the pressure.

    One of the puppeteer’s multiple personalities will turn state’s evidence.

    Comment by Nathan Wagner (01c83e) — 7/4/2011 @ 9:48 am

  1125. 1.) I still want to know what Tommy Christopher knows about Weinergate.

    2.) I still want to know why Tommy Christopher was “the chosen”.

    3.) I still want to know who chose him and how the contacts really worked or were set up for him.

    4.) I still want to know how his “collaboration” with NYT Jen came about, and when, and why her.

    5.) I still want to know why TC doesn’t outwardly appear to mind having been punked, or be pissed about it, or be very curious about it. (Which is why I kind of bet he already knows most of the answers –and truth– behind items 2,3, 4,and 5.)

    And, friends, that is why I believe the rest of the world gaining knowledge of the full answer to #1 would be quite useful. Tommy’s a real person–a public person. Obviously he had to have been interacting with at least one other real person who posed as and represented other (fake) people in order for him to have multiple communications with those fakes. What does TC know and when did he know it?

    Comment by elissa (4a1b75) — 7/4/2011 @ 9:53 am

  1126. I have nevar seen Jenay used as an alternative for Jennifer. More likely an alternative of Janae.

    Then again, I suppose someone with half a brain could pronounce Jenna as “jen – ay”.

    Jenay \j(e)-
    nay\ as a girl’s name is a variant of Janae (American). See Janae for more on meaning of Jenay.

    The baby name Jenay sounds like Jenny, Jena, Jennay, Jenai, Jenae, Jeanay, Janay and Jonay. Other similar baby names are Denay, Jency and Renay.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 9:58 am

  1127. Forrest Gump pronounced Jenny as Jenay, did he not?

    Comment by elissa (4a1b75) — 7/4/2011 @ 10:02 am

  1128. So Jennay is quite an unrelated name to Jennifer.

    Janae \j(a)-nae\ as a girl’s name is pronounced ja-NAY. It is of American origin. A favored contemporary variant of Jan, Jane or Jean. Janai is also a Biblical male name with the meaning “God has answered”.

    Janae has 22 variant forms: Janaea, Janaeh, Janah, Janai, Janais, Janay, Janaya, Janaye, Janea, Jannae, Jeanae, Jeanay, Jeanay, Jenae, Jenai, Jenay, Jenee, Jennae, Jennay, Jennaya, Jinae and Jinnea.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 10:04 am

  1129. Happy Independence Day to you and yours

    RR

    Comment by Reaganite Republican (c90bca) — 7/4/2011 @ 10:09 am

  1130. 1126 elissa

    That’s one thing I was thinking about a week ago. Someone mispronouncing someone’s name. That would connect back to the whole Jenna/Nikki porn thing. (Jenna Jameson and Nikki Tyler who were friends and lived together for a while).

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 10:11 am

  1131. 1111, except, Patriot fomented that Weiner-watching activity, and by my observations “Patriot” has long revealed his persona is as phony as any of the socks.

    The Nikki sock and Patriot socks are in league if not the same person.

    Why would THAT be so? I guess this matters, as I asked before: was there even a “bornFreecrew” to meddle with before the Weiner-watching began?

    Punking a pack of right-wing twitterers might be amusement enough for some, but it’s playing with fire to ignite a scandal about a specific politician when his bad habits are real and supsected if not known. It would draw down attention, unflattering attention on Weiner and potentially draw out women like Broussard and the Vegas chick and lord knows who else, but even more dangerous, his penchant for chatting up sweet young things (to the exclusions of other followers and fans) who idolize him, whom he has no business talking to privately except in the most general way.

    One inference that can be drawn from that high risk scenario is that the hoaxer(s) wanted attention drawn to Weiner’s habits.

    This might be to immunize Weiner against such attention by inventing a scandal that is later to be discredited. But that still seems incredibly risking and not worth the benefit of making Breitbart ridiculous, or someone like Mike Stack.

    What is more likely in my view is that the hoaxer wished attention to be focused on his bad habits, to GET THE STORY OUT.

    This could be a scheme of political enemies (even some from his own party)or a kind of personal revenge, jealousy or anger about another follower (Ginger lee has a stalker, BTW) or a way of some random Weiner sextress making her story/pics gain value for sale, or otherwise enriching or promoting its teller. And I’m sure there are motives for getting the story out I have not considered.
    ********

    The hoaxer(s) clearly had some plan develop for watching Weiner and gaining access to him and his doings through his other female followers – attempts to befriend and obtain an exchange of confidences.

    I’m thinking the story was offered to Breitbart less to punk him, than in the misguided notion he would publish anything, in hopes he would bite, and generate interest in Weiner’s habits.

    After all, everything the Marianela sock offered Stack really existed and was actually in the sock’s possession.

    When Breitbart passed, they went to Tommy to get an untrue story about Breitbart out. I see a deliberate attempt to game Tommy the way they thought they would game Breitbart – offer him a story he couldn’t refuse, that is exactly what he would believe and want to publish.

    The Tommy approach was a second try – this was post Breitbart saying “thanks but no thanks.”
    The nikki sock then gets caught in spectacular lie about the Breitbart is making us lie angle – and backs off that story in full reverse, though all that Marieanela sock had offered Stack was available.

    By this time Weiners pic has made his habits famous, the now more valuable stories of other women emerge, and Weiner’s contact with other minors is very helpfully being put forward by the Reidsocks.

    Mission accomplished?

    Suspicion is also thrown Mike Stack’s way, as potential penis pic hacker – deliberately by the socks. Is this pure misdirection resulting from the sock(s)’ fear of being caught out as Weiner’s exposer?

    A plan to punk anyone possible to punk is a hallmark of Anonymous-style operations. Is that the explanation for seemingly contrary goals –

    Perhaps this was a directed attack at Breitbart it failed in some ways and got out of hand, and switched them to simply yanking people around for lulz? I am not sure I can articulate why but I’m actually thinking NO on that.

    Is “get the story out, by any means necessary, without being identified” the goal? <– this one I am partial to.

    Did Anonymous-types simply join in the afterparty?

    This is a light entertainment for me at this point. It's, as I told Patrick, a guilty pleasure, my Jersey Shore.

    No matter who or why the motives, Weiner got caught being who he really is and that can't be undone. Even people who wold rather support him, in their hearts of hearts, know he would always be a looming liability to his own friends and own party. He's creepy and immature on his good days.

    So if it was a Breitbart sting, fail.
    If it was a get paid for my own pictures scam – win
    If it was an "expose Weiner" plot – win
    If it was screw with people plan, win win win.

    Comment by SarahW (af7312) — 7/4/2011 @ 10:11 am

  1132. Forrest Gump pronounced Jenny as Jenay, did he not?

    Comment by elissa — 7/4/2011 @ 10:02 am

    That is what I thought too. In fact, that was my first impression, that “Jenay” was from Forrest Gump, so Jenay = Jenny = Jennifer didn’t bother me one bit.

    Does this have any significance? I have to imaging not. I could see a girl growing up, her friends calling her “Jenay” from the movie, and her using that as a Twitter handle, no problem.

    Comment by Pious Agnostic (6048a8) — 7/4/2011 @ 10:14 am

  1133. Happy Birthday, USA!

    Comment by PatAZ (efd43b) — 7/4/2011 @ 10:15 am

  1134. The Forest Gump thing would have another interesting twist for someone trying to burn Weiner (stupid is as stupid does).

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 10:16 am

  1135. I tweeted Jenay cache on 6/18
    STLA hub post 6/19

    http://twitter.com/#!/az5thdstrct/status/82222113502666752

    Comment by az5thdstrct (e76e6a) — 7/4/2011 @ 10:19 am

  1136. #1134

    While I can see your tweet, the link in the tweet comes up “forbidden” for me.

    http://bit.ly/lMRuCE

    Anybody else?

    Comment by Pious Agnostic (6048a8) — 7/4/2011 @ 10:24 am

  1137. Patterico, my impression of shanahan was that he was inexperienced. He could do with a class in logic and also on how to keep personal and public opinions separate in his mind. A lot of his schtick is very high standards for other people, very low standards for himself.

    Comment by jd2 (cdceb5) — 7/4/2011 @ 10:27 am

  1138. 1124 elissa

    Do you think JP / NYT told TC to shut it, like Lee was told?

    Or do you think whatever higher power that got JP spooked (unless that was an act) also got to Colby / Tommy?

    Do they send people in to deliver a “national security” or other type of hush order?

    Total conjecture, of course.

    But remember the takeaway from the blowup between Lee and JP.

    My post to Lee from July 1
    http://leestranahan.com/weinergate-gosh-what-the-heck-happened#comment-6300

    Lee,

    I’m listening to your extended BTR show from last night and have reached a point of confusion on what you’re saying that Preston’s position on why to not pursue the person behind the call you received from Jen George in Boston and who Preston has talked to several times:

    1) You said earlier that Preston said that Prof Lew Hunter’s site may be a phony and the prof may have punked Preston/you.

    – You disagree. You think Hunter is real and was truthful.

    2) You said last night that Preston said that Jen George in Boston’s @startchild111 twitter was hacked so that JG is not responsible for the Weiner activity of Nikki. Preston: “Lee there’s nothing to tie JG into that Nikki Reid account.”

    – You disagree. (I don’t think Pru proved that the account was hacked or not hacked. Either could be the case) but you say it was not hacked. You say that Preston buys JG’s story that the account was hacked, “absolutely, hook,line and sinker.”

    So in case 1) you say Preston is saying that JG’s evidence (the prof) is fake….so Preston won’t pursue (this goes too deep, she warns you)

    And in case 2) you say Preston is saying that JG’s story is true.

    So I don’t understand how you say Preston both incorrectly disbelieves JG’s story and simultaneously incorrectly believe’s JG’s story.

    Isn’t that a bit messed up?

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/4/2011 @ 10:30 am

  1139. So in case 1) you say Preston is saying that JG’s evidence (the prof) is fake….so Preston won’t pursue (this goes too deep, she warns you)

    And in case 2) you say Preston is saying that JG’s story is true.

    So I don’t understand how you say Preston both incorrectly disbelieves JG’s story and simultaneously incorrectly believe’s JG’s story.

    Isn’t that a bit messed up?

    Comment by koam @wittier — 7/4/2011 @ 10:30 am

    That says more about JP than Lee.

    Mistrusting Lew H but trusting the rest of JG:s story is crazy, his site has been online for years. JP could also check his ID easily, if she wanted to.

    Comment by Temper Tantrum (02fe1b) — 7/4/2011 @ 10:41 am

  1140. My Forrest Gump comment above was purely pop culture observation, BTW. I personally have a singular disinterest in the whole Jenny Jenay angle.

    That said, one of the interesting observations about human psychology that can be made about the various threads (Patterico and Stranahan and Ace and Pru) on Weinergate is how different commenters and theorists latch on to the particular aspects of the hunt that they find particularly intriguing or to which their education/training points them as being the more relevant.

    Comment by elissa (4a1b75) — 7/4/2011 @ 10:42 am

  1141. #1134

    Sometime over the last week or so. Yahoo “blocked” that 1/2011 Jenay cache page.

    If you look at multiple postings of the Jenay cache you can see it came from Yahoo top right corner. Including STLA post

    screencap he used:
    http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-kN06BxQQIqo/Tf5cIF3BUII/AAAAAAAACOQ/_oOav941hF0/s1600/jenay.png

    Don’t know why Yahoo “blocked”.

    But at time I also found on Bing and had resumbitted this last week to Stranahan:

    So here you go.

    http://cc.bingj.com/cache.aspx?q=http://twitter.com/starchild111&d=4738964055069054&mkt=en-US&setlang=en-US&w=103056d3,77902c9f

    Comment by az5thdstrct (e76e6a) — 7/4/2011 @ 10:44 am

  1142. Thing is, someone relaying information verbally might find the information at the receiving end different from information relayed in written format. Same holds for someone trying to recall something from deep in the past (e.g. “dang, what was that actresses name … it was jen-something … Jenay, yeah, that must be it”)

    Other thing is, when people pick aliases, they often pick names close to their own or maybe with the same initials as their own. So a Jennifer picking a Jenay might not be so unusual. But then changing it to Nikki is kindof unusual. Why that particular name? That’s when I remembered the Jenna / Nikki connection and thought maybe someone was playing off that, considering the whole porn star angle going on with one of Weiners follows.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 10:53 am

  1143. FYI, this from the Associated Press:

    Google Inc. has temporarily shut down a search engine feature that allows users to find real-time updates from Twitter, Facebook, FriendFeed and other social networking sites.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 10:56 am

  1144. Crosspatch, how come?

    Comment by Sarahw (af7312) — 7/4/2011 @ 11:03 am

  1145. “By this time Weiners pic has made his habits famous, the now more valuable stories of other women emerge, and Weiner’s contact with other minors is very helpfully being put forward by the Reidsocks.”

    SarahW – I’m a little confused on the dates and timing you are referring to here, particularly with respect to the Reidsocks providing information before or after Weiner fesses up to tweeting his meat, which I view as the game changer and a signal for a jail break for all involved.

    We’ve got the dic pic late on 5/27.
    Betty’s mom strident defense on 6/3
    6/6 Weiner press conference about tweeting his meat
    6/8 X-Rated Weiner picture leaked.
    6/11 N.Y. Post publishes story saying Ethels mom says Weiner only sent two emails.
    6/11 Patterico publishes post saying Weiner sent Ethel five emails.

    Hopefully I got the above right.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/4/2011 @ 11:04 am

  1146. SarahW,

    I appreciate the theorizing as I think it could be helpful to have smart people like you talking about the possibilities.

    It seems pretty obvious to me that whoever Wolfe is, he was trying to get the story out about Weiner.

    If Reid is Wolfe — and I take no position on this — he was also against Weiner from the beginning and posed as pro-Weiner. If Reid is not Wolfe, Reid could have been a) basically what he says or b) part of a punk Breitbart and Wolfe operation or c) Lord knows what else.

    Alicia Pain and any other threateners/criminals may or may not be the same people. Frankly, that’s all I care about.

    The key to the interface between those two groups are the alleged threats coming from Lee. Lee says the only possibility is that she made them up. I say maybe the Alicia Pain hackers and punkers impersonated Lee to JG. There is evidence supporting that theory beyond what we have discussed.

    Comment by Patterico (f724ca) — 7/4/2011 @ 11:06 am

  1147. ==Comment by koam @wittier — 7/4/2011 @ 10:30 am==

    Quite honestly I have absolutely no conjecture to offer– or deeper thoughts about the TC/NYT thing beyond the series of questions I posted @1124. These questions have been plaguing me because I have felt the initial Mediaite story TC published was off in several respects and that much about his “followup” and other behavior since then has been rather strange. For someone, a journalist, who seems to have been purposely inserted into the story and then seemingly removed from it as opposed to reporting it, Tommy appears to be getting a pass from appropriate levels of scrutiny for some reason.

    Comment by elissa (4a1b75) — 7/4/2011 @ 11:09 am

  1148. 1141 if one goes with the frustrated screenwriter angle, Nikki wasn’t meant be an alias, so much as a distinctly drawn character.

    Comment by Sarahw (af7312) — 7/4/2011 @ 11:10 am

  1149. Hi Neal!

    Ticks are teh suck, literally.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/4/2011 @ 11:14 am

  1150. I am of the opinion JG caller, JG MA & Alicia Pain are all the same person & unrelated to Weinergate. Just a crank latching on for attention. I thought the call to Lee & Preston by JG was a punk job & told them so at the time.

    Comment by RocksEm (5241c6) — 7/4/2011 @ 11:15 am

  1151. 1145 Patrick

    Leads me to (continue to) think that:
    – JG MA is real person.
    – JG MA started @starchild111.
    – JG MA was broadly truthful in call to Lee.
    – Is generally who she says she is
    – Did get scary calls
    – Was genuinely uninvolved in case
    – Someone else took over @starchild111 at a later time & created Nikki.
    – JG MA went to BPD in good faith.

    But what of the contention that Lee put out that the JG MA report was being dismissed?

    - I understand if Lee has been exonerated (good) but BPD wouldn’t close case just because caller wasn’t Lee or Lee-related if there still were scary calls to JG MA.

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/4/2011 @ 11:20 am

  1152. Sarahw, apparently so they can get it somehow integrated into Google+ is the speculation.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 11:20 am

  1153. In her circle of friends it’s very likely there was more than one “Jennifer” since it’s such a common name.

    Hence she acquired a nickname for whatever crazy reason you get a nickname. Maybe Gump reference, maybe her middle initial is A.

    All I know is when I saw “Jenay” I immediately thought “Jennifer”.

    Comment by Molon Labe (dc676c) — 7/4/2011 @ 11:22 am

  1154. Contentions that Lee puts out are worth the documentary evidence backing them up.

    Comment by Patterico (f724ca) — 7/4/2011 @ 11:23 am

  1155. As far as the “Punking Breitbart” rationale goes, keep in mind that when PatriotUSA76 saw Weiner’s May 27 tweet, Patriot retweeted it to many media outlets, including Breitbart, Politico, Fox News, New York Post, Glenn Beck, and the Huffington Post.

    Breitbart and his editors were the ones to respond, no doubt in part because they already had info from an intermediary of Meagan Broussard that had established that Weiner was sexting women via social networks. (On one of Stranahan’s radio shows, Breitbart himself stated that he’d been approached by this intermediary on May 18.)

    Comment by Greg (bc8186) — 7/4/2011 @ 11:24 am

  1156. To paraphrase Mark Twain, the difference between conjecture and reality is that conjecture must make sense.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 11:25 am

  1157. The thing that seems weird is the whole going under cover with the Nikki thing and the swiping of pictures to create a false personna.

    That is my primary curiosity.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 11:28 am

  1158. As far as the Jenay = Jenny goes I’m just pointing out assumptions that I initially just accepted but now wonder about because on closer inspection they don’t make sense.

    @ az5thdistrc I see you keep saying you were the one who initially tracked down the starchild111 account? So you actually led St Louis Activist Hub and Stranahan to that tid bit?

    If that’s the case and from what I’ve seen here and on Lee’s BTR show that az5thdistrc is a trusted conservative blogger, then who initially came up with the name is solved. So someone from our team came up with the name Jennifer George?

    Comment by Johnny 5 is alive (5ccc5e) — 7/4/2011 @ 11:29 am

  1159. 1154 Greg
    Breitbart was already on the Weiner is a perv thing..but Weiner himself made it a big news story, all on his own, that very night. Weiner, a US Concressman, said his facebook / twitter accounts had been hacked and someone else had done bad things with his account.

    That is news no matter whether Weiner ever did a pervy thing in his life or not. Congressman’s accounts hacked is a big news story by any measure.

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/4/2011 @ 11:29 am

  1160. 1157 J5A

    AZ correctly stated a number of times that he tweeted the image of the old starchild cached page with the name “Jenay” on it to Lee.

    That AZ tweet was a step on the way to finding the name “Jennifer George”. AZ did not find the name “Jennifer George”. As far aw we know, STLAH found that name as described above and as detailed in 1090.

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/4/2011 @ 11:32 am

  1161. 1157 J5A

    STLAH is a hard-core lefty and he came up with the full name Jennifer George, as far as we know, using Google and a clue courtesy of AZ via Lee. STLAH also would have had to guess that Jenay stood for Jennifer and have used Jennifer @starchild111 in his google search. See 1090.

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/4/2011 @ 11:34 am

  1162. Is there any possibility that Lee is a puppet of Neals? Sorta feels like a disinformation game is going on with Lee at this point. Lee’s stuff just isn’t holding up at this point. Why did it start to diverge so much from Patterico’s?

    Comment by nancydrew (448ba9) — 7/4/2011 @ 11:41 am

  1163. So Jennifer George uses the starchild111 twitter account to create the Nikki person and begins to attempt to befriend follows of Weiner. But apparently just a young female followers who had been openly “flirty”. I haven’t seen anyone say that starchild111 ever contacted any male follows of Weiner.

    I mean, it isn’t like I have a lot of twitter accounts lying around that I use for creating false personnae but I suppose I shouldn’t project my thought processes onto other people.

    So. this starchild111 is some sort of a throwaway twitter account. Just how many accounts does Jennifer have? Or better, maybe Jennifer did create the account but maybe “donated” it to someone else to use (lesbian mafia?). She doesn’t deny owning the account, but she has never said she sent any of those tweets either.

    Someone who engages in crap like this often would need a lot of “cut out” twitter accounts they either create themselves or that they get other people to create for them and give to them.

    Just too weird.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 11:41 am

  1164. 1150 1145

    If what I’ve laid out above is remotely correct, then these are some really evil socks because they not only would have stolen an innocent person’s twitter account to conduct this fraud, but later would have allegedly called her with death threats and simultaneously tried to implicate a prominent blogger as the reported maker of the calls.

    On top of that the Alicia Pain threats to other bloggers, and reported threats to Ginger Lee, and perhaps others who haven’t gone public ….all of which we haven’t even gone deep on yet.

    We can see why people are getting more grave in tone about this at times.

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/4/2011 @ 11:41 am

  1165. 1163

    I left out Mike as one who received a threat.

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/4/2011 @ 11:42 am

  1166. – Someone else took over @starchild111 at a later time & created Nikki.

    I honestly do not understand how anyone can subscribe to this theory.

    1) Why not just create an account from scratch?

    2) Requires the unlikely guessing of the account password.

    3) Most importantly, it requires that the original account owner ignores the email that Twitter sends to the formerly registered email address warning them that their email address has changed!

    It looks like this and I have tested it:

    Hi, xxx

    You recently changed the email address associated with your Twitter account (@yyy).

    To confirm your new contact email, please follow the link in the confirmation message sent to that address.

    If you did not request this change and believe your Twitter account has been compromised, contact Twitter support by clicking this link: http://support.twitter.com/articles/31796-my-account-is-compromised-hacked

    The Twitter Team

    Comment by Molon Labe (dc676c) — 7/4/2011 @ 11:43 am

  1167. Well, if we’re all going to talk about what we think instead of what we know, here’s what I think:

    1. The bornfreecrew and Dan Wolfe were a group of people, probably conservatives, who were alarmed at what they saw Weiner doing and concerned about the young girls he might be contacting. Wolfe disappeared because he wanted to avoid publicity and attention after Weinergate broke.

    2. I’m leaning toward believing John Reid, family and friend (Veronica and Betty) are real. Alternatively, if they aren’t, they are liberals (see below) who wanted to punk Breitbart, Lee because he helped Breitbart with Pigford, and any other conservative bloggers or journalists who attacked Weiner.

    3. Gennette C is real and dedicated to helping Weiner.

    4. The other women who came forward publicly are real, and they have generally made their feelings and allegiances known. Ethel is also real. The only question mark for me is Jennifer George.

    5. Most if not all of the other characters are fakes — I’ll call them sockpuppets — whose goal is targeting Breitbart and conservatives who support him. The sockpuppets chose to involve themselves in the Weiner controversy because he was their outspoken political hero. Not only did they truly believe Weiner was the victim of a hoax, they also knew he would not back down until the hoax was exposed.

    6. Once Weiner admitted the truth and resigned, the sockpuppets remained involved to target Weiner’s attackers as revenge.

    Comment by DRJ (fdd243) — 7/4/2011 @ 11:44 am

  1168. @ Nancy Drew….you better leave this to the Hardy Boys ;)

    Andrew Breitbart will vouch for Lee. Lee writes for Big Government. He’s done extensive research on the Pigford settlement case. Lee is on youtube and does Blog Talk Radio. He leaves his phone number everywhere for anyone to contact him.

    Lee is real person and known.

    Comment by Johnny 5 is alive (5ccc5e) — 7/4/2011 @ 11:46 am

  1169. DRJ!

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/4/2011 @ 11:55 am

  1170. #1157.

    I only responded to an earlier question when someone wondering who STLA was referring to in tweeting Jenay cache page. That’s it.

    I responded for purpose of transparency so no one thought a conspiracy or go down a mystery tweeter rabbit hole.

    I’m not a blogger. I would not consider myself on a “team”.

    I did not come up with JG name. I was copied on a tweet from STLA’s initial JG post. I assume he did so because he initially had referenced me in initial post.

    When I received the tweet from STLA, I read post and quickly sent link to Stranahan if he had seen the post yet. Stranahan hadn’t and then he did. That’s why Stranahan’s comments on radio show 6/19 how JG could have been called so quickly stating she had received 2 phone threats when the STLA JG post had only come out few hours earlier. Coupled with claiming she lived in CA not MA.

    1st tweet (last) I had ever exchanged with STLA was his copy to me of his JG post.

    Comment by az5thdstrct (e76e6a) — 7/4/2011 @ 11:57 am

  1171. And point 4: Why use a hijacked account which has a discoverable past history inconsistent with your sock?

    Comment by Molon Labe (dc676c) — 7/4/2011 @ 12:03 pm

  1172. The other thing I noticed being on twitter is that a guy usually ends up collecting a bunch of what I believe are fake female follows that attempt to get them to click on links to see naughty pictures and stuff. You can usually spot these as people who have eleventy zillion follows, few followers, and only tweet links to naughty pictures of themselves.

    I call them Twots (TWitter bOTS but sounds like what they are putting themselves out there as). An example would be @Ramsey_2731 or @BluEydGrl4im or @ThedaSexton23 or Prince_354 or @stegghnilqly or @powerfulloudmou or @amelia1066 or @jaguar7686 or @cute_serra or @gAgtTJ or @Anononomol57503 or a zillion others.

    Now if she did “donate” the account, she might want to protect who she donated it to if it is a “cause” she believes in.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 12:03 pm

  1173. HAPPY INDEPENDANCE DAY, everyone!

    BTW, if any of you have Pandora on your PC, you could do worse than selecting “John Phillip Sousa” for a ‘radio station’ for the day.
    It’s like sitting on the curb while the marching bands go by.

    Comment by AD-RtR/OS! (d3e560) — 7/4/2011 @ 12:04 pm

  1174. I believe either JG created Nikki or “gave” the account to someone else who did but not unknown to JG. I think she is upset because maybe she didn’t figure the account would ever be traced back to her real name. She might be even more upset if she gave that account to some other entity that she might not want her association with to be known.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 12:08 pm

  1175. 1165 Molon Lake

    Not proven by any means but certainly possible.

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/4/2011 @ 12:11 pm

  1176. @wittier

    Thanks for clearing up that section of the info line.

    OK so it was STLAH where the name Jennifer George originated. I guess the next question becomes motivation. Was STLAH in pursuit of Jennifer George to try and out conservative sock puppets in an effort to clear Weiner name. Or were they trying to deflect a legitimate inquiry down the wrong path by throwing out a name. Which would indicate they were in on it to some extent because all the caches would have to have already existed for people to check on. There had to be some clues/bread crumbs for people to follow to engage in the Jennifer George lead.

    I still don’t know because that theory gets really complicated with a lot of hoops to jump through.

    Comment by Johnny 5 is alive (5ccc5e) — 7/4/2011 @ 12:12 pm

  1177. “1) Why not just create an account from scratch?”

    Because if you need several such accounts, that makes for problems. You might be able to get dozens of people all around the country/world to create “cut out” accounts that you can use when you need them. If someone digs deeply enough they all trace back to different places with seemingly nothing in common. More smoke.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 12:13 pm

  1178. I didn’t say Sock puppet. I said puppet. He is a leftie..maybe he’s an undercover puppet. Have you seen his anti-pain you tube videos? A sleeper cell so to speak. It fits with the Neal m.o. The anonymous m.o. the lulzsec m.o. Might be nothing, might be something.

    Comment by nancydrew (448ba9) — 7/4/2011 @ 12:14 pm

  1179. Was STLAH in pursuit of Jennifer George to try and out conservative sock puppets in an effort to clear Weiner name. Or were they trying to deflect a legitimate inquiry down the wrong path by throwing out a name.

    I believe that is a valid possibility.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 12:14 pm

  1180. #1173 To what end? What is the advantage to “donating” an account in lieu of simply setting up an account?

    It takes two minutes to create an account. And if you create it from scratch, you can give it whatever backstory you want with no risk of colliding with or revealing a former account owner.

    Why is it necessary to postulate all these multiple-actor theories when there is absolutely no basis for them?

    Comment by Molon Labe (dc676c) — 7/4/2011 @ 12:16 pm

  1181. Wouldn’t a very scared and worried girl who had received threatening calls from strangers want to not reveal her current location when she called to inquire about it with Lee & then Preston?

    So saying she’s in California at first makes sense if she doesn’t know if she should be very afraid of Lee or not.

    If your goal is to not get killed before sundown, misdirection on your location is a good idea until you are confident you’re not spilling the beans that could cost you your life.

    (Speculating what would be in an innocent JG MA’s mind at time of call to Lee on 6/19. Not saying Lee called to threaten her, of course. But she may have not been calmed by her phone experience until Jen Preston perhaps schmoozed her and calmed a bit and gave her some breathing room. Speculating.)

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/4/2011 @ 12:20 pm

  1182. #1176 Oh so now it’s a conspiracy of dozens of people all over the world. JFC.

    Comment by Molon Labe (dc676c) — 7/4/2011 @ 12:20 pm

  1183. 1179 Molon Labe

    A sock wants to have an account with some backstory that fits the persona she is trying to portray.

    The existing starchild account went back to the prior year or earlier and was all “girl talk” “fan of pretty girl celebrities” “talking makeup bags” “you’re the prettiest star” type of stuff. It was a good fit with the desired “I’m a teen girl who’s starstruck” persona that the sock wanted.

    Sock doesn’t start a new account in this case because a new account is obviously new. If it starts March 1 and starts going after Weiner girlfriends March 8, it look suspicious..oh this account was just created to stalk Weiner / Weiner girls. If the account has girly history for many months back, it looks more real.

    Sock kept a bunch of the history and deleted some too.

    that’s why.

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/4/2011 @ 12:24 pm

  1184. 1175 AZ5

    I see no evidence to suspect wrongdoing on STLAH’s part. It was an easy google search as I demonstrated on 1090, once you used Jennifer + @starchild111 and are looking for which Jennifer. You and I both confirmed the same back at that time and again today. I’m not suspicious of STLAH just because he’s a pinko. If there’s other reason to be suspicious, I’d want to hear it.

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/4/2011 @ 12:28 pm

  1185. No, it isn’t a conspiracy by dozens of people all over the world.

    Take for example a group such as “anonymous”, they might say “hey, we need a bunch of twitter accounts, can you guys create some phoney ones and send us the credentials” so their loyal minions do so and are glad to help.

    It isn’t so hard. It is “crowd sourcing” twitter accounts. Or maybe it is done word of mouth by people who know each other (I keep using the lesbian mafia as an example but only for convenience). Maybe Jenny has a friend who expresses a need for such an account and Jenny says she can use this old one she once created but doesn’t use.

    There are a lot of liberals, conservatives, people of all sorts of causes who might not mind helping out one cause or another just to feel like they are being a part of the game. But when something gets traced back directly to them, the game becomes completely different.

    It’s all fun and games until someone loses an eye, then its just games.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 12:29 pm

  1186. It isn’t “conspiracy by dozens of people” any more than all of this going on here is a conspiracy by dozens of people. It is more like stone soup. Lots of different people putting in what they can to make a bigger something.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 12:34 pm

  1187. enjoying the pool
    weiners on the barbeque
    right where they belong

    Comment by ColonelHaiku (822dce) — 7/4/2011 @ 12:37 pm

  1188. #1182 Oh yeah, it’d be really suspicious if a high-school aged girl had a new twitter account. Cause we’re all born with twitter accounts ya know.

    The “history” on the account was 7 tweets, and included discoverable information at odds with Nikki persona.

    Comment by Molon Labe (dc676c) — 7/4/2011 @ 12:38 pm

  1189. What was the elapsed time between the creation of the starchild111 account and the changing of the name to Nikki?

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 12:41 pm

  1190. 1175 1183 AZ

    On second thought, I think we were being given some hints about this last night. So I will have to revisit and think about it.

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/4/2011 @ 12:42 pm

  1191. Probably pointed out somewhere along the way, but regarding the leap from “Jenay” to “Jennifer,” it’s worth remembering that early Starchild111 had quite an interest in Jennifer Lopez. As of the 1/1 snapshot, several of her 11 follows and all but one of her tweets involved Lopez-related individuals.

    Comment by Greg (bc8186) — 7/4/2011 @ 12:43 pm

  1192. Comment by Patterico — 7/4/2011 @ 11:06 am

    Alicia Pain and any other threateners/criminals may or may not be the same people. Frankly, that’s all I care about.

    The key to the interface between those two groups are the alleged threats coming from Lee. Lee says the only possibility is that she made them up. I say maybe the Alicia Pain hackers and punkers impersonated Lee to JG. There is evidence supporting that theory beyond what we have discussed.

    I have been worried about caller ID spoofing and use of Spoofcard or phonegangster because of the voice changing Lee remarked on at one point.

    Some versions of these services permit spoofing of caller ID, (and you pick your own number) – i think Ispoofcard does not but you can change your voice and block your number.

    Lee’s caller appears to be the same person as the one making the report.

    If this is so, I do not see how (unless she is in league with other hoaxers) this caller is somehow distinct from the one who was interviewed by police.

    How would an outsider target such an individual – someone actually claiming ownership of the account?

    Comment by SarahW (af7312) — 7/4/2011 @ 12:43 pm

  1193. A sock wants to have an account with some backstory that fits the persona she is trying to portray.

    Which reminds me, maybe I should create a phony Twitter account now and make some innocuous tweets from time to time in case I ever need it in the future for something.

    ;)

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 12:45 pm

  1194. 1188 crosspatch

    Date of creation of Starchild111 is said by JG in call to Lee as 2009. See Prudence Pain’s blog for step-by-step detailed analysis of transition.

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/4/2011 @ 12:47 pm

  1195. 1190 Greg

    I was thinking that perhaps Jennifer G used “Jenay” so that she could talk with Jennifer Lopez without it being, “Hi Jennifer, it’s Jennifer.”

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/4/2011 @ 12:49 pm

  1196. “It’s all fun and games until someone loses an eye, then its just games.”

    crosspatch – I’m playing Jarts, too! Blow some sh*t up later.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/4/2011 @ 12:50 pm

  1197. Google Voice lets you pick a phone number of your choice. You can route it to where ever you want to. It would take a subpoena by a law enforcement agency to track it down. You can place calls from that number using other tools such as gtalk.

    http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/voice/thread?tid=7c20fa7523a13c63&hl=en

    Also, people that have access to certain VOIP systems can make their caller ID appear to be whatever they want. That also applies to PBX systems used by businesses. What they can’t change is the billing information. The billing information is separate. If you have a PBX and change the caller ID and call a toll-free number (e.g. 800 number) the recipient will get the real line address and not the programmed caller-id. A person with a regular line will see only the caller ID.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 12:52 pm

  1198. 1191 SarahW

    Not sure I follow but if JG is an innocent J-Lo/Kardashian fan who started the twitter account and then abandoned it, she called Lee with *67, no voice morphing, called Preston, walked in to BPD, was visited by BPD detective, all as herself.

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/4/2011 @ 12:53 pm

  1199. If you have questions about VOIP, ask Neal R. He is a VOIP expert.

    Comment by Patterico (f724ca) — 7/4/2011 @ 12:55 pm

  1200. 1196 crosspatch.

    JG called Lee with a blocked number (*67). What is the need for false numbers? I’m not following.

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/4/2011 @ 12:55 pm

  1201. Here’s what you have to believe to buy the hacker theory:

    1) Hacker searches all over Twitter to find an inactive account, with no followers who might be suspicious of a hack, and who only followed people unlikely to want to contact them lest the hack be exposed, and whose twitter image comported with a high school girl. (Try it yourself, prolly take you a month to find that profile.)

    AND

    2) Hacker knows he can guess the password on the account within whatever number of attempts Twitter allows before a warning email is sent or account is locked.

    AND

    3) Hacker knows the original account owner will ignore warning notification from Twitter that account email has changed.

    AND

    4) Hacker doesn’t care or realize (some hacker!) that internet preserves information contradicting his new sock’s persona. (i.e., the effing name on the effing account).

    From the point of view of the “hacker” let’s consider the alternative

    1) Hacker just creates a fucking account to begin with in two minutes.

    Or from the POV of reality:

    1) The person who created starchild111 is the one who impersonated Nikki Reid. Period. End of story.

    Comment by Molon Labe (dc676c) — 7/4/2011 @ 12:55 pm

  1202. So basically, we have IP proxies that can cloak IP addresses and make them untraceable without a subpoena. We have voice proxies that can cloak a phone number and make them untraceable without a subpoena. We have voice changers that make those unrecognizable.

    Modern technology, gotta love it. You can’t be sure anyone who calls you is who they say they are.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 12:56 pm

  1203. In case anyone missed 1145, it may be an important one to read.

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/4/2011 @ 12:57 pm

  1204. JG called Lee with a blocked number (*67). What is the need for false numbers? I’m not following.

    To make someone think it’s a particular person calling?

    Comment by Patterico (f724ca) — 7/4/2011 @ 12:59 pm

  1205. they had to destroy
    weiner to save the weiner
    tweets to contrary

    Comment by ColonelHaiku (822dce) — 7/4/2011 @ 12:59 pm

  1206. huma gave weiner
    pink slip now he look for some
    other place to park

    Comment by ColonelHaiku (822dce) — 7/4/2011 @ 1:01 pm

  1207. 1199 — if someone were to call JG pretending to be Lee and they had a voice number from something like Google Voice in the same location where he lives it could look very much like a phone number from the same location with a voice having frequency characteristics much like Lee’s voice. Get a capture of Lee’s voice, use a spectrum analyzer program to display the frequency distrubution, do the same with your own voice, now run that through what amounts to a graphic equalizer to make the spectrum of your voice close to Lee’s and there you go. Through in a few mannerisms and his cadence and stuff, and to someone who has never talked to Lee or heard him before, it could sound a lot like Lee if they were to hear his voice again later. Particularly so if something is said to frighten them and screw with their memory of the moment a little.

    Just saying that it isn’t all that hard for someone who does something like … is a music dj at parties or something. They would probably have all the required equipment and the knowledge to do it.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 1:01 pm

  1208. huma abedin
    Mister Ed ever been seen
    together? think NOT!

    Comment by ColonelHaiku (822dce) — 7/4/2011 @ 1:02 pm

  1209. Just saying that any sort of “hacker mafia” with political goals would easily have the resources required to pull something like this off and it gets easier if they have minions to toss in little bits of help here and there.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 1:03 pm

  1210. huma and weiner
    did Arab and Jooo ever
    not come together?

    Comment by ColonelHaiku (822dce) — 7/4/2011 @ 1:05 pm

  1211. alicia pain
    reid JG Lee a job for
    inspector Clouseau

    Comment by ColonelHaiku (822dce) — 7/4/2011 @ 1:07 pm

  1212. And considering how politically active certain Google employees have been in places like the White House, Egypt and Althouse, one might find themselves with some pretty high-powered help on a mission with a political agenda in their spare time. Same goes for any number of high tech business operations with people who have a political agenda and some technical know how operating in their spare time to “make a difference”.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 1:09 pm

  1213. Molon Labia
    bet you go through a lotta
    Chapstick®… just sayin’

    Comment by ColonelHaiku (822dce) — 7/4/2011 @ 1:10 pm

  1214. and NOTE that I am only advancing possibilities, not saying that I believe any of those things necessarily happened. Saying that until there is some real evidence, the possibilities are practically boundless. Getting someone’s IP address is useless. Getting someone’s phone number is useless … if they trace back to something that hides the real origination. Trying to recognize someone’s voice is useless.

    Someone who has had a few years to set up a network of “hacktivists” ( http://www.thehacktivist.com/whatishacktivism.pdf ) can accomplish quite a bit particularly when combined with crowd sourcing.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 1:14 pm

  1215. once had job as an
    undercover puppet hand
    up ass blew cover

    Comment by ColonelHaiku (822dce) — 7/4/2011 @ 1:16 pm

  1216. and I’m spent… you can thank colonel later

    Comment by ColonelHaiku (822dce) — 7/4/2011 @ 1:17 pm

  1217. But my curiosity goes back to why the change to Nikki and why the focus on female follows of Weiner. The primary question I would have directly for Jenny George is if she personally ever tweeted as Nikki on the day Weiner sent that picture.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 1:18 pm

  1218. “Here’s what you have to believe to buy the hacker theory:”

    Nope.

    Hacker has hacker friends and friends of hackers who created cut-out twitter accounts long ago and have them on the shelf ready to use for stuff like this and are available for the asking.

    Hactivism becomes much more effective when networks of people become involved.

    Have a look at this list, for example:

    http://twitter.com/#!/Dobroyeutro/hacktivist/members

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 1:24 pm

  1219. The Lee Stranahan posted three IP addresses that he suspected were from Patriot. Two of them traced back to WiTopia IP cloaking services, one of them traced back to a server that is or has been used for a porn site.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 1:28 pm

  1220. As Patterico intimated, perhaps we should be prepared for the possibility that the Pain/death threats to JG are completely different people than the Reid/Wolfe sock puppets. LE may only solve a piece of the puzzle… for now.

    Comment by Doug in oregon (a9a03f) — 7/4/2011 @ 1:29 pm

  1221. #1217 The end result of a donated off-the-shelf account is an account controlled by the “hacker” (i.e., with a registered email under the hacker’s control).

    Hacker could achieve that result himself simply by creating the account to begin with.

    What is the point in having off-the-shelf accounts? Especially when said account has a DISCOVERABLE HISTORY contradicting your sock’s persona.

    Comment by Molon Labe (dc676c) — 7/4/2011 @ 1:29 pm

  1222. Colonel seem to have
    no need of blue pill to get
    his juices flowing

    (artistic ones I mean) Thank you, Colonel.

    Comment by elissa (4a1b75) — 7/4/2011 @ 1:31 pm

  1223. If the UCLA Professor is Lew Hunter, he moved to Superior, Nebraska in 1999 or earlier, and his writers colony is held at his home, for two weeks, twice a year.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4EN3qtpPtCM&feature=related

    (Excerpt of TV news program, uploaded August 28, 2007, claims he moved to Nebraska “8 years ago”)

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lew_Hunter

    A Wikipedia article claims:

    “Every winter, Hunter returns to UCLA to teach his Screenwriting 434 course to graduate students in the screenwriting MFA program, the modern form of which he helped create.”

    That sentence was added to the article on 13:16, 15 October 2006. There seems to be a note there about a different change that person made:

    (Hunter’s Colony program grads did not write 9 of the top 10 grossing films. That was grads of UCLA’s screenwriting MFA program. (This was verified by him. I’m in the program and Lew is my professor.))

    In the next edit “in the winter quarter” was put in the same sentence, but then taken out the next day probably by the same person. Five edits were made October 15 and 16, 2006. The IP addresses were 68.183.1.259, 65.39.101.101, and 68.183.31.112, (3 times in the morning of Oct 16, undoubtably in the same session)

    Now a circa 2008 documentary about Lew Hunter does indicate he travels – so he could be there, but he probably doesn’t maintain a home in Los Angeles. On the other hand, he could still have a telephone number with LA Area Code – that’s been easy to do since 2003 and wasn’t impossible before. But the number on the website is a 402 number, which is the area code for eastern Nebraska. (there is now actually an overlay 531 area code as of March, 2011, but no numbers have apparently yet been assigned although they went to 10 digit dialing)

    His wife’s name is Pamela if that’s any help.

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (6f74ae) — 7/4/2011 @ 1:32 pm

  1224. JG called Lee with a blocked number (*67). What is the need for false numbers? I’m not following.

    To make someone think it’s a particular person calling?

    Comment by Patterico — 7/4/2011 @ 12:59 pm

    Anyone can use Spoofcard. I know some of the aps don’t let you spoof caller ID anymore. But they do let you block, and have a voice-changing feature.

    Not all *67 calls are perfectly blocked (800 numbers can see you despite) so spoofing can conceal your number.

    Someone spoofing as Lee to JG could cause confusion, but I wouldn’t know if anything like that happened, it was just a concern.

    Comment by SarahW (af7312) — 7/4/2011 @ 1:37 pm

  1225. “Especially when said account has a DISCOVERABLE HISTORY contradicting your sock’s persona.”

    Molon Labe – You keep saying this but offer no specifics.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/4/2011 @ 1:38 pm

  1226. “Hacker could achieve that result himself simply by creating the account to begin with.”

    But that is more difficult. If he collects accounts from people pretty much at random, he gets a accounts that were created at random times and random places and if they are traced back, they go to random people. No trail leads back to the hacktivist actually using the account except information that requires a subpoena to get and even then, maybe some that wouldn’t be available even if a subpoena is obtained.

    Retention requirements expire after a certain time. I doubt Twitter would have any records of what IP address created an account that is more than 2 years old. A newly created account would likely have information such as the IP address that was used to create it and possibly other information. Information that is old is likely no longer retained.

    So the last thing I am going to want to do is mess with someone using a twitter account that I myself recently created.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 1:38 pm

  1227. No, koam (@wittier) — that caller is a hoaxer. There is a negligible chance the caller not involved in the hoaxing.

    Her actions and story make no sense, she told lies, and outlandish stories.

    In fact I will PRONOUNCE – hear me pronouncing- NO WAY IN HELL is the caller on the level.

    Comment by SarahW (af7312) — 7/4/2011 @ 1:41 pm

  1228. I’m trying to remember if there was an episode where a twitter account was hacked by someone trying to trap and tarnish the name of a hated right wing journalist (Breitbart). While at the same time other socks “inadvertently” released a scandalous dicpic in the middle of the reverse sting. I’m writing Burn Notice right now to sell this plot for a new episode.

    I’m still leaning towards jilted ex-cyber-lover but I’m truly hoping it turns out to be a bunch of left wing activists who had their plans blow up in their faces on an epic level.

    Hears to hoping! Happy Independence Day!

    Comment by Johnny 5 is alive (5ccc5e) — 7/4/2011 @ 1:42 pm

  1229. Molon Labe – ALL CAPS CONVINCE PEOPLE MORE BETTER

    BOLD ALL CONVINCE PEOPLE EVEN MORE MORE BETTER

    Why are you trying so hard?

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/4/2011 @ 1:43 pm

  1230. @ SaraW

    Wasn’t it already proven that JG in MA was in fact “not on the level” about some things?

    Comment by Johnny 5 is alive (5ccc5e) — 7/4/2011 @ 1:45 pm

  1231. #1224 Daley for crying out loud we have a google cache image of the starchild111 account with name “Jenay”.

    If we have it, how would the hacker know going in that his target wouldn’t find it also?

    Comment by Molon Labe (dc676c) — 7/4/2011 @ 1:47 pm

  1232. I’m still leaning towards jilted ex-cyber-lover but I’m truly hoping it turns out to be a bunch of left wing activists who had their plans blow up in their faces on an epic level.

    Hillary Clinton has a LOT of friends in the gay community. There were even rumors of a “thing” between Hillary and Huma. If Weiner were messing around on Huma, a lot of people might be sympathetic and it is possible could look into things on their own. It might be that this same group is also sympathetic to left wing causes, but the two interests might not be related in this case. If Weiner were seen as a scumbag by a “true believer” progressive who was hurting a close friend of Hillary, all bets are off.

    Who knows what the motive was. I just want to know if it was Jenny tweeting as Nikki or not. If it was, then a lot of this goes out the window. If it wasn’t, then anything is possible.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 1:47 pm

  1233. Actually, if it was Jenny tweeting as Nikki, my followup question would be if anyone was “helping” her with the tweets. Did she have a “handler”.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 1:49 pm

  1234. And the answer to the first question should be verifiable. The second question would be harder to know for certain.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 1:50 pm

  1235. Oh god, I better spell it out for you Daley.

    Daley for crying out loud we have a google cache image of the starchild111 account with name “Jenay”.

    And that is discoverable information that contradicts the persona of Nikki.

    Comment by Molon Labe (dc676c) — 7/4/2011 @ 1:51 pm

  1236. crosspatch – you make some good points but keep in mind that when the Twitter account was being switched over from Jennifer/Jenay to Nikki, the future was unknown. Your extraordinary measures would have required extraordinary reasons… and they didn’t exist then. Which is why I think simpler explanations are sometimes more logical.

    Comment by Doug in oregon (a9a03f) — 7/4/2011 @ 1:52 pm

  1237. No Doug,

    That Weiner would screw up and tweet something in the open was clearly unknown. That is a total screwup on Weiner’s part. But if the intention was to get Weiner to tweet then a pic in private and then take that to Hillary/Huma in private … who knows.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 1:55 pm

  1238. Or maybe even use it to blackmail Weiner. Anything is possible.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 1:56 pm

  1239. When exactly did the account switch to Nikki? I must have missed in in this torrent of comments.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 1:57 pm

  1240. Which is why I think simpler explanations are sometimes more logical.

    Not offering an opinion on the specific issue you are discussing, but I have a problem with the “Occam’s razor” method of reasoning when there are hoaxers involved, or at least potentially involved.

    Occam’s razor tells the mark in a three-card monte scam that, after having correctly identified the card the last three times, he will be able to do it again, now that his own money on the line. Occam’s razor! Supposing that the previous bettor was a hoaxer in on the scam is a CRAZY theory supported by absolutely no evidence! Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof! Etc.

    And you can think that . . . right up until the time that you lose all your cash.

    Occam never met a hoaxer.

    Comment by Patterico (f724ca) — 7/4/2011 @ 1:58 pm

  1241. “And that is discoverable information that contradicts the persona of Nikki.”

    WTF are you talking about?

    This is not new information.

    Are you mentally challenged?

    Discoverable information contradicting the persona would be the the twitter personality taking positions or interests contrary to Nikki. Do we have it? No.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/4/2011 @ 2:02 pm

  1242. So basically everyone could be right but for the wrong reasons. Maybe STLAH saw Nikki’s actions as possibly someone attempting to get Weiner to screw up and was correct on that count, but then assumed that Nikki was some right-winger and got the motivation wrong. Maybe a lot of people got different pieces of the picture correct but then filled the rest of that picture with different conjecture.

    Everyone touching a different part of the elephant.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 2:03 pm

  1243. Daley, if you were a l33t hacker member of a global conspiracy trying to trap Weiner into sending you a dic-pic, don’t you think you’d avoid using an account which a simple google search reveals had a different name in the past?

    If you were not so sophisticated – say just for kicks a jilted 20-something sexting partner – don’t you think that concern would escape your grasp?

    Cause there certainly is a lot that escapes your grasp.

    Comment by Molon Labe (dc676c) — 7/4/2011 @ 2:08 pm

  1244. You know, Weiner was blackmailed – in 2009. The New York almost flatly reported it then.

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman — 7/3/2011 @ 2:56 pm

    Weiner was blackmailed? For what? Did an errant wiener pic show up in someone’s inbox?

    Comment by Mike Myers — 7/3/2011 @ 2:58 pm

    He was blackmailed into not running for Mayor in 2009.

    It was gradually escalated, and something may have been communicated privately too

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/12/nyregion/12wolfson.html?sq=abedin%20wolfson%20mayor&st=cse&scp=1&pagewanted=all

    For his part, Mr. Sheekey, who once accused Mr. Wolfson’s firm of having “corrupted” the political process with its relentless attacks on the mayor, said in an interview that he would rather have Mr. Wolfson working for him than against him.

    “I have both respected and feared Howard from probably the first day I met him,” he said, adding: “Howard coming to work for Mike Bloomberg is no different than Hillary Clinton going to work for Barack Obama: Think of all the nasty things that Hillary Clinton said about Barack Obama.”

    Mr. Wolfson claimed his first Democratic scalp in May, as Mr. Weiner — once a close ally in the Clinton campaigns — dropped out of the mayoral race amid a Wolfson-led behind-the-scenes campaign to force him to do just that.

    Working with a local press corps he had cultivated for years, Mr. Wolfson and his team dug up and then pushed a steady stream of politically damaging tidbits about Mr. Weiner, giving the congressman an early taste of what he might face come the fall.

    In one instance, Mr. Wolfson’s team discovered that Mr. Weiner had introduced a bill making it easier for foreign-born fashion models to work in the United States. In New York’s tabloid news culture — one Mr. Wolfson navigates well — the discovery produced unflattering news stories packaged with photographs of the congressman and sultry exotic models.

    No matter that Mr. Weiner was someone Mr. Wolfson dispatched frequently as a surrogate against President Obama during last year’s primaries, or that Mr. Weiner’s fiancée, Huma Abedin, is a confidante of Mrs. Clinton’s whom Mr. Wolfson once considered a friend.

    But Mr. Wolfson said that it was a fair fight and that he relished what he had accomplished. His team commemorated Mr. Weiner’s departure from the race by tacking on a wall in their office a photograph of the congressman in his goalie uniform during a pickup hockey game, with a caption quoting him as saying, “This is not a time for playing games; it’s a time for problem-solving.”

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (6f74ae) — 7/4/2011 @ 2:09 pm

  1245. I am still digging through Prudence Pain’s blog attempting to find the timeline where Jenay becomes Nikki. (A link to the posting would have helped) but one thing I noticed is that as of a cache dated May 14, starchild has made 60 tweets. Not a lot since 2009.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 2:12 pm

  1246. And you can think that . . . right up until the time that you lose all your cash.

    Point taken.
    Which is why I never, ever gamble.

    Comment by Doug in oregon (a9a03f) — 7/4/2011 @ 2:13 pm

  1247. Ok, so as of Jan 1, 2011 the account was still Jenay with no location specified. Following 16, 11 followers.

    On April 6 it says just “starchild” with the name Jenay removed. 7 tweets total on the account. Now following 26, still 11 followers. Account is being scrubbed and becoming more active.

    On April 16 it now has the name Nikki Reid 11 tweets, following 45, 22 followers. In that 10 days the number of following/followers have just about doubled.

    http://prudencepaine.com/2011/06/29/for-weinergate-addicts-only/

    So the account became Nikki (claiming to be in Los Angeles ) does the tweet pattern line up with Eastern time or Western time? Hard to tell because the screen shot will show the timestamp in the timezone of the person doing the browsing, not he person doing the tweeting.

    But anyway, there is nothing going on with that account that isn’t consistent with the person doing the tweeting wanting to create a false personna.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 2:22 pm

  1248. Comment by Sammy Finkelman — 7/4/2011 @ 2:09 pm

    I don’t really see showing your political opponent what they are in for is really blackmail.

    Comment by RocksEm (5241c6) — 7/4/2011 @ 2:28 pm

  1249. re: 1243

    So it looks like a lot of people were aware that Weiner was a slimeball.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 2:28 pm

  1250. That’s just exactly the sort of politician the mob LOVES to have in office at the local level and our enemies love to have at the national level.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 2:29 pm

  1251. And get this: Elite hacker cabal goes to all the trouble to hijack account and create fake Nikki persona, then does such a ham-fisted oafish job of it that a 19 yr old journalism student spots them as fakes immediately.

    Comment by Molon Labe (dc676c) — 7/4/2011 @ 2:34 pm

  1252. I don’t think anyone had to hijack anything.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 2:42 pm

  1253. Patterico @1239

    The Sting. Now that was a cool movie.

    Comment by elissa (4a1b75) — 7/4/2011 @ 2:43 pm

  1254. Heck, for all I know, Jenny might be a friend of Huma’s and let her use the account to nab Weiner herself.

    It could have been all Jenny, but if that is so, why would she go so far to hide her true identity? Why wouldn’t she have kept the name Jenay on the account? Whoever was communicating with Weiner’s follows wanted to appear to be someone they weren’t. It wasn’t innocent following of someone/infatuation, followed by a mistaken tweet. This was a concerted effort befriend his follows and then him by someone who wanted their real identity not to be known.

    I believe Jennifer George created the Starchild111 account. I do not have enough information to believe that she was the one using that account on the day Weiner sent the picture.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 2:46 pm

  1255. More importantly why hide the name Jenay but not the starchild111 name?

    Notice about the only tweets on the account were from late last year to entertainment personalities.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 2:49 pm

  1256. “Molon Labe”

    If I have an old twitter account lying around that I created more than 2 years ago and have never really used and if I were to email or IM you the password on that account and you use it, is that “hijacking”?

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 2:51 pm

  1257. Turn it around:

    CP: ML, do you have an old twitter account I could have?

    ML: Why don’t you just create one?

    CP: Ummm, just send the username and password.

    ML: Well, I sorta use that password for other things, don’t really want to give it out. Say, why don’t you just create an account? Takes 2 minutes.

    CP: Not good with computers. Blah blah.

    Comment by Molon Labe (dc676c) — 7/4/2011 @ 3:13 pm

  1258. And the word “hack” does not mean to break into, steal, or hijack. To the “hacker”, hacking means to use their skills in computing to do something. It actually refers to “hacking” on a keyboard as someone “hacks out code” or “hacks out a website” or “hacks the Linux kernel”. The word “hack” means different things to different people. To some people, being a “hacker” is someone who spends a lot of time at a computer keyboard producing something. It might be bad, it might be good.

    A “hacktivist” would be someone who uses their computing skills to advance their agenda. It doesn’t mean they break into anything or hijack anything, but they might.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 3:16 pm

  1259. I’m aware of the definition of hacker as a skilled programmer, and I am using it in that sense.

    The person acquiring the account would obviously have to be someone with skilz – even if it were a donated account from some mad hacker cabal.

    Enough skills, at any rate, to realize that his sock was compromised from the very beginning by the presence of contradictory information easily accessible on the net.

    And his socking was so poor that it was unmasked as fakery almost immediately.

    Hence, there was no third party hacker/donatee or anything of the like.

    Comment by Molon Labe (dc676c) — 7/4/2011 @ 3:23 pm

  1260. “Molon Labe”

    No, it goes more like this:

    A few years back, someone puts out on a hacktivist mailing list that they would like people to create some twitter accounts and just put them on the shelf later. It is sold as an easy task that many of the minions could perform to “help the cause”. Then in 2011 someone asks for one or more of those accounts to use for a “project”. In fact, such “projects” probably come up from time to time.

    To directly answer your question:

    They don’t want to create a new account because that new account will have a lot of information about its creation retained by Twitter. Twitter probably doesn’t keep logs for more than a year or two. They want an account that was created a long time ago and even if it can be traced to the creator, it can’t be traced to the user of the account.

    So it goes like this:

    CP: Hey, you guys, create twitter accounts we might be able to use for projects. Don’t use them for anything “real” but it is okay to engage in some innocuous chitchat, maybe follow some popular celebs as cover.

    ML: I created one, let me know if you ever want to use it.

    …. many months elapse

    CP: Hey, ML, can you send me the password of that twitter account you created? We need to use it for a project.

    ML: Here ya go.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 3:24 pm

  1261. So Jenny creates Starchild111 and it changes to Nikki Reid. Jenny (I believe) has admitted to creating the account (right?).

    Now why all the antics by “John Reid”?

    JG has admitted to creating the account and that pretty much exposes everything JR said was baloney. Why the smoke screen? Didn’t JR disappear right about the time JG admits creating the account?

    Is JR really the people who were using the account attempting to create a cover story and that got blown by JG’s admission?

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 3:31 pm

  1262. I believe JG created the account.

    I believe JR9 is associated in some way with the person or persons using the starchild account when Weiner tweeted the pic. Might even be the very same person(s).

    I don’t know for sure if JG is the person using the account when Weiner tweeted the picture.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 3:34 pm

  1263. I just don’t recall how the word got out about JG admitting to creating the account (nor am I sure she actually did, that’s just what I *think* I remember in this smoke-filled episode). Now if it was Stranahan that let that cat out of the bag … I can see why P would be annoyed.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 4:06 pm

  1264. Comment by crosspatch — 7/4/2011 @ 4:06 pm

    Yes, Lee announced JG had admitting creating account in call to him.

    Comment by RocksEm (5241c6) — 7/4/2011 @ 4:12 pm

  1265. shot out of cannon
    always better than being
    squeezed out of a tube

    Comment by ColonelHaiku (822dce) — 7/4/2011 @ 4:19 pm

  1266. Here is Lee’s blog post concerning the Sunday, June 19 call with a JG.

    http://leestranahan.com/weinergate-notes-on-my-619-jenny-george-call

    Joe

    Comment by Joe Smith (54c0c1) — 7/4/2011 @ 4:22 pm

  1267. Sir, not trying to say I “KNOW” all, just that I have been reading all about weinergate and have a pretty good handle on why the info is at a standstill. LE etc… was just trying to stop the crap and was pretty sure you were going to have to be the bigger man and let it go. Those of us that read you, know you are not a patsy. I doubt he will say sorry, and may not stop, but I tried. Sorry I stepped in and made you angry, not my intention at all. I love reading your blogs, sorry you are so busy at work. Have a great evening!

    Comment by freedom_costs (51c21c) — 7/4/2011 @ 4:37 pm

  1268. Why did Reid and Wolfe stay in the game so long? Especially after Weiner quit. They kept saying that they didn’t want the media to come after them, so why not just totally go silent? Couldn’t be political at that point and sounds personal on some level. But to what purpose? Just to screw with us? For fun? They have to have know that the more times they post, the longer the forensic trail. Doesn’t seem smart and they don’t seem dumb. What end game are they shooting for?

    Comment by Doug in oregon (a9a03f) — 7/4/2011 @ 4:53 pm

  1269. 1203 Patrick

    Didn’t Lee say several times that the call came in on a blocked number? That’s achievable from any number if you dial *67 first. I don’t see need for VOIP or caller ID spoofing as Lee said no number came up on the incoming call.

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/4/2011 @ 5:07 pm

  1270. 1206 crosspatch

    Is there some discussion that JG received a call from a caller ID that matched Lee’s and that there is tape of a voice that sounds like Lee’s on JG’s answering machine?

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/4/2011 @ 5:09 pm

  1271. Now my question is why Lee would want to protect that network. Because by letting that information out and forcing JR9 to ground, he basically said “hey, if she told me that, then she probably told someone else that, too” and forced JR9 to shut up before he could be exposed. In effect, Stranahan acted in a way that protected whoever is behind Nikki Reid, intentionally or not.

    Why is Lee trying so hard to put all the focus on JG? Why is Lee doing things to force JR9 to shut up?

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 5:10 pm

  1272. koam

    not that I am aware of. I was saying that if you know where someone lives, it is pretty easy to get a phone number in their general area and make your voice sound like them, though.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 5:12 pm

  1273. 1229 J5A

    What is proven except that JG who called Lee, scared, said she was in CA but was in MA?

    Wouldn’t a scared woman not tell the truth about where she was and use a blocked caller ID to avoid being located?

    Apparently after some interaction with Preston, perhaps she fessed up about location after feeling more comfortable that Lee wasn’t the one who called her with threats? Why not?

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/4/2011 @ 5:22 pm

  1274. koam- I believe there was just some speculation of how easy it would be to spoof Lee’s number and/or voice on JG’s phone if she did indeed get a death threat.

    Comment by Doug in oregon (a9a03f) — 7/4/2011 @ 5:23 pm

  1275. Now my question is why Lee would want to protect that network. Because by letting that information out and forcing JR9 to ground, he basically said “hey, if she told me that, then she probably told someone else that, too” and forced JR9 to shut up before he could be exposed. In effect, Stranahan acted in a way that protected whoever is behind Nikki Reid, intentionally or not.

    He also insulted Reid saying he was going to jail, leaving the comment under my name. (He had admin access and if he logged in under the admin could leave a comment that looked like it was coming from me.)

    And he said I said Reid was my source for a story that I never said Reid was a source for. And that he was not a source for.

    All actions that might drive Reid underground.

    Comment by Patterico (b1e9c9) — 7/4/2011 @ 5:24 pm

  1276. Why did Reid and Wolfe stay in the game so long? Especially after Weiner quit.

    To protect JG? If they did use an account that belonged to her, maybe they felt a need to pay “rodeo clown” and attract some attention toward them to keep people from digging into the account history and discovering JG. Kindof a panic move. I don’t think JG would do that AND tell Stranahan that she created the account herself if she were following the whole thing because she would have known Stranahan and Patterico were collaborating on the story. Telling Stranahan would be telling Patterico and appearing on his website answering questions would be lunacy.

    It is like telling Stranahan “JR9 is a fake” and then going on Patterico answering questions as JR9.

    Looks to me like Stranahan is now in a mode where he is, intentionally or not, covering for whoever JR9 is. At this point the game would be “sacrifice the lesser asset (JG) to protect the larger asset (the JR9 net)” and you have Lee standing in the intersection as traffic cop waiving everyone toward JG.

    JG is probably really pissed at someone and I don’t think it is P. If someone else was using that account, maybe they are going to throw her under the bus to protect themselves and Stranahan looks like he’s helping.

    Questions for Twitter: Did the password on the starchild account change between October 2010 and the time Weiner’s wiener showed up on teh interwebz and if so, how many times and when? From where did those password requests originate, if any.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 5:25 pm

  1277. “All actions that might drive Reid underground.”

    Not the actions of a polite guest blogger.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/4/2011 @ 5:27 pm

  1278. #1166 DRJ

    I tend to agree with all points you made in that post.

    And if the main characters are real, and if Gennette did email Nikki after asking JR9 if the address she had was still correct, it could be possible that she apologized(or something) to Nikki and everything was smoothed over with them. Hence, the sudden silence. Have been wondering about the silence.

    Lots of ‘ifs’ there, but seem to have seen a few others thrown out here also!

    Comment by jmel44 (7e725f) — 7/4/2011 @ 5:27 pm

  1279. @1274 – Similar to insults, threats and slurs leveled at Wolfe by Lee from Day 1.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/4/2011 @ 5:34 pm

  1280. 1261 crosspatch

    JR9 is definitely connected to the controller of starchild111 (Nikki) during the Wenier era (early to mid 2011.)

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/4/2011 @ 5:38 pm

  1281. 1262 crosspatch

    Lee got a call from JG saying she had created the starchild111 account. Lee reports it right away to all of us. That wouldn’t be a reason for Patrick to be upset. That was an important event.

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/4/2011 @ 5:39 pm

  1282. I gotta get the kids ready for fireworks. Been an interesting day. I think I have a better handle on the situation, or at least the parts of it that seem interesting to me.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 5:40 pm

  1283. 1267 Doug
    Agree with most of that but don’t see why it’s not political and only personal. That’s just one theory.

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/4/2011 @ 5:42 pm

  1284. 1280 koam

    It would be a reason for P to be annoyed, I think, but I can’t speak for how he felt about it. It would have certainly annoyed me.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 5:42 pm

  1285. I have been having trouble catching up with all the posts. Sorry for the late entry. Grats on the number of comments!

    On 6/19/11, I searched for “starchild111” and was simply checking what came up. You didn’t have to have the “Jennifer George” name to start; you only had to have the patience to sit and keep on looking at the results, looking for a name to show up somewhere in connection with the phrase. That’s all I did.
    I mentioned the oddity I found at: http://patterico.com/2011/06/18/timing-weinergate-nikki-reid/comment-page-5/
    comment number 185.

    But let me ask a related question… When I searched for “Jennifer George” there were tons of them… So how did the field narrow down to JGCA and JGMA? I actually had guessed in a completely different direction when I was playing with the searches. Was there evidence that narrowed the field?

    I don’t Twitter or Facebook, so I have been learning as I followed you folks discussing all these bits of information. It may be that the link was in research others could do that I couldn’t since I don’t do those things.

    Also, how did the discussion apparently end up assuming that the point of the account was definitely some kind of sting against either Weiner or Breitbart? There are other possibilities for “misdirection” as far as the purpose of the account goes.

    People lie or “misdirect” for many reasons. What evidence is there that the JG account holder became Nikki as a sting?

    Comment by Sue (24e46b) — 7/4/2011 @ 5:47 pm

  1286. 1270 crosspatch

    don’t follow

    Please use post numbers and please use nouns not pronouns so we can follow your meaning.

    1271 crosspatch

    please use post numbers. i’m trying to follow you and there are obviously many questions floating at the same time.

    I gather that you’re responding to 1269.

    Lee received call from JP that was “private number”

    I understand your response. Does this have to do with the call that JG received from someone claiming to be Lee or Lee-related?

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/4/2011 @ 5:47 pm

  1287. 1272 doug
    thank you to you and crosspatch

    it’s very confusing as lee just said jg was lying about everything and he didn’t give all the details.

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/4/2011 @ 5:49 pm

  1288. correction 1273 doug thanks

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/4/2011 @ 5:49 pm

  1289. 1274 pat

    holy hell

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/4/2011 @ 5:50 pm

  1290. 1274 Patrick

    He also insulted Reid saying he was going to jail, leaving the comment under my name. (He had admin access and if he logged in under the admin could leave a comment that looked like it was coming from me.)

    Holy holy hell

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/4/2011 @ 5:56 pm

  1291. 1285 koam

    I was referring to something someone else said about the threatening call JG got claiming to be from Lee. Not about the call to Lee from JG.

    I was saying that it is possible to create a phone number just about anywhere and place calls that appear to come from that number when you aren’t even using a telephone. The call would trace back to google and it would require a subpoena to google to find out where the call actually originated from.

    The conversation also says that one can make caller ID anything they want it to be in some cases. So if I have access to the right sort of phone equipment, I can call someone and make it look like the call came from you and I can make my voice sound somewhat like yours. Heck, a little sulfur hexafluoride from a welding supply shop and I can make Sarah Palin sound like Barry White.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 6:03 pm

  1292. 1283 crosspatch

    If you want to see part of what annoyed P, see 1274

    He also insulted Reid saying he was going to jail, leaving the comment under my name. (He had admin access and if he logged in under the admin could leave a comment that looked like it was coming from me.)

    I’m still in shock.

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/4/2011 @ 6:07 pm

  1293. @ koam @wittier

    I don’t understand what JG/MA motivation for calling Lee is at all in this story. Unless she feels like she’s about to be found out and irrationally hopes she can talk Lee out of pursuing the story. Or it was a hoaxer trying to push people further down the wrong path. While not impossible it requires more explanation than just an irrational jilted lover does.

    On I side note I can’t help but notice that the Weinergate cease fire didn’t last more than a day.

    Did Lee accidentally post under Patterico’s name here in regards to the comment directed at JR9 or would he have to do it intentionally? I was pretty shocked when I read that and held back responding to it for just long enough to find out it was someone who’d borrowed Patterico’s name.

    If it was intentional that’s low and makes me lose a lot of respect for Stranahan. The irony of it isn’t lost on me either though.

    Comment by Johnny 5 is alive (5ccc5e) — 7/4/2011 @ 6:08 pm

  1294. If I were P, I would want to keep JR9 coming back as much as possible. Having Stranahan blow that would have annoyed me.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 6:16 pm

  1295. 1284 sue

    great. see also 1098 and 1090

    Lee was focused on JGCA after reading her resume and he focused in her job at Reason Mag as a fundraiser. He called this “doing political work.” He emailed her with his phone number and sent her a facebook request on 6/19. Minutes later he gets a call from a JG saying she had been threatened and who said she was scared and worried. The call was from JG MA but Lee assumed it was JG CA calling an dlying. Lee said he was 90% certain JG CA was the target person because of this. The timing of the emails and the calls was “coincidental” relative to pointing toward JG CA.

    He later backed away from JG CA entirely and repeatedly. JG CA wasn’t involved.

    So I believe he found JG CA through that sequence of events and the 123people. Info that JG MA gave him (UCLA) was coincidental to JG CA’s background. That was also a mistake. But the mention of UCLA prof by JG MA, the caller, made Lee more sure it was JG CA who was calling at the time. A “Comedy of errors”.

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/4/2011 @ 6:17 pm

  1296. But oddly, Stranahan’s pattern of actions are like someone who is protecting JR9. Like he wants to shut JR9 up. Like he is taking extraordinary active measures to do things to shut JR9 up.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 6:19 pm

  1297. Did Lee accidentally post under Patterico’s name here in regards to the comment directed at JR9 or would he have to do it intentionally? I was pretty shocked when I read that and held back responding to it for just long enough to find out it was someone who’d borrowed Patterico’s name.

    If it was intentional that’s low and makes me lose a lot of respect for Stranahan. The irony of it isn’t lost on me either thoug

    I read that thread and was blown away when I saw that comment labeled “Patterico” which wasn’t him obviously. That post was very clearly intentional, I don’t see any scenario where it wasn’t since it so clearly lines up with Lee (and his tantrum of calling people crazy and pretenders) and is so far afield from what Patrick has been doing.

    Comment by Kaisersoze (c86eb0) — 7/4/2011 @ 6:19 pm

  1298. I should clarify I was shocked when I saw “Patterico’s” the cops are on their way comment. I thought it was the most awesome reveal ever if it was true but at the same time wondered about it. I intentionally waited to respond to it for quite a while and I’m glad I did because not to long after that he posted that it wasn’t him that had posted it.

    I’d be stunned to find out that Stranahan did it on purpose.

    That really can’t be the case that a sock puppet investigation turns into a blog interview coup d’état sock puppet style.

    Comment by Johnny 5 is alive (5ccc5e) — 7/4/2011 @ 6:23 pm

  1299. 1292 J5A

    JG MA if innocent calls Lee to find out what the hell is up. She’s not reassured and winds up at BPD.

    JG MA if not innocent is trying to pin hoax threat calls she says she received on Lee? I dunno. I’ve been assuming an innocent JG MA based on blurbs I’ve read here from important, careful participants.

    I concur that 1274 is another shocking post. I don’t know about accidental vs. intentional. At this point I don’t think I’d just flatly grant the benefit of the doubt. But P is heated today (see twitter) so this is either the reason or a side-effect (not giving Lee the benefit of the doubt). I hope it was accidental but we’ll have to see.

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/4/2011 @ 6:24 pm

  1300. turns into a blog interview coup d’état sock puppet style.

    Seems more like “double agent” to me.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 6:25 pm

  1301. 1293 crosspatch

    the word evil comes to mind.

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/4/2011 @ 6:26 pm

  1302. 1296 kaisersoze

    It’s a disgusting development.

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/4/2011 @ 6:28 pm

  1303. New idea.

    It has been referenced in this thread that Cong. Weiner had been subjected to an attempted blackmail earlier.

    Isn’t it possible that starchild111 was a cover for someone watching the Congressman to see if the people he contacted online were OK, and not attempting to harm him in some way?

    Starchild was a twitter account used to get background information on the young ladies who Wiener was interested in. To see if they were trustworthy or not. Which is why her tweets were always probing what GL and GNC were talking about with the Weenie.

    Patriot/Dan Wolfe was probably a similar persona used to burrow into accounts of conservative critics to see what they were up to.

    It explains the ready availability of fake ID’s and complicated personas with backstories without a whole lot of detail to back them up.

    Comment by CausticConservative (b29599) — 7/4/2011 @ 6:29 pm

  1304. Heck, who else has admin, how do we know P even posted that most recent comment?

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 6:30 pm

  1305. 1302, that idea has been brought up before. That starchild was used to “vet” Weiners follows.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 6:31 pm

  1306. 1282 koam

    Political passions run hot so, of course I won’t rule them out. I just haven’t seen a target being aimed at. Seemed to be only JR9 and Wolfe defending themselves and attacking critics. Don’t understand the MO from them. I DO believe they have been doing this for a reason, whatever that may be.
    I admit, I believe they are sock(s); not absolutely sure about JG MA (who called Lee) but probably.

    Comment by Doug in oregon (a9a03f) — 7/4/2011 @ 6:34 pm

  1307. @ Kaisersoze

    Yeah I’ve never run or owned a blog so I don’t know if one wrong click and you’re posting a comment like the owner of the blog or not. If it was intentional I’m shocked that Patterico is even on speaking terms. That’s some seriously dishonest sabotage.

    I kind of wonder if some level of jealousy has crept into this entire processes. I can’t help but notice that none of the sock puppets/people of interest want to talk to Lee.

    I’ve noticed him go on and on on twitter about everyone that’s speaking to JR9/Nikki/USAPatrio76/Gennette to make all their private convo’s public. Which ironically enough when one was happening that he could have been involved in he sabotaged it.

    Comment by Johnny 5 is alive (5ccc5e) — 7/4/2011 @ 6:35 pm

  1308. 1304 If that was their purpose, who were they? FBI/CIA backgrounders, looking for potential national security weaknesses in the Congressman’s contact list?

    Or a private firm hired by Wiener to “help” him out of sticky situations when he finds himself in them? Keep in mind, Weiner is close to the Clintons, and B&H had people with a similar job description working for them in the White House.

    What was that guys name again? It was so long ago…

    Comment by CausticConservative (b29599) — 7/4/2011 @ 6:37 pm

  1309. That’s some seriously dishonest sabotage.

    I can see someone “forgetting” for a moment that their comment would post as coming from the blog owner. But one would expect that upon seeing that they would pipe up with “that wasn’t Patterico, that was me” from Stranahan but no such thing happened.

    I’m not saying 100% that he did it intentionally to start with, but it didn’t appear that he took any action to correctly note who the comment came from, either.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 6:39 pm

  1310. I don’t really buy the vetting for Weiner idea. Gennette said she informed AW about the possibility of them being sock puppets to begin with. That he was aware of it and they were both “intentionally” screwing with them. Which doesn’t make any sense if that person was actually trying to vet others. Unless they were actually vetting Gennette.

    You’d think if the federal government was trying to probe/vet what ever they’d be able to pull of a better background than borrowing someone else twitter account. I’d imagine they wouldn’t make mistakes about teenage pop culture either.

    Comment by Johnny 5 is alive (5ccc5e) — 7/4/2011 @ 6:43 pm

  1311. Unless they were actually vetting Gennette.

    That would be where the notion was going when I brought it up a few days ago.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 6:45 pm

  1312. @ crosspatch

    I was thinking the same thing, there should have been an “oops” post shortly there after. Patterico actually posted next to clarify the situation.

    Comment by Johnny 5 is alive (5ccc5e) — 7/4/2011 @ 6:48 pm

  1313. 1309

    You’d think if the federal government was trying to probe/vet what ever they’d be able to pull of a better background than borrowing someone else twitter account. I’d imagine they wouldn’t make mistakes about teenage pop culture either.

    Federal govt? No, they would be better than that, I think, and would already have a stack of twitter accounts and wouldn’t need to worry. They could make them look pretty real. Hacktivists or some third world intelligence operation, maybe not.

    If you are a member of Congress on the Internet, you are going to have all sorts of people watching your every move. China will be watching, Iran will be watching, heck, the Zetas will be watching looking for an opportunity. You don’t have to worry just about political enemies, you have to worry about enemy enemies.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 6:48 pm

  1314. Weiner is just an idiot. It looks a lot like someone was positioning themselves into trying to get some dirt on him. Dirt can be pretty valuable. The possible motivation for it spans the spectrum. I’d like to talk to whoever was at the keyboard as JR9

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 6:51 pm

  1315. @ crosspatch #1311

    Those questions could be answered if someone just asked the woman who came forward. Was Nikki and company following the LV blackjack dealer? Or the other woman who was on Hannity? This story seems to just revolve around a handful of people.

    If it was vetting it was incredibly sloppy. If you are in the business of gaining a strangers trust online for the explicit reason of getting information out of them Nikki and company was terribly at it. So terrible that it “supposedly” made Gennette suspicious.

    Comment by Johnny 5 is alive (5ccc5e) — 7/4/2011 @ 6:51 pm

  1316. *terrible at it…like my proof reading.

    Comment by Johnny 5 is alive (5ccc5e) — 7/4/2011 @ 6:54 pm

  1317. I am not saying it was vetting, just saying the thought crossed my mind.

    I think JG had very little to do with this aside from creating a twitter account that was eventually used with regard to weiner. Thats all I am prepared to state with any certainty and even that is suspect because all I have is Stranahan’s word on the matter.

    Though the fact that JR9 shut up immediately after seems to indicate that might be the case.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 6:55 pm

  1318. The trouble I have with this entire story is I think just about all the main players are lying in one way or another. It’s tough to figure anything out when everyone is being duplicitous.

    If JG in MA is actually unstable then things start to make crazy-logical sense.

    Comment by Johnny 5 is alive (5ccc5e) — 7/4/2011 @ 6:58 pm

  1319. 1312 crosspatch

    Agreed

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/4/2011 @ 6:58 pm

  1320. If someone called JG claiming to be Lee, someone could have called Lee claiming to be JG.

    We really don’t have anything other than some phone calls and what Stranahan says.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 6:58 pm

  1321. 1319 crosspatch

    Well we always had to wonder about Lee’s concept of “proof” but now 1274 puts everything into question.

    But if we accept that Lee was just old Lee and was trying to find the truth and told us the truth, then JG called him, I think because she also talks to Preston a few times and then goes to the BPD. The discussion of continuity in her dealings on the phone and with BPD made most of us think it’s the same JG. And BPD would have verified that she’s a real person.

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/4/2011 @ 7:04 pm

  1322. 1306 -

    If it was intentional I’m shocked that Patterico is even on speaking terms. That’s some seriously dishonest sabotage.

    Comment by Johnny 5 is alive — 7/4/2011 @ 6:35 pm

    I liked Lee and listened to some of those blog radio shows (cat and all) and I don’t dislike him, but I really don’t get him making pronouncements of certainty based on a few data points. Patrick has done some serious biznitch-slapping of him on Twitter and I get the feeling it takes a lot to get Patrick to that level of action.

    Also on somewhat of a tangent, reading his comments to JG of California I can see where Lee could makes comments a little stronger than that and the person could take it as a threat. At this point I think Patrick’s scenario has to be the most likely since he is posting it and hinting he has evidence of it that isn’t public.

    Comment by Kaisersoze (c86eb0) — 7/4/2011 @ 7:05 pm

  1323. # 1320

    I used to think that too but Lee clarified that the Detective that spoke with JG MA also mentioned Prof Hunter. So unless the JG hoaxer knew that JG would use the prof as a personal reference to Lee that line of the conspiracy has to go another layer deeper.

    Which would be that a hoaxer did call Lee but JG in MA is a willing accomplice of sorts and they worked out this little tid bit ahead of time. Which begs the question why wouldn’t she just call Lee and tell him what she wanted to tell him. What was the purpose of the hoaxer JG?

    Comment by Johnny 5 is alive (5ccc5e) — 7/4/2011 @ 7:07 pm

  1324. 1317 – If JG in MA is actually unstable then things start to make crazy-logical sense.

    Comment by Johnny 5 is alive — 7/4/2011 @ 6:58 pm

    A huge amount of this is hidden and overlapping weirdness obviously, but some threads of it seem to make sense if you follow these theories:

    1 – Gennette was sexting Weiner and coordinated with him afterward on covering it up, as seen in the NY Post article.

    2 – Some of the Nikki Reed, et all accounts were from a young girl that was sexting him also, and coordinated with him afterward as seen in the Tommy Christopher “my mom vouches for it” article.

    3 – Neil Rauhauser was either brought in to help with the coverup or did it on his own, employing some of the underhanded/illegal tactics we have seen from the sockpuppets. Nikki gives account password to Weiner staffer who passes it on to operative Neil isn’t out of the question.

    All theories of course and I’m sure most are wrong, but it makes sense with what we have seen from Patrick and Gennette here. I could also see the JReid9 account and the Nikki Reid account being a troubled young liberal girl that did the Tommy Christopher stuff to protect Weiner, then came to this site out of spite for Gennette when she found out Gennette was playing her, or a bigger object of Weiner’s affection than she was, or whatever was rattling around her head at the moment.

    Comment by Kaisersoze (c86eb0) — 7/4/2011 @ 7:15 pm

  1325. @ Kaisersoze

    Yeah, I’ve been following Lee since he started reporting on the Pigford case. I’ve listened to his BTR as well. I’m not sure that I dislike him now but to sock puppet the owner of a blog and potentially chase off the very person the owner brought on to answer peoples questions seems really, really odd. It makes me question what his intent is at this point.

    Clearly Patterico is still chasing something down. Perhaps Lee has hit a dead end and feels that any speculation beyond his conclusion hurts his case. Or he’s offended that not everyone has just accepted his version of things. He does misrepresent some theories as fact though. All that being said I still think his explanation makes the most sense.

    It’s just the more he gets angry about it the more I have to wonder why? Perhaps he’s just as impatient as the rest of us are for the final chapter.

    Comment by Johnny 5 is alive (5ccc5e) — 7/4/2011 @ 7:18 pm

  1326. @ Kaisersoze

    Thanks for laying out the Neil angle. I hadn’t actually heard the theory from anyone. I know everyone keeps dropping the “Hi Neal” comments here and at Ace of Spades HQ but until now I wasn’t really seeing how he was involved.

    That theory actually makes quite a bit of sense as well. At this point I guess anything is possible and only time and LE will tell. Of course that doesn’t mean it isn’t fun to keep poking hole in random theories. Who is Neil posting under in this thread?

    Comment by Johnny 5 is alive (5ccc5e) — 7/4/2011 @ 7:26 pm

  1327. Kaisersoze: There was no Nikki Reid if what Stranahan says is the truth. I mean, there was certainly someone posing to be a Nikki Reid and snatching photos off of Facebook to create a personna of Nikki Reid, but the account was created by Jenny George or so Stranahan says the person who may or may not have called him said.

    Someone named Jenny George obviously called BPD to complain about a threat that claimed to come from Stranahan. Is that *the* Jenny George and *a* Jenny George, who knows.

    The detective apparently mentioned some professor … according to Stranahan. Stranahan is the source of practically everything we have.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 7:28 pm

  1328. 1274. Patterico

    Pat, izzat you? If so, you’ve been generous in your restrained response. Are you sure it had to be Lee? Does your blog protect use of your name?

    Comment by jeffeneff (707f3d) — 7/4/2011 @ 7:30 pm

  1329. Where is false post under Patterico name?

    Comment by RocksEm (5241c6) — 7/4/2011 @ 7:31 pm

  1330. And maybe Neil’s minions were in on it from the start, not “brought in” if the deal was to protect Huma from a philandering Weiner.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 7:32 pm

  1331. jeffeneff here, conducting test.

    Comment by Patterico (707f3d) — 7/4/2011 @ 7:33 pm

  1332. 1328. Patterico removed the false post

    Comment by jeffeneff (707f3d) — 7/4/2011 @ 7:33 pm

  1333. 1327 jeff
    I’d be very disappointed if Pat assumed Lee did it without checking IPs or other verification.

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/4/2011 @ 7:34 pm

  1334. 1325 – Thanks for laying out the Neil angle. I hadn’t actually heard the theory from anyone.

    Comment by Johnny 5 is alive — 7/4/2011 @ 6:58 pm

    From what you read of his past (if accurate) this kind of stuff seems to fit a pattern and Mike has posted here that Neil threatened him by saying he had proof he had hacked Weiner, etc. He also brags on Twitter about having worked for Democratic campaigns sub rosa, it wouldn’t be a surprise to me if it turned out to be true.

    Comment by Kaisersoze (c86eb0) — 7/4/2011 @ 7:35 pm

  1335. koam, likewise, but i showed you don’t need admin access

    Comment by jeffeneff (707f3d) — 7/4/2011 @ 7:36 pm

  1336. 1326 – Kaisersoze: There was no Nikki Reid if what Stranahan says is the truth.

    Comment by crosspatch — 7/4/2011 @ 7:28 pm

    Sorry, I meant the Twitter account labeled Nikki Reid. There is a huge amount of sockpuppetry and misdirection in this story obviously, sorry I wasn’t clear.

    Comment by Kaisersoze (c86eb0) — 7/4/2011 @ 7:36 pm

  1337. “Patrick has done some serious biznitch-slapping of him on Twitter and I get the feeling it takes a lot to get Patrick to that level of action.”

    Kaisersoze – You are correct in the above assessment.

    I cannot recall the date of the errant comment, but could it have been a sockpuppet Friday name change snafu between threads?

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/4/2011 @ 7:38 pm

  1338. test [edit -- since Molon Labe doesn't make it clear, this was not me, but Molon Labe conducting a test]

    Comment by Patterico (dc676c) — 7/4/2011 @ 7:45 pm

  1339. Guess I have admin status. Good grief what a tool.

    Comment by Patterico (dc676c) — 7/4/2011 @ 7:46 pm

  1340. If Patterico is coming out an saying that Lee did that he must have double checked IP addresses. One thing I’ve noticed about Patterico is he’s very specific in his statements and has something to back them up with.

    Comment by Johnny 5 is alive (5ccc5e) — 7/4/2011 @ 7:47 pm

  1341. It’s so simple, even a lib could do it.

    It’s me, crosspatch.

    Comment by Patterico (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 7:48 pm

  1342. I asked Lee on twitter if he did it accidentally or intentionally and never heard back from him. That would seem like something if you didn’t do it you’d adamantly deny. Gotta love the irony of it though.

    Comment by Johnny 5 is alive (5ccc5e) — 7/4/2011 @ 7:50 pm

  1343. Have fun folks, we’re going out to our neighborhood park to watch the fireworks. Hope everyone on the East coast had a great 4th.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 7:52 pm

  1344. daley testing

    Comment by Patterico (bf33e9) — 7/4/2011 @ 7:54 pm

  1345. if patterico goofed, he’ll own it.

    Comment by jeffeneff (707f3d) — 7/4/2011 @ 7:58 pm

  1346. Time to repeat the rally music!

    Plodding on to 2,000.

    Comment by Patterico (bf33e9) — 7/4/2011 @ 8:00 pm

  1347. Oops, that was me.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/4/2011 @ 8:01 pm

  1348. Re: #1294 koam @ wittier
    Thanks for the clarifications.
    So, Lee was going through JG’s and spotted someone with a background that fit some ideas he had and made direct inquiries? Then a person self-identifying as JG called him at a point where he assumed it was a direct response to his inquiries? Was/is there any evidence going from the account forward, or was it all the “Comedy of errors” and coincidence suggesting that this person was the account holder? In other words, aside from contacts leading to assumptions about the account holder’s identity, is there evidence going from the account to a specific JG person? I guess the related question there is this: the caller reportedly said they had opened the account but denied any connection to Weiner. As I understand it, the account didn’t have much in it to identify, so what evidence is there that the caller actually was the account creator? Is there anything that might lead elsewhere?

    Comment by Sue (24e46b) — 7/4/2011 @ 8:06 pm

  1349. On twitter Lee says it was an accidental posting.

    Stranahan Lee Stranahan
    Yes, a few days ago during one of the JohnReid Q&A sessions I made a comment that went up under Patterico’s name.

    Stranahan Lee Stranahan
    This happened because I was logged in as an Admin. I was logged in as an Admin because Patterico had asked me to read a draft of something.

    Comment by Johnny 5 is alive (5ccc5e) — 7/4/2011 @ 8:07 pm

  1350. Those tests don’t have much meaning.

    I really think Pat knows how this works.

    Comment by koam @wittier (e74ff0) — 7/4/2011 @ 8:08 pm

  1351. “Those tests don’t have much meaning.

    I really think Pat knows how this works.”

    koam – Yes, but all the commenters don’t.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/4/2011 @ 8:10 pm

  1352. Have a great Independence Day crosshatch! Happy 4th of July!

    Comment by Johnny 5 is alive (5ccc5e) — 7/4/2011 @ 8:10 pm

  1353. Happy Fourth of July! :-D

    Comment by Sue (24e46b) — 7/4/2011 @ 8:11 pm

  1354. I’m going to have to quit for tonight, but I have stray curiosity type questions.

    Despite the assertions of GC that she “knew” Nikki was fake and that is why she flirted, etc., that seems to be an assumption and/or possible misdirection.

    What if GC knew exactly what the account holder was, and the changes were implemented for some purpose other than “catching” Weiner? What if Weiner also knew?

    Comment by Sue (24e46b) — 7/4/2011 @ 8:18 pm

  1355. The blog owner can match IP addresses from people who post here. If I suddenly change my name and post under someone elses name he’d be able to match up my IP address.

    It was Lee that posted under Patterico’s name. He said it was on twitter and explained how it happened.

    Comment by Johnny 5 is alive (5ccc5e) — 7/4/2011 @ 8:19 pm

  1356. Hackers comandeered –and bragged about it–a Fox News political twitter account earlier Monday. False tweets claimed Joe Biden now president. Scary stuff out there.

    Twitter is the devil. Why sane people use it and trust it is hard for me to understand.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/05/business/media/05fox.html?_r=1

    Comment by elissa (4a1b75) — 7/4/2011 @ 8:25 pm

  1357. By the way, I am waiting (reasonably patiently) for the end of the story… in the meantime, I am enjoying the wonderful discussions here… ;-)

    Comment by Sue (24e46b) — 7/4/2011 @ 8:25 pm

  1358. Leee’s contention was that if Niiki Reid was fake then John Reid was her fake father and anything he provided would be subject to that same view.

    “What is his true motive, what is real vs fake”.

    However, JR9 did not run away because of Lee in my view but because of GC. The first parts of his doc dump look legit and GC confirmed many aspects but then he or someone provied additional items that GC claimed were false and after she asked if the emaile for Niiki was still good, well then you know the rest of the the JR9 story.

    Joe

    Comment by Joe Smith (54c0c1) — 7/4/2011 @ 8:26 pm

  1359. I’m really hoping an alien theory comes out at some point. Just because I really enjoy the Sci Fi genre. ;)

    Comment by Johnny 5 is alive (5ccc5e) — 7/4/2011 @ 8:32 pm

  1360. http://swiftread.blogspot.com/2010/10/desperate-democrats-hire-progressive-e.html

    Desperate Democrats Hire Progressive E-Thugs

    Yes, Neal uses the term clients to describe his former employers who hired him to “handle their social media needs, specifically on twitter” PPST = Progressive Political Strategy for Twitter”

    In a recent article he said he had “44 clients in total” – only 15 were listed on PPST. And Greg & I are so discredited that Rauhauser lost every single “public” election that he worked on.

    And while some like McCain question whether there was proof of Rauhauser’s involvement – the above article provides more than enough proof for those willing to read it. Including Rauhauser’s own words from Daily Kos.

    “Twittergate” was not done by Greg nor I. It falsely assumed Neal was linked to Tea Party Tracker, funded by the NAACP. The producer of that video jumped our investigation and went off on a tangent. Why? Because the “beandogs” harassed them & put her reaction on the teaparty tracker hash tag.

    IN fact, Rauhauser was linked to Democrat Political Campaigns – as the above title says. Not the NAACP.

    Comment by SwifftRead (8612d7) — 7/4/2011 @ 8:35 pm

  1361. http://swiftread.blogspot.com/2010/10/democrat-cyber-stealth-revealed-neal.html

    “Democrat Cyber Stealth Revealed”

    Details more research on Neal, using his own online footprint. And how he hid the identities of foreign entities who interfered in our election process. Neal was reported to the FBI, but I never filed charges on him. And for the record, he never worked in Washington DC – he just had a cell phone that pointed here.

    Comment by SwifftRead (8612d7) — 7/4/2011 @ 8:39 pm

  1362. http://swiftread.blogspot.com/2010/10/hank-gilbert-texas-ag-candidate-hires.html

    Last bit of research on Rauhauser. This reveals how far left Rauhauser really is, including his endorsement of Perma-Culture, which lays way to preserving the world’s food supply and social engineering.

    There’s some more to it. If you’re interested in Neal’s twitter tactics, simply look at the below photo album. Neal& his people making death threats are nothing new to twitter.

    http://swiftread.blogspot.com/2010/10/slide-show-progressive-psts-neal.html

    Comment by SwifftRead (8612d7) — 7/4/2011 @ 8:44 pm

  1363. http://patterico.com/2011/03/25/patterico-and-lee-stranahan-to-quit-blogging-at-huffington-post/

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNVit7cesj8

    Comment by vor2 (a0843a) — 7/4/2011 @ 8:50 pm

  1364. yes, VOR2, at that point, I had a very high opinion of Lee.

    Unfortunately, I think Patterico was too busy with work to carefully consider my concerns about Lee when I realized there might be a problem with the way this person handles private communication or the way he selects which detailed to bring forward.

    Seeing what I’ve recently noticed, where Patterico is upset that Lee is asking critical questions he already knows the answer to, regarding Patterico’s ‘follow up’ reminds me of how Lee handled an issue with me.

    I had recently gotten frustrated with how Lee handled one of his PatriotUSA suspects, and how he admitted to lying, and then issued what Lee has described to me as an apology, but clearly was the opposite of an apology… it was a rationalization. But people offer fake apologies all the time, and I just wanted to make clear I wasn’t able to count on his word, especially on this story, until he’s shown he’s worth trust again.

    Later, I explained I was deleting a joke twitter account meant to show some support for PatriotUSA76 because Lee informed me he was being threatened (at that point he made it sound like violent threats, but I’m not sure if that’s accurate). I explained I couldn’t support that sort of behavior, but Lee omitted that explanation and conveyed the twitter account deletion as though it was linked to whatever the news of the day was with John Reid. I think Lee thought he had John’s IP address (maybe he did… I don’t know or care). I found the way he cleverly mentioned some detailed to be extremely dishonest, and even a bit scary, because it linked me to characters I think are unsavory. Soon, I learned Lee had been telling his ‘radio’ audience he had some awful secret about me, as in “Dustin” (which is my name). When I challenged Lee directly, he had nothing of the sort (that I already knew). He was relying on something I had confided to him, but spinning it ridiculously. All he knew was that I had this particular twitter account.

    So he was spinning the same fact in two completely opposite directions at the same exact time. On the one hand, this twitter account’s deletion was spun as though it was linked to John Reid (again, he knew it wasn’t… he knew it was me and he knew it was removed to avoid being associated with someone Lee was having a serious problem with). On the other hand, the account was spun as a secret proving I’m dishonest (nothing I said on the account was different than what I’d say here).

    I know this is a minor issue. But he certainly didn’t make it sound minor, and some of his loyalists soon showed just how seriously they took his stupid commentary.

    So I explained to Patterico my concerns, and he wanted us to deal with the issue on our own (which is perfectly fair, but I worried he was not grasping my complaints at the time as a word of caution).

    Anyway, Lee has it in him to be an awesome journalist, but when he’s challenged or frustrated, his doesn’t handle it well. It was clear at the time that how he was treating me was intended to be a response to the fact I had challenged his integrity, linking specific grounds that didn’t make him look so great. Instead of showing me I was wrong, he showed me I was right. Since then, he’s moved on to ticking a lot of other people off in ways that make my complaint seem even smaller than it did then.

    But still, the fact is that he was unable to maintain a confidence between us, he was willing to selectively provide details in a harmful way, and he was reckless with someone’s reputation in the context of a matter he acts as though he takes seriously.

    Hopefully he learns his lesson, but I wouldn’t bet on it.

    Comment by Dustin (b7410e) — 7/4/2011 @ 9:12 pm

  1365. The blog owner can match IP addresses from people who post here. If I suddenly change my name and post under someone elses name he’d be able to match up my IP address.

    No. Not really. Some providers use NAT meaning that thousands of users may appear to come from only a few IP addresses. Others might use proxies that make for the same problem. Or the IP address you appear to come from might change every time you connect to the Internet. Or you might be using a VPN which masks your IP address.

    IP address means very little these days.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 10:17 pm

  1366. Well, I will qualify that. For SOME people the IP address can be traced back to at least their ISP and sometimes to them. Others can be much more difficult.

    It just isn’t the same in all cases so it isn’t safe to make assumptions that you can track someone’s IP address back to them.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 10:40 pm

  1367. Anyway, Lee has it in him to be an awesome journalist, but when he’s challenged or frustrated, his doesn’t handle it well.

    Comment by Dustin — 7/4/2011 @ 9:12 pm

    Agree, I know its petty but the point of him calling Patterico posters “crazy” and “pretending” about JReid9 was pretty annoying to me. Its funny too that we are all crazy if we didn’t accept his statements on Nikki/John Reid as gospel but now his story on his post that set Patrick off is “Oh, I forgot I was logged in as an admin, though I had posted under my own name dozens of times already”.

    He is also on Twitter asking why JReid would be giving info to a conservative blog as if there is only one answer (his). Here is another possible answer – because this is the blog Gennette was posting on and the aim of that person was to get back at Gennette. And why would they post one of the liberal blogs when they were either ignoring the story or still on the “Breitbart hacked Weiner” meme?

    Comment by Kaisersoze (c86eb0) — 7/4/2011 @ 11:04 pm

  1368. But still, the fact is that he was unable to maintain a confidence between us, he was willing to selectively provide details in a harmful way, and he was reckless with someone’s reputation in the context of a matter he acts as though he takes seriously.

    Yeah, this all sounds familiar. Every word of it.

    Comment by Patterico (f724ca) — 7/4/2011 @ 11:22 pm

  1369. I don’t think anyone would want to “get back” at Gennette. I mean, if JG created the account then Nikki Reid doesn’t exist. The Nikki Reid name was added to an account and pictures were swiped off of Facebook to create a persona. JG has allegedly admitted that she created Starchild111. Who is “getting back” at Gennette?

    This smells to me like someone was just trying to keep people off of Jenny George’s scent. I think the notion being that once they appeared to be a normal American family with an infatuated daughter, things would settle down, attention would focus back on Weiner and the heat would be off. Except someone made a Jenny George connection and then Stranahan says she admitted to creating the account. That blew JR9′s attempt at damage control out of the water.

    JR9 put enough stuff out there to show that he had access to some stuff that the owner of the account would have access to. Find out who JR9 is and my guess is you find out who was tweeting as Nikki or are very close to finding that out.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/4/2011 @ 11:28 pm

  1370. You guys are correct. You don’t have to have admin status to post a comment claiming to be me.

    If you do so, however, without making it clear it’s not me, you are subject to being banned.

    I found out about the Patterico comment from JohnReid9. I was appalled. As I always am when I see a comment on my site under my name that is not from me.

    Please stop doing it, even as a test. I don’t like it.

    Comment by Patterico (f724ca) — 7/4/2011 @ 11:42 pm

  1371. What I love is the position: JohnReid9 should not be given any voice at Patterico. We know that because he is a liar. Why, some of the proof we have that he is a liar is from information he provided because he had a voice at Patterico!

    I do not publicly subscribe to the position that JohnReid9 is a liar, by the way. I will say that even though he has apparently disappeared completely and is giving me no more information or emails. I will simply repeat what I have said perhaps a hundred bajillion times: whether he is really a father of a child improperly approached by Weiner, or a hoaxster (JG or someone else), his views, statements, and information are NEWS.

    And as long as those views, statements, and information are presented by someone who REPEATEDLY AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN says he is not vouching for JohnReid9, I don’t see what the possible harm is. If he is a huge liar, the commentariat will see it.

    And if he says something in public at odds with what he says in private, I can pounce. Of course, with people committing crimes right and left, I may choose to leave that information to law enforcement instead of a bunch of blog speculation. But as always, my devotion will be and will always remain to the truth.

    Comment by Patterico (f724ca) — 7/4/2011 @ 11:56 pm

  1372. Did JR9 traffic originate from the LA area? That is where Nikki claimed to live.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/5/2011 @ 12:17 am

  1373. But that might not mean much.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/5/2011 @ 12:20 am

  1374. Did JR9 traffic originate from the LA area? That is where Nikki claimed to live.

    That is not the kind of question I am going to answer.

    If he is an innocent man, he does not deserve to have that revealed.

    If he is not — if he is, in fact, Jennifer George or Neal R. or Patriot or all or none of the above, but/and/or somehow complicit in criminal activity — I am sure law enforcement can figure it out.

    So why discuss it on a blog?

    Comment by Patterico (f724ca) — 7/5/2011 @ 12:20 am

  1375. From Lee’s twitter feed a few hours ago:

    “@Stranahan Lee Stranahan
    And the day I need to show ‘self restraint’ to protect a liar trying to bring down my friends is the day I quit. So I did. @cshenkel”

    Protecting journalist or blogger friends is more important than revealing truth in the story is what I believe Lee is really saying there.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/5/2011 @ 12:24 am

  1376. No, daley, I think he is making some obscure point about not humoring JohnReid9.

    Comment by Patterico (f724ca) — 7/5/2011 @ 12:36 am

  1377. Ok, I wasn’t looking at it from a criminal perspective and in that light, yeah, that changes things. I was looking at it from a different, more social perspective.

    We have a conflict. We have a person who says he is Nikki Reid’s father and she was using the Starchild account who claimed to be in LA (though a person can claim to be from anywhere on a Twitter account).

    We also allegedly have someone on the opposite coast that says she created the account. I wasn’t looking for anything too exact, just wondering from which coast the traffic came.

    It was one of those “if you want people to believe you, some parts of what you say need to check out or at least some parts of what the other person claims needs to be shown to be false”. Not in a court of law, mind you, but from a more informal social setting.

    Any time one views a website, they must certainly know that the owner of the site potentially has an IP address where the traffic appears to originate (that isn’t always accurate but it is usually close, same coast, same continent, same country).

    Its ok, it was just a question I had in my mind.

    Trying to figure out which one is lying.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/5/2011 @ 12:38 am

  1378. “No, daley, I think he is making some obscure point about not humoring JohnReid9.”

    Patterico – I understand that and don’t that point is all that obscure. He feels that giving JR9 a platform helps bring down his friends in some way, but there was nothing, unless you two had an agreement, to prevent Lee from asking JR9 questions or challenging him while JR9 was commenting on your blog.

    As another commenter mentioned earlier, giving the participants enough rope to hang themselves, in this case exposing lies or contradictions in their own stories or those of others, is a time honored strategy.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/5/2011 @ 12:44 am

  1379. Everyone should go read Neal Rauhauser’s latest.

    Apparently, my wife is now a suspect, per Neal.

    Then again, Neal is relying on the word of . . . drumroll . . . Brett Kimberlin, Speedway Bomber.

    Go ahead. Google it.

    That is Neal Rauhauser’s big source. A guy who went to federal prison. Apparently Neal thinks that gives him credibility.

    Which I find . . . interesting.

    Hi, Neal!

    Comment by Patterico (f724ca) — 7/5/2011 @ 1:00 am

  1380. It can’t be said enough:

    “Brett Kimberlin, Speedway Bomber.”

    Put those words into Google, and marvel at the source Neal Rauhauser is using to slander me.

    “Brett Kimberlin, Speedway Bomber.”

    Comment by Patterico (f724ca) — 7/5/2011 @ 1:17 am

  1381. Over/under on how long it will take for that post to go private?

    Comment by Patterico (f724ca) — 7/5/2011 @ 1:22 am

  1382. Patterico,

    Do you have any dogs? If you do, they just might be suspected of being Nikki’s sockpuppy…odd things I ponder ; )

    Comment by ppk_pixie (7a67da) — 7/5/2011 @ 1:31 am

  1383. I’m at a loss to figure out why Lee is so opposed to letting JR9 potentially hang himself by screwing up and saying something that can be shown as factually wrong.

    There are so many ‘private conversations’ spoken about that I can’t help but wonder why bringing some of them into the light creates so much consternation for Lee.

    Comment by Johnny 5 is alive (5ccc5e) — 7/5/2011 @ 2:25 am

  1384. “In journalism it is simpler to sound off than it is to find out. It is more elegant to pontificate than it is to sweat.” -Harold Evans

    Comment by QuoteOfTheDay (786412) — 7/5/2011 @ 4:13 am

  1385. re 1309/@crosspatch and others talking about Lee “seeing” the comment:

    Hope Lee doesn’t mind me pointing this out, but he doesn’t “see” well these days. He is visually impaired.

    Forgive me if someone has already pointed this out. I have not read all the comments.

    Comment by Lizbuddie (133456) — 7/5/2011 @ 4:16 am

  1386. “Every journalist who is not too stupid or too full of himself to notice what is going on knows that what he does is morally indefensible. He is a kind of confidence man, preying on people’s vanity, ignorance, or loneliness, gaining their trust and betraying them without remorse.” -Janet Malcolm

    Comment by QuoteOfTheDay (786412) — 7/5/2011 @ 4:24 am

  1387. “The journalists have constructed for themselves a little wooden chapel, which they also call the Temple of Fame, in which they put up and take down portraits all day long and make such a hammering you can’t hear yourself speak.” -G.C. Lichtenberg

    Comment by QuoteOfTheDay (786412) — 7/5/2011 @ 4:26 am

  1388. “In the real world, nothing happens at the right place at the right time. It is the job of journalists and historians to correct that.”- Mark Twain

    Comment by QuoteOfTheDay (786412) — 7/5/2011 @ 4:32 am

  1389. “If, for instance, they have heard something from the postman, they attribute it to a semi-official statement; if they have fallen into conversation with a stranger at a bar, they can conscientiously describe him as a source that has hitherto proved unimpeachable. It is only when the journalist is reporting a whim of his own, and one to which he attaches minor importance, that he defines it as the opinion of well-informed circles.”- Evelyn Waugh

    Comment by QuoteOfTheDay (786412) — 7/5/2011 @ 4:34 am

  1390. “If it is not right, do not do it. If it is not true, do not say it.” -Marcus Aurelius

    “Beware of anyone who says they know. Trust me, they don’t, or they wouldn’t have to say they did.” -Harvey Fierstein

    Comment by QuoteOfTheDay (786412) — 7/5/2011 @ 5:42 am

  1391. Janet Malcolm’s name has crossed my mind more than once of late.

    Comment by koam @wittier (be5afd) — 7/5/2011 @ 6:31 am

  1392. Stran…

    Stran -ahan…

    Stran -ded Wind…

    See? I’m as good a detective as Neal!

    Comment by koam @wittier (be5afd) — 7/5/2011 @ 6:35 am

  1393. This thread is starting to look like day six of a lost weekend.

    Kinda whiffy too.

    Comment by Pious Agnostic (291f9a) — 7/5/2011 @ 6:38 am

  1394. Neal uses the word of bomber who tried to kill people over a person who puts criminals in prison to make life safe so Neal can live in safety to safely smear those who make him safe

    Comment by EricPWJohnson (2921b6) — 7/5/2011 @ 6:42 am

  1395. Pat,

    It is no excuse for Lee’s revelations of information you told him in confidence, but consider for a moment the public/private aspects of this kerfuffle.

    Unfortunately in blogs, the general consensus of the comments section can come to define reality – or at least define reality as conventional wisdom sees it. Lee had a theory that was opposed to the conventional wisdom on this blog. I think his theory is a better and more elegant fit to the public evidence than any other theory on the table. But Lee’s best efforts were unable to move the needle on conventional wisdom as defined by your commenters. He was, even prior to all the nastiness, roughly handled.

    Lee was concerned that you were being carried off into la-la land. He’s entitled to that opinion, and, if he holds it, it’s legitimate for him to try to persuade you that your line of thought is nuts. The harsh message, “Explain to me how I know that a normally rational person hasn’t been kidnapped and had their blog account taken over by conspiracy theorist?” is a perfectly fine thing to say to a friend – in a private email. Lee’s error was to do this all this publicly.

    Why do it publicly? Well, his posts are aimed, it seems to me, at breaking the conventional wisdom in the comments section of this blog. Why? Because the commenters’ conventional wisdom seems to define reality. Because getting through to the commenters became synonymous with getting through to you. I think that if the situations were reversed you can see the ease of the mistake – Lee headed, you think, off the deep end, helped on his way by an crowd of approving yes-men. Break the consensus of the crowd and maybe you get through to Lee.

    It was a mistake, an error of focus. He should have been as harsh as he wanted in private emails to you, made his case in measured tones on this blog, and sucked up his failure to persuade the commenters. A step as drastic as the one he took may have been called for if you were at risk of doing yourself serious injury – not if you were merely at risk of being wrong about the identity and motive of sock puppets.

    You have been unfailingly respectful towards Lee and had every right to expect that he would take the same line towards you. But it is far easier to be magnanimous when the world is on your side.

    I’m not saying that Lee’s error of focus should be excused – I’m just saying that it was an easy one to make.

    Comment by Nathan Wagner (01c83e) — 7/5/2011 @ 8:21 am

  1396. Nathan Wagner – People are still waiting for the evidence dump on Lee’s elegant spurned lover/sexter theory or a rational explanation of the harm done by allowing JR9 to comment here. So far, crickets.

    Care to address?

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/5/2011 @ 8:27 am

  1397. daleyrocks,

    Lee’s theory is speculative. There is no direct evidence for that specific motive – any more than there is direct evidence that the whole thing was a sting on Breitbart. However, Lee’s theory does, to my mind, do the best job of explaining starchild111′s single minded (and I think malevolent) pursuit of Weiner on one end, and the same person/group’s attempt to trick Breitbart after the scandal broke. A purely political motive does not explain the malevolence both toward Weiner and toward Breitbart. But we’ve discussed this before.

    I disagree with Lee as to allowing JR9 to comment here. I could understand the concern if Lee was afraid Pat was buying swallowing JR9′s line whole, but Pat’s theory required – if anything – that he be even more cautious in dealing with JR9 than he should have been if the puppeteer was a woman with personal motives. Lee felt that Pat was at risk. The more I think about it, given Pat’s theory, the less that makes sense.

    Comment by Nathan Wagner (01c83e) — 7/5/2011 @ 8:49 am

  1398. To nathan wagner in #1396 the harm done is in credibility. Pattericos, the posters here and by association Lee’s. Believe me. It is gone. To anyone outside, you all have become ridiculous. Lee included for his reaction to your nonsense. And to those who are all wah wah he scared “John Reid” off. Really? Not the demands for phone calls and video of him or her in the same strings of comments? Has Lee completely lost his mind and perspective? yep! But so have most of you! You should all read Krauthammer’s take on Occam’s Razor.

    Comment by Amanda Lynn (d3e2bd) — 7/5/2011 @ 8:50 am

  1399. Nathan @1397 – So while Lee advanced theories with evidence, Patterico remained agnostic, preferring to let events develop, yet you choose to find fault with Patterico’s approach. You have a right to your opinion. Lee was not universally criticized on the threads here and a wide variety of theories have been discussed. The most frequent criticism of Lee’s work was for not documenting his conclusions, which he himself admitted to doing, so don’t find fault with the commenters. Point your finger back at Lee.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/5/2011 @ 9:07 am

  1400. 1395 1397 Nathan

    We’re all entitled to having different theories about what happened, motives, etc.

    But you’re advocating that some parties, if they think they are thinking more clearly than other parties, should intervene and take actions beyond just expressing their opinions, respectfully.

    We don’t need people jumping in and doing things for each other, because they think they know better.

    Opinions yes, actions, no.

    Comment by koam @wittier (be5afd) — 7/5/2011 @ 9:13 am

  1401. 1395 Nathan

    There were plenty of posters here and elsewhere who agreed with Lee’s POV re: JR9 disclosures, theories, etc. People both pro and con to Lee’s theories and opinions existed every day. One of the most common was, “Lee, I can see your theory may be right, but you mix up what you consider to be proof. Sometime’s it’s factual proof but other times it’s ‘well it agrees with my theory so it’s true – or it doesn’t so it must be a lie’ as proof. And many participants didn’t like agree second standard for proof.

    Comment by koam @wittier (be5afd) — 7/5/2011 @ 9:19 am

  1402. daleyrocks,

    I don’t fault Patterico’s approach at all, nor was I trying to assign blame to the commenters. My purpose was only to say that Lee’s mistake – I’ll call it that – to aim at the commenters was an understandable one to make.

    Comment by Nathan Wagner (01c83e) — 7/5/2011 @ 9:20 am

  1403. koam,

    To be clear, I believe Lee’s public harshness and revelations of private communications were errors.

    Comment by Nathan Wagner (01c83e) — 7/5/2011 @ 9:26 am

  1404. Amanda Lynn, The problem here is that someone has to be lying. There can’t both be a real Nikki Reid using the starchild account AND the account belonging to Jenny George.

    So someone has to be telling a fib. Now the fact that the Nikki Reid personna was bolstered by photographs stolen from people’s facebook profile just ads to the mystery. Why did someone go through so much trouble to fake that?

    I am not interested in burning anyone or defaming anyone, I am interested in finding out who the heck was using the starchild111 account just to set the story straight.

    This could, I believe, had been cleared up quickly and easily via private conversations with P without anything being made public. But it hasn’t. That keeps open the possibility that there is some reason why the people in involved in this appear to not want to be known by anyone.

    That there is deception and people aren’t being forthcoming increases the curiosity.

    Comment by crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/5/2011 @ 9:27 am

  1405. “To be clear, I believe Lee’s public harshness and revelations of private communications were errors.”

    Nathan – Then what is all the other BS in 1395?

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/5/2011 @ 9:33 am

  1406. daleyrocks,

    The point was perspective – was to say to Pat that Lee’s errors were easy errors to make. Nothing more.

    Comment by Nathan Wagner (01c83e) — 7/5/2011 @ 9:39 am

  1407. “The point was perspective – was to say to Pat that Lee’s errors were easy errors to make. Nothing more.”

    Nathan – My take on it was to slam the comment section here for being an echo chamber on this story, which it has demonstrably not been. You may want to consider revising and extending that comment.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/5/2011 @ 9:43 am

  1408. Who always wanted Lee & Pat to be against each other?

    Comment by koam @wittier (be5afd) — 7/5/2011 @ 9:47 am

  1409. Certainly it wasn’t an echo chamber, but here’s Patterico @414:

    As long as a bunch of commenters I never heard of before agree, that is what matters.

    Pay no attention to the way an alternate theory explains everything.

    Patterico was discounting the dissent as not coming from the regulars. I understand Lee to have wanted to crack the consensus of the commenters Patterico would have felt had more sway.

    Comment by Nathan Wagner (01c83e) — 7/5/2011 @ 10:00 am

  1410. Have a good day, gentlemen. I’m off to other things.

    Comment by Nathan Wagner (01c83e) — 7/5/2011 @ 10:02 am

  1411. Nathan @1395-

    I think many of the points you make show good insight about blog dynamics in general and about the current Lee/Patterico dynamic in specific. Thank you. That such a promising venture – opportunity- relationship-collaboration- (whatever you want to call Lee’s guest posting on Patterico’s site) went so wrong muchly because of private confidences which were breached and tweet blasts that were made and exchanged in anger, is quite sad.

    Just another example of why I think twitter is the devil! Because without the availability of twitter much of the ugliness would have taken place and been ironed out over a private phone call or a private email between Lee and Pat (and Jen and Tommy and Ron, etc.). Instead, it was all out in the open for both friend and foe to see. Twitter just makes it way too easy for folks in the heat of emotion to dig and taunt and choose sides and retweet and draw deep lines in sand that are hard to be erased later. Twitter makes it just way too easy for people to embarrass themselves and reveal themselves in uncomfortable ways. With a mere slip of the tweet, twitter makes it too easy to create enemies both personally and professionally.

    The last thing I want to mention is I’ve found most commenters on Patterico to be smart and interesting and fair. There’ve been countless occasions where people have voluntarily corrected the substance of an incorrect statement they have made previously, or apologized for a comment that was misunderstood. I never viewed there to be any “conventional wisdom” on this blog that needed to be overcome by Lee. Maybe that’s because I guess I never saw the questioning of aspects of Lee’s theory by some commenters to be a rejection of it as much as a plea for more info or proof to help solidify it. I was one of them because I am a person who demands verification and facts before I sign on to almost anything in life. I look at the Weinergate “investigation” and sharing of info among the blogs and blog readers to be both a process of elimination and a journey to get to a solution–not a win/lose battle between clear cut and fully formed theories (because there are no fully formed solutions yet as far as I can tell.) Again, Nathan, thanks for pointing out how Lee may have taken this far differently (as an attack on him.)

    Comment by elissa (fb4a7e) — 7/5/2011 @ 10:24 am

  1412. Attention Regular Commenters:

    Which of you were

    1) sticking up for the bulk of Lee’s theory in general (JG=Reids=Patriot=probably spurned female liberal fan/follower/adorer of AW, now seeking revenge on AW as main motivation),

    and/or

    2) were openly critical of JR9′s docs being published here and Patterico’s stance as neither confirming or denying the veracity of docs or belief in JR9.

    (One or both of the above would suffice, just say which.)

    Thanks

    Comment by koam @wittier (be5afd) — 7/5/2011 @ 10:31 am

  1413. 1395 –

    He was, even prior to all the nastiness, roughly handled.

    omment by Nathan Wagner — 7/5/2011 @ 8:21 am

    If being “roughly handled” means a failure of posters here to fall on their knees and worship him as a God among Men, then yes – he was roughly handled.

    Failing to agree 100% is not the same thing as “rough handling”, especially on the Internet

    Comment by Kaisersoze (c86eb0) — 7/5/2011 @ 11:20 am

  1414. 1412 – Which of you were

    1) sticking up for the bulk of Lee’s theory in general (JG=Reids=Patriot=probably spurned female liberal fan/follower/adorer of AW,

    Yes


    now seeking revenge on AW as main motivation),

    No, I think there are a dozen things that could be that person’s motivation

    and/or

    2) were openly critical of JR9′s docs being published here and Patterico’s stance as neither confirming or denying the veracity of docs or belief in JR9.

    Nope.

    Comment by Kaisersoze (c86eb0) — 7/5/2011 @ 11:25 am

  1415. Koam @1412

    Weinergate is above my pay grade.

    Comment by Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (a18ddc) — 7/5/2011 @ 11:54 am

  1416. 1414. kaisersoze

    Thanks for your reply to 1412 and for explaining.

    Comment by koam @wittier (be5afd) — 7/5/2011 @ 12:04 pm

  1417. “Patterico was discounting the dissent as not coming from the regulars.”

    Nathan – I disagree. I think Patterico was disagreeing with commenters telling people to shut up because there was no room for theories other than Lee’s and it was a waste of time to give JR9 a forum.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/5/2011 @ 12:14 pm

  1418. “Attention Regular Commenters:

    Which of you were”

    koam @wittier – Witch hunt?

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/5/2011 @ 12:15 pm

  1419. That’s an accurate sum-up, Daleyrocks.

    It got old seeing the exact same lines parroted from one new commenter after another. Also, it really seemed like all these people made similar errors in describing what was going on with interacting with JR.

    Anyhow, when someone notes a theory is unproven, and can show a plausible alternative, it shouldn’t upset people so much.

    Comment by Dustin (b7410e) — 7/5/2011 @ 12:18 pm

  1420. 1418 daleyrocks

    There was talk that most supporters of Lee’s positions here were random new people and that the regulars weren’t showing him any support. I see you are addressing that in 1417.

    My thought is that there were regular commenters who both agreed with Lee’s positions (prior to the bigger rift) and those who didn’t. Some leaned toward Lee’s conclusions, if not his support for those conclusions.

    Comment by koam @wittier (be5afd) — 7/5/2011 @ 12:23 pm

  1421. I think that’s fair, Koam. I think a lot of regulars here didn’t want to give JR the time of day, and very few, if any, were outright disclaiming Lee’s scorned woman possibility.

    Comment by Dustin (b7410e) — 7/5/2011 @ 12:25 pm

  1422. koam @1420 – Let me ask you a question. You appeared out of nowhere here on this story. I find no history of you commenting under your nick on blogs.

    Where did you come from and who are you?

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/5/2011 @ 12:39 pm

  1423. I could make a similar comment about many of the other newcomers who became active on threads here.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/5/2011 @ 12:42 pm

  1424. 1422 daleyrocks

    I think my comments speak for themselves. I hadn’t heard of Pat & Lee & Ace before but I saw the Weiner story getting more involved and this is where it moved to a few weeks ago, so here I am.

    Comment by koam @wittier (be5afd) — 7/5/2011 @ 1:40 pm

  1425. elissa @1411

    Thanks much for your comment. I can see that I’ve riled people up here, which was not really my intent. You write:

    The last thing I want to mention is I’ve found most commenters on Patterico to be smart and interesting and fair. There’ve been countless occasions where people have voluntarily corrected the substance of an incorrect statement they have made previously, or apologized for a comment that was misunderstood. I never viewed there to be any “conventional wisdom” on this blog that needed to be overcome by Lee. Maybe that’s because I guess I never saw the questioning of aspects of Lee’s theory by some commenters to be a rejection of it as much as a plea for more info or proof to help solidify it.

    That’s probably the way most of the other commenters viewed it as well, legitimate probing. My impression was that Lee felt his theory – or at least the part of it which said the Jenny who called him and the Jenny who filed the police report were the same person – ought to have been viewed as inherently more likely than theories invoking suppositional hoaxers to explain away the phone call he received. Requesting hard proof of the identity of the (real) Jennys while appearing to be more lenient toward the notional hoaxer theory seemed to Lee not to be good sense. And it bothered him that he could convince neither Pat nor the commenters in general that it was not good sense.

    I don’t think the teasing apart of Lee’s evidence and his theories was out of line at all. I do think that doing so in service of a theory with greater evidentiary deficiencies is to apply an unbalanced scrutiny. (Patterico says he has evidence we haven’t seen, and I admit that may change the picture.)

    Lee would have helped himself to speak more in probabilities.

    Finally – to all – I’ll offer an apology. My remark in 1395 intended to describe Lee’s impression, “a crowd of approving yes-men,” was a rhetorical flourish I should have avoided. I’ll stand behind “a majority especially of regulars more critical of the less hypothetical explanation.” That’s as far as I should have gone.

    Comment by Nathan Wagner (e017b3) — 7/5/2011 @ 4:20 pm

  1426. I’m not a regular commenter really (came here from Aces site). I have stated that I think Lee’s theory is the most plausible. Mostly because the police report seems like such a crazy development.

    I am/was not critical of the JR stuff because I believe them to be a sock (however you see the motivations)and think it’s interesting insight into what is/was going on.

    I follow this story because the mystery etc. is interesting to me. I don’t pretend to think I know every in and out of this story. Patterico is just as likely to be right. I just think Lee’s scenario seems more plausible.

    Comment by Noodles (3681c4) — 7/5/2011 @ 4:49 pm

  1427. Wow. Just wow.
    I knew that if you even questioned the left you are labeled, tagged and hung out but wow. Scary,sick, sad stuff.
    Does anyone know why the heck he posted the email exg w lee? What was the point of that all he said was “Doesn’t bother me”

    Comment by Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c) — 7/5/2011 @ 4:51 pm

  1428. daleyrocks — 7/5/2011 @ 12:39 pm

    I’ve come over from Twitter – I have to admit some puzzlement at the Koam j’accuse. I thought
    everyone knew.

    I thought it was obvious and in the open. I’m surprised at the apparent surprise.

    Koam stands for “King of All Media” – and he had a tweet list of all Stern people.

    –FWIW, I’ve been operating under the assumption that he was {certain name}Stern guy. I didn’t think it was hidden.

    It’s been so long since I looked up Koam

    Comment by SarahW (af7312) — 7/5/2011 @ 5:43 pm

  1429. {certain name}do you mean Benjy?

    I’m just a fan. I don’t work there or anything.

    Benjy is the guy who was at the two press conferences. His twitter is @Bronk.

    Comment by koam @wittier (be5afd) — 7/5/2011 @ 5:47 pm

  1430. 1428. Point of minor interest, J’accuse is the defense, not the accusation.

    Comment by jeffeneff (707f3d) — 7/5/2011 @ 5:54 pm

  1431. “I’ve come over from Twitter – I have to admit some puzzlement at the Koam j’accuse. I thought
    everyone knew.

    I thought it was obvious and in the open. I’m surprised at the apparent surprise.”

    SarahW – Sorry, not obvious to me at all. After all, we’ve had socks supporting the posts of socks in the past. What caused me to question koam this morning was his incredible comment on the Rauhauser thread wondering why anybody should be spending any time looking at him at this point.

    There are a number of folks here with no history I find. Does that mean new nicks or new twitter a/c’s for this story? You tell me.

    I did subsequently find info on Koam.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/5/2011 @ 6:00 pm

  1432. “Point of minor interest, J’accuse is the defense, not the accusation.”

    jeffeneff – Correction. “J’accuse” is french for “I accuse” or a denunciation. You may be thinking of Emile Zola’s 1898 letter in which he ACCUSED the french military of covering up the mistaken conviction of Dreyfus. In that manner it was a defense of Dreyfus, but an accusation of the military.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/5/2011 @ 6:06 pm

  1433. 1430 It means literally “I accuse”, but yeah it was an accusation Zola leveled against the imprisoners of Dreyfus.

    It’s seems to me Koam was being accused

    Comment by SarahW (af7312) — 7/5/2011 @ 6:09 pm

  1434. @ daleyrocks

    I’m new commenting here as well. I’ve commented a lot at I Own The World blog some at Dummie Funnies and Lee’s Blog. My name has morphed from Johnny 5 is alive to Honey Badger DGAS. Although I just started out on Twitter which is where I’ve been spending most of my time. It’s like mainlining the news.

    Comment by Johnny 5 is alive (5ccc5e) — 7/5/2011 @ 6:15 pm

  1435. 1432, 1433 right, i just felt that it was a reversal of sorts of the analogy at hand.

    Comment by jeffeneff (707f3d) — 7/5/2011 @ 6:19 pm

  1436. Daleyrocks,
    Was that a rhetorical “you tell me”?

    Because if I told you I’d say there are and have been for some while, concerned and interested trolls and socks playing around in the mix of newer commenters. I just try to step over them really.

    Koam is new in his way, but I didn’t think his identity or connection to Stern was any secret. His FB is even linked to his twitter which I don’t even know how to do.

    Comment by SarahW (af7312) — 7/5/2011 @ 6:24 pm

  1437. Please note that my view of 1) the value-benefit ratio of giving “John Reid” a forum of any kind and 2) of working on outside chance alternate theories changed significantly after I found out that JG had gone to the Boston police and filed charges naming me, in addition to trying to get the police to stop me from talking about JG. The whole story entered a new phase for me at that point.

    Discussing things like whether I ACTUALLY talked to a planted JG who was part of Neal’s army of female hackers isn’t just a novel concept to banter about, it’s now potentially a confusing element that could slow the investigation and apprehension of a person who exists in the real world and is intent on causing real harm to me, my family and my friends.

    Comment by Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 7/5/2011 @ 6:35 pm

  1438. I googled
    koam site:patterico.com – 1,290 results
    @wittier site:patterico.com – 590
    koam @wittier site:patterico.com – 572
    koam site:leestranahan.com – 171
    etc.

    Way too many, I know, I know.

    Comment by koam @wittier (be5afd) — 7/5/2011 @ 6:36 pm

  1439. Lee

    Blogging and police investigations – they don’t mix

    disclosing confidential conversations – and trying to garner sympathy – ditto

    making claims about those conversations that are contrarian – well you know…

    look – this may not be the forum to discuss this – it seems you are seeking a negative reaction for some validation – whih – rarely happens on the internet as well

    Comment by EricPWJohnson (2921b6) — 7/5/2011 @ 6:41 pm

  1440. Johnny 5 is alive–

    I’ve enjoyed seeing your comments both here and at Stranahan’s blog, and definitely hope you stick around. But why do people keep ignoring my good advice? Twitter is the devil! :)

    Comment by elissa (fb4a7e) — 7/5/2011 @ 6:42 pm

  1441. This place needs some testosterone.

    Comment by YeahIwentthere (786412) — 7/5/2011 @ 6:46 pm

  1442. Twitter sucks, I agree, but it has become a necessary evil. I use tweetdeck but even with lists i can’t see most of what i want in just a few columns. I can’t see my own tweets unless I include @mention of someone else who is covered in another column. Maybe I just don’t know how to manage TweetDeck correctly. I certainly have to pop open new tabs at Twitter to follow certain conversations.

    Comment by koam @wittier (be5afd) — 7/5/2011 @ 6:47 pm

  1443. elissa – I’m inclined to agree wrt Twitter

    Comment by Nathan Wagner (e017b3) — 7/5/2011 @ 6:47 pm

  1444. Weiner sucks BIG Time
    There… I said it and the same
    goes for skipper wife!

    Comment by ColonelHaiku (822dce) — 7/5/2011 @ 6:52 pm

  1445. “Was that a rhetorical “you tell me”?”

    SarahW – No it was not.

    I was attempting to explain myself.

    Does something remain unclear?

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/5/2011 @ 6:53 pm

  1446. I am not engaging in tit for tat.

    Comment by Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 7/5/2011 @ 6:53 pm

  1447. elissa – Not on twitter or Facebook. I refuse.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/5/2011 @ 6:53 pm

  1448. Lee,

    I sincerely hope you two can bury the hatchet sooner rather than later.

    Comment by Nathan Wagner (e017b3) — 7/5/2011 @ 6:57 pm

  1449. I am not engaging in tit for tat.

    No, it is actually worse than that.

    Comment by Scott Jacobs (6ab327) — 7/5/2011 @ 7:00 pm

  1450. I’m not at all criticizing you – I hope that’s clear. Was just puzzled about the Koam thing.

    Comment by SarahW (af7312) — 7/5/2011 @ 7:02 pm

  1451. “in addition to trying to get the police to stop me from talking about JG.”

    Lee, did she specifically ask police to get you to stop talking about her? (As opposed to that being an imputed motive of her police report.)

    Comment by SarahW (af7312) — 7/5/2011 @ 7:05 pm

  1452. I like Koam. I have no idea where he’s from, but he has no idea where I came from either.

    I thought Daley was making a sarcastic reference to the level of mistrust we’re all dealing with.

    Comment by Dustin (b7410e) — 7/5/2011 @ 7:07 pm

  1453. Thanks elissa,

    I’d have to agree twitter is evil but it’s the fastest way to find out what’s going on in the blog-o-sphere and news-o-sphere. So many links to so many stories pop up there. I quit FB more than a year ago, it is indeed the devil.

    Comment by Johnny 5 is alive (5ccc5e) — 7/5/2011 @ 7:07 pm

  1454. The detective told me that when he interviewed her, she wanted the police to get me to stop talking — to which he replied “First Amendment”

    Comment by Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 7/5/2011 @ 7:08 pm

  1455. Lee

    I thought you were not going to talk about this unless it was being resolved or almost resolved

    how many days hours did that last?

    Comment by EricPWJohnson (2921b6) — 7/5/2011 @ 7:10 pm

  1456. Dear Eric,

    Thanks for your comment. Our entire staff here at the Criticize Everything Lee Says Or Does department really appreciates your feedback. We have noted your complaint and want to you know that we have passed it on to management. Please don’t hesitate to contact us again the next time you have another helpful remark!

    Best Regards,
    John Smith
    Customer Relations at C.E.L.S.O.D.
    Bangalore, India

    Comment by Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 7/5/2011 @ 7:15 pm

  1457. Lee – Yay police.

    Comment by SarahW (af7312) — 7/5/2011 @ 7:16 pm

  1458. A flame war might get this thread to 2000! :)

    Comment by Johnny 5 is alive (5ccc5e) — 7/5/2011 @ 7:22 pm

  1459. Comment by koam @wittier — 7/5/2011 @ 6:47 pm

    OK, buddy. You do what you gotta do. But remember that using twitter is like standing nekkid in the middle of Times Square. Not to mention that managing tweetdeck is a whole lot of frustrating hard work, and confining thoughts to 140 characters makes it real easy to be misunderstood. Be careful out there and don’t say you were not warned! :)

    Comment by elissa (fb4a7e) — 7/5/2011 @ 7:25 pm

  1460. Re: Flame war

    Okay, I’ll start. Johnny 5, your eyeshades are crooked, your wiring is off, and your cultural references are so ’80s.

    Comment by Nathan Wagner (e017b3) — 7/5/2011 @ 7:26 pm

  1461. @ Nathan

    You don’t know Jack…Wagner and your hair looks like a Flock of Seagulls.

    Comment by Johnny 5 is alive (5ccc5e) — 7/5/2011 @ 7:31 pm

  1462. Lee–

    I’m glad you’re here. I have a question if you feel comfortable answering it–and if you don’t, I understand. Do you think the same person who called you and then went to the police about you is the same person who sent death threats to Ace and Pat?

    Comment by elissa (fb4a7e) — 7/5/2011 @ 7:34 pm

  1463. “I’m not at all criticizing you – I hope that’s clear. Was just puzzled about the Koam thing.”

    Sarah – I know, I tried to explain where it came from.

    When we get inundated with new commenters and you don’t know who is who, it is sometimes very easy to check where they have been active before. With this group, no such luck in most cases.

    Does that tell me they are disguising identities to comment here, using new nicks, or what? koam dropped something from his handle which made it easier to identify him. Others, who knows where they have come from.

    koam’s comment this morning threw me for a loop. Perhaps it is lack of familiarity with Kimberlin/Friedman story, but after Swiftread links last night, the idea that nobody should have an interest in stepped up Rauhauser involvement in this story is laughable.

    No mystery here.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/5/2011 @ 7:37 pm

  1464. Lee – Call Neal Rauhauser

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/5/2011 @ 7:38 pm

  1465. 1463. daleyrocks.

    You realize that not everyone has read everything that you read last night.

    Comment by koam @wittier (be5afd) — 7/5/2011 @ 7:46 pm

  1466. Lee

    Okay then – here we go – you I am not criticising you just pointing out the obvious

    You wrote on July 3rd this on your own blog:

    Unless some major news breaks soon I’m done writing, talking or commenting about #Weinergate for the foreseeable future. It’s in the hands of law enforcement at this point.

    Patterico and I have a lot more in common on this story than separates us.

    annnd now you are talking about it….

    And of course there’s all that twitting nonsense too

    please spare us the melodrama

    we are not the enemy and I never questioned anything you said until you disclosed confidential information and conversations in writing

    So go ahead and be sarcastic – but I cannot see anyone ever EVER engging you when you resort to this level of childishness – its breathtaking, really – if you want a career in blogging – violating your for s better word “benefactors” trust and confidentiality – this might be a deal breaker

    Comment by EricPWJohnson (2921b6) — 7/5/2011 @ 7:49 pm

  1467. elissa, if it makes you feel better, I’ve had your ‘twitter is the devil’ comments in mind as I’ve decided not to bother with it anymore. Aside from trying to follow updates. It’s kinda a cop-out. You can state your conclusion, and because it’s twitter… no room for a fleshed out argument. They might as well limit users to emoticons.

    Comment by Dustin (b7410e) — 7/5/2011 @ 7:50 pm

  1468. “You realize that not everyone has read everything that you read last night.”

    koam – Why not? If they haven’t, they should!!!!

    Does this stuff need to be spoon fed to you people? Heh.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/5/2011 @ 7:51 pm

  1469. @daleyrocks

    I would be an example of a new commenter.

    I’ve been reading Patterico for several years now.
    Six years would be about right. I’ve also read your comments on a few other blogs. I’ve been a lurker for all these years. This story drew me in. I’m sure it was the same for a few others.

    Comment by cap'n john's nephew (28dda5) — 7/5/2011 @ 7:52 pm

  1470. 1466. Eric

    Lee’s been through a lot. I’d cut him some slack about whether he wants to participate or not.

    Frankly, I’m glad to hear what’s going on.

    Comment by koam @wittier (be5afd) — 7/5/2011 @ 7:52 pm

  1471. Oh, and by the way! A heads up. I wouldn’t get into a discussion with EPWJ. He doesn’t argue in good faith.

    Comment by cap'n john's nephew (28dda5) — 7/5/2011 @ 7:56 pm

  1472. Lee, I am sorry you are going through what you are. As a victim of crime, I completely understand how hard it is. I hope law enforcement gets to the bottom of it.

    Comment by Anita Busch (a025dd) — 7/5/2011 @ 7:57 pm

  1473. Thumbs up for KOAM ( I like the King Of All Media Ref) Stern fan since 1986.
    Many faves and smart/knowledgable people on this site.

    Comment by goatsred (b20383) — 7/5/2011 @ 7:58 pm

  1474. I like to eat like a rainbow

    Comment by Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c) — 7/5/2011 @ 8:02 pm

  1475. KOAM

    I dont think so, it seems to be some good old self serving pity party blog style

    He described a guy who has too look at cases every damn day of wrecked families victims and lives and dral with it and then just asks – asks that you not

    A. post crap in his name
    B. Violate his confidentiality

    And then he gets into it with a woman on twitter who is a professional researcher for the most prestigious firms, someone who has overcome poverty, illness, hardships upon hardships and gets ugly with her as well

    yeah cry a river

    boo hoo

    Comment by EricPWJohnson (2921b6) — 7/5/2011 @ 8:02 pm

  1476. @ Dustin you nailed it about Twitter. I like it for the access to what people blogging think or discover in real time but the 120 characters isn’t conducive to a conversation.

    Comment by Johnny 5 is alive (5ccc5e) — 7/5/2011 @ 8:03 pm

  1477. Pat and Lib chick deserve better than that

    Comment by EricPWJohnson (2921b6) — 7/5/2011 @ 8:04 pm

  1478. ==Comment by cap’n john’s nephew — 7/5/2011 @ 7:56 pm==

    You have just distinguished yourself, sir. (P.S. Enjoy your comments and hope you get drawn into other stories and threads here often.)

    Comment by elissa (fb4a7e) — 7/5/2011 @ 8:08 pm

  1479. cap n john

    yep I’m mean, nasty, use facts and figures – pesky things like court testimony, citations

    I rarely use op ed pieces authored by people who have an agenda or no qualifications in what they are talking about

    Go for yourself and look at the twitting flitting by lee w/ people who are WAY above his pay grade

    things like this:

    .@Stranahan Once again, sounds like you’re trying to intimidate me for trying to set the record straight. I’ve done NOTHING wrong. Back off.

    .@Stranahan You mocked him in posts, saying he believes certain socks r “real ppl.” That’s not wht @Patterico has sd. Ur distorting things.

    and there’s more, much more

    Comment by EricPWJohnson (2921b6) — 7/5/2011 @ 8:10 pm

  1480. “I wouldn’t get into a discussion with EPWJ. He doesn’t argue in good faith.”

    “I’ve been reading Patterico for several years now.”

    cap’n john’s nephew – Your keen powers of observation have convinced me. Heh.

    I am not trying to create a litmus test or anything. Nathan jumped on a comment Patterico made. I gave my interpretation of it. The obvious involvement of sockpuppets in this story has people wondering where people are coming from. When you recognize names, even if you have tangled on opposite sides, that gives you a sense that you know who somebody is. One of the whole discovery issues in the story has been about the date of creation of accounts. If commenters have no discernible history anywhere, who are they?

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/5/2011 @ 8:17 pm

  1481. @1470 Koam

    Compared to some, he’s been through very little regarding this whole thing.

    As much as it pains me, I’m going to have to take Eric’s side in this, for a number of reasons I can’t talk about.

    Suffice it to say, Lee really should follow his own advice and shut up.

    Comment by Scott Jacobs (6ab327) — 7/5/2011 @ 8:23 pm

  1482. I was off the internet all day today (again!). Is there a summary?

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/5/2011 @ 8:30 pm

  1483. Lee, I see that you’re exasperated, but some of what you’re saying is new to me.

    So don’t get irritated about this question: Did JG want you to stop talking about her, or about Weinergate, or just everything?

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/5/2011 @ 8:34 pm

  1484. I like and respect both Patterico and Mandy. I hope any disagreements are resolved as soon as possible. I believe all of us are working towards this goal, even if the method is something as simple as the decision not to launch or rekindle attacks.

    To the extent I may have failed to have taken this advice myself, I apologize.

    Outside parties fanning the flames does nothing productive or helpful to anyone involved.

    Comment by Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 7/5/2011 @ 8:35 pm

  1485. ==Is there a summary?==

    you silly wabbit

    Comment by elissa (fb4a7e) — 7/5/2011 @ 8:36 pm

  1486. Outside parties fanning the flames does nothing productive or helpful to anyone involved.

    Comment by Lee Stranahan — 7/5/2011 @ 8:35 pm

    Agreed.

    Comment by Dustin (b7410e) — 7/5/2011 @ 8:37 pm

  1487. /nothing sarcastic or ironic implied. He’s right.

    Comment by Dustin (b7410e) — 7/5/2011 @ 8:37 pm

  1488. koam – Why not? If they haven’t, they should!!!!

    Does this stuff need to be spoon fed to you people? Heh.

    Comment by daleyrocks

    Please spoon feed me. I am in internet hell. I couldn’t get to any sites today, and I was sent a very young technician with whom I had great difficulty communicating. Yesterday I had housework and guests.

    Please, venture forth with a baby spoon. I shall imitate a baby bird.

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/5/2011 @ 8:38 pm

  1489. I hope you ALL get to the bottom of this. I hope there is an investigation that points to the culprit/s and they he/she/they are arrested for domestic terrorism, which is what it is.

    Comment by Anita Busch (a025dd) — 7/5/2011 @ 8:38 pm

  1490. you silly wabbit

    Comment by elissa

    Can I graduate to “wascally wabbit”?

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/5/2011 @ 8:39 pm

  1491. Dustin, understand when I say that my nature’s one Better Angel is really fighting a losing battle here regarding Lee and his behavior.

    Comment by Scott Jacobs (6ab327) — 7/5/2011 @ 8:43 pm

  1492. Agreed, Scott.

    Comment by Anita Busch (a025dd) — 7/5/2011 @ 8:45 pm

  1493. Scott, I understand. I’ve also been fighting that battle in this thread, though I’m doing a better job than usual resisting the impulse to really dish it out.

    We’re on the same page.

    Comment by Dustin (b7410e) — 7/5/2011 @ 8:46 pm

  1494. 1473 goatsred

    Mike, 1986?! me too. 25 years. I was at MSG for the premier of Private Parts & sat with wack pack….never went to any other events, tho.

    Comment by koam @wittier (be5afd) — 7/5/2011 @ 8:49 pm

  1495. 1486.Outside parties fanning the flames does nothing productive or helpful to anyone involved.

    Comment by Lee Stranahan — 7/5/2011 @ 8:35 pm

    Nice try at deflecting – you described a guy – who BTW – for you and me – gives up a cool 6 figures a yr in the private sector or more – by serving us unselfishly – as someone irrational and emotional

    annnd I’m fanning the flames?

    Lee, I’m speechless

    Comment by EricPWJohnson (2921b6) — 7/5/2011 @ 8:58 pm

  1496. No flame war?

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/5/2011 @ 9:01 pm

  1497. 1500 looms

    Comment by koam @wittier (be5afd) — 7/5/2011 @ 9:02 pm

  1498. Hi Sal! I love you, Fred!

    Comment by koam @wittier (be5afd) — 7/5/2011 @ 9:03 pm

  1499. “Touche, Dr. Moriarty. You got me.”

    Comment by koam @wittier (be5afd) — 7/5/2011 @ 9:05 pm

  1500. Daley = I’m done – Lee got the msg

    Comment by EricPWJohnson (2921b6) — 7/5/2011 @ 9:08 pm

  1501. This thread is great fun and all but is there going to be further JR docs published. I realize JR has bugged at this point but I believe there were things which were pending at the time.

    Thanks

    Comment by Rocksem (5241c6) — 7/5/2011 @ 9:09 pm

  1502. Well, Johnny and I started a flame war, but he was so insulting I’ve just been sulking.

    Comment by Nathan Wagner (e017b3) — 7/5/2011 @ 9:09 pm

  1503. 1501 Rocksem

    Great question. I dunno. Pat has said his commitment is to publish all unedited. I doubt JR’s going silent would make Pat want to not publish.

    But 2 other things. Patrick’s busy with that trial, and they keep mentioning law enforcement getting involved. I wonder if LE could have an impact on whether documents are coming out or not.

    Comment by koam @wittier (be5afd) — 7/5/2011 @ 9:15 pm

  1504. Koam.
    If he can’t or has reasons not to that’s fine. I just would like to know. This thread has denigrated into I don’t know what and I rather not even check it if there is no reason to. But this seems the only place Patterico even mentions the topic.

    Comment by Rocksem (5241c6) — 7/5/2011 @ 9:21 pm

  1505. Way back in the mists of the early 1,000s, Patterico said something about being patient.

    I keep losing the thread, though.

    Comment by Dianna (f12db5) — 7/5/2011 @ 9:25 pm

  1506. Maybe off topic but Jen P’s twitter is up to some weird stuff. Phone numbers, “outing” people, etc. Just wondering what any of you think it going on?

    Comment by Noodles (3681c4) — 7/5/2011 @ 9:25 pm

  1507. #478 Elissa

    Thank You, Elissa. The pleasure of your mind has been all mine. The same goes for so many of the new commenters.

    #480 daleyrocks

    I don’t believe, for a minute, this story is over. In fact, I think we are enjoying a brief
    interlude here.

    @Koam

    May I have a copy of your book when it is published?

    Comment by cap'n john's nephew (28dda5) — 7/5/2011 @ 9:25 pm

  1508. Maybe off topic but Jen P’s twitter is up to some weird stuff. Phone numbers, “outing” people, etc. Just wondering what any of you think it going on?

    Comment by Noodles — 7/5/2011 @ 9:25 pm

    I don’t know, pretty weird. Looked more like vindictiveness then investigation to me. I’m thinking the person who wrote the HuffPo column Koam criticized is probably a close friend or old college buddy.

    Comment by Rocksem (5241c6) — 7/5/2011 @ 9:31 pm

  1509. @1508 (Rocksem) Ah, maybe that’s it. I read it as she “knows what’s really going on”. Which (from the outside looking in) seems laughable. Who knows.

    Comment by Noodles (3681c4) — 7/5/2011 @ 9:37 pm

  1510. Or she is not currently in control of the account.

    Comment by Scott Jacobs (6ab327) — 7/5/2011 @ 9:40 pm

  1511. @1508 (Rocksem) Ah, maybe that’s it. I read it as she “knows what’s really going on”. Which (from the outside looking in) seems laughable. Who knows.

    Comment by Noodles — 7/5/2011 @ 9:37 pm

    Oh I’m sure she knows way more than we do but I’m also sure she would never share it on Twitter. If she really thought Koam was a player in this she wouldn’t be giving his personal info away. She’d be using it to get to him and get him on record.

    Comment by Rocksem (5241c6) — 7/5/2011 @ 9:41 pm

  1512. @ Scott Jacobs “Did you use VPN/proxy to access Patterico? Why?”

    Just kidding! I wanted to pretend I was a hard hitting journalist for a second. lol

    Comment by Noodles (3681c4) — 7/5/2011 @ 9:44 pm

  1513. You forgot to publicly suggest that I am either a sockpuppet, or one of the masterminds behind something related to WeinerGate.

    Comment by Scott Jacobs (6ab327) — 7/5/2011 @ 9:46 pm

  1514. Yeah, it appears Ms Preston is openly speculating about Koam, and yet unable to back up this speculation with a shred of justification.

    It’s the same jerk behavior I’ve seen from others (cough cough) to harm the reputation of an honest critic.

    If Ms Preston has a reason to associate Koam, by his real full name, with this scandal, let’s hear it. Otherwise, she looks terribly petty. And unreasonable, too, given her claim she can’t understand why someone would want anonymity while she trashes someone she was able to out. Yeah, I know, she’s ‘just asking questions’.

    Comment by Dustin (b7410e) — 7/5/2011 @ 9:48 pm

  1515. @ Scott Jacobs Are you a sockpuppet or one of the masterminds related to Weinergate?

    Also, do you like mudkips? =)

    If it weren’t for all the death threats, criminality, etc. involved in this I would be very tempted to pull her chain. (and I’d actually be behind 7 proxies!) lol

    Comment by Noodles (3681c4) — 7/5/2011 @ 9:51 pm

  1516. ==Otherwise, she looks terribly petty. And unreasonable==

    Oh, I believe you must be mistaken, Dustin. Jen is a journalist with a capital J. She would be above all that nonsense.

    Comment by elissa (fb4a7e) — 7/5/2011 @ 10:01 pm

  1517. Noodles @1515 beat me to it.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/5/2011 @ 10:05 pm

  1518. 1516. Hahah Elissa.

    Comment by jeffeneff (707f3d) — 7/5/2011 @ 11:09 pm

  1519. I can see Prestion getting excited when she discovered any (presumed) pranky Stern types contributing – even heavily-, to weinergate comment threads.

    It’s just that the Stern connection wasn’t ever hidden. IRL name and everything – not hidden. It was right out there in the open. I can’t understand how this is news to her, or why Preston thinks this would be news to me or most other regulars here.

    Comment by SarahW (af7312) — 7/6/2011 @ 6:48 am

  1520. Prestion? This day starts with new words!

    Comment by SarahW (af7312) — 7/6/2011 @ 6:51 am

  1521. Congrats, SarahW on the neologism and portmanteau. Witty or inadvertent…it doesn’t matter anymore. Own it!

    _________

    This made me think of what happened with Lee and the editing of his radio show, under pressure and that quote: “Lee, you have no idea how deep this goes.” Context: A lot of fresh info had been coming out in the middle of the night on Lee’s radio show. Most nights, Lee wouldn’t write up a summary, let alone the details, of what he said on the show; so the info was in audio format only. Lee isn’t just an opinionator. He, like other writers, are part of the story. So those of us trying to figure out what it all meant had to replay the show (sometimes several shows) to hear details. (I and others asked him to write up because there would be so much confusion about the details when a group of people were trying to figure out what was real, vs. what was not, what was claimed vs. what was assumed, etc.)

    For this show, I tried to transcribe an interesting part the next day. This was pretty hard to do because Lee says about 4 words per second.

    My transcript of Lee’s BTR show about his convos appears above at comment #249 in this same thread (nearly 1300 comments ago).

    http://patterico.com/2011/06/30/someone-smarter-than-me-explain-why-this-is-not-possible/comment-page-61/#comment-814237

    apologies for the typos and editing errors. They’re unintentional. The whole first sentence “According to Lee,…” is in the wrong place…my error. so some of it is out of sequence….attributable to typing long things in this little box on the blog page instead of doing it the right way in Word. (I would have, but in Word you have to type in the HTML tags manually..I was lazy in that regard) The whole show is here “My Last Blogtalk Radio Show Ever? – Radio Stranahan” for reference. I posted the same thing on Lee’s but it’s all “stuck in moderation” probably because of too many links included.

    The show starts with @FilmLadd calling in and then Angelia (or something)…go to minute 20 for the salient part.

    It would be possible to excerpt from it right here and poke fun, (I mean I could say some pretty funny things) but I’m not here to confuse anyone, as most of you know very well. (Look up all my comments and tweets and take them as a whole.) So better to just read (or listen to) the whole thing and try to figure what it means.

    Also,
    This post (go to #440 on this same page) also asked some puzzling questions about what points Lee and JP agree and disagree on. I’m still confused.

    And this Radio Stranahan show “@Weinergate Post Modern Yellathon” on July 2 in which Lee explains how much he got yelled at because of the July 1 show (above). Take a guess as to who was yelling.

    Comment by koam @wittier (d56dc1) — 7/6/2011 @ 7:55 am

  1522. I am suspicious of the idea that a Stern fan could be so organized, thorough and logical. Koam, would you be willing to submit to some questions to demonstrate you’re really a Stern fan?

    Comment by jeffeneff (707f3d) — 7/6/2011 @ 12:32 pm

  1523. jeffeneff – The absence of profanity or misogyny is also a dead giveaway the commenter is a fake.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/6/2011 @ 12:44 pm

  1524. lamchopsl wrote in comment 212 Series 1 at 7/1/2011 @ 11:10 am

    On Lee’s Blog talk Radio show last nite he said:

    ‘NY Times reporter Jen Preston talked by phone with the Boston Jenny George and got the name of the screen writing professor from her. Preston called him and talked to him and his wife. At that point Preston tried to shut down the whole investigation, claiming the professor’s website was faked and he may have been related to the Sockpuppet posse and possibly the Yessmen or Anonymous. So Lee decided to call the professor and claims “everything checked out,” relating to the professor’s legitimacy and what he said about the Boston Jenny George….

    I can’t find a source closer to the original.

    Now wait. There have to be some mistakes here.

    Jennifer Preston talked to the California Jenny George. How could she have talked to the Boston Jenny George? Nobody has her phone number.

    The California Jenny George says:

    http://www.jennifergeorge.com/weiner.html

    from Jennifer George jennifer.e.george@gmail.com
    to “Preston, Jennifer”
    date Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 2:50 PM
    subject Re: New York Times reporter

    …..

    “I’m not sure if you’ve seen it, but commenters on at least one site are now talking about approaching one of their targets directly, in person. It appears someone has contacted one of her professors about her. She has been identified by name and publicly described as “unstable,” and people are speculating about her love life.”

    So who supplied the name of a professor? And WHAT WEB SITE?

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (d3daeb) — 7/6/2011 @ 4:44 pm

  1525. Heh. Fire away w ?s. I’m good.
    Only prob today is power out and phone is nearly dead battery. Hard to type too.

    Comment by koam @wittier (39aadc) — 7/6/2011 @ 4:49 pm

  1526. some one help Sammy . I’m on a phone. It was jg. Ma who talked to jp and lee. Prof is lew Hunter

    Comment by koam @wittier (0f7e57) — 7/6/2011 @ 5:39 pm

  1527. Sammy lee had jg ma talk to jp. Huge mistake but he did.

    Comment by koam @wittier (1ff170) — 7/6/2011 @ 7:09 pm

  1528. Re: 1526 koam @ wittier
    Save your phone battery. I am not sure any of this is going to be answered very quickly.

    I think Sammy’s comment at 1524 is interesting. I also had seen comments saying that no one had found JG/MA’s phone number and had kind of assumed that someone must have had it since both Jen Preston and Lee reportedly had spoken to her. And the common link of the professor apparently reinforced the idea that they had spoken to the same person.
    So did JG/MA call Lee and he told her to also call Preston? If so, what evidence is there that the caller actually gave them both the exact same information? Did either one, or both, get a callback number for her? Have Jen Preston and Lee matched up the contacts they received/made regarding the professor? It is certainly curious that Jen Preston and Lee came to such opposite opinions about Professor Lew Hunter’s information.

    Note to Lee, and anyone who is involved in mysteries like this: toll-free numbers are not that expensive to have these days, and you get the number that called you even if it’s blocked.

    Comment by Sue (24e46b) — 7/6/2011 @ 7:37 pm

  1529. Sammy,

    Witter is correct as that is what Lee shared on his BTR program.

    After JG in MA spoke to Lee on June 19, she also spoke to Jennifer Preston at NYTimes. I think lee spoke to Jennifer Preston both before JG called her and after the two women spoke.

    JG in MA provided the Lew Hunter reference.

    Joe

    Comment by Joe Smith (54c0c1) — 7/6/2011 @ 7:37 pm

  1530. Sammy,

    Opps, I forgot the website that was referenced on June 19 by JG was the STLA site and the blog post by Adam. There is even a post on the blog entry that appears to be from at leas one Jennifer George asking Adam to remove some informaiton.

    This is from another Jennifer G in CA ( yes, this is the Jennifer with the posts of Weiner related emails to document her involvement. So I dont’ see her making calls as then she would not have a record to post. This Jennifer George was also contacted by Jennifer Preston with a very misleading email.

    Here is the post on STLAH

    Excuse me could you please provide a contact number? I am Jennifer George from Los Angeles and I am getting calls now because of your blog. I’d like you to take this down. I have nothing to do with your ridiculous story. I will be calling the police as I am getting threats due to this. What is your number?

    June 19, 2011 5:11 PM

    Jun 14, 2011 at 1:30 PM
    Preston, Jennifer wrote:
    Subject: New York Times reporter

    Hi Jennifer,
    I would love to talk to you about a story that I am doing. Might you be available? My direct line is 212 556 4472.
    Thanks! Jennifer

    Staff Writer, Social Media
    The New York Times
    jepresto@nytimes.com
    facebook.com/nytjenpreston
    (212) 556-4472

    source: http://www.jennifergeorge.com/weiner.html

    Joe

    Comment by Joe Smith (54c0c1) — 7/6/2011 @ 7:49 pm

  1531. Sue,

    JG called Lee and Jennifer Preston. As Lee indicated she was using a blocked number when she called him.

    Joe

    Comment by Joe Smith (54c0c1) — 7/6/2011 @ 7:52 pm

  1532. Thanks, Joe. I haven’t been able to keep up with all the ins and outs of this story. I appreciate the details.
    At the source page you give for JG/CA’s roundup of her involvement or lack thereof, in her July 1 update, she states that she “did not author that comment” on the STLA Hub site. Since the comment said the commenter was “Jennifer George from Los Angeles” that seems to add a bit to the confusion, too.
    I’m looking forward to the future Clif Notes for this entire escapade. :-)

    Comment by Sue (24e46b) — 7/6/2011 @ 8:24 pm

  1533. Joe, for clarity’s sake, JG “of California” has made plain she did not make that comment. That comment was likely left by Lee’s caller.

    That is the woman who has identified herself as JG, who has claimed threats, and also claimed to live in LA after moving from Boston in childhood, and claimed to be living there at present (To Lee and Preston). However, she later proved to be in Boston.

    Comment by SarahW (af7312) — 7/6/2011 @ 8:30 pm

  1534. Sue & SarahW,

    Correct, at one point we had two Jennifer George individuals claiming to be in CA.

    Only later after the police report was filed in Boston that one JG was determined to be in MA, she claimed to have attended some type of screenwriting sessions with Lew Hunter which again tied back to CA and UCLA.

    That is the one thing, “UCLA” thread that both JGs had in common and keeps confusing this part of the story.

    Joe

    Comment by Joe Smith (54c0c1) — 7/6/2011 @ 8:56 pm

  1535. 1524 Sammy … is very confused. just ignore.

    1533 SarahW is correct.

    1534 Joe is correct in 1534

    All of this is according to Lee’s radio broadcasts/podcasts: http://www.blogtalkradio.com/stranahan

    So what we know is what Lee has told us.

    In short, Az5 found a screen cap of @starchild111 that had the name “Jenay”
    STLAH then Google searched “Jennifer starchild111″ (asuming that Jenay was a form of Jennifer) and found 123people.com had a “Jennifer George with a nickname of starchild111 on Twitter.” It didn’t say which JG that would be though. There are hundreds of JGs.
    Lee started looking at JGs and found one (JG CA) who had done “some political work” (according to Lee). She had worked as a fundrasier for a political magazine. (She has a wide-open online presence (blogs, linkedin, facebook, personal website, lots more) – the first clue that she probably isn’t a sneaky sockpuppet.) Lee thought this might be a lead and sent her an email with his phone number and a friend request on facebook. (As it turns out, JG CA reports that JP had emailed exchanges w/ her prior week. We don’t know how JP found JG CA, but it may have been same way as Lee did, perhaps with Ron’s research? (speculation))
    Shortly (minutes) after sending email to JG CA, (timing was a coincidence) Lee got the teary call from JG…but this was not JG CA, it was JG MA, who says she has been receiving threats, google searched, found Lee and called to ask what is going on. This JG (MA) says she did own the starchild111 twitter account but had abandoned it and was not involved in the Weiner story. (among other details reported by Lee). JG MA says she can give a prof at UCLA who can verify who she is. (timing of call, CA claim, and UCLA prof are all coincidences w/ other JG, which further confuse Lee temporarily) Lee has this woman call Jen Preston…in fact he sets it up while JG is still on the phone. So JGMA calls Preston. Preston calls prof. Preston calls Lee and says she thinks Prof is a fake (Prof is Lew Hunter, prof emeritus UCLA who runs seminar writing retreats in Nebraska at his large home, where, it seems, JG MA met him and his wife). Lee thinks this is very very strange because prof seems very very real. (Lee seems right on this and the claim by Preston is strange. JP apparently also said same to Ron, if Ron’s posted DM from her is true.) Lee & JP didn’t call Prof using a fake number given by JG MA. Lee & JP looked up prof’s website and used his number there. It is an extensive website with a long history dating back years. Lee calls Prof back and reconfirms with Prof & wife that they know JG MA. JP & Lee didn’t have JG MA’s number, as far as we know. She called Lee on a blocked caller ID. Presume same for JP.

    This is pieced together largely from listening to Lee’s radio and reading posts online from Lee, JG CA, and others.

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/7/2011 @ 5:10 am

  1536. Re: 1535 koam @ wittier
    Thanks again! That is the best summary I’ve seen.
    I assume your power is back on. Hope your day is a good one.

    Has Jen Preston actually discussed what she saw/heard that made her think the Prof was fake (other than generalities and mentioning Anonymous, etc.)? I am intrigued by the variance in the responses that Lee and JP had, apparently to the same website and the same people. Has Lee revealed any more of the reasons for his certainty for his position?

    P.S. I’m sure you have better things to do than to satisfy my curiosity. You don’t need to continue if you don’t want to, obviously. But thanks for the time and effort already given.

    Comment by Sue (24e46b) — 7/7/2011 @ 7:53 am

  1537. 1536 Sue

    Thanks. To answer your question, I don’t know that JP has said anything about Prof publicly. Her accounts come from Lee, primarily and Ron, secondarily. You can find the link Ron published himself to a blogspot page that presumably he owns and read his many tweets. No idea whether any of it’s real. Impossible to tell, but it sort of meshes with what Lee has said.

    It puzzles me why JP would say to Lee (and, it appears, to Ron, according to his blog), that she suspected they’d been “punked” by a fake Lew Hunter. According to Lee, both JP & Lee were given the name “Lew Hunter, Prof at UCLA” by JG MA. According to Lee, they didn’t just take a phone number from JG MA, (where she might have set up an actor, as has been speculated) but that they googled Lew Hunter, found him on UCLA’s site, and found his own site and looked up his phone number for themselves, speaking to Lew and Mrs. Hunter directly. (As far as I know, Lew is an older prof emeritus. He teaches one “keystone” type prestigious seminar for screenwriting grad students in the Winter when the weather is lovely in LA and pure crap in Nebraska, where he lives with his wife and holds writing retreats at their home. I believe there are 2 old mansions on his compound so it’s like going to a B&B where you are taught and work together with other writers for a week or 2 – held a couple of times a year. Evidently this is where JG MA knew Lew from, according to Lee.)

    Lee makes perfect sense that Lew Hunter is a well-known guy in the film biz who moved into being a prof a long time ago. Why JP would say to Lee that she suspects that they’d been punked is for sure puzzling. From transcript of Lee’s radio show about it:

    “I had mentioned that JP had gotten the name from JG in Boston of the screenwriting Prof. who she’d studied with so she contacted the prof and as i mendtioned before she (JP) talked to him talked to his wife, they both knew because she’d (JG MA) taken classes w teacher not at UCLA but elsewhere. THye said that they knew who she was and I thought that ended it.

    “So here’s the part that i’ve hinted at but haven’t talked about it. I thought next step was NY Times would track down this Jennifer George person and we’ll get at the truth. So what happened was, I got a message from Jen Preston saying:
    ‘I think that we’ve been punked by the UCLA professor and I think it’s been a huge waste of time’
    Lee continues, “I was very curious about this of course because she talked to the prof and I thought some important new fact had been gleaned. Something new and big was going on. So I called her (JP) and I said
    ‘What’s going on? What’s happening? What did you learn?’
    And Jen Preston said: ‘Lee, I just think we’ve been punked on this whole thing.’

    And I said ‘Ok, really? well, why?’

    Because I thought she’d learned something. Like “oh it didn’t check out or the number was wrong.” (this is what Lee imagines Jen P was gonna say)

    And she says: “You just have no idea how deep this goes.

    And I said, “What actually happened?”

    And she said, “I don’t know that his (the prof’s) website is real.”

    Lee: “And I was like, well, what do you mean? Because I’ve been to his website and it was real (chuckles) It was, it was real (chuckles more).”

    And she was like

    “I don’t even know if it’s real. I don’t even know who who I’ve talked to. These groups that are doing this sockpuppet stuff, you have no idea what they’re capable of. They can fake entire sites. The can get people… “

    Lee: “And I’m just like whoa, whoa, wait a minute, what are you talking about? why do you think that this has happened? do you have some proof?”

    And she’s like: “Lee, you have no idea how deep these things can go. Groups like Anonymous or the Yessmen, they are really capable, they could fake identities.”

    And I say “but YOU called the professor. Right? You looked up the number yourself and you called him and talked to him and his wife, correct?”

    And she’s like, “yeah”

    Lee: “well how could that be fake? (laughs) how could…”

    And she goes, “Look, this goes much deeper than that. “

    Lee: “Well, do you care if I call?”

    She says: “Go ahead; feel free to call.”
    Lee: “I hadn’t wanted to call in because I didn’t want to impose on the person because they’re teaching classes..etc…. so I called in and it checked out. But it made me feel like…and this is why I brought this up…because I like Jen in a lotta ways and I like working with her in a lotta ways and then when I saw this stuff that Ron Brynaert was saying the other day, I thought ‘well, this is sorta beyond the pale.’ Like obviously she’s been talking to Ron and a bunch of other people and rather than tell me she like “I’m talking to different sources and some of them think this and some of them think that…” she had
    bought into this idea to the point to where she wasn’t pursuing things with Jennifer George. Even she knew there were lies that Jennifer George had told. And I think that this happening has caused real problems for people. This lack of follow-up caused problems for people. ’cause I think that after that probably, right around that time, Jen George went into the police station and filed a report that I was the person who left death threats. So to me there was a level of credulity (sic) that had been dropped. And my wife was like “this is a reporter from the NYTimes? Why are they buying into this? ” So that’s part of the explanation. Part of what led up to it. …

    “The reason the info about the prof was dropped was there was this belief that the entire website may have been faked. And I tried to tell Jen (Preston) “there’s no way this web site is faked. I’ve heard who this is. ” but even now there’s this theory being floated by some people that there’s some big conspiracy going on that’s much deeper than what it is. and that’s why I say when I heard that the police had visited Jen George in Boston, and that/had confirmed a bunch of things,including that she was in MA, which the screenwriting prof had told us, I was like “well that really sorta changes things.” so anyway, that’s that bit of the story . I’ll probably write it up at some point.

    (Please do, Lee.)

    Further, I believe Lee said that the BPD Detective also called Hunter (I have to check when he may have said that. If I’m wrong he’ll let me know).

    So Hunter, by any reasonable assessment, unless JP has info that she hasn’t revealed, is a real dude.

    It calls for speculation, but either JP believes/believed what she told Lee (and possibly Ron too) …that Lew is fake and this is some wild , much deeper plot..scary stuff… (perhaps her powerful position allows her to have more info.)

    or

    that she was playing them both with a crazy theory that she thought they might run with (and get off the scent?) (dunno) Her saying to Lee that he should call Lew is kind of opposite to that but doesn’t rule it out. (Lee can and will do what he wants in any case.) Think of other reasons that she might say it to Lee if she didn’t really believe it. She allegedly wrote to Ron in a Jun 25 DM on that blog that she thinks Lee is trying to screw her and associate her with his BS jg story. Who knows if that is a real email or not, of course. It it were real, which part of Lee’s JG story was considered BS? We know that after Lee talked about what he said JP said that the Prof said about JG’s mental condition, that JG called Lee and asked him to remove those comments from his radio show. She went directly to Blog Talk Radio CEO and had him edit out 20 seconds of Lee’s show. Lee complied with this but said he didn’t think it was necessary. Lee documented it in a statement on his blog and in a subsequent radio show. Lee also said he got an earful from the reporter over all this in the end.

    So it remains a mystery why someone would think that there was a fake Lew website and fake Lew & Mrs Lew on the phone, other than an actual belief that some evil hackers & conspirators are capable of anything, or it was a tactical misdirection on her part. I am confused by this.

    Other possibilities? Anyone?

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/7/2011 @ 9:58 am

  1538. Yes thanks koam. That really helps clarify the timeline etc. I didn’t know people were still over here :)

    Comment by Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c) — 7/7/2011 @ 10:08 am

  1539. Koam, given how she initially contacted JG CA, under false pretenses, and how she tried to intimidate you (my interpretation), I wouldn’t rule out tactical misdirection on Preston’s part. Perhaps she thinks throwing BS out there will keep others off the scent of her leads, so she can be the reporter with the best chance of getting to the root of this issue?

    Or perhaps she’s an airhead who, like many, has said stupid things that aren’t logical, simply in an effort to remain relevant.

    Anyhow, by casting that degree of doubt on Hunter, she did a big favor for those who want doubt to surround every aspect of this scandal. In this topsy turvy story, that could curry favor with a lot of potential sources. Even JGMA, in a backwards fashion.

    All I know is that Preston is totally unreliable.

    Comment by Dustin (b7410e) — 7/7/2011 @ 10:17 am

  1540. Further it’s possible that these incidents give certain indications.

    – 1) JG MA is a real JG in MA who’s
    – 2) not involved w/ Nikki activity.

    Some observations point to 1) others point to both 1) & 2).

    Pro:

    She went to BPD as JG in MA.
    BPD visited her home in MA to follow up.
    Presumably, BPD likes to be sure they’re dealing with real people with real names, not actresses playing parts. (this says she’s a real person, it indicates that she’s not likely guilty, but it doesn’t preclude her involvement in the Nikki business)
    Lew & Mrs Hunter said she’s a real person. (Dunno what further confirmation was done that it was the same person.)(Lee thinks being a screenwriter indicates skills & guilt. Dunno that’s proven).
    JP had BTR remove comments from Lee’s radio show. This could have been to prevent JP/NYT liability in disclosure of personal information. One could see why JG or Lew would be upset about this disclosure, if it happened as Lee says it did. Suggests that JP thinks JG is real ID, as a sock can’t sue you. (Doesn’t prove guilt or innocence. If what Prof allegedly said was true, it could support Lee’s theory.)
    Lee has stopped frequently insisting she’s a faker (but he could have several reasons for doing so, including the LE investigation. Or maybe he hasn’t…dunno.I could be mistaken.)

    Con:

    JG said she was in CA when she called but she later admitted she was really in MA. (understandable, however, if you’re a real person who’s genuinely scared…But one tactical lie makes everything you say suspicious as others here have learned.)
    JG MA hasn’t revealed herself beyond Lee, JP, BPD (also understandable if were scared & wanted anonymity)
    A bunch of people have looked for her and haven’t found her. (Would a real screenwriting student in her early 20s be so anonymous online? Where are her friends and facebook or other online trail (I sound like GC). Not proof of anything, I know, but it doesn’t add up.)
    Even Patterico says Lee might still be right about JG. (but might be wrong too).

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/7/2011 @ 10:33 am

  1541. 1539 Dustin

    I agree.

    When that JG CA disclosure page (brilliant) very first went up, I went out and asked in comments or twitter about the approach that JP took to JG. (Note: Ron later said that approach was semi-genuine, I think.)

    But I asked if approaching in such an indirect, misleading, and flattering way would lead to JG CA clamming up when it got to the real questions at hand. That is, if JP wanted JG CA to tell a full story, that she was less likely to get that from her when it came down to the interview because of the approach. (Of course we were assuming that the name JG was potentially associated with the starchild111 handle so that such a JG would be a possible prime candidate to be the real “Nikki.”)

    I was told by several people who are experienced commenters and who likely know more about reporting that I do that it was a perfectly respectable approach. I took that as a lesson that I was somehow naive about how the sausage gets made. And I am.

    But JG CA’s subsequent comments about it indicate otherwise. (Even though JG CA is uninvolved, she bristled at being schmoozed and misled. JP probably doesn’t like that Lee landed on the same JG and tipped her hand.) We’ve seen the “much respect” type schmooze laid on others who are commenters on this story as well. I think JP may be off the Nikki story (scared? directed off?) and onto the post-story about the online collaborative/confrontational investigation by independent people.

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/7/2011 @ 10:47 am

  1542. I took that as a lesson that I was somehow naive about how the sausage gets made. And I am.

    Me too, btw. But you know, I think these sausage making journalists who eventually have to reveal to their sources they were being dishonest… before they get their info… they may not be going about this correctly. There’s too much room for mistakes, bias, and outright deception.

    For all the frustration of Patterico just letting his source say whatever s/he wanted to, and letting us think for ourselves, I see that approach as far superior to trying to trick folks the way Preston (And perhaps many other journalists) would.

    Anyway, here’s the bottom line:

    I think JP may be off the Nikki story (scared? directed off?) and onto the post-story

    So who is naive? Her methods failed.

    Comment by Dustin (b7410e) — 7/7/2011 @ 10:53 am

  1543. I have an odd potentially stupid question, forgive me if it has been answered. What if the Tweet that shows Jenay on the starchild account that was found was actually the fake. Not that the person who found it faked it. I don’t know very much about twitter and how you find lost tweets and that account was closed when it was found right?

    Comment by Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c) — 7/7/2011 @ 11:07 am

  1544. 1543. Blackburnsghost

    Do you know what a Tweet is? because your question suggests otherwise.

    It was a screen capture from a Google or Yahoo cache of what the starchild111 twitter account page looked at on a specific day in the past. A snapshot from history.

    You can find this documented earlier on this site with links.

    When a piece of evidence is found by someone, it inherently means that others can go find the same thing. If others didn’t find the same thing we’d have heard about it loud and clear.

    If you want to suspect that that was faked and somehow inserted into the Yahoo database, go right ahead.

    But first go back and see it for yourself.

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/7/2011 @ 11:40 am

  1545. Here is a link to the account page from twitter ( as reported ) via confirmed spider cache searches.

    http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-kN06BxQQIqo/Tf5cIF3BUII/AAAAAAAACOQ/_oOav941hF0/s1600/jenay.png

    Note: the actual cached results are expirining on may artifacts relating to this story. This screen shot shows the name assigned to the starchild111 on that date ( 1/1/2011 ).

    Joe

    Comment by Joe Smith (54c0c1) — 7/7/2011 @ 12:09 pm

  1546. Geez I said it was a stupid question because no I really don’t know what a tweet is. I am trying to figure that all out. I had another twitter account for my business which I have not been able to use because I don’t get it. That’s why I started the other one to try to figure it out without looking like an abject fool to my customers.
    I also did not know about the history of Twittergate etc. I am educating myself on a lot of things.

    Sorry I’ll keep to myself. This is just making a bad day worse.

    Thanks Joe

    Comment by Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c) — 7/7/2011 @ 12:22 pm

  1547. I like it! On to 2000.

    Who has a synopsis of what is undeniably known? The minutia in brackets.

    Next a synopsis of what is not undeniably known, but beyond reasonable spin. If that’s too broad, well, I think you know what I mean.

    An abbreviated updated timeline, incorporating the above, would be nice.

    I’m not knockin’ it, this pursuit of the truth. It’s just that my RAM and hard drive (brain) are very limited these days …….. I really hope any and all of the perps are exposed, at least, if not prosecuted, where applicable.

    Comment by MDr (fd1f4b) — 7/7/2011 @ 12:46 pm

  1548. 1547 MDr

    I’ve summarized all over the place here and in previous articles. There are a lot of arms and legs to this. There is no one summary and any statement of facts often assumes that you trust who’s told that part of the story. And certainly new stories have on a regular basis invalidated old stories. So understanding who believed what at a specific time (even if they were wrong) is permanently part of the story. It will never be simple.

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/7/2011 @ 1:04 pm

  1549. Thanks again for the wonderful info. :-)

    I have to say that I don’t understand Twitter either. I have never used it myself and I don’t do Facebook, either. I wondered how folks were researching some of this and I appreciate your insight on what it is and how that was done.

    I had gotten as far as opening Twitter windows on my computer to try to follow some of the discussions, but it moves pretty fast for me. And Lee’s radio shows aren’t very easy for me to go back over when I get confused (not like written info I can review).

    Blackburnsghost, hang in there. We can learn together, courtesy of the folks who understand it better than we do.

    I was realizing, as I tried to wrap my head around some of this, that part of my viewpoint is that of a person who is reasonably private and who doesn’t use all the media. So it didn’t seem that surprising to me that it would be hard to locate someone. And it didn’t seem surprising that someone might prefer not to be “outed” in real life. I guess if someone was trying to figure me out, they might suspect a “sock” simply because I usually lurk and only comment on occasion. As a matter of fact, I think this is the most I have commented on any thread. :-)

    Thanks to all for helping me understand.

    Comment by Sue (24e46b) — 7/7/2011 @ 1:08 pm

  1550. Sue,

    Your comments hit the mark and your recent comment about someone be outed would be what Jennifer Preston did to Witter.

    I don’t know all the details but it looked like JP tried to get information from Witter but he did not play her game so she felt it was proper to publish his anme and even the name of his dog.

    Not sure what her “news” purpose was but that is bad Big J in my book.

    Joe

    Comment by Joe Smith (54c0c1) — 7/7/2011 @ 3:10 pm

  1551. Joe and Sue, Thank you and ditto.
    After reading all the stuff I read today this is WAY above my techno pay grade, after reading about the previous twittergate thing I thought anything was possible re: faking things online etc. That’s where my spot on/brilliant idea came from.
    Anyway I will enjoy reading the comments and looking forward to progress if any.

    Koam is doing a bang up job of keeping up on this I think.
    Cheers to that!

    Comment by Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c) — 7/7/2011 @ 3:49 pm

  1552. Thanks.

    I just saw this today…just a side note

    http://qritiq.wordpress.com/2011/07/03/suspect-reporter/

    but this blog is where Lee had pointed out that a temporary and fake posting from a year ago (fake date) that had pics of the actress Nikki Reed (not Reid) and J-Lo and commented that these ladies looked like a pic of a Jennifer George which is available on a facebook profile for a JG in Boston.

    I have no idea why that fake posting was there. Lee said that he didn’t know that it was fake at the time that he posted it. If it had been real, then it would have linked a pic that is associated with a JG in Boston who has a fb profile with this story. The Nikki Reed & J-Lo thing would have been the giveaway. However Lee then said that the date was fake…and the post was removed later on.

    It was a waste of time, proof that there are people screwing with us (I think)..or just a joke for insiders..but still a waste of time for me.

    I kinda think I know who this is, but I haven’t asked her yet. If it’s the same person, she thought it was important for me to answer suggestive questions put to me recently. I don’t know why that happened either. It’s not terribly important but a strange loop in affairs to have someone possibly posting fake, year old, incriminating blog posts, and then that same person would get inquisitive with what were obviously retribution questions?
    Anyway, no need to follow up. Just interesting.

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/7/2011 @ 4:14 pm

  1553. Witter,

    I posted a number of links over on Lee’s blog that related to that fake blog post you referenced above dated June 30, 2010. They got stuck in moderation.

    Lee received the link from @lanelipton.

    She tweeted a facebook link to Lee on June 27 that she indicated was a picture of Jennifer George on FB:

    http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1104744369

    This URL also appears on the blog Lee tweeted about looking for an owner:
    : http://qritiq.wordpress.com/2010/06/30/look-a-likes/

    Note: This was before the look-a-likes blog post was deleted and then replaced with the current puppy picture.

    The first picture on the blog post has the same FB URL in the source code while the real image is at http://profile.ak.fbcdn.net/hprofile-ak-snc4/23073_1104744369_8766_n.jpg

    I also found something very intersting on Lane Lipton’s blog, on her about page…. she is a writer in New York.

    http://lanelipton.wordpress.com/about/

    The image at the top is very interesting ( star map )
    http://lanelipton.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/cropped-hubble1280x800.jpg

    Joe

    Comment by Joe Smith (54c0c1) — 7/7/2011 @ 4:45 pm

  1554. Well yes that’s where I think I was going with that, even without knowing someone was asking questions of you.
    I guess I thought well hmm we are all looking at JGMA and were looking at JGCA all due to a single cache found with the name jenay and I thought perhaps that could be created. To send us all on a long strange trip.
    :./

    Comment by Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c) — 7/7/2011 @ 4:53 pm

  1555. Blackburnsghost,

    Sorry but Jennifer George was already know to the press and they were contacting Jennifer George ( CA ) as early as June 14!

    Joe

    Comment by Joe Smith (54c0c1) — 7/7/2011 @ 4:59 pm

  1556. Sorry again. I need to learn to read links before post
    I’m getting hammered today on all fronts. :)
    #learning

    Comment by Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c) — 7/7/2011 @ 5:06 pm

  1557. Blackburnsghost,

    No attempt to hammer you ;-)

    Just tyring to keep the facts straight and try to reduce confusion. Stay with us and the facts will drip out slowly.

    Joe

    Comment by Joe Smith (54c0c1) — 7/7/2011 @ 5:25 pm

  1558. No it’s fine, I’m a big girl. Clearly an amateur detective with a dime store monocle.

    Comment by Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c) — 7/7/2011 @ 5:43 pm

  1559. I’m starting to think this thread might actually reach 2000.

    Comment by Pious Agnostic (6048a8) — 7/7/2011 @ 5:51 pm

  1560. Re: 1558 Pious Agnostic

    Sure, why not? As long as no one minds a slower commenter like me? :-)

    I think there are enough questions in this story to keep us going…

    Comment by Sue (24e46b) — 7/7/2011 @ 6:01 pm

  1561. @koam in #1537 “Other possibilities? Anyone?”

    koam, I don’t know Preston or her work and can only speculate by projecting. But I don’t think Preston doubts Lew Hunter exists, I think she probably just believes as I do that his use as proof of identity by the woman claiming to be his ex-student was an indication that the phone call she got was phony, and Lew Hunter is irrelevant to the Weiner saga outside the fact that bringing him into it offers yet another totally pointless diversion in a story already riddled with manufactured red herrings.

    JPreston likely doesn’t much care one way or another about the authenticity of the Lew Hunter she’d spoken to,since he couldn’t possibly prove anything about anything to her other than the fact that he had a student at one time who went by the name of Jennifer George – just as have probably hundreds of other teachers elsewhere had students who’ve gone by that rather common name.

    Whether or not Lee or JP or the BPD or anyone else could satisfy themselves that the Lew Hunter with whom Lee & JP spoke about the former student named JG is the real Lew Hunter who teaches a scriptwriting class at UCLA Extension is a completely irrelevant sidebar since, genuine or not, Hunter has absolutely no way of positively identifying without having directly seen her do it her that either the person who called Lee & Preston or the one who allegedly filed a police report also claiming to be a JG was the JG who was his student anyway, right?

    I took a couple of courses during my academic career with a well-known Prof or two who’d probably remember me too since I’ve kept in contact. If somebody else who knows (even second or third-handedly) that I took those courses with one of those guys, could he get his girlfriend to call up Jen Preston insisting that she was me and offer as proof of her “leilani-hood” that I once took a course with him?

    Of course not. Even more, it would certainly set off alarm bells to me – and I speculate Preston as well – that an obscure relationship like that was even being offered as proof of ID by someone, so I’m thinking Preston’s probably as perplexed as I am that anybody’s even discussing Lew Hunter as anything OTHER than a neon-flashing red herring which was intentionally thrown out by someone else as chum to further obfuscate the already deliberately muddied sock water.

    Preston says that the woman claiming to be “a” Jennifer George on the phone to her couldn’t even remember where in Mass. she went to elementary school, so the the film instructor reference the woman claiming to be named JG volunteered to Lee & JP as her means of supposedly confirming her “jennifergeorge-ness” is important only in that it justifiably helped heighten JP’s suspicion that the person to whom she was speaking was probably masquerading as someone by that name and didn’t know much else at all about the Jennifer George she was pretending to be.

    In fact, let’s face it, it’s really the kind of strange reference which somebody might offer as ID only if they didn’t know the person whom they were purporting to be very well at all and perhaps knew ONLY that a memorably eccentric woman named Jennifer George took a UCLA film class with Lew Hunter once – a fact possibly even gleaned through a third party if her name had been bandied about in conversation, isn’t it?

    Say somebody (we’ll call him Nool Roohooser), sees/plants the JG item at SLAH, wants to establish a quickie fake persona to punk someone on the phone with and puts out feelers among his peeps. “Anybody know someone named Jennifer George?” Someone pipes up: “Yeah, my sister took a UCLA Ex class with one from Massachusetts a few years ago. She was supposed to be a real character” And viola, ya got yourself an instant fake Jennifer George bio.

    Except somebody forgot to do their homework on basic stuff like where she went to elementary school before they talked to the New York Times and JP’s caller flunked the basic ID test that any journalist worth even half his or her salt would put an unseen interview subject through to prove they are who they say they are.

    I’m assuming that’s why Preston doesn’t want anything to do with a JG ‘theory’, particularly one which advances Lew Hunter the real-life man as having any relevance whatsoever to the Weiner story other than the fact that he was suspiciously the only detail proffered as ID confirmation by somebody obviously trying to send everybody on silly wild goose chases.

    In other words, Lew Hunter was once important to this story at all only insofar as the very fact he was used as an ID reference in the first place pretty much ‘outed’ Jennifer Preston’s phone caller as a fake to her.

    As well it should have, IMHO.

    But (and this is a very big but): Preston was waaaaay out of line if it’s true that she outed your real name on twitter, as I just read here, koam.

    Seriously, that’s some deeply weird &*%$. Scary-weird. And by a woman who was supposedly so offended that all these various & sundry Jennifer Georges were getting needlessly drawn into this whodunit?

    Ruh-roh. Not gonna look good for ya defending yourself in a civil suit if one of the other Jennys decides to seek redress, Ms. P. Shows a pattern of reckless disregard for people’s privacy, doesn’t it? Tsk-tsk.

    Comment by leilani (ccfc7e) — 7/7/2011 @ 6:30 pm

  1562. 1560 leilani

    Thanks for responding.

    Your first paragraph says that you don’t think that JP doubts Lew’s existence. But that is exactly what Lee said she said. See the transcript or listen to his show. Ron posts something similar, in his blog, allegedly from JP, and you can make your mind up about whether you want to believe Ron’s blog or not.

    But your argument is not with what JP believes, it’s with what Lee said she said. I believe Lee would tell the truth about what she said, so the question is, did she believe it or was she trying to trick Lee?

    As for whether a real Lew & wife can confirm whether the real JG MA who they know is the one who called Lee & JP, well there would have to be some kind of specific verification. Lee & JP are smart enough to know that a person may not be the same person. So if that was their fear, they would have keyed into it. I agree that they would need some kind of photo or additional info. I sort of expect that with the BPD triangulation, there must have been something. Let’s ask Lee, if he’ll discuss it.

    But to recap Lee:

    “The reason the info about the prof was dropped was there was this belief that the entire website may have been faked. And I tried to tell Jen (Preston) “there’s no way this web site is faked. I’ve heard who this is. ” but even now there’s this theory being floated by some people that there’s some big conspiracy going on that’s much deeper than what it is. and that’s why I say when I heard that the police had visited Jen George in Boston, and that/had confirmed a bunch of things,including that she was in MA, which the screenwriting prof had told us, I was like “well that really sorta changes things.”

    I think you get into speculation as to why a prof wouldn’t be a good reference. I think it’s irrelevant. It’s who the woman chose. At that age, I did often rely on profs as my references.

    The point is what JP said to Lee. That Lew’s web site is fake. Not a real person. She didn’t say what you said, which is, a real Lew knew a real JG from MA, but the real JG from MA is not who Lee & JP talked to. JP is capable of saying that. Instead she said to Lee (and reputedly to Ron) that Lew is not a real person…with a fake web site. (Research has been done to show the web site has been around a long time. It’s not fake). Let’s not make excuses for her unless you are saying Lee is lying about it or that a hacker got into Lew’s web site and changed the phone numbers and email addresses.

    As for the JG not saying where she went to school, and at first lying that she was in CA. Those can be explained by a real JG, who’s innocent, who wants to remain unfindable by Lee who she’s afraid of until she is more comfortable with talking with JP. I can believe that.

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/7/2011 @ 6:59 pm

  1563. Your first paragraph says that you don’t think that JP doubts Lew’s existence. But that is exactly what Lee said she said.

    Given how difficult it has been to get Lee to provide details and specific facts for his conclusions, are you certain Lee was quoting Jennifer Preston or is it possible he was interpreting what he thought she meant?

    Comment by DRJ (fdd243) — 7/7/2011 @ 7:03 pm

  1564. 1562. DRJ

    Am I certain of something Lee said? I’m quoting what he said and I said we should ask him again. He certainly repeated it. Weinergate Post Modern Yellathon But you’re right that if we can’t trust what Lee said to be quotes (rather than just his inferences or interpretations, which I challenge regularly), we have a lot of problems understanding what’s going on in general. Lee delivered this story with quotes. I can’t tell you if it’s real, just what we heard him say. Lee help us out.

    Corroboration, if you will, is at Ron’s blog.

    I think this Lew Hunter person? Was a fake.
    Direct message sent by Jennifer Preston (@NYT_JenPreston) to you (@ronbryn) on Jun 24, 9:48 AM.

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/7/2011 @ 7:35 pm

  1565. Re: 1560 Leilani
    I had seen someone mention before that JG/MA couldn’t name the elementary school she went to.

    It is details like that that makes it very clear to me that I have a slightly different viewpoint. I remember the school I went to (just one, K-6), but my adult son doesn’t; he went to four different ones and would be hard put to name any of them (moving is hard on a kid). There are sometimes valid reasons why you can’t name the school you attended.

    But your description of the possible chain of events leads me to wonder: if JP was asking questions that may have had simple, but slightly different, answers (like my son’s inability to name his elementary school), then what kinds of questions would a journalist end up asking in order to identify someone? And if you don’t want to detail your life history and have a journalist act like it isn’t enough to convince them, what do you offer up? In a strange way, I can imagine that it is possible for the conversation to become one of scrounging around for an authority figure of some kind – like a well-known professor – in an attempt to find something to point to that might fit the journalist’s expectations and end any further probing. So was the professor offered as an ID proactively, or was it perhaps offered out of exasperation since JP perhaps was refusing to accept someone’s other statement? Only JP and JG/MA know the rest of the context of the conversation.

    But I will also add that since Jen Preston has published koam’s real name, it seems possible that she may have been overly aggressive in other contexts as well; so the idea that JG/MA may have felt pushed and that she may have thrown something out as authoritative and been deliberately misleading due to possible discomfort with JP’s attitude remains a possibility, in my opinion.

    For the record, if any reporters want to know where I went to school, the answer is, “None of your business”. And if you want to think I’m a fake as a result, have fun. :-)

    Comment by Sue (24e46b) — 7/7/2011 @ 7:54 pm

  1566. I don’t think Lew Hunter was or is a fake. He also is not key this case.

    If JG(MA) was or is fake it would be easy to dismiss Lew. Again, his only role is to confirm JG is JG.

    JP or any other mainstream press group should be able to determine if JG is real using other methods.

    Joe

    Comment by Joe Smith (54c0c1) — 7/7/2011 @ 7:59 pm

  1567. Apologies, that last comment of mine was pretty flippant. Sorry.

    Comment by Sue (24e46b) — 7/7/2011 @ 8:25 pm

  1568. 1564 Sue

    Interesting story about your son.

    If we are to believe what Lee says happened, JG called him, very, very scared that someone was threatening to kill her. (He thinks she’s lying) But in an attempt, I assume, to have a second person corroborate the call and also, possibly to add some legitimacy to himself, he has JG call JP, who, it is easy to document, works for NYT. Lee is an independent with some pictures of himself on his page that maybe a girl afraid for her life wouldn’t really want to see. (Tough guy, scowling photos)

    If JG is really that scared, I wouldn’t blame her for fibbing about where she was and some details that she is giving up in her confused state to strangers. Why not lie about your location if you are scared someone’s coming to kill you?

    Now if the point of having JG call JP was to help reassure JG that Lee is not a killer, we can all see how that turned out. JG went right to the police.

    And on Ron’s blog, we can see how JP allegedly talks about Lee. Pretty rough stuff…(if Ron’s blog is to be believed.)

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/7/2011 @ 8:26 pm

  1569. Ron’s blog is not to be believed,even if it’s gospel truth. He’s not in a right frame of mind at present, and caution should be exercised there.

    Comment by Sarahw (af7312) — 7/7/2011 @ 8:41 pm

  1570. Sue, without offering any specific citation this minute, it is strangely the case that women have a distinct superiority in retention and recollection of detailed childhood memories, places, and events; a difference that may in part be due to measurable differences in the brain structures linked to these memories ( their hippocampuses). Men seem to have more childhood amnesia compared to women.

    JGma also lied about where she went to high school to lee and Preston and only admitted this when caught. She also filled her story with outlandish details, and used the same confidence games the socks used.

    Comment by Sarahw (af7312) — 7/7/2011 @ 9:00 pm

  1571. The whole mysterious JG tracking down and phoning Lee scared to death–Lee’s having JG call Preston– and the entirety of the bizarre Lew part of it– has never made any sense to me. I am not saying those things didn’t happen in some form or fashion, nor am I calling anybody a liar. But those pieces of the puzzle just do not fit right, yet. Some of those pieces just smell funny and have always seemed false flaggy to me (at least with the info presented publicly so far). To me, it feels like a poorly shot photo that is not in focus, but still intrigues because there are outlines and shadows. And that may be precisely the master plan.

    Comment by elissa (c14551) — 7/7/2011 @ 9:46 pm

  1572. 1568 Sarahw

    Yes, well, you know the salty talk made me suspicious. She wouldn’t, right?

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/7/2011 @ 10:21 pm

  1573. 1569 Sarahw

    Fair enough. But all that adds up to JGMA is a sock, not Lew. JP doesn’t say JGMA is a sock.

    In fact, she has Lee’s radio show edited ostensibly to remove a potentially slanderous remark (we’re guessing) about JG (the sock?) that slipped out in which she’s the reported transmitter of a notion.

    “She was like, ‘Oh, you can’t have that up there.’ Asked me if I could and would take it down. I say I dunnow how. She calls CEO of BTR and gets it done.” (paraphrased) Lee says to CEO “I don’t think it needs to be taken down but I’m not arguing at this point.” Preston selects 20 seconds to delete and CEO gets it done.

    That and other things point to JGMA being real, and possibly innocent.

    see #1540 from this morning.

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/7/2011 @ 10:30 pm

  1574. “Given how difficult it has been to get Lee to provide details and specific facts for his conclusions, are you certain Lee was quoting Jennifer Preston or is it possible he was interpreting what he thought she meant”

    DRJ, is there any reason to believe Lee’s assertions about alleged private conversations?

    Comment by Random (4dc233) — 7/7/2011 @ 10:30 pm

  1575. SarahW, so there were a lot more than just one or two problems with the discussion between JP and JG/MA. That makes more sense. Thanks.

    Elissa, I like the description of “a poorly shot photo that is not in focus”. So is this art, or accident? I wonder if we will ever know.

    Koam, it does seem odd to me that JG/MA called Lee, then goes to the police. It’s out of order. But a lot of this story seems that way.

    Thanks to all. I have a lot to think about and wonder about until tomorrow. Sweet dreams to all.

    Comment by Sue (24e46b) — 7/7/2011 @ 10:42 pm

  1576. Sue,

    Lee mentioned on his BTG radio program on 6/20/2011 that JG(MA) asked Lee if she needed to call the Police or the Campus police next. She was asking Lee for his feedback before contacting the Police. So this odd cycle has been out there since June 20.

    Joe

    Comment by Joe Smith (54c0c1) — 7/7/2011 @ 11:37 pm

  1577. Random,

    Yes there is reason to believe Lee is speaking the truth. The best example is the request from Jennifer Preston have the BTR recording edited to remove a comment abot JG.

    It is a clear example that JP and Lee spoke to the same person and JP thinks she is real. Why else request something be removed from the mp3?

    Joe

    Comment by Joe Smith (54c0c1) — 7/8/2011 @ 9:04 am

  1578. koam, #1561 Hi, thanks for the reply, sorry I’m late. Lunchtime!;-)

    You said: “As for the JG not saying where she went to school, and at first lying that she was in CA. Those can be explained by a real JG, who’s innocent, who wants to remain unfindable by Lee who she’s afraid of until she is more comfortable with talking with JP. I can believe that.”

    So you speculate she was lying about where she studied in Massachusetts because she was scared but she was telling the truth about studying with Hunter in California because she was …what? Experiencing a brief unexplained burst of uncharacteristic confidence thanks to the salubrious effects of the SoCal sunshine? If she doesn’t want to be found & isn’t the least bit interested in proving she is who she says she is in a way that passes even the mildest smell test and can confer upon what she says any validity o credibility at all, then why is she calling in the first place?

    Sue in #1564 offers the suggestion that perhaps the caller claiming to be named JG can’t correctly tell Preston where she went to elementary & high school is because she might have moved a lot & attended many schools, a scenario created out of the blue & without any foundation at all simply to justify the caller’s wild contradictions and her inability to pass Preston’s Journalism 101 scammer screening questions, never mind that it would help contradict the caller’s own story of growing up in Massachusetts.

    But we could just as easily concoct another scenario which has it that the caller couldn’t remember because she didn’t attend school at all & was in fact home-schooled by tutors in Buckingham Palace back in her Princess days, couldn’t we?

    I mean, as long as we’re inventing scenarios out of whole cloth to force-fit this caller into serving as the sole culprit in the Unisock Theory, we might as well go all out, no?

    Similarly, we are asked to accept that Lee’s caller must be telling the truth that she started the starchild account yet was suffering from a sudden onset of intermittent dishonesty when she says her account was abandoned &/or hacked and she herself had nothing to do with the Nikki tweets because…er, why?

    Why, simply because that wouldn’t fit the unified sock theory either, it seems.

    So we’re bending over backwards to engage in the rawest of meandering speculation in order to create justifications for her when she says stuff that doesn’t fit she was the lone perpetrator in the Unisock Theory, but we’re incongruously taking completely at face value anything she says that does fit the theory. Suddenly no extenuating explanations & fancifully speculative excuses are required for that.

    But using the Koam-Stranahan method of cherry-picking evidence and concocting selectively operable explanations without any foundation to mitigate all the contradictions in logic & to allow us to jettison the inconvenient stuff that doesn’t fit, we can speculate until the cows come home.

    Inded, as I said, we could make an equally compelling case for the claim that the woman who called Preston & Stranahan was the Queen of England, but what would be the point of it?

    You’re not going to end up with a provable theory that passes muster with anybody whose capacity for reason requires real evidence to make logically sound deductions, all you’ll end up with is, well, a fairy tale, won’t you? A fun & fanciful diversion maybe, but in the end an utter waste of time – just as Jennifer Preston (and the BPD?) have themselves evidently concluded.

    Comment by leilani (ccfc7e) — 7/8/2011 @ 9:55 am

  1579. Oops forgot to address this, also from koam in 1561: “But your argument is not with what JP believes, it’s with what Lee said she said. I believe Lee would tell the truth about what she said, so the question is, did she believe it or was she trying to trick Lee?”

    Wait, what? Even Jennifer Preston’s story has to go through the same selectively applicable process of acceptance into the body of evidence now?

    If she publicly says the story offered by the self-proclaimed JG she spoke with didn’t hold up under even the minimal scrutiny to which she subjected it and she can’t subscribe to Lee’s theory with a straight face, she might not be telling the truth because according to Lee she may have told him something vaguely different in private?

    But we have seen that quite a few others have objected to the way Lee has misunderstood &/or mischaracterized their own private conversations with him and have suggested he has a distressing habit of selectively hearing &/or cherry-picking their words to substantially distort what they’ve said.

    Yet we’re supposed to take at face value the iffy hearsay contention that JenP says in private something completely different than what she herself says directly in public – i.e., that the woman who called her was obviously a fake in her best judgement as an experienced journalist (who btw, just like cops, are required to adopt some tricks of the trade to ferret out imposters on the phone if they’re ever to get any work done at all since they are routinely the targets of attempted punkings) and she’s concluded that pursuing the woman who made that call would be a time-wasting wild goose chase.

    But why the heck should we? Toward what end?

    If you persist in selectively choosing only that which fits the theory and are simultaneously required to adopt a completely contradictory rationale to discount everything else which doesn’t fit it, what you end up with is not a theory, but a fantasy, koam, which is exactly why so many have heretofore declined to embrace Lee’s single sock solution.

    [And btw they're declining to embrace his theory not because they 'hate' him as he suggests or even that they distrust him necessarily. It's simply because they can't subvert their intellects & subjugate their requirement for logical consistency in order to make sound rational deductions, therefore they can't just take a leap of blind faith to arrive at the same unfounded conclusions at which he's arrived. His very vaguely articulated & selectively chosen evidence happens to be singularly unpersuasive to people's intellects. It's not the skeptics' fault they were born with fully-firing synapses.]

    Comment by leilani (ccfc7e) — 7/8/2011 @ 10:05 am

  1580. JGma also lied about where she went to high school to lee and Preston and only admitted this when caught. She also filled her story with outlandish details, and used the same confidence games the socks used. – Comment by Sarahw — 7/7/2011 @ 9:00 pm [emph., mine]

    Ahhh. Exactly! Now we’re talking, Sarah.

    The Hunter factoid in particular was a completely extraneous & irrelevant one which suspiciously served – and still serves – as the typical time-honored con artist’s distraction device which in turn helps to obscure the fact that there was no more substantial evidence to make the case that the caller was the twitter user who posted as Nikki than there was to make the case the caller was Prince William’s granny.

    In other words, the hoaxer wants Jen Preston – and the rest of us – to believe that just because everyone can confirm that there exists a screenwriting instructor named Lew Hunter who had a student named JG, everything else the caller is saying must ipso facto be true. But Lew Hunter tells us no more about the caller’s ID than would a claim by the caller that she owns Corgis have given the Royal Dog Trainer license to confirm that the person Preston was speaking to is the Queen of England and everything she might say thereafter that is true.

    The mere fact that the caller tried to pull off that slight of hand – one of the most notorious tricks of the con artist trade – to establish her bona fides with Preston, was itself a pretty good indicator along with all her other contradictions and evasions that this self-proclaimed JG was bogus and no matter what Lee may or may not think she said to him in private, it’s pretty obvious that Jen Preston wasn’t buying the ruse, thanks to the tricks of her trade which lets journalists & cops determine whether the unseen people they’re speaking to on the phone are who they say they are.

    Comment by leilani (ccfc7e) — 7/8/2011 @ 10:15 am

  1581. 1576 Joe

    correct

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/8/2011 @ 10:23 am

  1582. 1577 leilani

    I have tried to identify what was speculation, when I can. If I forget to, please always correct me. I’m not calling speculation a fact.

    I guess the driving force is that JG MA goes to the police and subjects herself to interrogation by detectives, as she said she was going to do. So if her story on the whole is utterly fake, I would expect it to be found out professionally. That’s why I was trying to infer what her intent would be in statements she made – not saying it’s true, just a what-if.

    What I’m not doing is calling statements lies that are not proven to be lies. I’m giving all the benefit of the doubt on general thruthiness until proven otherwise by facts.

    I think the hyperbole is fun, but not terribly relevant. I’m not offended.

    I don’t get the comment about force-fitting into the Unisock Theory, as I don’t think I’ve been reasoning or speculating in that direction. Lee is going in that direction, I take it. Lee doubts most of what JG said. I was saying it needs to be proven if certain parts are to be called false. So I don’t get what you’re saying.

    1578

    Where does JP say that JG is not legitimate? I may have forgotten. You’ve written quite a lot based on this. I know that one assertive follow up was to have Lee’s radio program censored after the fact.

    The snarkiness aside, do your comments allow that Lee and I don’t necessarily agree on this in general? I still don’t get it.

    The hyperbole and sarcasm can muddy the clarity of your purpose, which is what I’m interested in.

    1579

    So you’re with Pat’s theory (his hypothetical). OK. Why didn’t you just say that?

    Are the caller JGMA and BPD JGMA the same person and how are they related, or are they just new, unrelated players intent on pranking? Why does a new player with no stake take this to the police? Is she planning to vanish if BPD wants to take her to task for a false report?

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/8/2011 @ 10:47 am

  1583. 1577 Leilani

    I didn’t say JG MA told the truth about studying with Hunter in CA. I don’t recall for sure if JGMA said that the study with Lew was specifically in CA. I don’t think that was specified, just assumed. Lee says JGMA said she was in CA and attends/attended UCLA. Hunter only teaches once a year at UCLA now. Lew’s semi-retired (my wording) as a Prof emeritus. She told Lee she attended the UCLA Creative Writing Program. The Writer’s Program at UCLA that starchild111 linked to on Twitter is an extension program, with online courses, so that can be confusing to figure out.

    I believe that Hunter said that he knew JG MA from his teaching retreats in NE. I don’t recall if Hunter denied or ever addressed having taught JG in CA as well. (This may be claimed somewhere).

    One reference is Lee’s notes on JG call. He posted these June 30 (call was June 19) after several asked him to put the info in writing. Prior to that it was all on podcasts…extremely hard to review and discuss. Also look at Lee’s posts before and after this for other parts of the story, as well as his radio podcasts.

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/8/2011 @ 11:39 am

  1584. by all that holy
    conspiracy buffs have lots
    of stamina, damn!

    Comment by ColonelHaiku (822dce) — 7/8/2011 @ 11:44 am

  1585. Neal is just the sort of person to scare Jenny with a fake Lee or Lee-fan issuing a fake threat.

    But I’m not sure Lee was aware that such an explanation existed at the time he interpreted the fake threat the way he did (as a sign Jenny is lashing out and trying to stop him). I interpreted it the same way Lee did before I really looked into what Neal was capable of.

    Knowing now that Neal could easily do exactly what appears to have happened, my guess is that someone did scare the hell out of Jenny, mainly in an effort to screw with Lee, but also because he wants to establish something about the bloggers and commenters who have been pursuing this story. He consistently manufactures theories of stalking and cyber crimes that didn’t exist in order to present himself as the good guy.

    Obviously I am speculating, but it fits the facts well. Just keep in mind that someone is doing all they can to manipulate folks like Lee and us.

    Comment by Dustin (b7410e) — 7/8/2011 @ 11:47 am

  1586. 1584 Dustin.

    In which case there is a scared JG MA.

    What do you make of claimed lies that JG MA may have told Lee and/or JP? Don’t lies or inconsistencies prove that JG MA is not a real person? (Not my assertion, but see 1577)

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/8/2011 @ 11:56 am

  1587. Don’t lies or inconsistencies prove that JG MA is not a real person?

    They prove she has been deceptive. And frankly, I would be deceptive if I were in her shoes.

    Yes, if I’m right, Jenny is a victim, and collateral damage of someone willing to exploit innocent people if he thinks it will harm the reputation of his enemies.

    Comment by Dustin (b7410e) — 7/8/2011 @ 11:58 am

  1588. 1586 Dustin.

    That’s what I was sayin’.
    I was roundly roiled for postulating that today.

    What do you think might have happened to @starchild111 then?

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/8/2011 @ 12:06 pm

  1589. What do you think might have happened to @starchild111 then?

    Hell if I know. The problem with this story is that I know someone is trying to manipulate me, but I also know some aren’t. It’s impossible to select an appropriate degree of paranoia and trust right now.

    All I know is that I don’t know, brother.

    I was roundly roiled for postulating that today.

    I’d say join the club, but you’re a charter member.

    Comment by Dustin (b7410e) — 7/8/2011 @ 12:23 pm

  1590. I mean… once you cross this threshold of possibility, you quickly realize we could (are) dealing with some tremendously awful characters. And yes, I do recall Koam making this observation well before I did.

    Comment by Dustin (b7410e) — 7/8/2011 @ 12:28 pm

  1591. Hit Parade Time…..Flashback

    6/25/2011
    An Important Message to Weinergate Bloggers/Journalists, Part 1
    Filed under: General — Patterico @ 4:27 pm

    Did you write this?

    “That I will do, including fighting any legal action to compel me to divulge my source. There is a foundation that would support me in that cause. . . .

    We are ultimately, the sum of our actions. If you’ve done something for which you feel guilty, the best course is confession and amends, at least that’s my personal experience. As presented, that is what this would represent within a reasonable form. So, it’s up to you. It certainly has been an interesting exchange. If you’d like to go forward, please let me know. I will live up to my end of the bargain, such as it is. Thank you.”

    If you recognize this as your writing, you need to write me ASAP at patterico AT gmail DOT com.

    It is not the only quote of yours I have.

    Preview from Part 2:

    Once I received the information, this email trail would be deleted and, as far as I am concerned, you would not exist.”

    Yes, I have the rest. She may be telling you I don’t. But I do.

    Comment by Patterico — 6/25/2011 @ 5:33 pm

    So what of this?

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/8/2011 @ 12:37 pm

  1592. 1589 Dustin

    I did? I’m late to the Neal stuff. I know the chatter but haven’t focused on it really. But I often forget what I’ve said earlier…so if you come across something, lemme know.

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/8/2011 @ 12:39 pm

  1593. Last time I checked in that thread the take-away was Nixon’s the one. Or a gang rapist, I couldn’t quite make it out.

    Comment by SarahW (af7312) — 7/8/2011 @ 12:57 pm

  1594. I don’t know what’s real anymore.

    Comment by SarahW (af7312) — 7/8/2011 @ 12:58 pm

  1595. I did?

    Yeah, you mentioned the general point that some of the possibilities here would mean we’re dealing with some monstrous people. I’ve been reflecting on that as I learn more about Neal and his work with Mr Kimberlin.

    I actually thought you were pretty specifically talking about the possibility Jenny is a literally discrete person who was being manipulated into thinking she was threatened by Lee/Lee supporters. But that may just be my imagination combined with my thoughts on this.

    RE your 1590, that’s probably not related to what we’re talking about. Other than it appearing that someone was being manipulated by someone they shouldn’t trust. I think Patterico was trying to make a specific point to someone, rather than giving us clues of tremendous importance.

    Comment by Dustin (b7410e) — 7/8/2011 @ 12:59 pm

  1596. Last time I checked in that thread the take-away was Nixon’s the one. Or a gang rapist, I couldn’t quite make it out.

    Comment by SarahW — 7/8/2011 @ 12:57 pm

    Yeah, it’s quite the trainwreck.

    Comment by Dustin (b7410e) — 7/8/2011 @ 1:02 pm

  1597. 1595 Dustin

    You’re right.

    See 1146, 1151, 1164.

    Really evil to make a pawn/patsy of an innocent JGMA, then threaten her life, and falsely implicate Lee in doing so. On that call, Lee thinks she’s behind it all and she thinks he’s the one. And neither are.

    Noticed that a deleted post here and there has screwed up the reference numbers in places.

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/8/2011 @ 1:18 pm

  1598. Eveerybody seems to be assuming this all began sometime early this year or late last year. I think that’s causing some of the confusion.

    I don’t understand why nobody seems to be considering the following theory:

    JG in Massachusetts is an alias. This alias was adiopted quite some time ago, maybe just for limited purposes. JG/MA sought to create some confirmation of this name and found a JG in California. She went a class in Nebraska where basically she pretended to be JG/CA. She then had a reference.

    The Boston police may not be like the police in Cambridge Massachusetts. Maybe they don’t ask for ID or state ID. n any case if she is associated with the Reeds, there is a known abaility to forge although mayeb teh faxed IDs weren’t good forgeries.

    JG/MA created the starchild account and later turned it over to some other people she was associated with,.

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (d3daeb) — 7/8/2011 @ 2:44 pm

  1599. 1597 Sammy

    Why didn’t we all think of that?

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/8/2011 @ 3:19 pm

  1600. Curious and contorted tale in’it?
    Maybe deputy da here should bring in Darryl Issa
    (CA) and sinlinlin (NJ) in for some questioning

    Dem blokes didn’t bark!

    Comment by JennyFTB (d143f7) — 7/8/2011 @ 4:31 pm

  1601. 1599 JennyFTB

    made ya look…

    we’re at 1600

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/8/2011 @ 4:52 pm

  1602. And she says: “You just have no idea how deep this goes.”

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/8/2011 @ 5:00 pm

  1603. koam–
    I’m curious about something if you’d care to comment–

    You are obviously one of the people on this site who is most deeply engaged in the Weinergate mystery. You’ve taken lots of notes, interviewed people, done internet research, followed twitter fights, explained things, and transcribed Lee’s radio shows. All very helpful. So here’s my question: If, in your mind, you were to go back, say two weeks to June 24, have you changed, enlarged, subtracted, been surprised by, or revisited, any aspects of the SSS (single sock solution) during that time? More simply, is your theory today basically/exactly the same as it was two weeks ago or have you honed it or perfected it in any way that you are aware of? This is not a trick question BTW.

    Comment by elissa (157504) — 7/8/2011 @ 5:23 pm

  1604. 1590 koam

    Ron says it ain’t him on Twitter.

    @ronbryn
    Ron Brynaert
    patterico.com/2011/06/30/som…
    That most definitely reads nothing like I would write, if anyone is wondering. If I go to jail for Dan, it’s me alone.
    57 minutes ago via web

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/8/2011 @ 5:47 pm

  1605. wtf?

    Comment by elissa (157504) — 7/8/2011 @ 5:59 pm

  1606. Hoot WTF indeed but interesting.

    Comment by Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c) — 7/8/2011 @ 6:16 pm

  1607. 1602 elissa

    I haven’t interviewed anyone or done more than read the blogs, comments, tweets, and do google searches for old info. There are a dozen others who have done as much…they’re just smart enough to take some time off while, um, nothing’s happening. And I’ve tried to either stay out of the disputes among commenters (see how I don’t usually bite back when mocked), or I’ve tried to smooth things over between others. and I have a lousy memory for what happened when and would have to go through and see what developments happened since June 24.

    I don’t know for sure what I thought on that date. Maybe I didn’t know what I thought then either. I think that at some earlier time was more down with Lee’s assessment of his JG call from June 19. (but not entirely by any means). I think Lee concluded that JGMA was the big kahuna, the real queen of all socks. For a while he was 90% sure (his words) that JG CA was the real caller. I was never there, and I tried to poke a little fun at the notion, calling her Cute Kitty Video Blogger. That theory was like “Deep Throat” from Watergate turned out to be Mary Richards (or Ted Baxter.) But I never held with Lee’s outright suspicions about most of what JGMA told him, because I thought the labeling of those things as lies lacked concrete proof.

    As time has progressed, I think there’s more evidence (circumstantial and logical) for a real JG MA who’s a patsy.

    OK, you made me look. June 24 is day of Lee’s follow-up radio show about JG MA call “Nikki Revealed for Real” “Conjecture is over.” after having confirmed JG MA ID w/ Prof Lew Hunter & wife.

    In fact, I did a summary there, at comment #91, in which I took Lee’s statements and sorted them into claimed facts and inferences. Here’s the list:

    Hope Lee does a writeup soon.

    What he states as facts:

    Starchild111 originally had name “Jenay”
    Starchild111 had links to UCLA Screenwritng School
    He and Preston got calls from a Jenny who
    1) said she started Starchild111
    2) had closed it
    3) claimed to receive death threats
    4) said she’s not into politics at all
    5) gave sob stories to Preston about family
    6) said she’s a real person from MA / UCLA
    7) said UCLA screenwriting prof could confirm her identity
    has MA accent
    6) probably other stuff I’m forgetting

    Lee says he found UCLA Prof and

    1) believes him to be a real person, author, well-known, etc.
    2) Finally tracked him down just this morning
    3) Prof and Mrs Prof both knew Jenny by name as real person who has been to classes, retreats, seminars, etc. (not just an online friend)
    4) that she’s from MA
    5) that she’s very political/liberal, like the prof
    6) prof says Jenny wouldn’t attack Weiner because she’s very liberal
    7) prof says she’s unstable

    After that, Lee piecines together of the story based on beliefs and deduction rather than hard facts that anyone has stated or confirmed. Not criticizing ..just trying to put things into separate lists…Above, the stated facts & Below, theories based on those facts.

    Lee’s theory is that

    1) Jenny was a paramour of Weiner’s who at some point got upset with him. (he dumped her, she saw other women he was engaging with, or something)
    2) Jenny converted account from “Jenay” over to “Nikki Reid”
    3) Jenny is also Mrs Patricia Reid, Marialena Alicea, and John Reid
    3) Jenny is probably the person behind @PatriotUSA1776
    4) Jenny is probably another unnamed sock,
    5) motivations of jilted & unhinged liberal woman

    Comment by koam — 6/24/2011 @ 11:53 am

    Since then, we got Lee to document the call himself, and he labeled all the things JGMA said as either truths or lies.

    http://leestranahan.com/weinergate-notes-on-my-619-jenny-george-call

    I still have big doubts about most of the things Lee decide were lies. He specifically declined to give reasons for each of those conclusions. I also have a huge doubt, shared with Lee, about Preston’s conclusion that Hunter is a phony guy with a fake web site who “punked” her and Lee.

    I think now more than back then, I accept the concept of a real JG MA who’s a patsy. She was called and threatened, not by Lee, of course, but by whoever’s behind all this. She did start Starchild111 and she did abandon it. Someone took it over – there are a thousand ways for that to happen, not the least of which is that most people use lousy passwords. The reality of JGMA is strongly underscored by her going to BPD. Lee’s statement about BPD closing the case is likely indicative of his exoneration. The threat callers were just pinning it on Lee, so the case is still open. I think the calls happened. This is just a theory. I can’t prove it all, but I think it’s a better theory than others.

    More that we’ve learned since June 24 points to a real, innocent JGMA. I’m more in that camp now than I was back then.

    I don’t think JR9 was Dan Wolfe. I did a detailed comparison of the two (because I think I was among the first of many to see similarities, including the idea that they could be women) and concluded that they’re not the same person.

    One question, can anyone figure out if JR9′s twitter stream from June 21 was written on a computer, phone, etc? I’ve seen where twitter shows certain apps where tweets originated. How do we find that for Reid’s initial Twitter awakening?

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/8/2011 @ 6:40 pm

  1608. 1604 elissa

    see 1590. Hit parade…flashback

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/8/2011 @ 6:42 pm

  1609. What’s WTF worthy about that? Are you guys just not following what he meant? He’s not saying his twitter comments aren’t his. He’s saying he wasn’t part of this conversation. His comment about going to jail is not related to anything specifically happening to him, but rather just noting his devotion and … dramatic tone (I’m trying to be charitable to him).

    Ron’s simply noting that he wasn’t part of that conversation. I totally believe him.

    Comment by Dustin (b7410e) — 7/8/2011 @ 6:44 pm

  1610. I’m talking about Ron when I say “he” in 1608. Koam cross posted on the more general topic when I typed it.

    BTW, good thinking, Koam.

    Comment by Dustin (b7410e) — 7/8/2011 @ 6:46 pm

  1611. 1609 Dustin

    Yes Ron’s denying he wrote that clue that Pat dropped a few weeks ago (ref 1590)

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/8/2011 @ 7:06 pm

  1612. –Sorry, Dustin @1608– The “if I go to jail” thing that was printed in bold just looked like a very strange thing to say. If it was on here before and explained, I apparently missed it. It still doesn’t make any sense but I’ll take your word for it.

    –koam @1606–thanks. When I asked my question I did not intend for you to have to go to all that much work, but it was interesting. I’m afraid I cannot assist you with your inquiry about JR9′s twitter feed, though, because I treat twitter as the devil.

    Comment by elissa (157504) — 7/8/2011 @ 7:13 pm

  1613. 1611 elissa
    re: 1608, oh not that strange

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/8/2011 @ 7:29 pm

  1614. Re: 1577 leilani

    My apologies if I wasn’t clear.

    For the record, I don’t ascribe to any theory and am mainly intrigued with the processes and approaches of those trying to unravel this entire set of mysteries. I am interested in how someone gets to a conclusion from a given bit of information, and what data is available to help sort it all out (since much of this story involves media that I don’t use). I am occupying my spare time learning by observation while I await the end of the story.

    I was not trying to justify the caller in any way. I don’t know the extent or content of the conversation between JP and JG/MA and have simply been trying to understand the pieces of the story that I have caught. Some of the commenters here have been kind enough to try to help me catch up.

    I had seen the reference to the caller’s inability to identify her elementary school and I know from personal experience that such inability can exist for perfectly valid reasons. So invalidating someone’s story – IF it was done primarily on the basis of that one point – and sometimes that seemed to be the implication – seemed like jumping to conclusions. However, another commenter set me straight and indicated that there were several other points in the conversation that added to credibility concerns. (Thanks to SarahW.)

    I never went to “Journalism 101” and don’t know what would be in the textbook regarding “scammer screening questions”. Can they sometimes result in “false positives”? Perhaps you would be willing to help me understand those issues better?

    Please and thank you.

    Comment by Sue (24e46b) — 7/8/2011 @ 7:41 pm

  1615. … Rosebud…

    http://www.nationalreview.com/sites/default/files/nfs/uploaded/u12/clapping.gif

    Comment by ColonelHaiku (822dce) — 7/8/2011 @ 7:59 pm

  1616. we had to kill the thread to save the thread…

    Comment by ColonelHaiku (822dce) — 7/8/2011 @ 8:01 pm

  1617. end at 1616?

    Comment by ColonelHaiku (822dce) — 7/8/2011 @ 8:01 pm

  1618. ClonelHaiku,

    I don’t think so, we have not resolved the initial assignment from Patterico.

    Joe

    Comment by Joe Smith (54c0c1) — 7/8/2011 @ 8:26 pm

  1619. Excellent point, Joe.
    Did someone provide a theory explaining the impossibility of the propositions? My impression is that most of the theories and information discussed suggest the propositions are possible.
    Have I missed a disqualifier?

    Comment by Sue (24e46b) — 7/8/2011 @ 8:48 pm

  1620. So ends a long day
    Confusion remains unsolved
    Morning seeks anew.

    Dear ColonelHaiku, my poor effort is intended as a compliment to your skills, which I have enjoyed.

    Comment by Sue (24e46b) — 7/8/2011 @ 9:10 pm

  1621. I’m not wedded to any particular theory in this affair, and I’m not sure who all the players are, but I believe the players all thought discovery would drop as soon as AW resigned. Nobody expected Patterico and Lee to stay with it. But, when they kept right on going, it threw the players into a panic, causing them to act on damage control.

    Patterico was contacted by JR (sock or not), so he worked that angle. In pressuring JR, NR appeared suddenly. I actually wondered if NR was
    a frustrated NR coming out from behind the screen. I believe NR is one of the significant players.

    After the frustrated NR arrived on the scene, the death threats began. Yet none of the initial threats threw anybody off the case. Then, after
    a couple of days, this JG call comes up, and she just happened to have started the Starchild 111 account.

    Now I’m not saying ths development to be insignificant, I rather see it as just one aspect of the whole. And, I can’t get by the feeling that this development was a diversion. It needed to have some significant truth in it for the ploy to work.

    You will notice how JR is no longer on the scene. What happened to him? Where did he go?

    Further, I still have significant questions about the role Gennette played in this. I keep wondering what she felt she saw that drew her into it? What was her relationship to AW? And,
    why she felt she needed to stick with Nickii for so long? Last but not least, why did she suddenely encourage Nikii to contact Weiner when she did?

    I guess what I’m trying to say is, why aren’t we discussing and inquiring into the various aspects
    of this story? JG is far from the only loose end.
    Perhaps, we need other puzzle pieces before the whole picture will be understood.

    Comment by cap'n john's nephew (d29614) — 7/8/2011 @ 9:26 pm

  1622. –Sorry, Dustin @1608– The “if I go to jail” thing that was printed in bold just looked like a very strange thing to say

    OK, I’ll grant it’s a strange thing to blurt out, Elissa. No, I have seen no explanation for that. I mean… he’s referencing the excerpted conversation talking about fighting a court order to reveal a source (Ron is saying he would keep the identify of PUSA76 a secret, even if held in contempt). But this is not a necessary observation, since that’s not the confidentiality being discussed in the email.

    Anyway, I guess I have to confess I’m used to Ron being… dramatic, so I didn’t see that as anything special.

    His denial of that excerpt didn’t even seem necessary to me.

    Comment by Dustin (b7410e) — 7/8/2011 @ 9:27 pm

  1623. Thanks for your kind words, Sue. With all the deep thinkers at Patterico, I’ve found that if I can’t dazzle them with brilliance, I can certainly baffle ‘em with BS!

    Comment by ColonelHaiku (822dce) — 7/8/2011 @ 9:29 pm

  1624. Sue,

    The original as offered by Patterico while plausable adds a layer of complexitity to what might be a very simple story. However, this entire #Weinergate has been more complex with many unexpected twists and turns.

    I don’t see the need for the hoaxter to hate Lee or Breitbart. Just a need to direct attention away from real trail to help provide cover.

    If Niiki Reid is fake, then John Reid is fake. I am still not sure that I agree that JG created starchild111, had someone else take it over “as-is” and then spend 5 months slowly switching the persona to Nikki Reid.

    Only “public” ties between any JG is the cache search results. We still don’t know why JP was trying to contact JG(CA) as early as June 14.

    The June 19th JG(MA) call claimed that she had created the startchild111 id but since she lied about many items as Lee documents

    http://leestranahan.com/weinergate-notes-on-my-619-jenny-george-call

    Joe

    Comment by Joe Smith (54c0c1) — 7/8/2011 @ 11:27 pm

  1625. 1620 capn

    After Patterico contact w/ JR, “NR appeared suddenly”

    Nikki Reid and Neal Rauhauser share initials. Presumably you mean Neal.

    Can we all please use Neal & Nikki in lieu of NR going forward?

    Did the threats not start before Neal became publicly involved by writing at Kos?

    Do you have some ideas about Gennette’s role?

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/9/2011 @ 4:35 am

  1626. 1618 Sue

    The person claiming to be “Jennifer George” who called Lee was a hoaxer.

    (If this is what you meant by “propositions.”)

    This is false. Pat may have thought it was possible on June 30, but since then the players have indicated that the JG MA who called Lee is real and have been circumspect about discussing her, indicating she’s real, she’s filed a police report, and that they don’t want to say too much in that regard.

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/9/2011 @ 4:42 am

  1627. Tweet from Patterico last night

    Spoke to detective on case where JG claimed @Stranahan threatened her. Not just unhelpful; appallingly rude.

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/9/2011 @ 4:45 am

  1628. #625

    Your right about the initials Koam, sorry if I confused you. Perhaps that was a type of slip. The possibility that neal could have been both Nikii and John is one of the scenerios my mind is open to. At least, he may have used the sock on occasion.

    This not to say I believe neal was a lone wolf. This was a group of people acting as a team. Some amongst us may be leaning to a theory that JG was the team leader, while others lean towards neal (neal is certainly an alpha personality). I tend to lean towards neal at this time, but I am open to other possibilites. The operational organization structure of this team is another area that needs further fleshing. If John Reid and family are socks, it provides structural information.

    Gennette claims she noticed Starchild/Nikii’s activities on tweat, and that is what drew her in.
    If that is true, I would love her to explain what is was in the Starchild/Nikii account behavior that caught her eye. She said Nikii’s attention to Weiner, but I’m having difficulty buying that.
    I mean, so what if somebody was following Weiner.
    What specifically made Nikii’s activity different from others?

    There are other hanging chads surrounding Gennette that deserve closer examination, as well.
    After all,she was having phone conversations with Wiener. How did that come about? Gennette seemed to indicate that it had to do with her little investigation. An investigation she wanted us to help her with, yet was far from forthcoming with details that would help.

    So, like yourself, I would like to hear people’s thoughts.

    Comment by cap'n john's nephew (d29614) — 7/9/2011 @ 6:49 am

  1629. Re: 1627 — Cordova’s involvement with Starchild111 stems from the fact that Starchild111 contacted her on 05/05 and immediately began trying to strike up a friendship.

    At that point, Cordova already knew a group of people were monitoring both her and Weiner’s twitter streams, because the group had already singled her out in multiple tweets.

    If you want more specifics on what happened when, up until June 7, here’s a timeline I’ve been maintaining.

    Because Google has at least temporarily removed its Realtime search functionality, some of the links no longer work.

    Comment by Greg (e0d909) — 7/9/2011 @ 8:12 am

  1630. I guess I didn’t code the link correctly. Here’s the timeline.

    Comment by Greg (e0d909) — 7/9/2011 @ 8:14 am

  1631. Greg, that must have taken a lot of work. Thanks for linking it. You might even want to link it to your name (throw the URL in the website block).

    Comment by Dustin (b7410e) — 7/9/2011 @ 8:50 am

  1632. 1627 capn

    I think GC’s story is that she got a follow or tweet from Nikki, wondered who Nikki was, and noticed that Nikki was following/tweeting other online GFs of Weiner. This made GC suspicious of Nikki’s motives. (Presumably, Girls who love Weiner, follow Weiner, not other Girls who love Weiner. With #bornfreecrew already out there, GC, smart lady she is, is suspicious of Nikki…she says from the get-go.)

    If I have that wrong, someone please let me know.

    Gennette, you’re the source, so please feel free.

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/9/2011 @ 8:53 am

  1633. 1627 capn
    1638 greg

    We should also note that #bornfreecrew , while portrayed as some kind of secret, sneaky right-wing hacker-ish society if you only read MSM, was, evidently, doing its observation and finger-pointing very openly on a day-to-day basis, for all to see. They were out there warning young girls about Weiner’s pattern of socializing online with other young girls. And this was public.

    Gennette, a fan and friend of Weiner, thought this #bornfreecrew activity was suspicious, harassment and somehow nefarious. Weiner played as if it were too. Other girls commented that they were opposed to being talked to by #bornfreecrew and its allies (moms, etc.) who warned them. Instead they defended Weiner as a hero. (JR9 said as much. In that case, it may be an act. Who knows?)

    But now we know what Weiner was actually up to with his camera, twitter, facebook, email, and phone and a bevy of young ladies.

    And we know that the warnings from #bornfreecrew to young ladies, particularly, Ethel, who is a real high school girl, were admirable warnings.

    The papers didn’t really cover it that way.

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/9/2011 @ 9:19 am

  1634. #628

    Greg, Thank you for straightening me out on that key point. Not certian how I go turned around on that point. I appreciate it very much.

    I’ve tooke the time to read through your entire timeline, and I can’t say enough how helpful it is.

    Thank you for sharing your extensive work.

    Now, I’m going to read it again, and think this thing through again.

    Comment by cap'n john's nephew (d29614) — 7/9/2011 @ 10:10 am

  1635. Wow! How did *taken* morph into “tooke” ?

    Comment by cap'n john's nephew (d29614) — 7/9/2011 @ 10:14 am

  1636. Wittier,

    I asked Gennette about her communcation with Rep. Wiener before the May 27 package tweet when she was here on the blog pushing the JR thread.

    She was not intersted in “her” but wanted to focus on finding JR. Again part of my theory of individuals with an agenda trying to direct focus away from them.

    I personally don’t see her as a true victim, she was active in the communication with Rep. Weiner before the May 27 tweet heard round the world. She continues to play a victim but there are many missing facts to support her as a true random victim of the package tweet.

    Joe

    Comment by Joe Smith (54c0c1) — 7/9/2011 @ 12:37 pm

  1637. 1635 Joe

    I don’t understand.
    First sentence OK.

    2nd: Gennette didn’t want to answer your questions about her communications history with Weiner prior to the 27 photo tweet. Is that what you are saying?

    In what way is this a response to my posts 1631 & 1632?

    I understand you have a theory about Gennette’s history. I don’t think I referred to any of that in my recent posts. I’m just trying to follow the flow here.

    If we want to shift to what you’re discussing, my observed pattern for GC is that she tries to answer truthfully when she chooses to chime in and can add value. She doesn’t feel it’s her obligation to tell all, and certainly not here where she hasn’t been consistently treated with deference and respect. This is neither for nor against her; just my observation.

    I asked if she’d like to chime in on my summation in 1631 in response to cap’n's 1627, to indicate if I made any errors in recollection. I don’t expect GC to come forth with more info about what transpired privately between her and AW.

    But maybe she’ll surprise us all.

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/9/2011 @ 2:42 pm

  1638. Koam,

    I agree, Gennette could shed considerable light.
    I also agree with Joe’s point. IF her desire for the discovery of JR and others were sincere, she would be willing to pitch in. Short of that, I’m not sharing as high a regard for her as you do.
    My mind is open though.

    I, like others, have many questions concerning many facets of this story. And, while I may focus on this one or that one at any given time, I don’t want ot loose the big picture.

    As to what I feel about the JG/Hunter connection:
    The way JG uses Hunter as a reference is quite odd. Also, that Hunter would feel the need to suggest JG is liberal, AND a little off, sets off many red flags.

    How much do we know about Hunter? I mean really know.

    Also, what are your feelings and instincts concerning JP insiting to Lee that this goes
    too deep?

    Comment by cap'n john's nephew (28dda5) — 7/9/2011 @ 4:10 pm

  1639. 1637 cap’n

    GC & JR are potential sources of information, so I figure until we know more, I don’t need to judge them – or they’ll clam up. I think GC got more than she bargained for multiplied 10,000 times. Whatever she was doing wasn’t so bad. She evidently talked to JP and JP spun a story in GC’s favor. (for example, the story doesn’t state the key fact that GC is the one who brought up the topic of AW with Nikki. Yet the NYT story says Nikki is the obsessed one….but fails to mention that she never broached the topic with GC for a month. It’s not all that important, but there was a choice in how it could have been reported. We had to wait for JR9 to show up here and release documents for GC to tell that side of it.)

    I don’t think an innocent JG using Hunter as a reference is strange in any way. Others disagree. Look: She’s scared. She calls Lee. He says, “Call my friend JP of the most prestigious name in news, the NYT. She’ll tell you I’m no killer. See, I have friends at NYT who know something about this case too. I’m not dangerous.” JP asks JG for some info about her, and a reference. JG’s not supposed to give a friend or relative, who are not impartial. JP asks, “do you know anyone who’s got a public background, or who’s verifiable as an independent party.” At that age I would have given a professor’s name as well. 100% sure I would have. Hunter has a long history and is a known person. If what Lee and Ron say that JP said about Hunter is true (that, is, if she actually said Lew’s a faker and this goes way deep), I think that’s crazy talk. Whether she meant it or not is another thing altogether. She has been known to say things to try to get what she wants. (Her approach to JC CA, is an example…of course, in both cases, she didn’t get what she seemed to want and was lightly ridiculed by both Lee & JG CA.) And, certainly, JP could know things that we haven’t been told yet.

    Perhaps it goes deep. I dunno. But doesn’t go deep on the back of Lew Hunter being a phony, based on what I’ve seen.

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/9/2011 @ 4:35 pm

  1640. 1639 koam

    1639 is a scenario based on cap’n's question of what could have happened. The quotes are conjecture about how it may have gone down, given that we’re not being told the details.

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/9/2011 @ 5:48 pm

  1641. Re: 1626 koam @ wittier
    Ok, thanks. That explains the Update.
    Let me ask, though, whether it has been established that the person who called Lee is the same person who called the police? (Is it not possible that one person could have called Lee and another person could have been threatened and called police?) It seems like a reasonable assumption that there was only one person, but this story seems to involve so many reasonable assumptions that somehow go awry, that I am fascinated by the twists and turns. Please note that I am not suggesting anything or accusing anyone; I am just curious about what links have been resolved and to what extent and in what manner.

    Comment by Sue (24e46b) — 7/9/2011 @ 6:02 pm

  1642. Re: 1630 Greg
    Thanks for the timeline. It is very helpful for someone like me that needs to go back and see it in writing a few times.

    Comment by Sue (24e46b) — 7/9/2011 @ 6:04 pm

  1643. I want to thank you, Koam, for all the hard work you have done on this, as well as, the patience to put up with questions from people like myself.
    It is appreciated. I’ve been trying to catch up, and keep up on all the details in between life.

    I finally did some reading about Mr. Hunter, and I don’t think him involved, at all.

    In contimplating your take on JG, I’m wondering
    of the people surrounding JG. Somebody close enough to use, assume, or steal her twitter account.

    Sue’s question is a good one also.

    So many details, so much verification needing pursuit, and so few new revelations.

    Regardless, this story wouldn’t be where it is without your steadfastness, Koam.

    Comment by cap'n john's nephew (28dda5) — 7/9/2011 @ 6:37 pm

  1644. Re: 1636 Joe
    Gennette may have already answered this elsewhere and I’m sorry if I missed it and am going over old ground. But what reason does Gennette give for wanting to “focus on finding JR”?

    Comment by Sue (24e46b) — 7/9/2011 @ 7:56 pm

  1645. I also want to thank you, koam, for the transcriptions and responses and other notes and summaries you have provided. They are wonderful aids and much appreciated.

    My thanks to all the commenters here who have been so patient and informative.

    Comment by Sue (24e46b) — 7/9/2011 @ 8:09 pm

  1646. 1641 Sue

    I think this has been discussed. I think the JG MA who went to the police also discussed Hunter, but not sure where that’s cited. Since Lee believes almost nothing about this JG, he’d likely have thought that it could be a different person and have gone into that. Her report & interview must have included mentions of calling Lee & Preston. Lee would have to have said that to the detective. Pat tweeted last night about a rude & unhelpful Boston detective, but don’t know if it’s the same one or not.

    Here’s Lee’s first writeup about police calling him.
    http://leestranahan.com/jenny-george-files-police-report-accusing-me-of-making-threats-against-her

    Detective Thornton
    http://www.bpdnews.com/2010/03/18/detective-ellis-thornton-awarded-a-commissioner%E2%80%99s-commendation/

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/9/2011 @ 8:57 pm

  1647. Sue & Wittier,

    No there has been no conformation that the JG(MA) that called Lee is the same actual person that filed the police report in Boston.

    That is part of Patterico’s set of assumptions on this blog entry. There could have been a Hoaxser on the phone and a real JG(MA) that received a threat or threats from a “Fake” Lee or “fake” Lee followers.

    Joe

    Comment by Joe Smith (54c0c1) — 7/9/2011 @ 9:47 pm

  1648. Sue,

    Back to Gennette not answering my questions:

    In this blog thread: http://patterico.com/2011/06/26/a-couple-of-random-quotes/ GC was active so I asked a key question about her communication with Rep. Weiner.

    173.Hi Gennette,

    Welcome back and Happy belated 22nd Birthday!

    One thing in this whole #weinergate that continues to puzzle me was concerning the last communication you had with Rep. Weiner before he sent the package picture on May 27.

    We know he tweeted the #Thats545InSeattleIThink and that you retweeted it but there was a several hour gap before the fateful tweet that brought you into the public discussion.

    05/27/2011 16:00 @RepWeiner tweets that he is “Heading to 30 Rock to chat with Rachel at 9. #Thats545InSeattleIThink”
    05/27/2011 19:30 @GennetteNicole re-tweets @RepWeiner’s “30 Rock” message along with “#Thats545InSeattleIThink”
    05/27/2011 20:00 @RepWeiner tweets “@GennetteNicole http://yfrog.com/h25m3luj”
    05/27/2011 20:04 @RepWeiner tweets “Killng me!! RT @kknapp1: @RepWeiner that is a tragedy! #EpicGame”
    05/27/2011 20:05 @RepWeiner tweets “my tivo ate the hockey game! #WhoCanISue?”

    Joe

    Comment by Joe Smith — 6/26/2011 @ 4:01 pm

    Her response was:

    183.@JoeSmith
    Thanks Joe. And it puzzles me also. We hadn’t communicated that day at all unless you count my retweet. I’m only answering that because you prefaced the inquiry with a “happy belated birthday” wish.
    Like I’ve said, I’m interested in finding info on the Reids, not answering questions about AW.

    We now know that she was DMing Nikki and actually got the communication going between Nikki and Rep. Weiner based on the JR doc dumps. So her involvement is much earlier than the May 27 package event. She is a key player in the “entire” event!

    Joe

    Comment by Joe Smith (54c0c1) — 7/9/2011 @ 10:03 pm

  1649. Thank you all for the help and clarifications.
    I am going back through the timeline and notes and summaries and hoping for inspiration to strike… :-)
    I hope everyone stays safe and I will look forward to more information to come out soon.
    Thanks again.

    Comment by Sue (24e46b) — 7/10/2011 @ 6:47 pm

  1650. Call the time patrol:

    I discovered an anachronism:

    The comment that was NOt left by Jennifer George on the St Louis activist website;

    http://stlactivisthub.blogspot.com/2011/06/is-starchild111-actually-jennifer.html

    That goes:
    Excuse me could you please provide a contact number? I am Jennifer George from Los Angeles and I am getting calls now because of your blog. I’d like you to take this down. I have nothing to do with your ridiculous story. I will be calling the police as I am getting threats due to this. What is your number?

    June 19, 2011 5:11 PM

    Was NOt theer ion June 19. I saved the text of taht page on June 21, and although all the updates are there, and teh Seattle545 comment, that is not theer.

    Comment by Sammy Finkelnan (d3daeb) — 7/11/2011 @ 10:06 am

  1651. 1650 sammy

    Old news.

    JG CA has said she did not leave that comment on STLAH. She specifically denied leaving that comment already, a long time ago, after she was directly asked about it. This is documented on her own site on July 1.

    That comment on STLAH’s blogspot is apparently mischief.

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/11/2011 @ 10:23 am

  1652. At around 3:40 PM Eastern Daylight time on June 21, 2011, the Jennifer George comment on the STLA website that is dated June 19, 2011 5:11 PM (just three minutes after the post by Anonymous) was NOT there. Not there.

    It *was* there in the printout of the page I made on July 7 and it still there now. But it was not there on June 23!!

    June 23 was already after there had been two updates, and even after teh second update was updated with the words “So far, it is not entirely clear whether that exdplanation is even possible” crossed ouyt and presumably the words “Sounds like Twitter does make accounts available after 30 days of deactivation, so this story is possibly true” added.

    Just like now, there were 3 comments to that post. But the first comment was one dated June 19, 4:48 PM, that said that there was someone in Canada who had used the username starchild111, with links included. This has disappeared.

    The third comment link, when I saved the contents of the page was the seattle545 comment dated
    June 20, 2011 2:26 AM with the fake Weiner-Gennette DMs that “reveal” that Gennete controls the Nikki account and 4 overlapping starchild111 scvreencaps of public tweets posted in mixed up order – probably coming from two widely different time periods, with the transitiion in the middle of of one of teh screen caps. What seattle545 postyed was piosted before it was really ready.

    It doesn’t say it is from seattle545. All comments on the STLA website except maybe from
    people who registered are posted as comming from Anonymous. But that’s the second mass commenty posting by seattle545. You apperently don’t need to supply a name on the STLA website. Anyway that’s the third one.

    The second one on June 23 is now the first, and INSERTED IN THE MIDDLE after June 23, 2011
    3:40 pm is:

    “Excuse me could you please provide a contact number? I am Jennifer George from Los Angeles and I am getting calls now because of your blog. I’d like you to take this down. I have nothing to do with your ridiculous story. I will be calling the police as I am getting threats due to this. What is your number?

    June 19, 2011 5:11 PM”

    Shall we say that Adam copied soemthing over from private mail?

    But “Jennifer George” says she doesn’t have a contact number! That sound slike maybe she has no way to leave a message. I haven’t studied the STLA website so maybe itcould have been a private comment.

    Interestingly it doesn’t appear AFTER the June 20 comment, but right in time order.

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (d3daeb) — 7/11/2011 @ 10:35 am

  1653. Sammy,

    Wittier is quite correct. JG(CA) denied leaving the message on the STLA Adams blog post. She also posted the twiter exchange with Lane Lipton @lanelipton on her page: http://www.jennifergeorge.com/weiner.html and she answered Lane Lipton @lanelipton on twitter again denying that she had authored that anon message.

    Just an attempt at more misdirection by someone…

    Joe

    Comment by Joe Smith (54c0c1) — 7/11/2011 @ 10:51 am

  1654. I see that there is a sidebar on the STLA page that says: (I didn’t capture that part)

    Anonymous tips? Send email to stlactivisthubtips@yahoo.com

    So the fake Jennifer George *could* have emailed it less than 2 hours after Adam posted his message at Posted by Adam at 3:16 PM – BTW, two hours after and she’s already getting calls and threats?

    But getting it in email doesn’t explain why, if Adam transfereed it over later from email to the public comments – sometime after 3:40 PM June 23 EDT – it appears BEFORE the seattle545 comment left on June 20, 2011 2:26 AM.

    I don’t know – maybe the website software automatically adjusts position.

    The real Jennifer George of California said on June 30 – she wasn’t asked about it until June 30 – a further indication that it appeared on the website later than when it is dated – that would be why she wasn’t asked about it before – that she did not author that comment:

    http://www.jennifergeorge.com/weiner.html

    UPDATE, JULY 1, 2011: NEW CORRESPONDENCE.

    7:25 pm, June 30, 2011
    [http://twitter.com/#!/LaneLipton/status/86621368833155072]
    From: @LaneLipton Lane Lipton

    I’m curious if @blogarsay authored this comment: tinyurl.com/3cjt5ys & if so, why she thought story was “ridiculous” Or was it impersonator?

    9:36 pm, June 30, 2011
    [http://twitter.com/#!/blogarsay/status/86654278915194880]
    From: @blogarsay Jennifer George

    @LaneLipton I did not author that comment.

    10:01 pm, June 30, 2011
    [http://twitter.com/#!/LaneLipton/status/86660562049695746]
    From: @LaneLipton Lane Lipton.

    @blogarsay that makes sense – thx J

    The tinyurl.com/3cjt5ys gets you right to the spot in the STLA webopage where the comment appears.

    Another thing I don’t necessarily find suspicious that the search that turns up Jennifer George already has Jennifer George in the search. He says he looked at old searched and it is posisble and even likely a variety of seasrch terms were used and he;’s just finding it again.

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (d3daeb) — 7/11/2011 @ 10:57 am

  1655. Perhaps all the comments were in moderation? That’s one way to account for the odd-date comment. Perhaps Adam put that one up some days after it was submitted?

    Who knows. Clearly someone wanted to point at an LA JG. Ms. BostonJG (lee’s caller) seems to have dissembled about her residence in LA.

    I’m bored of idiot trolling by now.. I’m not sure I care anymore.

    Comment by SarahW (af7312) — 7/11/2011 @ 11:01 am

  1656. 1652 – 1655 Sammy, Joe, Sarah

    What if it were JGMA who left that message on STLAH blogspot?

    Good thought by Sarah that comments could’ve been in moderation. Also JGMA was on that day saying she was in LA (possibly because she feared the threats & wanted to divert people from her real location, or possibly because she’s full of it).

    Does anyone know if there’s a way to manipulate the dates on comments left on blogspot? From that incident where a certain blogger mentioned in this exchange posted a faked wordpress post falsely dated a year ago, so as to appear momentarily to be highly scandalous, we learned that the owner, at least, of a wordpress blog can slap whatever date s/he wants on it. I doubt that works for outside commenters, haven’t tried.

    As for the “quick response” to the discovery of the name, things were moving quickly then, right? I think the day before (June 18) is when az5thdstrct circulated the starchild111 screen cap with “Jenay”. Then June 19 was both the STLAH “Is StarChild111 Actually ‘Jennifer George?’” post and also when Lee got the call. I don’t know if we know the date that JG MA allegedly received the threatening calls. Do we know if she has said that they were received after this STLAH item went up or after Lee was talking about it?

    Sammy, good thought on how JG (false LA) comment on STLAH didn’t appear at the time stated and how she wasn’t asked about this or it wasn’t discussed until much later. (Moderation, tampering, Adam catching up, who knows?)

    Is STLAH the type to have his fingers in this to a greater extent than has been discussed? Certainly he has a confrontational past (“archenemy” of Dana Loesch, it would seem, from their heated exchanges caught on video. He also said at one point that accusations against DL & AB (e.g., that they had hacked Weiner’s accounts) were overstated in this case ).

    We now have two events tied to STLAH – the “discovery” of the JG name and the appearance of this comment (“I’m JG LA and I’ve been threatened. What’s your number?”) after the fact, which is possibly within the control of STLAH. Has he been asked about why it appeared at a later date anywhere (or do any of his notes explain why)?

    By the way, I figured out that one way that STLAH could have organically figured out the JG name was to assume Jenay stood for Jennifer, then search on Google for Jennifer @starchild111. (“Jenay + Starchild111″ don’t get you to JG name. You have to make the assumption that Jenay is really a Jennifer.) There are other ways as well, and these were available on June 18. STLAH didn’t specify the method used to find the full JG name.

    Background post by STLAH on Weiner & Breitbart/Loesch

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/11/2011 @ 11:43 am

  1657. STLAH archives on Weinergate. Used “Weinergate” tag provided by STLAH.

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/11/2011 @ 11:48 am

  1658. Sammy,

    Your are correct that Adam has edited the blog entry and the comments are slightly different.

    I would suggest you ask Adam why he made the canges but the content remains consistent.

    Also thr same poster 545inSeattle Posted by: seattle545 at June 20, 2011 03:14 AM (NUnGN) over on Ace’s blog: http://minx.cc/?blog=86&post=317751#c13441264 ( look near the bottom of the thread, Post #270 ).

    Also on Lee’s blog on June 20 here at patterico.com: http://patterico.com/2011/06/20/betty-veronica-solved/comment-page-1/#comment-806864

    Joe

    Comment by Joe Smith (54c0c1) — 7/11/2011 @ 11:58 am

  1659. Again, don’t forget that Jennifer Preston was looking for Jennifer George on June 14, well before she wrote the article on June 17 and the follow on find of the cached Jeany / starchild tweet data.

    Joe

    Comment by Joe Smith (54c0c1) — 7/11/2011 @ 12:10 pm

  1660. 1659 joe

    I lost you after “June 17.”

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/11/2011 @ 12:15 pm

  1661. 1659 joe

    I wonder what Ron knows about that June 14 reach out by Preston – how it originated, who found the JG name and how they did so? I think I saw Ron explain that JP was interested in the story pretense that she used to reach out to JGCA but that if she got her foot in the door would have brought up AW. I think I read Ron saying something along those lines, but it might have been someone else commenting. Not sure where that was, would have to research to confirm. It was a semi-rationalization for the approach to JGCA under those pretenses, but it made clear that the underlying purpose was to talk Weiner.

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/11/2011 @ 12:26 pm

  1662. 1659 joe

    I wonder if Lee ever asked Preston how she got JG name days before he did. They were still pals at one point.

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/11/2011 @ 12:31 pm

  1663. and how she landed on the same, incorrect, JG (CA) or if she emailed every JG she found (or at least more than that one).

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/11/2011 @ 12:34 pm

  1664. Wittier,

    Ok, Jennifer Preston sent an email to Jennifer George on June 17 with a vauge story line about doing a social media story.

    The JP story on June 17, exposes the starchild and mariannela twitter ids as sock puppets. On June 19, AZ finds the startchild cache with Jenay and and then the 123people.com searches turn up a connection between Jennifer George and starchild.

    Then a JG(MA) calls Lee on June 19 claiming to be JG(CA) but having nothing to do with Rep. Weiner sting other than creating the starchild twiter id back in 2009.

    She also claimes to be a student in LA and that someone was able to find her in the UCLA directory. ( appears to be a lie since she is really in Boston when she files police report ).

    However nobody seems to be able to find her phone name and the JG(CA) denies the whole situation.

    The JP article runs June 17: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/18/nyregion/fake-identities-were-used-on-twitter-to-get-information-on-weiner.html

    So how was Jennifer Preston onto any Jennifer George as early as June 14!

    Joe

    Comment by Joe Smith (54c0c1) — 7/11/2011 @ 12:38 pm

  1665. 1664 Joe

    first date you meant to type was June 14, date of Preston email to JG CA

    Jun 14, 2011 at 1:30 PM
    Preston, Jennifer wrote:
    Subject: New York Times reporter

    Hi Jennifer,
    I would love to talk to you about a story that I am doing. Might you be available? My direct line is 212 556 4472.
    Thanks! Jennifer

    Staff Writer, Social Media
    The New York Times
    jepresto@nytimes.com
    facebook.com/nytjenpreston
    (212) 556-4472

    _________________________

    On June 19, JGMA calls Lee. JG MA is not pretending to be that specific JGCA. The Cali & UCLA connections were merely coincidental between the 2 JGs. JGCA is a decade older than JGMA (we deduce). I don’t see JGMA as trying to point Lee to JGCA. JGMA didn’t know that Lee had just emailed JGCA. That was all a coincidence. It wouldn’t have made sense for JGMA to try to pretend to be that JGCA as JGCA is clearly not the person who JGMA described herself to be on the phone with Lee and JP. In fact JGMA tells JP who she is by referring JP to Lew Hunter. Lew is not going to say that she is JGCA. He doesn’t know JGCA. JGMA was just trying to not say where she really was – she was afraid of being killed that day (or she was making the whole thing up, but not pointing attention toward innocent JGCA).

    _____________

    I think Preston had researchers (Ron says he was doing research for JP and I think Ron says he may have been involved in researching the false IDs from the Reids. I think Ron may have said that he had some knowledge of the nature of the reach out on June 14, but I’m not sure if it was him or where I read it (I haven’t looked for it.))

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/11/2011 @ 12:57 pm

  1666. Correction to 1652, 1654.

    The way I had it in Number 1650 (shows as 650) is correct.

    I saved the file of the text cature of the StlA post on June 21 at 3:40 PM, and at that time it did not contain the “Jennifer George” comment complaining about the post linking starchild11 to the name Jennifer George.

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (d3daeb) — 7/11/2011 @ 2:43 pm

  1667. You know Koam, I think I disagree with that assessment, at least in part.

    JGMA was deliberately misdirecting, and I think deliberately creating ambiguity.

    The history of the sudden appearance of the comment may have a simple explanation, but I would like to hear it.

    Comment by SarahW (af7312) — 7/11/2011 @ 3:07 pm

  1668. 1667 SarahW

    I know you have a different idea.

    But Lee had fed us JG CA on a 90% sure platter. The call came in 15 minutes after he emailed JG CA. So he was convinced, and stayed convinced for days. But it was a coincidence.

    There is a JG MA who did take Lew Hunter’s course in Nebraska. Lew Hunter also teaches at UCLA. JG CA went to UCLA some decade + ago. JG CA also did work at UCLA on staff a year or two ago. She’s not in LA anymore. She hasn’t been a student for over a decade. JG MA told Preston that she knew a famous UCLA prof named Hunter. Preston called Hunter, confirms. Lee called and confirmed. Hunter knew JG MA was from MA. JG CA is not from MA.

    If JG MA wanted to pretend to be JG CA, she would have just given info that was much closer to JG CA’s info, which is there for all of us to see. Why would JG MA say she’s a student at UCLA now if JG CA hasn’t been one for a decade +? If JG CA is erroneously still in the staff directory at UCLA, and JG MA is pretending to be JG CA, why not say she’s a staffer, rather than a student? What’s the point of pretending to be JG CA and getting all the info wrong?

    It’s a coincidence.

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/11/2011 @ 3:29 pm

  1669. Someone should ask Adam if he knows why the 6/19 comment from the fake JG CA showed up on STLAH at a later date.

    Has anyone tested to see if comments on that site go to moderation automatically? It would seem reasonable to guess that it might be the case as he probably has enemies and might want to filter them out as needed.

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/11/2011 @ 3:32 pm

  1670. ==It’s a coincidence==

    Koam, there are coincidences and then there are ultra super duper coincidency coincidences. I don’t know the answer and I have no grand theory to offer. But you still have a hard sell convincing me that the mere 15 minute differential between Lee’s email to JGCA and his receipt of a call from JGMA is not related in some way or other. We just don’t yet fully understand how it was related, IMO.

    Comment by elissa (686a5f) — 7/11/2011 @ 3:56 pm

  1671. 1670 elissa

    The email was sent to JG CA. Another JG called. Why is that not a coincidence? The name Jennifer George was in the mix, on the table, publicly discussed. What does the email have to do with the call? nothing.

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/11/2011 @ 4:44 pm

  1672. 1670 elissa

    I’m still confused. Is Lee’s email being monitored so someone could see when he sent something to JG CA? Or did he tell someone that he was sending the email and that person somehow knew to alert JG MA to make the call? Or are we back to JG CA is a suspect?

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/11/2011 @ 5:17 pm

  1673. How come just after I mentioned Ken Danieli aka Koam aka Wittier connections to Kiva, Twitter went down?

    Do any other socks also work with them?

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/11/2011 @ 6:45 pm

  1674. I’m a longtime reader of this site, but I’ve never commented here before.

    And I sure am confused by this story.

    As far as I can gather, Koam or Wittier and Lee Stranahan and Neal R. and thugs from Daily Kos did something or really didn’t because they like to play games instead.

    Maybe there’s more information to be gathered on why so many “liberals” spent July 4th menacing innocent people in these links:

    http://kdanieli.com/id1.html

    http://www.crainsdetroit.com/article/20110703/SUB01/307039980/microloan-website-funds-five-startups-after-launching-in-detroit

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/11/2011 @ 6:47 pm

  1675. Hi, Ken!

    INFILTRATION MARKETING. Danieli pioneered a bold, new, grass roots approach to forging powerful consumer relationships with trademarks. Created for Josta, spanning from the street to the Internet, Danieli’s strategy has been expanded become an integral part of the company-wide Pepsi marketing approach: to drive emotional connections with consumers for the Flagship Pepsi and Mountain Dew Brands and new products like Sierra Mist Lemon-Lime and Mountain Dew Code Red, in North America and Internationally.

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/11/2011 @ 6:48 pm

  1676. I find my stuff from digging, not getting tip sheets from strandedwind etc.

    Wittier:

    Graduated in Top 1% of Class. Deans List. President, Lock Honorary Service Society. Beta Gamma Sigma-National Management Honor Society. Scholarship.

    Wow, impressive resume, Ken. Too bad instead of doing good, you decided to rewrite crappy Superman 3.

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/11/2011 @ 6:49 pm

  1677. the long slog to post
    one six seven five blocked by
    one six seven four

    Comment by ColonelHaiku (f2ed50) — 7/11/2011 @ 6:50 pm

  1678. Does any silly socks want to ask me questions?

    Like how does it feel to be menaced for weeks when you don’t work for a media organization and are only trying to protect scared sources?

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/11/2011 @ 6:51 pm

  1679. damn you ron brynaert
    you have effed it all up now
    better waich your back

    Comment by ColonelHaiku (f2ed50) — 7/11/2011 @ 6:52 pm

  1680. and then watch it, too.

    Comment by ColonelHaiku (f2ed50) — 7/11/2011 @ 6:54 pm

  1681. I always watch my back, cowards.

    But can any sock tell me if it’s just a coincidence or a prank that my landlord has the same name as this guy:

    http://www.linkedin.com/pub/dir/Vito/Conigliaro

    Vito Conigliaro
    Mr at Sviluppo Italia Sicilia
    Palermo Area, Italy | Information Technology and Services

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/11/2011 @ 7:09 pm

  1682. Is the Chris Ceriello on my Facebook the same one I went to high school with…or is he this guy:

    http://dya1700ny.tripod.com/id1.html

    Antpharm team manager
    Chris Ceriello: When Louis first told me about DYA, I just started cracking up. until he told me he was serious. so I did’nt even care because when Louis told me about them, they did’nt even seem like competition. They just seemed like a couple of losers looking to chase an impossible dream. DYA isn’t even a team, to me it looks like a freak show or a mental institution. So before anyone calls DYA and Antpharm a rivalry, think about this. In order to have a rivalry, you have to have some competition. DYA is not our competiton, DYA are our bitches.

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/11/2011 @ 7:11 pm

  1683. Maybe you stupid haiku socks used your unAmerican censorship hacker tricks to block this last time, try again:

    I’m a longtime reader of this site, but I’ve never commented here before.

    And I sure am confused by this story.

    As far as I can gather, Koam or Wittier and Lee Stranahan and Neal R. and thugs from Daily Kos did something or really didn’t because they like to play games instead.

    Maybe there’s more information to be gathered on why so many “liberals” spent July 4th menacing innocent people in these links:

    http://kdanieli.com/id1.html

    http://www.crainsdetroit.com/article/20110703/SUB01/307039980/microloan-website-funds-five-startups-after-launching-in-detroit

    Hi, Ken!

    INFILTRATION MARKETING. Danieli pioneered a bold, new, grass roots approach to forging powerful consumer relationships with trademarks. Created for Josta, spanning from the street to the Internet, Danieli’s strategy has been expanded become an integral part of the company-wide Pepsi marketing approach: to drive emotional connections with consumers for the Flagship Pepsi and Mountain Dew Brands and new products like Sierra Mist Lemon-Lime and Mountain Dew Code Red, in North America and Internationally.

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/11/2011 @ 7:16 pm

  1684. Seriously, though, you guys might as well ban books.

    Using cretin hackers to block tweets and make comments disappear is Stalinesque.

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/11/2011 @ 7:21 pm

  1685. Colonel Haiku: I think we need a Rod Serling inspired haiku regarding the last few posts. Brrrr.

    Comment by Simon Jester (1d2f37) — 7/11/2011 @ 7:26 pm

  1686. Is that the best you got, Simon Jester? Don’t you have any socks that can improvise?

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/11/2011 @ 7:30 pm

  1687. Is everybody involved – the so called performance artists, mainly i mean – in the smear campaigns against journalists who critique Markos just an utter criminal?

    Or do they get shown out of context quotes that make them decide that helping to menace people who don’t say things they agree with is the right thing to do?

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/11/2011 @ 7:34 pm

  1688. How many Billionaires for Bush are involved?

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/11/2011 @ 7:34 pm

  1689. http://youtu.be/SdQLCdeksiA

    Comment by Simon Jester (1d2f37) — 7/11/2011 @ 7:35 pm

  1690. I can’t think of a more “wretched hive of scum and villainy” then the one I jostled seven years ago. You Daily Kos thugs are scoundrels and should go form a communist simpleton anarchist jerk nation in a galaxy far far away.

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/11/2011 @ 7:40 pm

  1691. As if I would click on anything you post, hacker Simon Jester…

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/11/2011 @ 7:41 pm

  1692. Hi Ron,

    Did you discover the Jennifer George name for Preston? If so, how did you figure out the name?

    Did you select the JG in Cali for Preston to email on June 14, days before STLAH (supposedly) figured out the Jennifer George name?

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/11/2011 @ 7:49 pm

  1693. I also find it interesting that my landlord, Vito Conigliaro is on twitter and is following an obvious spammer bot, too.

    http://twitter.com/#!/vito_120689/followers

    Here’s the followers of only follower of guy with same name as my landlord:

    http://twitter.com/#!/Ariana_LE/followers

    And here are that spammer is following

    http://twitter.com/#!/Ariana_LE/following/people

    I like the whole global thing, you hackers got going on…it’s really precious. Nothing like celebrating July fourth week with anarchist hackers from around the world.

    BUT WAIT NOTHING TO LOOK AT HERE REAL PEOPLE AND SOCKS:

    I read on Huffington Post it’s really the government that assumes fake identities, harasses and stalks people, so it must be the truth:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/17/online-persona-management_n_837153.html

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/11/2011 @ 7:50 pm

  1694. Hi, Ken,

    I don’t reveal sources to journalists or clowns or thugs or hackers.

    Besides, all you do is manufacture evidence and fool stupid journalists. You are clowns.

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/11/2011 @ 7:52 pm

  1695. Are you that delusional, that any women you’ve harassed, Ken, and it’s mostly you doing the harassing here and on twitter, would believe your stupid misdirection and lies?

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/11/2011 @ 7:54 pm

  1696. Do you think anyone truly believes Jen Preston at The New York Times outed you? You did that yourself, obviously, you clown.

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/11/2011 @ 7:55 pm

  1697. But I’m more curious about this whole ridiculous Chinatown scam y’all are pulling now, anyway.

    Forget Weinergate.

    Any hackers want to brag about that?

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/11/2011 @ 7:57 pm

  1698. Ron,

    And why do you think Preston told both you and Lee that she figured out that Lew Hunter had “punked us” and that Lew’s web site was fake? Does that make sense or was Preston working some angle?

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/11/2011 @ 7:57 pm

  1699. give it a rest, idiot, you guys make prank calls, and fake tweets, and fake facebook postings, and you terrorize countless people across countless sectors of american life

    you’re the howard stern kevin smith crazies working the angles? we’re trying to be serious people and report news….you are hoods.

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/11/2011 @ 8:01 pm

  1700. i have close to ten sources…..i also have close to 30 stupid sock sources…i also know of well over ten people you’ve victimized in just this part of your marketing campaign.

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/11/2011 @ 8:02 pm

  1701. This thread is surreal. Is ronbryn crazy, or just acting?

    Comment by JD (e0b833) — 7/11/2011 @ 8:03 pm

  1702. How much are you getting paid, Ken?

    You guys spend close to 18 hours a day conspiracy theorizing, menacing and hacking?

    Did you learn it at Lee’s Horror Film Boot Camp?

    http://www.dreadcentral.com/news/36381/want-make-a-horror-film-attend-horror-film-boot-camp

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/11/2011 @ 8:04 pm

  1703. JD,

    You’re never funny. I mean seriously, goofballs, who do you think you are fooling? You are menacing punks.

    I disagree profoundly with almost every conservative that posts at this site, but you guys are unamerican sickos for hurting people and shutting them out and menacing and thugging.

    You make the Al Capone and Tammany Hall scandals look angelic because at least they didn’t delude themselves into thinking they were doing right and they had the guts to use their hands instead of moronic simpleton wit.

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/11/2011 @ 8:06 pm

  1704. Um, Ron? I’m not a nefarious sock puppet of some scheming evil genius. You certainly seem…excitable. The link, by the way, was to a Rod Serling youtube video.

    I wish you well, and peace.

    Comment by Simon Jester (1d2f37) — 7/11/2011 @ 8:08 pm

  1705. Ron Brynaert, I’d advise going to your pantry and throwing out any coffee you see that is not labeled “DECAF”.

    Immediately.

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 7/11/2011 @ 8:11 pm

  1706. Simon,

    I sincerely apologize. I realize now you are a genuinely nice person. Could you please provide an email address or phone call so I could contact and apologize personally to you?

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/11/2011 @ 8:12 pm

  1707. this is someone doing performance art, correct? Or is this what paranoia looks like?

    Comment by JD (e0b833) — 7/11/2011 @ 8:12 pm

  1708. SPQR, that made me laugh—it could have led to keyboard damage, but I am careful about drinking and reading these days.

    Patterico, is this person for real?

    JD, I don’t know.

    Comment by Simon Jester (1d2f37) — 7/11/2011 @ 8:13 pm

  1709. Ron – Simon is one of the kindest peole you will ever encounter, and yu sole to him like the Rowhowser’s of the world deserve to be spoken to. Why in the world, after reading this thread, would h give out his phone or email address to you? Or, are you another one of those Neal R puppets?

    Comment by JD (e0b833) — 7/11/2011 @ 8:15 pm

  1710. JD, have twitter?

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/11/2011 @ 8:15 pm

  1711. Usually, Simon Jester says something nasty like calling someone he disagrees with a “bitter and highly medicated little poseur.” But sometimes he pretends to be human not reading a script that’s meant to smear people as crazy:

    http://patterico.com/2011/05/28/woman-who-got-photo-in-weinergate-story-wrote-newspaper-article-on-meetings-stars-via-twitter/#comment-797250

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/11/2011 @ 8:16 pm

  1712. Nope, twitter is of the Devil.

    Comment by JD (e0b833) — 7/11/2011 @ 8:17 pm

  1713. okay, sock puppets, can you please do me one favor…and make me the fall guy in all your Weinergate theories:

    I’m all the socks. I’m all the hackers. Or it’s all in my crazy imagination.

    Just stop terrorizing everyone else.

    Pick on me instead, and if you ever want to come say “hi” to me in real life, you know where i live…plus all the addresses I used to live, it seems.

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/11/2011 @ 8:18 pm

  1714. Why do you think there are sockpuppets here, Ron? Is it because Lee posted here or something else?

    Comment by DRJ (fdd243) — 7/11/2011 @ 8:22 pm

  1715. I can haz puppets?

    Comment by JD (e0b833) — 7/11/2011 @ 8:24 pm

  1716. Real people don’t spend all of July 4th conspiracy theorizing at a conservative website because they get off in a sick way by mocking people they disagree with and scaring innocent women.

    Do you ever stop playing games?

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/11/2011 @ 8:24 pm

  1717. ronbryn Ron Brynaert
    I left a few comments here starting at #1673 just now, that is if the hacker haven’t hidden them all yet with code: patterico.com/2011/06/30/som…

    I saw this at Twitter…

    Ron Brynaert, I don’t believe there is any code here. The commenters that have responded to you are long-time commenters. I think most of us are at a loss to understand why you’re thinking those who have responded are socks.

    Comment by Dana (4eca6e) — 7/11/2011 @ 8:26 pm

  1718. Brynaert, evidently making up stuff amuses you.

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 7/11/2011 @ 8:27 pm

  1719. Hey, Koam, did you used to post as danthrax at Daily Kos, just a wild guess is all…

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/11/2011 @ 8:29 pm

  1720. I love games. I heart them. Especially football games. And basketball. I truly hope you find the help that you appear to need.

    Comment by JD (e0b833) — 7/11/2011 @ 8:30 pm

  1721. Or is danthrax just a friend of yours…since i see both your names in this forum:

    http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=373002

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/11/2011 @ 8:30 pm

  1722. that’s kind of a sick thread, koam, do you like young child stars?

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/11/2011 @ 8:32 pm

  1723. Brynaert, sock? You need to get your s**t in a sock. That’s the only relevant use of the noun here.

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 7/11/2011 @ 8:33 pm

  1724. Hey, Ken,

    Maybe you can add a picture to this post, soon:

    http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=383990

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/11/2011 @ 8:35 pm

  1725. Coo coo. Coo coo.

    Comment by JD (e0b833) — 7/11/2011 @ 8:36 pm

  1726. a fifth dimension
    beyond that which is known to
    man there dwells Brynaert

    Comment by ColonelHaiku (cc5c75) — 7/11/2011 @ 8:38 pm

  1727. Koam’s helpful hacking tips in forums:

    http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=189381

    “Pretty simple instructions, unlocks the iphone 100% (with 1.02 firmware), works with any GSM provider.

    Finally i can buy an iphone!!”

    http://www.broadbandreports.com/forum/remark,2107736

    “If there are 1,000 ways to hack past a router, let’s try and implement just one of them. I don’t have an opinion as to whether it can be done.”

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/11/2011 @ 8:39 pm

  1728. What would make someone say Lew Hunter’s site is fake and that its fakeness suggests that this whole thing goes way deep (suggesting powerful, scary, ruthless, etc. actors behind it)?
    http://lewhunter.com/

    She said it to two of her allied journalist/researchers, perhaps in confidence, and then they each let it out that she’d said it.

    But why would she say that to each of them?

    Maybe she didn’t say it. Maybe she believes it. Maybe she doesn’t believe it; maybe she’s not nutty, but says nutty things to them, sort of knowing that they’d let it out that she’d said it, marginalizing them in the process?

    Why?

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/11/2011 @ 8:40 pm

  1729. twelve dancing rabbits
    sing about toilet paper
    I give you Brynaert

    Comment by ColonelHaiku (cc5c75) — 7/11/2011 @ 8:40 pm

  1730. Brynaert, are you utterly ignorant of the fact that unlocking one’s own phone to use it on other carriers, (or with Android phones, to install other versions of Android) is not exactly a moral turpitude offense?

    Grow up.

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 7/11/2011 @ 8:41 pm

  1731. there are weapons that
    are simply thoughts and then there’s
    Mister Ron Brynaert

    Comment by ColonelHaiku (cc5c75) — 7/11/2011 @ 8:42 pm

  1732. Re: 1678 Ron Brynaert
    I understand you have been trying to protect scared sources, so may I pray for you and those you have been working to protect, sir?

    Comment by Sue (24e46b) — 7/11/2011 @ 8:44 pm

  1733. This is interesting post by Koam:

    http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=418145&page=41

    “Why does the OP say she died when CNN just posted this: http://www.cnn.com/2011/CRIME/01/09/…ex.html?hpt=T1 saying that she’s communicating now.

    ….

    Did you call NPR or other media sites and spread misinfo after the shootings like what seems to be going on now, Ken?

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/11/2011 @ 8:45 pm

  1734. Time is one-way street
    There is madness in town square
    Do NOT panic, Ron

    Comment by ColonelHaiku (cc5c75) — 7/11/2011 @ 8:47 pm

  1735. Brynaert, you’ve spammed the thread with links to someone named “koam” discussing the perfectly legal act of unlocking a cellphone, and discussing the potential threats to his own router/firewall.

    If the purpose of your useless spam was to somehow imply that the koam above is a person with criminal tendencies, you have in fact only established that you are an ignorant moron.

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 7/11/2011 @ 8:47 pm

  1736. pray for the colonel
    picture the future robots
    can be most helpful

    Comment by ColonelHaiku (cc5c75) — 7/11/2011 @ 8:50 pm

  1737. Anyone with the starchild111 phrase and a bit of patience could link the JG name to it. A simple Google search for “starchild111” brought up the 123people page and if you looked to see where starchild111 was on the page, it showed as a Twitter Nickname for JG. All that was needed to get that far was Google, the starchild111 handle, and opening links and looking. (So when did Jen Preston and her researcher(s) know “starchild111”?) But how does one get from JG as a name to JG/CA in particular? There are a lot of JG’s out there, so why center down on just one or two? I am guessing it must have taken some inspired search techniques or special contacts, perhaps.

    Comment by Sue (24e46b) — 7/11/2011 @ 8:53 pm

  1738. what’s that I hear now?
    one seven three nine unless
    I am late to game

    Comment by ColonelHaiku (cc5c75) — 7/11/2011 @ 8:53 pm

  1739. Damn!

    Comment by ColonelHaiku (cc5c75) — 7/11/2011 @ 8:54 pm

  1740. Ron seems to have no ulterior motives whatsoever. I will for sure click every link he offers at least two times. =)

    Comment by Noodles (3681c4) — 7/11/2011 @ 8:55 pm

  1741. Ken Danieli aka Koam aka Wittier liked this article on Facebook: “Outlaw Justice: When Hackers Retaliate Against Cyber Security”

    http://www.politicsdaily.com/2011/03/10/outlaw-justice-when-hackers-retaliate-against-cyber-security/

    http://www.facebook.com/pages/Politics-Daily-Investigations/301319910700

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/11/2011 @ 8:56 pm

  1742. 1737 Sue

    Please demonstrate your Google search and just how simple it was. Please do the actual search, starting with “starchild111″ only, dated prior to June 18, and show how you get to the name.

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/11/2011 @ 9:00 pm

  1743. So the point of your spamming, Brynaert, really is to make yourself look like a moron?

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 7/11/2011 @ 9:00 pm

  1744. Sorry i don’t know the difference between legal and illegal or immoral hacking (although i think hacking government agencies qualifies as the last).

    So help me.

    Why is Ken’s name on this? What does it mean?

    http://www.attackvector.org/enumerating-email-addresses-using-search-engines-the-return/

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/11/2011 @ 9:00 pm

  1745. Brynaert, yes, you are indeed succeeding at making yourself look like a moron spamming away like a meth head begging for quarters.

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 7/11/2011 @ 9:03 pm

  1746. attack vector and
    whiskey tango foxtrot ron
    what you want from me

    Comment by ColonelHaiku (cc5c75) — 7/11/2011 @ 9:04 pm

  1747. Is this the same Ken?

    http://www.yatedo.com/p/Ken+Danieli/normal/086cad25a4cf5a085bb268d5f958005a

    Do you live in Canada or work for Pepsi or ride in a small car with 30 hacker clowns, Ken?

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/11/2011 @ 9:06 pm

  1748. Brynaert, you seem to be the clown here. A spamming clown. Time to grow up.

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 7/11/2011 @ 9:09 pm

  1749. Who is Ron Brynaert? Why is he involved in this? Is someone paying him? Is he a dupe? Stayed Stuned…dun dun dun.

    Comment by Noodles (3681c4) — 7/11/2011 @ 9:10 pm

  1750. oh can’t wait…is the velvet revolution paying me or italian fascists or russian television?

    LOL

    anyway, just leave my sources and THE INNOCENT WOMEN ALONE!!!

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/11/2011 @ 9:14 pm

  1751. Ron, are you related to the Petranos?

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/11/2011 @ 9:16 pm

  1752. Oh, no! Not the dreaded ALL CAPS attack!

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 7/11/2011 @ 9:16 pm

  1753. Who are the Petranos, silly sock daleyrocks?

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/11/2011 @ 9:18 pm

  1754. Ron – Do your own research, sockpuppet.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/11/2011 @ 9:20 pm

  1755. I lol’d @ silly sock daleyrocks! hahaha

    Ron, you must just be trying to play some kind of angle right?

    From what I have gleaned from all your posts (and JP’s) is that you guys suspect someone like Rocksem or Wittier as the culprits of all this. Is that right? Did you or her come up with that theory? Both maybe?

    Comment by Noodles (3681c4) — 7/11/2011 @ 9:23 pm

  1756. 1749 Noodles – if you’re really asking what he has to do with this:

    Jennifer Preston is the NYT Reporter who wrote the article revealing that Tommy Christopher’s sources, “Betty & Veronica, & Betty’s mom” (Nikki, Marianela, & Patricia) had submitted fake IDs to Tommy.

    You can look up the person you’re asking about, who reports that he was doing research for Preston on this story. He also said that JP promised payment to him, but he didn’t get paid. (She said she’d ask about at at NYT, I think.) He may have done some work on researching those fake Cali IDs and he may have done some work on figuring out the Jennifer George name for Preston, although I’m not sure exactly.

    He published some of Preston’s DMs & emails to him to document this on his Twitter (click his name and scroll back through 6000 tweets or do a good google or twitter search) and on a blog.

    http://whyareweback.blogspot.com/

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/11/2011 @ 9:24 pm

  1757. Brynaert, accusing people of being sockpuppets is actually a vio of Patterico’s rules. Especially since you have no evidence and likely don’t even know what you are accusing people of, given your abject ignorance of all things internet.

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 7/11/2011 @ 9:28 pm

  1758. Thanks Koam. I was semi-serious. Really just trying to figure out what his angle is now. It seems very suspicious to me.

    Comment by Noodles (3681c4) — 7/11/2011 @ 9:29 pm

  1759. SPQR you might just be the only non sock here, aside from me, so perhaps you need the coffee.

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/11/2011 @ 9:30 pm

  1760. “I’m a longtime reader of this site”

    Ron, I’m not feeling it.

    “but I’ve never commented here before.”

    Popping your cherry doesn’t have to be this painful, embarrassing or long lasting. Just sayin’.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/11/2011 @ 9:31 pm

  1761. It has always seemed to me that Pat and Lee were playing good cop bad cop and so were JP and Ron.

    Comment by Noodles (3681c4) — 7/11/2011 @ 9:31 pm

  1762. He is probably Huma Weiners sockpuppet.

    Comment by DohBiden (15aa57) — 7/11/2011 @ 9:31 pm

  1763. Brynaert, you don’t even know what “sockpuppet” means. there are several regulars here and you continue to demonstrate that you are not the sharpest knife in the drawer.

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 7/11/2011 @ 9:32 pm

  1764. SPQR – He’s definitely a few cans short of a six pack.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/11/2011 @ 9:34 pm

  1765. 1758 Noodles
    I don’t think that’s doable or valuable

    Comment by koam @wittier (234826) — 7/11/2011 @ 9:34 pm

  1766. daleyrocks sock,

    i was mocking 100 comments left by your friends, above, as you well know…everything is a game.

    and SPQR, again, instead of fighting with a probable friend, do a search on the name of the socks you’ve aligned with on this page and every other one since June and mark the times they speak nonsense and contradict and take turns defaming all the people who run this website.

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/11/2011 @ 9:36 pm

  1767. Brynaert, oh no, I’m fascinated at the idea that you think that unlocking a phone is a moral turp offense to discredit someone.

    That one will have me all atwitter for days, I assure you.

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 7/11/2011 @ 9:38 pm

  1768. I’m hoping that for your next trick, you’ll call for my arrest and prosecution for rooting my phone and installing cyanogenmod on it.

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 7/11/2011 @ 9:40 pm

  1769. Hey, Brynaert, anyone in this screen cap remind you of yourself?

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 7/11/2011 @ 9:42 pm

  1770. My gut tells me Ron just wants some “socks” to click his links and see what he can see. Which would seem to say that he has no clue what’s going on. Of course I could be wrong. I have been many times before.

    Comment by Noodles (3681c4) — 7/11/2011 @ 9:42 pm

  1771. Is there an explanation for the above … besides the obvious: that Brynaert’s pharmacy is out of stock ?

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 7/11/2011 @ 9:55 pm

  1772. http://www.facebook.com/PoliticsDaily/posts/156413591082977

    Ken Danieli
    I can relate to your repo job. One of my first jobs in HS was sales at Hahne’s dept. store (now Lord & Taylor), where there were no cash registers and all sales were written up on slips by hand. We had terminals, the size of small calculators, on which we’d obtain authorizations for purchases on the store’s credit card. (Dept stores didn’t take Amex, MasterCharge, etc. back then.) The terminals went down frequently. I “hacked” (cracked) the code system so that I could predict the authorization code with 100% accuracy. So when terminals were down I could render a sale “approved” (even though it hadn’t really been and it was a small risk to the system if the customer turned out to be a deadbeat or the card was stolen). (The proper method would have been to phone in the sale for an auth #. But, of course, all the phone lines would be tied up when the credit terminals were down so the customer might have to wait for 20 mins while a sales associate was on hold waiting for the auth.) So the cracked code made for a lot happier customers and all of my older coworkers were pretty amazed that, at 17, I could figure out the right code. They’d all come to me for the digits rather than wait on the phone as they were supposed to.

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/11/2011 @ 9:55 pm

  1773. Brynaert, now you are going to prove that you don’t understand credit card processing networks too?

    You really shouldn’t trouble yourself, we could have guessed easily.

    By the way, Brynaert, do you know how magnets work?

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 7/11/2011 @ 9:57 pm

  1774. This could very well be the real Ron Brynaert from what I can tell. It’s not his first comment here, although he may not remember commenting a long time ago. Just so you all know. If it is, my considered opinion is that he should seek immediate help. If I had a patient in this state, I’d make sure a doc 1013′d him ASAP as a potential danger to himself and/or others.

    Comment by Stashiu3 (44da70) — 7/11/2011 @ 9:59 pm

  1775. So … Stashiu3 … you are thinking something stronger than caffeine, eh?

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 7/11/2011 @ 10:02 pm

  1776. And I snag the DOI comment.

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 7/11/2011 @ 10:04 pm

  1777. Whatever the cause, he’s even more unhinged than his ranting tweets about not getting paid. There’s not enough caffeine in the world to explain this.

    Comment by Stashiu3 (44da70) — 7/11/2011 @ 10:10 pm

  1778. Ron – You’ve been tweeting that you need help for weeks. Ask Larisa Alexandrovna. She’s bug nucking futs for conspiracy theories and creative writing. She’ll help a colleague out!

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/11/2011 @ 10:11 pm

  1779. Ron – Scary Larry Johnson is also probably available.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/11/2011 @ 10:13 pm

  1780. http://www.facebook.com/pages/Gary-Tuchman/28262511963?sk=wall

    Ken Danieli
    Gary…Ken from Myles at BU (’79-’83)… congrats on the reporting on CNN page that Obama’s COLB “is a computerized abstract of his birth information.” This is the first mainstream media report in which the nature of that 2007 document is accurately described. What I’d ask someone in the Obama campaign is why they had that document printed out in 2007, 8 months before they published it in response to questions. It seems convenient and prescient to have had that version on hand when the question arose. What was up with that? Best, Ken
    April 26 at 10:41am · Like · Comment

    Ken Danieli reference: http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com​/2011/04/25/trump-claims-o​bama-birth-certificate-mis​sing/
    April 26 at 10:41am

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/11/2011 @ 10:17 pm

  1781. That’s not helping, Brynaert.

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 7/11/2011 @ 10:20 pm

  1782. http://www.facebook.com/notes/tea-party-patriots/demand-to-defund-npr-grows-as-newly-released-video-confirms-bias/10150111036788823

    Ken Danieli

    Remember that all the things that NPR’s Ron Schiller said about the Republican Party (white, conservative, un-Christian-Christians, middle-American, gun-toting, racist, xenophobes) …secretly caught on tape…were the same things Obama said about blue-collar Democrats who were voting for Hillary Clinton in droves….secretly caught on tape at a small private fundraiser with wealthy San Franciscans.

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/11/2011 @ 10:20 pm

  1783. Oh, wow, Brynaert, that one … that’s the smoking gun.

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 7/11/2011 @ 10:21 pm

  1784. yep, koam aka wittier is a staunch republican..hey, whomever’s paying, he’ll support, i guess:

    http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=2208286653&v=wall&viewas=0

    Ken Danieli Help Hillary Clinton get VP nod:

    There is currently a poll on the WSJ – Wall Street Journal that asks which person Obama should pick for VP.

    Hillary is currently #1 with 27% of vote out of 7 candidates.

    We can help build her lead!

    http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/d​ocuments/info-flash08.html?project=OVOTE​08
    July 26, 2008 at 6:12pm · Like · Comment

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/11/2011 @ 10:22 pm

  1785. Brynaert, next you should search this website for any signs of koam.

    Comment by SPQR (26be8b) — 7/11/2011 @ 10:23 pm

  1786. Larisa and Larry are not my friends, sock puppets. Everyone who knows me personally knows about the former, and my attacks on larry johnson are all over the net:

    http://whyareweback.blogspot.com/2006/06/defending-howard-kurtz-part-1001.html

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/11/2011 @ 10:24 pm

  1787. http://www.boomantribune.com/story/2006/6/21/32418/6117#18

    Me to Larry Johnson:

    Your comment was despicable.

    And it’s not just right wingers who have criticized you.

    Rove-like tactics, my ass. You used Coulter-like tactics. Rove isn’t dumb enough to sign his name next to his hate.

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/11/2011 @ 10:27 pm

  1788. Is Socrates really Neal R or just connected?

    Here’s him sliming me:

    Regular blogger? I had like five posts in the history of brad blog….and he tried to sucker me into doing his blog for free in march..

    http://allaircraftarenotinvolved.freeforums.org/fintan-hertzberg-kos-du-brad-bev-and-the-raw-story-t160-30.html

    There was a regular blogger during BradBlog’s early days. Apparently he had the scoop on Jeff Gannon. His name is Ron Brynaert. Guess where he works now? At the Raw Story with Larisa Alexandrovna he is the executive editor. It now appears that convicted bomber Brett Kimberlin bankrolled both Raw Story, BradBlog, and AfterDowningStreet. We have Burch stalking a sex therapist and messing around with Wikipedia.

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/11/2011 @ 10:30 pm

  1789. Re: 1742 koam @ wittier
    I don’t know how to do a search prior to a particular date, sorry.

    On the morning of June 19th, I had heard about the “starchild111” name. I don’t do Twitter or Facebook, but out of curiosity, I did a Google search. I only entered “starchild111”; that was all the information I had. I opened each link that came up and did a Command F for “starchild111” to see where it was on the linked page. There were some UFO related things. And there was a 123people page, specifically when I clicked the link it took me to http://www.123people.ca/s/jennifer+george and if you go down to IMs/Microblogs, there is a Twitter entry showing Jennifer George with Nickname: starchild111. But the Twitter page was gone when I clicked the link on the page.

    I mentioned it in comment 185 at 11:03 am on 6/19/2011 on http://patterico.com/2011/06/18/timing-weinergate-nikki-reid/comment-page-5/
    By then the name “Jenay” was being mentioned, so I speculated that maybe “Jenay” was perhaps “Jen(nifer) A.” or something similar.

    I also mentioned it in comment 1285 of this thread on 7/4/2011 at 5:47 pm.

    I discovered later that the 123people.com page had the same Twitter link for the JG name. http://www.123people.com/s/jennifer+george under IMs/Microblogs on page 3. I will note that the JG/CA @blogarsay Twitter name shows up separately in those lists.

    But all I started with on June 19th was “starchild111” entered in a Google search and a bit of methodical curiosity. I assume if someone else knew the handle earlier on, as they very likely did, then they could have done the same.

    What I still don’t understand is how we got from Jennifer George, which has a great many search results across the country, to one or two or even a few possible choices for the owner of “starchild111” Twitter account. I understand that JG/MA told Lee that the account was hers (past tense). However, I don’t understand the link that led anyone to JG/CA, or anywhere else in particular, for that matter. I kind of assumed I missed the clues because I don’t Twitter or do Facebook, and maybe there was something there that others picked up on.

    Comment by Sue (24e46b) — 7/11/2011 @ 10:31 pm

  1790. “Larisa and Larry are not my friends”

    Hah! A diversionary comment. Create the illusion of dissent.

    We are on to your game Ron.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/11/2011 @ 10:34 pm

  1791. you slime have tarnished my name with jason leopold’s for years…he was fired by raw story…and i have publicly battled him for years…and when i took over raw story…i began freezing LA out partly because she supported bullshit “rove indicted” story and is tight with larry johnson and other freaks in vr.

    I do admit not realizing that brad was just as slimy as the rest…but anyway…they’re all working with you guys anyway….so you can slime good journos…peace, losers….

    http://newsbusters.org/node/6563

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/11/2011 @ 10:36 pm

  1792. Ron – Raw Story is a cesspool of conspiracy theories. You teethed on stories like Weinergate.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/11/2011 @ 10:37 pm

  1793. Why is Ron harassing our sources?

    LEAVE OUR SOURCES ALONE!!!

    Comment by Noodles (3681c4) — 7/11/2011 @ 10:38 pm

  1794. daley, go have some more beers with liberty chick and keep thinking you can sell me as some kind of larisa bad journalism accomplice.

    i have tons of IMs, emails, etc that show the truth.

    i never would have posted any docs at bradblog, anyway, suckers, because i didn’t at raw story…

    i shut out two Democratic campaigns for giving me phony stories….huff ran them instead.

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/11/2011 @ 10:38 pm

  1795. bye, socks, you all sound rather disjointed, get back on script and i’ll see you in my philip k dick dreams!

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/11/2011 @ 10:40 pm

  1796. Why is Ron spending July 12 outing sources? Does he not know on this day in 1984 Walter Mondale announced that he had chosen Representative Geraldine Ferraro of New York as his running mate?

    Sounds kind of unpatriotic to me.

    Comment by Noodles (3681c4) — 7/11/2011 @ 10:41 pm

  1797. Mr. Brynaert, I am praying for you and for those you are trying to protect. Take care, sir, and best wishes to you.

    Comment by Sue (24e46b) — 7/11/2011 @ 10:43 pm

  1798. Ron- I don’t know you and I don’t know your circumstances, but the way you sound online is very similar to people I’ve known who were having manic episodes. Have you ever been diagnosed with such a condition?
    I think we could understand you better if you could just rest and then comment.
    If this is not the case, I apologize. We all need a little help sometimes, no?

    Comment by MayBee (081489) — 7/11/2011 @ 10:55 pm

  1799. Maybee, I thought you weren’t a sock. Guessed wrong.

    Anyone else borderline want to comment on my mental condition – which is straight from strandedwind script – when confronted by a critic?

    Thank you, so much, Sue. There are tons of commenters that have been mocked and intimidated off this website. I can’t wait until they can all come back someday.

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/11/2011 @ 11:01 pm

  1800. Sue,

    Everyone locked on to Jennifer George in CA becuase of the UCLA follow on the Jenay twitter screencap.

    Once you got to the jennifer+george+ucla JG(CA) is the first name that Google returns.

    The bigger question why was JP contacting JG(CA) on June 14!

    Note for Wittier: the Google search results have expired but on June 19 at 12:30 PM ET, I was able to find hits only with starchild111. There were hits in 123people.fr / .de / .ca ( multiple countries ).

    Joe

    Comment by Joe Smith (54c0c1) — 7/11/2011 @ 11:10 pm

  1801. Maybee, I thought you weren’t a sock. Guessed wrong.
    Anyone else borderline want to comment on my mental condition – which is straight from strandedwind script – when confronted by a critic?
    Thank you, so much, Sue. There are tons of commenters that have been mocked and intimidated off this website. I can’t wait until they can all come back someday.
    Comment by Ron Brynaert — 7/11/2011 @ 11:01 pm

    Maybee’s not a sock, or perhaps you don’t really know what the word means. Also, I’ll comment on your mental condition. You have one. Get help.

    No charge.

    Comment by Stashiu3 (44da70) — 7/11/2011 @ 11:23 pm

  1802. MayBee, you are far too kind. I’m still not sure if this is performance art or not. But I tend to trust Stashiu3′s opinion on this kind of thing.

    Later, we all getting together for the Trilateral Commission meeting, right? What was the password, again?

    Sorry.

    Comment by Simon Jester (1d2f37) — 7/11/2011 @ 11:28 pm

  1803. yawnnn,,,

    Comment by starchild111 (5807dc) — 7/11/2011 @ 11:36 pm

  1804. Maybee’s right that his ranting is consistent with someone in a manic phase, whatever the underlying diagnosis might be. He’s also shown significant paranoia, delusional thinking, perseveration (combined with tangential thinking… not an easy thing to do), and grandiosity. How much is from a pathological process and how much springs from an underlying personality disorder would be a lively debate among professionals.

    The bottom line is that he really needs to seek help, get properly diagnosed, and started on treatment. He sounds ready to implode and quite possibly become dangerous to himself and/or others. I’m not kidding or taunting him when I say that. I’ve seen worse, but they were already inpatients.

    Comment by Stashiu3 (44da70) — 7/11/2011 @ 11:39 pm

  1805. yawnnn,,,
    Comment by starchild111 — 7/11/2011 @ 11:36 pm

    Sock, using an anonymizer. Yawn indeed.

    Comment by Stashiu3 (44da70) — 7/11/2011 @ 11:42 pm

  1806. ron dear,

    being unemployed takes it’s toll on people and those unemployment checks run out. however, the government pays well if you can show you have some mental disorder or appear to.

    luv starchild111

    Comment by starchild111 (5807dc) — 7/11/2011 @ 11:48 pm

  1807. Actually, Sue, if you’re the same one that left all the above comments, obsessed with a woman people keep smearing who has nothing to do with any of this…and who lol is pushing the nonsense that Preston outed koam (instead of you hackers hacking her account)….i take that back.

    Your role is to appear reasonable once in a while…but you socks are silly if you think the harassed woman in california is going to blame anyone more than Lee for harassing her. And every time one of you chuckleheads refers to her it’s harassment since she has nothing to do with this.

    And um my saying leave her alone is not pulling her into this.

    See you later, Andrew Breibart aka Andrew Breitfart aka ?

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/11/2011 @ 11:49 pm

  1808. In normal society, people don’t mock anyone for being crazy.

    So if I were unfortunate enough to be suffering from some mental illness, no one reasonable would take the word of people who mocked me.

    And, um, only Kos peeps would be mocking here, now, since there isn’t any conservative with a real name attached attacking me.

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/11/2011 @ 11:52 pm

  1809. In normal society, people don’t mock anyone for being crazy.
    So if I were unfortunate enough to be suffering from some mental illness, no one reasonable would take the word of people who mocked me.
    And, um, only Kos peeps would be mocking here, now, since there isn’t any conservative with a real name attached attacking me.
    Comment by Ron Brynaert — 7/11/2011 @ 11:52 pm

    Happens all the time in normal society, it’s just not nice.
    “If” seems to have been passed about 20 posts ago. It has reached the point of “what type?”.
    Finally, I am a conservative and have a real name here. It’s just not the one on my birth certificate. There are reasons for that. My online persona is a pretty accurate reflection of my real-life persona… about 90% “okay-guy”/10% ass (okay, maybe 60/40, I wouldn’t quibble over anything in between.)

    Seriously, get help.

    Comment by Stashiu3 (44da70) — 7/11/2011 @ 11:59 pm

  1810. Ron, do you smoke a lot of weed?

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/12/2011 @ 12:10 am

  1811. smoking weed can make peas look really really tasty

    Comment by happyfeet (3c92a1) — 7/12/2011 @ 12:19 am

  1812. This keeps getting more and more surreal!

    Ron, I’m sure your research skills are teh bomb, but don’t you think that commenting now just drives the story even more?

    Comment by ∅ (e7577d) — 7/12/2011 @ 3:11 am

  1813. and Pat was thinking – hey – lets have a monster thread – what could go wrong?

    Comment by EricPWJohnson (a60276) — 7/12/2011 @ 3:21 am

  1814. 1773. “do you know how magnets work?” made me laugh out loud.

    Cleanup in aisle three. Cleanup in aisle three, please. Holy @#$%buckets. I think for a small while, Ron convinced Jen Preston that she might not even be Jen Preston, that everything she knew was wrong, and she communicated that to Lee. The other possibility is that she just doesn’t want people to know what she knows.

    Ron is either
    1) acting, which I doubt, but if he is, he’s doing a heckuva good job.
    2) having some kind of paranoid meltdown
    3) has been getting spun in a million directions by some evil players who have sent him into a paranoid meltdown.

    Ron, for what it’s worth:
    1) Not every KOAM on the Internet is KOAM/Wittier.
    2) His name emerging from a harvester script that uses Pepsi as an example is hardly noteworthy.
    3) Not every Ken Danieli will be KOAM/Wittier
    4) If it is him, showing an interest in hackers is not such an outlandish thing.
    5) If it is him, having supported Hillary Clinton is not such an outlandish thing.
    6) If it is him, jailbraking an iPhone is hardly an outlandish thing.

    I’m sure there’s much more as I stopped reading halfway through.

    Remember how in A Beautiful Mind, John Nash has filled a room with yarn connecting a million things he’s pasted to the wall? Spiderwebs of information, all seemingly connected, but the guy is stark raving bonkers.

    Seriously Ron, you seem like a good guy operating on information overload, and possibly cracking under the weight of some people trying to spook the @#$% out of you. I’ve given you a share of crap, which you probably deserve, but I don’t like to see you going over the edge.

    Even if you are privy to real clues of What This Is All About (which I doubt, but must allow the possibility), in the state your in, you’re in no position to unravel them.

    I can see where a campaign to drive you bonkers (a short ride?) would be attractive to players out there, be they politically motivated, or just in it for the lulz.

    If you’re being threatened, call the police. If others tell you they are threatened, advise them to call the police. Then take some deep breaths and disengage, at least until you can distinguish signal from noise.

    Summary: I think Ron is KOAM.

    Comment by jeffeneff (707f3d) — 7/12/2011 @ 4:00 am

  1815. Ron,

    I really don’t know you. If you are the guy I spoke with on the phone, then you have been responsible about certain information, which I appreciate. If you’re on the up and up, it sounds like people have been messing with you. That has apparently made you overly suspicious, to the point where you think longtime commenters here are sock puppets, or that I was an imposter when I last called you.

    Stashiu3 has a background in treating those with mental health issues. I don’t mean to insult you when I say that if he says you should get help, you might consider it. Which is not to say there aren’t sock puppets on Twitter, email, and perhaps your phone who are messing with you. My guess is that is happening.

    Comment by Patterico (f724ca) — 7/12/2011 @ 4:39 am

  1816. I admit I wanted to get to 2000 comments, but this wasn’t really the way I wanted to do it.

    Comment by Patterico (f724ca) — 7/12/2011 @ 4:41 am

  1817. Pat

    I was trying to be funny I guess the operative word was trying..

    Comment by EricPWJohnson (a60276) — 7/12/2011 @ 4:53 am

  1818. 1789 Sue
    1800 Joe

    Google lets you search using a specified date range. This lets you search as if it were an earlier date so that the results aren’t impacted by what has gone on since that date.

    On the Google page on your search results, look in the left column for setting dates. You can then set a Custom Range to end on June 17. For “starchild111″ I get 10,600 results. Where does 123people come up in those 10,000+ results? And you made it to page 3 of the results at 123people?

    If you have “Jennifer” (not “Jenay”) and “starchild111″ you can find it easily. With “starchild111″ only prior to June 18, it’s very difficult, I think, to find Jennifer’s name.

    We don’t know how Preston focused in on JG CA. Maybe her researchers know.

    We know how Lee focused in on JG CA. Lee had the 123people page and went through the links to several of the JGs there. JG CA has a detailed background online and Lee though her work at a magazine was of interest. That’s why he says he emailed her. But perhaps Lee was in contact with others in figuring this out too? Hard to say.

    Comment by koam @wittier (60c14e) — 7/12/2011 @ 5:06 am

  1819. Stashiu

    Dont diagnose people on the internet or try to use you unverified status as a health care professional to make judgements

    We all dont know who you are – and I refuse to accept the premise that a sock which BTW you certainly are – which anyone who is blogging anom is – nothing more than a sock – is some kind of expert without verification – can legally dispense medical advise on a thread

    You’vr made way to many mistatements about me on this blog for anyone to take you seriously

    Comment by EricPWJohnson (a60276) — 7/12/2011 @ 5:08 am

  1820. Yeah Stashiu, only scientist and lawyers have valid opinions. Get with the program!

    Click.
    Check.
    Click.

    Comment by ∅ (e7577d) — 7/12/2011 @ 5:17 am

  1821. o

    Stashiu is a best a troll who makes ugly statements and cant handle discussions

    he’s the last person I would allow or take any medical advise or any advice from

    Comment by EricPWJohnson (a60276) — 7/12/2011 @ 5:21 am

  1822. Stashiu is a best a troll who makes ugly statements and cant handle discussions

    First an attack on DRJ, then this.

    And there have been other problems too.

    It’s too much.

    I have placed your IP in moderation while I think about what to do. Eric, you’ve been personally very kind and supportive. But you’ve gotten on the wrong side of my most trusted commenters. Your comments will be in moderation for a while, while I think about what to do about this.

    I don’t like banning people and this is not a ban — at least, not yet. But honestly, you need to think long and hard about how it is that you are at odds with people as solid as Stashiu and DRJ.

    Comment by Patterico (f724ca) — 7/12/2011 @ 5:33 am

  1823. By the way, Stashiu hasn’t diagnosed anyone. He has said that Ron needs to get help and GET a diagnosis.

    I don’t mean to insult Ron when I say Ron should at least consider it.

    Comment by Patterico (f724ca) — 7/12/2011 @ 5:38 am

  1824. Eric,

    You’re a good guy and Patterico knows it.
    Ignore these trolls…and thanks.

    Comment by Ron Brynaert (5e3edf) — 7/12/2011 @ 5:39 am

  1825. Ron,

    Last comment and then off to work.

    I just placed Eric in moderation for calling two longtime commenters “trolls.”

    With you, I’ll let you go for a while because it’s interesting in a weird sort of way and nobody is taking your accusations seriously. But if you’re not some kind of jokester yourself — a possibility I do not entirely discount — then I ask you to take a deep breath and reflect on what has been said.

    Off to work. Have a nice day.

    Comment by Patterico (f724ca) — 7/12/2011 @ 5:43 am

  1826. I admired Stash’s piece about Gitmo, and his general comportment on this site. But dispensing unsolicited professional medical advice in the comments section of some dark corner of the internet isn’t defensible. I’m not saying Brynaert doesn’t appear to be having a weird internet- induced psychosis. But I’m rocking back and forth sitting in a bowl of butterscotch pudding flipping cards into an old bowler hat wearing one sock and an old robe, so what do I know? Oh, and I, for one, will not miss EPJW.

    Comment by Birdbath (19803d) — 7/12/2011 @ 6:07 am

  1827. But dispensing unsolicited professional medical advice in the comments section of some dark corner of the internet isn’t defensible.

    Your characterization of my blog as “some dark corner of the Internet” factors in to my assessment of your comment’s credibility.

    Comment by Patterico (7f0df6) — 7/12/2011 @ 6:31 am

    </