Weiner Document Dump, Part 3: Including Still More Alleged DMs from Weiner to Nikki
The following is given in chronological order. It is material sent to me from the person behind the JohnReid9 Twitter account. As with my previous document dumps, I make absolutely no representation that any of this material is genuine. There are two possibilities: 1) it is genuine, or 2) it is not. Either way, the alleged DMs are more information relevant to the controversy over the identity and motivations of Reid, Patriot, and other shadowy Internet figures. Either way, they are newsworthy — at least to those who still care about this controversy. (If you’re wondering why you should still care, I explain here.)
The Cliff’s Notes version: there are alleged DMs from Weiner to Nikki talking about how he is a superhero in cape and tights, and how that will be his and Nikki’s secret, and so forth. There are alleged DMs from Gennette to Nikki saying she flirted with Weiner (which Gennette admits having sent, although she says she did not actually flirt with Weiner; she was baiting Nikki, she says, whom she knew to be a troll). There are alleged DMs from Gennette to Nikki saying Weiner flirted with her, which Gennette denies having sent.
I vouch for absolutely nothing. Anyone who suggests differently is a liar.
If they’re not real, someone went to extraordinary lengths to construct them, add timestamps, and the like. To illustrate this, I will try to intersperse occasional screenshots of the more interesting DMs.
Gennette Cordova has already confirmed the authenticity of some of these DMs, and denied that of certain others. Let me be specific about that.
On June 23, I published this screenshot, which includes three of the messages that appear in this document dump:
I specifically asked Gennette Cordova if she had written those, and she confirmed that she had:
[Y]es, I did. It was a week and a half in, I knew why this person was engaging me but they hadn’t brought him up yet.
So I got the ball rolling.
In comments at my site, Gennette explained that she had not actually said these things to Weiner, but told Nikki that she had, because “I knew they were fake and I was trying to get it out of them that they were interested in him.” (Assuming this explanation is genuine, Gennette was prescient, as the New York Times later revealed that identification documents provided by the Reids to Tommy Christopher were fraudulent.)
When you look at the screenshot, you have to read from bottom to top — meaning the top one is the last one. In the thread where Gennette confirmed the accuracy of this screenshot, Aaron asked her:
Okay, here’s my next question. the first DM ends by saying “And Rep. Weiner said” and then it cuts off.
What came after that?
What did he say?
Although Gennette appeared several times in that thread subsequent to Aaron’s question, she did not answer Aaron’s question in that thread. (Last night she answered the question to me. We’re getting there.)
I received an e-mail threat that night from “Alicia Pain” threatening my family if I looked into the activities of Gennette and Weiner any further. Here is a partial quote:
You need to stop digging into Genette Cordova and Rep. AW. I cannot insure your safety if you continue.
Do not trust anyone.Please think about your family. This story is not worth it. I can assure you that.
The next day, John Reid forwarded me the above three DMs, as well as the one that, according to what he sent me, would have been next in line. Remember, Gennette agrees she said: “Lol. 1 time I told him that I’d been pretty obsessed with him since I saw him address the house once and Rep Weiner said . . .” Here is what Reid claimed came next:
“obsessed? how big an obsession?” And I said, “Big.” And he said, “That’s not the only thing that’s big.” Ah I LOVE this man!
Direct message sent by GNC (@GennetteNicole) to you (@starchild111) on May 18, 1:14 AM.
I asked Gennette by e-mail on June 25 if that DM was genuine. She said it was a fake, and that Reid should have DMs from her saying Weiner never flirted with her. Last night, I asked her what she told Nikki that Weiner had said. In other words, what came after “Lol. 1 time I told him that I’d been pretty obsessed with him since I saw him address the house once and Rep Weiner said . . .”? What did she tell Nikki that Weiner had said in response? The answer: “obsessed with good government, I’m sure.”
On June 25, Gennette also denied the veracity of this DM:
Rep Weiner is hot. The funny thing is that when he first followed me I totally flirted with him & he flirted right back! It was hot.
Direct message sent by GNC (@GennetteNicole) to you (@starchild111) on May 18, 12:58 AM.
Finally, in the monster thread I included a screenshot of another DM:
When he stopped flirting back I admit it was a let down. Lol
Direct message sent by GNC (@GennetteNicole) to you (@starchild111) on May 17, 8:39 PM.
Gennette e-mailed me to deny that one as well. The next day (three days ago), John Reid e-mailed me for the first time in weeks. In response to my statement that I planned to prove he is Dan Wolfe, Reid replied that my doing so would convince people that the DMs he gave me were fake. He claimed, as an alleged Weiner supporter, that he was happy about that, saying things like:
Weiner did nothing wrong with underaged girls and shouldn’t be the target. If you really cared about truth you wouldn’t have written such horrible lies about him and Gennette.
He also said:
No. You did exactly what we wanted. We knew you would tie us to Dan like other people and it’s perfect. Gennette can do a victory dance and so can Weiner.
We wanted everything ever published discredited and you helped. Not trying to scare you. Just saying what you’ve done. You’ve helped.
No one thinks we have credibility and no one ever will. All of your stuff is tainted forever. Anything relating to Gennette and Weiner included.
No one will ever believe a word.
This may have been a clumsy attempt at reverse psychology — an attempt to keep me from connecting John Reid to Dan Wolfe by claiming that doing so would discredit my posts, and acting pleased by the prospect. But we’ll leave the theorizing for another day. Suffice it to say that I vouch for absolutely nothing a puppet says. Whether he says he is telling the truth or whether he says he is lying, a puppet’s motives must always be scrutinized.
Always.
I will publish that entire e-mail chain in the near future.
Complete document dump follows. Here we go:
Thanks!
Direct message sent by [Ethel] (@[ethel]) to you (@starchild111) on Apr 14, 11:23 PM.
Of course! You seem like you’d do the same for someone else. You have my loyalty also!
Direct message sent by GNC (@GennetteNicole) to you (@starchild111) on May 12, 4:18 PM.
I know. I love Cali! Two of my best friends live there. I really hope I can make it out this summer. That’d be awesome.
Direct message sent by GNC (@GennetteNicole) to you (@starchild111) on May 15, 10:48 PM.
so i’m your hero, do you mean like a superhero?
Direct message sent by Anthony Weiner (@RepWeiner) to you (@starchild111) on May 16, 10:31 AM.
well i left my cape at home today but i might have my tights on that’s our secret ok?
Direct message sent by Anthony Weiner (@RepWeiner) to you (@starchild111) on May 16, 10:48 AM.
the trolls are gonna attack you because they attack all the teenagers I follow. maybe you can help me fuck with them.
Direct message sent by Anthony Weiner (@RepWeiner) to you (@starchild111) on May 16, 10:53 AM.
sure, if the campaign takes off & progressives rally around you that would give me a great reason to go to the prom. keep working on it!
Direct message sent by Anthony Weiner (@RepWeiner) to you (@starchild111) on May 16, 1:53 PM.
are your friends fans of mine too?
Direct message sent by Anthony Weiner (@RepWeiner) to you (@starchild111) on May 16, 1:54 PM.
don’t your friends know that i’m not just an important Congressman but also a superhero complete with cape and tights?
Direct message sent by Anthony Weiner (@RepWeiner) to you (@starchild111) on May 16, 1:55 PM.
sorry sugar i don’t mean to ignore you, i didn’t see that last message. are you cross with me?
Direct message sent by Anthony Weiner (@RepWeiner) to you (@starchild111) on May 16, 1:57 PM.
so i’m an idol does that mean i’m up there with leo?
Direct message sent by Anthony Weiner (@RepWeiner) to you (@starchild111) on May 16, 2:05 PM.
you gonna watch me this week?
Direct message sent by Anthony Weiner (@RepWeiner) to you (@starchild111) on May 16, 2:06 PM.
they’re all excited about my michele bachmann campaign scrappy chasing crazy. tea party trolls hate that. i love jacking them up
Direct message sent by Anthony Weiner (@RepWeiner) to you (@starchild111) on May 16, 2:07 PM.
the more wound up we can get the trolls the better. isn’t this fun? we’re a great team!
Direct message sent by Anthony Weiner (@RepWeiner) to you (@starchild111) on May 16, 2:27 PM.
if they bother you let me know. they keep talking about a sex scandal with me and some other dem congressmen.
Direct message sent by Anthony Weiner (@RepWeiner) to you (@starchild111) on May 16, 2:31 PM.
are you cross with me?
Direct message sent by Anthony Weiner (@RepWeiner) to you (@starchild111) on May 16, 2:35 PM.
Kk lemme know what’s up after class and what I can do to help with the prom!! I’m so excited for you! And a little jealous!
Direct message sent by [Ethel] (@[ethel]) to you (@starchild111) on May 16, 2:42 PM.
I love messing with the trolls. Don’t you?
Direct message sent by Anthony Weiner (@RepWeiner) to you (@starchild111) on May 16, 5:49 PM.
I have an NBA player following me
Direct message sent by GNC (@GennetteNicole) to you (@starchild111) on May 16, 7:07 PM.
[Redacted]. He played for Boston now he plays for OKC.
Direct message sent by GNC (@GennetteNicole) to you (@starchild111) on May 16, 7:15 PM.
We grew up in the same area but [Redacted]’s like eight years older than me or something like that.
Direct message sent by GNC (@GennetteNicole) to you (@starchild111) on May 16, 7:22 PM.
Lol. No:) Celebrities are fun to talk to and hang out with but not to date! Haha.
Direct message sent by GNC (@GennetteNicole) to you (@starchild111) on May 16, 7:33 PM.
I would never trust celebrities in a relationship. That’s why I won’t go as far as dating but I hang out with them & other stuff.
Direct message sent by GNC (@GennetteNicole) to you (@starchild111) on May 16, 8:23 PM.
No, not dating. Ive been close to it though and spent time around them and basically they’re just different than regular people.
Direct message sent by GNC (@GennetteNicole) to you (@starchild111) on May 16, 8:23 PM.
Late out here. Ill talk to you tomorrow lemme know it goes.
Direct message sent by [Ethel] (@[ethel]) to you (@starchild111) on May 16, 10:17 PM.
i saw your tweets. thank you for taking on the trolls and defending me. sorry you have to be bothered by them. that’s all they have in life.
Direct message sent by Anthony Weiner (@RepWeiner) to you (@starchild111) on May 16, 10:24 PM.
Ill talk to you tomorrow.
Direct message sent by [Ethel] (@[ethel]) to you (@starchild111) on May 16, 10:26 PM.
yeah i’ve had to unfollow and refollow a few of the girls on my list because of them.
Direct message sent by Anthony Weiner (@RepWeiner) to you (@starchild111) on May 16, 10:35 PM.
i see the fb campaign is going well too. nice work! i’m noticing new followers!
Direct message sent by Anthony Weiner (@RepWeiner) to you (@starchild111) on May 16, 10:45 PM.
yeah? am i your favorite?
Direct message sent by Anthony Weiner (@RepWeiner) to you (@starchild111) on May 16, 10:47 PM.
good. i like being your favorite.
Direct message sent by Anthony Weiner (@RepWeiner) to you (@starchild111) on May 16, 10:54 PM.
oh you saw that? yeah i was fired up. did you like that?
Direct message sent by Anthony Weiner (@RepWeiner) to you (@starchild111) on May 16, 11:00 PM.
i love taking them on. them and their tea party troll followers with one tooth.
Direct message sent by Anthony Weiner (@RepWeiner) to you (@starchild111) on May 17, 12:38 PM.
ah the trolls. they have empty shells of lives. they are tormented by how much fun i have fucking with them.
Direct message sent by Anthony Weiner (@RepWeiner) to you (@starchild111) on May 17, 2:21 PM.
they are perverts who prey on teenagers dont you agree? i’m sorry they are harassing you now. you don’t deserve that just cause i follow you
Direct message sent by Anthony Weiner (@RepWeiner) to you (@starchild111) on May 17, 2:33 PM.
so how’s my prom date doing? don’t let those trolls get you down.
Direct message sent by Anthony Weiner (@RepWeiner) to you (@starchild111) on May 17, 4:54 PM.
you liked that one? what did you like about it?
Direct message sent by Anthony Weiner (@RepWeiner) to you (@starchild111) on May 17, 4:56 PM.
thanks, sugar. there will be some opportunities for you to watch this week.
Direct message sent by Anthony Weiner (@RepWeiner) to you (@starchild111) on May 17, 4:58 PM.
thanks for being so loyal and protective. isn’t it fun to sit and giggle at the trolls? they make it so easy to jack them up.
Direct message sent by Anthony Weiner (@RepWeiner) to you (@starchild111) on May 17, 4:59 PM.
i have a few ideas on how we can make their lives a little miserable lol
Direct message sent by Anthony Weiner (@RepWeiner) to you (@starchild111) on May 17, 5:01 PM.
yeah i like that. we could try that one too. good thinking. how funny would that be? we make a great team. i’ve been looking for a sidekick.
Direct message sent by Anthony Weiner (@RepWeiner) to you (@starchild111) on May 17, 5:04 PM.
all in a days work. i stomp out tea party trolls in a single bound. it’s not easy being a Congressman AND a hero.
Direct message sent by Anthony Weiner (@RepWeiner) to you (@starchild111) on May 17, 5:11 PM.
nice job. they will think twice about messing with the teenagers on my list next time.
Direct message sent by Anthony Weiner (@RepWeiner) to you (@starchild111) on May 17, 5:15 PM.
yeah? who do you think is cuter? (you don’t have to say me)
Direct message sent by Anthony Weiner (@RepWeiner) to you (@starchild111) on May 17, 5:16 PM.
thank you i’m flattered. nice to be up there with him on your list!
Direct message sent by Anthony Weiner (@RepWeiner) to you (@starchild111) on May 17, 5:25 PM.
They are insane! They did the same thing to me! Old men and old women republicans with no lives. Sorry you have to go through that too!
Direct message sent by [Ethel] (@[ethel]) to you (@starchild111) on May 17, 5:27 PM.
sure. anything you need, just let me know.
Direct message sent by Anthony Weiner (@RepWeiner) to you (@starchild111) on May 17, 5:29 PM.
next week. ever see DC in the spring? it’s beautiful.
Direct message sent by Anthony Weiner (@RepWeiner) to you (@starchild111) on May 17, 5:30 PM.
you like that? yeah i’m doing more on Thomas soon. stay tuned
Direct message sent by Anthony Weiner (@RepWeiner) to you (@starchild111) on May 17, 5:36 PM.
keep fucking with the trolls. i love to watch.
Direct message sent by Anthony Weiner (@RepWeiner) to you (@starchild111) on May 17, 5:37 PM.
well, you’re special you know. not everyone gets a follow after they use #WeinerYes, lol.
Direct message sent by Anthony Weiner (@RepWeiner) to you (@starchild111) on May 17, 5:37 PM.
make sure you mention why you fight for progressive ideals and why you are not a republican or tea party troll
Direct message sent by Anthony Weiner (@RepWeiner) to you (@starchild111) on May 17, 5:38 PM.
and that’s why scrappy is chasing crazy and is close to beating her.
Direct message sent by Anthony Weiner (@RepWeiner) to you (@starchild111) on May 17, 5:39 PM.
that’s right. you know who’s boss. lol
Direct message sent by Anthony Weiner (@RepWeiner) to you (@starchild111) on May 17, 5:40 PM.
well now that you shut down that group of trolls they can’t ever say anything about that. glad you mentioned you did #WeinerYes. nice job.
Direct message sent by Anthony Weiner (@RepWeiner) to you (@starchild111) on May 17, 5:41 PM.
what do you expect? the tea party trolls can’t think and brush their one tooth at the same time lol
Direct message sent by Anthony Weiner (@RepWeiner) to you (@starchild111) on May 17, 5:42 PM.
you’ve seen all my fb pics right? why is that your favorite?
Direct message sent by Anthony Weiner (@RepWeiner) to you (@starchild111) on May 17, 5:43 PM.
really? that’s your favorite? well thank you
Direct message sent by Anthony Weiner (@RepWeiner) to you (@starchild111) on May 17, 5:44 PM.
you saw that? did you like my stand up?
Direct message sent by Anthony Weiner (@RepWeiner) to you (@starchild111) on May 17, 5:45 PM.
I appreciate u telling me this but u really didn’t need to. I’ve been talking to you for a long time now & you’ve never brought repweiner up
Direct message sent by GNC (@GennetteNicole) to you (@starchild111) on May 17, 6:39 PM.
We’ve talked about a lot of other things in depth and I really think you’re a sweet person.
Direct message sent by GNC (@GennetteNicole) to you (@starchild111) on May 17, 6:40 PM.
I promise you don’t have to worry about me questioning your intentions. You never brought up Rep Weiner to me. I consider you a friend.
Direct message sent by GNC (@GennetteNicole) to you (@starchild111) on May 17, 6:50 PM.
Awww:( honey. I have an unexplainable affinity for you. You’re like the little sister I’ve never had. Lol. I know you’re a sweet girl.
Direct message sent by GNC (@GennetteNicole) to you (@starchild111) on May 17, 7:03 PM.
I remember the 1st time he sent me a text. I was so excited! I couldn’t believe I just watched him on Maddow & then received a text from him
Direct message sent by GNC (@GennetteNicole) to you (@starchild111) on May 17, 8:33 PM.
When he stopped flirting back I admit it was a let down. Lol
Direct message sent by GNC (@GennetteNicole) to you (@starchild111) on May 17, 8:39 PM.
don’t be sad. smile for me. are you gonna watch me tomorrow?
Direct message sent by Anthony Weiner (@RepWeiner) to you (@starchild111) on May 17, 8:42 PM.
Wow. They’re truly non stop. You shouldn’t waste your time defending Rep Weiner to them they’re obviously not going to listen to your tweets
Direct message sent by GNC (@GennetteNicole) to you (@starchild111) on May 18, 12:51 AM.
Rep Weiner is hot. The funny thing is that when he first followed me I totally flirted with him & he flirted right back! It was hot.
Direct message sent by GNC (@GennetteNicole) to you (@starchild111) on May 18, 12:58 AM.
How come you never talk about Rep Weiner? Don’t you want to talk about him with me?
Direct message sent by GNC (@GennetteNicole) to you (@starchild111) on May 18, 12:59 AM.
There’s something terribly attractive about outspoken socially aware men! Ah. I couldn’t help it:)
Direct message sent by GNC (@GennetteNicole) to you (@starchild111) on May 18, 1:06 AM.
I told him that he’s basically my idea of the perfect man. Lol. And then another time I saw him on Maddow and I told him he looked so cute.
Direct message sent by GNC (@GennetteNicole) to you (@starchild111) on May 18, 1:08 AM.
Lol. That’s actually pretty embarrassing but I can’t help myself with him especially when he’s on Maddow! I’m obsessed.
Direct message sent by GNC (@GennetteNicole) to you (@starchild111) on May 18, 1:08 AM.
Lol. 1 time I told him that I’d been pretty obsessed with him since I saw him address the house once and Rep Weiner said
Direct message sent by GNC (@GennetteNicole) to you (@starchild111) on May 18, 1:13 AM.
“obsessed? how big an obsession?” And I said, “Big.” And he said, “That’s not the only thing that’s big.” Ah I LOVE this man!
Direct message sent by GNC (@GennetteNicole) to you (@starchild111) on May 18, 1:14 AM.
It’s so sweet that you keep defending Rep Weiner to those crazies. I’m sure he appreciates it. You’re such a sweet person.
Direct message sent by GNC (@GennetteNicole) to you (@starchild111) on May 18, 1:23 AM.
And that tamale102280 & redrivergrl are women who said to you they’re moms. What kind of mothers harass random girls like you on Twitter.
Direct message sent by GNC (@GennetteNicole) to you (@starchild111) on May 18, 1:30 AM.
I’m sorry you have to be attacked by them just because Rep Weiner follows you. There are always crazies out there.
Direct message sent by GNC (@GennetteNicole) to you (@starchild111) on May 18, 1:41 AM.
So you have no plans to follow any of them? I noticed he added quite a few new girls. Well, that’s up to you. I wonder if he talks to them.
Direct message sent by GNC (@GennetteNicole) to you (@starchild111) on May 18, 1:45 AM.
How come you aren’t following any of the bunch of new girls Rep Weiner has just started following? Didn’t you notice them?
Direct message sent by GNC (@GennetteNicole) to you (@starchild111) on May 18, 9:48 PM.
Also you shouldn’t talk to these people. Please be careful! For your own sake.
Direct message sent by Gennette N Cordova (@GennetteC) to you (@johnreid9) on May 29, 2:37 PM.
I hope you’re ok I’m worried about you. I’m ok, I know you’re worried about me. Don’t worry.
Direct message sent by Gennette N Cordova (@GennetteC) to you (@johnreid9) on May 30, 11:49 AM.
That’s it for now, except for one thing. I guess I should add a couple of notes on what has been verified and denied up until this point.
There will be more information in coming days that may help put some of this in perspective.
Patterico (f724ca) — 8/12/2011 @ 7:44 amI would just like to apologize to tamale102280 & redrivergrl. I was playing a role. I never thought these would be published.
About %85 of these are real. Some are for sure fabricated. There are two or three that I really can’t say for sure.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:09 amPatterico – Yesterday in response to a statement I made about Gennette knowing Nikki was fake before they started corresponding, Gennette claimed she had never said that. Maybe not in those words, more often in terms like, “I always knew Nikki was fake.” I interpreted always from the start or before since Gennette seemed to monitor Weiner followers so closely.
I asked if she was fake who she thought she was and as usual, no cogent theory emerged. Back on June 23rd, at least Gennette was willing to say she initially though Nikki was part of the bornfree crew.
The timing and content of the phone call you point out in this post certainly point to a significant track covering motive. Perhaps Gennette can enlighten us as to when she determine Nikki was a fake, especially since she claims to exchanged 50 messages the first day they corresponded.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:15 am@Patterico
Many of these from AW may very well be authentic. Somethings But there’s stuff missing, that I’m sure JR9 purposely omitted, that would be from his last DM to her on the 17th to the one from me at 6:39 pm on the 17th of May.
He would be messing with her more and more, and eventually openly calling her out for being a troll…
This is why she and I were having the conversation about her being real. And she asked me to DM him and vouch for her being a real person. But, JR9 would have obviously omitted those parts of the conversation as well.
Is this all he gave you?? There’s so much more. These (the ones that are real) are the ones that fit his story, I suppose but there really should be tons more.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:27 am@DaleyRocks
I think I’d made this clear plenty of times that when she asked me to follow her so we could DM, I looked at her page and it was beyond sketchy. It was obvious that she was fake. As time went on and more holes were revealed I became even more certain. I never thought she was a 17 year old girl.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:31 amMy instinct is to keep theorizing as things come up, because that’s more fun, but I’ll refrain for the time being; but you’re killing me, Patterico.
Leviticus (b85154) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:32 amWith suspense.
Leviticus (b85154) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:33 am@DaleyRocks
I monitored his followers closely? What are you talking about??
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:33 am“Is this all he gave you?? There’s so much more. These (the ones that are real) are the ones that fit his story, I suppose but there really should be tons more.”
Gennette – You are in a position to know there are tons more why?
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:43 am@DaleyRocks
Ummm, because I talked to this person for a month.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:44 amThe veracity of all these posts aside, this is a pretty damn good indicator of why politicians need to stay the hell off of social media, especially applications that encourage compulsive, unreflective thought like Twitter.
At some point, adults need to realize that using tools prized by the emotionally and intellectually immature, in some vain attempt to seem “hip,” is not going to provide society with the culture of serious reflection needed to keep that society intact.
Another Chris (c04459) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:45 amI’m so pissed that I don’t have time to read all of this now. Gotta go find a missing boat.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:45 amThen why not fill in the blanks, Gennette? I don’t see what purpose your comments alluding to more information serve.
President Potemkin (093e9c) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:47 am“Ummm, because I talked to this person for a month.”
Gennette – Ummmm, I meant Weiner tweets, duh.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:47 am@DaleyRocks
I wasn’t referring to the Weiner tweets. If these are real this would be it from him. They talked from the 16th-17th.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:55 am“I wasn’t referring to the Weiner tweets.”
Gennette – You should have made yourself clear.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 8/12/2011 @ 9:00 amFAKE
I remember the 1st time he sent me a text. I was so excited! I couldn’t believe I just watched him on Maddow & then received a text from him
Direct message sent by GNC (@GennetteNicole) to you (@starchild111) on May 17, 8:33 PM.
When he stopped flirting back I admit it was a let down. Lol
Direct message sent by GNC (@GennetteNicole) to you (@starchild111) on May 17, 8:39 PM.
Rep Weiner is hot. The funny thing is that when he first followed me I totally flirted with him & he flirted right back! It was hot.
Direct message sent by GNC (@GennetteNicole) to you (@starchild111) on May 18, 12:58 AM.
How come you never talk about Rep Weiner? Don’t you want to talk about him with me?
Direct message sent by GNC (@GennetteNicole) to you (@starchild111) on May 18, 12:59 AM.
“obsessed? how big an obsession?” And I said, “Big.” And he said, “That’s not the only thing that’s big.” Ah I LOVE this man!
Direct message sent by GNC (@GennetteNicole) to you (@starchild111) on May 18, 1:14 AM.
So you have no plans to follow any of them? I noticed he added quite a few new girls. Well, that’s up to you. I wonder if he talks to them.
Direct message sent by GNC (@GennetteNicole) to you (@starchild111) on May 18, 1:45 AM.
How come you aren’t following any of the bunch of new girls Rep Weiner has just started following? Didn’t you notice them?
Direct message sent by GNC (@GennetteNicole) to you (@starchild111) on May 18, 9:48 PM.
This one, I’m not exactly sure if I wrote.
I hope you’re ok I’m worried about you. I’m ok, I know you’re worried about me. Don’t worry.
Direct message sent by Gennette N Cordova (@GennetteC) to you (@johnreid9) on May 30, 11:49 AM
And this one from AW is most likely fake because of the time
don’t be sad. smile for me. are you gonna watch me tomorrow?
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/12/2011 @ 9:07 amDirect message sent by Anthony Weiner (@RepWeiner) to you (@starchild111) on May 17, 8:42 PM.
You could’ve asked for clarity before assuming. But I’m not going to fight with you today.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/12/2011 @ 9:08 amHuh?
What is the point of these AW threads at this time?
I have a feeling someone could summarize this entire thing in three sentences if they tried really hard.
S. Carter aka J-Z (786e37) — 8/12/2011 @ 9:13 amYou must be new here; it’s an ongoing saga, you’ll have to read past posts to get up to speed.
Jay S (237a25) — 8/12/2011 @ 9:17 amGennette,
It’s funny that you say probably 85% real and the fake ones all amount to the ones which have to do with flirting with Weiner or obsessive following of girls following Weiner. Both of which you have either directly or indirectly admitted to if only to trick “Nikki” into reveling herself. So I would say the other 15% are disputed rather than fake to me. Stylistically everything seems very consistent and I would lean towards all being real in the sense that they were actually sent to “Nikki”.
I do have one question for you though. What do you mean by “because of the time’ about Weiner’s tweet?
Rocksem (e1d29d) — 8/12/2011 @ 9:22 am“You could’ve asked for clarity before assuming. But I’m not going to fight with you today.”
Gennette – I did not assume anything. I read your plain English words. I am not aiming to fight, but you are not allowed to get away with equivocations and obfuscations that you love so much. An aspiring journalist should know better, especially talking to grown men and women.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 8/12/2011 @ 9:26 amSo if those DM’s are fake, Gennette, someone went to a lot of time & trouble to fake screenshots.
Someone really has it in for you. Someone wanted to make you look like an obsessed fool for Weiner, reduced to following the teenage girls he was really hot for and he flirted with.
A mysterious Someone sent threats to Patterico & others …. way beyond goofing on Twitter. Yet you don’t feel seriously concerned for your safety? You have no idea who would hate you that much?
Yet you won’t video chat with an Assistant District Attorney, who’s had to prosecute violent criminals and who is an officer of the court.
Interesting.
Miranda (4104db) — 8/12/2011 @ 9:26 amIs it really that funny? Because we know that JR9 was trying to make me look bad. The ones that he originally gave to Pat, where I said I was flirting, were real. If I was just denying the “flirting” DMs, I would have denied those also, right?
JR9 saw that no one was getting overly excited about the first bunch so he then furnished new (fake) DMs.
Stylistically they might be accurate and that might have something to do with the fact that he has 100’s of messages from me to mimic.
I say that the AW DM is fake because by this time he had called her out for being a troll. Which is why she was trying to assure me that she was real. After he had called her out, according to him and according to her, they never communicated again.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/12/2011 @ 9:28 amOne thing that comes to mind as I read this is–
How on earth do the people involved here have the time to spend on so much twittering/messaging?
I cannot fathom having that much free time. My job alone would preclude it.
Enigmaticore (a6843f) — 8/12/2011 @ 9:31 amWeiner is a failure.
DohBiden (d54602) — 8/12/2011 @ 9:31 amActually, and I’m not sure if someone would have screen caps of this, but by 8:42 pm on May 17th I don’t even think he was following her anymore. This is what she was complaining about to me.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/12/2011 @ 9:32 amPatterico,
Did JR9 send you all the documents in the three document dumps you’ve published to date all at the same time? (Or within a 24-hour period or whatever…)
Or did they come to you over a lengthier period than that?
Thanks.
Greg (bc8186) — 8/12/2011 @ 9:39 amThat is exactly why it is funny, or odd, to me. These seems no worse or any more convincing than the 1st 3 which you admit are real so why go to the trouble of faking them? They are still consistent with your explanation of the 1st 3. The point that you told “Nikki”, untruthfully, that you had flirted with Weiner has been made. If I was the faker why would I go to such elaborate lengths to belabor it? Your denial of these seems more related to you seeing these as damaging to you personally IMO.
As to the time thing I guess I need to catch up a bit. When did Weiner call Nikki out as a troll?
Rocksem (e1d29d) — 8/12/2011 @ 9:39 amI could have said that I had sex with him on his desk in a french maid’s costume and I wouldn’t worry about it damaging me personally. I knew Nikki was a fake.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/12/2011 @ 9:43 amBut I’m not going to admit to writing DMs that I didn’t write.
I was lookinmg for Part I. I think I only had part 2. I had a file that seemeed to named after part I but it was from another blog about this.
http://minx.cc/?post=317993
Patterico’s New Document Dump
I hadn’t yet really started to try to search for the first part.
You had Weiner Document Dump, Part 2: Including Alleged DMs from Weiner to Nikki
But you didn’t have Weiner Document Dump, Part 1
Instead that turns out to be:
The Owner of the Nikki Reid Account Speaks Out
Which I did save, and read, and search through, but under a different name. Not as DOCDUMP anything. But as NIKKIOWN.
It has good comments. I don’t think I got around to writing much, but the first question is, how do we interpret the timestamps?
My comment there – at the end – everybody else had already left – was that the screenshots did NOT look better when enlarged into its own screen – at least not on the computer I was using.
That was before I learned how to use BOLD and italics here.
All those in the first documenmt dump are probably genuine, although maybe misleadding without context.
was that the screen
The second thing to note from the first document dump is that
Sammy Finkelman (d3daeb) — 8/12/2011 @ 9:52 amSome of the amateur sleuths in the comments are sounding pretty silly. My honest take is that I think Gennette is actually telling the truth about which ones are fake and which are not. Because, as she points out, it makes no sense to admit to sending SOME texts acknowledging flirting w/AW to “Nikki” but deny sending others. Assuming you don’t believe her “I was trolling on purpose” explanation, the ones she’s already owned up to put her on the hook just as much as the later ones. Furthermore, her willingness to say that she’s actually not sure whether she wrote a post rings true: better to acknowledge doubt than commit to something you can’t remember clearly.
Just felt the need to speak up here because, while Patterico has been very circumspect in his conclusions, some of the commenters here are frankly a little stupider, yet more morally certain, than they realize. (Daleyrocks I’m lookin’ at you.)
Jeff B. (1d11ce) — 8/12/2011 @ 9:55 amBut you would admit they are consistent with those you do admit are real & are no more damaging than those correct? So it would be logical for someone to conclude these are at worst disputed. Is there any reason to think, beyond your say so, that these are fake?
Rocksem (e1d29d) — 8/12/2011 @ 9:57 amIf someone on the internet tells me she is a minor and tries to engage me in inappropriate talk and/or web-activity, I’m running fast as I can in the other direction. Just not a wise thing for an adult person to throw him/herself into.
Jay S (237a25) — 8/12/2011 @ 10:06 amSome of the ones Gennette claims to be fakes refer to receiving ‘texts’ from AW. The others do not. Does the use of ‘text’ imply phone? Versus ‘tweet’ or ‘dm’ which would not.
Just curious. Gennette?
jmel44 (587a2f) — 8/12/2011 @ 10:11 am@jmel44
Yes. The use of “text” would imply phones.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/12/2011 @ 10:13 amThis is the type of thing I am talking about Gennette. You do not deny the 1st here but you do the 2nd. If I am the faker, what exactly is my motivation for creating that 2nd tweet? Especially for such a ridiculously minor, almost irrelevant to “Nikki”, point.
Rocksem (e1d29d) — 8/12/2011 @ 10:14 amThanks.
jmel44 (587a2f) — 8/12/2011 @ 10:16 amFrom what I can see, John Reid was unhappy with the reaction to first doc dump. So he added DMs that were subtle and similar in style to the ones that I had admitted to writing.
He added DMs that:
1. Say that Weiner had flirted with me (before it was just that I had flirted with him).
2. Say that that we had “text” messaged.
3. Made it seem like Nikki didn’t want to talk about him and I was forcing her to.
4. Made it seem like I encouraged Nikki to follow other girls that he followed.
None of these things actually happened.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/12/2011 @ 10:17 am@Patterico
How long after doing the first doc dump did you receive these new messages??
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/12/2011 @ 10:19 amThe first three DMs where Gennette is telling Starchild how she flirts are dated 05/16.
The last of these DMs is incomplete. It reads ends with “And Rep. Weiner said…” (Ellipsis mine)
The new screencap that purports to show where it continues, which starts “obsessed? how big an obsession…” is dated 05/18.
There are other DMs from Gennette to Starchild111 dated 05/17.
In other words, the first half of this seemingly continuous response is sent on 05/16, the next half doesn’t arrive until two days later, and in the meantime, other messages from Gennette do show up.
Greg (bc8186) — 8/12/2011 @ 10:21 amWow, I hadn’t even noticed that!
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/12/2011 @ 10:27 amThe accusations that Anita Hill made against Clarence Thomas weren’t really damaging either.
But they weren’t true, so he denied them.
(I listened to the testimony. It wasn’t just he said/she said. There were points of difference where his story was backed up by the co-workers and not hers. She was *not* avoding him. The really telling point was her explanation of why she followed Clarence Thomas from one job to another if she was being sexually harrassed. She could have said, well, actually it didnb’t amount to anything which would have stepped on her story, although it would have fit with inaction over the years. But she said if was because the it was being proposed that the Department of Education should be abolished. Senator Arlen Spector (D-Penn) cross-examined her quite well on this thing. She had civil service protection.But he didn’t make it clear to the audience what was the main point because maybe it was so obvious to him. This claim about the Department of Education was clearly an appeal to ignorance. Abolishing the Department of Education didn’t mean ending most of wwhat it was doing. It would just mean ending its Cabninet rank. Except for the top level people most of it would continue. Just as it had been going on before Jimmy Carter made it a separate cabinet department by taking it out of HEW. But Anita Hill did not back down from her claim – neither did she explain how it made any sense. There was a lot of propaganda about hiow the testimony helped Anita Hill but the exact opposite was the case. I don’t know if teh styory was entirely invented in 1991 and the disntinbguished witnesses who said Anita Hill had said long before that she left her job because she was sexuially harassed as Clarence Thomas seems to think. Actually she could ahev just made up that styoryu because it made her look better than saying she wasn’t so good at her job. One thing is knoiwn – Anita Hill was very reluictant to go opublic with this. That would make ssense if the whole story was vague lie. It would also make sense that in that case she would try to make the wholle thing sound not really bad anyway. She wouldn’t have a bad conscience then. She went public because she was urged to do so by a round robin letter signed by Yakle Laww School graduates. Guess you were Yale Law School graduates of the same vintage. Bill and Hillary Clinton. David Brock started to write a book who leaked it and then he changed it to a book about Anita Hill “The Real Anita Hill” He was working fro Clinton then. Bill Clinton announced for president at the time of the leak)
was clearly
Sammy Finkelman (d3daeb) — 8/12/2011 @ 10:28 amLol. 1 time I told him that I’d been pretty obsessed with him since I saw him address the house once and Rep Weiner said
Direct message sent by GNC (@GennetteNicole) to you (@starchild111) on May 18, 1:13 AM.
“obsessed? how big an obsession?” And I said, “Big.” And he said, “That’s not the only thing that’s big.” Ah I LOVE this man!
Direct message sent by GNC (@GennetteNicole) to you (@starchild111) on May 18, 1:14 AM.
No, these are 1 minute apart….the screen prints are a bit unclear, the 18 looks like 16.
Pious Agnostic (291f9a) — 8/12/2011 @ 10:30 amSo as I suspected you think these new docs somehow raise things to a different level.
This is a distinction important only to yourself. Based on Weiner’s MO I doubt there are many people who think Weiner didn’t at least attempt to flirt with you.
Who is the we here? You have already admitted to texting with Weiner and you did mention knowing “Nikki’s” phone privileges had been revoked. It seemed like you had spoken on the phone. You didn’t text with her? Why would this be important even if it were true?
I don’t really see asking why you don’t want to talk about Weiner is forcing and you already admit you “got the ball rolling.”
This I would admit seems new. But I have yet to determine why it’s important even if interesting. It could go a number of ways.
Rocksem (e1d29d) — 8/12/2011 @ 10:35 amClearly May 18, as Pious said.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/12/2011 @ 10:36 amThe first time JR9 gave these to Patterico it said the 16th.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/12/2011 @ 10:38 amGreg is referring to this:
This is how the DMs were first presented
And actually, that convo did happen on the 16th… so JR9 changed it to the 18th?
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/12/2011 @ 10:41 amI’m not sure why.
Zoom in on May 18
The dates line up.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/12/2011 @ 10:42 amThe times & dates in the screencaps of email notifications supplied by JR are consistent & all use May 18th for that series. The earlier screen cap supplied by Seatlle555 uses May 16th. The times are also different.
So they do conflict but with each other, not with themselves.
Rocksem (e1d29d) — 8/12/2011 @ 10:44 amWell, that is interesting. Very curious.
Pious Agnostic (291f9a) — 8/12/2011 @ 10:45 amIs there a screenshot of that one saying May 16? I’ll look for one.
I think they are separate conversations, one from the 16th, and a different one from the 18th. There is no problem if that’s the case.
The “and Weiner said” [Break] “Obsessed? How obsessed” is not broken in this set. I will see if I can find if that date was actually changed.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/12/2011 @ 10:45 amThat screencap was supplied by Seattle555, not JR. JR merely confirmed the content was accurate.
Rocksem (e1d29d) — 8/12/2011 @ 10:48 amA lot of those dates were clearly tampered with. It was very clumsy and obvious too.
But thanks for clarifying. One explanation (pretty obvious) is that someone has been on a warpath to delegitimize the veracity of these DMs, and so they modified the dates of ones they wanted people to doubt.
It would take a lot more effort to make them all line up like they to in this set. They all look perfect.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/12/2011 @ 10:49 amnote that GC links the May 16 version in comment #48 @ 10:41.
Of course, those are the versions we already knew were pretty discredited. Someone went out of their way to change the dates, but in a way that wouldn’t withstand much scrutiny.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/12/2011 @ 10:52 amActually, no. The conversation would NOT have been on the 16th, my mistake.
But how would Seatlle555 have access to these DMs… I believe the Seatlle555 DMs showed up first right?
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/12/2011 @ 10:53 amRemind me who Seattle555 is, who provided the May 16 screencaps? I thought I knew all the players, but apparently, not.
Pious Agnostic (291f9a) — 8/12/2011 @ 10:53 amWell, at least that makes this less confusing, I wouldn’t think John Reid would make such an egregious error.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/12/2011 @ 10:54 amI’m still having a busy day and can’t get into all the nitty gritty, but wanted to say that it’s been good to see some of the old commenters back on the job these past couple of days.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/12/2011 @ 10:56 amActually, not necessarily so clear…
Patterico first linked to that screencap on 6/20.
In that post, he explains that the source for the screencap comes from a commenter who left a link at Ace of Spade. Here is that comment.
When you go to the URL located in the comment, you arrive here.
Is that May 16 or May 18?
Greg (bc8186) — 8/12/2011 @ 10:56 amThe first three DMs here, the ones confirmed by Gennette, were not released here on June 22, in the first document dump in the blog post entitled
The Owner of the Nikki Reid Account Speaks Out
Filed under: General — Patterico @ 10:56 pm
https://patterico.com/2011/06/22/the-owner-of-the-nikki-reid-account-speaks-out/
but rather Patterico asked John Reid about them and he said they were real.
They were first posted by seattle545 on June 18 in a comment at Riehl World View (a comment in one of the threads here at patterico and I’ll find it later led me to that)
http://www.riehlworldview.com/carnivorous_conservative/2011/06/tommy-christophers-ignorance-in-online-reporting.html?cid=600d83451c1db69e2014e893ac468970d
They are not numbered there, but it’s the 9th comment:
Gennette Nicole Cordova
http://bit.ly/mP4dVy
Posted by: seattle545 | Saturday, June 18, 2011 at 10:10 PM
Seattle545 probably put it in anumber of places.
Update: I found it quickly with the help of Google. It was a first mentioned here by patterico on June 20:
https://patterico.com/2011/06/20/questions-for-nyts-jen-preston-and-mediaites-tommy-christopher/
Questions for NYT’s Jen Preston and Mediaite’s
Tommy Christopher
Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:04 am
And on Ace’s site, someone posted this:
251 Gennette Nicole Cordova
http://bit.ly/mP4dVy
The word Ace’s is blue, and links to:
http://minx.cc/?blog=86&post=317751#c13441264
A Complicated Comic-Book Misadventure Involving Shenanigans By Betty and Veronica
Ace adds the comment:
[This is a post by someone other than Gennette Cordova, obviously. I do not know if the linked material is fake or not. The person posting this will not answer questions about the alleged DMs. — ace.]
Posted by: seattle545 at June 18, 2011 05:23 PM (VvrOT)
That is earlier than Riehl World View. Seattle545 was going around posting things everywhere.
Sammy Finkelman (d3daeb) — 8/12/2011 @ 10:58 amNo he didn’t. He links to a different screencap of a similar conversation, but that one was clearly modified and discredited quickly. I theorize that the point of modifying the dates was to discredit an accurate screenshot, but feel free to disagree.
It’s a photoshop. That date carries no credibility to impeach the other screenshot.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/12/2011 @ 11:00 amYep. Doesn’t prove he is telling the truth, of course. Just means that the egregious error Greg identified is only an error if you either believe Seattle555’s screenshots (which no one does) or think John Reid and Seattle555 are the same entity (which is certainly possible, I suppose).
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/12/2011 @ 11:02 amYes, they did. Prior to anything from JR. The caps were posted at Ace of Spades, Liberty Chick’s & here I believe. It’s possible Seattle555 is Michela.
Rocksem (e1d29d) — 8/12/2011 @ 11:03 amHowever the ‘let’s mix truth and lies’ gambit is basically the dominant theme of those handling the misinformation campaign.
In Greg’s favor, I acknowledge the fact that John Reid isn’t exactly Abraham Lincoln anyway.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/12/2011 @ 11:04 amJR did suggest Seattle555 was Michele or someone, her family, connected to her in comments.
Rocksem (e1d29d) — 8/12/2011 @ 11:04 amThose did, however, show up first if I recall correctly. Which means whoever posted them either got them from JR9 or was JR9 himself.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/12/2011 @ 11:04 amWho is Michela?
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/12/2011 @ 11:05 amIs Michela right? I’m getting that name wrong I think.
Rocksem (e1d29d) — 8/12/2011 @ 11:06 amAbsolutely. Though in a really strange manner. And the photoshop was just poor enough that people would cry foul. I can’t say deliberately poor, but I do think that’s the case.
Who does appear to be trying to undermine the actual screenshots, assuming you’re correct (and I think you’re correct).
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/12/2011 @ 11:07 amIf Nikki is Betty, she’s Veronica. Supposedly these were supplied to her by Nikki as proof to give to Goatsred.
Rocksem (e1d29d) — 8/12/2011 @ 11:07 amOH! Marianela… who is the same person as Nikki, who is the same person as John Reid.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/12/2011 @ 11:07 amMarianela! that’s it.
Rocksem (e1d29d) — 8/12/2011 @ 11:08 amUncle! I’ve tried to care, I really have. I’ve read endless inane comments ad nauseum till my eyes were dry and red, till my guts were in an uproar, till my mind went numb. Now, I have to ask, “Where’s the beef?”
At some point, and I’m already there, it comes down to a very simple equation: is the potential pay-off worth the time and effort required to unmask the culprits?
If the fish are big enough it might make sense to solder on, but if the rats are only low-level, self-appointed, toothless, guttersnipes then make the smart business decision and walk away winners.
ropelight (9ee20b) — 8/12/2011 @ 11:09 amIn the first Ask JR thread he was asked about the Seattle555 cap & if he supplied it. JR said he did not but might have been by Marianela’s family and that the 2 families were not exactly seeing eye to eye at that point.
Rocksem (e1d29d) — 8/12/2011 @ 11:10 amAt any rate, it would be wrong to say there is a discrepancy in the “Weiner said” [break] “obsessed”
pair. It isn’t evident that those were modified to make separate conversations appear to be the same, but of course John’s latter actions show he is not honest, and does want the May 18 versions discredited. It’s too complicated at that point to theorize what that means, IMO.
It would be right to say that Seattle555’s versions are clearly date-doctored, though this was already known.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/12/2011 @ 11:11 amI feel your pain. All these stupid little things to discuss like it’s the crime of the century.
Dan Wolfe/the sock-drawer has successfully inoculated Weiner, which is the weirdest damn thing.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/12/2011 @ 11:15 amI agree. I feel like the doc dumps, with all of the build up and “inane comments”, were a complete waste of time.
The question is, who is behind the Reids?
And I think “John Reid’s” purpose for releasing these documents (especially since it wasn’t all at once), and fabricating DMs was to cause a big distraction. Which he succeeded in doing.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/12/2011 @ 11:15 amDustin, Patterico links to both versions of the screen-cap in this very post. That’s why I noticed the discrepancy.
When I said “Patterico first linked to that screen-cap on 06/20,” I am referring to the version that appears in this post — the first image that does so. See it up there?
Meanwhile, in this post, Patterico writes, “On June 23, I published this screen-cap….”
While Patterico did in fact publish it on June 23, he first published it on June 20. Click the link to confirm for yourself.
Hence, I wrote “Patterico first linked to that screencap on 06/20.”
Greg (bc8186) — 8/12/2011 @ 11:18 am@Greg
Dustin just wants to make it very clear that the first set of DMs that you’re referring, from Seatlle555, DO NOT discredit the new ones that are here.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/12/2011 @ 11:23 amWe agree on that. We’re all fighting eachother. Assuming you are a pawn in this, that even suggests the person who threatened others to leave you alone (against Patterico, who is not a coward and would just do his damnedest to resolve this at that point), perhaps the motivation was specifically to pit you against him and keep that going forever.
It’s as though someone finds someone who has a bona fide reason to be defensive, and also look very suspicious, and finds someone else who is honestly going to be a bit tenacious in criticizing that suspicious and defensive person, and plants seeds to ensure a larger and longer and more public and more distracting conflict. It reminds me of my conflict with Lee.
What is this meant to distract from? Perhaps the distraction is simply the point, for the amusement of trolls, but I sincerely doubt that’s all there is to it. Someone has something serious at stake, and knowing what’s being discredited might help show who that is.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/12/2011 @ 11:25 amGreg’s right. We just confused eachother a bit, I think.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/12/2011 @ 11:26 amSeems to me like we should wait for the rest of Pat’s material before we reach any conclusions. I’m not quite buying the fact that this is a waste of time.
jmel44 (587a2f) — 8/12/2011 @ 11:31 amBut it is difficult to work with. I think some of the issues in controversy must be worthwhile and serious, hence the risks taken by the thugs, and some are distractions.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/12/2011 @ 11:35 amAs someone who remains confused — but extremely interested — in this my thanks to both Patrick and Genette for their efforts.
Genette: we here are a tough lot. We expect truth and logic to will out. Thanks for tolerating us. Please don’t stop.
Patrick: YOU TOO!!!
reff
reff (76c7c5) — 8/12/2011 @ 11:35 amBased on all of this, what does John Reid-Dan Wolfe-Alicia Pain-et al. want to make people here do?
Whiskey (34d467) — 8/12/2011 @ 11:42 amDistraction from what? This attracts attention, not divert it.
Rocksem (e1d29d) — 8/12/2011 @ 11:47 amI don’t believe at all that the “intentions” of John Reid, as stated in his new emails to Pat, were his actual intentions from the get-go.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/12/2011 @ 11:50 amThis has attracted attention to, mainly, what was said by Anthony Weiner and myself.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/12/2011 @ 11:52 amThis does not attract attention to what was said by the Reids or who the Reids are.
Are there DMs or Tweets or something which back up this outing of her? Where did she try to assure you she was real?
Rocksem (e1d29d) — 8/12/2011 @ 11:54 am“Just felt the need to speak up here because, while Patterico has been very circumspect in his conclusions, some of the commenters here are frankly a little stupider, yet more morally certain, than they realize. (Daleyrocks I’m lookin’ at you.)”
Jeff B. – Just felt a need to reply, since you were the casual commenter who yesterday said this whole thing was incomprehensible, I welcome your well thought out conclusions. Look all you want.
While you’re at it, look very carefully at Gennette’s language. You’ll see she has not specifically denied what I said. That’s SOP for her. She operates in both literal and substantive mode and shifts between the two. If you had been following this you would have recognized that behavior.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 8/12/2011 @ 11:54 amOh it attracts plenty of attention, to everybody. Patterico wouldn’t be planning to post the email exchanges he had with JR too if it didn’t.
Rocksem (e1d29d) — 8/12/2011 @ 11:57 amMay 16th at 1:57 pm, in a screenshot which looks to be from Weiner, he writes:
“Are you cross with me?”
Weiner is a brash, life-long New Yorker. Would he really say “cross” or would he say “angry?”
Whiskey (34d467) — 8/12/2011 @ 12:00 pm@DaleyRocks
What are you going on about?
You said I was monitoring his followers, I deny that.
You said I didn’t say who I thought was behind the Reids, I don’t deny that because I didn’t say.
I’ve always maintained that I thought Nikki was connected to the bornfreecrew because I always connected her to Dan Wolfe.
So, what is it that you’re talking about?
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/12/2011 @ 12:01 pmNow, wouldn’t it be nice if we could compare Gennette’s DMs to these?
I hope Pattercio or someone reaches out to Weiner for comment. He must still have a PR person.
Noodles (3681c4) — 8/12/2011 @ 12:05 pm“What are you going on about?”
Gennette – I was responding to Jeff B. Was there something unclear about my comment?
You did not directly respond to what I asked and still have not, sorry.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 8/12/2011 @ 12:10 pmNo. My account was deleted. I don’t have any Nikki DMs. But you can see where, starting at the 6:39 May 17th DM from me, she had been trying to convince me that she wasn’t a troll.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/12/2011 @ 12:12 pmShe also asked me to message him and vouch for her, which I can’t prove.
Here’s what you said:
In response to this, I said I think I’d made this clear plenty of times that when she asked me to follow her so we could DM, I looked at her page and it was beyond sketchy. It was obvious that she was fake. As time went on and more holes were revealed I became even more certain. I never thought she was a 17 year old girl.
I’ve said that, no, I was not monitoring his followers.
No, I didn’t know she was fake before ever corresponding with her.
No, I could not say who I thought Nikki was. Yes, I did think she was definitely connected to Dan Wolfe and therefore connected to the bornfreecrew.
What have I not answered?
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/12/2011 @ 12:17 pmGennette, I’m thinking you could get your account back from Twitter (intact), especially since there has been LE involvement. Have you tried to? Probably not as hard as you would think.
Noodles (3681c4) — 8/12/2011 @ 12:17 pmIt’s been pointed out you saved a lot of screenshots from Weiner… even prior to any scandal emerging (which is really kinda strange).
Am I mistaken about this? I believe you confirmed it.
I assumed you basically had screenshots of 100% of these.
For example, Greg’s point about the May 16 to May 18 discrepancy. Do you have a screenshot? I suppose not, if you’re saying it’s a complete fiction.
Here’s one possibility: the sock-drawer knows you have something to be defensive about. They modified the date in hopes you proved that date was incorrect with the only evidence you had… a screenshot that implicates you anyway.
Or, you take a defensive track and deny some things that really happened but have been handled dishonestly by the sock drawer. In a way, your denial is accurate in the strictest sense.
As problems emerge with this effort, a defensive Gennette vs a frustrated truth seeker creates a major diversion from some aspect of the DMs that really happened but someone now sorely wishes to never be believed.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/12/2011 @ 12:20 pmComment by Gennette — 8/12/2011 @ 12:12 pm
So you are saying that all day, right up til 5:45 PM Weiner is chatting with Nikki & then he outs her as a troll & an hour & 45 minutes later you are discussing that at 6:39? If you are then discussing her problems with her veracity with Weiner all that time why are you pretending to Nikki, that you flirted with Weiner, in the early AM of the 18th in order to get “the ball rolling” because Nikki has failed to mention Weiner much?
Rocksem (e1d29d) — 8/12/2011 @ 12:23 pmExcuse me, that’s 54 minutes later, not 1 hour & 45 minutes later.
Rocksem (e1d29d) — 8/12/2011 @ 12:25 pmCan someone tell me if these statements are correct or incorrect, and why?
1. Gennette was following Weiner, then he followed her, and they conversed by DMs and other means.
2. Subsequently, Nikki started following Weiner, he followed her, and they apparently conversed by DMs.
3. Gennette contacted Nikki after noticing she was following Weiner.
4. Gennette first mentioned Weiner to Nikki because Nikki didn’t mention him in her online conversations with Gennette.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 8/12/2011 @ 12:26 pmYes, you are mistaken.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/12/2011 @ 12:28 pmI have VERY few screen shots saved from AW.
@RocksEm
I wanted her to feel comfortable talking about him which was why I talked about flirting.
Honestly, I don’t have any DMs, so I can’t be sure about any of these times and if they’re accurate or not.
I do know that when I was reassuring Nikki that I didn’t think she was a troll, it was because Weiner had “called her out” (maybe not explicitly) for being a troll.
She was trying to assure me that she wasn’t.
I don’t know what took place in their conversation… he told me that had went “round for round” with the troll.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/12/2011 @ 12:35 pmShe told me that he had been mean to her and unfollowed her.
In June, TMZ published an article detailing a Weiner email to Ginger Lee. In the email, Weiner tells Lee that a “conservative blogger/troll” is contacting his female followers with the intent of doing a story about them.
The email was sent on May 12, the same day Gennette says she and Weiner spoke about Starchild for the first time.
Starchild also sent Ginger Lee several tweets on this day, which appear to have been prompted by Lee’s Tumblr post about dealing with a stalker.
Patriot also sent more than 20 tweets that day about the impending sex scandal, including ones like, “@2LiveinLiberty @goatsred Wonder if @RepWeiner teen mistress will get an advice column like Socks-Spitzer’s ex-girl?” and @2LiveinLiberty @goatsred If the bro-code applied, I’d help a brother out, I admit. But @RepWeiner ain’t no bro. That’s for sure.
So it seems likely Weiner was on the look out for new followers who happened to be super hot high school girls with an interest in Gucci purses, tiny clutch-dogs, sparkly earrings, heavy make-up, baseball, politics, and homework.
Greg (bc8186) — 8/12/2011 @ 12:37 pmGennette, I only mentioned the LE thing because that is one possible route back to your twitter account.
There is probably a lot easier way, asking for it. I think it’s very likely they would give it back to you. Plus, you have a legit (and well known) story and reason for them to give it back to you.
Noodles (3681c4) — 8/12/2011 @ 12:39 pmI’ll be glad when everybody gets over their Weiner obsession, and moves onto something else.
Talk about a tempest in a teapot.
Dave Surls (e59f18) — 8/12/2011 @ 12:41 pm1. I followed him, he followed me, we conversed via DM. We exchanged a few texts AFTER the scandal had broken.
2. Correct.
3. Wrong. Nikki was following me before she was ever following Weiner. She then sparked up a conversation with me. After a week and a half Weiner finally came up. She then followed Weiner.
4. I first mentioned that I noticed that there was “a politician” following both Ethel (someone who Nikki had to me was a “friend” of hers) and me. The she responds like, “oh Rep Weiner, yadda yadda”. She wasn’t following him at that point.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/12/2011 @ 12:42 pmGennette, can you answer #23 from Miranda, please? Thanks.
Anita Busch (a025dd) — 8/12/2011 @ 12:44 pmSo you don’t think it’s not inconsistent to say that starting after 5:45 PM on the 17th you have an extended discussion with Nikki and 7 hours later you have to pretend to Nikki that you have flirted with Weiner in order to get “the ball rolling” because she hasn’t mentioned him much up until that point? That’s what you are saying?
Rocksem (e1d29d) — 8/12/2011 @ 12:44 pmOK. Glad I asked instead of asserted.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/12/2011 @ 12:44 pm@Noodles
When I contacted Twitter they said that they DO NOT retrieve data from terminated accounts.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/12/2011 @ 12:45 pmI’ve told people before, if you know a way to get that stuff back, please let me know. Because I’d love to get these DMs back.
I’ve been mistaken about times and dates because I don’t have the conversations anymore and I saw them over a month later.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/12/2011 @ 12:48 pmI brought him up on the 16th to “get the ball rolling”, I talked about flirting (whenever it was that I talked about it) to make this person think that I felt comfortable divulging information about him.
Did you receive any threats?
Anita Busch (a025dd) — 8/12/2011 @ 12:48 pmWhy do you think Weiner wasn’t talking about the BornFreecrew in his emails to Ginger Lee? Why would Weiner be on the lookout for young girls when up until this point all the people who were trolling him were older? Do you think all the DMs to Nikki, supplied by JR, on the 17th are fabrications? Because they aren’t consistent with someone who thinks he’s talking to a troll or even appears cautious.
Rocksem (e1d29d) — 8/12/2011 @ 12:49 pmThanks for the response Gennette. I don’t know anything about Twitter or it’s terms of service etc. but there is no doubt they could do it if they wanted to. Most likely they just don’t want to have to do this service for everybody and anybody that closes their account.
Like I said, you might have to use your celebrity (for lack of a better term) or see if (maybe through Patterico) LE could get them to do it.
Noodles (3681c4) — 8/12/2011 @ 12:51 pmI have felt a concern for my safety throughout this whole thing. And yes, it would appear that someone has it out for me, although now they say that really they’ve been trying to help me this whole time.
I’d be interested to know how you think videochatting with a District Attorney, who hasn’t been looking out for my best interests at all through this thing, would make me feel safer?
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/12/2011 @ 12:51 pmThank you for your response, Gennette. I’m intentionally directing my questions to the general audience so you won’t feel compelled to answer. Having said that, I appreciate when you do respond.
Regarding this statement by Gennette — 8/12/2011 @ 12:35 pm:
Does anyone know the answers to these questions?
1. Who said Nikki was fake first — Gennette or Weiner?
2. If Weiner already thought Nikki was fake, could Weiner’s opinion have convinced Gennette that Nikki was fake? In other words, could Weiner have been the source of Gennette’s “intuition” regarding Nikki?
3. Is there any evidence that others, besides Weiner and Gennette, were discussing whether Nikki was fake?
DRJ (a83b8b) — 8/12/2011 @ 12:52 pmSo you are saying now that the fake flirt DMs from you to Nikki were on the 16th? Because earlier in this thread you said they were on the 18th. You think Seattle555’s cap is accurate and the various Nikki caps of the same DMs are using false dates? Why would JR make such an obvious mistake when they took the time to make such elaborate fakes?
Rocksem (e1d29d) — 8/12/2011 @ 12:53 pmI guess what is still a bit astounding is that you (or anyone) in the first place would have joined in this bizarre game with a major creep who was perving on every female in sight. I mean, we’re talking about someone who thought nothing of sending crotch shots to you (among others) and embarrassing you in front of the whole world. Even setting that aside, it’s frankly just amazing that the “ewwwww” factor didn’t register from the gitgo, leading to simply declining to join in this sleazy web activity. Really tres creepy stuff to get pulled into.
Jay S (237a25) — 8/12/2011 @ 12:54 pm@Anita
I’ve never received any threats and I’ve been really skeptical of all of the threats that people received in this. I want to be clear that I’m not minimizing the severity of any of these threats. I just question the motives and stated intentions.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/12/2011 @ 12:54 pmHow would I have known?
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/12/2011 @ 12:55 pmNo. Those DMs were on the 18th.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/12/2011 @ 12:57 pmOn the 16th, I brought him up for the first time. And then I went to sleep shortly after.
But he is looking for the truth. He is not advocating for you, he is simply seeking the truth in good faith.
He does want to know exactly who threatened him, and would not do anything to conceal the truth about anything related to this.
His finding the most disturbing person involved with this, or confirming the identity of various people, should give you some comfort. And that he’s sought the truth many times in the past should show you that he is serious about this. The only thing helping Patterico will do is lead to truth.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/12/2011 @ 12:57 pmIntuition?
DRJ (a83b8b) — 8/12/2011 @ 12:58 pm1. I said that she was fake first. And then he warned Ginger.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/12/2011 @ 12:59 pm2. No.
3. Not that I’m aware of.
New keyboard please!
jmel44 (587a2f) — 8/12/2011 @ 1:01 pmA follow-up regarding this statement by Gennette — 8/12/2011 @ 12:35 pm:
It sounds like Gennette and Weiner were playing a game of “Good Cop, Bad Cop” with Nikki. Was this deliberate or a coincidence?
DRJ (a83b8b) — 8/12/2011 @ 1:03 pm@DRJ
Well, they were only talking for less than two days and I talked to her for almost a month. And other when I pointed her out to him on the 12th and then those two days that they had talked, I didn’t discuss my Nikki conversations with Weiner. So it wasn’t really like that.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/12/2011 @ 1:06 pmBut I see what you mean.
That communication to Patterico makes it perfectly clear that you said up until you sent the Fake Flirt DMs that “this person hadn’t brought up him up yet” and you had to get “the ball rolling”. But now you are saying you had been talking with Nikki about Weiner extensively for hours on the previous day and you had gotten the ball rolling on the 16th?
If you got the ball rolling on the 16th why did you say to Nikki “I’ve been talking to you for a long time now & you’ve never brought repweiner up” at 6:39 PM on the 17th?
Rocksem (e1d29d) — 8/12/2011 @ 1:08 pmGennette: The threats these people received … at least where Patrick is concerned was very real.
koam asked me on the other thread if Patrick accused me or spoke ill … no, he didn’t, but he was aggressive in trying to find out if I was real and if the statement I gave to all other media was real. It was odd, but I understood, given what I had gone through.
You, Gennette, of all people having gone through what you have, should understand the suspicion as well.
I hope you change your mind eventually about Patrick. He is one of the good guys.
Anita Busch (a025dd) — 8/12/2011 @ 1:15 pm@RocksEm
In the first or second doc dump you will see my DMs to Nikki where I brought him up on the 16th.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/12/2011 @ 1:19 pmWhen I said she never brought him up, to her, that was because she hadn’t. I had initiated the conversations at that point. And I wanted to assure her that I didn’t think she was fake.
Well, I suspect you would agree that a older man – of whom the social media scuttlebutt (as evidenced by the the troll-rumors-games)is that he “likes” young girls – with a deep need to “f— with” persons online who claim to be underage girls probably has a screw loose in the head, at the least.
What sane, non-perv person would do such a thing? (and we are talking a member of Congress, yet)
Was it a case of you just not having your thinking cap on and getting carried away for whatever reason? Wouldn’t the intelligent thing to do be to tell him “Good luck with the alleged underage girl trolls and tell Chris Hansen I said “Hi”?” and then unfollow & block him from contacting you?
I hope I don’t sound mean or disrespectful, I’m just saying alarm bells should’ve been sounding loud for you to steer the other way. In hindsight I believe that should be even more incredibly obvious.
Jay S (237a25) — 8/12/2011 @ 1:26 pm@Anita
I wasn’t saying that the threats weren’t real. I do believe that they’re real.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/12/2011 @ 1:28 pm“Intuition?”
DRJ – Gennette said the following above:
“I think I’d made this clear plenty of times that when she asked me to follow her so we could DM, I looked at her page and it was beyond sketchy. It was obvious that she was fake.”
That does not sound like intuition.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 8/12/2011 @ 1:33 pm@JayS
I had been communicating with this girl before I ever discussed her with him.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/12/2011 @ 1:34 pmI was interested in this person because they had sought me out and I felt like there was probably a “story” behind it.
Weiner wasn’t weird with me, I didn’t know anything about the women he was sexting with, he seemed interested for a few days in messing with a troll… I don’t know why any red flags would have went off.
@DaleyRocks
A lot of it was intuition. I had no hard evidence that she was real. But her Twitter page, the people she had followed, the way she talked to me… it was all highly suspicious.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/12/2011 @ 1:36 pmGennette your stated reason for the Fake Flirts was to instantiate a conversation with Nikki about Weiner. Since it’s clear now that you were having an hours long conversation with Nikki about Weiner prior to the Fake Flirts what purpose is there to sending the Fake Flirt DMs? You obviously had her confidence prior to the Fake Flirts. There is nothing now to suggest those DMs about you flirting with Weiner were not in fact exactly what they purport to be and this massive inconsistency in your explanation lends a lot of weight to the idea that the other DMS which you are suggesting are fake are in fact accurate.
Rocksem (e1d29d) — 8/12/2011 @ 1:37 pmI guess Gennette doesn’t know any weird 17 year olds. I do. There is a wide variety of types. Some are in band, some are cool, some are angry, some are friendly.
Some act like adults, even.
For the same reasons I find Gennette’s diction compatible with a 21 year old, albeit a very intelligent and motivated one, I find Nikki to be a plausible minor. I do not understand why it’s so clear she wasn’t. Something specific from this twitter bio would help me, perhaps, understand the obviousness.
This is certainly a major facet that doesn’t add up. It’s part of why it would be helpful if Gennette confirmed we’re actually dealing with her (I believe it’s her, but it would help the pursuit of truth to know for sure). I also find Jay S’s point to be quite well said. That is an interesting personality that is cool with Weiner, but not with Patterico, on a basis of ‘weirdness’ or especially one of trust.
Miranda has been on the ball too, and it’s a shame we don’t get along (let’s not distract by rehashing that). She’s right on the money that Patterico shining more light and identifying the creepiest character in this ordeal should be a comfort to Gennette.
But Miranda was also right that pleading for this to occur is unlikely to accomplish anything, so I think we just have to take this as circumstantial evidence as we puzzle over the mess.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/12/2011 @ 1:41 pmAnd of course, I do realize Gennette was right all along that Nikki was fake. I don’t mean to suggest there’s still a chance she was real.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/12/2011 @ 1:43 pm@RocksEm
What I was attempting to explain to you is that those conversations happened within just two days of each other and were presented to me over a month later. They were not really well distinguished in my mind.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/12/2011 @ 1:46 pmI brought AW up to Nikki to get the ball rolling. Later, I said that I had flirted to make her feel comfortable talking about him.
I can’t be sure about any of these dates really. I don’t necessarily trust that JR9 has presented these correctly.
Ah, well, that’s where we would disagree. 🙂
Jay S (237a25) — 8/12/2011 @ 1:46 pmI truly hope you have since found a good friend who, on things such as this, will say “Gennette, WTH??!!?” to serve as an ‘external warning bell’. Best wishes.
Gennette,
I’m not sure I will be commenting on this topic anymore but I don’t want to leave without offering you some words of encouragement and caution.
First, if you really are Gennette (and I think you are), please don’t be so trusting of social media in the future. Your desire to get close to famous or ideologically similar people may encourage or open doors for you but I think it has already come at a high personal price, perhaps for some time to come. Further, I hope you can also acknowledge that your intuition failed you in one respect — the person you chose to get close to, Anthony Weiner, clearly wasn’t a good friend to you or anyone he contacted.
Second, you are understandably concerned about your recent experience. It would be upsetting for anyone, let alone someone just beginning their adult life. I hope you have an adult relative who can offer advice that is in your best interests. You are right to be careful who to trust but the mere fact that you are still online suggests to me that you don’t have good counsel or that you’re listening to someone who doesn’t have your best interests at heart.
Third, I’m not asking you to trust Patterico because only you can make that decision. But he has a history — both online and in real life — of being tenacious and fair in resolving complex issues. He also has personal concerns that prompt his involvement, as he and others have explained to you in the past. He and his family have been threatened as a result of this matter so if you believe it makes sense for you to stay involved, he also has a good reason to stay involved in this story.
Fourth, I hope you emerge from this older and wiser, and I think you will if you learn better ways to decide who to trust. In that regard, whether you like it or not, Dan Wolfe and the bornfreecree were right about Weiner. That doesn’t make everything they did right but it counts for something. If you ever have a daughter, I think you will understand why.
Finally, I rarely discuss things like this online and now I’ve done it twice with you. For your sake, I hope you’re exactly what you portray yourself as and you’re not here under false pretenses. If you are what you claim, I wish you the best.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 8/12/2011 @ 1:50 pmGennette you just stated you were comforting her most of the night on the 17th about Weiner. You suddenly need to create the Fake Flirts at 1 am on the 18th to reassure her? Why would she be turning to you on the night of the 17th about Weiner and not feel comfortable hours later?
Rocksem (e1d29d) — 8/12/2011 @ 1:51 pmBTW, if Gennette goes through with the video chat to Pat, I will call or video chat Lee Stranahan (his choice).
Not that Gennette really seems to have a problem with me. But a sign of good faith. I’ll also take a month hiatus from discussing Weinergate. & any other reasonable concessions she’d like.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/12/2011 @ 1:52 pmGennette, in comment 122 you state: I’ve been really skeptical of all of the threats that people received in this. Then you go on to say you don’t want to “minimize” them.
In comment 135 you say that you believe the threats are real.
So, first you are skeptical and then you are not.
I can understand why Patrick is confused by your statements.
Anita Busch (a025dd) — 8/12/2011 @ 1:53 pmWhen did I ever say I was having hours long conversations with Nikki about Weiner?
We never had hours long conversations about him.
And I still don’t know why I would admit to some DMs and deny others unless I really didn’t write them.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/12/2011 @ 1:54 pmI knew she was fake, I don’t care what the DMs say, I was obviously playing a game with her.
But I didn’t write a lot of those DMs.
@Anita
You chopped up my quote. I said I was skeptical of the motivations and stated intentions of the threats.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/12/2011 @ 1:55 pmI’m done commenting as well. I agree with DRJ’s last comment.
Anita Busch (a025dd) — 8/12/2011 @ 1:56 pmSorry, Gennette. Read to me like you were skeptical of the threats.
Anita Busch (a025dd) — 8/12/2011 @ 1:58 pmBut you did call them benign. And I believed there was a real chance you actually thought they were, which is why I’ve tried to explain in reality they are anything but benign.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/12/2011 @ 1:59 pm@RocksEm
#145
Where are you getting this information? I said I was comforting her most of the night of the 17th?? You keep saying that things were said that were never said.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/12/2011 @ 1:59 pmOh no. DRJ and Anita leaving this discussion? Average IQ is about to drop in here.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/12/2011 @ 2:00 pm@Dustin
That was before I realized that there was apparently lots of info that I didn’t have concerning the threats.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/12/2011 @ 2:01 pmThis is true. I’m glad you understand that.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/12/2011 @ 2:01 pm62. SF> Patterico first linked to that screencap on 6/20.
Actually the first mention on this blog was in a comment on June 18.
I hadn’t realized the dates had been changed. I would presume the dates were changed to make a better timeline.
Sammy Finkelman (d3daeb) — 8/12/2011 @ 2:02 pmAnd I thought Douche-Weiner paid way too much attention to this girl.
Talk about feeding the trolls.
She is going to get a Pulitzer based on her work here.
S. Carter aka J-Z (786e37) — 8/12/2011 @ 2:11 pmAlright,
I’ll be off for most of the day.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/12/2011 @ 2:12 pm#159, can I petition for an extension of the sabbatical?
S. Carter aka J-Z (786e37) — 8/12/2011 @ 2:12 pm#160
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/12/2011 @ 2:20 pmYeah!
GNC is right when she says this was all a big distraction.
From what?
How soon thus thread forgets what was happening with JG when the doc dumos started.
In fact, JG seems to have been completely dropped in all this so yeah, the distraction totally worked – which was my fear the entire time. The real person who created the starchild account but zero mention in 3 different threads with 600+ comments. Well played.
Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 8/12/2011 @ 2:22 pmRocksem, answers to your questions from above. Your questions in bold.
Why do you think Weiner wasn’t talking about the BornFreecrew in his emails to Ginger Lee?
I think he was talking about the Bornfreecrew. By 05/12, he had already been copied on literally hundreds of derogatory tweets from PatriotUSA76 and was quite familiar with Patriot and some of the others.
Why would Weiner be on the lookout for young girls when up until this point all the people who were trolling him were older?
Because Patriot was predicting a sex scandal that would involve Weiner and a teenage girl. On April 13, a month before Weiner has this 05/12 conversation with Lee, Weiner followed HS student Ethel.
On that same day, both PatriotUSA76 and Starchild111 contacted Ethel (within one minute of each other) and engaged in multiple tweets with her.
Patriot tweeted a photo of Ethel and he and others in the Bornfreecrew copied Weiner on some of the tweets they were posting about him following a schoolgirl. Here’s an example: “@mikemadden59 @goatsred @jihadihunter @redrivergrl @RepWeiner new pal is a high school girl. First porn actresses now little girls. Weird.
13 Apr”
Presumably Weiner saw these tweets because he unfollows Ethel the same day. If he ever checked out her time-line that day, he may have also seen some of the many tweets that Starchild was tweeting about him to Ethel.
On 04/19, Patriot tweets that Weiner is following a schoolgirl with initials GN.
On 5/11, the day before Weiner talks to Gennette and Ginger about the trolls, Patriot copied Weiner on tweets about a rumor that “a top rightwing blog has sexscandal pics of high profile Dem.” Other tweets Weiner was copied on describe the girl in question as “a teen. Not underaged…”
So, Weiner knows that trolls are very interested in the fact that he follows young sexy females. And they’re actually predicting that there are pix that somehow implicate him in a scandal with a teenage girl.
So if a really sexy looking teen girl (who doesn’t really look all that much like the shy teenager she purports to be) suddenly starts following him, that would likely set off some alarm bells.
Do you think all the DMs to Nikki, supplied by JR, on the 17th are fabrications? Because they aren’t consistent with someone who thinks he’s talking to a troll or even appears cautious.
I would argue that they appear very much like the work of a very incautious person who thinks he’s trolling a troll.
Are they actually real? I suspect at least some of them are.
Another interesting datapoint: On 05/16, when Weiner and Nikki start their DM messages, Patriot tweets the following at 8:46AM: “There could be some great fun on the agenda today…”
At 9:03AM, in apparent response to a Starchild DM, Weiner replies, “you’re welcome! have a good day at class.”
And so the fun began.
Greg (bc8186) — 8/12/2011 @ 2:46 pmGennette, if you haven’t left yet:
When Starchild111 first contacted you, did she have her female avatar?
Greg (bc8186) — 8/12/2011 @ 2:50 pmWhat do I have to do quote the entire comment section?
You say there are missing DMs from Weiner to Nikki between 5:45 and 6:39 on the 17th. How would you know about those if not talking to Nikki at the time?
At 6:39 you START reassuring her you don’t think she’s a troll. Start implies a number of exchanges. By 8:42 Weiner isn’t following her. You must have been following her profile pretty closely. You weren’t conversing?
By 1 am you are sending her fake flirt DMs to reassure her some more despite the fact it’s clear you had her confidence earlier. You did an awful lot of reassuring/comforting that night.
If Weiner had already dumped her earlier that night why are you attempting to draw her out more with the Fake Flirt Dms at 1 am for anyway?
Rocksem (0471ae) — 8/12/2011 @ 2:59 pmTo me they seem like a bunch of innocuous BS except for his superhero in tights routine.
Rocksem (0471ae) — 8/12/2011 @ 3:08 pmAnd how does restarting interest in this, when it was virtually dead, help with that distraction?
Rocksem (0471ae) — 8/12/2011 @ 3:11 pmBecause you could explain away those 3 DMs. No one writes a dozen DMs about flirting if they don’t mean it. Those need to be denied. You didn’t write a lot of those DMs? What ever happened to 85% were accurate?
Rocksem (0471ae) — 8/12/2011 @ 3:17 pmReally? These statements don’t sound like someone who thinks he’s messing with someone who’s angry because he previously tweeted about Tea Party trolls with one tooth?
Again, I don’t know how many of these quotes are real. But the basic premise Weiner lays out for Starchild — he’ll go to prom if she agrees to recruit followers for him (Patriot’s worst nightmare…) — along with the constant references to trolls suggests Weiner is doing exactly what he tells Starchild he loves doing — messing with the trolls.
Greg (bc8186) — 8/12/2011 @ 3:43 pmThis quote makes it sound like Starchild has told Weiner that she shut down the Bornfreecrew after they tweeted numerous warnings to Ethel about Weiner?
Greg (bc8186) — 8/12/2011 @ 3:47 pmpork chop on a stick
ColonelHaiku (d1f5ff) — 8/12/2011 @ 4:07 pmweiner dipped in the cornmeal
Pat Boone at State Fair?
i don’t understand why Gennette is still here, honestly. Unless I was seriously invested in this in some way – as opposed to an unfortunate bystander being accused of things I knew I had no part in – I woulda said “f*ck this” a long time ago and just kept to myself. Gennette’s probably dropped hundreds and hundreds of comments on this, all the while insisting that she has nothing to gain from it. I don’t get it.
Leviticus (b85154) — 8/12/2011 @ 4:38 pmAt some level – and again, I’m haven’t been involved in this discussion for very long – it has “running interference” written all over it.
4000 comments later, WHO EVEN KNOWS WHAT REALLY HAPPENED!!!!????!!!1!1!! INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY, AND ALL EVIDENCE IS SUSPECT!!1!!!
Man… that would be some cynical sh*t…
Leviticus (b85154) — 8/12/2011 @ 4:43 pmI haven’t forgotten. I never did.
Did you ever get information from the Boston police on that? The last time I talked to the detective he all but told me to go to hell.
Patterico (f724ca) — 8/12/2011 @ 5:08 pmWho dropped JG? Do we have control over that? Are we supposed to endlessly discuss something with no new information? What is happening with it Lee?
Rocksem (0471ae) — 8/12/2011 @ 5:13 pmJG is not dropped. And Weiner is the skeez he ever was.
SarahW (af7312) — 8/12/2011 @ 5:19 pmThat’s for sure. Part of what I find so baffling about the whole John Reid thing is that, to the extent the blogs had any role in Weiner’s resignation, it was a) mainly all Breitbart, and b) to a tiny extent over the Ethel story — a REAL story about a REAL girl in Delaware.
Neither is undercut (or much supported) by John Reid, whether he is pro-, anti-, or indifferent. So why are all these people still so wound up over it?
I know why *I* am. But why them?
Patterico (f724ca) — 8/12/2011 @ 5:29 pmThat’s the real question, isn’t it?
Whatever is under this rock has got to be ugly.
Pious Agnostic (6048a8) — 8/12/2011 @ 5:34 pmPatterico,
I also find it more than a coincidence that JR9 resurfaced shortly after you publicly stated you thought DW was a fraud.
And shortly after DW DM’ing you his rant on 7/31 “”It KILLS YOU that you will NEVER EVER EVER find me EVER!!!! HAHAAAAAAAAAA” — “Dan Wolfe,” 7-31-11″
Maybe that helped spark their ‘obsession’ or fear.
az5thdstrct (865e5b) — 8/12/2011 @ 5:44 pmobsession or fear
ColonelHaiku (d1f5ff) — 8/12/2011 @ 5:49 pmjust leave it to Danny Wolfe
to bring up the rear
Pat,
That frustration wasn’t aimed at you.
I should get the number of the 2nd report (by Thornton) and request both. Just haven’t yet – too busy trying to help people make $50,000.
Can you expand on what the Detectve said, so I have an idea what to expect?
Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 8/12/2011 @ 6:01 pmThe detective told me he wasn’t going to talk to me and was going to end the conversation. I named a specific law enforcment agency and said will you cooperate with them if THEY call you, and he said no, he wouldn’t, and he was going to end the conversation.
Incredibly hostile and unhelpful. I can’t believe this man is a police officer.
Patterico (f724ca) — 8/12/2011 @ 6:03 pmHas anybody talked to JG in person?
Is there any way it was a woman in Boston who was posing as JG?
Could you describe the voice of the woman you talked to? Young, middle aged, high pitched, husky?
Patterico (f724ca) — 8/12/2011 @ 6:05 pmThat’s very strange that the detective refused to talk to another law enforcement agency.
Anita Busch (a025dd) — 8/12/2011 @ 6:10 pmYou bet it is. I was astounded. But he’s really a detective at Boston PD. I tracked him down through the main number.
I heard a rumor that the detective had told someone JG was a mental case and that she made a stink inside the department and that the detective got pissed off, which could explain it. But it’s a rumor and who knows if it’s true.
Patterico (f724ca) — 8/12/2011 @ 6:18 pmPossibly mental lady in Boston?
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/12/2011 @ 6:31 pmObviously there are many many people in Boston, so this is almost completely baseless.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/12/2011 @ 6:31 pmDustin,
Not necessarily.
Patterico (f724ca) — 8/12/2011 @ 6:32 pmmental lady in Boston??? Where would one start?!?!
ColonelHaiku (d1f5ff) — 8/12/2011 @ 6:32 pmI have no idea if that person is mental or not, I should add. I do know, however, that she hates Mike Stack. Assuming it’s a she.
Patterico (f724ca) — 8/12/2011 @ 6:33 pmI also know that she flamed out about him on Twitter the day he got an e-mail threat.
And that she disappeared from Twitter the day I got an e-mail threat.
And I know a few other things too.
Patterico (f724ca) — 8/12/2011 @ 6:34 pmWas it shown that Starchild must have been Jenny’s? Specifically, the claim she couldn’t have possibly abandoned the twitter account in the timeframe? Or is this more of a very strong circumstantial case (such as the Jenay name post ‘change’ and JG having admitted to having the account at one point)?
If the JR9 stuff really was a distraction, then they probably think there was something folks can actually discover worth distracting us from.
I asked Mike about Darrah a few days ago. Mandy was extremely helpful too. But damn are there a lot of characters on the internet. I’ve found myself switching from one theory to the next and hesitate to do it again.
But the timing Patterico is sharing seems very interesting.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/12/2011 @ 6:41 pm108.I’ll be glad when everybody gets over their Weiner obsession, and moves onto something else.
Talk about a tempest in a teapot.
Comment by Dave Surls — 8/12/2011 @ 12:41 pm
Hey Dave–I’ll be glad when commenters that pop in here and give a misguided comment just go back to KOS or TPM. Some here have a vested interest in bringing the scumbags behind these events to justice. I’ll gladly trade the stress,aggravation,threats,stalkings,death threats and the defamation with you to get over “the Weiner Obsession” as you call it.
goatsred (66819b) — 8/12/2011 @ 7:00 pmI cannot live a normal life right now and have not been able to since AW accused some of hacking and the assho’s at KOS and Mediaite,Gawker,Salon destroyed my reputation.
So a lesson for you: Next time you decide to speak out of school about something you find stupid, I’ll be glad if you move onto another website.
Maybe USAToday.com or TMZ, So STFU.
Assume that the Tweets that GNC says are fake, are fake.
What does it say about JRs actual motives?
Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 8/12/2011 @ 7:34 pmI haven’t read all of the comments (I got through 83 before I did a print of the dump.
I’ve highlighted blue for Patterico and Genette agree on the veracity of the Tweet/DM.
I’ve highlighted green for fake according to Genette.
I’ve marked the AW Tweets/DMs in yellow.
The pattern I see from this? The greenies (fake per Genette) show crude attempts to draw a confidence, combined with slight condescension – they’re reasonably close to Genette’s style per the blue highlights, except for constant use of “sweet girl” and a faintly patronizing tone (not consistent with the ones Genette and Patterico agree are genuine).
I hope this helps, and I’m not entirely off-base.
Dianna (f12db5) — 8/12/2011 @ 7:46 pmOK, now I am confused. Why did you say you were skeptical of the threats before?
If you believe the threats are real, why are you skeptical? Or did you just mis-type?
Dianna (f12db5) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:04 pmDave Surls is generally OK. He just isn’t listening to me when I say there is something going on here beneath the surface.
I assume.
Dave, if the posts bore you, you can skip over them. But please don’t treat it as trivial. As Mike notes, it is not.
Patterico (f724ca) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:25 pmEmploying those assumptions: JR9 wants to falsely paint Weiner as having flirted with Gennette; Gennette as having texted Weiner pre-scandal; and Gennette (not Nikki) as having pushed Nikki to talk about Weiner.
I think I have that right.
Meaning what, in your opinion? What is the deeper motive?
Patterico (f724ca) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:28 pm@172, Leviticus. An innocent reason could be that she’d concerned about more damage being done to her reputation, and is trying to steer things away from her.
htom (412a17) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:34 pmI didn’t have an answer in mind.
That’s a good summary, I think.
Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:39 pmI think she means (and said) she was skeptical of the motive of the threats.
She did, on August 4, call them “benign,” as Dustin points out. Even though I had assured her, the day before (August 3): “As for the threats . . . I’ll just say: someone went to great lengths and great risk to make the threats. More than you know, assuming (as I do) that you weren’t involved.”
So she has indeed trivialized the threats even after I told her she should not.
Which, I will admit, annoyed me.
But I would like to think that she has wised up a bit regarding that issue, and is now expressing skepticism, not of the threats themselves, but their stated intention (to help her).
Patterico (f724ca) — 8/12/2011 @ 9:29 pm19. Huh?
What is the point of these AW threads at this time?
I have a feeling someone could summarize this entire thing in three sentences if they tried really hard.
Comment by S. Carter aka J-Z — 8/12/2011 @ 9:13 am
Ditto. (yawn)
easily amused sock puppet (75c9eb) — 8/13/2011 @ 5:25 am#202 < Drats, I forgot to drop my sock puppet.
Summit, NJ (75c9eb) — 8/13/2011 @ 5:27 amNo, they don’t. Where is “Nikki” angry about BFC being called trolls? Why would she be if she pretending not to be a troll herself?
These quotes are totally consistent with other stuff Weiner sent to women which have been verified minus the overt sexual stuff. The references to trolls are part of his Superhero routine. Me and you against the Blue Meanies.
Weiner did the prom thing to get followers. The fool thought getting to 50,000 was some kind of magical event. Even if it caught on he would have graciously bowed out. Politically the optics of him going to the prom with a teen are horrible. Especially in someone else’s District. If these are accurate then what he did here is his usual routine. Follow as long as it’s ok and then stop when it looks bad and follow again later. Similar to Ethel.
What’s the point of “messing with trolls” in private DMs anyway? No one would see it. If he wanted to mess with her he would have used regular tweets.
*Sorry it took so long to respond to this but I missed it.
Rocksem (0471ae) — 8/13/2011 @ 8:01 amThe BFC also went back and forth with “Nikki” about herself, Weiner & the prom. This tweet sounds like Weiner praising her for successfully going back at them and basically saying go to hell. Especially for using #Weineryes. He’s obsessed with getting followers.
Rocksem (0471ae) — 8/13/2011 @ 8:07 amOpinions please?
1) Did Weiner resign due to the problem of the crotch shot he sent to Gennette?
2) Or was it due to issues of tweets to high school girls?
3) Why would someone threaten Patterico to not go further into the Gennette/Weiner relationship, especially if the two are consenting adults?
4) Don’t you think he could have withstood the pressure if this was the worse there was out there? Democrats never resign after this kind of thing.
5) Wouldn’t Gennette and Weiner have had to have some actual physical moments together for him to have trusted her with a picture of his Brett Farve?
6) Has Gennette admitted being in the private company of Weiner?
7) Is the Gennette that is posting here the same one who did the tweets with Weiner? It seems that posting here is inconsistent with the attitude professed in the Weiner tweets.
Thank you Patterico for the Cliff Note summary posted previously. I still have some difficulty wading through over 200 posts so maybe some of my questions have been answered. Maybe not.
AZ Bob (aa856e) — 8/13/2011 @ 9:26 amAll right.
The threats are the thing that keeps me coming back to this; though I love puzzles, there’s so much going on that this would definitely end up on the back burner, otherwise.
Stay safe.
Dianna (f12db5) — 8/13/2011 @ 9:34 am#6 NO!
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/13/2011 @ 10:03 amI think you are right. Which suggests he’s following her time-line, seeing her have exchanges with people he’s very familiar with.
Paying such close attention to her timeline, he’s:
A) Also probably seeing all the times Starchild has conversed with Ginger Lee and Ethel.
B) Seeing that she follows Ginger, Ethel, and Gennette.
C) Has only just started talking to other HS students (i.e., Juan, Marienela, and another teenager who like Juan appears real and otherwise uninvolved/oblivious to what was going on) in the last couple days.
Did Weiner look this closely at Starchild’s page? We don’t know of course. But what we do know, according to information from the interviews with Meagan Broussard, is that Weiner paid enough attention to Broussard’s FB page that he knew her child’s name even though she’d never mentioned it to him.
Greg (bc8186) — 8/13/2011 @ 10:07 am#7 That’s the question, isn’t it. I think that Patterico, and most of the commentariat here, believe that the Gennette who comments here is the Tweeter-made-famous-by-Weiner.
Though for some, doubt remains.
Pious Agnostic (6048a8) — 8/13/2011 @ 10:07 amSorry, I didn’t mean to fall into a common hole and assert what Patterico believes or doesn’t believe about the personalities who he’s interacting with in this matter.
I should have said, “I don’t think that Patterico hasn’t publicly stated that he believes that the Gennette here is a different person, and has certainly acted politely as if she were who she claims to be.”
It gets convoluted when you try to cover all the bases and be accurate. I think I’ll shut up.
Pious Agnostic (6048a8) — 8/13/2011 @ 10:13 amLee, who approached Breitbart with Broussard’s stuff?
SarahW (af7312) — 8/13/2011 @ 10:16 amWhen I pointed out the Starchild111 account, Weiner immediately thought it was fake and linked it to the BFC.
The day I point it out (May 12) he says, “This is a troll who has been bragging elsewhere that he has dirt on me. The profile is fake.”
On the 16th, the day he firsts talks to Nikki, I ask “So what do you think about this whole thing?”
He responds, “Still think its a troll thing. Remember the attacks on [Ethel], Gingerlee, and you all started at the same time.”
He was referring to DW tweeting us with screencaps of our profiles, etc.
I’m not sure if he actually wrote these DMs to Nikki, I think he may have, and when I read them it sounds like someone messing with a person who he knew was an adversary/troll.
Mike can confirm these DMs, they’re verbatim.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/13/2011 @ 10:28 amAZ Bob, Gennette has (believably) claimed that she’s never even been to NYC or DC.
This is part of why I think Gennette should be angry at Weiner. A lot of people are going to assume things like that are a possibility, just because they do not live in a world where responsible adults send this material around to strangers. It’s so pointless and irresponsible, after all.
Just remember, Gennette didn’t send this pic. Her reaction and some of her choices afterwards (And I guess before) are frustrating to say the least, but it’s really Weiner who owns that pic, not the recipient(s). It’s clear enough that he didn’t mean to send it the way he did, and we can’t even be sure who he meant to send it to.
I’m not Gennette’s advocate, nor can I say I’m a fan, but we shouldn’t believe she actually encountered Weiner in person. I find it sad for her, despite my differences with her, that this is going to be something people wonder about. I honestly am amazed she’s shown ‘Oh Gosh’ level anger for Weiner, who really was unbelievably irresponsible not only with Gennette but a hell of a lot of people. His pattern is consistently selfish, from ‘f—ing with’ people he merely guesses aren’t kids to blaming real, named people as hackers in order to escape his own deeds. He knew the hard left will seek vengeance, Bad Faith Stef style.
Anyway, the most productive point I’ve read recently is Lee’s noting we’re probably being led off the right path.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/13/2011 @ 10:41 amNot that I should have to explain this to anyone, but I thought it was very important for me to keep my emotions private during all of this. The feelings that I’ve expressed openly are very very different from the feelings that I’ve expressed to my family and close friends.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/13/2011 @ 10:50 amHow I felt about this wasn’t really anyone’s business and I didn’t need another headline because I came out and publicly bashed him.
Once I tweeted that I thought he should resign and within half an hour Politico and the Seattle Times had made a story out of it. I didn’t want stuff like that to happen.
OK. Fair enough.
I see your point.
I’m actually trying to be fair. I just can’t lie and pose as your fan when noting Weiner obviously wasn’t meeting these people he was sending material too. That’s part of what makes him such a jackass, though. I understand the confusion this gives people. I honestly don’t understand him, and I actually used to have a pretty positive impression of him considering our politics are near polar opposites.
But hey, you have to admit, it’s distinctive to see you call one guy an asshole for a sin of being critical (way too critical in your view) vs … keeping your opinions to yourself for a sin of potentially ruining folks’ lives.
Your answer makes some sense, but that is one reason folks here may look at you askance.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/13/2011 @ 10:56 amGennette- assuming he did not tell you he was sending sexually explicit messages to Ginger Lee and many others, he was not being honest with you about his interactions with other women.
MayBee (081489) — 8/13/2011 @ 11:01 amHe had a vested interest in you not thinking he would be really interested in flirting with a high school student.
Unless you knew what he was up to with Ethel, Ginger Lee, Megan, etc, his interest in dealing with Nikki and his communication with her was not necessarily what he told you it was.
I understand that. I also feel like a lot of the bad feelings that people have towards me are unwarranted but I suppose that comes with the territory. And I’m not going to lose sleep over it, but it’d be nice if how much people disliked me wasn’t such a focal point. Because I think it’s counterproductive.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/13/2011 @ 11:03 amMea culpa.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/13/2011 @ 11:04 amHey people who ask what the point of this is, or for a summary:
Ever try maybe reading the post? Or clicking on a link in that post?
Why do I bother with the links if you’re going to ignore them?
Hint: try the end of the second paragraph.
Patterico (8a5f36) — 8/13/2011 @ 11:06 amWell, he never told me about his interactions with any women because we didn’t have conversations like that. I wouldn’t have felt comfortable having that kind of conversation with him; it wasn’t any of my business.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/13/2011 @ 11:07 amI think I see the point you’re trying to make and it’s something to consider. But I think it makes me sense the other way.
*makes more sense
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/13/2011 @ 11:09 amI’m not sure what you mean by the other way.
Even if he thought she wasn’t real, he knew he had something to hide from the world. He was sending pictures of himself to people he didn’t know anything about.
You say you were interested in Nikki being a troll just for whatever reason…curiosity I guess.
But he knew he
a)was willing to say (at least) inappropriate things to high schools students
b)had reason to be concerned about who was trolling him
c)had reason to pretend the people trolling him were merely trolls (and not people with real information)
d)wanted to have a similar inappropriate relationship with you.
By your own account, he wasn’t honest with you.
MayBee (081489) — 8/13/2011 @ 11:25 amWhy would he have told me about his online affairs? I never asked. Wouldn’t it have been weird for him to tell a random Twitter follower, who he had previously discussed politics and trolls with, about his private life?
Did the trolls have real information? I might have missed that, I didn’t think that they did.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/13/2011 @ 11:34 am*He* didn’t know what they had, Gennette. He knew there was plenty of stuff out there.
I’m not saying he should have told you what he was up to in his private life. I’m saying he didn’t. You had no idea what he was really saying to anybody. You only knew what he was saying to you, and he had reason to lie to you about all of his interactions.
Would it be weird for him to tell a random Twitter follower about his private life? Not as weird as sending a random Twitter follower a picture of his crotch.
MayBee (081489) — 8/13/2011 @ 11:39 amGennette – Did you think it was strange that AW was following a porn star?
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 8/13/2011 @ 11:40 amDid the trolls have real information? I might have missed that, I didn’t think that they did.
And this…
MayBee (081489) — 8/13/2011 @ 11:40 amSince nobody knows who the trolls were or what their motivations are, nobody really knows what the trolls have.
I think if I’d received an unwarranted and totally unsolicited crotch shot from a sitting (standing) U.S. congressmen I’d have filed a civil lawsuit against him by now. Especially if I’d been communicating with him on a purely innocent basis on account of I liked his politics. I don’t think the oopsie defense and his public apology would have been sufficient for me to feel I’d done all I had to do to restore my reputation and honor out of this sordid affair.
elissa (32a457) — 8/13/2011 @ 11:49 amI think it’s interesting that Darrah Ford’s focus is porn stars, and I think Ginger was a relatively prominent one. She’d have been situated to know about Weiner’s behavior, and I suspect Mike’s interest in exposing it, and she seems to have the motive to set up Mike and cause a huge trolly mess.
And she’s in MA, and Darrah is a pseudonym. Her timing with abandoning accounts is compliant with some aspects of this story.
I’m really curious about her behavior that got her banned from that porn wiki site, but I’m cautious because I don’t know much about Darrah, and LC (who I admit taking some cues from) called her dramatic rather than sinister, so I don’t want to go full bore into speculation.
Timing seems to suggest LC is recently on the right path and Lee may have been too with JGMA. But that is thin.
Darrah, are you out there? Join the discussion.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/13/2011 @ 11:50 amWhere is this from?
Rocksem (0471ae) — 8/13/2011 @ 11:53 amI actually didn’t realize she was porn star. I remember looking at her profile but I think you would have had to google her or look at her blog.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/13/2011 @ 12:01 pmShe tweeted about politics. When I found out she was a pornstar, yeah, I thought it was strange.
Thank you for answering some of my questions. I have two more:
1) Do we have any of the specific tweets Gennette sent to Weiner?
2) She denies flirting with him but why would he send a picture of his Brett Farve? She said her tweets to Nickie were not a sincere reflections of her views.
3) Is Gennette the same hottie as depicted in the picture attached to her tweets?
AZ Bob (aa856e) — 8/13/2011 @ 12:09 pm1) They’re not public but I’ve shared the DM’s that I had randomly saved with NYT and I’ve shared a few with Mike.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/13/2011 @ 12:19 pm2) Didn’t Brett Favre send an UNSOLICITED picture to Jen Sturgess or whatever her name was? Idk. I can’t answer this question. I’ve said a million times, I don’t know why it was sent, if it was supposed to be to me, if it was a joke, etc, etc.
3) I was never a “hottie” until people started saying it because it made sense for the story.
Gennette makes a good point. How one feels about a person involved shouldn’t play into how one interacts with them. I ran into this problem when I fist tried to get the DKos offshoot crowd (MLW, Political Flesh Feast people) to hear me out on inconsistencies in Larisa Alexandrovna’s reporting and blogging.
Some hated me so much, they never dealt with facts I came up with. Their focus was on “trolling” me.
My humble opinion is that this is the real Gennette. I think it would be very easy for that to be confirmed without a phone chat. All it would take would be for her to go through her student newspaper (if there is one) and confirm through them this is her. Or something like that.
It’s unfortunate she deleted her twitter account, because then she could simply say it is her posting at Patterico’s. Like if anyone were wondering about me posting here, which granted no one is, I could post at one of my two blogs to confirm it.
There are theories and even facts I could discuss pertinent to at least the aftermath of the original weinergate story, but I don’t feel comfortable as yet doing so.
I will say that it’s pointless to discuss anonymous usernames. It’s ok for a while, but after a while, there’s nowhere to go with it. It turns off newbies and fence sitters. It doesn’t actually accomplish much.
Real names are a different story. When Dave Weintraub (DFQ) uncovered the UGOG’s from DKos, he pinpointed actual real people (with at least one a verified political consultant) as being the leadership. Talking up Dan Wolfe and Patriot whatever doesn’t do much. Sorry Patterico. Unless Dan Wolfe can be confirmed, there’s nowhere to go with that.
And even if real names are solved, it still might not matter other than for knowing whether or not the convoluted afetrmath was part and parcel of the original story. That would be nice to know. But if it can’t be figured out, I don’t get what the point of a lot of these threads are.
So the fockers figured out my real name. I’m just a regular guy from Massachusetts. Thus, the cybersmearing of me is just more limited hangout. A conceited part of me feels it is being done to shut me up. Or perhaps it is done to scare off similar “regular guys” from sincerely participating. Such as, look at what happened to that guy. We can do it to you too. I don’t know.
I do find it interesting there was a Jenny from Boston, and that’s the area I come from. It was strange reading that a fake Lee Stranahan threatened her.
I also understand Gennette’s rationale for posting at this website, even though it is “enemy territory.” That’s what I did by going to DKos as Prepostericity. Democratic Underground was making it pointless to try. They are very quick with the scrub brush. Daily Kos has their rigged post hiding system, but in regards to diaries, those appear to always remain. Plus that was the only other big place I could think of besides DU where my topic was ever discussed.
So that’s why Gennette is here, imho. You are the only ones discussing her topic.
And I’m not saying this is enemy territory for myself. While I have no inclination to mix it up with anyone who hates lefties on sight, there are a number of folks here including Patterico and Dustin I would be willing to have political dialogue with. Others no. I’m just too busy right now to even try. Any of you who would like to get into politics with some self-proclaimed lefties, you can try pffugeecamp.com. There are only a few rules, such as no outings, no porn, etc..
I’m not even advertising for them, as I don’t post there too often. In fact, because of getting cybersmeared, I got off the net for a couple months. I invited this guy donkeytale to come here, but he declined saying he already did the Red State thingie years ago.
It is to this website’s credit that Lee Stranahan posts here. I saw there was a bit of friction a while back, but it would be in your website’s interest to be a safe haven for lefties with thick skin.
I have thick skin at this point. Yet sometimes things cross the line, and no armor can protect from it. I refuse to be cyberstalked and smeared on websites I’m blogging on. I am grateful for Patterico for deleting some of my personal info on another thread. I would appreciate if he and the other moderators can keep an eye out for that.
From my perspective, this is what I think and what truly interests me about Weinergate. Yes, Gennette is correct that a lot of this is existential, and that’s why it appears most of us have our own agendas. It happens.
I think Weiner did want to reach some magical number of followers. I think he was in over his head dealing with internet trolls. I think he messed up and did things that led to his resigning, like tweeting his thingie and accepting an offer to go to a 17 year old’s prom.
I don’t believe he broke any law. I think he was just incredibly stupid. I have no idea whether he was caught up in some paid internet fake sting, or if he just got noticed by internet trolls into messing with individuals.
What really interests me is how Breitbart got the story. If it can’t be proven who provided that other than an anonymous username, all we have are theories.
What I don’t believe is simply a theory is that the professional anti-Breitbart crowd has jumped all over this and piled on the convolution. Proving that will take some work. Maybe it can’t be proven.
I don’t think the convoluted aftermath has had anything to do with objectives of helping or hurting Weiner. I think he is a pawn for some other agenda. That agenda may appear to revolve around a libtard versus repukelican script, but I believe such an endeavour transcends politics. I hope that makes sense.
It’s them versus us. Liberty Chick and Patterico seem to understand what I mean. I wish I could say more and blog on it, but for now I need to keep my cool. It doesn’t look like we will ever get all the answers, but we could get some of them. Patience may be in order. (end of novelette)
Prepostericity (b5629b) — 8/13/2011 @ 12:25 pmGennette, from the few pictures I’ve seen of you, you are a very attractive lady. Calling you a hottie does seem a bit inappropriate considering the nature of this story. And I’m not flirting with you either, because I realise as a “grown man” over 40, I am more your father’s or an uncle’s age. p:>
Prepostericity (b5629b) — 8/13/2011 @ 12:28 pmElissa, not everyone has the money to go lawsuit hunting. Some of us actually think filing lawsuits should be done as a last resort, and that it’s done far too often. I’ve never sued anyone. Well, once I got hit from behind and got a very small settlement. I’m not sure if that counts in regards to your recent post.
Prepostericity (b5629b) — 8/13/2011 @ 12:32 pmThe last question was for my benefit. But thank your for answering the first two as well.
AZ Bob (aa856e) — 8/13/2011 @ 12:38 pmYep, if I’d been sent an unsolicited crotch shot from a nationally known public official I definitely would sue to clear my name. Too bad Gennette is on record with tweets saying she had flirted big time with AW. If Gennette had not lied to fake Nikki about the flirting situation she might have found a lawyer to help her get some nice sexual harrasssment settlement money out of the deal.
elissa (32a457) — 8/13/2011 @ 12:50 pmGennette,
After his photo tweet to you, how many times were you in contact with Weiner or with anyone representing Weiner?
Did Weiner or someone representing Weiner suggest how you should respond or what you should say publicly after the photo tweet story broke? If so, did you follow their recommendation(s)?
Did Weiner or his representatives recommend or play any role in your interview with Jen Preston?
DRJ (a83b8b) — 8/13/2011 @ 12:51 pm235. Comment by elissa — 8/13/2011 @ 12:50 pm
The tort of sexual harassment normally requires an employment relationship. I cannot think of any way this could have led to a pay day.
AZ Bob (aa856e) — 8/13/2011 @ 12:56 pmThis is something I’ve considered, as well as a lawsuit against the NY Post, and some other people…
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/13/2011 @ 12:58 pmIt all sounds very draining. I’ve spent the last month trying to get my life back to normal with exception of trying to figure out who the Reids are/ getting sucked into to arguments here.
Maybe in the future though.
AZ, Elissa, I don’t know how Weiner breached Gennette’s rights, really, but I do think he is guilty of obscenity.
It’s interesting that there is a different law for Alvin Greene than there is for Anthony Weiner, the guy who wrote laws regarding creeps on the internet even.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/13/2011 @ 12:59 pm3 times. No and no.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/13/2011 @ 1:02 pmGennette, are you back in school? Still interested in journalism?
Just wondering. I imagine you don’t want to get too specific here.
Miranda (4104db) — 8/13/2011 @ 1:10 pm==I cannot think of any way this could have led to a pay day==
Use some good old American ingenuity and contemplate a good lawyer’s available negotiating tactics and maybe you’ll come up with a way. I know this sounds snarky, but in the vernacular of the younger set, “are you new here”?
elissa (32a457) — 8/13/2011 @ 1:15 pmDo you still admire Anthony Weiner as a politician? As a person?
DRJ (a83b8b) — 8/13/2011 @ 1:17 pmI never actually left school. Reporters were showing up to my classes everyday so I finished everything via email.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/13/2011 @ 1:18 pmIm not taking classes right now because its summer but, yes, I’ll be returning in the Fall… still studyin journalism.
*studying
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/13/2011 @ 1:18 pmWas @RepNeedledick
Whiskey (34d467) — 8/13/2011 @ 1:19 pmjust a @JihadiHunter,
or could he be a lone Wolfe, too?
All right, guys. Don’t ask me how, but I know 100% that Gennette is absolutely the person who has been commenting here.
100%.
I’m 95-99% certain that she is not behind any of the crazy stuff that has been going on.
I’m reasonably certain that she has a good handle on what happened with John Reid and Dan Wolfe.
I am going to treat her as an ally in all this. I am totally fine with people questioning her, but I’m going to increasingly demand that you be polite.
Patterico (f724ca) — 8/13/2011 @ 1:19 pmWhich I’m not saying that anyone is currently not being polite. I have not been reading the thread today.
I like DRJ’s question.
Do you still admire Anthony Weiner as a politician? As a person?
Are you willing to answer that, Gennette?
Patterico (f724ca) — 8/13/2011 @ 1:22 pmThanks Gennette. I knew you were on summer break (from previous questions) but I thought your Fall session had started already. Or maybe it was your summer session.
To go back to questions I had on another thread, which reporters did you meet in person? Actual, sit-down, face-to-face, could reach out & physically touch the other person, meetings?
And which ones by video chat?
Was the interview w/ Jen Preston via telephone only?
Just curious. Thanks.
Miranda (4104db) — 8/13/2011 @ 1:25 pmI’m reasonably certain that she has a good handle on what happened with John Reid and Dan Wolfe.
Yeah, so it would be great if she would cooperate with you. I’m trying to point out that she doesn’t know what she doesn’t know, she only knows how Weiner presented the story to her. Someone else might understand him differently. I can’t see any reason why she wouldn’t be completely forthcoming with you the way she was with the NYT reporter who obviously had no need for the information. You do.
MayBee (081489) — 8/13/2011 @ 1:28 pmI completely agree. I’ve never sought money or notoriety from this situation. I just wanted my name to be cleared and to find out who Nikki was.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/13/2011 @ 1:37 pmMy “interview” with the NY Post was in person.
My interview with Michael Barbaro of the NYT was on the phone.
My conversation with Jen from the NYT wasn’t an actual interview but she ended up using information that I’d given her… and that was over the phone.
I didn’t do any other interviews.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/13/2011 @ 1:39 pmIf Weiner told you he’d been hacked, why did you delete your account? Why didn’t you save it, knowing you’d just spent months dealing with a weird twitter troll who seemed to be talking about the very thing that Weiner ended up doing?
MayBee (081489) — 8/13/2011 @ 1:41 pmIt could have helped his investigation.
It could have been useful to you.
But you deleted it.
I deleted it BEFORE I asked him what had happened. After the picture was sent I literally had like 100 @ mentions. My friends were being tweeted. I didn’t know what was going on. I was freaked out.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/13/2011 @ 1:44 pmGennette, so that was Reuven Fenton of the NY Post you met in person?
The one who you said “Trojan Horse’d” you because he posed as a photographer’s (Daniel Berman) assistant?
I’m confused as to why the NY Post would fly out their reporter from NYC to Seattle/Bellingham to meet with you – if they didn’t have your permission to do a story, and apparently they coordinated with the photographer, Berman, who lives in Bellingham & was a student intern.
Just to be crystal clear, you met in person with Reuven Fenton?
Thanks.
Miranda (4104db) — 8/13/2011 @ 1:49 pm#258
Wouldn’t be the first time a newspaper did that. Weiner was a NY Congressman, so it was worth the thousand or two to try.
Whiskey (34d467) — 8/13/2011 @ 1:59 pmWhat confuses you?
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/13/2011 @ 2:01 pmShe already said she met in person with Fenton and described how he and his photographer hoaxed her.
Patterico (f724ca) — 8/13/2011 @ 2:06 pmGennette, for the sake of argument, forget about the “confusion” part.
I’ll repeat my question:
Just to be crystal clear, you met in person with Reuven Fenton?
Miranda (4104db) — 8/13/2011 @ 2:06 pmDidn’t he say (on Twitter) he’d been hacked about an hour later?
Anyway, just a shame you deleted all the hard sleuthing you’d been doing, rather than just make your account private. Especially since you reconsidered and came back to Twitter just a few hours later.
MayBee (081489) — 8/13/2011 @ 2:08 pmHindsight, I guess.
The scientist in me marvels that Patterico can calculate his probabilities with such precision.
The rest of me is glad to have Gennette’s authenticity confirmed.
Pious Agnostic (6048a8) — 8/13/2011 @ 2:08 pmPatterico, I’m sorry I didn’t see that.
Gennette, is that what happened? You met in person with Reuven Fenton?
Miranda (4104db) — 8/13/2011 @ 2:08 pmWell, your name is a hard thing, when you end up at the center of a mess like this, but honesty and good behavior go a long way.
As to who Nikki Reid was/is? You are not alone! If we’ve followed this far, we’re eager to know, too.
A final grand reveal, of who’s who, who did what to whom and when and most of all WHY, is a consummation devoutly to be hoped.
Dianna (f12db5) — 8/13/2011 @ 2:09 pmGennette,
I’m confused by your earlier statements in this thread. In your comment here you say:
and later in the same comment:
After a back and forth with daleyrocks you then say here-2:
My question is how could AW “be messing with her more and more” etc. if “this [his last DM to her on the 17th] would be it from him?”
Baldeagle26 (cd115a) — 8/13/2011 @ 2:09 pmAnyway, once again, I would say it all sounds as if the communication you have saved is completely innocent. The NYTs isn’t using it for their story, but it would be very helpful to Patterico.
MayBee (081489) — 8/13/2011 @ 2:10 pmMayBee:
Gennette has now given me that communication.
Patterico (f724ca) — 8/13/2011 @ 2:16 pmYou’re right, that was a mistake. I’m not sure why I said it would be it from him.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/13/2011 @ 2:17 pmNikki seemed very upset about how he was “mean to a 17 year old girl.” And how her idol didn’t turn out to be who she thought he was.
I reconsidered and came back to Twitter a few hours later? I came back when my statement was released… days later, not hours.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/13/2011 @ 2:19 pmYay! Hope it helps, Patterico. Good going, Gennette.
MayBee (081489) — 8/13/2011 @ 2:19 pmGennette,
Thanks. So my assumption is there would be “tons more” DMs from both of you? Is that correct?
Baldeagle26 (cd115a) — 8/13/2011 @ 2:39 pmNo, probably not too many more from him. And yes, tons more from me.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/13/2011 @ 2:42 pmThere are many of us on the net who have blogged for free. I once thought maybe my cybersleuthing could lead to something. My last attempt to do so with that as an objective was by going to BradBlog. When Brad ignored my findings, even when they were right up his alley, I sensed something fishy was going on.
I then cybersleuthed Velvet Revolution and found out about Brett Kimberlin. All my blogging on that was basically borne of a conviction to simply get out truths that were either unknown or underreported.
Another thing we have in common is that we are self-proclaimed lefties spending time on a righty blog. I know that can seem risky or go against our core values.
I trust Patterico, in that even if something were to arise that on the surface hurt his side of a polarised two-party system, he would not bury it.
That is the bond I share with him, Liberty Chick, and Dustin. The truth is the truth is the truth is Paul Pierce. p:>
It was surreal to recently find out cybersmears have been made saying I work for Breitbart and am in the middle of Weinergate. I see that the person cybersmearing me has been published by VR. Hmmm.
It took me a week or two to finally get somewhat of a grasp of this story. Since I’m not really involved and don’t have much to share, that’s why I’m not posting much.
I’m glad you have reached an understanding with Mr. Patterico.
Prepostericity (b5629b) — 8/13/2011 @ 3:19 pmDustin – you said “I find Nikki to be a plausible minor”
Say it ain’t so. Nikkisock is not and never was any such thing, at least not in the full context of their real-time interactions.
Of all the points of doubt involving Gennette, this is the very least of them, the most obviously true on on its face, when viewed in context of how she came to Gennette’s attention and their interactions.
Had I been confronted with a similar character my reaction would have been the same. The behaviour was manipulative, which would raise suspicion – then, her follow history too coincidental, her reasons for contacting others related to Weiner too similar, too swift (immediate), too ingratiating, too probing. Her profile did not immediately set her out as a teen, that followed upon her attempted connections with Ethel; she only added (stolen) pictured of “herself” upon delicate hints by Gennette that this was odd. She added a “friend” with a stolen picture after the same sort of query. And their dialogue was crafted to appeal to the Weiner-followed that nikkisock was trying to appeal to and gain the confidence of. It was actually pretty sucky fakery to tell the truth.
I accepted “Nikki” as “real” despite some squirrely circumstances largely on the strength of Tommy Christopher’s vouching. I’ll never make that mistake again, and not just for him, for any blogger or journo who (especially) claims 100% CERTAINTY but won’t show work.
For sure, I thought their interactions seemed normal (Nikki and MA socks) but I lacked Gennette’s context and in the beginning a solid timeline of interactions with others and descriptions of the DM’g going on. Even then there was sufficient squirrelyness to CONSIDER fakery, I will never ignore gut again and dismiss it on such weak verification as a biased journolist. Actually, trying to track the socks down and finding nothing was a big clue. Net invisibility is not common among teens who use social media.
Fake fake fake fake fake.
SarahW (af7312) — 8/13/2011 @ 3:55 pmI can’t vouch for Gennette being on the up and up here either, at least wouldn’t for recent writing.
Video chats aren’t “weird”, and there has been some vacillation in the style of address and style of writing. I do wonder sometimes if her friends are Docweaseling her, or if there is a Gleenstyle “cabana boy” assisting.
SarahW (af7312) — 8/13/2011 @ 4:04 pmPatrick, so, I’m asking you “how”.
Also did Lee answer my question? I can’t see that he did. It’s one that needs answering.
SarahW (af7312) — 8/13/2011 @ 4:09 pmPatterico, that “actual” G has been commenting here does not rule out cabanaB style assistance, for one thing.
Also, is that exactly what you meant, as the wording is ambiguous: Did you mean it is 100% certain that Gennette Cordova, the student claimed by her college and photographed in the Post is commenting here, or did you mean only to claim “Gennette” commenting now is the same one who has been commenting here from the get-go?
SarahW (af7312) — 8/13/2011 @ 4:14 pmOK.
But how do you know it wasn’t a sucky fakery effort by a weird 17 year old? 17 year olds obviously are not always honest on the internet, such as about their physical appearance.
All I know for sure is that this was a strange bird. I know now why it is strange… because it’s a complete fraud host master carried on a ton of weird frauds.
When I try to put myself in Weiner’s shoes, I cannot be sure this is someone I should engage with in that way. It’s someone expressing they are a minor, and I have no way of knowing that’s not true, even if I can tell they are not completely accurate.
And another thing I find interesting: I found Tommy’s made me more suspicious.
Anyway, in case this wasn’t clear: I am not saying that I entertain the notion Nikki is a 17 year old. I’m saying I do not understand this certainty.
That you do is forcing me to ask whether I’m just not capable of seeing this aspect clearly. No way no how this Nikki was a 17 year old to you, from Gennette’s experience basically from first impressions? 0% chance? not 25% or 5% but 0%?
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/13/2011 @ 4:20 pmThat’s good enough for me.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/13/2011 @ 4:23 pmMy 279 “Host” should be “whose”
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/13/2011 @ 4:24 pmI think Nikkisock was handled delicately at first though with warranted suspicion, that rational and pattern-based suspicion (sometimes described as intuition) would have informed.*
I think it clear( or that it would have been clar) the person was inventing a history, was not at all whom they represented themselves to be, and that this would have become more and more apparent. With the later and obvious connection of “odd duck faker” with #bornfreecrew the chances of this genuinely being a minor girl is possible but…unlikely.
To your direct question, in hindsight, the chance the nikkisock was a 17 yo who just happened to be nutty and faking her twitter existence approaches 0.
There was quite a bit to suggest faking and trolling and non-seventeen-ness; including the twitter but no facebook or other social media accounts or other web-presence thing, and the dialogue.
* I would describe intuition in my own experience as being something like an overlay of patterns with discrepancies or anomalies sticking out. They are real enough but the “feeling” is very immediate and takes a much greater time to articulate.
SarahW (af7312) — 8/13/2011 @ 4:44 pmOh, and thank you, Gennette, for going ahead and confirming it’s you. That alone is helpful, and I know you probably found it insulting.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/13/2011 @ 4:55 pmThanks for explaining this view.
That’s a major aspect of Gennette’s explanation for her behavior, and it’s helpful that this side be explained by a disinterested party.
I guess I should be thankful that I do not find myself in a position of figuring out if someone is a minor or not.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/13/2011 @ 4:57 pmDustin, I’m glad you said Tommy’s reported dealings with them made you more suspicious. I still kick myself for squinching down the notion that they just didn’t sound genuine – based on Tommy’s vehement vouching.
Now THAT dialogue was really and truly bad and stilted. It was someone trying to sound like a convincing 17 yo. If that is what communications with Gennette were like (and I imagine they couldn’t have been much better) it would have naturally put her on her guard and made her think something squirrely was going on, that “nikki” was not genuine.
SarahW (af7312) — 8/13/2011 @ 5:01 pmI wanted her to feel comfortable talking about him which was why I talked about flirting.
So Gennette talked about how she had flirted with Weiner *after* Starchild had been DMing Weiner and then he stopped following her?
It sounds to me like Gennette was fishing to find out if Weiner had flirted with Starchild. Which is of course what anyone would want to know.
MayBee (081489) — 8/13/2011 @ 5:34 pmMayBee, I’m not sure if you’re referring specifically to Weiner’s “cape-and-tights” DM to Ethel, but I realized something potentially interesting about that DM because of your post.
When Weiner was having his conversation with Gennette about Starchild/trolls, he hadn’t actually sent that DM yet to Ethel. Gennette says she spoke with Weiner on 05/12. Ethel doesn’t tweet about the “cape-and-tights” DM until 05/24.
In other words, if these Weiner/Nikki DMs are authentic, then his capes-and-tights conversation with Nikki happens before it happens with Ethel.
Greg (bc8186) — 8/13/2011 @ 5:45 pmThat’s definitely not what I was trying to do.
Gennette (d5ea45) — 8/13/2011 @ 5:46 pmThat’s definitely not what I was trying to do.
So….were you hoping she would pass that information on to someone else?
You two were already talking about Weiner, so you must have made up your flirting with him for a reason.
MayBee (081489) — 8/13/2011 @ 6:16 pmWhy not to try to find out if he had flirted with her, too? You already knew that Weiner followed Ethel. Surely you wondered if some of what the Patriot group was saying was true.
flirting with weiner
ColonelHaiku (d1f5ff) — 8/13/2011 @ 6:20 pmthe world’s most dangerous game?
weiner wag the dog
Hmmm…..interesting Greg. He emailed Ginger Lee about a wardrobe requirement that helps him highlight his package. So I think he liked the idea of himself in tights.
MayBee (081489) — 8/13/2011 @ 6:21 pmWho is behind the threats is ALL that matters. Gennette did not receive a threat. Why? Because she was obviously friendly with AW? Or because she was in the newspaper and became too high profile? Or did they think she was too inconsequential or harmless?
AW is tightly tied to the Clintons. And we all know what their morals are like.
Anita Busch (a025dd) — 8/13/2011 @ 6:36 pmGennette, just saw your earlier response to my questions at the puppet thread 2 (I think – I’ve lost count).
Thanks very much – you’ve answered my questions.
Miranda (4104db) — 8/13/2011 @ 6:40 pmAW got caught, was exposed and then someone tried to make the mess worse and another tried to clean it up for him. And they might be the same group of people … it’s politics and high level dirty tricks.
It’s the game of making nothing look as it seems so confusion covers the crime.
Anita Busch (a025dd) — 8/13/2011 @ 6:44 pmThere’s a Darrah Ford in the porn industry … who is Darrah Ford and is she friends with Ginger Lee?
Anita Busch (a025dd) — 8/13/2011 @ 6:47 pmAnita,
DRJ (a83b8b) — 8/13/2011 @ 6:49 pmThe threat purported to be on behalf of Weiner and Gennette, even though Gennette has always maintained she wasn’t involved in any of the scandalous aspects of Weinergate (except to the extent she was the innocent and possibly unintended recipient of the famous tweet). Thus, instead of wondering why Gennette wasn’t threatened, I wonder why someone believes Gennette is so involved that she needs protection.
Greg,
If you’re willing to speculate, do you think it’s likely Weiner used the same “cape and tights” lingo with all his teenage fans? Or could it be that Weiner thought Nikki was fake (as Gennette claims), so perhaps he also thought Ethel was a plant? Or can you think of other possibilities?
DRJ (a83b8b) — 8/13/2011 @ 6:56 pmDRJ … to create a distraction. To use her as part of their scheme.
Anita Busch (a025dd) — 8/13/2011 @ 7:04 pmGinger Lee also got a threat or threats, but what were the nature of those threats? Anyone know?
Anita Busch (a025dd) — 8/13/2011 @ 7:22 pmAnita- but she had made herself part of their scheme, no?
According to her own story, she worked hard to foster a relationship with starchild, got Weiner in touch with starchild, and then, after starchild’s prom scheme had drawn attention (and Weiner said starchild was a troll), Gennette turned around and told starchild something that hurt Weiner.
He’s a married man, and Gennette gave starchild the scoop that they had been exchanging flirty DMs. Why would someone do that?
MayBee (081489) — 8/13/2011 @ 7:24 pmThe Cape and tights bit was a standard for Weiner. He used it with the women he was sexting with too before any of this. I believe he genuinely saw himself as some type of liberal super hero in a sense.
Rocksem (0471ae) — 8/13/2011 @ 7:27 pmRegarding threats to Ginger Lee:
DRJ (a83b8b) — 8/13/2011 @ 7:28 pmAnnette- I don’t know the nature of Ginger’s threats. She also said someone was going to issue a statement in her name that she did not agree with.
MayBee (081489) — 8/13/2011 @ 7:28 pmThis report could be read as saying there were multiple threats directed at Ginger Lee.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 8/13/2011 @ 7:32 pmUp until now the story on that is Gennette was trying to get “the ball rolling” with Nikki because she hadn’t spoken about Weiner. These DMs make clear that was false. By Gennette’s own admission she was talking with Nikki about Weiner just a few hours prior to the Fake Flirt DMs. The story is now she was just trying to reassure Nikki.
The real story? Either Gennette was flirting with Weiner or was trying to impress Nikki by saying she was. Based on Weiner’s MO I doubt Gennette would have needed to pretend she and Weiner had flirted.
Rocksem (0471ae) — 8/13/2011 @ 7:34 pm@Maybee
I didnt think he’d be sending her flirty DMs because I knew he thought she was fake. Were you unclear about that?
And I wasn’t the one working hard to establish the relationship, she was. She sent probably 70% of the messages and she initiated nearly all of the conversations. Generally, all I had to do was respond occasionally to keep it going.
I thought that she was after info about Weiner and I wanted to see how she would use me. I told her that I had flirted with him. I figured saying this would make her comfortable enough to ask questions about him and our communications because it would make her feel like I was open to talking about it. It’s not that difficult of a concept to grasp though I understand that you have to consider all angles.
Gennette (c776af) — 8/13/2011 @ 7:34 pmThe threat from Alicia Pain was specifically to stop talking about Cordova. It would make no sense if she had received a threat from her. Whoever threatened Ginger Lee would not threaten her either because she was supportive of Weiner, at least in relation to her.
Rocksem (0471ae) — 8/13/2011 @ 7:40 pm@DRJ … it says a “series of ultimatums” and later says the threats were “documented.” Good link. Thanks.
@MayBee … the only one who can answer that is Gennette. Great point!
Anita Busch (a025dd) — 8/13/2011 @ 7:41 pm@RocksEm
The DMs were to get the ball rolling. She hadn’t been discussing anything with me before that other than to tell me that she liked his politics and then to complain that he had called her out for being fake.
Why would I try to impress someone who I knew was fake and if I really had been flirting with him why would I tell someone who I knew was fake/against him? Those conclusions make a lot less sense than what actually happened.
Gennette (c776af) — 8/13/2011 @ 7:43 pmGennette, do you have any theories of why some people have been threatened and others (such as yourself) haven’t?
Anita Busch (a025dd) — 8/13/2011 @ 7:46 pm==To use her as part of their scheme==
1. Being fearlessly nonchalant about remaining right out in the public eye through blog posts/twitter).
2. Apparent lack of curiosity about why, or even showing modest anger that AW did send her the crotch shot heard ’round the world.
3. Stated interest in story is singular focus–merely wants to ascertain the identity of Nikki persona’s handler.
4. Is basically the only known direct, non-sock personality who was involved in the entire Weinergate saga who still is out and about and interacting, except for Mike. (Weiner, Tommy, Jen, the other women, JG, the Boston police, Gloria Allred–all MIA in the aftermath as far as I can tell. No press, no followup tabloid articles, no updates on the principals.)
Very strange. It’s just so quiet except for the threats. Who is using who?
elissa (5f35d1) — 8/13/2011 @ 8:00 pmGennette- the concept I don’t grasp is why you would tell a known troll that a married man was attracted to your flirty DMs? You knew there were people looking for him to be having an affair with a young girl. Why would you turn around and hint that he was, in fact, someone who flirts online with women other than his wife?
MayBee (081489) — 8/13/2011 @ 8:02 pmWhat was the next part of the plan?
At the time, Ace did not think Alicia was the threatener, noting it was public knowledge, and perhaps this person was just referencing that in order to appear more menacing.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/13/2011 @ 8:05 pmShe was discussing Weiner with you on the night of the 17th. You just said his politics. There was no need to get the ball rolling. It had been rolling earlier that night. She wasn’t complaining about him calling her fake either was she? She was complaining he had told her he had to stop following her. The same as happened to Ethel. If Weiner suspected & wanted to mess with her why would he ever have followed & DMed her? Who would see it? How does that help his rep as a right wing troll killer? Did he follow other trolls?
I do not believe either you or Weiner suspected Nikki was a sock prior to her interactions with Tommy. You told Nikki because it made you feel important and special. After all you are familiar with celebrities right?
Why were you 2 discussing dating celebrities anyway?
Rocksem (0471ae) — 8/13/2011 @ 8:16 pm@Maybee
#313
I told Nikki that he never flirted with me. JR9 apparently omitted those DMs.
@Elissa
To your #2, I’m not sure why you’d think there would be a lack of curiosity. This is definitely not the place I’m going to speculate about that topic though, or any blog for that matter.
Gennette (f8bb6e) — 8/13/2011 @ 8:25 pmTo your #4, Mike and I were both sought out and used by JR9/DW.
I told Nikki that he never flirted with me. JR9 apparently omitted those DMs.
Apparently he omitted those.
But that doesn’t matter. Wiener was following you on Twitter, and you were DMing each other. You made up a story about him being receptive to your flirting. And you told that story to someone you believed was looking for dirt on him.
Did you ever tell Tommy Christopher you had sent this false information to his sources? They tried to use it, right?
MayBee (081489) — 8/13/2011 @ 8:31 pm@RocksEm
She was asking me about celebrities and if I had ever dated one.
Gennette (f8bb6e) — 8/13/2011 @ 8:51 pmWe can’t have this conversation if you don’t think that I knew Nikki was a sock. I did from the beginning. I have evidence of this. It’s been shown to numerous people including Patterico.
That seems a pretty odd topic for conversation among non celebrities.
Whatever conversation we have is entirely up to you. I can only deal with the evidence made available to me. If it’s been shown to numerous people then make it public. Proving Nikki is a sock hardly reflects badly on you.
Rocksem (0471ae) — 8/13/2011 @ 8:58 pmSarah,
I wasn’t involved directly or indirectly in the Broussard stuff. I knew about it based on conversations with Breitbart.
Breitbart has said it was a friend of hers and he doesn’t really know how it is.
It’s NOT PatriotUSA76, however. My recollection is that at the same exact time that Breitbart and his lawyers were talking to Broussard’s friend on the phone, Patriot was ranting non-stop at Ladd online.
Random note: Everyone should listen to Greg on the facts of this story, because he’s done an outstanding job of assembling a timeline.
And a question for Gennette — did Weiner ever mention a celebrity he claimed to have slept with to you? Broussard says he bragged about one to her.
Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 8/13/2011 @ 9:09 pm@RocksEm
I don’t need to make my private communications public. I don’t really see the need for that.
And I agree, it was a strange topic. A lot of her conversation topics were strange.
Gennette (f8bb6e) — 8/13/2011 @ 9:10 pm@LeeStranahan
No, he didn’t.
Gennette (f8bb6e) — 8/13/2011 @ 9:13 pmThanks, Gennette…
One more — your list of interviews didn’t include anything from the New York Daily News that I saw. Did you speak to Alison G. at one point?
Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 8/13/2011 @ 9:16 pmNo you don’t. There is no need for it unless you expect it to matter.
Rocksem (0471ae) — 8/13/2011 @ 9:18 pmI’m not sure who raised this question but this ABC report discussed the release of Megan Broussard’s story:
DRJ (a83b8b) — 8/13/2011 @ 9:27 pm@LeeStranahan
Yes. I gave her my statement and she asked a few questions for clarity about my familiarity with DW. And then she wrote her article saying that I had backed Weiners contention that he had been hacked, which I never did.
Gennette (f8bb6e) — 8/13/2011 @ 9:27 pmAlso — the idea that Gennette and “Nikki” were discussing celebrities isn’t actually that weird at all, based on two things…
1) GNC had written an article about celebrities and Twitter and admitted she’s interested in celebrities.
2) JG told me on the phone she was interested in celebrities and the Starchild account shows this to be true.
(Nothing wrong with this and I’m not judging. I’m interested in celebrities, too — just a weirder list than most people. Like, I was uber-thrilled to get a picture with Neil Innes and the other Rutles.)
Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 8/13/2011 @ 9:33 pmcontention that he had been hacked, which I never did.
Much to your credit, even though he had told you he was hacked.
MayBee (081489) — 8/13/2011 @ 9:34 pmSo on some level, you must have believed he was the kind of guy who would send a picture like that to you.
Being interested in celebrities and talking about hanging out and dating them, as if it’s a serious possibility, are 2 entirely different things.
Rocksem (0471ae) — 8/13/2011 @ 9:44 pm@DRJ, you’re a genius!
Anita Busch (a025dd) — 8/13/2011 @ 10:18 pmNo wonder Dan Wolfe is so scared … the circle is very, very small.
Anita Busch (a025dd) — 8/13/2011 @ 10:43 pmAll 3 “teens” were 16, not 17.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/14/2011 @ 4:30 amI thought the real one was 17, as reported by the New York Times and Fox News. Do you have a source that suggests otherwise?
As for the fake ones, are there sources anyone knows of for their alleged ages other than the Tommy Christopher story? That is, did the fake teens ever post their ages on their Twitter profiles, mention them in public tweets or DMs, etc? Or did they only become officially 16 after giving their fake IDs to Tommy Christopher?
Also, how old is Patricia Reid? And where is her ID photo?
Greg (bc8186) — 8/14/2011 @ 8:59 amGreg,
If you have time, do you have any thoughts on my question at 298?
DRJ (a83b8b) — 8/14/2011 @ 9:03 amOr at least, the kind of guy who would send a picture like that to someone.
SarahW (af7312) — 8/14/2011 @ 9:31 amAlso Maybee, I think she must have understood on some level the impropriety of his interactions with her and other women, even if she didn’t really get, as we would, just how inappropriate it was, and just how strange for a man of his situation; the comments GC has made about being used to unwanted or unconsciously inspired male attention implied to me had some from Mr. W.
SarahW (af7312) — 8/14/2011 @ 9:36 am@SarahW @Maybee
There are a lot of incorrect assumptions being made by the two of you. Which is fine. Everyone has the right to assume.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/14/2011 @ 10:00 amThis clue about Weiner from Instapundit: “Narcissists rise to the top because people mistake their confidence and authority for leadership qualities. ‘However, scientists have discovered that while narcissists are convincing leaders, they are so consumed by their own brilliance that it actually cripples their creativity and often causes them to make bad decisions.’”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2024577/Narcissists-rise-people-mistake-confidence-authority-leadership-qualities.html
AZ Bob (aa856e) — 8/14/2011 @ 10:30 amLee, I can’t second enough your endorsement of Gregs posts and Greg’s timeline. (He usually lays facts and sensible conjecture here with a useful and very enviable clarity.) The delightfully arch commentary in the timeline is a bonus.
The timing and content and results of Broussard’s dealings with Weiner have become more and more interesting to me after coming back to and reviewing that timeling. The intermediary is an interesting point in this story full of hidden motives and disguised/anonymous “helpers”.
You wrote: It’s NOT PatriotUSA76, however. My recollection is that at the same exact time that Breitbart and his lawyers were talking to Broussard’s friend on the phone, Patriot was ranting non-stop at Ladd online.
Patriotsock did rant – but not on the phone. He was typing. His typing was also full of lags and repetitions. If it is less likely that the person typing with Ladd was also on the phone with B’s people, it is not IMPOSSIBLE. Not a bit.
A sock-juggler might be capable of pulling that of. The socks and all the shenanigans are also not necessarily the offspring of a single individual. The identity and motivation of Broussard’s intermediary is unkown, and there are peculiarities of timing , methods and potential motive that interest me.
I pulled out all Greg’s Broussard entries into a Google doc here – I’ve added some bolding to a few phrases that stuck out to me.
Why am I interested?
Broussard’s manouvered more than she let on. She egged on W, even after she had friend acting on her behalf.
We do not know how or when or why this friend befriended Broussard.
According to the timeline , Broussard was approached by “intermediary”, intermediary approached BrtBart BEFORE the famous RTd underwear shot (one recycled by Weiner, having already been sent to Broussard. SHe is a progressive. Why on earth would she go to Breitbard or Drudge?
On the possible red herring but INTERESTING points -You know her brother was a former baseball player? Note Socks used baseball as convo topic.
One Motive could be to might be to pump up value of her pictures and story.Her brother aspiring musician – She sold interview for $$$.
Even assuming Broussard had no knowledge of any sockery or spying underway – if Weiner has Twitter spies, is it so far out of consideration that he might have had FB spies, too? One that might befriend and ingratiate self with Broussard?
Breitbart’s remarks as characterized/outlined in the timeline indicate he had very, very, very little curiousity on the point.
Well, I declare my curiosity aroused.
SarahW (af7312) — 8/14/2011 @ 10:48 amGennette, I do assume that age and experience makes a person look at a similar set of facts and come away with a different understanding of the implications of those facts.
That you even held your mind open to the possibility he was not hacked means you believed him capable of sending that picture.
SarahW (af7312) — 8/14/2011 @ 10:54 amComment by Greg — 8/14/2011 @ 8:59 am
Thanks for the correction. Ethel was 17. The “other two” 16. I don’t think Tommy ever released the 3 fake Cali IDs to us, though I imagine he, or JP, or her intern, or any number of other people could.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/14/2011 @ 10:57 amhey drj,
re: your request to #298, which is:
We know he used “cape-and-tights” lingo with the 40-year-old blackjack dealer, Weiss, on repeated occasions, in contexts that eventually turned overtly sexual.
Beyond that, there are so many variables — the biggest being, are all/any of the Starchild/Weiner DMs authentic? — that the speculation gets unwieldy when you try to account for all the different possible scenarios.
This is especially true when you consider Patriot’s response when he discover the Ethel post on Tumblr where she quotes Weiner’s DM. Patriot interprets this very quickly as a DM that Weiner has sent Ethel, rather than, say, some past quote of his that she has somehow discovered. Specifically, he says, “Check it out bro her tumblr today has a quote that Weiner DID NOT tweet or say last night on the floor. This proves it was a PRIVATE convo!”
But what if she’d discovered the quote from a Youtube clip of one of Weiner’s countless media appearances? Or found it an old article?
How, in short, is Patriot so certain so quickly that Weiner said this in a “private convo” with Ethel?
Greg (bc8186) — 8/14/2011 @ 11:00 am==I don’t think Tommy ever released the 3 fake Cali IDs to us, though I imagine he, or JP, or her intern, or any number of other people could.==
Just overall an amazing lack of curiosity or desire for problem solving or closure on so many levels by so many people.
elissa (e0d4ef) — 8/14/2011 @ 11:03 amGennette- I’m basing my assumptions on the idea that–
1. you are now telling the truth about the timing of your DMs about flirting with a married Congressman
2. you told a troll that you had been flirting with a married Congressman because you wanted the troll to believe that. You wanted that to interest the troll.
3. you did not intend to draw more troll attention to the Twitter relationship between you and Weiner
4.You did not know that, in fact, Anthony Weiner was engaging in cybersex with other women who flirted with him on Twitter and Facebook
5.you had a reason to not publicly support Weiner’s assertion that he had been hacked
6.you had access to Tommy Christopher (and others) when your DMs were being used against Weiner.
7.The trolls have used your story in various ways, including using it against Weiner, claiming they’d made up the DMs, and to threaten others
8.Things did not turn out as you had planned.
Where am I going wrong?
MayBee (081489) — 8/14/2011 @ 11:15 amI would believe that anyone, who I don’t know very well, is capable of anything. But I did believe he was hacked. Not just because he said it, but because we didn’t have that type of relationship at all. More importantly, the person who had retweeted the picture was someone who I believed to be completely obsessed with AW. When I first saw the picture, I thought for sure that it was fake.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/14/2011 @ 11:19 amBut I didn’t publicly support any theory because I didn’t know for sure.
@Wittier
341
Nikki told me that she was 17, almost 18. She was finishing up her junior year of high school.
One very strange thing about her that I didn’t understand is that she would invite me to California all the time and she said she knew all of the best clubs. But she was supposed to be underaged. Maybe that was just a major oversight on her part.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/14/2011 @ 11:27 amKids with the right connections can get into a lot of clubs in LA.
MayBee (081489) — 8/14/2011 @ 11:32 amEspecially hot girls.
MayBee (081489) — 8/14/2011 @ 11:36 am@Maybee
Yes but her parents were supposed to be really overprotective and she was supposed to be sheltered.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/14/2011 @ 11:41 amThanks, Greg. That does sound like circumstantial evidence Patriot knew Weiner had used “cape and tights” in private conversations with others, and thus he concluded Weiner had done that with Ethel, too. Of course, one way Patriot might know that is if he was privy to Nikki’s private conversations with Weiner (or the blackjack dealer, but that seems unlikely) but, as you note, there could be other explanations.
I wish I could be as helpful regarding your questions as you have been for mine. I’ve never seen anything suggesting the Reids’ IDs have been posted or published, although I suspect several people have seen them.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 8/14/2011 @ 11:42 amYes but her parents were supposed to be really overprotective and she was supposed to be sheltered.
I just don’t see that part of the tale as outrageous. She wanted you to see her as cool, so she said she knew all of the clubs. Underage kids can get into the clubs. Kids with overprotective parents sneak out windows. People say they know the hottest clubs even though they don’t, because they want to sound impressive.
Obviously, she never thought you were really going to come to California.
Unless she did. Maybe her obsession wasn’t with Weiner after all.
MayBee (081489) — 8/14/2011 @ 11:48 amGennette:
I assume your point is Nikki wasn’t being consistent, something that further substantiated your belief that she is fake. But is it really that uncommon for parents to claim they monitor everything their kids do, while their kids still do things the parents don’t know about? That doesn’t mean all kids engage in illegal behavior but it strikes me as a fairly common description of virtually all parent-child relationships at some point.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 8/14/2011 @ 11:57 amI should have read the comments first because Maybee said it first, and better.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 8/14/2011 @ 11:57 amYou always say it better, DRJ. I’m fascinated by the observation you and Greg have made, and the two of you and Sarah have me thinking again about the Broussard timing.
MayBee (081489) — 8/14/2011 @ 12:08 pm@Maybee
I don’t think it’s outrageous but it was definitely something that struck me as inconsistent, on top of everything else.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/14/2011 @ 12:14 pmLook at the first DM notification and compare the “Date” time on the email with the “twitter” time in the content of the message:
Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 06:14:41 +0000
Twitter: May 18, 1:14 AM
The “+0000” indicates UTC time. The difference is 5 hours. What TZ must starchild’s Twitter account be set to? Answer is Central time
Central is UTC-6, but add 1 hr for daylight savings time = 5 hours behind UTC.
This shows that starchild’s Twitter account is necessarily set to Central time. May it’s the default. Who knows.
What’s important is this: In the Part 1 DMs, the email time was formatted in the computer’s local TZ. It was one hour ahead of the Twitter time in the email content.
This means that the computer receiving the Twitter DM notiications has its TZ set to one hour ahead of starchild’s Twitter TZ setting.
I showed starchild’s Twitter TZ was Central.
Hence the PC that received the Twitter DMs has its time zone set to Eastern time. Eastern time like in BOSTON.
Molon Labe (dc676c) — 8/14/2011 @ 12:24 pmI’m sorry, but I just can’t move away from the Tommy Christopher aspect of the saga. Tommy and his boss at Mediaite were used. They were used by somebody for a reason. There is absolutely no doubt about this. The question is were they knowingly used, or unknowingly used. This matters because later when the SHTF a person who is used knowingly would react quite differently than someone who was used unknowingly. At least it sure seems so.
Logic would suggest that in the first case there would be a quick attempt to minimize their involvement, and a desire to let the situation quickly die away from the public eye. A hope that people would forget about Tommy and the Reids and that they don’t ask a lot of pointed questions. Logic would suggest that in the second case, however, the Mediaite people would be so incensed and so irate that they had been used that they would move heaven and earth to find out who punked them and why they were the chosen outlet to report on the Reid’s.
It sure seems that Mediaite has disappeared the Weiner story and that has always seemed bizarre to me. I just think they know a whole lot more about it- or have found out a whole lot more about it- than they have ever let on.
elissa (e0d4ef) — 8/14/2011 @ 12:25 pmTommy Christopher is another one of those people who would be a valuable resource, in an alternate universe.
Patterico (f724ca) — 8/14/2011 @ 12:30 pmPatterico,
Rockem (0471ae) — 8/14/2011 @ 12:44 pmI realize you can’t or won’t divulge certain things but could you state if JR’s email is from one of the major web provider like Yahoo, Hotmail, Gmail, etc? You don’t need to say the specific provider.
Sorry, I meant Nikki’s email.
Rockem (0471ae) — 8/14/2011 @ 12:57 pmI kept posting that Tommy C was virtually silent for close to a week after the NYT article (outing “Betty & Veronica” as frauds) – only rote tweets about his website, and no articles at Mediaite.
Remember the innumerable interviews he had done previously? And his angry & self-righteous attitude? He had absolutely no curiosity as to who lied repeatedly to him? AND – made him look like the pretend journalist he is? Doesn’t make sense.
That one really stinks – to high heaven. And to think he sits in the WH briefing room most every day, as a member of the Press corpse (correct) – disgusting.
Miranda (4104db) — 8/14/2011 @ 12:58 pm@RocksEm
It was a ymail account.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/14/2011 @ 1:03 pmDo you mean Yahoo?
Rockem (0471ae) — 8/14/2011 @ 1:06 pm363 was for Gennette, sorry.
Rockem (0471ae) — 8/14/2011 @ 1:07 pmYes
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/14/2011 @ 1:09 pmThanks Gennette
Rockem (0471ae) — 8/14/2011 @ 1:10 pm@366: The forwarded messages in the Part 1 screencaps are not in the format Yahoo uses for forwarded messages.
Molon Labe (dc676c) — 8/14/2011 @ 1:14 pmSarah,
Sorry — but I don’t know any other way to put this. Yes, it’s impossible. I know more than you do. I was actually on the phone with Ladd and Breitbart when this broke. It’s not possible. Period.
Do you have a right to conjecture? Sure. But I see lots of people who have their ‘theory’ about things and ignore the people who actually have firsthand knowledge. It doesn’t help clarify the situation.
It’s one thing to ask a question but it’s entirely another to basically ignore the answer when it comes from a direct witness.
So, not trying to single you out. Feel free to ignore the facts from a person who actually knows. But you’re wrong. Incorrect. Off base. Got that?
Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 8/14/2011 @ 1:19 pm@Rocksem, however, when I forward an email from my Yahoo email account, the “Date” on the forwarded message is consistent with my Yahoo TZ setting.
I sent a test message to my Yahoo account at 2:10 PM local time. My Yahoo time zone is set to Eastern. I forwarded the message back to myself, and the Yahoo format for the forwarded message is shown below.
Note the “Date” field is in the Yahoo TZ. But the order of the message headers differs from those in the forwarded emails in Part 1.
— On Sun, 8/14/11, Me wrote:
From: Me
Subject: Test twitter time
To: me@yahoo.com
Date: Sunday, August 14, 2011, 4:10 PM
Test
Molon Labe (dc676c) — 8/14/2011 @ 1:19 pmJohn Reid can go to hell. I don’t owe anything to a fraud. He contacted me on a gmail account. But it was clearly associated with the JR9 Twitter account and he DM’d me from that account. It’s the same name as the ymail account (nikkireid93) but at gmail instead of ymail like he used with Gennette.
Yeah, John, I just gave out your email address. And I am going to publish those emails complete with the email address. You’re a fraud. I owe you NOTHING.
Patterico (f724ca) — 8/14/2011 @ 1:21 pmAnybody who wants to write John Reid and ask him why he’s such a fraud can do so at nikkireid93@gmail.com.
Patterico (f724ca) — 8/14/2011 @ 1:23 pmThanks Pat,
Rockem (0471ae) — 8/14/2011 @ 1:29 pmWas all of Nikki’s DMs forwarded to the gmail account and then sent to you? Or were some forwarded directly from the yahoo account?
I think I am going to do a post now about how very, very pro-Weiner John Reid was.
Patterico (f724ca) — 8/14/2011 @ 1:30 pmLee, just to clarify — are you saying you were on a phone call with Ladd and Breitbart on the night of the 27th?
Or do you mean you were on the phone with them on June 3, when Ladd was doing an IM interview with Patriot?
Thanks.
Greg (bc8186) — 8/14/2011 @ 1:34 pmAre you using Yahoo classic or the new one?
Rockem (0471ae) — 8/14/2011 @ 1:34 pmClassic, I suppose. Haven’t used that account in years. I’m just going to mail.yahoo.com to access my yahoo email.
Molon Labe (dc676c) — 8/14/2011 @ 1:38 pmAre you willing to update to the new to test? You can’t go back. I am not. If you are not then I will make a new yahoo account for testing purposes.
Rockem (0471ae) — 8/14/2011 @ 1:44 pmIn one of these alleged DMs between Weiner and Starchild, Weiner says, “you like that? yeah i’m doing more on Thomas soon. stay tuned”
On his blog the next day — May 18 — Weiner posts about how Clarence Thomas should recuse himself from SC case about healthcare because of Thomas’ wife’s role as lobbyist.
But obviously that’s not what Starchild is referring to, because it happens the next day. Weiner had apparently been raising this argument against Thomas for several months, but what I’m wondering is if there was any prominent media appearance he made around May 17 that may have prompted Starchild’s comment. If anyone knows of one, please post.
Greg (bc8186) — 8/14/2011 @ 1:46 pmConversations with Puppets, Part 4: The Very Pro-Weiner John Reid.
Patterico (f724ca) — 8/14/2011 @ 1:48 pmOk. New Yahoo has same forward setup as old. So. In both instances JR was using a client to read & forward Nikki DM emails. The thing is it must have been 2 different clients. It is also not the forward for gmail. The 2 clients used could both be on pc, web, or one of each. Also why do the mail header in Part 3 DMs not show To field?
Molon labe point still stands. That is assuming TZ were not purposely manipulated to confuse.
Rockem (0471ae) — 8/14/2011 @ 2:09 pmGreg,
This was the Friday (I think) before the Monday that Breitbart released the photos.
This was when Ladd sent the link to Patriot that we tracked, although that didn’t go anywhere. This all happened at like 5 o’clock or so Central time — I had to hop a bus to get to the bank, I remember clearly. Crazy day all around.
Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 8/14/2011 @ 2:18 pmThis is off-topic but I consider this fall-out from Weinergate: Rapper claims his Twitter account was hacked after LA County Sheriff opens investigation into one of his tweets.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 8/14/2011 @ 2:54 pmLee, what is it you know? The Broussard intermediary was on the phone, you said, at the same time Ladd was conducting an interview in which dw was ranting.
Since that does not preclude simultaneous conversation, something else must have been going on that does.
Was Ladd on the telephone before his online chat? Were any of these video conversations?
What else would make that simultaneous convo impossible in your judgement/observation?
Accepting the premise that the simultaneous conversation was a physical impossibility, what precludes the intermediary and the DWsock from having some other connection, or being persons working in tandem?
Who did the intermediary claim to be, that is, what identification did he/she provide, if any beyond “a friend of Broussard’s”? Did you or Breitbart have a clue, a suspicion, did you ever find out or care to find out?
Did the intermediary claim a sex ? Was that person passing as male or female? Breitbart called his information low priority, and the intermediary as of no interest to him and said little more than he was unknown and disposable,
Was Breitbart actually in possession of information he denied having to Ron? You said you don’t know who the person was either. do you really have no clue at all?
When I know who that intermediary is, and how he/she knew Broussard, I can make up my own mind about whether there is any connection to the cavalcade of socks with more confidence.
Broussard’s actions seem more interesting in hindsight and on review.
Sarahw (af7312) — 8/14/2011 @ 3:03 pmSarah, the other day on Twitter, Ron asked Breitbart many questions about Broussard’s intermediary, and somewhat surprisingly, Breitbart provided some info. Look under 05/18 on my timeline for an aggregation of Breitbart’s answers, along with links to the actual tweets. Short answer: Breitbart identifies intermediary as male, doesn’t know/remember name, never met in person, talked on phone twice.
Lee, it sounds like you were talking to Breitbart and FilmLadd on 06/3 — that’s the friday before the famous press conference.
According to Breitbart’s tweets above, he was talking to Broussard that day, not intermediary.
Greg (bc8186) — 8/14/2011 @ 3:23 pmThanks Greg.
I was just supposing maybe the simul-communications are not why Lee thinks DW can’t be or be connected to Broussards intermediary in any way…
Or is it in fact that simultaneous talking that is the clincher?
SarahW (af7312) — 8/14/2011 @ 7:26 pmLooks like they were all over that.
I’ll leave it at that.
Patterico (f724ca) — 8/14/2011 @ 7:34 pmLee:
You have called Patriot “they.”
How do we know one of “them” wasn’t talking to Ladd while another one of “them” was talking to Breitbart?
Patterico (f724ca) — 8/14/2011 @ 7:36 pmYes, the denial of the plural possibilities intrigues. I asked why DW couldn’t have a helper, too.
I did hear Lee say that the Film Ladd interview and the phone call with the intermediary couldn’t be happening at the same time.
I thought Film Ladd’s interview was by IM only, I must assume that is not the case based on what Lee says.
But perhaps Lee really meant something else? That is, that there is another basis for distinguishing the two or ruling out a connection?
SarahW (af7312) — 8/14/2011 @ 7:48 pmYou know Molon Labe makes a very good point. I think he pretty much proves the Starchild twitter account was set to Central Standard Time. Odd considering she said she was in LA. The multiple & not typical mail clients used, along with differing times, points towards someone like Dan Wolfe too as he used proxies & tried to obfuscate things.
Rocksem (0471ae) — 8/14/2011 @ 8:36 pmI am convinced that
1) Starchild’s Twitter time zone was set to Central (perhaps by default, not really relevant)
2) The email client (whether PC-based or web-based) that JR used to forward the DM notifications in Part 1 was set to Eastern. (Again that may be a default setting, but come on, the default setting would be no time zone [UTC])
Molon Labe (dc676c) — 8/14/2011 @ 9:54 pmRocksem tells me I have a problem with #2 above. The DM notifications forwarded by JR were of DMs sent to johnreid9 not starchild.
At any rate there is still information in the 1 hour time discrepancy.
Of course we all know that JR created both accounts, so likely had the same TZ as starchild.
Molon Labe (dc676c) — 8/14/2011 @ 10:26 pm