Conversations with Puppets, Part 5: The Very Pro-Weiner John Reid, 2
This is a follow-up to my post from earlier today where I show that John Reid was assuredly not pro-Weiner. This post sets out still more evidence of that. If you’re wondering why you should still care about this, I explain here.
Specifically, I found the part of the chat where John Reid starts trying to manipulate me into being the one to reveal that he and his “wife” are starting to re-evaluate Weiner. This is from June 23. All emphasis is mine.
Please understand that, as I was chatting with Reid, I was also chatting with Liberty Chick, and telling her that the style was obviously Dan Wolfe:
me: Dan Wolfe style filibuster
Liberty: LOL
Reid starts off talking about how Weiner’s technique is similar to what the pedophiles do:
me: That “Tights and cape” thing is a grooming line
nikki: YES!
me: See how the person responds
nikki: That’s what I was getting at
That and him speaking like a teenager
me: Are you SURE you got EVERYTHING?
nikki: that technique is common
talking like a teenager – the pedophiles use that
He also says I am a hero, that the “tights and cape” line gave them “chills,” and that Weiner’s behavior was “disgusting”:
me: The “tights and cape” line?
nikki: That gave us chills
me: Are you aware that Jen Preston airbrushed that?
I wrote all about it
I savaged her for it
nikki: Yup. We saw that. Disgusting.
You are a hero
becasuse we would not have known about all of Nikki’s DM’s with him
had you not pushed that
so we thank you
Real pro-Weiner!
At the very same moment I was telling Liberty Chick:
me: Dude, this is SO Wolfe
He thinks he is manipulating me
It is frigging hilarious
Liberty: Ask him if Nikki is Dan Wolfe’s daughter in real life. LOL
me: I am playing along
The flattery is making me a little sick though
He likes to do that
Thinks it is a good manipulation tactic
I am a hero
I swore Liberty Chick to secrecy on that, because I was VERY nervous about letting it get out that I thought they were the same person. (And I will admit that there were times I questioned my certitude — although as the evidence mounted, I became more and more sure.)
Now we get to the part where I asked Reid about Wolfe and his crew. I was seeing that Reid was starting to turn on Weiner, so I thought I would ask him about Wolfe directly:
me: One question I have is
Can you possibly see Dan Wolfe and his crew in a different light now?
Perhaps they were trying to protect people
nikki: Yes we can sympathize much more now
Much more
But here’s the thing
This is what needs to be done carefully
me: What, if any, of this are you willing to say publicly
nikki: on our part
That was my next point
me: OK
nikki: This is the problem we discussed – my wife and I
if we come out now and say all that we just said about Weiner – which wasn’t bad – it was a normal parental reaction
you can guess what I’m going to say
let’s see how good you are
shoot:
me: You were digging up dirt on him, and against him, all along!
nikki: BINGO!
See the problem we have?
me: I do
nikki: You are good.
So this is why
me: But I don’t know how to solve it
nikki: well we thought
we would let you come to those conclusions as you present the DM’s
obviously you said you would not comment
but
I think what you highlighted for example tonight says your true feelings
Perhaps later on, after everything is out – we can say in public what we really think
but now is not the time for that
And the same goes for how we are re-thinking our feelings on Wolfe and his group
We can’t say that now. Because you know that reaction “They were for Wolfe all along!! They ARE really Wolfe!!”
In reality, these are human emotions, normal re-evaluations that any parent or person would have.
They are not manipulations or calculations.
And I’m sure you know that.
But others, not so much.
See how he is manipulating me to be the one to suggest what he really wants to get out there?
Anybody who knows anything about Dan Wolfe recognizes the pattern.
In coming days I plan to publish all the reasons that I believe Wolfe is Reid, and the “manipulations or calculations” will become even more clear.
I have asked Liberty Chick to come on and verify our June 23 chat. Not sure if she is awake, so be patient.
Patterico (f724ca) — 8/14/2011 @ 9:23 pmI want to print this and the Ladd interview out, and read them side by side- comparing the syntax. Red penning, if you will. I know I think I see strong similarities, but I like “hard copy” to work with.
*shrugs* I’m weird- this is not news.
ppk_pixie (1df0c8) — 8/14/2011 @ 9:33 pmI have a ton of similarities. I spent some time on that post tonight. It is hilarious when you start adding them up.
Patterico (f724ca) — 8/14/2011 @ 9:38 pmHere’s my point: Wolfe set up Reid as someone who loved Weiner — but it was crap. He also set up the Reids as people who pointed the finger at Wolfe — and that too was crap, designed to hide the fact that they were the same person.
Any time someone suggested it, he could always say “Nikki was the reason people questioned me. LOL” or something. (Of course people would question him anyway.)
Patterico (f724ca) — 8/14/2011 @ 9:46 pmThere are some reindeer games people should never play- particularly with the people they attempt to play them with/against. It amazes me sometimes.
I just can’t fathom the “why”. I try to see things from another person’s point of view- but this eludes me. And I’m not disappointed by this.
I simply wish we could find the people that did the threats, get that taken care of- and then take the time to unravel the mystery.
Someone/s needs to be in jail…asap.
ppk_pixie (1df0c8) — 8/14/2011 @ 9:51 pm“Wolfe set up Reid as someone who loved Weiner — but it was crap.”
– Patterico
Not necessarily, right? If this were someone trying to muddy the water around AW, it would make sense for the John Reid persona to want you to do anti-AW document dumps if it meant that the person behind that persona could come by in a different persona later and say that those documents were fakes, and evidence of some sort of conspiracy against AW. It would explain why Dan Wolfe was trying to shop anti-AW stuff to Breitbart, too.
Leviticus (b85154) — 8/14/2011 @ 9:55 pmFINALLY!! I have been dying for the day to arrive when I could vouch for Pat on this. I vouch for every bit of it. It was pure comedy gold. And Pat was a damn good actor during the whole thing.
Mandy
Liberty_Chick (230f2f) — 8/14/2011 @ 9:59 pmLiberty Chick 🙂
_____________________________________________
where I show that John Reid was assuredly not pro-Weiner.
That’s surprising, mainly because it suggests someone was desperately trying to call attention to Weiner’s behavior. Surprising because a complicated maneuver to out Weiner would have made sense only if that politician weren’t so flagrant and shameless in the first place. There wasn’t much about Weiner’s happy-go-lucky flashing pics of himself that indicated he was worried about being caught.
I imagine Wolfe got so deeply caught up in his ploy, that out of embarrassment he didn’t want to then reveal what he had been up to. If he were a flaky, meaning-of-is-is liberal, he probably wouldn’t have minded instigating such a charade in the first place, and then being exposed for doing exactly that, or something that was shady and manipulative.
Mark (411533) — 8/14/2011 @ 10:47 pmYou know how when you are interacting with a small child, and said child is trying to get away with something and start hedging and calculating, and you can see what they are doing a mile ahead of time but they don’t realize it because they are a stupid kid trying to fool an adult and are always totally shocked when the adult can see right through their pathetic attempts at deception?
This reminds me of that.
The multiple layers of signal interference that the Internet adds makes it more difficult for Patterico, but in the end, the result is similar.
I’d call Pat my hero, but I know he hates that.
Pious Agnostic (291f9a) — 8/15/2011 @ 4:42 amI am not 100% up on this, but I have to say the different theories being floated about are just as interesting as the false identities and manipulation. Human nature is quite fascinating.
My theory as of now (and granted I am not as informed as lots of you) is this started out as just lulz. Yes, they may have had an agenda, but it was still lulz on the internet. Very easy to be anonymous, very easy to get carried away. I don’t see anybody having a big stake in the outcome of Weiner, whether good or bad.
But the very real threats add a different level. I still think it’s mostly arrogance and not a specific agenda on the parts of some of these people, but it is very interesting that they would risk this.
So, of course I could be wrong… but I can see why this has attracted so many amateur sleuths.
prmetime (1d022f) — 8/15/2011 @ 4:49 amWow. So I was out of line when I thought you were giving Reid the benefit of the doubt rather than just stating you will not provide your views on him.
A lot of people were more aggressively out of line about that, I think.
I agree with Pious that the signal interference makes it impressive if anybody can really keep up (such as Greg).
I firmly do not believe this is just for the Lulz. At least the part I actually care about. Someone is incredibly bitter about this situation.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/15/2011 @ 5:12 amLet me see if I have a clue:
Reid is Wolfe, Wolfe wanted to expose Weiner, so he set up a sting operation and lured Weiner into compromising exchanges. Weiner fell for it hook, line, and sinker.
Once Wolfe/Reid had the goods, he then caused Weiner to be exposed using a series of cat’s paws.
Now, Wolfe/Reid is caught in his own web of deception. He likes the attention but wants to evade direct responsibility.
ropelight (b80e6b) — 8/15/2011 @ 5:23 amThis is how I’m reading it.
Pious Agnostic (291f9a) — 8/15/2011 @ 5:25 amComment by ropelight — 8/15/2011 @ 5:23 am
what did AW fall for regarding DW’s traps?
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/15/2011 @ 5:33 amSounds good.
But throw in that there are some extremely aggressive bad guys threatening people, asserting lies, defending a domestic terrorist, asking for photos of people’s spouses, and even taking their threats to the next level where law enforcement knows it has to stop them.
Are those guys just reacting angrily to the loss of Weiner? Are they covering something terrible up? Are they actually somehow involved with Dan Wolfe (calling into question his motivation being anti-Weiner, and making this impenetrably complicated for me)?
This makes more sense to me if Dan was Darrah, and Neal and his couple of insane pals are not directly affiliated with them. If we can figure out whether Lulzshack et all are of the former or latter, I think that goes a long way towards understanding the situation.
I believe Lulzshack is related to the threats (which probably doesn’t help much). I think he’s trying to pose as though he’s both related to Neal and to Dan (I think one of these is probably untrue, but that is not an informed opinion).
I realize I just threw yet another freaking sock into the discussion, which should bring groans from every direction.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/15/2011 @ 5:40 amCompromising prose and dirty pictures.
ropelight (b80e6b) — 8/15/2011 @ 5:41 amI don’t know about falling for it, per se, but he was interacting with Gennette because of the sock drawer. And Dan was the one who witnessed the pic.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/15/2011 @ 5:42 amDustin, I do not think lulz and bitterness are mutually exclusive, but there are varying degrees of lulz, I believe.
Lulz is a lighthearted word, but that is a bit misleading, I think. To do something for the lulz, does not always (or even usually) mean to do it for laughs, or that there is no larger cause. It very often means that no individual will get credit, maybe nothing will happen, but you have done some measure of harm to your enemy.It does not have to be serious harm, a signal that they can wade into your turf at any time will suffice. As happened with BART yesterday. No real harm done, but they let you know you they are there.
I am not a hacker, but I do love to follow these groups. I am also a huge follower of all things that start on 4chan. I really think they are going to be quite a force to reckon with in society, good and bad.
Anyway, of course I could be wrong, but about these characters, and certainly none of them have ever been on 4chan. But I think a lot of people misunderstand the word lulz, and perhaps do not realize how common it is on the internet.
Anywho, I still love hearing about all the theories here, and I hope they keep coming.
prmetime (1d022f) — 8/15/2011 @ 5:44 amI see.
I think this is probably a better understanding than I suggested.
I do not think they are just goofing off to laugh at the victim, much like a hidden camera prank.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/15/2011 @ 5:47 amBingo! Lulz does not mean goofing off at all. There is a message there.
I don’t believe the people involved would ever use the word lulz, as they have not really done anything sophisticated, just basic manipulation of humans.
But it is a useful to word to know and I though I would throw it out there.
prmetime (1d022f) — 8/15/2011 @ 5:55 amNeal especially likes to co-opt. He simultaneously mocked those who blamed him for Beandogs while bragging he could sic them and congratulating them, and calling them “my beandogs”.
Similarly, Lulzshack is posing like he’s not a bitter partisan asshole, but acting like he is the worst sort of hack. His favorite point is to insist he’s part of a large group of anonymous allies that his enemies should fear. He posts links to that wiki-for-trolls site noting “we wrote this”, but it’s just one guy editing the page.
My point: just the minor one that these guys are small in number and acutely sensitive about that. They want you to think anonymous is their personal army.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/15/2011 @ 6:01 amNeal and Darrah are closely affiliated (as are LulzShack and Darrah). You can take that as a given for purposes of your theorizing.
Patterico (f724ca) — 8/15/2011 @ 7:01 amWhere is DF from again?
Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c) — 8/15/2011 @ 7:07 amDoes anyone have the link to the article Tommy Christopher wrote after interviewing the Reids?
Wondering (786412) — 8/15/2011 @ 7:07 amDustin, point noted and it made me laugh. I do not know about these two characters, but acutely sensitive sounds about right.
I can only imagine what fun Anonymous would have with them. I see that lulzshack is familiar with 4chan. That is interesting, but the one doc I see is pretty boring.
What is disturbing is how many people IRL may know them and think they are decent people.
prmetime (1d022f) — 8/15/2011 @ 7:13 amOK I have a question I don’t know the answer to. Is there any way to tell the IP address that JR9 was communicating from or any way to trace him that way?
Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c) — 8/15/2011 @ 7:13 amPictures with Nikki? Is it compromising prose w/ Nikki if there’s evidence that AW believed her to be a phony? I thought AW’s DMs to Nikki could all be read as taunting the troll if one believes the concept that AW thought she was a sock.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/15/2011 @ 7:20 amThis makes no sense to me. If Wolfe was a political operative, why *not* target someone reckless? I bet his mission was to get Weiner to send him (Nikki) pictures because there were rumors Weiner did that.
Patterico (f724ca) — 8/15/2011 @ 7:21 amSorry, I keep forgetting some of the details.
Darrah and Dan both want to screw Mike over. Neither of them have made their reasons very clear.
Neal has noted he’s involved with female hackers, but his definition of hacking seems to be trolling twitter with spam.
So I find the Neal and Darrah working together aspect totally plausible, and wind up wondering why, if Darrah(or Neal or any of his pals) and Dan are the same, he would be anti-Weiner.
So either I’m mistaken to associate Dan with them (I find it impossible to ignore the timing of threats and more with JR9), or something else isn’t adding up.
But why must everything add up? These people are not resorting to these tactics because they are particularly smart or reasonable. Their motivation cannot be seen from their results, because they are jackasses and because they are so interested in misdirection. They probably were the second Weiner sent that pic.
For all I know, Neal realizes he screwed up so badly in trying to protect Weiner that his career as a democrat helper is ruined if he does not desperately make an enormous mess.
Thank you for the swift and clear correction about Darrah and Neal.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/15/2011 @ 7:21 amwondering…
I am not sure about the exact article, but I did find this.
prmetime (1d022f) — 8/15/2011 @ 7:23 amI haven’t looked too closely, but LulzShack sounds like PeterPavel1 and Jen Preston’s intern.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/15/2011 @ 7:24 amI don’t think so.
also, DF claims to be from Boston.
I probably should stop trying to figure out how Dan and Neal/Darrah’s motivations line up, but I can’t help it.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/15/2011 @ 7:25 amAlso, Lee did get Dan to click a link and found he used means to conceal his actual IP address.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/15/2011 @ 7:26 amwondering…
I am not sure about the exact article, but I did find this.
Comment by prmetime — 8/15/2011 @ 7:23 am
Thank you
Wondering (786412) — 8/15/2011 @ 7:26 amMy take away from this is and always will be that a lot of people suck at being humans.
Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c) — 8/15/2011 @ 7:32 amEven if my personal theory about this turns out to be bunk. What I have learned about the way some “people” operate is very educational. I hope they are taken off the radar ’cause they B L O W
#29 Dustin
Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c) — 8/15/2011 @ 7:38 amI know.
I don’t think it’s too hard if you stop thinking like a person who is after facts and honesty. Just read NR KOS posts or for that matter Stef.
#30 Dustin
Thanks. I thought I remembered that.
Comment by koam @wittier — 8/15/2011 @ 7:24 am
oops, I meant, Neal & NYT Jen Preston’s shared intern.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/15/2011 @ 7:38 amThis is the Tommy Christopher article I wanted to re-read. Thanks prmetime. It was sort of under the article you provided.
Wondering (786412) — 8/15/2011 @ 7:38 amhttp://www.mediaite.com/online/andrew-breitbart-did-not-run-weinergate-evidence-which-turned-out-to-be-fabricated/5/
Comment by Blackburnsghost — 8/15/2011 @ 7:13 am
The original emails from JR9 (using Nikki’s ymail.com email address) were from an IP that went through some server farm in San Fran, but I was told that made it untraceable. Forgive me if I didn’t use the right tech names.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/15/2011 @ 7:42 amComment by Wondering — 8/15/2011 @ 7:38 am
The “main” Tommy Christopher article was always a 5-pager, and each page had “title”
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/15/2011 @ 7:43 amNeal as LulzShack likes to pretend to be Wolfe. It is tempting to believe, since Wolfe has the technical sophistication if a hacker. But Wolfe hurt Weiner badly. Why would Neal do that??
Patterico (f724ca) — 8/15/2011 @ 7:46 amComment by koam @wittier — @ 7:20 am
Koam, I’m short on specifics, my two cents is pure uninformed speculation, nothing but guesses and gut reactions to the overall gist of the topic. The many comments and complex twists and turns have left me only tangentially involved.
Patterico says I should be interested, but his case is, so far, to me, unpersuasive. I’m willing to cut at the root, but thrashing at branches isn’t a priority.
My comment @5:23am was an attempt to find out if my take was anywhere close to the mark. Since my interest here has been both shallow and intermittent, I defer to those better suited to explain the facts and their implications.
ropelight (b80e6b) — 8/15/2011 @ 7:47 amThe “main” Tommy Christopher article was always a 5-pager, and each page had “title”
Comment by koam @wittier — 8/15/2011 @ 7:43 am
Thanks koam @wittier. I am still trying to make sense of all of this but I think my attempts are futile.
Wondering (786412) — 8/15/2011 @ 7:50 amThis is the most confusing bunch of information I have ever seen which is why I may just give up trying.
Maybe you can answer this question. Is the person/people in Tommy’s interview the same person Patterico has been talking to?
YES.
The JohnReid9 that emailed and DM’s patterico was also DMing Tommy Christopher.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/15/2011 @ 7:54 amPatrick, can you elaborate on lulzshack? I am seriously behind, but I have seen nothing even remotely technically sophisticated.
I’ve been looking up lulzshack and they/he/she just look silly and really fake.
prmetime (1d022f) — 8/15/2011 @ 7:55 amYes. Most people believe that Tommy was corresponding & talking on skype phone (voice only) with a female who said she was Patricia Reid, Nikki’s mom — and that is the same entity who as, John Reid, Pat’s husband, who is talking w/ Patterico.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/15/2011 @ 7:57 amThanks Dustin. Not that I now feel clear about the whole thing but that is helpful.
Wondering (786412) — 8/15/2011 @ 7:58 amI’m chasing my tail on who or why with Dan, so I’m going to go back to shutting up for a while.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/15/2011 @ 8:00 amYes. Most people believe that Tommy was corresponding & talking on skype phone (voice only) with a female who said she was Patricia Reid, Nikki’s mom — and that is the same entity who as, John Reid, Pat’s husband, who is talking w/ Patterico.
Comment by koam @wittier — 8/15/2011 @ 7:57 am
Same email address I assume? (I know really dumb question.)
Wondering (786412) — 8/15/2011 @ 8:05 amMoney?
Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c) — 8/15/2011 @ 8:10 amI saved a spot on the fence for you Dustin 🙂
What does Tommy think about all of this? Does anyone talk to him? I would be interested to know what his opinion is.
Wondering (786412) — 8/15/2011 @ 8:12 amWait, Skype? Okay now I am confused again. So Tommy never talked to this person over email? Only DM and skype?
Wondering (786412) — 8/15/2011 @ 8:18 amI give up. You must all see something I don’t. I’m just not smart enough to figure this out.
Wondering (786412) — 8/15/2011 @ 8:20 amThanks for trying.
No elaborating on LulzShack. He’s Neal.
I have it on good authority that some of his “beandogs” are actually decent people in a way and that some of their targets really are nasty themselves. But I really don’t know much about it.
Don’t even really know much about why Neal would have it in for me. What do I care about him? I get the feeling it’s all driven by Brett Kimberlin.
Patterico (fbec01) — 8/15/2011 @ 8:22 amI don’t know.
But Tommy was really weird throughout this. He was calling people f**kface at what seemed to me to be the drop of a hat. His radio interviews filled me with distrust.
I’m not trying to say he’s in on the scam, but I doubt he’s the way to the truth.
It’s not a shortcoming on your part. This is supposed to trigger that reaction. That’s the point of their misdirections.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/15/2011 @ 8:23 am31.I haven’t looked too closely, but LulzShack sounds like PeterPavel1 and Jen Preston’s intern.
Comment by koam @wittier — 8/15/2011 @ 7:24 am
Please,please share your insider knowledge about this,especially how it sounds like JP’s interns. I am waiting on pins and needles for you to fudge up this one.
goatsred (c1f2f8) — 8/15/2011 @ 8:32 amJust because I am quiet it doesn’t mean that I’m stupid.
List five reasons why it may be those interns.
You’re like way too many people who really do not know what’s going on, but play the game of amateur sleuth/deflector.
CONCRETE proof and a definitive list of reasons as to why this may be.
Sick of some of this s**t.
oops, I meant, Neal & NYT Jen Preston’s shared intern @wittier
Saw this one also. Just stupid.
Nothing personal.
goatsred (c1f2f8) — 8/15/2011 @ 8:35 amI want to take issue with something Mandy said. I would not say I was an “actor” with Reid. I seriously considered the possibility at times that he and Wolfe were just intensely private people. What I want people to understand is, I never lost sight of the possibility/likelihood that they were frauds, even at the very beginning of my contact with Reid.
Patterico (fbec01) — 8/15/2011 @ 8:36 amComment by Wondering — 8/15/2011 @ 8:05 am
I don’t know because I don’t know what email addresses were used in the Reids’ correspondence to fool Tommy.
To fool us they used nikkireid93@ymail.com for Document Dump 1. I see that Patterico reported that they used the same account name but at gmail and perhaps hotmail as well. I only saw ymail (which is Yahoo!).
“John” went into “Nikki’s” ymail account and forwarded Twitter DM notifications and emails to us..so there was no intermediate email account. The DM notifications from Twitter had been sent to the same ymail account, and then were forwarded directly to us. The Twitter account “JohnReid9” used the email address “nikkireid93@ymail.com” I don’t know if there is/was a John Reid email account…but apparently after starchild111 twitter was shut down, the JohnReid9 account was opened using Nikki’s ymail email address.
So, to comment on a related discussion somewhere around here, John Reid was forwarding the actual Twitter DM notifications. He was not sending screenshots of those in Doc Dump 1 (June 22). And I believe Gennette confirmed the ones that related to her. Perhaps later ones that John sent to Patterico were attached rather than forwarded? Perhaps there is correlation between attached DM notifications and those which GC has called FAKE?
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/15/2011 @ 8:39 amYes email. I believe the phone contact was via Skype and that Patricia sent the fake IDs to Tommy via the fax-like functionality of Skype, but Skype wasn’t used for video calls. See Colby Hall’s spinning on behalf of Tommy after they were both proven to have been patsys. It’s on Mediaite.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/15/2011 @ 8:44 amAs I recall during the Larry O’Connor interview, Patterico asked Tommy Christopher (through Larry, because the audio was bad) how he had had contact with the Reid family – he asked if it was by phone, email, text (?), in person …. Larry repeated only three methods – left out “in person” …. then Tommy repeated something like “yeah … phone, email, text” ….
Do I have that right Patterico? I can’t find the archived interview.
Some refreshers on Tommy:
http://bigjournalism.com/lstranahan/2011/06/19/mediaites-tommy-christopher-was-given-fake-ids-in-weinergate-story/#more-202312
https://patterico.com/2011/06/17/about-mediaites-explanation-of-their-fiasco/
Note Tommy’s irate, self-righteous, profane ranting at Lee.
Isn’t it interesting that after being busted for accepting bogus ID’s his rage & hunger for back-to-back interviews suddenly evaporated … and he’s had absolutely no curiosity about who orchestrated this drama.
Miranda (4104db) — 8/15/2011 @ 9:09 amMike, “I haven’t looked too closely” it’s just the tone…for example repeatedly alleging that someone “menaced” someone else. Sounds like the utility intern. Sounds like means sounds like, which could be intentional.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/15/2011 @ 9:14 amYes.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/15/2011 @ 9:17 am==I give up. You must all see something I don’t==
Wondering– The point with Tommy is that as a “respected” DC mainstream “journalist” he published a scoop that immediately changed the complexion of the Weiner scandal (mostly in Weiner’s favor.) He was then quoted and used as a reliable source by dozens of other media outlets. When the Reid “people” he had proudly profiled and said he had interviewed by phone turned out not to even exist and were outed as fake entities by the NYT no less, Tommy’s story was shown to be total rubbish-a manufactured/planted scoop. Not what you’d expect from a “respected” journalist who is supposed to, like, check sources and maybe verify facts and double check addresses and locations and do some due diligence before they publish anything about a U.S. congressman caught up in a nationally important story. Tommy’s gullibility, or his willing compliance in an effort to help Weiner, or his journalistic laziness–whatever you choose to believe, has never been fully fleshed out or explained rationally. He interjected himself into the Weiner story at a critical juncture but has mostly been MIA ever since.
The fact that the trajectory and narrative of a genuine political scandal was, for a while, affected by an MSM story based completely on fake people, should scare the carp out of every American no matter what side of the political fence they’re on.
elissa (ac1977) — 8/15/2011 @ 9:19 amI’m glad people are talking about Tommy. That was the little push so many elements of the hoax needed.
The degree of his anger at Lee was odd, even to me. Totally unprofessional. His interview online just sent a ‘do not trust’ message.
Elissa’s right that even if Tommy is innocent but lazy, this draws a perfect blueprint for handling of scandals.
If I were in Tommy’s shoes, I damn sure wouldn’t have dropped the story like this. I’d be giving as much insight as I can. I’d be sharing 100% of anything I have in the open. I’d be investigating anyone I suspected of having so ruined my name.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/15/2011 @ 9:28 amComment by elissa — 8/15/2011 @ 9:19 am
Yes. And, if the intern was the actual “researcher” on the NYT story, then it’s very possible that the puppetmaster first attempted to ensnare Breitbart…then orchestrated the Mediaite stories…and then orchestrated the NYT stories…which drove the mainstream media on this…and then greatly influenced the blogs for weeks.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/15/2011 @ 9:34 amKoam, that makes Breitbart look pretty good, IMO.
I guess it shouldn’t be so above and beyond the call of duty to be much more careful than Tommy C and the NYT were.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/15/2011 @ 9:39 amWe know for a fact that law enforcement is involved, because of the threats (and other activities?) against Patterico & Ace & Mike Stack.
So I would assume LE would question Tommy C. After all, he spoke to at least one Reid family member by phone, by his own admission. The threats haven’t stopped Patterico from continuing to write about Weinergate. So why is Tommy silent?
Oh, well .. silly me. Tommy is a real Journalist with a capital J, so he’s been working on blockbuster stories, like … did Rep Barney Frank pass gas on the Rachel Maddow show?
http://www.mediaite.com/online/daily-caller-has-two-reporters-investigate-barney-franks-alleged-on-air-flatulence/
and how World Net Daily published a photo of Maddow being served with a lawsuit:
http://www.mediaite.com/online/worldnetdaily-publishes-photo-of-rachel-maddow-being-served-bradlee-dean-lawsuit/
Real Journalism with a capital J!
Miranda (4104db) — 8/15/2011 @ 9:42 am“Intern?”
Oh, jeeze…just when I think I know the players.
Who is the “intern?”
And why did the mention anger goatsred so much?
Pious Agnostic (291f9a) — 8/15/2011 @ 9:42 amPious, they are talking about Ron Brynaert, who is right in the middle of this rather than outside throwing crap in every direction. The reason he poses as the latter is to deflect from the former.
Another strange guy who hates everyone until Brett Kimberlin’s name is mentioned, at which time he sobers up and expresses skepticism about what we already know for sure.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/15/2011 @ 9:45 amComment by Dustin — 8/15/2011 @ 9:39 am
Yes, it was a lousy plot, either way.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/15/2011 @ 9:46 amThank you Dustin. Still clear as mud, but now slightly clearer mud.
Pious Agnostic (291f9a) — 8/15/2011 @ 9:50 amWhen was Ron B an intern for the NYT? Did he work directly for Preston?
Isn’t he a little long in the tooth to be an intern? I had the impression he was 40 + & rather rough around the edges. And a little too fond of the sauce. Just my impression.
It is strange how the tone of his tweets has changed.
Miranda (4104db) — 8/15/2011 @ 9:51 amComment by Miranda — 8/15/2011 @ 9:51 am
When someone does the work and doesn’t get paid, “intern” is a polite term for the position. Something you could put on your resume, “NYT Investigative Journalism Research Intern”…and on a big story, to boot.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/15/2011 @ 9:56 amSo Tommy hasn’t talked to anyone? Since he was the one who interviewed these people in question, why hasn’t he? Has anyone tried asking him what he knows? If not, WHY? I assumed Tommy was helping. I have to learn to stop assuming.
Wondering (786412) — 8/15/2011 @ 9:56 amI sure would love to know whether or not the police are doing anything. This is all very strange. It feels like someone is covering up something to me. I am not accusing anyone because I don’t even understand who is involved but seriously, what is going on?
Wondering (786412) — 8/15/2011 @ 10:00 amHe’s 42.
I do not know if the word intern is the best, but I’ve used it so my mistake if that’s not accurate. He was doing research for Jen Preston, and I thought their relationship was indeed described as an internship.
Ron’s prior claim to fame was being the guy who reminds VHS tapes at the rental store and pushing conspiracy theories at Brett’s Raw Story kook-blog. I have no idea why the NYT would rely on him for information. Even with their rather terrible level of bias I find it surprising.
Wondering, I think Tommy burned bridges to some extent with folks who want these answers. I can’t say everyone who has been disagreeable is a conspirator. Perhaps he was defensive and shifty because he knew he was out on a limb.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/15/2011 @ 10:02 amPatterico has said they are.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/15/2011 @ 10:03 amWondering, I have no idea who Tommy has talked to – but from reading Patterico’s comments, he hasn’t talked to him. Or at least hasn’t helped him.
And he hasn’t done a Weinergate article in some time. In fact, after the NYT outed the Reids as frauds, Tommy was MIA – he usually tweets quite a bit & publishes between 1 – 3 articles per day at Mediaite. But he went silent for almost a week (beside his daily tweet about some other “news” site he has – X-rated news or something like that).
Just weird. Always use the reasonable person test – if you were played for a fool by someone who created fictional characters, would you stay silent? Wouldn’t you want to get to the bottom of the mystery?
Miranda (4104db) — 8/15/2011 @ 10:05 amDustin, then surely they have spoken to Tommy (which would satisfy me.) He seems to be the place to start trying to figure this out. Don’t the police have ways to trace things? Maybe they already know the facts. I sure hope so.
Wondering (786412) — 8/15/2011 @ 10:07 amI listened to the Larry radio with Tommy live and Tommy did not come off well at all.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/15/2011 @ 10:09 amOk, thanks Dustin & Koam. That’s what Ron B was ranting about a while back – that Jen P wouldn’t call him – that they had an agreement that he’d be paid – something like that.
So she mined him for info, relied on his research, mentioned possible payment (according to him), then he felt burned because there was no money after all.
Lay down with dogs, you get fleas.
Miranda (4104db) — 8/15/2011 @ 10:10 amWondering, I know nothing about the serious investigation (which is as it should be). I just know they are doing something.
I believe they are going to get their culprit.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/15/2011 @ 10:13 amI should probably know this, but who/what is “LE”?
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/15/2011 @ 10:13 amLaw enforcement, Gennette.
Thanks again for resolving a couple of aspects. It’s really helped me, and I do hope you get to face the people who used you.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/15/2011 @ 10:14 amMiranda, I wouldn’t/don’t take too kindly to anyone lying to me. But especially if I were someone whose livelihood depended on being able to trust and be trusted. I am in in total agreement.
Wondering (786412) — 8/15/2011 @ 10:16 amI will trust the police know more than I do and are finding the facts that will put this all to rest. One thing I am actually glad about even though my curiosity isn’t.. I am glad they are keeping what they know to themselves until there is proof. I think that is why I am always lost. There are 100 different theories but as far as I can tell, few facts.
Oh wow, that’s embarrassing.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/15/2011 @ 10:16 amComment by Miranda — 8/15/2011 @ 10:10 am
Yes. Not just “according to him” …he posted alleged DMs and emails from her that may or may not be real, but it’s not just his word.
Remember as well that there were actual tweets where Jen P mentions him…tweets that she later deleted, apparently. The fact of these tweets and their subsequent disappearance was documented by JGCA, thankfully. Smart lady.
All that, and either or both of them (reporter and intern) could be misleading us, as well.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/15/2011 @ 10:19 amNot really. I’ve forgotten more than once.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/15/2011 @ 10:20 amGennette, thanks for your engagement with us. I know I was hard on you previously but we all wanted to expose you as a fraud or as a conspirator if you were one. I’m leaning the other way, based both on Patterico’s statements & from the info you’ve provided. I sure hope you’re not playing us all for fools.
Anyway – just curious – are there any liberal/progressive bloggers or political operatives who are helping you discover who is behind the fictional Reid family? Is Patterico the only person who is working with you?
I hope you see that Patterico wants the truth to come out – and so do most of us (can’t speak for everyone) – no matter the political persuasion of those involved.
Miranda (4104db) — 8/15/2011 @ 10:23 amI have an implied fact! Anthony Weiner believes his penis can rule the world! I’ll bet he dresses it up in a uniform.
Wondering (786412) — 8/15/2011 @ 10:26 am@Miranda
Thank you, I understand. Patterico is the only blogger that I’ve been working with.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/15/2011 @ 10:33 amI do hope you get to face the people who used you.
If Gennette was used, she was using right back.
The Tommy Christopher article is an exercise in mutual back-covering by both Gennette and the trolls.
Only one person used Gennette, and that was Weiner.
MayBee (081489) — 8/15/2011 @ 10:48 amI get where you’re coming from, Maybee.
But I believe Gennette was used by the socks. I’m not trying to determine right from wrong as far as Dan and JR9 and Weiner goes at this point. I just want to know who is behind the threats.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/15/2011 @ 10:56 amThe thing that fascinates me is the fact that I now read some of these comments, from people I’m not familiar with, and wonder “Does this person really mean that, or are they saying that to manipulate the conversation in a particular direction.
I’m sure there are people who are right now wondering, “Why did Pious bring this up right now?
It’s destructive of trustful dialog, which naturally is why they do it I suppose.
Pious Agnostic (291f9a) — 8/15/2011 @ 10:58 amTo whom are you referring Pious?
Wondering (786412) — 8/15/2011 @ 11:17 amI think part of the difficulty some of us have had in believing Gennette is the ideological gulf between conservatives and progressives. That sounds ridiculous – but I think it’s more of an issue than initially apparent.
Sometimes I will flip through sit-coms on TV, and I can’t believe the garbage on – heavy, clumsy sexual innuendo, barbs aimed at conservatives & evangelical Christians, lots of references to casual drug use, as if everyone smokes pot, etc. I think to myself – who are these people? Who watches this trash? But a lot of people do. In fact, that stupid show Two & a Half Men was getting over 11 million viewers – for a repeat! That’s a heck of a lot more than watch Bill O’Reilly (not a big fan), who gets 3 mil +.
Progressivism is much more than a political philosophy – it includes what many of us see as degradation of women by acceptance of anything-goes sex – porn & legalized prostitution, gay marriage, “polyamorous” relationships (setting the stage for polygamy); legalization of drugs – at least marijuana; indoctrination of our children through Leftist, politically-correct public education, etc.
So when we’ve put ourselves in Gennette’s place, we know we’d be shocked & disgusted if we (or our daughters) were to receive a Weinertweet. But for a progressive, it’s really no big deal. After all, isn’t that what teens & twenty-something’s do on shows like MTV Real World? It’s acceptable behavior.
For most of us though, it’s not the real world – it’s bizarro land.
PS – Pious – I know what you mean – I’ve been suspicious of others’ motives all along. An obvious tactic would be to be nice to Gennette so she’d confide more here. But I meant what I said at 10:23 am – foolishly or not. Of course, I may be posting this in order to manipulate you! Just kidding – really!
Miranda (4104db) — 8/15/2011 @ 11:20 amWondering, I’m not picking fights. Just commenting on the multiple layers of meaning within these comment threads.
Pious Agnostic (291f9a) — 8/15/2011 @ 11:37 amI would call that a dichotomy. But what do I know? I just have instincts…don’t we all?
Wondering (786412) — 8/15/2011 @ 11:42 amI also am glad that Gennette stuck it out here, and appreciate her courage. She’s encountered a lot of flack. Some of it is engendered by actual suspicion of her motives and involvement, and I’ll admit that early on I looked askance.
But now I wonder how much of the vehemence was designed to drive her away?
And as I’m typing this, I think I know why the threats against Patterico warned him away from following up on her story.
She has proven to be an ally in the fight, so any way to drive in a wedge and shove her out would be pursued.
Pious Agnostic (291f9a) — 8/15/2011 @ 11:57 amThe socks aren’t great at everything, but they’re very effective at seeding mistrust among those who ought to trust each other, deliberately frustrating & sidetracking any progress made by collaborative work.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/15/2011 @ 12:02 pmDuh … I hadn’t thought of that Pious. So many twists & turns to this story.
I keep thinking – who benefits? Which is at a minimum a two-part question – because if you look at who benefits from Weiner gone – why continue the drama after the objective has been reached?
I keep coming back to a hell-hath-no-fury scenario … but that doesn’t make much sense with more than one player. Could only one person have pulled all this off? I don’t know.
Miranda (4104db) — 8/15/2011 @ 12:06 pmBut now I wonder how much of the vehemence was designed to drive her away?
Considering Patterico himself got quite frustrated with her, I’d say your theory needs some working on.
MayBee (081489) — 8/15/2011 @ 12:13 pmMayBee — 8/15/2011 @ 12:13 pm
You are no doubt correct. I’m a dilettante.
Pious Agnostic (291f9a) — 8/15/2011 @ 12:25 pmBut I can totally see someone calculating that the attempt to work with Gennette, post threat, would lead to tons and tons of acrimony. Maybee is obviously critical and skeptical in good faith, but that would be something you could predict would happen once the wedge was driven (and to a lesser extent, before).
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/15/2011 @ 12:28 pmZING
Miranda (4104db) — 8/15/2011 @ 12:32 pmI wonder if the socks have gone quiet. And whether any more threats have been made or other nefarious activities taken place.
I also wonder where the copy of the police report is re JG Boston & Lee S. I thought Lee was going to get a copy. I’d think he could post a copy, with name & address redacted of course.
Miranda (4104db) — 8/15/2011 @ 12:39 pmComment by koam @wittier — 8/15/2011 @ 9:14 am
My apologies to you. wittier. Because I see what happens when something new gets “introduced” into the story. I read it incorrectly and overreacted.
goatsred (66819b) — 8/15/2011 @ 12:42 pmThe thread gets hijacked and we veer way off topic once again.
Sorry for the misunderstanding.
Tommy was suckered, it’s as simple as that, and a bitter irony it is, since he was so busy protecting his bogus scoop and cloaking it with his magical J card – or waving it around like Van Helsing at “unprofessional” vampires.
Hope he learned his lesson whether he admits there is one or not.
SarahW (af7312) — 8/15/2011 @ 12:52 pmMike, no sweat.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/15/2011 @ 12:53 pmAlso, there is no “Dan Wolfe” either. Wolfe is a constructed fraud character as much as any of them.
SarahW (af7312) — 8/15/2011 @ 12:56 pmLee had posted, I think, that anyone can order a copy of the police report for a $5 fee.
Later, we discussed if that seemed like it’s really a police policy. Why would the police report filed by a woman who says she had her life threatened be available to the public? If your sister had her life threatened (hypothetical)…would you want anyone to be able to order the report for $5? Maybe she’d want it to remain privileged info for police & prosecutors.
I’m sure patterico knows how this works and would have paid the $5 if the thought he could get any info on who JGMA is.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/15/2011 @ 12:57 pmDid Ron ever call himself this, or was this a term initially applied by someone else?
Greg (e8b551) — 8/15/2011 @ 1:04 pmComment by Greg — 8/15/2011 @ 1:04 pm
I think I coined it. He later called it polite.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/15/2011 @ 1:07 pmAs the subject of “motive” is discussed, it’s important to remember this:
If whoever was behind this was simply a political operative, let’s say democratic operative trying to ruin weiner for a future NYC mayoral run for instance, then once Weiner is “destroyed” and resigns, he/she would be gone. A) The mission would have been accomplished. B) Continued exposure, participation in the drama could lead to he/she’s identity being exposed.
If one looks at all this through that lens, perhaps “destroying” Weiner was still the objective… but unlikely a purely political one.
scoovy (0e137d) — 8/15/2011 @ 1:07 pmThanks Koam. For a while I got busy & didn’t follow the story as closely – now I’ve had a lull so I’m back on the trail.
Now if Lee was a party to the alleged incident, and he was interviewed by a detective, I would think he’d have a right to the report.
Miranda (4104db) — 8/15/2011 @ 1:13 pmComment by scoovy — 8/15/2011 @ 1:07 pm
I don’t understand why you say a non-political operative intent on destroying Weiner wouldn’t care about being exposed or would pursue him beyond his resignation.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/15/2011 @ 1:13 pmkoam@wittier 117
Not saying a non-political operative wouldn’t care at all about being exposed…
Just that if this were strictly political dirty trick, the operative would likely want to get out of dodge as soon as the job was done. Would be more “professional” about it. Does that make sense?
scoovy (0e137d) — 8/15/2011 @ 1:26 pm98.Wondering, I’m not picking fights. Just commenting on the multiple layers of meaning within these comment threads.
Comment by Pious Agnostic — 8/15/2011 @ 11:37 am
Just a very stressful thing going on here. I am in agreement that we should all get along, because all contributions help here.
goatsred (66819b) — 8/15/2011 @ 1:31 pmWe’ve gotten a lot done with that formula. I’m just as confused by all the layers within the comments as you are sometimes.
There’s a lot of personal things at stake for a bunch of us here, me being one.
I try to just sit back and decipher what I am reading most of the time.Other times jump right in without thinking.
It’s definitely a turnoff reading extreme right wing stereotypes of the left. The most idiotic one I’ve seen on the net is that Obama is a socialist. No. He is a right wing democrat. That’s how he got elected. Through triangulation.
I studied Social Theory. My department was heavily influenced by the Frankfurt School of Critical Theory. With that gravitas, I feel confident to share the opinion that Obama has next to nothing in common with socialist thought. Republicans and Democrats are ultimately not that far apart, in that both support historic liberalism. Folks who go to the edges or beyond those parties venture towards shades of conservatism and socialism respectively, both of which are still part of historic liberal thought. Liberalism by definition is a belief sytem based on institutions working for the common good. Liberalism doesn’t call for excessive change or dismantling. It asks for reform. The further one ventures past the ends of each side of the political spectrum is where we become vulnerable to being easy prey for reactionary fascism or totalitarian communism.
In regards to the topic at hand, I believe one objective of the convolution dumps is to exacerbate friction between people with divergent world views. There does appear to be an element of divide and conquer. The fakes don’t expect Patterico and Gennette to work together. Their business model is based on the idea of us versus them. I’ve been getting attacked precisely for exposing that house of cards.
There’s a time and place for us to mix it up as libtards and repukelicans. This isn’t it.
Prepostericity (04c337) — 8/15/2011 @ 1:32 pmMaybe you know more about this than I do, but does Stranded Wind present as a buttoned-up professional about anything, including this? I don’t think so.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/15/2011 @ 1:34 pmI was just reading something I had never before read. (Tommy article)
Wondering (786412) — 8/15/2011 @ 1:35 pmStatements from the Reids…. If Dan Wolfe is “Reid, et al” why would he accuse himself of stalking?
Multiple personality disorder?
Comment by Wondering — 8/15/2011 @ 1:35 pm
Not that I believe it, but why wouldn’t he accuse himself of stalking?
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/15/2011 @ 1:38 pmNot that I believe it, but why wouldn’t he accuse himself of stalking?
Comment by koam @wittier — 8/15/2011 @ 1:38 pm
I just think that’s odd…but then to be in the minds of most of these people would seem odd to me. Think about what those statements created…yet he stayed to defend himself. Why would he do that? Is the mindset that if Dan Wolfe created Dan Wolfe to blame, the heat would be taken off someone else? If that were the case, why wouldn’t Dan just disappear completely? What’s the motive?
Wondering (786412) — 8/15/2011 @ 1:44 pmIf you compare the manner of speaking…The TC interview vs. Dan Wolfe interviews. I don’t think they seem the same. Am I alone in that feeling?
Wondering (786412) — 8/15/2011 @ 1:50 pmIf I had two
sockspersona and I wished to try to hide the fact that they were bot me, I’d definitely have one of them accuse the other of dirty deeds. I’d do all I consciously could to make them seem as distinct as possible.It would be the unconscious things that would give me away.
Pious Agnostic (6048a8) — 8/15/2011 @ 1:50 pmLike what Pious?
Wondering (786412) — 8/15/2011 @ 1:52 pm==I wonder if the socks have gone quiet.==
Oh, I rather doubt that they have, Miranda.
elissa (ac1977) — 8/15/2011 @ 1:53 pmThat would be a REALLY difficult thing to do. If that is the case, he must be a genius.
Wondering (786412) — 8/15/2011 @ 1:54 pmComment by Wondering — 8/15/2011 @ 1:50 pm
I did an analysis of Dan vs John a long time ago. I listed the similarities and differences. My conclusion at the time was that they were not the same person.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/15/2011 @ 1:57 pmJohn Reid doesn’t really speak like Nikki Reid but they’re both the same person.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/15/2011 @ 1:59 pmFor example, they used different vocabulary when expressing anger, with little overlap. Dan types “LOL” while John types “Lol” (could be a phone auto-capitalizing, though).
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/15/2011 @ 2:03 pm==That would be a REALLY difficult thing to do. If that is the case, he must be a genius.==
I tend to reserve the word genius for people like Mozart and Mendel and Curie and Watson/Crick. But maybe that’s just me.
elissa (ac1977) — 8/15/2011 @ 2:05 pmkoam @wittier — 8/15/2011 @ 2:03 pm
I’m sorry, I didn’t understand this. It seems to me that “LOL” and “Lol” are very similar.
Are these examples of different vocabulary?
Pious Agnostic (6048a8) — 8/15/2011 @ 2:07 pmI did an analysis of Dan vs John a long time ago. I listed the similarities and differences. My conclusion at the time was that they were not the same person.
Comment by koam @wittier — 8/15/2011 @ 1:57 pm
Well I am not qualified to analyze but reading the statements the Reids made to Tommy and comparing the writing style to Dan Wolfe, I would not think they were the same person. Again, my instincts/logic are my own but I am a bit curious about the proof. Did I miss the proof? I have been coming here reading fairly regularly but I could have missed it.
Wondering (786412) — 8/15/2011 @ 2:08 pm“Like what Pious?”
Comment by Wondering — 8/15/2011 @ 1:52 pm
Word choice, vocabulary, allusions, expectations, regional quirks, knowledge, cultural grounding, class privilege, prejudices, talents, instincts, upbringing, birth place, horoscopes, psychology and inspiration.
All the things that make a people unique.
Why? What did you think I meant?
Pious Agnostic (6048a8) — 8/15/2011 @ 2:12 pmNo they are the same vocabulary. But possibly an example of “unconscious things” that give them away. If one person always types LOL and the other Lol that could be one of those unconscious differences.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/15/2011 @ 2:13 pmJohn, DW and Nikki are all characters. They may have distinct personality traits and mannerisms but there are some similarities… like the way they all respond to being called a fraud despite the fact that they’re all frauds and their preoccupation with Weiner.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/15/2011 @ 2:13 pmThey’re all socks being played by the same person, or same group of people.
In my opinion.
Word choice, vocabulary, allusions, expectations, regional quirks, knowledge, cultural grounding, class privilege, prejudices, talents, instincts, upbringing, birth place, horoscopes, psychology and inspiration.
All the things that make a people unique.
Why? What did you think I meant?
Comment by Pious Agnostic — 8/15/2011 @ 2:12 pm
Wondering (786412) — 8/15/2011 @ 2:14 pmOh sorry pious, I didn’t make myself clear I guess. I meant specific Dan Wolfe vs. Reids kind of things.
This is all just my curiosity. I am just trying to understand how so many of you are so sure.
Wondering (786412) — 8/15/2011 @ 2:17 pmI don’t have too many DW writing samples. Did anyone ever notice if he would randomly capitalize words that didn’t necessarily need to be emphasized? Just wondering.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/15/2011 @ 2:18 pmkoam @wittier — 8/15/2011 @ 2:13 pm
OK, I understand now. Thanks for explaining.
I meant specific Dan Wolfe vs. Reids kind of things.
Comment by Wondering — 8/15/2011 @ 2:14 pm
Heck, I don’t know. @wittier has analyzed the texts and come to a conclusion that they are different people. Others may come to a different conclusion.
I can’t claim any specific knowledge in this area. I’m just a dilettante.
Pious Agnostic (6048a8) — 8/15/2011 @ 2:18 pmWhen you don’t have proof, I guess you go with logic and instinct?
I find the people commenting about this as fascinating as the “accused.” (Very few have been exempt it seems haha)<I sure hope Dan Wolfe didn't do that. Here..LOL, lol, Lol, lOl
Wondering (786412) — 8/15/2011 @ 2:28 pmGuilty until proven innocent. It's sure an interesting concept. Happens all the time I suppose.
Whatever the case, I sure do hope it has a professional conclusion soon.
Gennette, I think you are exactly right to refer to them as “characters”. Anyone who is familiar with the theatre knows that an individual actor can, within the same play, portray pre-established, multiple, diverse characters and unique personalities with believability. All such stage characters are also fakes in every thing but the literary sense. And in the socks’ case it’s even easier than on stage because they are in the shadows rather than having to overcome visible voice, sex, and physical characteristics.
elissa (ac1977) — 8/15/2011 @ 2:31 pmI’m comparing these released chats between Patterico and Reid and the Ladd interview- I printed them out (easier for me to literally draw comparisons) and I’m having my husband and son also give me their opinions individually.
So far, I’m leaning towards them being the same person, but I’m one- not done, and two- biased because I felt this was the same person when I started.
I’ll holler when I have my boys’ reactions.
Also- want to make it clear that I am not discounting Wittier’s opinion one bit. I value what he’s done and all his input. He’s done a metric buttload of work into this, and I for one, am very grateful to him.
ppk_pixie (901c40) — 8/15/2011 @ 2:33 pmPatterico in a Chat:
Dan Wolfe style filibuster
Patterico 8/10/2011
Conversations with Puppets, Part 2
Dan Wolfe, aka PatriotUSA76. He is (supposedly) a man who claimed to hear rumors of a Congressman with compromising photos; fixated on Weiner’s habit of following young women; and took screencaps of the famous Weinertweet, during the few seconds when it was still up.
That’s one of the thinbgs he filibustered about. Because it was up for a whole lot more than 5 seconds, and Dan Wolfe spent mayube an hour pondering or consulting what to do.
He certainly filibustered:
From the Ladd Ehlinger Jr. Filmmaker interview with Dan Wolfe dated Friday June 3, 2011:
http://filmladd.com/?PatriotUSA76Interview
He gets asked a question at 4:51 PM:
Filmladd (4:46:52 PM): Ace sent me some questions, I hope you don’t mind I told him I was interviewing you.
…..
Filmladd (4:51:07 PM): “It is questioned how he saw he photo so “quickly.” It is asserted it was only up for 5 seconds. No idea if that’s true. How did he see it, and how long, in his estimation, was it actually up for?”
And he doesn’t answer that question for 1 1/2 hours:
Filmladd (6:20:45 PM): No, I guess, let’s ask Ace questions or the wrath of Ewok will descend upon me.
danwolfe7676 (6:20:51 PM): Shoot
Filmladd (6:21:09 PM): “It is questioned how he saw he photo so “quickly.” It is asserted it was only up for 5 seconds. No idea if that’s true. How did he see it, and how long, in his estimation, was it actually up for?”
danwolfe7676 (6:21:15 PM): Ok that
danwolfe7676 (6:21:18 PM): Glad you asked
danwolfe7676 (6:22:25 PM): Now that I realize Stranahan is a literal creature, I realize I can’t ever say things like “break a leg” for good luck or “hold a sec” — because he will actuall think I mean break your leg or hold a sec
danwolfe7676 (6:22:56 PM): When I said that 1-5 seconds thing to Stranahan that was me trying to communicate that it was deleted fast
danwolfe7676 (6:22:58 PM): And
danwolfe7676 (6:23:00 PM): let me finish
danwolfe7676 (6:23:21 PM): If you don’t refresh your browser you don’t lose the twitter page
danwolfe7676 (6:23:30 PM): I realized htat
danwolfe7676 (6:23:31 PM): that
danwolfe7676 (6:23:34 PM): because
danwolfe7676 (6:23:54 PM): I tried doing the automatica “RETWEET”
danwolfe7676 (6:24:00 PM): it wouldn’t work
danwolfe7676 (6:24:06 PM): That’s how fast he saw it and deleted it
danwolfe7676 (6:24:10 PM): He was right there
danwolfe7676 (6:24:14 PM): And as Ace notes
danwolfe7676 (6:24:19 PM): NOT tweeting about hockey
danwolfe7676 (6:24:26 PM): silent for over 3 hours.
This is all a pack of lies. Weiner did not delete trhe tweet immediately. And Patriot did not forward it immediately.
The Smoking Gun put up a few documents from Dan Wolfe – what purport to be documents – they may have altered one or two or they got switched with somethinbg else buy the time they got it, but they seem to be documents Dabn Woilfe forwarded to Andrew Breitbart or others:
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/bizarre/dan-wolfe-anthony-weiner-weinergate-632095
The documents are difficult to see and even more difficult to save. In Internet Explorer under windows you basically need to press Ctrl-C to put the screen into the clipboard and then paste it with Ctrl-V into Microsoft Word or the like and then you can print it or save it.
The Smoking Gun purports to give you 6 files Dan Wolfe sent to Breoitbart, to wit:
* Weiner tweet in search results.jpg
* Weiner tweet in his timeline.jpg
* Weiner yfrog screen cap.jpg
* Other images in Weiner’s yfrog right before pc.jpg
* More images in Weiner’s yfrog before pic.jpg
* gennetteNicole friend talking about her Weiner crush.jpg ]
Weiner tweet in search results.jpg means any tweets with the string repweiner and Weiner tweet in his timeline.jpg means tweets sent by Anthonmy Weiner
Here is the all tweets in which the string repweiner appears.
RepWeiner Anthony Weiner
@GennetteNicole http://yfrog.com/h25m3luj
3 minutes ago
PeteWalker74 Pete Walker
@RepWeiner I find your lack of “eyyyyyyyyy”in response to The Fonz disturbing.
9 minutes ago
owendbanks We Owe The Banks
Gutter Mouth @RepWeiner had he decided to run for NYC Mayor,he could have beaten Bloomberg “like a rented mule.”
http://is.gd.0mKxyt
16 minutes ago
RepWeiner Anthony Weiner
Tonight Me and Rachel on MSNBC
#ThePerfectFridayDateUhKindaSorta
6 hours ago
[It says there: Top Tweet]
RepWeiner Anthony Weiner
Pretty crazy that the Scotus does a pre memorial day friday
— and that’s where the screen capo cuts off.
The foillowing would be what Dan Wolfe calls Weiner’s timeline. This means mssages left *by* RepWeiner
RepWeiner Anthony Weiner
@kknapp1 just kill me now.
17 minutes ago
RepWeiner Anthony Weiner
Killing me!! RT @kknapp1: @RepWeiner that is a tragedy!
#EpicGame
20 minutes ago
RepWeiner Anthony Weiner
my tivo ate the hockey game!#WhoCanISue?
21 minutes ago
RepWeiner Anthony Weiner
@GennetteNicole http://yfrog.com/h25m3luj
25 minutes ago
RepWeiner Anthony Weiner
Wow what an honor. Thanks RT @hwinkler4real: @RepWeiner
There seems to be an inconsistency here. In the screen capture where the yfrog email was 3 minutes ago, Weiner’s previous tweet Tonight Me
and Rachel and the pone before that about the Supreme Court. When 25 minutes have elapsed the previous tweet is Wow what an honor (time unknown) The only way ths is possible I think is if Weiner in the interim had deleted the Rachel Maddow and Supreme Court tweets (because the show was over and the Supreme Court one because? And he
had not deleted the yfrog tweet yet.
Because he hadn’t noticed it. And this was all after he had started tweeting about hockey.
Sammy Finkelman (d3daeb) — 8/15/2011 @ 2:44 pmNow I am going to be paranoid about how I type the initials for Laugh out loud and I won’t be randomly capitalizing words either.
In fact, I will never again call anyone a hero, say the words chills, disgusting,(Crap, I think I said that this morning) dude (oh wait, I think that was Patterico)
I think I’ll just stop writing altogether. Keep up the good sleuth-work people!
Wondering (786412) — 8/15/2011 @ 2:44 pmGennette, I thought you were the one who had to prod Nikki into talking about teh Wenis?
∅ (e7577d) — 8/15/2011 @ 3:29 pmHow do you know the JR9 Twitter account had the Nikki yahoo account attached as an email?
Rocksem (0471ae) — 8/15/2011 @ 3:45 pm#148
Yes, because, for some unknown reason, with me Nikki didn’t want to appear interested in AW.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/15/2011 @ 4:03 pmBut there was an obvious preoccupation.
Comment by ppk_pixie — 8/15/2011 @ 2:33 pm
thanks. I am not clinging to my analysis by any means, but it was my conclusion at the time that I did it. I listed both similarities (the reason that I did the analysis) and differences. I respect Patterico’s analysis and, importantly, know that he knows stuff that we don’t…but I’m looking forward for him to give evidence more than inference/intuition.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/15/2011 @ 4:08 pmis similar to
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/15/2011 @ 4:08 pmOk
I don’t know if it really matters but after checking AGAIN I was wrong. New Yahoo Mail does add the forwarding header as shown in Part 1 thread for DMS to JR9. So those were forwarded using Yahoo Mail as Koam said. The DMs to Nikki, as in Part 3 thread, were not. They were forwarded to Patterico using Gmail after they had been forwarded to the Gmail account from a Windows Live account, perhaps via Yahoo.
A Windows Live account was created( by Nikki) to retrieve & view mail sent to Nikki’s Yahoo email. The Windows Live account could send mail via the Yahoo account.
Considering JR had to use the Windows Live account I would say emails sent to Nikki’s Yahoo account were deleted from Yahoo when retrieved by the Windows Live account. This seems to have been changed for JR9 Twitter account DMs as they were still on Yahoo or Yahoo was used to retrieve them from whatever account they were sent to.
Rocksem (0471ae) — 8/15/2011 @ 4:15 pmI received the emails from John Reid on June 22. They were the ones in Doc Dump 1. In them you can see that he was forwarding from within Nikki’s ymail account and they show that, for example, they’re DMs sent from Gennette to @JohnReid9.
For example,
and this was delivered to Nikki’s ymail.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/15/2011 @ 4:22 pmI feel like the man who went to a soothsayer, who drew forth the entrails of the chicken and examined the spots on its gizzard.
“Yes, but what does it mean?”
I presume the point of this is to indicate that Nikki and JR9 are the same person?
Isn’t that a given? Once Nikki was determined to be a fake persona, it becomes obvious that her “parents” are equally fake, right?
Pious Agnostic (6048a8) — 8/15/2011 @ 4:31 pmThanks Koam.
Rocksem (0471ae) — 8/15/2011 @ 4:37 pmYou are almost surely correct. But it is possible the Yahoo mail account was set to retrieve these DMs from another account and then were forwarded from within Yahoo. All that would needed to be done is edit the Forward header to show Yahoo email address prior to sending the forwarded message. I think you are right though and that wasn’t done.
Why would Nikki’s Twitter be set to Central Standard Time?
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/15/2011 @ 4:38 pmGennette,
Did you receive any emails from Nikki yahoo mail prior to her Twitter account being shut down?
Rocksem (0471ae) — 8/15/2011 @ 4:39 pmI’m getting to that, sort of.
Rocksem (0471ae) — 8/15/2011 @ 4:40 pm@RocksEm
The Starchild account? No.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/15/2011 @ 4:43 pmSorry gang. I’m the guy in the movies who says “What’s gonna happen next???!!!”
I’ll watch and learn.
Pious Agnostic (6048a8) — 8/15/2011 @ 4:45 pmNo, I don’t mean DMs. I mean an email directly from Nikki’s Yahoo Mail to you.
AS shown here: https://patterico.com/app/uploads/2011/06/2-gennette-reid1.jpg
Were there others, prior to AW pic, or does that amount to all the emails you exchanged?
Rocksem (0471ae) — 8/15/2011 @ 4:46 pmIt could be a number of people in cahoots rather than same person doing all.
Rocksem (0471ae) — 8/15/2011 @ 4:47 pmComment by Rocksem — 8/15/2011 @ 4:47 pm
You may be correct, of course, but somehow my instinct is leaning towards “lone gunman” rather than “vast conspiracy.”
On the other hand, I think it’s been noted that they stayed on top of things practically round the clock, which implies taking it in shifts. So perhaps so, but what kind of an organization would this be?
See? I just can’t keep out of it. This mystery is absorbing.
Pious Agnostic (6048a8) — 8/15/2011 @ 4:58 pm@RocksEm
There are more but none prior to the picture.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/15/2011 @ 5:00 pmAny number of groups. But it could also be spouses or something. Or just one person.
Rocksem (0471ae) — 8/15/2011 @ 5:01 pmI don’t have the attention span to read through the thousands of comments about this whole thing, but has anyone considered the following?
Neal Rauhauser is a paid political operative for Democrats. He must have connections. What if one of his connections told him about Weiner’s “unorthodox” use of twitter and social media and Neal set out to “prove” how crazy “right-wingers” are by leaking these rumors about Weiner hoping to get someone like “Wolfe” to take on this mission (for lack of a better term)? The goal was to then expose Wolfe as a stalker and discredit him – and conservatives by association. Neal (or an accomplice) might have also urged Wolfe to contact Breitbart in order to get Andrew involved.
Then Weiner went and screwed it all up by tweeting the pic to Gennette.
This could explain why Neal (at DailyKos) tried so hard to make Weiner’s “hacking” story seem plausible – and the Breitbart was behind it – never expecting Weiner would screw up Neal’s plan again by eventually admitting he had sent the tweet.
The Neal just sends the whole thing down the memory hole and moves on leaving Wolfe – clearly a disturbed individual himself – holding the bag.
Anyone considered this? Just food for thought while we wait for the next installment.
diggrbiii (1c7d09) — 8/15/2011 @ 5:02 pmSo basically you never even heard of Nikki’s Yahoo email prior to her account being shutdown right? She didn’t send you email from a different account right?
Is there any evidence anywhere that nikkireid93@yahoo.com existed prior to her twitter account being shutdown?
wait, I’m just noticing Koam listed it as nikkireid93@ymail.com earlier. Was it a Yahoo account or not?
Koam…Greg…Beuller…anybody?
Rocksem (0471ae) — 8/15/2011 @ 5:06 pmOK, I see that ymail is owned by Yahoo and is the same. So nikki’s account was at ymail.com Koam?
Rocksem (0471ae) — 8/15/2011 @ 5:10 pmwhen you sign up at yahoo, you get the choice of using @yahoo.com or @ymail.com.
Anita Busch (a025dd) — 8/15/2011 @ 5:15 pm@koam@wittier, Dustin, Greg and Patterico …
they have the best handle of what is going on.
Anita Busch (a025dd) — 8/15/2011 @ 5:17 pm@RocksEm
Yes it’s ymail, which is still yahoo. No, there’s no evidence (as far as I know) that it existed before Starchild111 was shut down.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/15/2011 @ 5:30 pmdiggrbiii — 8/15/2011 @ 5:02 pm
There is no “Dan Wolfe”. There is no real life analog – he’s a character.
SarahW (af7312) — 8/15/2011 @ 5:43 pmI don’t recall seeing Nikki’s email address until yesterday.
Greg (bc8186) — 8/15/2011 @ 5:43 pmSarahW… I understand that. I’m just using the name of the “base” character as a frame of reference.
diggrbiii (1c7d09) — 8/15/2011 @ 5:53 pm@RocksEm
Nikki needed to send me “TONS” of “evidence” which is probably why she created the email. 140 characters or less is difficult to work with.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/15/2011 @ 5:58 pmBased on that info I will modify what I said here
The Windows Live/Hotmail account was not used to retrieve mail from nikki’s ymail account. An unknown Windows Live/Hotmail account was the one associated with Starchild111 twitter account prior to Weiner pic. This is why Nikki DM notification emails were forwarded from Windows Live/Hotmail to Gmail prior to be forwarding to Patterico. They were sent to the Windows live/Hotmail account to begin with.
The nikkireid93@ymail.com account was created to convince Gennette the sender was Nikki Reid from the starchild account. It was probably created right after starchild account was deleted and was used when creating JR Twitter account which is why email notifications of DMs to JR9 went there.
Why create a new account instead of using Windows Live/Hotmail account? The info & username of WL/H account did not remotely match Nikki Reid. It was easier to create a new account than modify the WL/H account. There was no need for a nikkireid email account prior because Nikki had never sent an email to anyone.
Rocksem (0471ae) — 8/15/2011 @ 6:06 pmI believe Koam claimed that ymail was used for the first document dump. That is false. I never got anything from John Reid via ymail. [UPDATE MADE MINUTES LATER: See two comments down. I got this wrong. — P]
I know that he sent me copies of e-mails in which ymail had been used to talk to Gennette.
Patterico (f724ca) — 8/15/2011 @ 6:15 pmymail.com is Yahoo.
Patterico (f724ca) — 8/15/2011 @ 6:16 pmActually, I’m sorry. I spoke too soon. I was going from memory but I checked and I was wrong.
It looks like there were messages sent to me and wittier via ymail.
Maybe he only sent gmail stuff to me.
Curious.
Patterico (f724ca) — 8/15/2011 @ 6:19 pmJust to double check. Is it correct DMs to JR9, Part 1 thread)like this one: https://patterico.com/app/uploads/2011/06/4-gennette-reid1.jpg were sent to you from the nikkireid93@ymail.com account?
Rocksem (0471ae) — 8/15/2011 @ 6:26 pmI don’t feel like going back and checking which ones right now. The ymail account was used for something, yes. I don’t have the time or patience to scroll through everything to verify whether the whole document dump came from ymail.
Patterico (f724ca) — 8/15/2011 @ 7:07 pmkoam/wittier sez:
Yeah, except your claims regarding the consistency of “LOL” are not consistent with my chat transcripts. And many of your claimed differences are things like “John Reid likes Weiner while Wolfe hates Weiner” which I believe to be a premeditated plan on Wolfe’s part to hide that they are the same person.
My list of reasons they are the same is extensive, and I daresay more convincing.
By the way, “Wondering” is long-time Dan Wolfe fan (just a fan?) FineClayArts aka 500 million other pro-Wolfe things. She is not some disinterested observer and should not be treated as such.
Finally, I moderated a comment by qritiq just because she did it to Dustin and I didn’t like that. So there.
Patterico (f724ca) — 8/15/2011 @ 7:28 pmIf qritiq wants to drop the snark, get helpful, jump on the team and come on in for the big win, she is always welcome.
If she’s going to continue to demand apologies for non-existent offenses, post password-protected posts and hide the password from me, and snark at real threats, then she is not welcome.
Patterico (f724ca) — 8/15/2011 @ 7:30 pmPatterico,
Based on Koam & the look of the caps I am going to assume the DMs to JR( came form the ymail account.
BTW, a search of nikkireid93 brings up only one thing. this Flickster account http://www.flixster.com/user/nikkireid1993
Rocksem (0471ae) — 8/15/2011 @ 7:42 pm🙂
Nice to have someone take up for you once in a while.
Koam, I do think these folks/folk were devious enough to actually plan out things such as your analysis of capitalization. They are bastards, but they are pretty sophisticated in their bastardy.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/15/2011 @ 7:42 pm“Pretty” sophisticated.
Not really all THAT though.
Patterico (f724ca) — 8/15/2011 @ 7:46 pmEnough to try to be consistent with LOLs in emails, and then forget that plan in chat. Perhaps.
Or to establish a pretense that works at first glance for purposes of confusion, but never really passed the smell test.
I am sure whoever is doing this is both taking great joy at their self assumed cleverness and will resort to a display of pathetic begging once they are caught.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/15/2011 @ 7:50 pm1 thing is for certain. Unlike other email accounts a Yahoo account sets the time shown based on the time zone set on the computer being used. Change the time on the computer and the time changes no matter what Time Zone or Zip Code you put in the Yahoo settings. In others if you change the Time Zone in the settings the time changes in the emails.
The Nikki Ymail account is showing a time hour later than is set for the JR9 Twitter account. Unless the Twitter account was set to the Alaska Time Zone for some odd reason there is no way the computer being used to access the ymail account was set to Pacific Time.
Rocksem (0471ae) — 8/15/2011 @ 7:51 pmRight, Patrick. They have certainly left a nice trail for LE … have you all figured out the why behind the threats yet?
Anita Busch (a025dd) — 8/15/2011 @ 7:53 pmSo correct me if I’m wrong here but it seems to me that there are 2 striking facts about the person behind the socks. Number 1: Patterico has concluded that he was anti-Weiner from the beginning. Number 2: the puppeteer tried it to get into the mainstream press that Breitbart had pushed Nicci to lie, and at the same time tried to draw Breitbart to overreach in his allegations. What kind of person, then, would want to damage Weiner while at the same time wishing to discredit Breitbart? The universe of such people is small indeed.
We have:
(1) A democratic political operative who is parochial interests were anti-Weiner
(2) A republican political operative jealous of Breitbart’s prominence
(3) An unhinged liberal former flame of Weiner’s.
Add to this, that the same individual is likely to have been the same person nuts enough to have threatened Patterico.
Nathan Wagner (bb5470) — 8/15/2011 @ 8:04 pmAnita,
Can’t talk about it.
Patterico (f724ca) — 8/15/2011 @ 8:05 pmDo names come to mind in any of those categories?
Nathan Wagner (bb5470) — 8/15/2011 @ 8:06 pmOK. You may be wrong.
My pet theory is that the Wolfe/Reid entity was in fact PRO-Breitbart. Tried to steer good evidence to Breitbart. Set up Reids as anti-Breitbart as camouflage — and created Marianela as a scapegoat for the “Breitbart tried to get us to lie!” story that would eventually be exposed as a lie.
Patterico (f724ca) — 8/15/2011 @ 8:07 pmRocksem, you are speaking of this part? I pulled that from the header in a yahoo mail I sent myself trying to get the time to change.
I changed the system clock and the zip code in my user settings and couldn’t get it to change.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/15/2011 @ 8:07 pmIrrelevant, IMO, because that’s not what was going on.
You can’t trust ANYTHING a puppet says. When a puppet says “I hate __________” you must consider the very real possibility that the puppet is ___________ or is working with ____________.
Got me?
Patterico (f724ca) — 8/15/2011 @ 8:08 pmNever mind.
I was looking at the wrong part. Indeed it’s following my system clock.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/15/2011 @ 8:10 pmFor example, when a puppet says “I hate Dan Wolfe” you must consider if the puppet is Dan Wolfe.
Patterico (f724ca) — 8/15/2011 @ 8:10 pm@Pat 8:07.
Nathan Wagner (bb5470) — 8/15/2011 @ 8:10 pmBut isn’t the mainstream press the big time?
I got you Pat. I just think that getting into the mainstream press is the big time, the goal, and therefore the attack on Breitbart is real revelation of motive. You don’t misdirect when you’ve got, for a few moments, the metaphor you’ve wanted.
Nathan Wagner (bb5470) — 8/15/2011 @ 8:15 pmI got you Pat. I just think that getting into the mainstream press is the big time, the goal, and therefore the attack on Breitbart is real revelation of motive. You don’t misdirect when you’ve got, for a few moments, the metaphor you’ve wanted.
Nathan Wagner (bb5470) — 8/15/2011 @ 8:15 pmI’m posting from a stupid phone and it auto complete is driving me nuts megaphone not metaphor
Nathan Wagner (bb5470) — 8/15/2011 @ 8:16 pmObviously Neal cannot fit in that theory as cooperating with Dan. From what little I know, Darrah isn’t pro-Breitbart.
So they either fell for the initial hacker spin or decided they didn’t care if it’s true, and decided to react because they hate Mike and/or Breitbart.
That’s simple enough. Correct me if I misunderstand.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/15/2011 @ 8:17 pmYou do if you get scared. Maybe that part of Dan’s story was true. Note: I am wildly unsure about all things related to Dan.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/15/2011 @ 8:18 pmDustin do you mean to suggest that Breitbart really did try to get marienela to lie, even though he had the rest of the goods?
Nathan Wagner (bb5470) — 8/15/2011 @ 8:23 pmRe: 191 and 194
(Nathan’s comment)
What if Wolfe wasn’t so much defined by being a democrat or republican operative (or a jilted sexter – how good could that have really been?) but a single-issue advocate who felt Weiner had crossed an important line?
Could someone/a small group who believed, for example, that Weiner had married into a family connected to the Muslim Brotherhood, decide that he was simply unacceptable in a post 911 New York City?
JoeBlow (b017e6) — 8/15/2011 @ 8:29 pmNo, that is the actual email header & is a whole different story. As far as changing times on emails shown I was speaking of the time your email client shows in a list or generic view of an email. Not the actual header. Normally you don’t even see the actual (full) header.
When I mention Forward header that relates to the header generated and placed at the top of your mail, like —Forwarded Message—, when you forward an email.
Rocksem (0471ae) — 8/15/2011 @ 8:32 pmHow many such people exist, I don’t know, Joeblow. But a single issue obsession could also fit the facts.
Nathan Wagner (bb5470) — 8/15/2011 @ 8:32 pmOK. But the first line of my header says “From – Mon Aug 15 21:56:39 2011” and did change based on system clock from yahoo.
I see what you’re talking about now. I’ll forward some mails from my yahoo later on and see what you mean (I realize this is grasping at straws, but that’s OK).
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/15/2011 @ 8:40 pmAbsolutely not. I’m not sure where you’re reading that, but no.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/15/2011 @ 8:41 pmRe: the lengthy piece that Tommy Christopher published early on: I went back and re-read that tonight and two passages caught my eye:
1: “[Nikki/Starchild111] had a lot of information that I could not verify…”
2: “Breitbart now confirms, to Mediaite, that @PatriotUSA76 referred him to another source, and that they each shopped him evidence, none of which he used, which included the DMs from @Goatsred’s YFrog account.”
Regarding 1: Has Christopher (in follow-up radio interviews, say) ever stated specifically what this information included? Was it just the Nikki/Gennette DMs and Nikki/Weiner DMs that Marienela had told Goatsred about?
Regarding 2: Has Christopher ever explained who the other “source” is? If it were Goatsred, why not just say “Goatsred,” since Christopher is already mentioning him in the piece?
Greg (bc8186) — 8/15/2011 @ 8:49 pm211
Greg,
My guess is Marianela would have been the other source, although it’s Wolfe’s way to leave real, verifiable people holding the bag (which he packed).
JoeBlow (b017e6) — 8/15/2011 @ 8:53 pmGreg, great link.
This my favorite part.
More seriously, is this before Meghan B was known? I wonder if they are talking about her. I don’t understand how Dan would be the connector here, but reality != that article.
I agree Tommy owes us 100% of what he was provided by Dan and pals. No matter his decision to filter this or that to be responsible. We know they are frauds. Let’s see what they tried to do before exposure.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/15/2011 @ 8:54 pmOkay, more stuff to aggravate Patterico:
Time Zone of Starchild111 twitter account based on caps of DMs shown in Part 3 thread.
As pointed out by Molon Labe we can tell exactly what TZ the Starchild was set to when it received a DM. This is because the forwarded DMs have a forward header which shows the UTC time. UTC is basically the same as GMT. This is absolute. No matter what time zone any email, computer or Twitter is set to that UTC time shows the actual time the DM was sent.
In the caps shown there are 2 Time Zones used.
From 10:31 am till 1:57 pm on 5/16 the TZ is Pacific.
Once at 10:54 PM on 5/16 the TZ is Central.
From 2:21 PM till 6:50 pm on 5/17 the TZ is Pacific.
This time correlates with the time AW is following the Starchild account and uses Pacific except for that one DM. Perhaps a test of changing TZ?
From 8:33 PM on 5/17 till 1:14 am on 5/18 the TZ is Central.
It looks as if the TZ was Pacific up until AW stopped following and then changed to central.
This analysis is limited as there are caps for only 23 of the many DMs shown in the Part 3 thread. Caps for all would show more of course.
Not pushing Patterico …just saying. 🙂
Rocksem (0471ae) — 8/15/2011 @ 8:55 pmDustin,
Rocksem (0471ae) — 8/15/2011 @ 9:00 pmBear in my when I said other email accounts I had not tested Google. Google may draw the time from your computer similar to Yahoo. I will test soon.
I know Windows Live/Hotmail does not draw the time from the computer you are on but rather goes by the TZ you set in the settings.
Rocksem, it may very well be more than one person was donning a sock.
Some people use virtual machines to maintain security if they are particularly paranoid. Perhaps they upgraded their security measures at some point, and this explains the TZ change. It’s hard to know what this change means. It could just be another little planned change (like LOL or Lol).
Is it really impossible to spoof UTC? I always thought email was generally pretty loose, accuracy-wise, but I’m not an expert.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/15/2011 @ 9:01 pmDustim,
The Marianela account was apparently pushing the story to tommy christopher that Breitbart had asked her and Nicci to lie. Pat is suggesting that this may have been misdirection, that the ultimate goal was to credit Breitbart and have Marianela take the fall for lying about Breitbart. I don’t see it. I say you don’t misdirect like that when you’re (fleetingly) in the mainstream press and you have a brief chance to get across your real message.
You suggested “maybe that part of Dan’s story was true.” I took you to be referring to the Breitbart pushing Marianela to lie bit.
Nathan Wagner (bb5470) — 8/15/2011 @ 9:04 pmDid Marianela ever have an email address?
JoeBlow (b017e6) — 8/15/2011 @ 9:10 pmOh, nothing is impossible. All this is based on no spoofing or editing. The Forward header can easily be edited prior to sending the forwarded email. I just don’t think that happened as there are a lot of DMs and it would be tedious. It would be have been easier just to delete the Forward header if you wanted to hide that info.
Rocksem (0471ae) — 8/15/2011 @ 9:10 pmDustin,
Rocksem (0471ae) — 8/15/2011 @ 9:13 pmGmail also uses the time set on the computer viewing the email.
Breitbart knew of Meagan Broussard as of May 18, and had gotten specific info from her by the morning of May 28 (i.e., the morning after the Weiner-tweet.)
Also, he stated on Lee’s radio show that he asked Broussard and (I think) her intermediary about PatriotUSA76 and Goatsred and that they maintained they had no knowledge of them.
Greg (bc8186) — 8/15/2011 @ 9:14 pmOh. (at least this may be an answer to one of Greg’s questions, but I’d like to know from Tommy).
I meant when Dan was panicking when this story his that media point, perhaps s/he was actually worried about being exposed. Story got hot, fast, and perhaps s/he got scared of being exposed. Since Dan was, at that time, pleading and begging to be left alone, that’s what I meant about ‘that part’.
Breitbart does seem to do a good job relying on verifiable evidence for his stories. He’s not perfect, and sometimes he relies on people who goof up, but actually asking someone to lie? No chance for that, IMO.
If you’re scared of being exposed, perhaps you do, right at that exact moment.
What was his real message, anyway? What else did he need to do in order to get it across?
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/15/2011 @ 9:15 pmThanks. I do not know how you keep this stuff straight, but you are a big help.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/15/2011 @ 9:21 pmThe real message: I take the attack on Breitbart in earnest. If you want it reported in the mainstream press that Breitbart is a lying manipulator, that means you don’t like Breitbart. There’s no two step going on where you plan to come back later and disavow it or have another sock contradict it. For one, you don’t know whether you’ll get another chance to be the story. For two, your credibility doesn’t look so good if your socks are changing their story or if connected socks are contradicting each other. For three, a lie goes halfway round the world before truth puts on her boots, and the msm will always give more prominence to anti Breitbart stories than to corrections or new evidence on his favor.
When the socks wanted.it in the mainstream press that Breitbart had pushed Marianela to lie, it was, I think, revelatory of real antipathy toward Breitbart.
Nathan Wagner (bb5470) — 8/15/2011 @ 9:36 pmWell, then, Nathan, that’s a theory that John Reid is also really pro-Weiner. Since the family came out so strongly in favor of Weiner at a pivotal moment.
But I don’t buy it. Read the post. Do you buy John Reid’s crap there?
Patterico (f724ca) — 8/15/2011 @ 9:38 pmNo Pat, I don’t buy it, but in that case the pro Weiner message served to bolster the credibility of the the socks in their story of inappropriate DMs. The attack on Breitbart was gratuitous – not needed as part of the backstory.
Nathan Wagner (bb5470) — 8/15/2011 @ 9:48 pmFrom Greg’s soundbitten:
Is it possible to tell when this account was actually opened?
MayBee (081489) — 8/15/2011 @ 9:54 pmBecause 24 followers w/16 tweets in 23 hours makes me think either this was an account that had been set up earlie and waiting to be pulled into use (like starchild’s), or there were other socks that would just all start following each other.
They tended to follow celebrities. Many people automatically follow back too. It’s easy to pick up followers if you don’t care who it is.
Rocksem (0471ae) — 8/15/2011 @ 10:03 pmGoing to bed.
Nathan Wagner (bb5470) — 8/15/2011 @ 10:08 pmUnfortunately, a lot of the links in my timeline have already deteriorated — in part because Google took its Realtime option offline, and in part because I guess the cached versions of pages it keeps have a pretty short shelf life. Much of this stuff I never bothered to screen-cap.
As for your specific question about start dates, the Marienela account was apparently terminated sometime around May 28. Because it was terminated, it was not possible to get a start date from Tweetgrader.com for it.
I’m also pretty sure I was not able to click on the “Followers” links for either Marienela’s or Starchild’s cached accounts to see who’d they’d been following.
I was able to click on their visible follows, and what I remember from that was most of Marienela’s visible follows were the same as Starchild’s.
In Starchild’s case, they included celebrities, women who followed Weiner, people who were Dodgers fans, surf-related sites, people/businesses with some connection to Orange County, and a few people that had portraits, first/last names, some biographical info but had been “suspended” quickly by Twitter. In other words, spambots. I thought this was interesting, because I think it’s possible Starchild111 herself was originally created for stealth marketing purposes.
Greg (bc8186) — 8/15/2011 @ 11:40 pmIf that’s the case, Greg, it’s very hard to overlook that Orange County is a conservative hotbed in CA.
Anita Busch (a025dd) — 8/16/2011 @ 12:15 amComment by Pious Agnostic — 8/15/2011 @ 4:31 pm
Doesn’t say what you are responding to. Please use “Comment by” references
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/16/2011 @ 2:05 amSorry all, I was invited impromptu to a dinner party last night and when I came back I went off reading other threads & tabs rather than this one…So i have to catch up.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/16/2011 @ 2:10 amYes
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/16/2011 @ 2:29 amJohn Reid asked us to not show the email address, which is why Patterico had redacted it and I hadn’t named it. You may remember that a week or 2 ago I offered to DM it to Gennette rather than use it in comments.
Reid also asked us not to share what he was sending to to others, explicitly not to Lee (This has been said before…it’s not news).
And he asked to publish everything he sent, without editing, except to redact Nikki & Gennette’s email addresses, etc.
Once Patterico had declared that deals are off and shown some Nikki email addresses this week, I posted above (8:39 AM) the specifics of which email address I had seen and how it was used. Nikki’s ymail address is attached to the JohnReid9 twitter account.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/16/2011 @ 2:40 amReid didn’t send anything to me using gmail. My guess is that you could see that emails sent to you by Reid from gmail weren’t also addressed to me.
I had read some of the discussion of whether DM notifications that had been forwarded to you were screen shots sent as attachments. That’s why I posted above that I wondered if the ones sent to you as attachments had any correlation with the ones Gennette has called “Fake.”
The ones I received were just directly forwarded from the same ymail account that had received the DM notifications from Twitter. They were not attachments and they don’t appear to have passed through any other email account. They seem clean, unhandled. And GC also said that they were real, not fake.
So is there a theory or possibility that Reid was so sloppy as to just forward the real ones in situ (so to speak) and then to doctor or create others and send only those as attachments, switching email accounts along the way?
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/16/2011 @ 2:54 amI said earlier that I’m not clinging to my Dan vs John analysis. And I was deferential to your opinion and access to additional info.
But I tried, at the time of my analysis, to approach it without bias. Listing similarities and differences should be done (to my mind) in a quasi-scientific (non-Lee) way. “One loved Weiner; one hated Weiner,” is meant to be an observation (one of many, supported by quotes), not an analysis or a conclusion. I suppose I could have been super clinical and used much more cautious wording: “Dan’s statements appear to be against Weiner and Dan appears not to like him,” but I didn’t do that.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/16/2011 @ 3:12 amDoes Tommy’s lack inquiry about being duped suggest that he has concluded, like Preston apparently has, that it was dangerous, mysterious lefties
behind the deception rather than your garden-variety evil conservative sneaks?
If it were evil righties, wouldn’t they both be on this like white on rice?
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/16/2011 @ 3:38 amThere’s a whole world of people who firmly believe that all Breitbart ever does is lie and get people to lie. So the entire concept of Breitbart trying to get Marianela and/or Nikki to lie was likely written by someone from that world, because they believed the media would run with it. But even Tommy didn’t fall for that one.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/16/2011 @ 3:53 amLooks like LulzShack may have closed his twitter.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/16/2011 @ 4:14 am#
koam/wittier sez:
I did an analysis of Dan vs John a long time ago. I listed the similarities and differences. My conclusion at the time was that they were not the same person.
Yeah, except your claims regarding the consistency of “LOL” are not consistent with my chat transcripts. And many of your claimed differences are things like “John Reid likes Weiner while Wolfe hates Weiner” which I believe to be a premeditated plan on Wolfe’s part to hide that they are the same person.
My list of reasons they are the same is extensive, and I daresay more convincing.
By the way, “Wondering” is long-time Dan Wolfe fan (just a fan?) FineClayArts aka 500 million other pro-Wolfe things. She is not some disinterested observer and should not be treated as such.
Finally, I moderated a comment by qritiq just because she did it to Dustin and I didn’t like that. So there.
Comment by Patterico — 8/15/2011 @ 7:28 pm
I am seeking facts, what about you? I want the facts not someone’s opinion. I don’t know much about you so I won’t accuse you of anything. Isn’t that the expected response? I realize it is your job to assume, but I want to know if Dan Wolfe’s consistent story is true. I do NOT think Tommy’s interview sounds anything LIKE him.
I find it interesting that you felt the need to tell people I have spoken to Dan in order to try to discredit anything I have to say. Why?
FYI I hadn’t spoken to Dan in weeks before the other day when I asked how he was doing. His response is what prompted me to write something here.
Wondering (786412) — 8/16/2011 @ 4:35 amI won’t make that mistake again.
This may be a very old observation, but did anyone ever notice that if you have TweetDeck running (I use it in Chrome on PC) and a tweet from someone shows up in one or more of your search or list columns, and the tweet is then deleted (right away or later) by the person, the deleted tweet can remain visible to you in TweetDeck, at least until you do a full refresh of TweetDeck or close and reopen your browser? I just noticed this.
So if you were observing someone’s twitter activity you wouldn’t have to be sitting at the computer watching every minute to catch even deleted tweets.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/16/2011 @ 4:40 amComment by koam @wittier — 8/16/2011 @ 3:53 am
Absolutely true. In the universe of Breitbart haters, it never occurs to them to question their received wisdom that he’s a lying liar who makes other people lying liars too.
This is the sort of thing I was referring-to last night when I made my list of “unconscious” characteristics that could betray a sock’s identity.
Comment by koam @wittier — 8/16/2011 @ 4:40 am
That’s a very good observation, and makes perfect sense based on how such viewers work. This could be the explanation for how DW was able to snag the weinerpic so quickly, and hold onto is despite the quick deletion.
Pious Agnostic (291f9a) — 8/16/2011 @ 5:10 amThere is another thing I don’t get about all this: what’s the point of remaining engaged? What did Reid intend to accomplish the remaining engaged?
To get Patterico to release fake information?
If Weiner’s gone, what’s the point?
And also – why stay engaged and make threats against further pursuit of the story at the same time?
If Pat is now speaking freely about John Reid, does that mean he has concluded Reid is unconnected to Alicia Pain?
Nathan Wagner (0d93bd) — 8/16/2011 @ 5:33 amCould it suggest that RAW was a casualty (one that was destined to happen anyway), but wasn’t “the point?”
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/16/2011 @ 5:59 amOur host is in quite a unique position. He is a District Attorney. He can say anything he wishes because his title protects him. I cannot say what I would like to him because he isn’t fond of anything that sounds even relatively like criticism. So I become protective of my thoughts.
The reason I ever started talking to Dan Wolfe was because I watched a gang of people accuse him of being a hacker without ever having ANY PROOF. We now know he didn’t hack Weiner. That didn’t matter.He gave multiple interviews. That didn’t matter. No matter what he did, he was attacked. I saw only 2 people being fair to him. AceofSpades and JustKarl. So,after seeing he was following FilmLadd, I asked for authorization to talk to him. I also tweeted a supportive tweet to him on Twitterverse. The only question I asked him was if his real name was Dan Wolfe. I had not asked him anything else until recently after reading the Mike Stack Smoking Gun article. I asked him how he knew him. He told me Mike followed him after seeing they had similar political interests. He followed Mike back and they started a Twitter relationship. There is more he said to me about this but I will not divulge it here. I have been his friend and I can say without any hesitation, that he is one of the most genuinely kind people I have ever talked to. If he weren’t, I would have nothing to do with him.
Patterico has intimated that I am somehow involved in something nefarious. I am not even remotely involved in anything even WRONG let alone anything illegal or otherwise. It seems he has no problems accusing people without proof. I have always been very confused by his actions. In fact, he blocked me after I asked him on Twitter if he really was a DA. (I was being serious)
I was blocked by all whom I questioned about fairness to Dan. I asked them all why they were so confused why Dan stopped talking to them after they accused him of everything short of homicide at every opportunity. Dan TRIED telling people the truth. No one cared. People seem to have this innate wish to destroy. That has been more than proved to me over the course of this. This is fun for all who aren’t falsely accused or who are hunted by strangers. People don’t stop and think about how they would react if the same were done to them. I got a taste of the “attack pack” as well. I had people searching for me using my Twitter photo. I was hacked, I had Twitter accounts opened in my name, I was accused of some of the most bizarre things imaginable. I have had people treat me as though I am a criminal…questioning every single thing I said and did…..by those on the right who claim to want to protect privacy rights.(just not mine) Why? Because I befriended someone who was alone. WHO CARES if people lie to get what they feel entitled to, right? Lee Stranahan baited and LIED Dan by saying he had hired a private detective to find him then SCREAMED THREAT! THREAT! When Dan reacted like any normal human would have. He apologized to Lee. But Lee didn’t talk about that part. Did Lee apologize to Dan for lying? In fact, MANY have lied to Dan and others just to get what they feel they are entitled to. Ask yourselves how you would feel if this happened to you after all you did was Retweet a tweet? Or be KIND to someone who was alone and being incessantly and unfairly attacked? Would you be trusting? Would you be forthcoming OVER AND OVER after people who asked you to trust them, betrayed you over and over? Every single person has betrayed him….used him, baited him, lied to him. Ask yourselves how you would feel? I think Dan should tell you all to fuck off then disappear. But he is determined to clear his name. He is MUCH nicer than I am.
I am tired. I want this to be resolved so Dan can have his life back and I can stop worrying that some stranger is going to show up at my house and blow my head off because some amateur sleuth thinks I am guilty of something. I have nothing to gain from this. I have merely wanted to do the right thing and show kindness to someone I feel has been mistreated.
Wondering (786412) — 8/16/2011 @ 6:09 amI will say, this has certainly been an enlightening experience. It has made me even more cynical about people and especially has taught me about mob mentality. As a study in human nature, it’s both fascinating and scary.
I feel pretty sure Patterico will delete this post so I am sending it to a few people just so I can be heard….somehow.
Patterico, I sent you all my personal information so that you would trust me and I could feel safe from the hunters. I am not sure what it takes to earn your trust but I have to tell you, I will look at life in general much differently because of you.
I will always wonder why you didn’t protect Dan and prove to him he could trust you. He would have had multiple conversations with you if you could have dug deep and found that. I tried to tell you that in email. You never responded to anything from me. You never spoke to me like a human being after I asked you that “historic” question about your job. I get that it pissed you off…. But this has been a long and WEIRD grudge against me.
Honor….must be earned.
Man o man, I sealed my fate with this one. Time to wait for weird goings on again.
Sometimes you have to just find courage and do what is right.
Koam @ 4:40,
Very interesting. I think that could be very important.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 8/16/2011 @ 6:13 amThey were not anti Weiner until they were trying to set up the “Patterico is obsessed with the underage girl angle”
Why could’t someone be hired to observe/take down a loose cannon/liability and have a pet project like AB at the same time.
Just morning coffee observations. Operative word morning, perhaps not enough coffee.
Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c) — 8/16/2011 @ 6:20 amI mean, let’s just say your mission was to snag Breitbart in a sting. That is, trick AB into publishing something that seems like another big news scoop, but is later to be revealed as fake, permanently shredding AB’s credibility, in a provable way this time (e.g., the girls didn’t exist). Certainly someone might want this to happen. And certain others might not care so much if it were done dishonestly if it achieved the goal of bringing down Breitbart, who they believe to be evil and dishonest in any case. All’s fair, right?
Now what do the big, BIG, Breitbart stories have in common? A progressive “target.” ACORN, NPR, etc.
So such a sting would need a progressive target. And who’d be a good candidate? Maybe someone who’s reckless, who can’t stop himself, maybe one who’s already a dead man walking, of his own accord? One who’s in a state that’s going to lose 2 seats in Congress in any case, 1 of which is likely to be a Democrat? Disposable.
Who fit the bill?
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/16/2011 @ 6:35 amPatterico said none of the caps came as attachments. That was just something I was wondering.
You say you received nothing from the Gmail account.
Rocksem (0471ae) — 8/16/2011 @ 6:40 amDid you receive anything Patterico has in the Part 3 Thread? Did you receive DMs to Starchild or just JR9?
I like that theory a lot koam. That really makes the most sense. And explains why Nasty Neal has been involved.
AW really wasn’t that important.
And the reason why the sock JR is still flailing wildly is because s/he/they just can’t abandon the mission. They’re still trying to find some way to bag a conservative …. if they couldn’t get AB, they still hope to get Patterico, by manipulating him into thinking the manufactured DM’s etc were real, then stating & publishing the same, then … surprise …. evidence comes to light they’re fake, and Patterico is busted.
These people are driven not just by political ideology, but by hatred.
Miranda (4104db) — 8/16/2011 @ 6:47 amRegarding whether the Reid group was pro-Weiner or anti-Weiner, remember how, when John Reid made his debut, he trashed the NYT (his contempt even extended to their paywall) and compared it unfavorably to the Bigs.
I doubt the majority of liberals are well acquainted enough with the Bigs to know that Breitbart’s media outlets go beyond just being referred to as “Breitbart.”
Does anyone have Reid’s rant? Was there something about how the NYT (with its size and resources) doesn’t compare to the Bigs?
At the time, to me, he didn’t ring true in the role of a liberal trashing a liberal newspaper.
JoeBlow (b017e6) — 8/16/2011 @ 6:48 amPatterico,
I just noticed something else. Please look at this DM to Starchild https://patterico.com/app/uploads/2011/08/Screen-shot-2011-08-11-at-9.35.52-PM.png
The Forward Header at the top should include a TO: field showing who the dm notification was sent to. Did you remove this to protect ID or was it not there when you received it?
Rocksem (0471ae) — 8/16/2011 @ 6:51 amRe: The Breitbart sting theory
Wolfe sent out dozens of retweets of the picture that night, to at least a dozen news outlets. He deleted them within a day, lest he look like a Weiner-obsessed nutcase.
That seems too scattershot for a guy targeting Breitbart alone.
Also, why would he assume that Breitbart wouldn’t check out the information he was providing? Was it hubris, stupidity or based on the sheer power of his con game?
JoeBlow (b017e6) — 8/16/2011 @ 6:55 am#247 6:35 AM
I wasn’t suggesting it was their “mission” in fact quite the opposite more of something to do for the laugh. “A pet project”
KOAM correct me if I’m wrong didn’t AB already have MB stuff? Wouldn’t that have been enough.
Sigh. I don’t know just thinking out loud.
Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c) — 8/16/2011 @ 6:57 am#247 6:35 AM
I wasn’t suggesting it was their “mission” in fact quite the opposite more of something to do for the laugh. “A pet project”
KOAM correct me if I’m wrong didn’t AB already have MB stuff? Wouldn’t that have been enough.
Sigh. I don’t know just thinking
Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c) — 8/16/2011 @ 6:57 amPerhaps our cavalacade of socks resulted from a person or persons with very ambivalent or confused motives. That would have been Lee’s suggestion a few weeks ago, I don’t know if he holds the same opinion now.
A person who feels angry or betrayed might have that kind of mixed agenda – and that could include any number of types of persons, from a star-blanker erotomaniac, a person who felt used, a Gawker-rag closet hater, a FOH (friend of HUMA).
Even if turns out not quite exactly what Lee had (at least at one time) decided, I am convinced that this is more than business; it’s PERSONAL. But that has a broad definition.
Getting one over on people has its own satisfactions, the con takes pride in his gamesmanship, and enjoys the sense of control gained through manipulating others then showing them up as foolish – though there is usually some additional mcguffin – money or revenge or notice of important others, in the mix.
So Lulz is part of it. I had no patience for it, and would not have tried to draw out the socks. I refused to believe P. for one second was blockheaded enough to consider Reid anything but a sock for some playacting bad-faith actor, (and you see, I was right) and admitted there was utility in drawing it out, but it seemed like a bad idea to me at the time. Feeding the trolls is as fun as feeding wild animals but they bite and eat
If they want to engage so badly, have a motive for engaging others, my idea of the best way to get that out is to leave them with little option but banging their OWN drum, that way it’s easier to divine their real goal, what it is they are trying to get out.
One motive seldom discussed is profit motive. Another paramour might have an interest in boosting salacious interest in the Weiner story to gain some attention or boost the value of, their own story or pictures, perhaps meaning to advance some of means of capitalizing on attention. Not that the socks have had any success at getting the attention of any but a handful of persons on earth bothering with them at all.
However, in the earlier stages that might have been driving it. Even JGMA might have some delusion that she will come to the notice of the world through this great work. LOL (lol?).
The overwhelming motive seems to be to get a negative story about Weiner out. But in the beginning, I think the reason for the continued fiction and playacting was a little panicked realization that their accounts would be investigated, and to attempt some sort of damage control, prevent discovery of him/her/themselves.
SarahW (af7312) — 8/16/2011 @ 6:59 am“bite and eat you or your attic insulation.” got erased by accident I see.
SarahW (af7312) — 8/16/2011 @ 7:03 amSarahW, I agree that the motives are probably confused or ambivalent. This was definitely personal. I think that explains why they couldn’t let it go, even as Weiner resigned. Somebody is obsessed.
Honestly, I’m not even that interested in the motives right now. I am very interested in their identity, though. I think it’s either someone fairly prominent or someone that Weiner trusted.
prmetime (1d022f) — 8/16/2011 @ 7:10 amComment by Rocksem — 8/16/2011 @ 6:40 am
Thanks for clarifying that there were no attachments. (Was there a different technical opportunity for doctoring?)
I received nothing from any Gmail account. I only received the first wave, all from Nikki’s ymail account, June 22. I don’t believe I got anything in Part 3.
Checking the emails, I received follow notification to JohnReid9, DM notification to JR9, follow notification to starchild111, DM notification to starchild111, emails to Nikki’s ymail.
Let’s take a couple of examples, one to JohnReid9, one to starchild111, and compare them:
On a Follow Notification to JR9, it starts with:
Note I added four single quotes above because the Patterico web site was suppressing the things between the pointy brackets in the Live Preview. My experience in the past is that HTML may preview one way, but show up differently in the actual post…so I will have to recheck after Submitting Comment.
On a Follow Notification to starchild111, it shows:
So they do appear to be differently formatted. I notice that the word “Twitter” appears in the first one (to JohnReid9) in the “From:” line, but doesn’t appear in the second one (to Starchild111).
Patterico was also a recipient of everything I received. I wasn’t a recipient of subsequent things that he received.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/16/2011 @ 7:13 amNote in my post immediately above, the Patterico.com html processed some of the stuff that I was trying to post for you all to see. In the JR9 example above, next to the words “From: Twitter” it should show the following between pointy brackets
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/16/2011 @ 7:16 amAnother difference between the two examples above:
In the second example (to starchild111), there was no “To:” line showing Nikki’s email, but there was a “To:” line in the first example (to JohnReid9).
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/16/2011 @ 7:18 amI like the idea that Brietbart was the target of this whole thing, with AW considered expendable and collateral.
But, if the same folks are behind the threats to Patterico, AoS and others, then what’s the reason for that? It seems to me either they realized that they were in over their heads, and wanted to stop the forward progress of the investigation by threatening dire consequences, or…
…they expected that these threats would increase P & AoS’s interest in the matter, and keep them investigating. In this scenario, they had expectations that 1) they could guide the investigation along the ways they liked; and 2) that the threats would not be followed-up on by LE and/or they would not be able to be identified and prosecuted.
Last night @Patterico tweeted that some people were running scared. I imagine it’s related to this matter (though of course in his day job he probably has people jittery too) and I wonder if they regret poking this particular bear.
I hope he makes them regret it, anyway.
Pious Agnostic (291f9a) — 8/16/2011 @ 7:22 amComment by JoeBlow — 8/16/2011 @ 6:48 am
I have Reid’s rant, approximately 134 tweets, saved as an HTML doc that opens in my browser.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/16/2011 @ 7:30 amComment by koam @wittier — 8/16/2011 @ 7:18 am
RE: Pointy Brackets
If you replace the left one with < and the right one with &rt; it should display the way you wish.
Pious Agnostic (291f9a) — 8/16/2011 @ 7:32 amComment by Pious Agnostic — 8/16/2011 @ 7:32 am
oops, sorry, the right ones should be >
I always make that mistake.
Pious Agnostic (291f9a) — 8/16/2011 @ 7:34 amComment by Blackburnsghost — 8/16/2011 @ 6:57 am
Yes AB & DL had stuff from Meghan Broussard prior to the dic pic, I believe. I’m no expert on that part of the story. So correct ME if I’M wrong.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/16/2011 @ 7:41 amI hadn’t thought about Breitbart being the target, but I can see how that may be plausible.
I think they realized they were in over their heads, but also incredibly arrogant. After all, no major media outlet was doing much digging and they probably thought bloggers wouldn’t spend much time on it. Which may have been true, had they just shut up, shut down the sockpuppets, etc. But someone really is obsessed, which makes me think it’s personal.
prmetime (1d022f) — 8/16/2011 @ 7:44 amGreg- Your surmise that the accounts originally started as a marketing or PR tool is a very very good one.
They both love everything that’s cool about LA, although Marienela living in/loving The OC and going to The Buckley School (in Studio City) would make for a looooong commute.
I know PR and advertising agencies will have interns run around the net, searching for terms on Twitter and “liking” certain things on Facebook. Other firms will write terrible reviews on their client’s competitors’ Yelp pages (and other things similar).
Starchild never really relished talking about Weiner with Gennette. Maybe originally she was just supposed to find out what women who liked Weiner liked.
(ps. If Marienela was in The OC, it really does make it inexplicable why Tommy would have accepted a Hollywood High ID)
MayBee (081489) — 8/16/2011 @ 7:45 amIt’s precisely these two stories that make me think “let’s sting Breitbart” was not a motive.
The premise behind the “let’s sting Breitbart” motive is that the perpetrators would feed Breitbart information that could be easily discredited and then Breitbart would be criticized for falling for it, publishing it without vetting it, etc.
If the perpetrators had simply made up entirely fake DMs between Weiner and some fictional entity — that is, if they had made up Weiner’s answers too — and then sent this to Breitbart as legitimate info, that may have indeed qualified as an effort to sting Breitbart.
But that’s not what Starchild appeared to be doing. (And it certainly wasn’t what Patriot was doing.)
Instead, Starchild111 was a fake persona constructed to collect real information. In the case of ACORN, the “pimp” and the “prostitute” were also fake personas constructed to collect real information. In the case of NPR, the “wealthy Muslim donors” were also fake personas constructed to collect real information.
When it was revealed that these fake personas were fake, did these stories somehow prove ruinous to Breitbart’s reputation? Arguably, these stories are in large part responsible for cementing Breitbart’s reputation as a successful and effective muckraker (or at least a publisher of successful and effective muckrakers).
Is there some difference between the Weinergate fake personas and the fake personas used in the ACORN and NPR stories that would somehow end up discrediting Breitbart?
Greg (bc8186) — 8/16/2011 @ 7:53 amI’m pretty sure that Tommy said that Patricia’s Driver License address matched up with the girls’ public school district. And you know how thorough Tommy is.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/16/2011 @ 7:53 amInteresting idea that a marketer of consumer products took the Nikki account ‘off the shelf’ and activated it to do something regarding Weiner.
Sampling the ‘Weiner demographic’ sounds like a political/ideological hit, though, considering it was a couple of women.
JoeBlow (b017e6) — 8/16/2011 @ 7:55 amHer first tweets were to celebrities, asking questions. If they would have answered her, she would have gotten instant attention.
(One of my dear friends has a lot of latin celebs for friends IRL. As soon as one of the celebs starts following her on Twitter, or says something to her– Boom! she gets more followers and a bunch of people asking her how she knows so-and-so.)
MayBee (081489) — 8/16/2011 @ 8:11 am“Is there some difference between the Weinergate fake personas and the fake personas used in the ACORN and NPR stories that would somehow end up discrediting Breitbart?”
Greg – For the sake of argument, yes. The plan was never allowed to come to fruition because the dick tweet interrupted everything. There was not enough time to convince Breitbart or others to bite on the fake evidence offered by Marianela and/or Nikki and they had no knowledge that he had been contacted by an actual sexting pal of Weiner’s and had no need of some dubious internet source.
Why assume pro-Weiner socks knew anything about what he was actually doing on-line. He also had plausible deniability with respect to teen tweets; “Hey, I’ve got over 40,000 followers, how do you expect me to keep track of who they all are?”
Just sayin’.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 8/16/2011 @ 8:32 amMrs P spills a few beans on JGMA. She’s from Quincy.
Posted here before she deletes it.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/16/2011 @ 8:36 amComment by JoeBlow — 8/16/2011 @ 6:48 am
In the JohnReid9 rant of ~134 tweets, I couldn’t find mention of Breitbart. Reid had this one tweet on 21 June that is related:
I just did text searches for “big” “andrew” “breitbart” ” ab ” etc. and this is all I found. I have them all in a file.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/16/2011 @ 8:51 am@13monster’s tweets are protected now, but I actually read them last night.
Three or four comments to Ron saying that they had met in person and Ron had better not engage in the character assassination of 13monkeys he had done to other people. 13 also noted Ron had a bad reputation. He also had a lot of other tweets discussing politics from a left wing POV.
Nothing he said suggested much involvement with anything. But who knows?
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/16/2011 @ 8:57 amI believe Quincy is its own city, with its own police force. JGMA, I believe, filed her police report in Boston with the PBD, and Detective Thornton, of BPD, visited her in her Boston apartment for the follow-up interview. There were some verification questions that JP had discussed with JGMA (I guess, based on my memory of what we heard/read when Lee was active) regarding “where did JGMA grow up”, go to elementary school?”, etc. So Quincy may have been JGMA’s home town, and she may live now in nearby Boston. (And,again, this is from my memory.) But I think today’s JP tweet is the first time the word Quincy has been released, unless I missed its prior use.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/16/2011 @ 9:00 amWondering, I don’t know what question you asked about Patterico IRL, but you probably shouldn’t talk about his job here, and he doesn’t respond to that kind of stuff and if it’s rude, he takes it to be an attack.
Also, while I share your opinion of how some people reacted to Dan in initially as an unreasonable frenzy, how can that excuse Dan being a manipulator on the scale of posing as Reid?
He manipulated opinions, and he left real people holding the bag for his choices, and Patterico’s interest in resolving this mystery is much more important than a grudge against Lee or whomever.
Your comments show you’re also being manipulative, taking on one voice and then a totally different one, and often posting in bad faith. If you’re just caught up in feeling sorry for Dan, I think you can drop it. Anyone adding confusion to this story at this point is doing something seriously wrong.
Things are different now than they were before the threats. Which frankly was a long time ago.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/16/2011 @ 9:02 amDustin, so was this monkeys guy much different from the other twitter characters? I had skimmed a bit of the exchange, but hadn’t focused. You heard that LulzShack closed up shop, like PeterPavel1 did?…and probably others as well.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/16/2011 @ 9:06 amComment by koam @wittier — 8/16/2011 @ 7:41 am
Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c) — 8/16/2011 @ 9:07 amCan’t correct you, I was really asking a question. Thank you.
Koam –
Re
The Quincy, Mass, link was known. It’s supposed to have been where JG grew up.
Whiskey (b017e6) — 8/16/2011 @ 9:15 amComment by Whiskey — 8/16/2011 @ 9:15 am
thanks
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/16/2011 @ 9:47 amWhy are some people referring to Dan as if he’s a real person?
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/16/2011 @ 9:59 am“Things are different now than they were before the threats. Which frankly was a long time ago.”
Dustin – I agree, but I do not believe that gives us license to rewrite the history of events as they transpired. I think it allows us to revisit events with the benefit of hindsight. I think certain people have been mixing up the concepts, but I am not here to debate. You can’t afford me.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 8/16/2011 @ 10:00 am@Wittier
On tweetdeck, would you have to refresh or click on something to see new tweets? Or do they come in automatically?
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/16/2011 @ 10:01 amGood point.
Daleyrocks, you’re right too. But if someone wants to go in that direction, make it worthwhile. It’s smart to revisit those events with a critical eye and see if that sheds light on choices that seemed odd. Just do it in good faith, seriously, and with care.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/16/2011 @ 10:06 amThat is a shame. Sarah is doing a great job, and at the very least exposes assumptions.
Credibility alone is not an argument that works for more than one or two people at this point.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/16/2011 @ 10:13 amLOL, it looks like I was taking Daleyrocks’s joke to be an earnest statement now.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/16/2011 @ 10:14 amYes, that confirms some things. Anything coming from the Starchild account was forwarded twice. To Ymail & then to you and Patterico for some things (like Ethel follow of Nikki). To Gmail and then to Patterico for others. Anything coming from the JR9 account were forwarded directly from Ymail indicating that account was associated with the JR9 account.
There is nothing which indicates Starchild account was associated with the Ymail account and no emails have been shown to have been sent from Ymail account prior to Starchild account being deleted.
I have not checked every email provider, have most of the biggies, but considering the use of only the big ones so far it’s likely the Starchild account was associated with a Windows Live/Hotmail account as it has that Forward Header with UTC time instead of local.
JR has taken the time to delete to To: field from
items forwarded from WL/H probably because the name of the email account indicates something about the person behind this. It is not “Nikki” as Nikki name is in not way hidden in Ymail account name. This calls into question the entire forwarded header, it can be easily edited changing times, etc. But why makes changes & end up with 2 TZs indicated. If changes were made I think the effort would have been extended to get it right or simply delete the entire forward header fro WL/H. This wasn’t done to preserve some evidence the email had actually come from Twitter to start with.
One question is why create & use Gmail account at all? Supposedly this was done by John Reid by why not use his name instead of Nikki’s?
Rocksem (e1d29d) — 8/16/2011 @ 10:15 amAnything new shows up automatically in TweetDeck. Might happen faster if you click refresh.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/16/2011 @ 10:20 amThis isn’t necessarily true. It all depends on how the Twedeck is interacting with Twitter. Sometimes it’s slow. But normally it’s fast and deleted tweets disappear from your view without any action by you. I know this because there have been times I have asked people to delete a response they made to a DM I accidentally sent public. It happened almost instantaneously and I did not close Tweetdeck in the interim.
Rocksem (e1d29d) — 8/16/2011 @ 10:23 am==Does Tommy’s lack inquiry about being duped suggest that he has concluded, like Preston apparently has, that it was dangerous, mysterious lefties
“you don’t know how deep this goes, Lee.”
“Neall R is a dem operative. at this point do not engage. very dangerous.”
Direct message sent by Jennifer Preston (@NYT_JenPreston) to you (@ronbryn) on Jun 26, 7:46 AM.
behind the deception rather than your garden-variety evil conservative sneaks? If it were evil righties wouldn’t they both be on this like white on rice?
Comment by koam @wittier — 8/16/2011 @ 3:38 am==
Yes. It sure seems if they (Tommy and Jen) thought it was righties behind the fakes and deception, their dogged pursuit of the truth would be merciless and public. The lack of interest of lefty blogs is noticeable, too, post-Weiner. Also interesting was the quick move by Pelosi to get him gone when so very often disgraced Dems hang on and on and on. An internal undercover project to rid the party of loose cannon Weiner and try to hide its own involvement from the base by attempting to use hated Breitbart to publish the coup de gras “evidence” makes a lot of sense. It’s really quite a simple plan.
elissa (ba6b85) — 8/16/2011 @ 10:26 amElissa, that does make a lot of sense. Whether it turns out this is true, I think many think that’s right and it’s a good explanation for some of the behavior we see now.
BTW: How did Preston conclude Neal was involved?
It is frustrating that all these ‘journalists’ left a big confusing mess about a story they were covering, and now they aren’t really covering it. I don’t even know what information they have. What is their purpose if they aren’t presenting information?
I don’t mean to distract from Rocksem’s analysis. Hopefully two conversations can slalom around eachother.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/16/2011 @ 10:31 am@Wittier
But we can pretty much assume that DW had been sitting and watching, right?
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/16/2011 @ 10:33 amHe was seemingly the only person to have seen the tweet. And he had it screencapped, commented on it and retweeted it within about three minutes of the original tweet being posted.
There’s no distractions. It’s a comment section. Comment. 🙂
Rocksem (e1d29d) — 8/16/2011 @ 10:33 amI’ve never seen any indication DW was using Tweetdeck. Instead had multiple tabs open showing timelines. This is why he would see deleted tweets after deletion because Twitter for web, or web page, does need to be refreshed for changes to appear, or disappear.
Rocksem (e1d29d) — 8/16/2011 @ 10:37 amMy observations of what deleted tweets persist on TweetDeck, and other related twitter behavior concerning deleted tweets. But first, one of my own that did not persist in TweetDeck.
I posted a tweet this morning that I meant to send as a DM. It showed up in a related search column of TweetDeck right away. I then deleted the tweet on the Twitter page and the tweet then disappeared right away from the related search column in my TweetDeck, without my refreshing TweetDeck at all.
However, someone we all know posted a Tweet yesterday. It showed up in 2 columns of my TweetDeck. One column is a “List,” the other a “Search.” I woke up early this morning and the tweets were there in Tweetdeck. I right-clicked the date stamp to observe the tweet in its own tab. (Reason, the tweet was addressing someone else, but the other party was unnamed, so I wanted to see if it was a reply or part of a conversation) The tweet wasn’t found. I loaded that person’s twitter page in a new tab. The tweet wasn’t there and didn’t show up after waiting. In another tab, that also happened to already be on that person’s twitter page from yesterday or an earlier time (I have a lot of tabs open at any time), I later saw that it had “2 new tweets” notification at the top. I clicked that and it loaded the “new” tweets, including the one that had already been deleted (I believe that the pending new tweet was cached in my computer to be displayed upon my click…..my click didn’t poll the server to go get the new ones.) I then right-clicked that tab, which showed the deleted tweet in the tweet stream on that person’s twitter page, and clicked “Duplicate,” which goes to the server and duplicates the URL of the current tab into a new tab. Then the deleted tweet didn’t show up anymore on the new tab.
However, the deleted tweet does still show up this afternoon in my TweetDeck, in both columns, because I haven’t refreshed my TweetDeck and haven’t closed my browser window since at least yesterday.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/16/2011 @ 10:40 am“Yes. It sure seems if they (Tommy and Jen) thought it was righties behind the fakes and deception, their dogged pursuit of the truth would be merciless and public. The lack of interest of lefty blogs is noticeable, too, post-Weiner.”
elissa – That is one of the reasons I remain in the camp I am in. If the socks were righties or anti-Weiner, the left would be all over this like white on rice rather than throwing up diversions and clouds of obfuscation.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 8/16/2011 @ 10:49 amYeah, that’s just a glitch with Tweetdeck but it’s not a consistent one. I have seen DMs which I have deleted in Twitter web which will persist for a long time in Tweetdeck. But it’s random when that happens. I have seen the reverse too.
Rocksem (e1d29d) — 8/16/2011 @ 10:51 amDon’t let your own biases against the left skew your perceptions. Don’t get ahead of the evidence. It has to play itself out before anyone knows what actually happened.
Anita Busch (a025dd) — 8/16/2011 @ 11:00 amYou certainly may be right. Again, I don’t profess to be an expert on the machinations of timing of those events that night. Others know that stuff cold and I would defer to them.
I just thought the fact that I can see a deleted tweet a day (now) after it was deleted, both in TweetDeck (in 2 different columns) and also on the Twitter page (see my post 10:40 AM), was interesting, if not exactly what happened with diligent Dan. Certainly, I have learned that the deleted tweet does not disappear from view while you run to the fridge, take a nap, or go for a jog. It’s there to be manually copied and retweeted. (I know about manually copying and retweeting because the night that JohnReid9 sprang to life, railing against you and JP, I had to manually copy and paste to RT him to the interested people. The reason in this case is that JR9’s Twitter account was protected, so I could not just RT him onto my Tweet stream. And I knew people would be interested in what he was saying, although I have no idea how interested. And I didn’t RT all because it became very tedious after 10 or 20, or however many I posted….and the fella went on and on.)
I have no idea how the yfrog thing would have worked in relation to this in order for Dan to capture the photo (and have asked previously if maybe there isn’t software that would automatically grab such things and save them). But I recall from Ladd’s interview that Dan said that DL & AB got their copies of the AW tweets (and pic?) from TweetCongress.org. And I don’t know if that’s true or accurate. But I guess they already had the photo (differently cropped?) from Meaghan B. (so I heard.)
ote also that there are alarms that one can set so that the TweetDeck creates a pop up and makes a sound when it find somethings that fits your search. So you could watch a movie on TV and the computer will ring when something salient crosses your screen.
But again, you’re probably right that Dan was on the scene when it happened.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/16/2011 @ 11:01 am“Don’t let your own biases against the left skew your perceptions. Don’t get ahead of the evidence. It has to play itself out before anyone knows what actually happened.”
Anita – In this case, absence of normal activity from a sector could be evidence, as well as the walls of obfuscation being thrown up by actors on that side.
Many of us here have been following this story intensely from the start.
Don’t let your bias against the right cloud your judgment.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 8/16/2011 @ 11:17 amWhen you say “fake evidence,” how are you defining it? What would this fake evidence consist of?
Greg (bc8186) — 8/16/2011 @ 11:27 amI made an observation. You guys are building on a theory based on biases, when all that matters is what the true facts are which have not played itself out yet.
Anita Busch (a025dd) — 8/16/2011 @ 11:32 amComment by Anita Busch — 8/16/2011 @ 11:32 am
This is good advice, under all circumstances.
On the other hand, if you hear hooves, think horses not zebras.
Pious Agnostic (291f9a) — 8/16/2011 @ 11:43 am==Comment by Anita Busch — 8/16/2011 @ 11:00
Anita, of course you are correct. Most of us genuinely do want the facts and evidence to lead to the truth of the mystery no matter where it lies. Surely you can see, though, that this saga would never “play itself out” if it were not for Patterico, Lee, and a very few other curious souls who are still trying to find the truth in a haystack. The “real” media and the left blogs and cable have shown a singular disinterest in pursuing what seems to be a very intriquing behind the scenes story. That looks strange and smells out of character for them. It looks as if a lot of people who should be very curious are just not at all interested in helping it “play out” for some reason. As a journalist yourself can you explain such passivity by them?
With respect, I would ask that you not let your biases skew your perception either. It appeared you could barely contain your glee when you read that a known Republican staffer was the intermediary connecting Broussard with Breitbart. Does this mean anything? Maybe. Maybe not. If Broussard, herself a liberal, was a cog in the larger plan to expose how easily Weiner could be lured and how recklessly vulnerable he was to democrats, then Megan’s sexy pictures and teets and emails would hardly have been offered to Breitbart through a Dem operative or intermediary, would they?
elissa (ba6b85) — 8/16/2011 @ 11:44 am“I made an observation. You guys are building on a theory based on biases”
Anita – No, you suggested the theories of commenters were based on biases rather than evidence in your observation.
There is nothing wrong with having theories is there? In my observation, I suggested why the lack of normal behavior from a sector may actually constitute evidence, as did elissa. That is not bias, that is an observation based upon well-established past behavior.
We are all waiting to let facts emerge, but I have not seen anyone here completely wedded to particular theories.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 8/16/2011 @ 11:50 amI’d say it’s mildly biased but we’re looking at evidence.
This was a media manipulation plot and how the media reacted is telling. Tommy & Jen dropped this cold when it started to smell like Neal.
And the main lefty blogger, on this (how curious that it’s the same guy) insisted, right up through his banishment at Kos, that Weiner had been hacked by righties, in fact by Patterico — who now doesn’t agree with us. Maybe that’s a red herring?
Interesting, to say the least.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/16/2011 @ 11:50 am“When you say “fake evidence,” how are you defining it? What would this fake evidence consist of?”
Greg @304 – Whatever Marianela and/or Nikki claimed to have or could fabricate. It did not have to actually exist since the dick tweet blew up the plan.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 8/16/2011 @ 11:52 amdaley, sorry, i should have been more precise:
If nikki or any other fake entity collected real responses from weiner, then sent those real weiner responses to breitbart, would that constitute “fake evidence” in your mind?
Greg (bc8186) — 8/16/2011 @ 11:56 amI can only speak for myself here, but I find it very difficult to compartmentalize my analysis of the facts from my knowledge of how the world works, and what kind of people do certain things.
So bias is a problem worth being aware of.
But if it turns out the facts contradict my biased theories, I haven’t resisted that. That’s the best I can do.
But when I think about bias, Elissa “It looks as if a lot of people who should be very curious are just not at all interested in helping it “play out” for some reason.” is where that takes me.
What is with Ms Preston? What caused her to work with Ron? What caused Tommy to be so reckless? Why don’t they act like that interests them?
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/16/2011 @ 12:00 pm“And the main lefty blogger, on this (how curious that it’s the same guy) insisted, right up through his banishment at Kos”
Who are you referring to? Neal?
Bret (493d93) — 8/16/2011 @ 12:02 pmYes, Bret.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/16/2011 @ 12:05 pmThe only evidence I have heard that Marianela says she had were DMs of GC saying she flirted with AW to Nikki and DMs sent to Nikki from AW. None of this was fake. GC states her DMs were pretend but the only evidence of that is her word.
Rocksem (e1d29d) — 8/16/2011 @ 12:06 pm“JR” has produced DMs which show AW calling Nikki “Sugar”, etc. These could be fake but it’s still possible they are real in the AW sent them to Nikki, whoever she is.
It is my impression from tweeting with Preston that her and Ron have a history which predates anything related to Weiner.
Rocksem (e1d29d) — 8/16/2011 @ 12:08 pmNeal is from Kos? I did not know this.
I was starting to think I had somewhat of a grasp on this in Part 4, but I am lost again now. Several names that are new to me.
Still, I think the theories are great fun. I agree we should be aware of our biases, but honestly with so many fake people and so much deceit, I can see why there are many theories.
I was trying to go thru and make a cast of characters, but I give up! 🙂
prmetime (1d022f) — 8/16/2011 @ 12:14 pmWell, in this case, we’ve been told that Weiner, and Gennette, and Loesch, and Breitbart were all smarter than the fake jailbait. Weiner supposedly didn’t bite, so the hypothetically promised evidence wasn’t much, or would have been written by the socks, & inserted among the real exchanges.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/16/2011 @ 12:16 pmHis name there was Stranded Wind. You definitely should read his diaries if this story interests you.
However, I can assure you that basically 100% of what he’s saying is lies meant to harm good people.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/16/2011 @ 12:16 pmYes. This post and many others on this case, all ridiculous. Search for “Stranded Wind”…and go back several Patterico posts, though it’s hard to do. Is there a topic page here for this case?
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/16/2011 @ 12:23 pmThe characters running the show, in order of appearance,
Sockpuppet Theater:
(please fix as needed, add traits, etc.)
Wolfe
Nikki
Marianela
John Reid
Alicia Pain
JoeBlow (b017e6) — 8/16/2011 @ 12:26 pm“If nikki or any other fake entity collected real responses from weiner, then sent those real weiner responses to breitbart, would that constitute “fake evidence” in your mind?”
Greg @311 – No, those are real Weiner messages. Nothing fabricated to them, but that’s not what I was describing in my first response to you.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 8/16/2011 @ 12:26 pm“The only evidence I have heard that Marianela says she had were DMs of GC saying she flirted with AW to Nikki and DMs sent to Nikki from AW. None of this was fake.”
Rocksem – Who cares? This chain of comments goes back to Greg’s question @270, which I answered @274. It is all based on hypotheticals if you follow the chain of comments.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 8/16/2011 @ 12:32 pmThis list makes no sense. You use the name Nikki and then say Nikki created other people like Marianela, John Reid, etc. You treat Nikki automatically as a separate individual from Wolfe while at the same time lumping all others with Nikki.
This may all be what happened but it’s confusing to read.
Rocksem (e1d29d) — 8/16/2011 @ 12:35 pmThank you Dustin. I had only seen that name mentioned with lulzsec. I looked them up and they looked too ridiculous to be true.
I just looked up Stranded Wind (heehee) and didn’t make it thru even one entry. Wow…
prmetime (1d022f) — 8/16/2011 @ 12:35 pmAnd thanks koam and joeblow. Those help a lot.
I can’t imagine what organized brains you guys must have to keep track of this!
prmetime (1d022f) — 8/16/2011 @ 12:38 pmWell I care or I wouldn’t have commented. You suggested there was fake, as in manufactured evidence, in play here. There’s no evidence shown yet the evidence was fake.
Rocksem (e1d29d) — 8/16/2011 @ 12:40 pm#324
Rocksem, I was trying a different approach altogether. Who are they each individually and what caused some of them to exist.
Personally, I think Wolfe and the Reids are the same, but it doesn’t hurt to reevaluate.
JoeBlow (b017e6) — 8/16/2011 @ 12:40 pmAs for the right wing/left wing political angles in this,
Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.
(Sometimes.)
JoeBlow (b017e6) — 8/16/2011 @ 12:42 pmDaley, if I’m understanding you correctly, you’re saying that the difference between Starchild111 sting and ACORN sting is that:
A) in the case of Starchild, the intention is to use fake personas to create completely fabricated evidence i.e., there’s nothing real about it whatsover. Starchild111 is made up. The responses/information ostensibly collected from Weiner or some other real source is made up.
B) in the case of ACORN, the intention is to use fake personas to collect real responses from real individuals.
If this is not generally what you’re saying, then I’m clearly not get getting why you’re making a distinction between the methods employed in Starchild operation versus methods employed in ACORN and NPR/Muslim donors operations.
Greg (bc8186) — 8/16/2011 @ 12:43 pm“Well I care or I wouldn’t have commented. You suggested there was fake, as in manufactured evidence, in play here. There’s no evidence shown yet the evidence was fake.”
Rocksem – No I didn’t. Follow the chain.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 8/16/2011 @ 12:46 pm157: Comment by Gennette — 8/15/2011 @ 4:38 pm
Why would Nikki’s Twitter be set to Central Standard Time?
Headquarters?? Or more likely, time zone when starchild111 account was first set up in 2009??
Omaha is in the central time zone. (So are a lot of other places, like Chicago)
Whatever it means, it’s something pointing to the account holders not being exclusively all the time since the beginning on the west coast.
Sammy Finkelman (d3daeb) — 8/16/2011 @ 12:48 pmThe more theories that are laid out, the more it feeds into these people’s agenda to cover the facts with chaos (using fake names) and confuse everyone.
Maybe everyone should re-read Patterico’s posts, including what he links to. Seems to me, he has the best handle on this of all involved, with the exception of koam who seems to be taking a very logical approach.
Anita Busch (a025dd) — 8/16/2011 @ 12:52 pmIf you are using a premium proxy, don’t you have the option to set a time zone? I have no idea if they were using one, but I have an ex that used to use them and I think you had some of those options.
prmetime (1d022f) — 8/16/2011 @ 12:52 pmRe #332 Time Zones
If a person deliberately set out to deceive, why not set the Twitter time zone to something other than one’s own?
It could be useful in creating confusion.
JoeBlow (b017e6) — 8/16/2011 @ 12:53 pmI don’t have a problem with your reasoning. It’s just reading it. Maybe if you said Nikki and Wolfe are created too it would make more sense to me.
Rocksem (e1d29d) — 8/16/2011 @ 12:55 pm“A) in the case of Starchild, the intention is to use fake personas to create completely fabricated evidence i.e., there’s nothing real about it whatsover. Starchild111 is made up. The responses/information ostensibly collected from Weiner or some other real source is made up.”
Greg – If the purpose is to sting Breitbart and not Weiner, the evidence on Weiner needs to be false. No one has come forward with any damaging flirty messages between Nikki and Marianela and Weiner as Rocksem points out. Any spicy ones needed to faked. The socks could have also provided fabricated sexts from other girls from Weiner to sting Breitbart. The fact that Weiner at least temporarily follows Nikki and Marianela gives them a shred of credibility. What they use for a sting attempt is a completely different discussion. It went out the window after the dick tweet. All bets were off.
You asked how it was different from ACORN, that’s how it could be different.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 8/16/2011 @ 12:55 pm321 Comment by JoeBlow — 8/16/2011 @ 12:26 pm
The characters running the show, in order of appearance,Sockpuppet Theater:
(please fix as needed, add traits, etc.)
There are also these puppets: (this is confined to writrteen material)
1. Seattle545: Posts
A) real DMs on June 18 and
B) one batch of real (but carefully selected) public tweets from strachild111 togetehr with a batch of fake DMs between Anthony Weiner and Genette which puirport to show them Genette running the Nikki account – on June 20.
2. Juan2487. Created at the same time as Marianela, that is,m around May 14.
3. @MarkAli33 Mark Alicea – Marinella’s father – cvreated at the sdame time as John Reid 9 – little used.
4. Possible unknown sock. Created no later than a few days after May 5. Meagan Brousard’s male reopubliucan friend. Left no trace as Nikki possibly intended after finding a Weiner mistress.
Sammy Finkelman (d3daeb) — 8/16/2011 @ 1:01 pmGreg seems to have compiled a very good timeline. And Dustin has keen observations.
Anita Busch (a025dd) — 8/16/2011 @ 1:02 pmYes, you did.
There is nothing to indicate Marianela or Nikki offered any evidence that was fake to Breitbart. There is no reason Marianella should have doubted Gennette when she DMed that she had flirted with Weiner. Breitbart’s problem wasn’t the evidence but the fact that no one would go on record and even agree to be contacted.
Rocksem (e1d29d) — 8/16/2011 @ 1:03 pmOh, now I get what you’re getting at about Central Time, (though I don’t put a lot into time zones as evidence.)
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/16/2011 @ 1:06 pmI realize you want me to butt out but sorry. This isn’t necessarily true. Tommy Christopher’s reputation has been severely damaged by this IMHO and he did little more than vouch for them & issue their statements of innocence & support of Weiner.
If they had convinced Breitbart to run just the GC Pretend Flirt DMs(which are real) to Nikki and they had been outed as socks it would have damaged Breibart much more. The MSM would have had a field day with it.
No fake sexts of a spicy nature would have been needed and I don’t think Breitbart’s decision to not run anything would have changed simply if the DMs were more spicy.
Rocksem (e1d29d) — 8/16/2011 @ 1:16 pmIf the purpose was to take down Breitbart, wouldn’t this individual/persons still need to have a pretty serious grievance with Weiner? Or is the premise here that Breitbart was so important Weiner could could just be collateral damage?
prmetime (1d022f) — 8/16/2011 @ 1:22 pmDoes anyone know if Breitbart has enemies on the right?
Nathan Wagner (7601d3) — 8/16/2011 @ 1:22 pmWhat if this whole thing wasn’t political at all?
Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c) — 8/16/2011 @ 1:22 pmWell, maybe it wasn’t political, but if it was a woman scorned, I think she would not be as interested in his public persona. She would make it personal.
If not political, than what?
prmetime (1d022f) — 8/16/2011 @ 1:26 pmThat is Lee Stranahan’s contention. He believes all of this, and I mean everything from Dan Wolfe to Alica Pain,, is the product of the fevered mind of an obsessed former fan/wannabe lover of Weiner’s.
Rocksem (e1d29d) — 8/16/2011 @ 1:26 pmThis is out of left field, totally out of context. Don’t crucify me. Has anyone blown up the theory that by late May…
1) Weiner knew that the shit was about to hit the fan with either the Meaghan stuff and/or the Nikki stuff (and/or other pending gal pal eruptions). It was spinning out of his control.
2) He intentionally sent the tweet to Gennette, let’s stipulate without her foreknowledge, so that he could simply say he’d been hacked by the very entities that were about to come down on him, and deny everything from the start (and “#Hacked” and “deny” is exactly what he did)?
Perhaps he didn’t plan on being caught in the tweet, late on Memorial Day Friday, when most people are traveling or partying, but was just planting the record so that he could fall back on the “I can prove I was previously hacked story” when other stuff was released. (His “#Hacked” tweets came after Dan RT’d, right?) I suppose this doesn’t provide sufficient cover for the artwork he’d shared with Meaghan (do recall however, during his pathetic week of denials, that he prattled on about how some photos may have been taken from one account and switched to another — so perhaps he would claim he had private stuff for the Mrs. that he never shared but his computer had been taken over and right wing bad guys had pretended to be him and sent his galleries to the ladies), but perhaps it would have for his less substantive chatter with minors?
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/16/2011 @ 1:26 pmI think at some point DW suggested or goatsred believed DW was in NY/NJ. I have always thought it possible the person behind DW, and probably Reids sting, was someone who had a personal run in with Weiner. Perhaps someone who’s livelihood was ruined by some program or law Weiner pushed for heavily and claimed credit for.
That is still political but it’s of a personal nature.
Rocksem (e1d29d) — 8/16/2011 @ 1:34 pmMy problem with the crazy ex-girlfriend / crush theory is that it could be used to explain every unsolved mystery on record.
kidding.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/16/2011 @ 1:37 pmWhat if it’s ideological?
JoeBlow (b017e6) — 8/16/2011 @ 1:37 pmCould it be related to Weiner’s marrying a woman who people claim is tied to the Muslim Brotherhood, for example? (Wolfe seemed to believe that, if I remember coreectly.) Could it be another issue of deep resonance in his district, or nationally, like his level of support for Israel? Or something that elicits similarly intense responses on the part of those on both sides of the issue?
No I’m not at all suggesting it had anything to do with Huma or a crazy ex/crush.
Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c) — 8/16/2011 @ 1:46 pmI don’t know what I’m thinking exactly but if you take the AW tweet out of it for a minute it becomes a whole different ball game to me.
I think Anita’s post just got me thinking in a whole new way.
Absolutely, I agree with this. If Starchild111 presented completely fabricated info to Breitbart, as opposed to real responses elicited from Weiner using fake personas, that would be different than the ACORN/NPR operations.
Greg (bc8186) — 8/16/2011 @ 1:47 pmAre you familiar with the Chrome app Extended Share for Google Plus? It’s designed to make it easier to post things on Twitter, Facebook, etc., but I think it also lets users check what’s been posted without actually visiting the platforms. What do you think?
DRJ (a83b8b) — 8/16/2011 @ 1:59 pm“Yes, you did.”
Rocksem @340 – What evidence did they have which if Breitbart had published would have been embarrassing to Breitbart? DM’s from Weiner to teenage girls? No, that’s not what I was talking about. I was talking about them fabricating something salacious.
@342 – I’m not suggesting you butt out, only understand the flow of conversation rather than make accusations.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 8/16/2011 @ 2:00 pmThat is still political but it’s of a personal nature.
Ahh. I had not of this. That’s a decent enough theory. It would account for the obsessiveness.
I really can’t get behind a scorned woman, although jilted lovers are capable of nastiness.
And if the target was Breitbart, why Weiner? This was personal.
prmtime (1d022f) — 8/16/2011 @ 2:00 pm“Absolutely, I agree with this. If Starchild111 presented completely fabricated info to Breitbart, as opposed to real responses elicited from Weiner using fake personas, that would be different than the ACORN/NPR operations.”
Greg @353 – If mixed in with the fabricated salacious DM’s, there are some innocuous DM’s from Weiner, all the better because Breitbart can be accused of fabricating them if Weiner decides to validate which DM’s are real.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 8/16/2011 @ 2:04 pmJoeBlow, if someone really thought Huma was tied to the Muslim Brotherhood, it makes no sense to go after AW. Why not go after Hilary or Huma herself. I am not understanding that.
prmtime (1d022f) — 8/16/2011 @ 2:07 pmelissa — 8/16/2011 @ 11:44 am
You mention Megan Broussard’s friend was a “known Republican staffer [who] was the intermediary connecting Broussard with Breitbart.”
Where did this come from? Are you saying Broussard’s information was relayed to Breitbart by a staffer for a GOP member of Congress?
DRJ (a83b8b) — 8/16/2011 @ 2:08 pmYes. A number of us have offered up the idea that Weiner was a time bomb, and therefore disposable. Not a real loss to anyone, even those on his side.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/16/2011 @ 2:09 pmWeiner was taking photos of himself in the Congressional gym and, apparently, chatting online during some of the workday. It’s not unthinkable that word of that might leak out on both sides of the aisle. If word got out that someone — Megan Broussard? — was ready to go public with information about Weiner, perhaps the Republicans decided to find out if Weiner’s online chats were more widespread than just one consenting adult female. Or maybe the Democrats decided to try to sting Breitbart because they knew it was a matter of time before the Weiner story went public.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 8/16/2011 @ 2:13 pmComment by DRJ — 8/16/2011 @ 1:59 pm
Thanks. I don’t have Google +.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/16/2011 @ 2:13 pmYes I call Stranhan’s theory “The Unified Field Theory of Weinergate”.
While I think it’s likely Dan Wolfe & Reids, etc. are the same person I think Alicia Pain and JG are not the same as DW/JR and not the same as each other either.
From the moment Lee & Preston got calls from JG I have been on the opinion it was a crank who had latched onto this. Turns out the crank lives in Boston.
Alicia’s Pain’s main focus to me seems to be protecting Cordova. I do not see anything ever coming from JR which is any more damaging to Weiner than DMs to Ethel so he needs no protection here. JR/DW plays up that angle with Patterico but has to know that short of coming forward the accusations against Weiner will have little impact. What has been released, while denied by Gennette, has been particularly damaging to her. If the DMs to Nikki from GC are accurate I can see why someone would not want them released. Alicia Pain I think is probably a friend or wannabe friend of Gennette’s, acting without or even possibly with Gennette’s knowledge. There are some people on Twitter who are ridiculously protective of Gennette IMHO.
It is interesting that Gennette initially played down the seriousness of threats to Patterico.
Where Neal and the gang fit into this and why they have got involved I have no clue but I do not doubt Patterico’s need to be concerned concerning them. perhaps they are simply using this opportunity to damage their perceived enemies on the right.
Rocksem (e1d29d) — 8/16/2011 @ 2:17 pmNo, not at all DRJ. Sorry if my words were imprecise. I took the idea it was “known” to be a team R organization person from the long ABC quote about Broussard that was posted on here several days ago, I think by you. And Anita responded to it calling you a genius.
elissa (ba6b85) — 8/16/2011 @ 2:22 pmYou’re missing my point. It would matter little what Breitbart published from the Reids, etc. What would be embarrassing would be the outing of his sources as complete fakes. It would be used by the MSM to question the his validity on any story. that would be the hoped for outcome of any sting on Breitbart.
In fact using real evidence like DMs from Gennette would be best as they could be independently verified, by Gennette, without first verifying the Reids, etc making the chance Breitbart would publish more likely.
Rocksem (e1d29d) — 8/16/2011 @ 2:25 pmComment by koam @wittier — 8/16/2011 @ 2:09 pm
Gotcha. That is plausible, but my money is still on a political rival or threat.
The sheer number of fake people & manipulation is so diabolical, I think it has to be a politician. Or psychopath, they can go together! That could mean a conservative or liberal; I pretty much hate them all.
Or… it could be both. A rival who wants to discredit Breitbart before any dirt is thrown upon him/her. Very far fetched, and that is a sign I should probably leave this thread and hang out at reddit for awhile! 🙂
prmetime (1d022f) — 8/16/2011 @ 2:27 pmI will have to look at it but I doubt I will ever be on Google +. I can barely handle twitter’s commitment. 🙂
Rocksem (e1d29d) — 8/16/2011 @ 2:31 pm==In fact using real evidence like DMs from Gennette would be best as they could be independently verified, by Gennette, without first verifying the Reids, etc making the chance Breitbart would publish more likely.==
DM’s do not make a scandal. Racy pictchas make a scandal. There needed to be pictchas.
elissa (ba6b85) — 8/16/2011 @ 2:32 pmThanks, elissa. From the article I linked a few days ago:
I read that to mean she talked to a Republican friend but I guess the phrase “with Republican political ties” could also refer to someone with a partisan job.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 8/16/2011 @ 2:34 pmkoam and Rocksem,
I’m definitely not trying to get you to use Google Plus or Chrome. This link says the app has “created a way to check or post to Facebook or Twitter without actually visiting those platforms.” But it’s from a discussion board so I don’t know how accurate it is.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 8/16/2011 @ 2:38 pm“You’re missing my point.”
Rocksem – You seem to keep missing mine. If fabricated twitter or online personas have nondamaging tweets or messages from Weiner there is nothing for Breitbart to publish. What is the story?
The story only becomes interesting if the content of the messages is interesting. To sting Breitbart, the content offered has to be juicy enough for him to bite on it, which in this case means the content would have had to be fabricated based on what we know. In some ways it’s a chicken or egg deal.
If there were fake people actually communicating with Weiner, no big deal?
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 8/16/2011 @ 2:43 pmIf word got out that someone — Megan Broussard? — was ready to go public with information about Weiner
I’m thinking that maybe the May 27 tweet wasn’t the first unintentional explicit Weiner tweet, but maybe they happened on May 5. (except how could it be that only Patriotusa76 noticed)
Thursday, June 02, 2011
Weiner’s Tweet History – never tweeted a yfrog pic from Tweetdeck
http://milowent.blogspot.com/2011/06/weiners-tweet-history-never-tweeted.html
“Weiner’s history shows he has tweeted links to yfrog pictures 7 times (excluding the now deleted tweet.). On six of those occasions, he did so by posting “via Twitter for Blackberry”. (4 times on May 5, 2011; once on November 3, 2010, and once on September 26, 2010.) On the other remaining occasion (on 2/25/2011) he posted “via Yfrog.”
OK. Does anyone have the May 5 tweets? Even if those tweets were innocuous, the page Yfrog page itself was public provided you could find it.
Anyway what also happened on May 5:
http://www.soundbitten.com/archives/week_2011_06_19.html
Weiner emails Broussard a photo where he’s written “Me” on a piece of paper, at 3:08pm
This is a new picture – one she asked him to take. the picture with the cats, sent May 4 was older. Ove rthe next two weeks he sent her three more pictures. the last was not very explicit conmfusing some people at ABC but maybe it wa sthe last one he had uploaded on May 5.
And on May 5:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/08/nyregion/conservative-group-scanned-weiners-posts-warned-women.html
On May 5, Mr. Wolfe told him that he had a friend who knew Matt Drudge who had said that a scandal involving a member of Congress was coming soon.
[By the friend who knew Matt Drudge Dan Wolfe probably means Breitbart, except of course he is no friend of Dan Wolfe]
The same day that Meagan Broussard, 26, of Texas, said that she had received an e-mail from Mr. Weiner with a photo she had asked him to take, while holding up a white piece of paper that said “me.”
At 6:35 p.m., Mr. Stack, using his Twitter handle, @goatsred, posted: “Rumor … a ‘bigtime’ Congressman caught with mistress. There are pix and a top 5 right-wing blogger has them. @RepWeiner is it you?”
Now the question is, did Weiner slip up on May 5, not just May 27?
Did Patriot have alkl the pictures sent to Meagan Brousard even before Broussard have them?
Except that maybe SOCKREID and company had no idea who the pictures were intended for.
So, intensive detective work starts. Because May 5 is also the day Nikki Reid contacted Genette, isn’t it?
Now there may some holes in this theory, but usinmg Occam’s Razor is the mkind fo mistake a 4-year old makes. There may be some unknown facts that fix the holes, if there are any holes..
Sammy Finkelman (d3daeb) — 8/16/2011 @ 2:44 pmFwiw, that ABC News article also describes Broussard as “disinterested in politics and previously unaware of Weiner.” Similar charaterizations of her are used in Fox News reports as well. In other words, she wasn’t an emphatic liberal/progressive like virtually all the other women/girls, real and fake, associated with Weinergate.
Greg (bc8186) — 8/16/2011 @ 2:46 pmI think your contention there is nothing damaging to Weiner, and therefore unpublishable, to Weiner in DMs which suggest he is sexting with Gennette ( Pretend flirt DMs) and speaking inappropriately (“Sugar” & Hero/tights) with a teen “Nikki” is ridiculous. Up until the stories on Ethel came out Weiner was unwillingly to resign. It was exactly the DMs to Ethel which convinced him to.
Had Nikki & Marianela been real and been willing to go on record I have no doubt Brietbart would have seriously considered publishing what they had offered.
Had there been no dic pic and it shown Nikki & Marianela were fakes he might still have if the person performing the sting had gone on record. Weiner had no way of knowing teens were fake. What he did would still have been inappropriate.
Rocksem (0471ae) — 8/16/2011 @ 3:08 pmI think tweetdeck can do that on pc or phone. Also FriendFeed and other apps for phone that can do it too. I’ve never added facebook to TweetDeck because it wouldn’t be practical, I think. TweetDeck also handles Google Buzz and Foursquare.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/16/2011 @ 3:13 pmOh, and would use Google + but it’s in limited rollout and I haven’t received a live invite yet.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/16/2011 @ 3:13 pmNow there may some holes in this theory, but usinmg Occam’s Razor is the mkind fo mistake a 4-year old makes. There may be some unknown facts that fix the holes, if there are any holes..
Comment by Sammy Finkelman — 8/16/2011 @ 2:44 pm
I strongly and respectfully disagree. This amateur sleuthing is fascinating and fun, but I no longer believe the timelines, DMs, email headers, etc are going to lead to any sort of a smoking gun. It’s just discussion and going round and round now. I just don’t think there is anything significant that will be found. And of course I could be wrong. And of course this statement could make me look like a manipulative sockpuppet!
I am thinking Patterico has something more significant and for obvious reasons can’t tell us.
But I am loving the theories and I can’t wait to see who is behind this. My money is still on a politician.
prmetime (1d022f) — 8/16/2011 @ 3:29 pmThis speaks to the point I was trying to make, Rocksem. If the real material (i.e., Weiner responses) collected via fake personas is true, then how is it a sting of any consequence on Breitbart if it turns out the fake personas are fake?
If perpetrators were out to get Breitbart by using the same methods that helped Breitbart launch Biggovernment.com so spectacularly — i.e., eliciting genuine and damning responses by using fake personas — then they sure weren’t thinking things through too much.
Greg (bc8186) — 8/16/2011 @ 3:31 pmComment by Greg — 8/16/2011 @ 3:31 pm
Because if there weren’t documented indiscretions with real women, only fake teens involved, the story, when first “verified” by the likes of Tommy, would have been been a big splash, then a big bust when the fact that the teens were fake was revealed.
Just like participants didn’t expect the dic pic tweet, we suspect that the sockmaster didn’t know for sure that there was much more illicit stuff already going on with real live Meaghan & Lisa. So the sockmaster thought that the stuff he was working on with the Nikki & Marianela characters was going to be the big scandal news.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/16/2011 @ 3:45 pm#373
Thank you for pointing out that Broussard said herself she had no interest in politics. This is how she claimed she developed an interest in Anthony Weiner:
It all stems back to an e-mail Meagan Broussard sent after a class at Lamar University. The teacher showed a video of Congressman Weiner.
From this article: http://setxhomepage.com/fulltext/?nxd_id=139097
Broussard is a 26 year-old nursing student, btw
#372
Here is the specific mention of Broussard’s May 5th activity from the NYT article:
On May 5, Mr. Wolfe told him that he had a friend who knew Matt Drudge who had said that a scandal involving a member of Congress was coming soon. The same day that Meagan Broussard, 26, of Texas, said that she had received an e-mail from Mr. Weiner with a photo she had asked him to take, while holding up a white piece of paper that said “me.”
Broussard’s contact allegedly shopped the story to both Drudge and Breitbart. Breitbart was aware of the story as early as May 20th. It is unclear if he had the photos at that time.
The infamous “underwear tweet,” the same one sent to Cordova on May 27th, was sent to Broussard on May 18th (presumably via Facebook.) This according to Broussard in her ABC interview. So that picture did exist and was available to others prior to May 27th…
[note: fished from spam filter. –Stashiu]
scoovy (0e137d) — 8/16/2011 @ 3:46 pm@RocksEm
I definitely don’t agree that there are some people on Twitter who are “ridiculously” protective of me.
And also, to this point that you’ve made:
What has been released, while denied by Gennette, has been particularly damaging to her. If the DMs to Nikki from GC are accurate I can see why someone would not want them released.
I don’t think that anything was particularly damaging. I knew Nikki was fake, and I’ve known that I have proof that I knew she was fake. The fabricated DMs look pretty bad but I would never have to worry about those damaging me, because I know that nobody would be able to prove that they’re real… because they’re fake.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/16/2011 @ 3:54 pmOh?
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/16/2011 @ 3:56 pm@Wittier
Yes? Were you unaware of this?
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/16/2011 @ 4:02 pmWhen it turned out O’Keefe wasn’t a real pimp, did it derail ACORN story?
Greg (bc8186) — 8/16/2011 @ 4:05 pmComment by Gennette — 8/16/2011 @ 4:02 pm
I thought we discussed and you called it intuition that Nikki was fake.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/16/2011 @ 4:15 pmIf Breitbart published with no stinger on record ( No “Chris Hanson”) the exposure of Reids as fake would have been gold for the MSM. It wouldn’t matter AW DMs were true, they would be labeled as false as the Reids. Breitbart would be the liar making up evidence that the left has contended all along.
If you look back in early tweets and threads here you will see I was one of the first to suggest a theory this was a hit on both Weiner/Breitbart by a liberal rival of Weiner’s. But only if this was by professionals. I do not think this was a professional hit job.
This was a sting on Weiner alone. DW/JR has never been Anti-Brietbart to my knowledge, at least not early on. DW, for whatever reason, is unwilling to go on record. Goatsred was an attempt to get a real face for the sting which DW knew Breibart would need and they were working to get Brietbart to publish but he wasn’t happy with Goatsred as a face and passed. I think if he hadn’t passed DW would have outed Reids to Goatsred and attempted to get him to tell Breitbart Goatsred was the Reids. Or maybe just go on record himself once he had Breitbart’s full support.
But then the dic pic hit. DW was only one to see it and it was to good too resist. Exactly what DW had been after all along. He RTed & there was no extricating him from the story despite DWs constant attempts by saying he had done nothing but RT and so didn’t matter. Which was true actually.
DW couldn’t be both the source of RT AND Reids too though. That would have called into question the dic pic and lent credence to the hacker theory. The Reids were no longer needed, considering the other women coming out too, and the Tommy story was an attempt to make them disappear. “Nothing here…we love Weiner.” I think Marianela’s story about Breitbart was never meant to be taken seriously and was an attempt to establish their liberal bona fides with Tommy so he would publish statement and not question IDs too much.
I think it would have been left at that had Gennette not told the NYT she thought the Reids were fake. That is what set “John Reid” completely off as his Tweets made clear when he announced he would publish. John Reid is an attempt to vindicate DW’s work in stinging AW and damage Cordova by proving she was lying.
DW probably thought he had Gennette completely fooled, perhaps he did, and had the DMs he thought proved that. The Part 3 thread.
JR’s running down of Weiner to Patterico is not to get Weiner. Weiner’s been got. It’s an attempt to show that that DW had already gotten him as Nikki and to get Cordova.
Anyway, that is about where I am at now. Tomorrow something else will come out and I’ll chuck all that out the window.
Rocksem (0471ae) — 8/16/2011 @ 4:24 pm@Wittier
I said, proof that I knew that she was fake. Not hard proof that she actually was fake.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/16/2011 @ 4:35 pmBut I was as certain as you can be without being 100% sure and I have conversations discussing this certainty.
Perhaps a more precise way to say it is ‘I have proof I was convinced she was fake, and that Weiner was convinced she was fake.’
To some, if you say you ‘knew’ something, you are saying you can justify that knowledge with absolute deductive proof of some kind rather than inductive reasoning (IE an intuition).
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/16/2011 @ 4:46 pm@Rocksem…
I liked that post and nevermind if I think it’s a good theory; I like my theory, but I amend it with lots of posts.
But this line of yours just cracked me up…But then the dic pic hit. DW was only one to see it and it was to good too resist
There is nothing wrong with it,but I immediately thought of South Park and the Lil Crime Stoppers episode, which is probably my all time favorite.
I do not mean that in any derogatory way whatsoever, it just gave me a chuckle.
prmetime (1d022f) — 8/16/2011 @ 4:49 pm@Dustin
Yes. That’s what I was trying to say. Thanks.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/16/2011 @ 4:51 pmThat’s fine, we’ll disagree. I don’t have any animosity towards you. I could be, and probably am, totally wrong about things. But I have seen people who will automatically RT Tweets critical of you or arguing with you about Weinergate, with criticism. People who only seem to be twitter friends.
You don’t think DMs showing you as the girl flirting with a a middle age newlywed congressman would be particularly damaging? I think if those Dms are accurate that in combination with the dic pic “jokingly” sent to you and Weiner’s reputation will not be good for your career. I doubt Broussard will be working for the NYT or a TV station any time soon. Even Ginger Lee didn’t want to be known as that although she seems to be using it in her advertising.
Rocksem (0471ae) — 8/16/2011 @ 5:04 pmNo problem. As long as you respect Ma Authority!
Rocksem (0471ae) — 8/16/2011 @ 5:06 pmThat you will not publish and which, when shown to Patterico, he states “logically suggests”, does not prove, that you thought Nikki was fake.
Listen, I’m just a person observing all this stuff. I’m willing to believe you thought she was fake. But I can only deal with what can be observed. No one is gold here. No one’s word is gospel truth.
Rocksem (0471ae) — 8/16/2011 @ 5:13 pmIt’s a language difference. I’ll just take it for what it is without arguing. Thanks for clarifying, all.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/16/2011 @ 5:22 pmNo problem. As long as you respect Ma Authority!
Oh, thank God you’re a South Park fan! We could learn a lot from those 4th graders 🙂
prmetime (1d022f) — 8/16/2011 @ 5:27 pm<3 SP
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/16/2011 @ 5:36 pmYou’re right. I doubt anyone can prove those are real at this point. But I do have a test which might prove they were faked, or add validity to them.
Gennette, you admit the DMs talking, hypothetically, about dating celebrities are real correct?
If Pattrico can check, or if not is willing to forward a couple of the DM emails to Koam (which I think will still work). We can test something.
If these DM notifications are faked the email might show it. The faking would have needed to be done in the actual email when it was forwarded. These emails from twitter of the DM are not one solid image but a series of images and text formatted in HTML. If a fake email was compared to the celebrity email in source there would be subtle differences in the html with regard to placement of images and formatting which would show. If both are identical except for text content and times, etc. It’s more likely both are as real as we are ever going to be able to show them to be.
Rocksem (0471ae) — 8/16/2011 @ 5:54 pm<SP too. Cartman would get to the bottom of this real quick, and civil rights be damned!!
prmetime (1d022f) — 8/16/2011 @ 5:57 pmoops, i left my heart out. <3SP
prmetime (1d022f) — 8/16/2011 @ 5:59 pm@RocksEm
I’m sure there would be a way to prove that they were real if JR9 really wanted to. But he won’t because they’re fake.
The ones about hypothetically dating celebrities are real though, yes.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/16/2011 @ 6:18 pmWhen it turned out O’Keefe wasn’t a real pimp, did it derail ACORN story?
Comment by Greg — 8/16/2011 @ 4:05 pm
If he published DMs from (fake) Nikki and (fake) Marianella, but was initially sold on the teens as real, he would not know the source was fake.
So: AB knew O’Keefe, the source, wasn’t a real pimp, but would have thought Nikki and Marianella, the new sources, were real. That is the difference and the vulnerability to AB.
Baldeagle26 (3d2bbd) — 8/16/2011 @ 6:20 pmEven if JR was real it would be hard to prove the emails were real for certain without some kind of independent verification from the email provider and or twitter at this point.
Rocksem (0471ae) — 8/16/2011 @ 6:22 pmNo problem. As long as you respect Ma Authority!
Comment by Rocksem — 8/16/2011 @ 5:06 pm and
Comment by prmetime — 8/16/2011 @ 5:27 pm and
Comment by prmetime — 8/16/2011 @ 5:57 pm
Shouldn’t it be: “Ma Authoritay!”
Baldeagle26 (3d2bbd) — 8/16/2011 @ 6:23 pmWell, if we look at the timeline, you have to go back farther in time:
During the election before the Democratic candidate was chosen, rumors surfaced about Hillary and Huma. VERY quickly after, an item appeared in the NY Post Page Six about Huma being interested in Anthony Weiner.
The Clintons are a powerful political force in New York. Anthony Weiner knows this. He is a very ambitious man and had his eye on the Mayoral race. Bill Clinton officiates the Huma-Weiner wedding.
Now, AW was just downright stupid. It was so easy to expose him because he (literally) exposed himself. The question is who benefitted from destroying him?
When AW’s antics are exposed by Breitbart, he immediately does what any politician or celeb does — goes into damage control mode — he lies (obviously thinking it would be a one or two-day story not understanding he is standing in front of an unleashed locomotive,) and he also says he hired an Internet Security company to help him.
Whose benefit was it to try to cover it all up and make it all go away?
The sock puppetry is gobbleygook, done obviously to push agendas and confuse.
When did Neil Rauhauser enter the picture? And why does he describe himself in his Linked-In profile as “Hitman at Twitter Lesbian Mafia.” (Is it his real Linked-In profile?)
Fast forward: What was so flippin’ important that a person/or people would stick his/her/their necks out — three times now is it — and think he/she/they can get away with domestic terrorism, including one directed at a very well-regarded assistant D.A. in Los Angeles?
That’s the problem with evil. It doesn’t know when to stop and eventually, it destroys itself.
Anita Busch (a025dd) — 8/16/2011 @ 6:24 pmRocksem & Genette,
What do you mean exactly by proving these are ‘real’?
Are you hoping for a real live person that is willing to go on record with their identity?
What sort of proof are you thinking would be satisfying? I am puzzled here.
prmetime (1d022f) — 8/16/2011 @ 6:26 pmI would say proving there are real would mean that they can be shown to have come from twitter unaltered. My test can show they are not altered, at least in relation to others, but only the email provider or Twitter can prove they were sent or delivered unaltered from Twitter.
Rocksem (0471ae) — 8/16/2011 @ 6:37 pmTwitter can show, if records still exist, if the email was sent as is even if the person it was sent to was a sock.
Yes, you’re right. In fact that’s how I wrote it but it was altered by an evil sock named spell checker.
Rocksem (0471ae) — 8/16/2011 @ 6:40 pmHaHaHa
Baldeagle26 (3d2bbd) — 8/16/2011 @ 6:43 pm@Rocksem
Ok, gotcha. It sounds reasonable if you can do a bit of tech on your own.
I was afraid you were either looking for Twitter to give you records (and that ain’t gonna happen) or hoping a verifiable human steps up, and I suspect that ain’t gonna happen either.
prmetime (1d022f) — 8/16/2011 @ 6:57 pmGennette,
I have no specific questions as to the whole cyber-mystery; but I have a personal one. Feel free to not answer. I will not think it is suspicious if you don’t want to answer.
What is your personal theory as to who is behind this? I am not asking for a name, rather why do you think this went down? If that is too specific, can you tell me if you think the target was AW, or Breitbart, or someone else?
prmetime (1d022f) — 8/16/2011 @ 7:03 pmGood comment. What you say makes sense to me, Anita.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 8/16/2011 @ 7:09 pmI don’t follow.
Patterico (f724ca) — 8/16/2011 @ 7:10 pmkoam/wittier:
I just looked at a screenshot I made of a comment at a Stranded Wind diary. Neal said (went to a different computer so I’m paraphrasing from memory but this is close): Weiner is gone. This is about getting at Breitbart.
So.
You may well be right.
But can you make the case for me that Neal could be John Reid, yet not care about a) highlighting the RT, or b) emphasizing the Ethel story? Both of which hurt Weiner?
And if you want to say Neal was dwp6776, but not PatriotUSA76, he still emphasized the Ethel story. And my God he sounded like Patriot.
And John Reid has to be the same person. I have so much evidence to that effect.
My head hurts.
Patterico (f724ca) — 8/16/2011 @ 7:29 pmBut what about Pink?
Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 8/16/2011 @ 7:42 pmPatterico, I know your question was addressed to koam, but just in case he is not here, may I address it for a moment?
I just recently learned several hours ago that Neal was connected to Kos. I have been reading his diaries off and on (I can only take a minute or two and I’m a fast reader) since then and I have seen nothing that would remotely resemble JR. Not even close, although I can see him being Lulzsec.
I know I haven’t been following this as closely as many others, and I may be missing quite a bit. But sometimes it is useful to see things from a different perspective.
I am just throwing it out there and I understand if you are suspicious about me, but these cyber messages have been discussed in 6 billion posts and it’s still going, and I think the motive is way more important.
I will completely understand if you ban me! 😉
prmetime (1d022f) — 8/16/2011 @ 7:52 pmMan, I’ve lost the thread. Who is Pink, in all this? I thought I had my scorecard properly filled out!
Dianna (f12db5) — 8/16/2011 @ 7:53 pmYes,who is Pink? I thought I had a handle on the last thread, but it didn’t transfer well after post 200 or so. I will keep plugging.
But really, Lee, who is Pink?
prmetime (1d022f) — 8/16/2011 @ 7:57 pmPink sang the hit song “Get the Party Started”.
Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 8/16/2011 @ 7:58 pmI knew that, but I was hoping for something more sinister and underground, Lee!
prmetime (1d022f) — 8/16/2011 @ 7:59 pmLee, you’re mean!
But funny, so I will forgive you!
Dianna (f12db5) — 8/16/2011 @ 8:02 pmYes
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/16/2011 @ 8:03 pmYes
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/16/2011 @ 8:05 pmhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rMGb0mpOKrs
10:30 – 11:40
Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 8/16/2011 @ 8:07 pmPink, who sang the hit song, also banged Weiner, according to Weiner. He bragged about it to, I think, Meaghan (or Lisa). Presumably the bang was before his wedding.
(I’m going from memory here. I don’t remember where I read this. I’m not making it up.)
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/16/2011 @ 8:18 pm#424 – koam?
Really? That’s…bizarre.
Dianna (f12db5) — 8/16/2011 @ 8:22 pmI assume you’re not following the part about you not agreeing with us.
I had asserted that the main mission of the teen sock project was to take down whatever media (presumably Breitbart) would publish the fake sting (and a couple of people posting here today seem to agree) and lately you’ve been indicating that the main mission was to take down Weiner.
If I didn’t understand, “I don’t follow,” please let me know.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/16/2011 @ 8:24 pmComment by Dianna — 8/16/2011 @ 8:22 pm
Really. And I’d completely forgotten about it and hadn’t considered it part of the mystery. It seems that Lee knew that too and is perhaps making a joke. Or not?
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/16/2011 @ 8:26 pmkoam, I like you, but dude you went too far. Pink bangs AW? Really? He’s already a legitimate sleeze ball, no need to add News of the World stories!
prmetime (1d022f) — 8/16/2011 @ 8:29 pmThank you.
Those Weinergate “RedEyes” were some of the best shows ever.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/16/2011 @ 8:31 pmComment by prmetime — 8/16/2011 @ 8:29 pm
Check that video. I’m pretty sure I’d read it elsewhere and knew what they were talking about on RedEye.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/16/2011 @ 8:34 pmComment by prmetime — 8/16/2011 @ 8:29 pm
Oh and there’s ample evidence of many attractive younger women who find RAW attractive. We don’t have to understand it, but it’s a fact.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/16/2011 @ 8:36 pmKoam’s right about the Pink aspect. Though I have no idea if it’s accurate.
prmetime, I do wish the story didn’t include a lot of coarse references, but it just does. This is an R rated conversation on the best day. I haven’t made honey mustard in two months.
And I just started digging into Darrah Ford’s forum activities. Which let me just stipulate so others do not have to wade in there… Mike was dealing with someone who was obviously insincere and deliberately dramatic. Darrah’s tweets and Kos comments about Mike, combined with Neal’s recent advocacy of her case, carry zero credibility.
Thinking about Anita’s point, I have to imagine the list of Twitter specialist goons to consult on ‘internet security’ has to be pretty damn short, and Neal’s on that list. I suppose he could have simply reached out to Darrah as a common foe, or there could be more to this.
It’s not clear to me how we can link Dan/JR9/etc with Neal at this time, but I do not see anyone jumping up and down demanding we do that.
Weiner messed up on his own, Dan capitalizes on it, the story grows until Weiner resigns, and Neal is reacting to all that. Could be.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/16/2011 @ 8:44 pmHe’s got power. He’s famous. If you’re ideologically inclined, he’s making a difference.
Once you get specific, I worry about the women who did find him attractive. Some of his comments were just plain ghastly. But what do I know?
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/16/2011 @ 8:47 pmComment by koam @wittier — 8/16/2011 @ 8:36 pm
I do not understand the comment and I have googled a few definitions of RAW.
I did not mean my comment to be insulting in any way. I just thought you were kind of reaching with the Pink/AW thing. AW may be a sleazebag, but I see no reason to bring Pink into this.
I am sorry if that didn’t come out the way I intended.
I really like reading your comments and take on things.
prmetime (1d022f) — 8/16/2011 @ 8:48 pmKoam,
You may well be right.
Patterico (f724ca) — 8/16/2011 @ 8:49 pmRep Anthony Weiner = RAW.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/16/2011 @ 8:52 pmprmetime, I do wish the story didn’t include a lot of coarse references, but it just does
WOW! I am so not getting my main points across.
My male buddies have downloaded so much porn on my laptop that I finally created a new id for them. And I have accompanied them to strip clubs when we want to drink, and the want naked! I am not a prude, and I will make sure to read my messages before I hit submit.
I just like integrity. I had no idea I was coming across this way. 🙁 Thank ypu for telling me.
prmetime (1d022f) — 8/16/2011 @ 8:55 pmKoam,
Yeah – good catch.
Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 8/16/2011 @ 8:56 pmOk, and now that I understand RAW, I agree completely. Power is quite the aphrodisiac for women. I have succommed to this myself. Thank god I’m older now.
prmetime (1d022f) — 8/16/2011 @ 9:04 pmNo sweat. Perhaps the miscommunication is with my interpretation.
Anyway, you’re right it’s not like anyone here knows what this Pink lady did with Weiner. That’s not important anyway.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/16/2011 @ 9:07 pmCheck that video. I’m pretty sure I’d read it elsewhere and knew what they were talking about on RedEye.
Comment by koam @wittier — 8/16/2011 @ 8:34 pm
Ok, that video is 41 minutes. I watched 13 minutes and they didn’t get to the point. I like Breitbart but no way in hell am I going to watch a 41 minutes of a video looking for good parts. Tell me the good minutes.
prmetime (1d022f) — 8/16/2011 @ 9:09 pmIf you got it from RedEye, you were incredibly prescient!
Greg (bc8186) — 8/16/2011 @ 9:12 pmThank you Dustin, I am really embarrassed as I have made a bit of an ass of myself.
Are you this nice IRL? I am going to attempt to surf this weekend in a very hostile spot. I will buy beer, lunch, and dinner if you can you can defuse the lineup! Are you in SoCal?
Anyway, I don’t comment on many threads, but I do read and you are just a genuine good guy. One of the reasons I read comments ;} Thank you for being nice ‘)
prmetime (1d022f) — 8/16/2011 @ 9:21 pmI hadn’t noticed that that comment by Neal at Kos.
I got “wind” that Neal could have been involved here from the top of the monster thread, I guess. And from Preston’s comments reported by Lee & her intern.
So if we accept that, you’re asking why Neal (or someone from his team) would act in a way that hurt Weiner?
I think RAW was an acceptable sacrifice. A minor loss if it meant bringing down Breitbart, who is effective at dismantling what Neal calls “valuable resources.” As I said earlier, Weiner was about to fall in any case, of his own accord, one way or another. And with NY losing 2 House seats, at least 1 sitting NY Dem was going to be displaced by the US Constitution & 2010 Census. So why not let it be the guy with a stack of skeletons? And why not “get something big” for the loss?
Breitbart is way bigger trophy than Weiner was an asset. The guy who’d brought down AW would become a legend in certain circles.
I’d posted earlier on the Part 2 of Conversations with Puppets
Comment by koam @witier — 8/11/2011 @ 10:34 am
I haven’t said Neal was either dwp6776 or PatriotUSA76. But I thought dwp6776 was PatriotUSA76 reincarnated.
Do you think it’s Stefanie? or Beth? or who?
Looking forward to your next blog post. And my head hurts too. But that’s the point, I guess.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/16/2011 @ 9:26 pmHa. I didn’t remember that.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/16/2011 @ 9:29 pmLee and I both posted the 1 minute that was important to watch. 10:30 – 11:40.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/16/2011 @ 9:39 pmRe: Pink — if you want to cut to the chase…
Greg (bc8186) — 8/16/2011 @ 9:43 pmNice pic Gennette (no sarc) … now I finally do believe you are “real”; i.e. the Gennette commenting here is the same person whose pics were publicized etc.
It is funny that Ron B tweeted that he wasn’t caught up in reading all the comments here – yet he read mine, because he questioned you about the NY Post reporter etc.
Crazy …. like a fox.
Miranda (4104db) — 8/16/2011 @ 10:33 pmIt is funny that Ron B tweeted that he wasn’t caught up in reading all the comments here…
Comment by Miranda — 8/16/2011 @ 10:33 pm
And wasn’t he just miffed since there’s more than one thread on the topic- the poor beleaguered dear 😉
ppk_pixie (901c40) — 8/16/2011 @ 11:01 pm@elissa #307: It appeared you could barely contain your glee when you read that a known Republican staffer was the intermediary connecting Broussard with Breitbart.
It wasn’t glee that it was a Republican. Not at ALL. What DRJ said made a light bulb go off in my head in something that might help Patrick.
There are sociopaths/psychopaths of all political denominations … whether those right wing nuts who murder doctors and set off bombs at abortion clinics to to the liberal environmental nut jobs.
That was my only point: Throw all biases out the window and let the facts emerge. The media made that mistake early on with Giffords shooter Jared Lee Loughner, too.
The really great thing here is that law enforcement (LE) has so many investigative tools at its disposal. And, they have something that no journalist or blogger has: Subpoena power.
Anita Busch (a025dd) — 8/16/2011 @ 11:22 pmGennette has more restraint than I do.
Most of us would have wanted to flip him off in that picture. Which may be the closest we come tto a consensus.
Whiskey (d9735a) — 8/16/2011 @ 11:26 pmLet’s just all pray that they catch the bastards.
Anita Busch (a025dd) — 8/16/2011 @ 11:26 pm@216 “Is it really impossible to spoof UTC?”
The “UTC Time” displayed in the forwarding header is taken from the “Date” header in the original DM notification received from Twitter.
It is placed there by Twitter when the message is sent from Twitter’s servers! There’s no way to spoof it.
Molon Labe (dc676c) — 8/16/2011 @ 11:49 pm@220 “Gmail also uses the time set on the computer viewing the email.”
To clarify, I think you mean that for the purpose of *formatting* the message time in the forwarding header, Gmail uses the TZ set on the computer viewing the email.
In all cases, the time used is the “Date” header in the original message, which is placed there by the sending server (i.e., Twitter).
Molon Labe (dc676c) — 8/16/2011 @ 11:52 pm@335 The TZ setting on nikki’s account isn’t important in and of itself.
The point is that if you know the nikki Twitter TZ, you may be able to determine the TZ of the computer that was used to forward the DM notifications to Patterico based on the date format in the forwarding header.
That is, if we know Nikki is in Central, and we see that the forwarding header shows a local time 1 hour later, then the computer that sent that forwarded message is in Eastern TZ.
Molon Labe (dc676c) — 8/17/2011 @ 12:12 amnice hair
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/17/2011 @ 4:25 amPatterico,
This is one of JR’s tweets:
Everything we have seen so far has been stuff sent to JR9 & Starchild. Has JR given you anything that shows “Nikki’s side of convo”? Koam you?
Rocksem (0471ae) — 8/17/2011 @ 5:24 amYes, that is correct. But not just for that but when you are in your account viewing a list of messages or the message itself it does the same.
Rocksem (0471ae) — 8/17/2011 @ 5:27 amNo. I asked for that. JR9 promised that, but I didn’t see that.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/17/2011 @ 5:28 amWhat picture did Gennette post?
Pious Agnostic (291f9a) — 8/17/2011 @ 6:59 amComment by Pious Agnostic — 8/17/2011 @ 6:59 am
http://lockerz.com/s/130360024
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/17/2011 @ 7:01 amComment by koam @wittier — 8/17/2011 @ 7:01 am
Thanks. That’s pretty funny, Gennette.
Pious Agnostic (291f9a) — 8/17/2011 @ 7:13 amShe deleted the tweet w/ the pic, btw.
Miranda (4104db) — 8/17/2011 @ 7:14 amComment by Miranda — 8/17/2011 @ 7:14 am
I can still see the tweet and I have restarted my computer to install Windows Updates today.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/17/2011 @ 8:30 amThe only reason I even knew who Ronbryn was? He compared Dan Wolfe to Jarred Loughner and I saw it. When I commented “WOW” to that tweet, a dialogue ensued. It wasn’t a pleasant one. I have felt people throw around accusations not keeping in mind the crazy people who are just looking for an excuse. (no, the irony is not lost on me) Ron is very good at what he does.(manipulate) After he accused me of being a “sock” (I didn’t even know what that was)and hiding my ID, I made the comment that if I were trying to hide, why would I use a photo of my own pottery as an avatar. He made a complimentary remark, and that is when he earned my trust…temporarily. This is just one exchange between us. (by the way, I never hid my name and even had a link to my pottery site before I stupidly decided to share my opinion about Dan Wolfe and people started hunting me)My original account was hacked. DM’s that I had deleted more than a year prior were showing up as coming from and being sent to the wrong recipients) I was advised to delete the account by someone I would trust with my life. Because enough time passed since deleting that account, I have now been able to again use my original account. When I was told people were using my photo to try and physically find me, this all changed. I then became very afraid personally and have felt unsafe since. So anyone who wishes to accuse me based on that, has never been stalked. I had a stalker for YEARS that I never knew existed until he showed up standing right in front of me reciting things I had said on the Internet. There is a lot of assuming going on in this. I still cannot believe I became a part of it. I can assure you, I will think twice before I ever try to defend someone I believe is innocent again. I do not know anything about Dan Wolfe other than what I can glean from my own perceptions. I did not like that people were unfair to him/accused without proof and that is where my involvement begins and ends. I didn’t know him before this, never heard his name and only knew about Weiner because of Megyn Kelly’s smackdown. I have once again sent Patterico my phone number and have told him to feel free to call me.
Ron, You claim to be some kind of defender of the innocent. I am innocent yet you are trying to make me look guilty. Can you assure me no one will physically find me? If you can, then copy/paste away. I have done nothing wrong. If you can’t, stop being a hypocrite and putting innocent people at risk of harm. Everyone can’t be guilty of everything. At least not in OUR reality. I knew someone like you once. He was so up and down and paranoid, he used to print out every single thing anyone ever sent to him as well as what he sent to others. When I say he had a mountain of paper, that is a gross understatement. He also only used pay phones and believed everyone was someone else. He was living in a different world than the rest of us when he wasn’t taking his medication.(even when he was on his meds, he was either depressed or manic) He also put people at risk with his delusional behavior.
Anyone who wants to question me is free to. I am and always have been completely honest.
Artist_R Artist(R)
@ronbryn I’m sorry.It is very hurtful.If you try to defend yourself,you are accused of being 2 defensive.If you do nothing, you are elusive
ronbryn Ron Brynaert
@Artist_R yep it’s like throwing accused witches in the water…if they drown they’re not a witch yay!!!!!!!!
(No, this irony is not lost on me either)
Wondering (786412) — 8/17/2011 @ 8:31 amAnita – Where DID this come from:
I understand an Issa staffer was invovled in some of this business, but I had not been aware of any connection to Broussard’s approach of Breitbart through an intermediary.
Mike Stack was at least a former friend of the Issa staffer that I have seen mentioned – Mike, can you clarify your relationship to that person and tell us whether you know anything about his contact with Broussard and Breitbart, if there was such contact?
IOW, did you know him to be an intermediary for Broussard?
I am leaving room for mix-up and misinterpretation at this point. I have not seen this particular connection mentioned before, I’ve been curious about the intermediary for days now.
If the Issa staffer you are friends with is also Broussard’s intermediary… how do you know him? Did he play a role in any other aspect of the story?
SarahW (af7312) — 8/17/2011 @ 8:42 amI am done with this. I am amazed by a lot of things but mostly by the proof of the old adage “No good deed goes unpunished.” Maybe I am naive, but I believe Dan is a real person who may have been used. I try not to(I am sure I have failed but I sincerely do try) assume or accuse without proof, but that is my assessment based on what little I know. I asked Dan only a few questions in our exchanges. The first was “Is your real name Dan Wolfe.” Recently, I asked “How did you meet Mike Stack?” His account of what happened has never been inconsistent in my opinion.
Wondering (786412) — 8/17/2011 @ 9:02 amPatterico, the offer will always stand. Call me. I have nothing to hide. Other than that, I am finished defending myself. I want nothing more to do with Dan or Razor or anyone. I tried to do what was instilled in me,(I have thought of my Dad many times during this) but have found that it isn’t worth it. My Dad was a Lt Commander in the Navy. I may as well have also been because that kind of American pride has been around me my whole life. I do not like liars, users, opportunists, power abusers….I don’t know what reward people can find in being dishonest.
Okay, that’s it. I hope answers are found soon and the innocent are free again to ..well, be free.
The man I am thinking of is Seamus Kraft, that guy the smoking gun made so much of. (I hate to bring up such a sore subject.)
SG says Kraft was “Seamus Kraft (pictured above), press secretary and “director of digital strategy,” for the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform”
He had contact with Mike/”Wolfe” about the underaged girl angle.
Mike was referred to Kraft – SG says Mike says he was referred to Kraft by a woman who had recently worked for Issa’s committee. The female staffer, Stack said, “thought I would be good at keeping Seamus and Mr. Issa up to date with ethics and BHO [Barack Hussein Obama] issues around the clock.
When did this referral happen?
Who was the female? Did she appear out of the blue? Was she a mere atwaintance? (Twitter acquaintance)? A well-known person or a bit of a mystery?
Most importantly, did Kraft have ANYTHING to do as intermediary for Broussard?
SarahW (af7312) — 8/17/2011 @ 9:18 am“atwaintance?”
Oh, SarahW….
😛
Pious Agnostic (291f9a) — 8/17/2011 @ 9:22 amOops sorry I see the tweet again.
Miranda (4104db) — 8/17/2011 @ 9:40 amSarah, did you post something once about early Patriot follows?
Greg (bc8186) — 8/17/2011 @ 9:46 amSarah, do you mean the woman referred to here:
“MORE: The Smoking Gun didn’t transcribe one email in particular in full, so I’ll remedy that now:
From: Michael Stack [email address redacted—YAFB]
To: Dan Wolfe [email address redacted—YAFB]
Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2011 2:51PM
Subject: Re: check this out bro
This guy Seamus Kraft is awesome. We were introduced by a writer at the Daily Caller who saw my postings at Weasel Zippers (I’ll send to you) and referred me to this person named Ashley Swope. She thought I would be good at keeping Seamus and Mr Issa up to date with ethics and BHO issues around the clock. They have proven to be great allies. Follow mr Issa at @darrelissa
Talk in a bit ”
http://www.rumproast.com/index.php/site/comments/after_weinergate_coming_soon_issagate/
and here:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/artist-53/darrell-issa-anthony-weiner_n_873161_91700188.html
Miranda (4104db) — 8/17/2011 @ 10:09 amI just found this. I’m not saying any of it is correct, true, verified, etc. But it’s about whether their could be a connection between the Meagan info and the Nikki info getting to AB.
I’m in a meeting so haven’t even read the whole article…but maybe it will lead to something of interest as it’s part of the current discussion.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/17/2011 @ 10:48 am@SarahW #467 … DRJ posted it. It was a link from ABC News talking about how the information went from Broussard to Breitbart.
Anita Busch (a025dd) — 8/17/2011 @ 11:06 amComment by SarahW — 8/17/2011 @ 8:42 am
RE: Issa staffer Seamus Kraft..Following our previous usual pattern of discussion, I will send you emails as proof.
Seamus never had anything to do with the MB part of the story, (at least as much as I know).
Everything that is contained in the news stories is true.
This goes from how I was introduced to why and to the names involved.
As far as I am concerned, all of my contact with him was of a professional nature. I can post screenshots or forward them to Sarah.
Then I wrote to him regarding the RAW rumors. He never replied.
After a little while, I wrote to him,apologizing for even sending the “information”.
He wrote back that “it was no problem”
On my follow up to this post ( I am in a hurry to get something done right now) I will post both dates of these conversations.
And,after these two emails, not a response back. Ever.
Many theories abound because of this, and some are screwier than the next.
Will return in about an hour.
Then, I’d like to talk to “Wondering”, and thank/discuss some of what was discussed in his earlier post about DW.
goatsred (722631) — 8/17/2011 @ 11:30 amWho released the gym photos of Weiner?
SusanT (355042) — 8/17/2011 @ 11:34 amMike, I have no facts, only my own perceptions. Fact and truth are two separate things. For example, Ron asserts all tweets as fact. Are there “words” in Tweets? Yes (fact) Can we confirm FACT from out of context, one-sided, incomplete, questionable, unknown, unclear meaning from them? Many do, but in FACT we cannot. (All perception; aka someone else’s “truth”)
That is why this is all futile (in my opinion) until professionals have access to ALL of it. THEN the likelihood of a FACTUAL outcome/conclusion grows exponentially.
The ironic part is, that’s the whole reason I am even typing here right now. I didn’t like that those who didn’t have facts, pretended they did.(about Dan)By the way, I don’t have facts about Dan either. Just perceptions.
I have been like an angry cheerleader. I just want people to stop assuming/accusing without facts and in the process harming innocent people.(not kidding, when I go to the mailbox now I look around for strange cars)
Have I been curt, a smartass, flippant? Yes. Have I been frustrated? Yes. Have I been afraid for my own safety because of irresponsible people? Yes. Have I tried to be true to my values? Above all.
Finally, do I have any facts that any of you would care about? NO
One thing Dan has said to me probably a hundred times. “I wish I had never seen that Tweet. It ruined my life.”
Wondering (786412) — 8/17/2011 @ 12:53 pmCall me a softie, but that saddens me and is why I care enough to say a word. I could get really philosophical with all of this but the thing that stands out to me most is the destruction. From bad and unscrupulous “journalism” to people threatening others to falsely accusing and a whole lot in-between…I have definitely seen the ugly side of humans.
Mike, there is no way I will get involved. I tried to help and look what happened. Sorry, but no thanks.
By the way Mike, I am a female.(second time someone thought I was male. I guess I should start being submissive.) (ugh)<smart ass comment
Wondering (786412) — 8/17/2011 @ 12:57 pmI anybody else’s antenna twitching?
Pious Agnostic (6048a8) — 8/17/2011 @ 1:21 pmMiranda – thank you for filling in those blanks for me.
Mike, thanks for being direct and open about your dealings, and what you know, as always. Miranda’s links say you were put in touch with Swope through a Daily Caller writer. Was this all pre-Weinerama or was the referral by DC to swope related somehow to Weiner’s shenanigans?
Susan – I know some shirtless photos were found by ABC at a website linked to an alias email used by Weiner (and used with Broussard). I don’t know if they are the gym pictures or different ones.
DRJ and Anita- I see, no one specific is alluded to by ABC – just her “close friend” who knew drudge, “with Republican political ties.” I see there is no direct, or really even hinted, link to Seamus the Issa staffer.
Breitbart identified that person as a male, but the intermediare is still a little mystery.
Greg’s timeline outlines some of the discrepancies between ABC’s outline of Broussard’s story, and the timing of actual events – for example, she “came forward” in advance of Weiner’s errant tweet.
Lee told me looking into any of this was barking up the wrong tree.
His implication – the raccoon is in the other tree. One takeaway from my recent struggles with suburban raccoon squatters, though, is that sometimes there is a surprise raccoon in the wrong tree too.
If Broussard’s dealings with Weiner underly the rumors of scandal “wolfe” alluded to, there is necessarily a connection through the rumor mill to “Wolfe.” That “Wolfe” made all the rumors up or they relate to someone else, is of course possible too. After all, there was no shortage of POTENTIAL Weiner skeezasters on the horizon.
Why would Broussard, who said she wished to be private, come forward, pre-twitter scandal, after confiding in a Republican friend with political ties, and allow her story to be shopped to the likes of Drudge and Breitbart? Did she allow it or did the friend take it upon himself? She certainly handed everything over to ABC (for a fee) but her story was being shopped well before it’s value shot up as a result of the tweeted pants.
SarahW (af7312) — 8/17/2011 @ 1:23 pmSarahW,
I agree there is no indication a Republican staffer was involved with Broussard, which is why I asked elissa about it above. See comments 359, 362, 364, and 369 for how that discussion evolved.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 8/17/2011 @ 1:44 pmHowever, if Broussard was shopping her story, I suspect a lot of people in Washington heard or knew about it.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 8/17/2011 @ 1:45 pmI find it curious that Broussard asked AW to show a picture of himself with “this is me.” It was as if the final confirmation was needed to move forward as if someone asked her to do that.
Anita Busch (a025dd) — 8/17/2011 @ 2:02 pmMaybe, although it sounded to me like Broussard wondered whether she was really talking with Weiner (as opposed to someone pretending to be Weiner) and wanted him to send her something confirming it was him. It certainly seems reasonable to me that Broussard was doubtful a Congressman was sexting someone he’d never met from his home or his office in the Capitol.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 8/17/2011 @ 2:14 pmQuite welcome Sarah.
FWIW, here’s an interview w/ MB’s father:
http://setxhomepage.com/fulltext/?nxd_id=139097
She lives in Beaumont TX (or perhaps a suburb nearby).
She seemed a little off in the Hannity interview – “why should it bother me that he’s married – I’m not” – those were NOT her exact words – just my impression. I am NOT implying anything nefarious on her part. She just seemed rather nonchalant. Like Gennette’s reaction – RAW sent me his Weinertweet – so? what’s your point?
The ideological/cultural/philosophical/moral divide once again.
Miranda (4104db) — 8/17/2011 @ 2:17 pmI’ve asked myself probably a hundred times why I am so interested in all this–why I am so fascinated–why I keep coming back to read about it week after week. I think it goes to the heart of my flip comments that “Twitter is the devil” which I occasionally threw out into the conversation for levity.
-The twitter “records” and accounts that may or not be altered
-The anonymous ghosts roaming the back alleys and sewers of the internet
-the lies and false narratives which so easily are dropped in and spread via electronic media
and websites
-Google earth and the online public records that expose people’s addresses and finances and lives to mischief, even danger
-social friendly face book, where naive and over trusting people display themselves and their families daily to the world’s cunning and conniving predators and users and marketers (and even to amateur sleuths)
-anonymizers and voice modifiers whose only purpose is to deceive
-the apps and various smart phone related media which facilitate porn, child endangerment, and overt criminality such as vicious and rampaging flash mobs.
I guess this is our world now, and apparently our future. And the more I see of it the more I don’t like it. It is like watching a slow-mo wreck. I can’t take my eyes off it, yet at the same time I am horrified and appalled at what I see happening with respect both to individuals and to civil society. The Weiner saga, even what little we know so far, has exposed what is possible. It’s like a peek into a hellish Mad Maxish digital future.
elissa (9161d4) — 8/17/2011 @ 2:17 pmHere, Here elissa. Ditto.
Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c) — 8/17/2011 @ 2:20 pmPatterico & Koam,
Would you be willing to say exactly how many DM notification email were forwarded to you by John Reid. Are there more that haven’t been published?
Rocksem (e1d29d) — 8/17/2011 @ 2:21 pmMy Story by Meagan Broussard
http://biggovernment.com/mbroussard/2011/06/06/my-story/
MB> I was contacted and asked to tell my story.
No name and no date given, but since she was already in contact with Breitbart by May 18 or 19, this must have been before May 18.
But who knew?
Well, possibly, the RED BARON (boss of SOCKREID)knew.
How did they know?
Well, this is the mystery.
I can figure out a way, but what’s hard to figure out is, how, in that case, only patriotusa76 and company knew.
But it probably has something to do with Weiner preparing pictures to send on May 5. Because a lot of things started on May 5.
On May 5:
1) Weiner takes the picture of “ME” that he later sends to Megan Broussard – although maybe that was late on May 4.
2)Four tweets are issued by Yfrog in weinerr’s name. In the course of the next week and half 4 pictures are sent to Meagan Broussard. The last one is milder than the others confusing ABC but consistent with the idea that was the last one of a batch she hadn’t seen.
3) “Dan Wolfe” informs Mike Stack and has him tweet that there are pictures that would indicate Weiner has a mistress. Well actually he wants Mike Stack to be a little bit mysterious about this.
4) “Nikki Reid” contacts Gennette Nicole
MB> I finally came forward last week because I saw on television that Rep. Weiner had hired an investigating firm to go through all of his files. I worried that there would be people looking at my pictures and messages.
Finally…last week. Now remember this artucle was published on Monday June 6. The tweet @genettenicole had been issued on Friday May 27.
If that’s the beginning is that enough time for finally ?
Of course Anthony Weiner had no intention of letting the Meagan Broussard pictures become public.
Sammy Finkelman (d3daeb) — 8/17/2011 @ 2:22 pm484. She wanted to make sure it was him.
Sammy Finkelman (d3daeb) — 8/17/2011 @ 2:23 pmComment by elissa — 8/17/2011 @ 2:17 pm
You’re the voice of our generation. 🙂
Pious Agnostic (6048a8) — 8/17/2011 @ 2:24 pmQuite welcome Sarah.
FWIW, here’s an interview w/ MB’s father:
http://setxhomepage.com/fulltext/?nxd_id=139097 She lives in Beaumont TX.
She seemed off in the Hannity interview – “oh, so he was married – well, I’m not” – those were NOT her exact words – just my impression. I am not implying any nefarious import to her words – just that her attitude was so nonchalant. Reminds me of Gennette – “oh, RAW sent me his Weinertweet – so? what’s your point?” Again, not G’s exact words either – just my impression.
The ideological/cultural/philosophical/moral divide once again.
Miranda (4104db) — 8/17/2011 @ 2:27 pmelissa @487 – Sort of like being back in high school!
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 8/17/2011 @ 2:32 pmSorry for repetition … could have sworn my comment didn’t take the first time.
Miranda (4104db) — 8/17/2011 @ 2:54 pmEverything I have said is not just lip service. If I ever discover I have been mislead/lied to, I will not keep that information from authorities.
That is not to say I am actively seeking anything because until there is acceptable proof, I only have my instincts. But if the time comes that my opinion changes about this because of found proof, I will not remain silent.
Wondering (786412) — 8/17/2011 @ 2:57 pmDan, that is not a threat. I am simply saying on record that if you have lied to me, I will not protect you.
If you are being honest, you have nothing to worry about.
Sarah–“all pre-Weinerama or was the referral by DC to swope related somehow to Weiner’s shenanigans” All Pre-Weinerama. I was posting on Weasel Zippers- mostly anti-Weiner articles,etc.
The writer was Jonathon Strong.
And “Wondering”, the thanks/inquiry I wanted to say was that the paragraph you wrote about” stop assuming/accusing without facts and in the process harming innocent people” was exactly what I have learned due to this experience. It has changed my perspective on a lot of things in my life.
goatsred (66819b) — 8/17/2011 @ 3:01 pmThat sounded really mean. I didn’t mean for it to. I am just growing really tired of all of this.
Wondering (786412) — 8/17/2011 @ 3:04 pmI will do what is right as I always have. If Dan has lied to me, you can all point and laugh at me. If he is telling the truth, you can all point and laugh at me. In other words, the only thing I care about is making sure the innocent are not harmed further and facts are revealed. It’s all I’ve ever cared about.
You betcha. “I did nothing wrong” said the gum-smacking Broussard.
Yes, you did. 1st, you chewed gum like a common hoochie during an interview on national TV. Capital offense.
SarahW (af7312) — 8/17/2011 @ 3:12 pm2nd, no respectable person lady solicits, encourages, or accepts the amorous attentions of a man promised or married to someone else – a near stranger, no less. It’s a wrong against society, forget his wife.
Mike, I will never forget any of this. I wasn’t a huge fan of people before, but this pretty much seals the deal. I fully expect “Trust” to be removed from the dictionary within the next 10 years and “Paranoia” to be at the beginning of every definition. This has taught me to STFU when something doesn’t concern me. Lesson WELL-learned.
Wondering (786412) — 8/17/2011 @ 3:13 pmI’m just an old fashioned girl. Sorry for the rant.
SarahW (af7312) — 8/17/2011 @ 3:13 pmSarahW, most women don’t have respect for each other. If they did, they would never even consider hurting them the way they have been hurt (assuming they are within the 99% who have been cheated on)
Wondering (786412) — 8/17/2011 @ 3:25 pmWondering–You said yesterday that DW’s story about how he met me didn’t add up.Did you press him on it? So, right there, how about putting his nose to the grindstone? Post number 496 you state plainly and firmy that its on record that if he lied you will expose him.
I would like to see what his answers are.
How are you sure it’s him?
The person named Dan Wolfe, or the puppet playing him is a LIAR. He latched onto me and my followers. He told me a rumor and had me tweet it. He went to my sources and sold me out. He took my emails to the Smoking GUN.
He had a hand in doing some other terrible stuff to me that I cannot even publicize right now because of legalities.
His whole existence is a LIE. Have you talked to him on the phone? Why did he pack up and disappear? Did he tell you he contacted people about the pic and then had them all contact me because he was scared to be taped? All this because he was afraid of his ex wife and crazy ex girlfriend would find out? So, did they? If he is named DW,the odds are that they found out,right?
So, if that’s his real name, why wouldn’t he be found by now? The first lie is the easiest-HIS REAL NAME- so, true to your word, you should expose him.
The biggest scumbags in the world can be found. Why not this scumbag? Because there is NO DAN WOLFE. You’re the only person in the world that believes in the existence of this person. Unless, of course, you are the scumbag “DW” himself.
He knew details that I shared thru DM’s and emails. Details that then got used against me or made to seem like I was essential in orchestrating a “hoax” or hacking of AW’s Twitter account.
Be true to your word. Not this “holier-than-thou nonsense. If you know DW and you see all this nonsense that he’s pulled, and he’s telling you he never lied, it’s a tie as to who’s more naive.
The fact that all these people are saying the same thing EVERYWHERE about this person-and you are protecting him-makes you not worthy of my not even acknowledging you here ever again. It wasn’t until I read this post that I realized that I actually complimented you on the last post.
Maybe gool ‘ole DW will pull some tricks on you and your family. Better yet, maybe a few times, after dragging your name thru the mud for a month. Then brag about it with many on Twitter. Then many will have a good laugh. And DW will be laughing loudest. Because you fell for his act. And went on the record defending “him”
goatsred (66819b) — 8/17/2011 @ 3:28 pmMike, I’m not even going to finish reading that. I have already said I have no facts about Dan. I only have perceptions. Hell, it could be you emailing me, right?
I will not do anything to hurt innocent people. I don’t really give a shit who likes it or who doesn’t.
Wondering (786412) — 8/17/2011 @ 3:33 pmAS I SAID, if I SEE PROOF, and I mean FBI-type proof, that he has lied, I will happily turn over the email address I have.
I have to wonder what kind of conservative “close friend” would advocate her pushing this seedy behaviour of herself and the congressman, into the public eye – to the Drudge report no less. Would any person who calls themselves conservative, who was really her friend, who really had Broussard’s interests at heart , think it preferable to bust Weiner at the expense of his friend’s privacy and reputation?
(My friendly advice to someone I cared about would have been conceal it as much as possible – and to gently counsel her to stop. Stop playing with fire – stop engaging men, particularly married men, and even more particularly that married man, by sending risque pictures on the internet, encouraging him in extra-marital sexual conversations.)
What conservative, political ties or otherwise, would think it healthy, ok, decent or the best thing for his friend, and to first react by shopping the story and encouraging her to egg him on and get more (she was sending him pics even after contact with Breitbart was made)?
That would have to be a person with few scruples or very bendable ones –
SarahW (af7312) — 8/17/2011 @ 3:37 pmWe JUST talked about trust. Am I in some alternate universe?
Wondering (786412) — 8/17/2011 @ 3:39 pmI trust people until they give me reason not to. That’s how I live my life. That’s why there is such a very small circle of people I trust. (And it’s getting smaller)
Comment by SarahW — 8/17/2011 @ 3:37 pm
That would have to be a person with few scruples or very bendable ones –
It is a certainty that there are people like that supporting the Republicans (or, just anti-Democrat).
Whether they are “true conservatives” is a question that can only be answered by a True Scotsman.
Pious Agnostic (6048a8) — 8/17/2011 @ 3:45 pmMike, I will say this this one last time. This is about GETTING FACTS to me. If there is some weird gang of people in the universe hurting innocent people…. I don’t know, let’s say they are running around accusing people of blackmail, should I accuse YOU just because someone told me to? Or would you prefer I not say your name with an inaccurate accusation unless I knew for sure you were guilty?
Wondering (786412) — 8/17/2011 @ 3:51 pmIsn’t that what you thanked me for pointing out? (Maybe I get confused easily)
Wondering,
You may not realize this, but you are coming across on this comment thread as someone with rather severe emotional problems, including paranoia and depression. If this is so, and you are in pain, I urge you to seek professional help. There are plenty of services available, and your employer probably has an EAP program that can help.
If this is a character that you are putting on for our benefit, you may want to tune it up a bit, because you are throwing off big sharp “I’m a fake” vibes.
Pious Agnostic (6048a8) — 8/17/2011 @ 4:01 pmOh for Pete’s sake Pious. Maybe it’s because I am tired. I am fine.
Wondering (786412) — 8/17/2011 @ 4:09 pmOkay, well never a more clear reason to stop talking than THAT.
And you wonder why I don’t trust people? REALLY? EVERYTHING I have ever said has been scrutinized. If this suddenly became about you, would you be affected emotionally?
I give up. I’m done. Unbelievable.
Wondering, who were you talking to/about here???
“Dan, that is not a threat. I am simply saying on record that if you have lied to me, I will not protect you.
If you are being honest, you have nothing to worry about”
Did you talk to him, or not? It IMPLIES that you did.
goatsred (66819b) — 8/17/2011 @ 4:25 pm==If this suddenly became about you, would you be affected emotionally?==
Perhaps I have missed something in the translation. But I was not aware “this” suddenly became “about you”, Wondering. (You say you are voluntarily here to defend him and that you will protect the embattled Dan Wolfe– while not offering any reason or proof for anyone to think that “Dan” is embattled– or that he needs your protection.) So, what is the point? Are you sending a coded message to someone? Or replying to one?
elissa (9161d4) — 8/17/2011 @ 4:30 pmLastly, then I’m done with you…
“498.That sounded really mean. I didn’t mean for it to. I am just growing really tired of all of this.”
“you’re growing really tired of all this”??
You sound alot like the puppet who plays the scumbag DW.
And I’m very tired of this.
Once again, it might be fun for you, until the torture starts when “DW” is done with you.
“Whatcha gonna do
goatsred (66819b) — 8/17/2011 @ 4:31 pm“Whatcha gonna do
“Whatcha gonna do
When Dan Wolfe turns on you”
First, who first published the gym photos?
Sammy Finkelman (d3daeb) — 8/17/2011 @ 4:33 pm512. Comment by elissa — 8/17/2011 @ 4:30 pm
Long,crazy rambling answer to follow……
goatsred (66819b) — 8/17/2011 @ 4:33 pmPat- if you’re looking to build a case that Neal is JohnReid9
I have more circumstantial evidence related to this that I can elaborate on if needed.
Auntie Social Disorder (2f38aa) — 8/17/2011 @ 4:33 pmWe need an accurate timeline. That’s almost the most important thinbg that can help clarify things.
Sammy Finkelman (d3daeb) — 8/17/2011 @ 4:34 pmDon’t give up on people, Wondering! It’s all we have!
…There are pets too. Sometimes a good pet can take the place of people. But still, don’t give up on us (people)!
Birdbath (19803d) — 8/17/2011 @ 4:42 pmI found now:
http://www.quora.com/If-a-user-deletes-a-tweet-on-Twitter-will-all-associated-re-tweets-also-be-deleted
If a user deletes a tweet on Twitter, will all associated re-tweets also be deleted?
1 Answer
Liu Miao, zaijietou.com & liumiao.com 7 votes by ….
It depends on which kind of retweet it is. For official retweets, if the original message is deleted, all the retweets will disappear; for traditional RTs, they will just remain there.
Comment • 22:57 on Mon Feb 14 2011
I found out that an “official retweet” is a retweet made by using twitters retweet feature, while a traditional retweet is one made by typing RT and so on. With an officiazl retwete you can retweet all of a completely full tweet.
http://neworganizing.com/2011/08/03/tip-dont-use-twitters-official-rt-feature/
“For those newer to Twitter, the retweet function was created a little over a year ago. Before that, any retweet had to be done by adding “RT
@Whoever” to the beginning of the tweet, hence the name “traditional RT.” The retweet button is a perfectly legitimate form of tweeting and
spreading information. It allows you to share information easily, but unfortunately it diminishes the power of direct advocacy on Twitter.
So if you’re trying to get someone’s attention by swamping them with mentions, have people do the “traditional RT” instead of using the RT button!”
If Patrtiotusa76 had used the retweet button, his tweet would have disappeared when Weiner deleted his message as he surely would sooner or later.
This would be a perfectly good answer for “Dan Wolfe” to giove as to why he didn’t use the retweet button but Dan doesn’t say that. He claims Weiner was right there.
I think Weiner Weiner was not. He was tweeting about hockey after sending the original tweet – because the original tweet was sent as Milowent
demonstrated from Yfrog – by Weiner yes – but he didn’t know it.
Weiner only became aware of the Yfrog tweet when Dan retweeted it, because his software then popped up the picture. He, Weiner, was not
lying about that.
Dan wants to say that Weiner intentionally sent
Sammy Finkelman (d3daeb) — 8/17/2011 @ 4:43 pmthat. He even tells people how – Weiner tweeted @ instead of D.
danwolfe7676 (6:23:54 PM): I tried doing the automatica “RETWEET”
danwolfe7676 (6:24:00 PM): it wouldn’t work
danwolfe7676 (6:24:06 PM): That’s how fast he saw it and deleted it
danwolfe7676 (6:24:10 PM): He was right there
danwolfe7676 (6:24:14 PM): And as Ace notes
danwolfe7676 (6:24:19 PM): NOT tweeting about hockey
danwolfe7676 (6:24:26 PM): silent for over 3 hours.
danwolfe7676 (6:24:35 PM): So I couldn’t
danwolfe7676 (6:24:41 PM): do the automatic Rewteet
——
Filmladd (6:32:05 PM): Anyone can make a fake straight-text RT
Filmladd (6:32:12 PM): Which is why Twitter went to the retweet button.
danwolfe7676 (6:32:13 PM): But that tweet has proven to exist
Filmladd (6:32:21 PM): Has it?
danwolfe7676 (6:32:25 PM): Tweetcongress and Weiner both have it
Sammy Finkelman (d3daeb) — 8/17/2011 @ 4:44 pmhaha
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/17/2011 @ 4:45 pmThis story is sprawling. Like “Once Upon A Time In America”.
Birdbath (19803d) — 8/17/2011 @ 4:46 pmSammy, it was TMZ on June 12:
http://www.tmz.com/2011/06/12/anthony-weiner-representative-congress-house-of-representatives-gym-locker-room-photos-pictures/#.TkxSuaiKj9Y
Miranda (4104db) — 8/17/2011 @ 4:47 pmIn the ABC News timeline, it’s actually the first photo she sends. So it could just be as someone else suggested, a request to establish identity from someone who believes they themselves were getting pranked by someone claiming to be a celebrity.
But there is a curious order to the photos Broussard received from Weiner. First, she receives two photos where his identity is clearly established. (The “Me” photo and the one with the cats.) Then she receives two explicit photos — the erect penis photo and the underwear photo. These will no doubt prove embarrassing — but neither reveals Weiner’s identity in a strongly convincing way. In other words, the portfolio is missing something — a pic that both reveals Weiner’s face and has a sexualized or sexualizable context. Two days later, Weiner sends a photo that fits this bill — the one of his bare chest and enough of his face to strongly suggest it’s him. Whether by design or happenstance, the portfolio is complete.
The big question only Weiner, Broussard, and maybe a few others know: Was Weiner simply sending her whatever he felt like sending to her, or was he responding to specific requests designed to elicit the various kinds of photos that ended up creating a complete portfolio?
Greg (bc8186) — 8/17/2011 @ 4:49 pmOh she had requests, he had requests. You know how it goes.
No pic with his face was needed either. The pics were sent by either email, social media or phone. All 3 would have had a record of where it was sent from even without his face in the picture.
Rocksem (0471ae) — 8/17/2011 @ 4:53 pmAt the risk of feeding the trolls…
Agreed.
Agreed.
And something strange:
and this:
The last two statements don’t go together.
Baldeagle26 (54c753) — 8/17/2011 @ 6:04 pm@#524, Greg Was Weiner simply sending her whatever he felt like sending to her, or was he responding to specific requests designed to elicit the various kinds of photos that ended up creating a complete portfolio?
TV (ABC in this case) needs pictures for stories, Greg, don’t they. And the more salacious, the better.
AW’s stupidity is astonishing.
Anita Busch (a025dd) — 8/17/2011 @ 6:28 pm522.522.This story is sprawling. Like “Once Upon A Time In America”.
Comment by Birdbath — 8/17/2011 @ 4:46 pm
Great reference. One of my faves, but definitely a two parter sometimes.
goatsred (66819b) — 8/17/2011 @ 6:35 pm“If this is a character that you are putting on for our benefit, you may want to tune it up a bit, because you are throwing off big sharp “I’m a fake” vibes.”
Comment by Pious Agnostic — 8/17/2011 @ 4:01 pm
Yes, he or she is trying too hard to pile on things that don’t seem to matter. Like this person claims to be female, an actor in this story, of how Dan Wolfe might be legit. If there was a Dan Wolfe, he wouldn’t have disappeared. Since no one can even be sure there is a real Dan Wolfe, I’m curious how finding the tweet has so damaged his life.
Prepostericity (763212) — 8/17/2011 @ 6:49 pmwell, ABC News wasn’t going to pay $15,000 to license email addresses!
Greg (bc8186) — 8/17/2011 @ 6:50 pm“And something strange:
I asked Dan only a few questions in our exchanges.
Comment by Wondering — 8/17/2011 @ 9:02 am
and this:
One thing Dan has said to me probably a hundred times.
Comment by Wondering — 8/17/2011 @ 12:53 pm
The last two statements don’t go together.”
Comment by Baldeagle26 — 8/17/2011 @ 6:04 pm
Yeah, comments like that are strange.
Prepostericity (763212) — 8/17/2011 @ 6:55 pm528 LOLlol. Perfect sprawl analogy. Of course, the short edit of Once Upon a Time in America isn’t any good.
SarahW (af7312) — 8/17/2011 @ 6:58 pmIt looks like some people get published instantly, while my posts are put into a moderation queue. I’d like that changed.
Prepostericity (763212) — 8/17/2011 @ 7:02 pm@Greg, yep. She knew what she was doing, no doubt. Chomping gum on national TV like she’s some naive little nurse? Uh-huh.
Anita Busch (a025dd) — 8/17/2011 @ 7:12 pm478. And you’re not supposed to post under different names here “—-_—-”
I have screencaps of Dandy Dan Wolfe telling me the exact same thing about that tweet.Then he asks me if he can be of any help to me and my family. Then, he wishes he could tweet again, because he has no friends. He misses the #bornfreecrew. I will send these screencaps to SarahW.
So, if I needed that help, would DW had come to me and my family? What do you think?
Why would he have to stop tweeting?He had ten other sock accounts.
He also asked me after all that if I wanted to work with another person and him to do more “undercover work” with another person who was accused by Ron Brynaert of hacking DW Twitter.
I’ll tell SarahW that name too, in case you wanna verify it with the caps.
Here’s what worries me about your schtick here–
“ ASTOUNDING.
“ WOW. YOU DIDN’T ask him that?
My question is: Why are you inserting yourself into this if you dont HAVE FACTS,just “perceptions” (your words)
goatsred (66819b) — 8/17/2011 @ 7:23 pmIt’s awfully strange for someone to put themselves in harms way,talking about looking for strange cars and being in fear for their life for no reason at all.
You felt bad because DW was accused of something? You’re a softie? Because you feel bad for DW?
I’m “Wondering” what your primary motivation for being here is, and why under a different name??
And, by the way, when you talk to poor old Dan, tell him I said that the lives he f’ed up are REAL lives, not sock lives, and that I will be at his Federal sentencing,sitting in the front row.
Then I will ask the same empty questions about helping HIS family. I’ll send John and Nikki Reid in every visiting day,and since you are his pal, so you’ll get on the list.
It’s just a shame that he is fearful of being recorded,however,because all jailhouse conversations are recorded.
Tell him I’ll bake him a cake and stick a nailfile in it for a jailbreak. And to send pictures from TweetDeck of the big ball chained around his ankle.
As for you, just want to remind you of this,in case you were “Wondering”:
Commenters who do not use a consistent name, and/or who use a proxy to post, are subject to banning.
Sorry- Before “Astounding” should have been ” The first was “Is your real name Dan Wolfe.”
Before “You asked him that” should have been “How did you meet Mike Stack?” “
goatsred (66819b) — 8/17/2011 @ 7:27 pm@goatsred … Vengeance is mine, sayeth the Lord.
Anita Busch (a025dd) — 8/17/2011 @ 7:29 pmUnions upset that Verizon wants them to pay their fair shares.
DohBiden (d54602) — 8/17/2011 @ 7:31 pm#531
It all stems back to an e-mail Meagan Broussard sent after a class at Lamar University.
The teacher showed a video of Congressman Weiner.
Meagan’s father says his daughter then e-mailed the congressman and expressed an interest in politics.
This is an excerpt from the following article:
http://setxhomepage.com/fulltext/?nxd_id=139097
She was a nursing student. What class would that be exactly where they are showing videos of Anthony Weiner?
She first contacted Weiner on April 20th. Less than four weeks later, she’s accumulated a cache of sexual images from him, has shopped them to Drudge and Breitbart (with help from someone?…), and found a home for them. All in less than a month.
Chomp that gum…
scoovy (130a21) — 8/17/2011 @ 7:31 pmThat he didn’t have to send. No guy was ever entrapped into sending a picture of his dick. Just because Weiner was quick on the draw doesn’t mean he gets a pass.
Rocksem (0471ae) — 8/17/2011 @ 7:43 pm“What class would that be exactly where they are showing videos of Anthony Weiner?”
scoovy – It could easily have been a class with a session talking about all the “improvements” to healthcare mandated by ObamaCare with a clip of Weiner lying his butt off about what the bill contained. Pretty sure it was not a clip off Weiner saying New York City would need a waiver from ObamaCare.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 8/17/2011 @ 7:47 pmNo one is saying that Rocksem. Not at all. He was easy to set up … she just ain’t that “aw shucks Texan, I’m just a single nursing student chomping gum on national TV” naive.
Anita Busch (a025dd) — 8/17/2011 @ 7:48 pmDems don’t want to publicize those waiver clips.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 8/17/2011 @ 7:49 pmThanks, Anita. You have my 100% respect.
Also, have forwarded DW screencaps and Seamus Kraft emails to Sarah. She can vouch for their authenticity.
Thanks,as usual Sarah. Even tho I really didn’t ask this time.
goatsred (66819b) — 8/17/2011 @ 8:23 pm==He was easy to set up==
The spotlight here today is on Broussard, but in discussing who set up who and where pictures all came from, let’s not forget about Ginger Lee, Traci Nobles, and Lisa Weiss and perhaps still others who may have stayed quiet and not exposed themselves-at least to the media.
elissa (9161d4) — 8/17/2011 @ 8:24 pm“not exposed themselves-at least to the media”
elissa – Prolly still negotiating price with Larry Flynt. Heh.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 8/17/2011 @ 8:32 pmI had a nice long talk on the phone with Clay_Arts aka Artist_R aka Wondering tonight.
In this crazy matter, I always remain open to the possibility that someone is playing a role and punking me. So I make no declarations. But…
…my general impression was that she was a very straightforward person. She had a noticeable Southern accent and a very common sense and simple approach to looking at things.
She didn’t sound crazy or anything like that. I liked her.
For what it’s worth.
Patterico (f724ca) — 8/17/2011 @ 9:08 pmThanks Patterico. You didn’t sound crazy and I like you too 🙂
We are both seeking answers. We may not agree on everything but I was grateful you took the time to explain what I have been too impatient to try to understand.
Wondering (786412) — 8/17/2011 @ 9:24 pmIt’s all a process for me. I will continue to try to find reasons that are logical to me but will be open to your logic. I am stubborn but basically a reasonable person.
Thanks again for your time.
Indulge me a long post, but I’d like to post a theory on this whole mess (only a theory) so people can tell me the obvious holes in it. This is forest-not-trees level and doesn’t go into individual people/twitter accounts because they obviously overlap, passwords can be shared, some are the same people, etc. I will only refer to groups or entities as “teams”.
The story begins with someone with interests counter to Anthony Weiner who put things in place to monitor him and eventually push his political career down a flight of stairs. I’ll call this “Team New York”. Maybe it’s a rival for the NY Mayor race. Maybe it’s a purely personal thing no one knows about. Maybe Weiner has outlived his usefulness as a beard for Huma and is known to be reckless, so the decision is made to avoid another Lewinsky mess. For whatever reason, Team New York puts the wheels in motion to monitor Weiner and push him before a real mess occurs.
To do this Team New York hires Team Rauhauser to monitor Weiner and this is how the Patriot and Dan Wolfe accounts come into existence. Christmas arrives early when Weiner sends out the crotchshot.
Weiner has suspected something was up and believes he is being discrete with his sexting friends prior to the crotchshot. Gennette was one of his sexting friends but also running interference for him and vetting online things for him. After the scandal breaks, Gennette does the news interviews to say nothing inappropriate ever happened and helps with damage control, along with members of Weiners inner circle. This is “Team Weiner”. (BTW, I don’t think there is anything wrong for Gennette to do any of this as a consenting adult, but I do consider Weiner a total perv).
Team Rauhauser creates the various Twitter accounts of Nikki, etc and initially uses useful idiot Tommy Christopher and others to establish a first line of denial while also putting out feelers to Andrew Breitbart. Team New York simultaneously pushes for Weiner to leave office behind the scenes but in person supports him and gives the “Breitbart hacked Weiner” meme to Weiner while helping spread it. Team Rauhauser prepares for the next chess move of exposing the Reids as fake with the NY Times after Weiner is gone so that after Weiner has resigned, they can expose the Reids as fake. This will show Breitbart as a smear merchant – giving them a 2 for 1 special after Weiner is gone.
Team Weiner fights a losing battle and eventually too much information comes out. It reaches a critical mass and Weiner is forced to resign. Team New York releases the “Huma is pregnant” story to make sure he will never run for office again.
Team Rauhauser, out of both arrogance and hatred, continues the Nikki Reid/John Reid games partly out of animosity toward Gennette/Team New York and partly to send her a message that her hand is close to a very, very hot stove, and she shouldn’t talk about anything that Weiner or his circle has told her. (I don’t think its any coincidence Gennette was here instantly when Patrick started blogging on this and has stayed for weeks). I think a lot of it also is that Team Rauhauser is just a malevolent person who simultaneously likes screwing with people and thinks he is smarter than everyone else and therefore will never be caught.
Team New York wants to make sure no lose ends talk. Patterico and Ace continue a thorough and dogged pursuit of the story, so Team Rauhauser sends the Alicia Pain threats to stay away from Gennette as a serious threat/message to Gennette that bigger forces are at play. Team Rauhauser does this thinking they won’t get caught and even if they are, Team New York will protect them.
Team Patterico Posters drive themselves nuts on the details, and will do so until someone from Team Rauhauser is charged with a crime.
Kaisersoze (298188) — 8/17/2011 @ 9:39 pmNo time for stubbornness, Wondering. If you or your family were threatened like Patrick’s was, you’d hope and pray that anyone that could sincerely help you will be there for you. I hope if you have anything that might help him, you will turn it over to him. This is a very serious matter.
Anita Busch (a025dd) — 8/17/2011 @ 9:44 pmQuite a theory Kaiser. Makes a lot of sense.
I’m confused on one point – that Team NY released the “Huma is pregnant” story so that AW will never run for office again.
You mean she may well not be pregnant?
I recall that the nekkid p-pick was published on Gawker around 11 am (on a Wed?), shortly after AB inadvertently allowed a video cam to capture the shot while he was on that radio show. And later that afternoon, a NYT blog (surprise – not) had a story that Huma was pregnant. The very same day.
Miranda (4104db) — 8/17/2011 @ 10:00 pm“You mean she may well not be pregnant?”
I assumed before that she probably wasn’t and even if she was, the timing of the information hitting the press was part of all this drama.
I just did a quick google search and found some articles that say she is and show pictures of her that look like she has put on weight. I wanted to take a closer look but before I could, Andrew Sullivan broke into the room and crowded out my view of the baby bump. (kidding, I assume she really is pregnant).
Kaisersoze (298188) — 8/17/2011 @ 10:12 pmIn a beard marriage situation a baby coming along in due time would be pretty necessary–having nothing to do with the scandal. I assumed the timing of the announcement was to elicit sympathy.
elissa (3bd02c) — 8/17/2011 @ 10:19 pm“In a beard marriage situation”
elissa – I don’t recall any pictures of Huma eating a corn dog, which seems to be the litmus test for the liberal media these days.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 8/17/2011 @ 10:26 pmheh, daley
Sometimes there are thoughts that pass through my brain that I am actually prudent enough not to put into writing in the comment area on Patterico’s. This is one of those times.
elissa (3bd02c) — 8/17/2011 @ 10:37 pmWeird. I’m working on my own longish theory.
Anyway.
Patterico (f724ca) — 8/17/2011 @ 10:44 pmDone. Remnant from trying to keep people from posting your information here.
Stashiu3 (601b7d) — 8/18/2011 @ 3:46 amComment by Rocksem — 8/17/2011 @ 2:21 pm
Looks like about 26 emails of all types (DMs, emails, follow notifications, etc.) I think Patterico published them all in DD1, but haven’t checked each one.
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/18/2011 @ 4:13 amAs Patterico has spoken with Wondering on the phone, and is willing, as far as he has, to vouch for her, I apologize for implying that she was emotionally disturbed and/or a fake person.
I regret any pain I may have caused her. It was not my intention to bully or silence anyone.
After weeks of discussing sock puppets and constructed internet people, I seem to have jumped to the wrong conclusion. I’m sorry about that.
I’m still going to keep my antennae out, though.
Pious Agnostic (291f9a) — 8/18/2011 @ 4:18 amDear Stashiu3 (and other people who might be interested)…
I sent this to Patterico and Aaron. It’s interesting to learn about “weird internet behavior.” Here is how a real problem resolved itself:
http://skeptools.wordpress.com/2011/08/17/case-study-notorious-spammer-brought-down-twitter-tumblr-social-media-mabus/
It’s a horrific story. But it ended well. I look at this person spending hours each day trying to harass others via the internet. Crazy.
Simon Jester (cdcfc2) — 8/18/2011 @ 5:14 amComment by Simon Jester — 8/18/2011 @ 5:14 am
That was a very interesting article. Thanks for sharing it.
Pious Agnostic (291f9a) — 8/18/2011 @ 6:41 amBetter ending would have been for him to have been hit by a bus while tweeting… but getting arrested is okay I guess. I appreciate the link.
I’m really sick of these type of people, can you tell? 😉
Stashiu3 (601b7d) — 8/18/2011 @ 6:54 amRe: Comment by goatsred — 8/17/2011 @ 7:23 pm
Goatred sent all promised – some of which I had seen before (the moans of DW) , and some which I had not related to Kraft and the evolution of that acquaintance, and examples of their dealings, which date back to early Sept 2010 and concern more mundane political news/tips, on very non-weinerish issues.
I’m still not clear on how Mike came to the attention of Swope, who apparently gave his contact info to Kraft, who then formally introduced Mike to Jonathan Strong at the Daily Caller.
Mike told me the name DW dangled before him ( as some kind of potential undercover colleague, but it happens to be the name of a fictional character famous for his aliases – It might have been mentioned before, but I’ll leave it to Mike to mention again.
SarahW (af7312) — 8/18/2011 @ 8:10 amPatrick keeps his powder dry and needs no advice from me. Just saying.
SarahW (af7312) — 8/18/2011 @ 8:16 amOne more thing – I’m busy today and don’t have time to ransack my old files. Does anyone have to hand a list of the (orig) Patriot’s follows?
I remember noting that he had CA connections – his first follows were in LA/SanFran, and he had some political wonkytype follows in the mix.
I’m going to check whoistheleader but am not expecting to find any info on the Patriot account.
SarahW (af7312) — 8/18/2011 @ 9:07 amThat was a fun theory.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/18/2011 @ 9:10 amSarahW, JR9 emails came from IP of server co in SF. I know that doesn’t mean much.
koam @witier (a45470) — 8/18/2011 @ 11:33 amComment by Stashiu3 — 8/18/2011 @ 3:46 am
Thanks Stashiu3
I haven’t much to offer on this topic, unless it ventures into the Neal convolution. But if it does, it’ll be easier for me to participate.
I do appreciate the efforts made to make me feel safe on this blog. The cat’s out of the bag on who I am, well, in a very on the surface way. Out of principle, I refuse to post on blogs that allow myself to be attacked especially with personal info being posted. Attack my ideas, fine, no problem. But not me personally. Thank you for ensuring that level of decency.
I apologise for opening up the Mormon can of worms on another thread. I’ll be more careful in the future. It’s one thing to discuss how Romney being a Mormon affects his Presidential prospects. It’s quite another to start debating whether the LDS is a cult or not. I thought you handled that situation perfectly as a moderator.
Prepostericity (980208) — 8/18/2011 @ 11:56 amJack Palladino, a private investigator who has worked for the Clintons, works out of San Francisco.
Anita Busch (a025dd) — 8/18/2011 @ 11:56 amI agree kaisersoze’s theory makes mostly good sense. I think Weiner posed a threat to Team NY as he calls them, some specific pack of Democrats who troll the internet.
What we often forget is that within each part of a two-party system, everything is not all cake and ice cream.
I would like to add to Kaisersoze’s post. I think this Team NY actually believes that the internet is a major vehicle for influencing political outcomes. I disagree. I think the internet is overrated, and that is why it is so difficult to get stories about internet convolution into the main stream media.
I think there is a network of astroturfers, i.e. political operatives, who do control the content of major boards and are willing to get down and dirty, if they believe it will help their candidates. I think Weiner was being watched by them, like they watch a lot of the internet. Thus, they were prepared to help make sure Weiner would be ruined, because Weiner was unable to keep hidden his inappropriate tweeting behaviour, and they were following that behaviour in real time. Weiner was an idiot, but it took a push by Team NY to cement the deal of him resigning.
A bit of my blogging has specifically centered on that cabal of democratic operatives who control DKos. My blog is dedicated to the man who outed them. I don’t like fake Democrats, those referred to as blue dogs or DINOs. I don’t like other people who also pose as lefty activists, come up with various hoaxes, and then parlay that into big buck donations. They appear affiliated to this Team NY.
There’s a reason someone is trying to get my blog deleted. It is because since it is a blogger blog, it does quite well with google searches. A lot of my stuff was original research. For a long time until the Patterico-Liberty Chick cavalry arrived, I truly was the only one pushing for accountability on this specific topic I allude to.
Prepostericity (980208) — 8/18/2011 @ 12:18 pmThat was a fun theory.
Comment by Gennette — 8/18/2011 @ 9:10 am
Its right up there with Milhouse explaining the JFK Assassination on The Simpsons.
So other than general insanity (which I wouldn’t discount) what is your current theory on the motives of the John Reid/Dan Wolfe/Whoever collection?
Kaisersoze (298188) — 8/18/2011 @ 12:21 pmGennette:
Going back to those DMs of yours that were originally dated 05/16 when they were initially posted in June, and dated 05/18 when they were released as part of the latest document dump — can you think of any reason why Starchild/JR9 would have faked the date on the first release of these DMs?
Greg (bc8186) — 8/18/2011 @ 12:47 pmWondering,
I also apologize for calling you fake and any pain that may have caused you. But that does not change the observations on your strange behavior in this thread.
Baldeagle26 (ef74c2) — 8/18/2011 @ 1:29 pmI don’t have to apologize for what I thought, do I?
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/18/2011 @ 3:05 pmI would like to apologize for Koam’s lack of certitude about an apology, and for all the children who may have felt affected.
Dustin (b7410e) — 8/18/2011 @ 3:10 pmSolving the Weinergate history puzzle is a bit like solving a diagramless crossword puzzle (where you don’t know which boizxees are black)
Not only do you have to put the pieces together correctly, but you have to determine what are fake pieces and what are real.
This is not beyond human reason, though.
If you limit yourself to what you surely know there aren’t enough pieces.
Sammy Finkelman (d3daeb) — 8/18/2011 @ 3:34 pmI would like to apologize for Baldeagle26’s strange apology.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 8/18/2011 @ 3:39 pmJeeze, I’m sorry I said anything.
I apologize.
Pious Agnostic (6048a8) — 8/18/2011 @ 4:46 pmOh, and Sammy?
Why do they have to be “black boizxees?”
Pious Agnostic (6048a8) — 8/18/2011 @ 4:47 pmThat’s highly confidential, Piousx
koam @witier (3219e1) — 8/18/2011 @ 6:33 pmOh, also..
That weird thing of over-praising that Patterico points out…..that ‘you’re a hero’ etc thing?
As I mentioned JG did that to me on the phone. Out of place, over-effusive praise….
Oh, and Nikki Reid did that to Tommy Christopher, too.
Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 8/18/2011 @ 9:37 pmJohn Reid, too:
koam @wittier (7b067e) — 8/18/2011 @ 9:58 pmAlso, Patriot to me when I found the “Seattle” tweet
Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 8/18/2011 @ 10:06 pmI still wonder if it was JG who called me a few times from a private number and whose voice sounded altered.
Called 3 times, I think. My wife listened, too — sounded altered to her, too. Might not be, but I wonder.
Lee Stranahan (708cc3) — 8/18/2011 @ 10:08 pmIn his earliest tweets to me, heaped mounds of praise on someone he had just started communicating with,and always kissed ass.
goatsred (66819b) — 8/19/2011 @ 5:05 amThat’s a really interesting observation. You guys are geniuses!
MayBee (081489) — 8/19/2011 @ 8:38 amThe utility intern praises Patterico.
koam @witier (7b067e) — 8/19/2011 @ 8:45 amNikki did that to me all the time.
Gennette (55c21d) — 8/19/2011 @ 11:17 amMAYBEE!
SarahW (af7312) — 8/19/2011 @ 3:52 pmAnthony Weiner should be in hell.
LawandOrder[1990-2010] (d54602) — 8/19/2011 @ 3:56 pmDamn sockpuppet.
DohBiden (d54602) — 8/19/2011 @ 4:11 pmWondering, I’m curious….
No wait, you’re Curious, aren’t you?
I mean the infamous commenter over at Ace of Spades HQ, AKA ” ” (hash tag k1rwm), of course.
Your online “voice” is a dead ringer for that commenter (same marker words, same syntax, same cadence, phrase construction & incidental “tells”) and your propensity to share the innermost thoughts of your many, many mysterious ‘friends’ who’re always amazingly directly connected to everything that ever happens anywhere, Forest Gump syle, is startlingly similar.
If you are indeed curious, a word to the wise for anyone else who never reads the comments over at Ace’s and isn’t up to speed: do not EVER click on a link from this innocent-seeming person who spends an astonishing percentage of its day online passively-agressively toying with website commenting communities rather than with, strangely enough, his or her many, many mysterious “good friends” who just so happen to be involved in every single event which ever occurs anywhere and who are always at the ready to conveniently serve as authoritative sources on every fact in contention on any subject at any given time.
The link might lead to homosexual pornography or worse, though he/she will apologize profusely that it was merely the most innocent of errors. One of his/her many “friends” just sends these links to Curious/Wondering/ Ar, you see, and he/she isn’t inclined to to check out what these links even lead to at all before taking the trouble to tinyurl it & breathlessly share it with the rest of the commenters as being so exceedingly clickworthy.
leilani (ccfc7e) — 8/20/2011 @ 7:43 amMarker words, syntax, cadence, phrase construction and “tells”.
I gotta add those to my list. Thanks. leilani.
Pious Agnostic (6048a8) — 8/20/2011 @ 8:27 amI have my suspicions that “Wondering” is “Dan Wolfe” who is really a woman, and has her “friends” ,like you say Leilani, appearing innocently,at all times.
It seems to be a pattern everywhere.
Good work,Nancy Drew. /no sarc.
Dan Wolfe new “PatriotUSA76 account filled with viruses. Right,”Wondering”???????
goatsred (66819b) — 8/20/2011 @ 11:28 amI suppose instead of discussing Warrent Buffett’s op-ed about how we are coddling the uber-rich you can chase some more weiner.
concerned citizen (639e0a) — 8/20/2011 @ 1:35 pmComment by concerned citizen — 8/20/2011 @ 1:35 pm
Why didn’t you include a link to your own post on “Warrent Buffett”? I’ll bet that’s interesting.
Pious Agnostic (6048a8) — 8/20/2011 @ 1:52 pmhttp://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/15/opinion/stop-coddling-the-super-rich.html
There’s the article. My response is: I agree.
concerned citizen (639e0a) — 8/20/2011 @ 1:55 pmLast 3 posts…meant for another thread?
koam @wittier (931ded) — 8/20/2011 @ 1:59 pmNo, we’ve used up our CC Weinergate minutes.
sarahW (af7312) — 8/20/2011 @ 2:37 pmAlso, solved.
MayBee — 8/19/2011 @ 8:38 am
sarahW (af7312) — 8/20/2011 @ 2:38 pmnow I’m lost
koam @wittier (931ded) — 8/20/2011 @ 3:06 pmThat what I was thinking about yesterday, while away from computer. My intuition was that you might make such a comment.
JR9 certainly stroked me (quotes above).
I should add that, in hindsight, it was obvious that Pappa Reid really wanted Patterico to be the publisher from the start (DMs show that). I just happened to be the first person to notice JR9 start tweeting that night & jumped right on it by manually RTing him.
If there was an agenda to embarrass a “right wing blogger,” maybe JR9 had moved along the continuum from AB to Pat. Fortunately, Pat had the smarts to handle it appropriately (as AB had as well)… I’d guess that JR9 is pissed that this episode, from June 21 through now, has upped Pat’s reputation for integrity rather than the opposite.
koam @wittier (931ded) — 8/20/2011 @ 3:44 pm“As an outsider looking in”
Mike
Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c) — 8/20/2011 @ 4:28 pmBeen thinking the same thing for a few days.
Comment by Blackburnsghost — 8/20/2011 @ 4:28 pm
That’s just so apparent. Someone distracting and deflecting. Badly wanting to be a part……….of something……..anything.
Have a great rest of the weekend.
goatsred (66819b) — 8/20/2011 @ 6:39 pm576. Comment by Sammy Finkelman — 8/18/2011 @ 3:34 pm
Solving the Weinergate history puzzle is a bit like solving a diagramless crossword puzzle (where you don’t know which boizxees are black)
Not only do you have to put the pieces together correctly, but you have to determine what are fake pieces and what are real….
579. Comment by Pious Agnostic — 8/18/2011 @ 4:47 pm
Oh, and Sammy?
Why do they have to be “black boizxees?”
I saw that, but too late to change it.
The black boxes in a crossword puzzle are the ones that are not filled out.
Sammy Finkelman (d3de3a) — 8/21/2011 @ 2:49 pmThe most important priority that the puppets had was to hide the fact that they were puppets, which means hide the fact that anything they did had an ulterior motive.
That being the case it is hard to imagine that at any point might have been to go public.
Therefor Nikki’s intention must have been to gather information and not to go public.
This is not altogether that far fetched – this may be exactly what happened with the puppet that talked with Meagan Broussard, assuming that is, that Megan Broussard’s anonymous male Republican friend was a originally a cyberfriend. (This is an example of coloring in a black box in a diagramless crossword puzzle)
Dan Wolfe’s persona would kind of fit the description of Meagan Broussard’s unknown male Republican friend, but whoever it was probably didn’t use the same name and may not have been the same exact person.
Sammy Finkelman (d3de3a) — 8/21/2011 @ 6:20 pmThere is a very important thing that seems to have been missed:
Consider: After the May 27 tweet, patriotusa76 (or somebody) had access to other pictures uploaded to Yfrog by Anthony Weiner.
If anyone had pictures then then either:
1) Something about a Yfrog tweet led to it. But and then a previous Yfrog tweet could also have led to it long before May 27 since whatever clues you may imagine were available on May 27 were available before. This was not the first time a link to a Yfrog picture had been tweeted by Anthony Weiner.
2) If the Yfrog tweet did not lead to the discovery of the other pictures, then again, whatever clues you may imagine were available on May 27 were available before.
Now, sometimes I like some kind of theory too much. This was the case with my idea that maybe Weiner posted explicit pictures on May 5. Those May 5 yfrog pictures actually were of the ground Zero visit of President Obama after killing bin Laden.
But except for that little detail, I think that this is close. Patriotusa76 did have the pictures sent to Meagan Broussard even before Broussard had them, because they were uploaded to Yfrog – probably on May 4, not May 5.
He had the pictures but he had no idea to whom they were addressed!
Therefore Nikki contacts Gennette, and DanWolfe2 contacts Meagan Broussard.
Dan Wolfe and company may have discovered the Yfrog pictures back before January – maybe there were other things then there too – and/or there were other things, like 2009 newspaper stories, indicating Weiner might be having an affair (therefore the interest in his followers) but on May 4 maybe he uploaded pictures.
Sammy Finkelman (d3de3a) — 8/21/2011 @ 6:28 pmWhere did you find out that Broussard’s Republican friend was a cyberfriend or anonymous?
Anita Busch (a025dd) — 8/21/2011 @ 6:39 pmComment by Anita Busch — 8/21/2011 @ 6:39 pm
Where did you find out that Broussard’s Republican friend was a cyberfriend or anonymous?
I don’t know that Broussard’s republican friend was originally a cyberfriend (originally because he was also at least a voice on a telephone) but there is nothinbg i bread that excludes that. You cannot fiund any kind of description as to how she came to know him or for how long she knew him – not that he was a friend at work, of the family, they met when she did X, or anything at all.
But that he was a cyberfriend is one of the black boxes I filled in the diagramless puzzle. Also reading between the lines of some New York Times articles, Jennifer Preston seems to have thought that he could very well have been “Dan Wolfe” or an associate.
That he’s anonymous is more clear. Breitbart said he never knew his name. Maybe ABC had a name, but it was Breitbart who put broussard in contact with ABC.
There was a discussion in a previous thread here:
https://patterico.com/2011/08/12/weiner-document-dump-part-3-including-still-more-alleged-dms-from-weiner-to-nikki/
Sammy Finkelman (d3daeb) — 8/24/2011 @ 3:35 pmIn that thread, Greg Beato writes: (Comment by Greg – 8/14/2011 @ 3:23 pm)
Sarah, the other day on Twitter, Ron [Brynaert] 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…
And at Soundbitten http://www.soundbitten.com you can read:
05/18/11: An associate of Broussard’s contacts Breitbart about Broussard’s exchanges with Weiner. (Source: Lee Stranahan Blog Talk Radio show)
Notes: In Twitter exchanges with Ron Brynaert on 08/10/11, Breitbart says that Broussard’s intermediary contacted Breitbart “by email 1 week-plus before infamous RT. Then I called & left VM. He called next day. Took week to get to Megyn.” (Source: Twitter).
[He gives as sources http://twitter.com/#!/ronbryn
(hich slowly loads twweets going backward in time)
and ://twitter.com/#!/AndrewBreitbart/status/101387488387534848 where you can read:
ronbryn Ron Brynaert
@AndrewBreitbart @RepWeiner @ChrisCuomo How did Broussard’s male friend contact you? By phone, email or Twitter? Did you know him already?
10 Aug in reply to @ronbryn
@AndrewBreitbart
AndrewBreitbart
by email 1 week-plus before infamous RT. Then I called & left VM. He called next day. Took week to get to Megyn. @ronbryn
10 Aug via Osfoora HD ]
Then he expands on his response and answers additional questions from Brynaert with this series of tweets: Tweet: “I’ve never met Megyn or her friend in person. Megyn doesn’t seem political. Her friend may be. I didnt/dont care if he is or not.” Tweet:: “Always said ‘friend’ of Meagan emailed in advance & we followed up. I don’t know his name. But Meagan said she’s friends w him.” Tweet: “Don’t remember his name. Once I was in contact with Meagan, he was disposable! Hope he doesn’t take that personally!” Tweet: “I have no idea if he contacted me on May 18 because she asked him to. Didn’t ask.” Tweet: “1st time spoke to MB was FriJune3. Spoke to him SatMay28 for brief moment then on TuesMay31. Thats it. Never met either in person.” Tweet: “He contacted me on 18th. We followed up but didnt take too seriously. Then @patriotusa76 RT triggered frantic calling of the guy.” Tweet:”Limited resources. One of my trusted associates had convo. If he had delivered goods woulda been different story.” Tweet: “No, just wrote to you we had contact between then. Not me. And was put in ‘low priority’ bin. Conspiracy that!”
Greg Beato gives links to the tweets (Q and A)
http://twitter.com/#!/AndrewBreitbart/status/101403814929772544
http://twitter.com/#!/AndrewBreitbart/status/101406616942936064
http://twitter.com/#!/AndrewBreitbart/status/101406809180479488
http://twitter.com/#!/AndrewBreitbart/status/101410653796974592
http://twitter.com/#!/AndrewBreitbart/status/101412435965132800
http://twitter.com/#!/AndrewBreitbart/status/101413496763326464
http://twitter.com/#!/AndrewBreitbart/status/101414599907217408
http://twitter.com/#!/AndrewBreitbart/status/101414819248345088
Actually reading this, Breitbart did get a name, buit says taht once he was in contact with Broussard he didn’t need the internmediary any more – and doesn’t seem to consider his name important.
Sammy Finkelman (d3daeb) — 8/24/2011 @ 4:06 pmSince not much is happening here, a side show:
Benjy Bronk, who asked the newsmaking questions at the two Weiner pressers, recently spoke at an MTA Fare Hike Hearing in NYC.
koam @wittier (22a1b9) — 8/25/2011 @ 11:38 amComment by koam @wittier — 8/25/2011 @ 11:38 am
Benjy Bronk, who asked the newsmaking questions at the two Weiner pressers, recently spoke at an MTA Fare Hike Hearing in NYC.
Somebody’s confused. Or maybe put in all these words Benjy Bronk Town Hall Hearing Footloose Speech Port Authority MTA Toll Fare Hike to catch searches as if this was a sales listing on eBay.
This was the proposed Port Authority toll hike (also fares on the PATH trains between New York and New Jersey where they wanted to go from $1.75 to $2.75)
The Port Authority has nothing to do with the MTA, which is entirely within New York State.
When there was a subway strike,m the PATH trains kept running (also the bus to Chinatown)
In the meantime there is lot of coverage (more than usual) of the upcominmg September 13th election for Anthony Weiner’s seat.
I’ll say in short that the two candidates illustrate what’s wrong with the two major political parties today.
Sammy Finkelman (d3daeb) — 8/25/2011 @ 3:59 pmAugust 14
“I’m working on my own longish theory.”
August 17
From comments maybe there’s an evolving theory?
koam @wittier (4ec816) — 8/25/2011 @ 4:16 pmWill there be an update?
In June/July, I sent emails to two ABC News staffers, asking if they knew the identity of Broussard’s intermediary. They didn’t reply. (They had replied to earlier questions I asked about the interview.)
In going over the ABC News articles on this, I noticed two things that may be of interest. First, Broussard told more than one person about her exchanges with Weiner:
Also, May 18, the day her friend contacted Breitbart, also appears to be the first time Weiner spoker with Broussard on the phone. He calls her from a Manhattan area code, and the call lasted 2 minutes and 19 seconds. Shortly thereafter, Broussard emails him four photos, and he emails her the x-rated pic. Earlier that day, before the phone call, he emailed her the underwear pic.
All along, I’ve been assuming that Broussard’s intermediary contacted Breitbart on this day after Weiner had emailed Broussard these photos and had this phone conversation, but now it occurs to me there’s no basis for this assumption.
[note: fished from spam filter. –Stashiu]
Greg (bc8186) — 8/26/2011 @ 10:38 amComment by Greg — 8/26/2011 @ 10:38 am
I recall Broussard’s “ABC” story was that she had been involved in this sexy exchange w/ Weiner privately, sort of by chance, and that she came forward after the scandal broke so that she could control the narrative rather than have it exposed involuntarily and have to be reactive about it.
Now I knew that she or her intermediary had been involved with Breitbart/Drudge (via the ABC story) prior to the dic pic, which should have raised some questions.
But this post by Greg says that her media contacts were contemporaneous with her first talking to and receiving dirty pics from RAW….not some time later.
So does this mean that the story as to “why” she came forward to ABC was false? And does it mean that she only got into this (in a serious way) to reveal and/or sell her story? If so, did someone put her up to it?
What of her “Hottt” comment on a Weiner video online? (Her first reach out to him…she said, I believe, that she wasn’t at all into politics, but caught a clip of his passion on TV and decided to comment online about it on YouTube or Facebook….and that he responded back.) Does this suggest that she was trying to get him to do what he did all along? What then was the motive?…the media payday? the takedown? Has anyone asked if she was paid to start it up in the first place?
koam @wittier (4ec816) — 8/26/2011 @ 11:14 amThis may have been a random event but I’ll mention it anyway. A week or so ago, Broussard’s name had come up on one of the Weinergate threads.
I nosed around a bit & posted an interview w/ her father on a Beaumont TX news site (they live there). Then I searched some more, thinking to look for any ties to political parties etc. I had a few sites open at the same time.
Well in seconds I had a bad virus – it attacked everything in my computer. The pro bono computer expert in my family tried to fix it – he had never seen anything like it. And I had virus etc. protection (not the best but not free either) and AdAware.
Maybe a coincidence, maybe somebody playing games, maybe one of the nasty puppetmasters. Who knows.
Patterico knows about this – I emailed him the next day.
Miranda (4104db) — 8/26/2011 @ 12:40 pmodd if it was on a page related to her
koam @witier (93b11d) — 8/26/2011 @ 1:14 pmPositano
koam @wittier (4ec816) — 8/27/2011 @ 1:25 amMiranda: Sounds like somebody laid a trao for anybody with too mujch curiosity.
Sammy Finkelman (d3daeb) — 8/29/2011 @ 11:01 amIn reply to my email request, Andrew Breitbart forwarded me a copy of the email Broussard’s intermediary sent on 05/18/11, with the intermediary’s name, email address, and phone number redacted.
The intermediary sent the email to feedback@breitbart.com. It had a time-stamp of “Wed, 18 May 2011 19:51:15 -0700.”
The email does not mention Broussard by name. The intermediary says he has “a friend who chats with Anthony Weiner on facebook…” He says Weiner sent her “nude pics” earlier that day, and that while he has not seen those, he has seen pics Weiner has sent his friend previously. He also mentions that Weiner “called [Broussard] today from his office in New York.” The intermediary provides a phone number and encourages Breitbart to call or text him if he has any questions.
And that’s pretty much it. There’s nothing in the email that alludes to whether or not the intermediary is contacting Breitbart on Broussard’s behalf or even with her knowledge. Also, the intermediary makes no specific offer to supply pix or anything else — at this point, he just basically says, “call or text me…”
It’s also not clear if the intermediary included an actual name in the email or just an email address.
I believe the -0700 part of the time-stamp means it was sent from an account set to Pacific Time.
Based on the time-stamp and the info, it appears it was sent after the Weiner/Broussard phone call that day, and after the nude pix as well.
Broussard sent more pix of her to Weiner after he sent her the x-rated photo, but it’s not clear if she sent them before or after the intermediary’s email to Breitbart.
Broussard did send at least five more pix of herself to Weiner on May 20, and Weiner sent her one pic of himself on that day (the one where his bare chest and much of his face are visible.)
When the intermediary says that he has already seen photos Weiner sent to Broussard, he is presumably referencing those sent on May 4 and May 5. (ABC News’s timeline does not list any other photos sent between May 5 and May 18.)
So it looks like Broussard was telling others about her exchanges with Weiner pretty early on, even before he’d sent her illicit photos of any kind.
Greg (bc8186) — 9/1/2011 @ 12:30 pmFrom comments maybe there’s an evolving theory. We can guess that maybe it isn’t what we wanted or expected.
Will there be an update?
koam @wittier (a1d10e) — 9/2/2011 @ 4:02 pmThis thread seems to be dying. If this all leads to dead ends I hope someone (Stranahan maybe?) would at least give their theory about JG Boston. What does anyone know about her? Was she involved or threatened Alicia Pain style for cover?
That part of the story bothers me because it seemed to be an outlet to actual facts in all this but has seemed to gone nowhere.
Noodles (3681c4) — 9/3/2011 @ 6:39 pmComment by Noodles — 9/3/2011 @ 6:39 pm
This thread seems to be dying.
That’s mainly because it’s not visible on the main page.
The June 30 thread continued because so many people were posting (which had the effect also of placing posts on the list of last 10 Recent Comments on the top right of the main page.
On August 20, @ 8:45 pm koam @wittier placed a link to this thread.
I think this can continue, even if it does at much slower message-and-reply pace than we have gotten used to on Internet forums, which is actually anyway way too fast.
I am working on a chronology of the key events of May 27.
I think a chronology could be divided into 4 parts:
A) Pre-May 27 5PM
B) The night of May 27/28
C) Events May 28 through June 16
D) Events since the Jennifer Pre3ston New York Times story.
You could write a ook about this. It maybe could be called:
As you go over this you continually discover new questions.
Like – who were the two dozen followers that
weiner added between about midnight Fri/Sat May 27/28 and sometime May 31?
Some of them must be his new followers who used #WeinerYes whiom he decided to add, but maybe one or two could be a clue to something Weiner was doing then? A law firm or a Public relations agency maybe? Does anyone know?
There’s quite a bit of coverage going on in the local newspapers – even radio – on the Congressional race and people who live in the district are being bombarded by mail and telephone calls some of tehm anyway. If you’re not being bormbarded you don’t live in the distruict, and , hiort of getting the League of Voters map, that’s about the only way to know.
Well, people who were in his district before probably know.
JG Boston. What does anyone know about her? Was she involved or threatened Alicia Pain style for cover?
I suppose the investigation into the threats is still going on, but if there is no discussions I don’t know where Patterico could notify anyway. he could maybe start a new thread.
JG Boston is likely some kind of a fraud, and was probably the caller to Lee Stranahan. The threat received by JG Boston was fake because she’s a fraud.
Sammy Finkelman (d3daeb) — 9/7/2011 @ 3:26 pmI can’t get rid of typos.
In the previous comment, it should be:
You could write a book about this. It maybe could be called:
Of course, it is Dan Wolfe. But it was also Dan Cooper.
Sammy Finkelman (d3daeb) — 9/7/2011 @ 4:06 pm