Patterico's Pontifications

8/14/2011

Conversations with Puppets, Part 4: The Very Pro-Weiner John Reid

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 1:47 pm



[UPDATE: If you’re wondering why you should still care about this, I explain here. Original post follows.]

John Reid has tried hard to portray his family as pro-Weiner at all times.

Remember that the family, in their statements to Tommy Christopher, purported to support Weiner. And in his recent e-mails to me, Reid said:

I / family was never Wolfe and actually to this day have still not said a word against Weiner. I’ve said wife and I rethought things. But still admire him.

Oh really?

You’re about to read a couple of excerpts from my chats with JohnReid9.

On June 24, we were discussing various aspects of the timeline. He was telling me that, because of the Ethel story, he had gone back to Nikki and found out she had more DMs than she had first revealed. He said things like:

nikki: I just got a bone chill . . . He is more dangerous than I thought . . . That is really really disturbing. Bone chillingly disturbing . . . I fear this man might be sicker than we ever thought possible

On June 25, he said:

I’m getting you everything. There is volumes of stuff now that Nikki gave me more of her Weiner messages

It turns out they messaged more than we ever thought . . . YOure not gonna beleive this stuff

Real pro-Weiner!

But, you see, he didn’t want to come out and immediately reveal that he was re-thinking Weiner. He was afraid it might not seem believable. So he tried to manipulate me into laying the groundwork for the proposition that he and his wife had changed their minds about Weiner.

Anybody who knows anything about Dan Wolfe recognizes the pattern.

From June 26:

me: May I quote you regarding how you got Nikki to reveal more of these after you noticed the Ethel discrepancy?

nikki: Of course. Ypu are to thank for all of that. Thank God for you, Patterico.

You are a real hero.

Someone needs to recognize you publicly

me: I’m OK not being “recognized”

nikki: I know but you really should be.

What you did is saving kids

I’m sure [Ethel]’s parent’s agree

perhaps after you quote me that will open the door for someone to ask our feelings now, if we are reevaluating Weiner and Bornfreecrew

He doesn’t want to come out and say it. He wants to manipulate me into saying it.

Anybody who knows anything about Dan Wolfe recognizes the pattern.

I have a lot more to say about this. But you should know that, in my opinion, John Reid’s little facade of being pro-Weiner is crap. (I was always going to tell you that, but I wanted to let the guy talk. I gathered a lot of information in those talks. I could have gathered more if he had not been driven away.) And if I’m right about him being Patriot — and I don’t know that to be the case, but I have plenty of evidence that he is — then this was a premeditated plot by someone against Weiner.

Including everything John and Nikki Reid ever did.

UPDATE: I found the chat where Reid first tries to manipulate me, Dan Wolfe style, into saying that he should re-evaluate Weiner. What he didn’t realize is that, because of numerous “tells,” I was already onto him. Details here.

214 Responses to “Conversations with Puppets, Part 4: The Very Pro-Weiner John Reid”

  1. Dan Wolfe always used to say I was a “hero” too, by the way.

    That kind of flattery really got my antennae up.

    Patterico (f724ca)

  2. weiner dreams ripped at the seams

    bu ut … oh!

    those wei-ei-ner nigh-hights

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  3. I want to make it clear: I am revealing information about Reid because I have concluded that he is a fraud. Indeed, that conclusion is inevitable, since he recently told me that he WANTS his DMs to be seen as fake, and believes he somehow manipulated me (I guess he missed the part where I never vouched for him or his material).

    I will say that if my theory is right, many of the DMs allegedly from Weiner to Nikki could still be genuine. Because it would mean that Reid was Wolfe, doing a sting of Weiner.

    A sting that, if Gennette is to be believed, Weiner might have been onto.

    (But keep in mind that Weiner is a liar and lied to Gennette about the hacking, so he could have been lying to her about being convinced Nikki was a troll. Maybe he wasn’t sure, and flirted with her just in case she was a real girl and a cutie.)

    Patterico (f724ca)

  4. Patterico, have you heard from John Reid since his “tirade”, when he spoke of Gennette doing a victory dance etc?

    Miranda (4104db)

  5. “nikki: I just got a bone chill . . . He is more dangerous than I thought . . . That is really really disturbing. Bone chillingly disturbing . . . I fear this man might be sicker than we ever thought possible”

    Melodramatic. And it does remind me of the tone DW used.

    But very heavy handed on the manipulation attempts. Bright these/them/him/her/what-the-hell-ever ain’t 😉

    ppk_pixie (1df0c8)

  6. Patterico,
    So all DMs revealed so far are part of the original bunch given to you by “JR”?

    Rockem (0471ae)

  7. Hmm not that this matters as we know he’s fake but.
    On June 24th or 25th when JR was answering questions here he says that there is another family involved that he needs to protect, but in Doc dump 3 clearly Nikki knows and warns Gennette that she/Marianela is fake. That was on June 1st.

    Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c)

  8. Comment by Blackburnsghost — 8/14/2011 @ 2:32 pm

    Where is this? The June 1st email in part 2 shows Nikki treating Marianela as a real girl who shouldn’t be trusted.

    Rockem (0471ae)

  9. With regard to Weiner’s behavior, does it even matter what John Reid/Nikki Reid actually thought?

    Weiner’s DM’s speak for themselves, don’t they?

    AZ Bob (aa856e)

  10. Warns that she is “fake” or that she is not to be trusted?

    Marianela is a straw person conceived to be a scapegoat for pushing the “Breitbart tried to get us to lie” line. This explains why Nikki thought Breitbart was dishonest when the grand plan was to have Breitbart save the day, and then it would be revealed that Marianela’s lies were responsible for initially making Breitbart seem like a bad guy.

    In my opinion.

    Patterico (f724ca)

  11. Weiner’s DM’s speak for themselves, don’t they?

    The ones to Ethel do.

    The ones to Reid? Depends on whether they were real.

    I suspect at least some of them were. Perhaps all of them.

    Patterico (f724ca)

  12. @Blackburnsghost

    Nikki never told me that Marianela was fake. She told me that she was not to be trusted.

    Gennette (2c00ef)

  13. Rocksem from Doc dump 1 the email exchange.
    Your right Patterico it’s warns “not to be trusted”
    Doh! so much for my sleuthing

    Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c)

  14. Lee could help out here. My working theory is that John Reid was pro-Breitbart as well as pro-Weiner. I know Lee disagrees, but answer me this: is it not the case that Nikki could eventually blame (and did blame) Marianela for any allegation that Breitbart tried to get her to lie?

    If I’m wrong about this please let me know. I have been fuzzy on this specific issue before.

    Patterico (f724ca)

  15. That’s why I sit on the fence mostly :)
    Funny neil r was commenting on that old post.
    Ok I’m going back on the fence now.

    Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c)

  16. Comment by Patterico — 8/14/2011 @ 2:48 pm

    Yes, Marianela definitely looks like the cut out.

    Rockem (0471ae)

  17. I think Reid was working his way around to declaring, ever so reluctantly, that Weiner was a bad guy, and Breitbart saved the day.

    Because he was Dan Wolfe.

    And it was Wolfe’s plan to steer all his goods to Breitbart.

    But someone got in the way: Lee Stranahan. And foiled Dan Wolfe’s whole premeditated scheme.

    Why do you think Dan Wolfe hated Stranahan so much?

    Patterico (f724ca)

  18. How did Stranahan foil the scheme? Are you saying Breitbart refused to bite on the story because of something Stranahan did, as opposed to Breitbart deciding on his own not to publish something?

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  19. I don’t understand where Lee fits in except if you mean Lee’s immediate interest in finding out who is PatUSA. The Dic pic put on kabaosh on the whole Nikki/Marianela docs to Breitbart.

    Rockem (0471ae)

  20. There is an alternate theory: that what JohnReid9 told me recently was true. The plan to throw up a lot of smoke and discredit all the evidence against Weiner.

    To me, that works only if John Reid and Dan Wolfe are different people. Because Dan Wolfe sure screwed Weiner over by noticing and emphasizing the Ethel Tumblr — not to mention RT’ing the Weiner picture. So either they’re different people, or Dan Wolfe is the most incompetent political operative of all time.

    Patterico (f724ca)

  21. How did Stranahan foil the scheme? Are you saying Breitbart refused to bite on the story because of something Stranahan did, as opposed to Breitbart deciding on his own not to publish something?

    Frankly, I don’t know. It is my impression that both Lee and he were skeptical of Dan Wolfe from the get-go. Whether Lee was driving that skepticism, whether it was mutual, whether they were together and agreed to it at the same time, I frankly don’t know. I bet Lee could clear that up.

    But regardless of how it ACTUALLY happened, Lee was more aggressively anti-Patriot (although Breitbart was immediately and openly skeptical as well, and I don’t mean to suggest otherwise), and it may well be that Wolfe CONCLUDED Lee had screwed up the plan, even if Breitbart was skeptical all along.

    Patterico (f724ca)

  22. The Dic pic put on kabaosh on the whole Nikki/Marianela docs to Breitbart.

    No, that is not my understanding. Dan Wolfe’s refusal to speak on the phone did that.

    Patterico (f724ca)

  23. Why do you think Dan Wolfe hated Stranahan so much?

    Comment by Patterico — 8/14/2011 @ 2:54 pm

    That has puzzled (and intrigued) me for some time now. In Ladd’s postings with DW, the…hate (best term I can think of) that DW has for Mr Stranahan was epic. I figured it was some back channel reason, but still- had to be some thing serious to garner that much outrage.

    I had mental images of DW spitting at his monitor as he(she/them/whatever) typed when the subject was Mr Stranahan.

    If only he had called Mr Stranahan a hacker/sock/boogieman we could all say “Hi Ron!”

    ppk_pixie (1df0c8)

  24. If Wolfe is incompetent, then he’s the luckiest guy in the world given how much incriminating information he gathered on Weiner.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  25. the stuff with Breitbart may have earned the hate of Lee but Lee’s focus on Patriot immediately on twitter definitely cemented it. Wolfe was looking for accolades, not an inquisition.

    Rockem (0471ae)

  26. No, that is not my understanding. Dan Wolfe’s refusal to speak on the phone did that.

    Comment by Patterico — 8/14/2011 @ 3:03 pm

    I thought Breitbart said he was immediately suspect of Marianela when goatsred approached and that he didn’t think he even needed it any longer once the pic hit and he had Broussard?

    Rockem (0471ae)

  27. Whether Dan Wolfe is a real person or a political operative, here’s another theory (like Rockem’s) why Wolfe might hate Lee Stranahan:

    Wolfe worked for weeks, perhaps months, gathering information on Weiner and he finally hit pay dirt. The Weiner tweet was actual, incriminating evidence. But instead of focusing on what Weiner had done, the left’s response was to focus on Wolfe. How infuriating that must have been. And because Stranahan was one of the first people to weigh in and focus on Wolfe, he may have become the focus of Wolfe’s ire.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  28. Once bitten by Sherrod, twice shy?

    AZ Bob (aa856e)

  29. John Reid, a supposed grown man, was using his fake daughter’s two email addresses to correspond with Patterico.

    How strange.

    Couldn’t be bothered to fake an account for himself?

    Whiskey (34d467)

  30. Patterico,
    Would you confirm Gennette’s contention she showed you evidence which proves she knew or suspected Nikki was fake early on?

    Rockem (0471ae)

  31. Whiskey,

    Wouldn’t he have to use the same account to prove he was representing Nikki?

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  32. Why do you think Dan Wolfe hated Stranahan so much?

    Since there is no Dan Wolfe, the truth of any opinion he asserted is as suspect as he is.

    The sockmaster behind the persona may actually resent Lee or may only want you to believe DW does.

    I think the puppetmaster was scared of discovery, having been caught out in lies, with the sock suspected – and perhaps was frustrated by Stranahan’s interference.

    The sock might have been engaging in a type of damage control either as sole motive or overlayed on that frustration and fear.

    A REAL DW (if one had existed) would not be any fan of a person accusing them of what Lee asserted about DW. It is necessary for the sock to have some reaction to Lee, and for it to be believable, if the game is to continue and the character prolong the fiction of its existence.

    The sockmaster behind DW might also be infuriated at Lee using private detectives to come after him. (That means exposure) The puppet could be using the sockmasters real fears to build his own character, and would be trying to react in character at the same time.

    The character is trying to stay in character and

    “He” may only have wished “his” audience to use his created character the way he wanted them to.

    So, the puppet character would naturally have a loathing and anger at Lee, and it’s voicings informed (or not) by the actual puppetmaster.

    I think the puppetmaster, the creator of the DW character, would actually think of Lee as a kind of nemesis and try to discredit any opinion or conjecture or conclusion Lee might make, lee having got somewhere near the truth.

    SarahW (af7312)

  33. Did that make any sense at all? I know it was repetitive.

    SarahW (af7312)

  34. Nikki never told me that Marianela was fake. She told me that she was not to be trusted.

    Comment by Gennette — 8/14/2011 @ 2:44 pm

    Setting up the double-dealer plan?

    SarahW (af7312)

  35. Gennette,
    Maybe you have answered this before, maybe I even asked, but why were you emailing Nikki not to talk to journalists and pushing her to return to twitter AFTER the pic hit the fan? Especially if you knew her to be fake?

    Rockem (0471ae)

  36. @Rockem

    I wasn’t really pushing her to return to Twitter. I mentioned it once after she said she had to delete her Twitter because she was being harassed.
    I told her to stop talking to journalists because Tommy had contacted me saying that she had been in contact with her and her family. I couldn’t deal with having to explain the Nikki situation in top of everything else going on.
    I knew she was fake but since she pretending to be my friend I thought she might listen.

    Gennette (a0e804)

  37. I knew she was fake but since she pretending to be my friend I thought she might listen.

    Comment by Gennette — 8/14/2011 @ 3:52 pm

    You thought people you knew to be trolls, who for all anyone knew at the time might have hacked Weiner & sent that pic to you, were going to listen to you?

    Rockem (0471ae)

  38. @Rockem

    I’ve said multiple times, I always felt that Nikki was anti-Weiner but I never felt like they were trying harm me personally. It was worth a try if I could at least delay having to explain Nikki… it’s obviously a very confusing, complicated situation.

    Gennette (a0e804)

  39. Tinkers to Evers to Chance.

    ColonelHaiku (d1f5ff)

  40. Would you confirm Gennette’s contention she showed you evidence which proves she knew or suspected Nikki was fake early on?

    I have already confirmed that Gennette has sent me the screenshots which, if genuine, show she believed Nikki to be fake. Nikki is not named, but in context Nikki is clearly the most logical person for her and Weiner to be talking about.

    Patterico (f724ca)

  41. I’m pro-weiner castration………..see what I did there?

    DohBiden (d54602)

  42. Assuming the puppet master is anti-Weiner, why did he/she create the pro-Weiner Reid family? I haven’t been following this all that closely, so it isn’t clear to me what anti-Weiner purpose they served.

    Infidoll (dea325)

  43. Infidel- misdirection, some lulz, and iff acting out of some personal obsession/ grudge, maybe some confused or mixed objectives

    Sarahw (af7312)

  44. Infidoll,

    I think the theory is:

    1. Dan Wolfe followed Weiner to catch him in inappropriate relationships with teenage girls.

    2. The Reids had a teenage girl who corresponded with Weiner.

    3. If the Reids and Wolfe are the same person or working together, the Reids’ purpose was to get compromising conversations between Weiner and their daughter (or other teenage girls she befriended online). However, they would always appear to be pro-Weiner because that would make their story more believable.

    4. Wolfe would provide compromising information regarding the Reids’ daughter (and others, if possible) to Breitbart, so he could publish it and discredit Weiner.

    5. Initially, the Reids would object and claim Weiner acted appropriately. Ultimately, though, they would turn on Weiner after seeing all his conversations with their daughter. This change of heart would make their story more believable.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  45. My working theory is that John Reid was pro-Breitbart…

    Comment by Patterico — 8/14/2011 @ 2:48 pm

    On 04/12, Patriot makes his first attempt to publicize Weiner’s perceived online womanizing. He tweets to the Daily Caller and Weasel Zippers that Weiner is following Ginger Lee. As far as I know, these are the only two media outlets he tweets this info to.

    On 04/20, he tweets the Daily Caller and Weasel Zippers that Weiner is following Gennette. Again, it looks like these are the only two media outlets he tweets this info to. (I’m using Tommy Christopher’s archive of Patriot tweets as the source — it may not list every tweet.)

    On 05/27, when Patriot sees the Weiner-tweet, he tweets Breitbart first, then follows up by tweeting numerous other media outlets. For example, he tweets Fox News five times, Drudge five times, Michelle Malkin, Right Wing News, New York Post, Politico, The Hill, Politico, Huffington Post, etc. He tweets Breitbart at least twice during this time, but it does not appear that he’s making any special effort to capture Breitbart’s attention — he tweets Fox News and Drudge a lot more. (Source: Liberty Chick screen-cap)

    The fact that Breitbart picks up on the story before other outlets is probably due more to the fact that Breitbart already knows about Weiner’s sexting habits through Broussard, rather than the fact that Patriot made a special effort to target him.

    Also: Why doesn’t Patriot include Daily Caller and Weasel Zippers in his tweets on the 27th?

    Greg (bc8186)

  46. ther is no Wolfe. There are no Reids, except as created fictional characters. these socks are not real people with false names, they are invented characters,

    Whoever is.behind this has meta- motives, the characters only means to some end which remains unclear.

    Sarahw (af7312)

  47. Also: Why doesn’t Patriot include Daily Caller and Weasel Zippers in his tweets on the 27th?

    He had already roped in Mike Stack.

    Patterico (f724ca)

  48. Greg, good question. I’d like to know the answer…why are the DC and Weasel zippers blog out of the loop for RTs of the Weiner-tweet?

    Sarahw (af7312)

  49. I just answered that question.

    Patterico (f724ca)

  50. If the Reids and Wolfe are the same person or working together, the Reids’ purpose was to get compromising conversations between Weiner and their daughter (or other teenage girls she befriended online).

    I’m sure the ultimate goal also included obtaining compromising pictures if possible.

    Patterico (f724ca)

  51. What, I forgot stack posts at weasel zippers.

    Sarahw (af7312)

  52. Pictures seem logical goal

    Sarahw (af7312)

  53. I have another question…does weasel zippers have any connection to Docweasel?

    Sarahw (af7312)

  54. I also forgot that Stack has daily caller friends

    Sarahw (af7312)

  55. He had already roped in Mike Stack.

    Comment by Patterico — 8/14/2011 @ 5:27 pm

    Patriot had roped in Mike prior to tweeting on 04/12 and 04/20 too, but he (Patriot) tweeted to DC and WZ then.

    I’m not saying the absence of tweets to DC and WZ on the 27th means anything — it could just be that Patriot figured this story was so big he could take it straight to bigger outlets and it would get noticed right off.

    On the other hand, I do think it’s noteworthy that when Patriot comes across his biggest scoop to date, he ignores two outlets that he has previously shown great interest in.

    Greg (bc8186)

  56. The day I point it out (May 12) he says, “This is a troll who has been bragging elsewhere that he has dirt on me. The profile is fake.”

    On the 16th, the day he firsts talks to Nikki, I ask “So what do you think about this whole thing?”
    He responds, “Still think its a troll thing. Remember the attacks on [Ethel], Gingerlee, and you all started at the same time.”
    He was referring to DW tweeting us with screencaps of our profiles, etc.

    If this is the exchange I think there are a lot of assumptions being made. It would help to have some more of what was exchanged related to trolls here. It could refer to someone else. Weiner states jokingly 10,000 of his followers are Tea party trolls.

    Why is Gennette referring to Starchild on the 12th when Starchild has made no effort at all to get Weiner to follow, as far as GC knows, and won’t till until specifically prodded to by GC at 1:18 am of the 16th?

    9 hours later Weiner is following Starchild and she thanks GC for it. He is DMing Starchild throughout the day. In the midst of this GC asks about “the whole thing”. Starchild amounts to the whole thing?

    Unless there was a combined effort to entrap Starchild by GC & Weiner during this time, and GC says there was not, how could this exchange be about Starchild? Why isn’t Weiner doing something in DMs with Starchild to attempt to catch her out as fake? This is a whole thing orchestrated by trolls and Weiner is casually chatting with Starchild about trolls as if she would just say “Oooo, ya got me.”?

    Isn’t it more likely “the whole thing” is BFC’s starting in on teens, like Starchild & Ethel, the way they had in April?

    Do exchanges on 12th or 16th between GC & AW refer specifically to Starchild account?

    Rockem (0471ae)

  57. 53 is big deal to me.

    SarahW (af7312)

  58. I’m confused. I think at this juncture it’s important to remember the fundamentals.

    The first of which being WEINER …

    WEINER PIC ON THE NET!

    Weiner posted his willie!

    Caught with his tallywacker wagon!

    all the rest is just detail.

    papertiger (e55ba0)

  59. papertiger,

    Sure. How does that help me catch the people menacing my family?

    Patterico (f724ca)

  60. I’d like to read a follow up on how (or if) the couch sessions are helping Weiner to break himself of posting pictures of his manroot on the net.

    It’s been a month or so without any relapse, and I for one find that a hopeful sign

    papertiger (e55ba0)

  61. Pat. What in the…?
    Someone is sending threats?

    That’s just insane. I guess you have to worry about it.

    I was just trying to lighten the mood. Sorry.

    Ignore me and my little funnies while you tend to business.

    papertiger (e55ba0)

  62. Why would someone threaten the messenger over a month old message?

    That’s just stupid.

    papertiger (e55ba0)

  63. UPDATE: If you’re wondering why you should still care, I explain here.

    Patterico (f724ca)

  64. @Rockem

    If you read the DMs it would be obvious that they are about the Starchild account.

    Gennette (fc0584)

  65. If you read the DMs it would be obvious that they are about the Starchild account.

    Comment by Gennette — 8/14/2011 @ 6:37 pm

    I can’t read the DMs.

    Then, apparently at the direction of Weiner, Gennette went and exchanged, by her own account, over a thousand direct messages and e-mails with Nikki.

    Patterico stated that. Is it true? I seem to remember awhile back that you said there was no combined or concerted effort by you and AW?

    Rocksem (0471ae)

  66. I thought Breitbart said he was immediately suspect of Marianela when goatsred approached and that he didn’t think he even needed it any longer once the pic hit and he had Broussard?

    Comment by Rockem
    The reluctance by DW to talk on the phone to me or to others as this was breaking quickly cooled down the desire for DW to be a legit source for anything.
    I’ll give Patrick permission right now to publish emails between DW and myself showing all his excuses and sob stories.
    I also have DMs from his new account with all his apologies to me and the #bornfree crew if anyone is interested.

    goatsred (66819b)

  67. Patterico: how does Breitbart tie into all of this, then? If you are thinking that John Reid might be a fictional persona tied to Dan Wolfe, and Dan Wolfe intended on passing a bunch of information to Breitbart so that Breitbart could disseminate it, and Dan Wolfe might itself be a fictional persona… what does that say to you? Who benefits from that? And who’s shown a propensity for using underhanded sting operations to go after liberal politicians/liberal organizations?

    Standard disclaimer: I haven’t been following this until recently, so there could be something serious I’m missing in that line of reasoning. But have you spoken to Breitbart about all this?

    And like I said before: assume what John Reid said was true (about you accidentally helping him in his cause and whatnot); you say that would make Dan Wolfe the worst damage control type in the world, but only if he didn’t intend to get Weiner off the hook by restricting the extent of his public excoriation to sending an inappropriate picture to an ultimately fictional girl. If the reality was worse than that, perhaps he wouldn’t be such a bad damage control type after all. It’s a plea bargain with public opinion at that point.

    Leviticus (b85154)

  68. Comment by goatsred — 8/14/2011 @ 6:42 pm

    I realize that about DW & phoning with Breitbart. But that was about the dic pic.I thought the only you had approached earlier with Marianela stuff. Was DW also involved with Breitbart on that?

    Rocksem (0471ae)

  69. IIRC, the Reids emerged (publicly) AFTER Weiner had tweeted the pic to GC and the media speculation was, “did he (Weiner) really do it or was he hacked?” In that context, the Reid testimony seemed to help Weiner. Assuming the unified sock puppet theory is correct, the mission was accomplished once Weiner was caught. So why would the puppet master go to the trouble of creating the Reid family and having its various members talk to the media? Why not just have the Reids remain silent?

    Sorry if I’m being dense.

    Infidoll (dea325)

  70. And who’s shown a propensity for using underhanded sting operations to go after liberal politicians/liberal organizations?

    Comment by Leviticus — 8/14/2011 @ 6:43 pm

    If you mean O’Keefe, forget it. Breitbart would be aware of anything O’Keefe is doing. Breitbart wouldn’t have called DW out publicly over no phone call if it was O’Keefe. Plus O’keefe is all about video. There’s no video in this story.

    Rocksem (0471ae)

  71. Comment by Greg — 8/14/2011 @ 5:19 pm

    Amazingly enough–Tweeting irony alert– @Drudge because (DW) he first told me that he got the rumor from a “source” at Drudge.

    goatsred (66819b)

  72. Exactly you imbecile.

    DohBiden (d54602)

  73. Hey Sarah 53.I have another question…does weasel zippers have any connection to Docweasel?

    Comment by Sarahw — 8/14/2011 @ 5:39 pm
    Just talked to the main man over there, and there is no connection at all.

    goatsred (66819b)

  74. Papertiger, are you an Englishman??

    goatsred (66819b)

  75. Sorry if I’m being dense.

    Comment by Infidoll — 8/14/2011 @ 6:51 pm

    You’re not dense. There’s no real answer yet on why the “Reids” have done anything.

    Rocksem (0471ae)

  76. 61.Pat. What in the…?
    Someone is sending threats?
    That’s just insane. I guess you have to worry about it. I was just trying to lighten the mood. Sorry.
    Ignore me and my little funnies while you tend to business.

    Comment by papertiger — 8/14/2011 @ 6:21 pm

    You have a lot of reading to do. I’m pretty sure if you’ve read twenty posts in any of these threads you would have seen the words “threats,threat, family, harassment,…etc.,,” Please stop insulting our intelligence.

    goatsred (66819b)

  77. Infidoll,

    I’m not sure we know the answer. One possibility is that Wolfe/Reids wanted to make sure Weiner had to resign, and initially it wasn’t clear he would do that. Another possibility is that this wasn’t a conservative sting but a liberal sting carried out on behalf of a Democratic competitor, such as a potential NYC mayoral candidate (because Weiner was reportedly considering running for mayor). Weiner’s resignation may not be enough to keep him out of a future mayoral race. I guess a third possibility is that Wolfe and/or the Reids are real and who they claim to be, and acted for reasons that may not make sense to us but did to them. I’m sure there are other possibilities, too, but these are the ones that jump out at me.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  78. Mike, glad to hear it.

    Consortium of griefers with a semi-porn blog geared to the barely legal, history of trolling with cast of characters including tender frightened girls (though mainly blog pimping trolling), early stalwart founder wrote primer on sockpuppeting; had some blogging connection with “New England Republican” and “Optimistic Patriot” out of MA…

    …Brrrr….thank the good lord there is no connection.

    SarahW (af7312)

  79. “If you mean O’Keefe, forget it. Breitbart would be aware of anything O’Keefe is doing. Breitbart wouldn’t have called DW out publicly over no phone call if it was O’Keefe. Plus O’keefe is all about video. There’s no video in this story.”

    – Rocksem

    I don’t mean O’Keefe, specifically. I mean Breitbart or someone working for him, generally.

    Interestingly enough, this whole mess is an interesting piece of validation for O’Keefe’s persistent pursuit of video evidence.

    Leviticus (b85154)

  80. Comment by Rocksem — 8/14/2011 @ 6:41 pm

    I know you can’t read them. And no, that’s not really true. I was communicating with Nikki for a week before I ever brought her to AWs attention. We talked about it over the course of five days. Then I continued to talk to her for two more weeks, after he had stopped talking to her/stopped talking to me about her, until she discovered that I knew she was fake.
    I did, however, assist him in engaging her by encouraging her to follow him.

    Gennette (fc0584)

  81. I realize that about DW & phoning with Breitbart. But that was about the dic pic.I thought the only you had approached earlier with Marianela stuff. Was DW also involved with Breitbart on that?

    Comment by Rocksem — 8/14/2011 @ 6:51 pm

    He approached AB with pic, etc, but knew about girls, and told AB about them that morning.( they had disppeared by 9:30 AM Eastern time) He knew about the girls(because he steered us towards each other) and was waiting for me to get the “files” that they were going to send to me.

    Here’s the catch. He wrote AB an email. In it, he gave all AB my info and said that I would do all the talking and for AB to get in touch with me.

    In other words, in following his pattern, he would attach his “findings” to my name and then have nothing else to do with the info he passed on.

    I have all of this stuff if Patterico wants to do a Document Dump with my stuff too.

    goatsred (66819b)

  82. 72.Exactly you imbecile.

    Comment by DohBiden — 8/14/2011 @ 7:02 pm

    What comment is this directed at???

    goatsred (66819b)

  83. My guess is DohBiden is agreeing with RocksEm and calling Leviticus an imbecile.

    Which is uncalled for because I like Leviticus. Although I disagree with his characterization of Breitbart.

    Patterico (f724ca)

  84. Everything about DohBiden makes me laugh.

    The name is great and for some reason the word “imbecile” always gets a chuckle out of me.

    I didn’t at all think it was directed towards me, just didnt know the context. And I don’t really know Leviticus.
    Thanks Pat.

    goatsred (66819b)

  85. Comment by Gennette — 8/14/2011 @ 7:22 pm

    You were communicating with Weiner for 5 days about Starchild account and you have nothing which specifically uses the name Starchild or Nikki?

    On what day did “Nikki” discover you knew she was fake?

    Rocksem (0471ae)

  86. On what day did “Nikki” discover you knew she was fake?

    I think it’s the day John Reid blew his stack and started raging at Gennette and the NYT. No?

    Patterico (f724ca)

  87. Always helpful to add flesh and bone for credibility, I guess.

    Since there is no DW, just someone acting as DW.

    SarahW (af7312)

  88. The indignation of the socks! How it did burst out.

    SarahW (af7312)

  89. Comment by goatsred — 8/14/2011 @ 7:24 pm

    I know DW was involved with girls in background, through you as front man, but I thought your approach to Breitbart about that was days before dic pic hit. No?

    Rocksem (0471ae)

  90. Comment by Patterico — 8/14/2011 @ 7:38 pm

    That was after NYT story about fake IDs. By then everyone knew Reids were fake. It had to be sooner.

    Rocksem (0471ae)

  91. I don’t mean O’Keefe, specifically. I mean Breitbart or someone working for him, generally.

    Comment by Leviticus — 8/14/2011 @ 7:22 pm

    No one working for Breitbart. Breitbart’s public calling out to DW to phone was basically a call to investigate DW & who the hell he is. He already knew DW wouldn’t call. Brietbart wouldn’t do that to someone working for him.

    Rocksem (0471ae)

  92. We talked about her over 5 days, but not everyday of those five days. And I don’t have all of my communications with him. There are very few, actually.

    I’m not sure which day it was. I’d have to go back and look at the emails.

    Gennette (fc0584)

  93. I’ve got a great theory.

    The people that you are dealing with have very little motivation to do what they’re doing. They’re internet /b/ tards who are doing it for the lulz and nothing else.

    Please see the following link for more information on how I got my theory.

    Brilliant theorist (b9e15f)

  94. It’s a good one and near the top of my list. That said, they were spying on Weiner. what was that all about?

    Sarahw (af7312)

  95. I can’t figure out the Nikki Reid character. If she was set up to dig dirt on Weiner, she sure didn’t take the opportunity to go for it when he followed her. And it sounds like she got very little from Gennette- just a few tweets about Gennette flirting with Weiner. Otherwise, it sounds like a lot of time invested talking about Orange County, a fake dog, and hanging out with basketball players. A lot of squeeze for very little juice.
    Was that really what she was supposed to be doing? Utterly pointless. She seems more obsessed with Gennette than Weiner.

    MayBee (081489)

  96. “Although I disagree with his characterization of Breitbart.”

    – Patterico

    I’m not really saying I think Breitbart did this; but if you’re looking at this as an offensive sting operation rather than a defensive smoke and mirrors operation (which makes more sense to me), and you’re saying that Dan Wolfe intended on feeding his information to Breitbart, and Breitbart is the sort of person who would want to do a sting operation on Weiner in the first place, then I’m saying have you considered Breitbart as a candidate for all these socks and if not why not? (And the answer might be very very obvious and I might still be overlooking it because I’m not caught up on all the backstory and the list of characters).

    Leviticus (b85154)

  97. #97 Leviticus –

    Why would AB bother with what amounts to a fairly small-potatoes congresscritter?

    AB was probably intended to take the bait and end up looking like a fool, if you re-read the time line and behavior of the many and various socks.

    Dianna (f12db5)

  98. Comment by MayBee — 8/14/2011 @ 8:36 pm

    I never understood that.

    Gennette (fc0584)

  99. I am slowly catching up, but I have a couple of questions. Sorry if they have been answered before or are obvious.

    Who is Marianela? And Ethel is/was a real girl, right?

    Please don’t refer me to the monster thread, as it makes my head spin backwards.

    prmetime (1d022f)

  100. As a former journalist I can tell you that people think about giving scoops to the media outlet they most read.

    Perhaps Dan Wolfe was a regular reader/commenter on Daily Caller and Weasel Zipper.

    Anita Busch (a025dd)

  101. “AB was probably intended to take the bait and end up looking like a fool, if you re-read the time line and behavior of the many and various socks.”

    – Dianna

    Ah. That makes sense. Thanks.

    Leviticus (b85154)

  102. Hmmm. Except that Weiner actually turned out to be a skeeze; so if Breitbart calls out Weiner on the advice of “Dan Wolfe”, who happens to be fictional, who’s gonna care about the latter part if the former part is accurate?

    Leviticus (b85154)

  103. Leviticus,

    I assume Breitbart doesn’t want to get played by fake people or people he couldn’t confirm. They’re unreliable and that increases the chances that their information will be unreliable, too.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  104. prmetime,

    Here’s my understanding:

    Ethel is real.

    Marianela is Nikki’s friend. Mediaite’s Tommy Christopher gave them aliases — Veronica and Betty — to protect their identities because they were thought to be underage.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  105. I apologize for a “catch me up” post but I was out of this for a couple of weeks with the market meltdown.

    Trying to catch up, doesn’t it seem like the mostly likely confluence of Dan Wolfe/the Reids/whoever and the Rauhauser/Brynaert group is that this was a instigated by a Democratic Pol trying to bring Weiner down for reasons related to the NYC Mayoral race?

    It would seem to be the only theory that would have someone nuts enough or motivated enough to send death threats to Patrick, Mike and Ace.

    Kaisersoze (298188)

  106. There are different theories, Kaisersoze. That is one of them.

    Patterico (f724ca)

  107. Internet /b/ tards brought down Congressman Weiner, “Brilliant Theorist”?

    And why would they do that?

    Do you realize how integral Dan Wolfe was in Weiner’s downfall?

    Patterico (f724ca)

  108. Patrick – Is there a convergence between the two groups? I’m missing gaps in this like I said, but my thought (about 1500 comments into the monster thread) was that the meat of this and the source of the threats was tied to people working for Weiner on damage control – who may or may not have been authorized/empowered to do so by Weiner or his staff.

    Kaisersoze (298188)

  109. It could be anything. It could be a bored wacky person. It could be a Dem operative.
    It could be a private detective hired by his wife (or someone else).
    Think about how genius it would be for a private detective to seed a bunch of fake twitter accounts to use as needed at some point in the future.

    MayBee (081489)

  110. DRJ,

    It didn’t keep Woodward or Bernstein from fame and glory – it all depended on the story they broke. It doesn’t seem that anyone would go out of their way to discredit Breitbart with a true scandal; they’d try to get him to buy into a completely bogus one.

    Leviticus (b85154)

  111. There’s a lot here..

    What question do you want answered first?

    Lee Stranahan (708cc3)

  112. It’s a good one and near the top of my list. That said, they were spying on Weiner. what was that all about?
    Comment by Sarahw

    That could be the $64,000 question, imho.

    Here’s a humble theory. Apologies in advance if it’s off base.

    I have no way of proving those involved in the convoluted aftermath were part and parcel of the original sting. For obvious reasons, I am drawn to wanting to understand that convoluted aftermath.

    I googled something like John Reid Broussard Dan Wolfe Andrew Breitbart. It led me to this page.

    (Video) Andrew Breitbart laughs as he shares Anthony Weiner pic with shock jocks

    (excerpts) June 8, 2011 Andrew Breitbart has been making the cable rounds playing the victim (again) this time of a “violation of trust” by shock jocks Opie and Anthony. Weiner has made them take the fall for sharing an explicit picture Breitbart says his “source” claims is Weiner’s privates. But in the video below, you can see Breitbart having a fine time passing around the pic, which he curiously saved to his cellphone….

    Meanwhile, the papers have been rolling out their stories on Meagan Broussard, the Texas single mom who seems to have sold the full stock of photos and text messages she received from Congressman Weiner, after consulting with a Republican “friend” about what to do with them. The friend suggested Drudge or Breitbart.

    Breitbart was obviously set up to be the #1 villian of the aftermath.

    The Reid Report by the way traces back to Joy Reid of ImageLab LLC. That name by coincidence or not is remarkably similar to John Reid. Searching the Reid Report archives shows it has blogged on things such as the Connell hoax while also publishing Raw Story and VR excerpts as if they are legitemate sources.

    According to Joy-Ann Reid’s linked in page, ImageLab LLC “[provides] media consulting services to political, corporate and non-profit clients.”

    I am not in any way whatsoever saying this person has had anything to do with John Reid’s (Dan Wolfe’s?) activities. And I do admit I am running the risk of hijacking this thread with a lame post. I’m just wondering if perhaps the person or persons behind the Reid persona came up with the name John Reid after the name Joy-Anne Reid popped into his head. And I may be wrong, but the first excerpt seems to imply that it was Breitbart who was behind stinging Weiner. I don’t get why the word source was in quotes seemingly in wink wink snark mode. It’s also odd that the “article” says, “[The Weiner pic was] curiously saved to [Breitbart’s] cellphone.”

    I realise this might be a goofy deadend route to travel. Nonetheless, I find it interesting that the above link’s spin was basically exploiting Weinergate to mock Andrew Breitbart.

    Prepostericity (04c337)

  113. Oops, sorry for again having a typo in my username link to my humble blogspot.

    Prepostericity (04c337)

  114. Comment by Kaisersoze — 8/14/2011 @ 9:22 pm That makes some serious sense. The original sting and the aftermath could be two separate stories.

    Prepostericity (04c337)

  115. If Kaisersoze is correct, there could be two separate groups dealing with the aftermath according to different agendas. That’s it for me, at least for now.

    Prepostericity (04c337)

  116. Patterico,
    If you are still around can you answer this. It’s important, to me anyway. The various caps of DMs you have posted. Were those made by you of forwarded email or were the caps attached as images to an email sen to you?

    Rocksem (0471ae)

  117. For one thing…

    Go with the assumption that the person behind this is a liberal woman who has a personal vendetta against Weiner…

    She is gathering information using Wolfe and Reid for months

    Then the picture to GNC happens…

    She puts out the word to every media outlet…

    And Breitbart picks it up.

    She’s torn.Wants to take down Weiner but as a liberal, Breotbart is public enemy number one.

    He wants to talk on the phone. She can’t because she is a
    woman.

    (the only phone calls connected to this story are with women., you’ll note, mrs Reid to Tommy. JG to me)

    So a few days inoto the scandal, I say publicly I think Wolfe is fake and possibly a woman.

    That’s why she hates me.

    Lee Stranahan (708cc3)

  118. I think that theory seriously overestimates the importance of Andrew Breitbart to your average liberal. At the end of the day, I don’t think most people care enough about Breitbart to let him get in the way of a personal vendetta they’ve – particularly a vendetta with as many moving parts as this one.

    Leviticus (b85154)

  119. First, you’re wrong about the general hatred of ab

    Second, everything I’m saying is consistent with the behavior I witnessed

    Lee Stranahan (708cc3)

  120. Thank you DRJ, and thanks for the link. I had not seen that before.

    prmetime (1d022f)

  121. Comment by Lee Stranahan — 8/14/2011 @ 9:44 pm

    Here’s the problem with your theory Lee. Where’s the gloat? People on personal vendettas will want the victim to know who took them out. If this is how you say what is the point of keeping up Reid? Neither you are Breitbart is falling for it or even remotely likely to. So no point to keeping up Reids.

    After taking out Weiner why didn’t this woman simply out herself as DW and gloat over the fact she took Weiner down? She had done nothing illegal in doing that.

    Rocksem (0471ae)

  122. Internet /b/ tards brought down Congressman Weiner, “Brilliant Theorist”?

    And why would they do that?

    I believe the term the kids use these days is “for the lulz”…

    Scott Jacobs (d027b8)

  123. You don’t seem to understand how obsessed people act.

    Lee Stranahan (708cc3)

  124. Who cares about Andrew Breitbart, seriously? That’s my point.

    Leviticus (b85154)

  125. Certain segments of the Left seem to care a great deal…

    Scott Jacobs (d027b8)

  126. Who is to say that the gloat hasn’t already happened – privately. If Mrs. Weiner doesn’t know, why should AW tell the world?

    Nathan Wagner (3a0685)

  127. I guess I don’t run in those circles, Scott.

    Leviticus (b85154)

  128. Certain segments of the Left seem to care a great deal…

    Comment by Scott Jacobs — 8/14/2011 @ 10:09 pm

    too true, for example: indictbreitbart.org I do NOT suggest hitting the site Neal was pimping it all over his DK account prior to being banned.

    ppk_pixie (1df0c8)

  129. Gennette,
    if you are still around could you tell me if you have any caps or emails of Twitter notifications of DMs from Nikki? It doesn’t matter what’s in them. I just want to ask about the Time.

    Rocksem (0471ae)

  130. Try this…

    Ask yourself what DW / the Reids were obsessed with proving about Weiner…

    Then look up what screenwriting teacher Lew Hunter’s big credit is about….

    Lee Stranahan (708cc3)

  131. Uhm, there’s a website called indictbreitbart.org. There was all that stuff revolving around ACORN. Breitbart is a major player in regards to internet zeitgeist, as are his opposition. I agree the average slob on the streets couldn’t care less about any of this. Since Weiner was on a serious trajectory to compete for Mayor of NYC, the occam’s razor mentioned would say people in favour of other candidates might have been behind the original creepy following of him.

    Prepostericity (04c337)

  132. ppk_pixie, great minds think alike.

    Prepostericity (04c337)

  133. Asking “why didn’t JG go away after Weiner was exposed” assumed incorrectly that Weiner was exposed for the reason JG wanted him exposed….which clearly isn’t true.

    Forget the pic sent to gennette – that wasnt part of the JG agenda

    Lee Stranahan (708cc3)

  134. I guess I don’t run in those circles, Scott.

    Well, no…

    You see, you’re sane… :)

    Scott Jacobs (d027b8)

  135. Comment by Lee Stranahan — 8/14/2011 @ 10:24 pm

    From IMDB

    Fallen Angel (TV 1981)

    Twelve year old Jennifer is unhappy with her widowed mom’s relationship with a family friend. Feeling lonely, she readily accepts the friendship of an adult man named Howie and joins the softball team he coaches. Soon, Howie is convincing Jennifer to pose for photographs which become more and more revealing. Howie turns out to be a pedophile who works in child pornography and he plans to make Jennifer a “star”. Will Jennifer’s mother be able to help her daughter before it’s too late? Written by Anonymous

    Prepostericity (04c337)

  136. @76 You have a lot of reading to do. I’m pretty sure if you’ve read twenty posts in any of these threads you would have seen the words “threats,threat, family, harassment,…etc.,,” Please stop insulting our intelligence.

    I’ve been skipping the post mortem, pretty much.
    You remember the first time you played organised ball?
    You quite understand the rules? Well I don’t understand the rules of this game, so I’ll bid you good day and good hunting.

    papertiger (e55ba0)

  137. Comment by Lee Stranahan — 8/14/2011 @ 10:30 pm

    By being the person who RTed the pic she took down Weiner. She accomplished her months & months long goal. Why isn’t she gloating over it? Instead of hanging around as DW/Reid and not being believed by anybody? What’s her agenda now? Give things to Patterico to post so you can call her out as a fraud some more?

    Rocksem (0471ae)

  138. papertiger is OK, goatsred. He just hasn’t followed this.

    papertiger, we consider this important. That’s all.

    Patterico (f724ca)

  139. Gennette,
    Forget about what I mentioned. DM notifications to you won’t help.

    Rocksem (0471ae)

  140. Is there a Rocksem and a Rockem?
    Or are those the same??

    @Rocksem
    I have no DM notifications from the starchild111… my email notifications were disabled. But I have email notifications for the DMs from the JR9 account that Nikki used when I returned to Twitter.

    Gennette (fc0584)

  141. Comment by Gennette — 8/14/2011 @ 10:47 pm

    They’re the same. Didn’t realize I forgot the S till you addressed me as Rockem. The DM notifications don’t help. They are formatted to your TZ. Thanks though.

    Rocksem (0471ae)

  142. Patterico,
    It would still help if you could answer if you made caps or they were sent to use as attachments.
    Thanks

    Rocksem (0471ae)

  143. sent to you as attachments…

    Rocksem (0471ae)

  144. @Rocksem

    Couldn’t we compare both sides of a conversation and see if the times match?
    JR9 sent Patterico the DM notifications from me to Nikki to the JR9 account, if I recall correctly.

    Gennette (fc0584)

  145. Gennette, Yes that would help. I thought you didn’t have the DMs anymore?

    Look at Part 1 of this thread and find a DM screencap from you to JR9. Then tell us what time you actually sent it.

    Example, JR9 received the first DM on that thread at 1:09 AM in the TZ set on his Twitter account. If you sent it at 11:09 PM your time, that would put JR9 twitter TZ as Central time.

    Then, the fact that JR9’s email client shows the time of the Forwarded message as 2:09 AM indicates that the email client was configured with an Eastern TZ.

    Molon Labe (dc676c)

  146. @MolonLabe

    I had no email notifications from my first Twitter (GennetteNicole). It was linked to my main email and the notifications clogged my inbox so I disabled them.
    When I returned to Twitter (GennetteC) I had to use a new email address and I kept the Twitter notifications enabled.

    Gennette (fc0584)

  147. Gennette, well OK, but it’s not really about notifications you *received*, it’s about notifications you caused to be sent by DM’ing JR9 or Nikki.

    Either way, you don’t have the info I take it. But perhaps you could reconstruct the time you sent one of those DMs? We just need the local (to you, Pacific I assume) time that you sent one of those DMs to place JR9’s twitter TZ.

    Molon Labe (dc676c)

  148. Gennette, have you considered asking Twitter to restore your old account? Sounds impossible but maybe if you could get ahold of someone and explain the situation?

    Much greater chance of success if you did it in person. Just sayin’

    Molon Labe (dc676c)

  149. Gennette,
    The problem is each user sees everything in or from twitter based on the TZ they put in the settings. Mine is EST. But If I send a DM to you you will see it as 3 hours earlier and the notification sent to you will reflect that, not my TZ. Emails to you from Nikki would be different. They would show in header the TZ set in senders email. I don’t expect you to give those though. Did you notice any time difference in emails from her?

    This all relates to what Molon Labe brought up in comments at the end of Part 3 thread here.

    He has shown pretty conclusively that the TZ for the Starchild Twitter account was set to Central due to UTC time stamp in headers of Forwarded DM Notifications.

    The TZ for the JR Twitter account was set for 1 hour prior to TZ of email used by JR to forward DM notifications sent to Nikki email. Assuming, which is all we can do (no evidence/no UTC), that JR9 twitter was also set to central that would mean email JR used to forward Nikki DM notifications was Eastern.

    Provided Order of Forwarded email headers in DM notifications to JR and Nikki were not manipulated, unlikely I think due to large number, neither were forwarded using Yahoo or Gmail. Hotmail account was probably used to forward Nikki DM notifications. I haven’t determined what was used to forward JR DM notifications yet. All of this forwarding was done prior to cap being made. So Reids were using a Hotmail account & another besides Yahoo & Gmail.

    Some of this depends on whether Patterico capped the DMs or they were sent as images to him. I am assuming images because forwarding headers do not match Gmail which is what Patterico says he received emails from.

    Rocksem (0471ae)

  150. I capped the DMs. How they were sent to me I have no idea. What do I look for?

    Patterico (f724ca)

  151. I mean they were sent by Gmail but how he got them in the Gmail I’m not sure.

    Patterico (f724ca)

  152. Sorry Molon Lobe. I was typing all that time & didn’t see your responses.

    Rocksem (0471ae)

  153. Patterico,
    Look at an email JR sent you with a DM. Is there an attachment with an image like a jpg or a gif?

    When you say capped. Did you make a screen capture of the email sent to you, paste it into a photo editor, and save it as an image? Or did you click on an image in email from JR and save that?

    Rocksem (0471ae)

  154. Figure out how to view the full message headers in your email application. Example, In Outlook 2010, you open a message and then access File->Info->Properties.

    Don’t just post the headers yet though, there could be identifiable info in there about you or your computer.

    If you delete the first Received: header and everything above it, then scan the rest for anything personal, you should be OK to post it.

    Molon Labe (dc676c)

  155. I bet Liberty_Chick can parse the headers. You should send them to her.

    Note you can’t just forward the JR email, the headers get stripped from the forwarded message (except the From, To, Date, and Subject headers)

    Interested in what email client, the path the message took to get to you, and any times. I doubt the times will be helpful since they will be in UTC and not in any local TZ.

    Molon Labe (dc676c)

  156. It’s just a forwarded message, as if Twitter had sent the DMs to the Gmail account and then they were forwarded directly to me.

    Patterico (f724ca)

  157. UTC is easily convertible…

    redc1c4 (fb8750)

  158. forgive my ignorance but what is UTC?

    Anita Busch (a025dd)

  159. Patterico,
    Here is my problem. Look at DMs in Part 1 thread to JR. The Forwarded message part at the top has this order;
    From:
    To:
    Sent:
    Subject:

    In my Gmail account when I go to Forward a message i can see the forward header as I can add a message above it. The order there is;
    From:
    Date:
    Subject:
    To:

    Notice the difference? Different order & word is Date instead of Sent.

    Th caps in Part 3 do not even look like a Forwarded message but rather directly from the email. Did you cut off the forwarded part in the Part 3 caps?

    Rocksem (0471ae)

  160. Rocksem, you can have a gmail account and send/receive mail without using the gmail web interface. E.g., you can configure your iPhone or even Outlook to send/receive mail though your gmail account.

    In that case, the particular format of the forwarded message headers depends on the email client on the phone, pc, etc.

    Molon Labe (dc676c)

  161. redcic4, but if all times are in UTC there is no information about the sender’s time zone.

    Molon Labe (dc676c)

  162. Comment by Molon Labe — 8/15/2011 @ 12:52 am

    Oh, that’s true. It could also be another web client was being used to retrieve & send email from Gmail account. But it wasn’t done in gmail web client.

    Rocksem (0471ae)

  163. I took screencaps that showed the header on the original image, but not the “forwarded from” part.

    I originally did not intend to reveal John Reid’s email address.

    Patterico (f724ca)

  164. I just grabbed the text from one of the emails including the forwarded part.

    From nikki reid nikkireid93@gmail.com
    to Patterico date Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 7:03 PM
    subject Fwd:
    mailed-by gmail.com
    signed-by gmail.com
    Important mainly because of the people in the conversation.
    Images from this sender are always displayed. Don’t display from now on.
    hide details Jun 26

    ———- Forwarded message ———-
    From: nikki reid
    Date: Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 9:02 AM
    Subject:
    To: nikkireid93@gmail.com

    Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 22:41:28 +0000
    From: dm-wraav_trbetr=ubgznvy.pbz-4e41d@postmaster.twitter.com
    Subject: Anthony Weiner (@RepWeiner) has sent you a direct message on Twitter!

    Too bad you told me you’re a fraud, John Reid. That sorta released me from any promises. I don’t owe any duty to frauds.

    Patterico (f724ca)

  165. I’d be willing to forward some of these to someone I trust.

    Fully.

    That universe is very, very small these days.

    Patterico (f724ca)

  166. Okay,
    Hotmail does not add a forwarded Message tag when you forward. I would say a Hotmail account was used to retrieve emails from Nikki yahoo account (Part 3 thread) and then forwarded those emails to Patterico from Hotmail using the Gmail address. So, the Hotmail account had access to Yahoo and Gmail accounts.

    A separate client was used to retrieve and forward DMs in Part 1 thread from gmail account.

    Rocksem (0471ae)

  167. OK,
    Just confirmed with test.

    Based on 165 from Patterico. The DM notifications to Starchild111 were retrieved from Yahoo email using Hotmail/Windows Live account and forwarded from Hotmail account to the Gmail account and then forwarded to Patterico using Gmail web client.

    Patterico, in 165 email there is a solid line above
    “Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 22:41:28 +0000″ correct?

    A different client was used to forward the email notifications for the DMs of the JR9 Twitter account.

    Rocksem (0471ae)

  168. I know this all may seem silly to some. But at the time I remember Patterico waiting a very long time to receive stuff from JR after being told it was coming. This was probably due to all of this stuff being done prior. These are not the actions of some befuddled dad or tech newbie as DW purported to be IMHO.

    Rocksem (0471ae)

  169. Rocksem,I think what you are doing is every bit as intriguing as this weiner stuff. Maybe more so; the technical details that people don’t think of are very telling. Anyone with a hotmail account is automatically suspicious!

    prmetime (1d022f)

  170. Comment by prmetime — 8/15/2011 @ 2:15 am

    yes, that should narrow it down to less than 100 million I think. :)

    Rocksem (0471ae)

  171. HA! But surely there are few of these accounts used for anything other than spam..

    Anyway, I like your thinking.

    prmetime (1d022f)

  172. Well I’m not 100% sure but the Windows Live Client, desktop not web, is the first I have seen that uses Sent instead of Date in Forward header. The order is not exactly the same but that may be because he was using an older version.

    Rocksem (0471ae)

  173. “Why would AB bother with what amounts to a fairly small-potatoes congresscritter?

    AB was probably intended to take the bait and end up looking like a fool, if you re-read the time line and behavior of the many and various socks.”

    Comment by Dianna — 8/14/2011 @ 9:00 pm

    I agree. It was a lame plot against whatever media, AB being a prime target, would rush to publish without demanding real verification of the accusers/”victims.”

    koam @wittier (7b067e)

  174. Lee, I followed up on your comment in the other thread (WD3) with some questions.

    SarahW (af7312)

  175. Sarah,

    Can you link or ask again
    here?

    Lee Stranahan (708cc3)

  176. I am having a hard time keeping up with the various threads, too.

    Yes, the denial of the plural possibilities intrigues. I asked why DW couldn’t have a helper, too.

    I did hear Lee say that the Film Ladd interview and the phone call with the intermediary couldn’t be happening at the same time.

    I thought Film Ladd’s interview was by IM only, I must assume that is not the case based on what Lee says.

    But perhaps Lee really meant something else? That is, that there is another basis for distinguishing the two or ruling out a connection?

    Comment by SarahW — 8/14/2011 @ 7:48 pm

    I was just supposing maybe the simul-communications are not why Lee thinks DW can’t be or be connected to Broussards intermediary in any way…

    Or is it in fact that simultaneous talking that is the clincher?

    Comment by SarahW — 8/14/2011 @ 7:26 pm

    Lee, what is it you know? The Broussard intermediary was on the phone, you said, at the same time Ladd was conducting an interview in which dw was ranting.

    Since that does not preclude simultaneous conversation, something else must have been going on that does.

    Was Ladd on the telephone before his online chat? Were any of these video conversations?

    What else would make that simultaneous convo impossible in your judgement/observation?

    Accepting the premise that the simultaneous conversation was a physical impossibility, what precludes the intermediary and the DWsock from having some other connection, or being persons working in tandem?

    Who did the intermediary claim to be, that is, what identification did he/she provide, if any beyond “a friend of Broussard’s”? Did you or Breitbart have a clue, a suspicion, did you ever find out or care to find out?

    Did the intermediary claim a sex ? Was that person passing as male or female? Breitbart called his information low priority, and the intermediary as of no interest to him and said little more than he was unknown and disposable,

    Was Breitbart actually in possession of information he denied having to Ron? You said you don’t know who the person was either. do you really have no clue at all?

    When I know who that intermediary is, and how he/she knew Broussard, I can make up my own mind about whether there is any connection to the cavalcade of socks with more confidence.

    Broussard’s actions seem more interesting in hindsight and on review.

    Comment by Sarahw — 8/14/2011 @ 3:03 pm

    Dustin (b7410e)

  177. Lee, Greg and P offered some fact points/questions, too, so I’ll put the point where it begins here:

    Comment by Sarahw — 8/14/2011 @ 3:03 pm

    and then just keep scrolling to see the rest – comments from 383 -388

    SarahW (af7312)

  178. Lee, Greg and P offered some fact points/questions, too, so I’ll put the point where it begins here:

    Comment by Sarahw — 8/14/2011 @ 3:03 pm

    and then just keep scrolling to see the rest – comments from 383 -388

    SarahW (af7312)

  179. Try it…

    You go and type in one conversation while talking on th phone for ab extended period and see if the person on the phone doesn’t notice.

    Theres more I’m not at liberty to say but what I said is enough

    Lee Stranahan (708cc3)

  180. So Weiner is a dick?

    What else is new?

    DohBiden (d54602)

  181. “He wants to talk on the phone. She can’t because she is a
    woman.

    (the only phone calls connected to this story are with women., you’ll note, mrs Reid to Tommy. JG to me)

    So a few days inoto the scandal, I say publicly I think Wolfe is fake and possibly a woman.

    That’s why she hates me.”

    Lee – That’s a good hindsight explanation given the JG MA call occurred significantly later than when you began implying Wolfe could be a woman on 6/02. When did Tommy C. confirm telephonic conversations with Patricia Reid?

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  182. Comment by Prepostericity — 8/14/2011 @ 9:32 pm

    re: Joy Reid / Nikki Reid

    Nikki Reed is a pretty TV actress who has a youthful following. Starchild111 aka Jenay aka Nikki Reid had a history of being a fan of several pretty girl celebs, so one existing theory was that she (supposedly a Jennifer George from Boston) took the name as a fangirl.

    koam @wittier (7b067e)

  183. Who benefits from Weiner resigning? Any other sitting US Rep from NY who was at risk of being redistricted out. The 2010 census is going to make NY lose 2 seats in Congress, one of which is likely to be a Dem seat. With a Dem gone, the rest of them can breathe easier. NYT analysis

    koam @wittier (7b067e)

  184. Koam, my problem is with information overload. It’s taking me too long to figure things out.

    Maybe you and others can help. Please clarify or correct.

    A real Jennifer George from Boston used to own one of the “teenaged” twitter accounts. It became dormant and thus open for anyone to take over. Like if a domain expires, someone independent can take ownership.

    A cache showed that the original starchild111 was this Jennifer George. It is now known that the real George had nothing to do with Weinergate.

    A police report stated that Lee Stranahan threatened this person. It was later amended to state that a follower of Mr. Stranahan made the threat.

    The recent twitter incarnation of the starchild111 name was created last September but not used on a consistent basis until this recent March.

    I’m curious if starchild111 as a word in itself means anything. I know starchild does.

    I have located a starchild111 posting on a convoluted message board called Project Avalon starting in April, 2010.

    I could have sworn it’s been implied by that Neal creep that I might be “Jennifer George, work for Breitbart, be behind these fake accounts, work for conservative paid fakes, was behind the attempted sting of Weiner, am a paid fake with sock puppets, etc.. But information overload and the psychological attacks have made it very difficult for me to be of much use at this time.

    I’m a fricken human being. I don’t really have the time to figure these things out, and the way things are set up, it doesn’t seem possible. it’s definitely no fun seeing my real name tossed around in conmplex cybersmears.

    I hope good people can put two and two together and solve this story close to its entirety.

    Prepostericity (04c337)

  185. Lee, it’s not enough. What is it you know that actually rules it out?

    let me understand you – you are saying that what occurred was a simultaneous convo, one on phone, and one by IM, is how I should rule out Broussard’s intermediary as being or being connected to DW. But I’ve done it – not as a part of hoaxing but most definately while multi-tasking on unrelated matters.

    Bluetooth and headsets make it very easy, so on the simul-convo point alone that doesn not rule out what you seem to be implying it does.

    And it’s bindun, as they say, in other internet hoaxes

    SarahW (af7312)

  186. “It is now known that the real George had nothing to do with Weinergate.”

    Comment by Prepostericity — 8/15/2011 @ 12:54 pm

    Most of us don’t know who the real George in MA is. Those who are privy to the LE investigation may have more info than we do (they hint this repeatedly). It’s possible that you could call Lew Hunter and he or his wife would tell you something about her.

    koam @wittier (7b067e)

  187. FWIW, Breitbard says Broussard’s intermediary was talked to on the phone, and presented himself as a male.

    So at least one unidentified helper/intermediary/story pusher to R wing media is male, though this one is not among the known cavalcade of socks.

    SarahW (af7312)

  188. “The recent twitter incarnation of the starchild111 name was created last September but not used on a consistent basis until this recent March.”

    Comment by Prepostericity — 8/15/2011 @ 12:54 pm

    Check this and other posts by Pru Paine for fact-based analysis of Starchild111’s history with actual dates. It is definitely not known when the starchild111 account was created. You cannot get the start date on a closed twitter account. The possibly innocent JGMA said that she started it in 2009.

    koam @wittier (7b067e)

  189. Comment by Prepostericity — 8/15/2011 @ 12:54 pm

    Yeah we looked at that Project Avalon starchild111 a long time ago. I think it’s just a coincidental name. If I recall, the age of the woman was a disqualifier, for starters.

    koam @wittier (7b067e)

  190. Papertiger

    Been in a shi*** mood all weekend. My apologies.

    If Patterico stands up for you you must be OK

    goatsred (66819b)

  191. Comment by Prepostericity — 8/15/2011 @ 12:54 pm

    Koam, my problem is with information overload. It’s taking me too long to figure things out.

    Do you know how much research I’ve done on this thing? I get on slightly false trails – I follow side issues – and then Idiscover things.

    It’s possible to examine just one little piece of this and get interesting insights.

    Weinergate is sprawling. If it is not an ocean, it is more than a pond.

    Eventually, things begin to become clearer. And you realize what’s NOT clear, that should be clear: like exactly when the tweet was left.

    And that’s one of the things SOCKREID and company have succeeded in keeping obscure.

    I’ll probably put some of this stuff in a different place.

    Sammy Finkelman (d3daeb)

  192. Maybe you and others can help. Please clarify or correct.

    A real Jennifer George from Boston used to own one of the “teenaged” twitter accounts. It became dormant and thus open for anyone to take over.

    A dormant account can’t be taken over. This thing looks a little bit, so it’s very logical to assume the account was created for another purpose and then put to this use.

    According to the chronology at http://www.soundbitten.com/archives/week_2011_06_19.html

    There was also an account called Frankiethadog
    that had been created on January 8, 2010, that suddenly, on May 18, 2011 began retweeting some of Mike Stacks’s (goatsred) tweets.

    Like if a domain expires, someone independent can take ownership.

    I think the time period is longer. And some cache’s prove the two accounts are the same. At least anyway it was continiously used from August 2010 at least on. Of course JGMA claimed to have created it in May. But anyway when if a user name is used again the real name shouldn’t stay the same.

    A cache showed that the original starchild111 was this Jennifer George. It is now known that the real George had nothing to do with Weinergate.

    The cache shows the operation was continuous.

    See Starchild in Transition:

    http://leestranahan.com/weinergate-starchild111-in-transition

    There is no reason to say this George had nothing to do with Weinergate.

    A police report stated that Lee Stranahan threatened this person. It was later amended to state that a follower of Mr. Stranahan made the threat.

    The second time a police report was taken JGMA revised or corrected the story.

    The recent twitter incarnation of the starchild111 name was created last September but not used on a consistent basis until this recent March.

    There is a tweet from August in one cache. It was probably used to try to gin up fan activity, buzz and publicity at first.

    Sammy Finkelman (d3daeb)

  193. Thanks for the replies. I’m a bit groggy but will try to return the offer before signing off.

    Wow, so Lew Hunter is actually into this. I thought Lee mentioned him as an easy puzzle to understand the big picture motive of the teenaged sock puppet schtick.

    I got that September tidbit from this Brisbane Times article. On page 2 is where it says the source is The New York Times. So those dates seem solid. The new starchild111 incarnation was started in September 2010 and picked up the pace the following March.

    Ok, maybe it was just a coincidence that two people would decide to add a 111 to the end of a somewhat common phrase like starchild. Though April and Sept. 2010 are relatively close dates and fairly close to March 2011. I guess it would be nice to know when Jennifer closed her starchild111 twitter account. My major schtick has been to blog on internet convolution. I’ve been at it for quite a while. This isn’t the first time I’ve been ensnared in some stupid, goofy cybersmear. Maybe you can thus see where I’m coming from. Perhaps the starchild111 name was picked because it was originally owned from a Bostonian and that’s where I come from too. But maybe not, and I can’t prove that.

    Sammy- There is definitely a learning curve to virtually every topic. There are few where no prerequisites are required.

    I know what it’s like to be on both sides of knowing as much as anyone on a topic and being a total newbie.

    While this doesn’t seem like an ocean, it feels like it might be a great lake. So your analogy on that makes sense.

    Prepostericity (04c337)

  194. Sammy, I now see your new big post. I don’t have time to respond immediately but will check it out. Thanks in advance for that effort. It’s appreciated.

    Prepostericity (04c337)

  195. Koam wrote that George says she started the twitter account in 2009. Sammy’s saying she started it in May I’m assuming 2010. Those two statements are like fitting a square peg into a round hole. This seems to be a very important subtopic to figure out, in my humble opinion. The August 2010 date lines up with the NYT’s article.

    Prepostericity (04c337)

  196. 194. Comment by Prepostericity — 8/15/2011 @ 2:09 pm

    Sammy, I now see your new big post. I don’t have time to respond immediately but will check it out. Thanks in advance for that effort. It’s appreciated.

    Oh, that’s not my really big post, which I’ll try to put here:

    http://patterico.com/2011/08/14/conversations-with-puppets-part-5-the-very-pro-weiner-john-reid-2

    There’s more about starchild here:

    http://prudencepaine.com/2011/06/29/for-weinergate-addicts-only

    Excerpt:

    Here’s the newly discovered middle cache of the Starchild111 account, depicting its state as of 4/6/11:

    [Defunct link in brackets]

    Changes since previous cache:

    “Real Name” change from Jenay to Starchild
    Avatar change from Twitter’s generic egg to a user-uploaded falling star graphic
    Page background change from Twitter’s generic blue clouds to Twitter’s black starry night
    Original (presumed) 16 people followed by Starchild111 remain followed (as evidenced by the little thumbnails of the followed avatars)
    Things remaining the same:

    The account still has only 11 people following it, though we don’t know if the actual people on the list changed. Only that the number remained constant.

    The account now follows 10 more people than it did previously. Thumbnails of the new 10′s avatars are shown first, before showing the original, matching 16—adding up to the total 26.
    Both caches show that Stachild111 had tweeted only seven times since the account began.

    However, Twitter deducts any deleted tweets from the total tweet count.

    The first cache shows tweets ranging from August 14 to November 11, 2010. The second cache does not show the account profile page, so we only get a glimpse of the account statistics on the right. It doesn’t show tweets. Therefore, we don’t know which of the early tweets she deleted to make room for her tweets to Ginger Lee, nor do we know whether she had deleted any Ginger Lee tweets.

    (The third cache below shows three tweets to Ginger Lee between 1/1/11 and 4/6/11.)

    Sammy Finkelman (d3daeb)

  197. I thought on the Stranahan threat thingie, George said the policeman taking the report made the error. There’s another discrepancy that would be nice to resolve. I’ve got to stop. Thank you very much. Hopefully those of you with better knowledge of this than me can nail some of this down. I’ll need time to look into this more closely.

    Prepostericity (04c337)

  198. Did George say when she last made a tweet as starchild111? It seems like the FBI should be brought into this investigation. Unless of course the people behind the scamming are FBI informants. Maybe starchild111 is Whitey Bulger’s girlfriend. p:> Yikes. That was a joke. Anyway, this is a crazy world we live in. Ok, I’m going now for sure. Thanks again for helping out this newbie.

    Prepostericity (04c337)


  199. I 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.”

    Comment by Gennette — 8/15/2011 @ 2:18 pm

    Gennette,

    PatriotUSA76
    sources: PatriotUSA76 public tweets http://www.scribd.com/doc/56678261/patriotusa76-tweets-april26-may30 (this link has been made private since I did my analysis. I don’t know who owns it and why its status has changed)

    and Ladd IM interview with PatriotUSA76
    http://filmladd.com/?PatriotUSA76Interview

    koam @wittier (7b067e)


  200. Koam wrote that George says she started the twitter account in 2009. Sammy’s saying she started it in May I’m assuming 2010. Those two statements are like fitting a square peg into a round hole. This seems to be a very important subtopic to figure out, in my humble opinion. The August 2010 date lines up with the NYT’s article.

    Comment by Prepostericity — 8/15/2011 @ 2:19 pm


    It is definitely not known when the starchild111 account was created. You cannot get the start date on a closed twitter account.

    Try Twitter Grader on an open account and on a closed account.

    koam @wittier (7b067e)

  201. Here’s the thing – I do not have an interest in debating, if I say I’m 100% sure ite not the same person for example then I’m 100% sure. If someone doesn’t believe me or agree, then – so? Whatever you keep on thinking that if it floats your boat.

    I’ll try to answer questions but zero interest in debate. If anyone really wants to debate my fee for consulting is $200 an hour and I accept PayPal.

    I’ll do anything I can to help Pat, too.

    Lee Stranahan (708cc3)

  202. Re: 200 to koam@wittier

    That pdf link of Patriotusa76’s tweets was posted by Neal Rauhauser, along with some other pdfs of tweets from other players like @repneedledick, probably in early June.

    JoeBlow (b017e6)

  203. @Koam 201

    Thanks. I’m noticing some subtle similarities between DWs and Nikki’s writing styles.
    Of course, they could easily be coincidences.

    Gennette (55c21d)

  204. Re: 200 & 204

    The cache is still up for Rauhauser’s pdf pf the Patriotusa76 account.

    Is it possible Wolfe was tweeting in Central time? Or is the Central time reference related to the time zone of the computer that made the pdf?

    Here’s Wolfe’s infamous retweet, as it appears in the scribd cache, marked Central Daylight Time:

    RT @RepWeiner @GennetteNicole http://yfrog.com/h25m3luj >> Anthony Weiner tweets X RATED PIC TO FOLLOWER! RT RT RT Fri May 27 2011 23:34:09 (Central Daylight Time) via web

    I’m pretty sure the correct time for that tweet was 11:34 pm (23:34) Eastern, not Central.

    JoeBlow (b017e6)

  205. errata: Of course JGMA claimed to have created it in May.

    She claimed to have created it in 2009, month unspecified, according to Lee Stranahan. I am not sure what I was thinking of when I typed May. She claimed to have dropped it at some point.

    Sammy Finkelman (d3de3a)

  206. Lee, there is no “debate.”

    Whether they are the same person or not, or two people working to similar ends with a connection beyond that, is POSSIBLE under what you said makes it impossible.

    If there is something beyond the simultaneous conversations, just say so.

    SarahW (af7312)

  207. Why not help by explaining why they cannot be the same person, or persons with a connection?

    SarahW (af7312)

  208. Also, did you ever get a hard copy of the UCLA directory? (since JG would not have been able to redact that until the next publication)

    Have you had follow up with Hunter?

    Have you learned anything about the history of JG that would make her seem an even likelier participant in the events?

    Do you know who contacted Breitbart on Broussard’s behalf? Was Breitbart telling Ron correctly that he also had no idea who that person was?

    Even if that intermediary is a person apart from all that’s gone on I think his identity is important.

    SarahW (af7312)

  209. Also, assuming there is more than the simultaneous IM/phone business, why did you say you are not at liberty to explain your
    100% certainty? In a post-tommyX world that percentage bandied about without explanation is…a warning sign.

    You said it would be impossible to carry on a phone convo and im somebody else at the same time about a different matter without others being the wiser. Since I’ve done I don’t see why someone else can’t, especially given “Wolfe’s” lags and repetitions. IS THERE SOMETHING MORE THAN THAT?

    Broussard called that person a friend but I know neither how or when or why that person approached her and tried to pimp her story out to right wing press outlets.

    SarahW (af7312)

  210. ANd by WHY you are not “at liberty” I mean, is it a point of honor (promise), an instruction by law enforcement (cooperation with authorities), a professional courtesy (another reporter-who doesn’t employ your or vice vera-sharing info), interest (potential saleability of a future scoop, fears of liability) or part of an employment agreement?

    SarahW (af7312)

  211. Joe Blow: Here’s Wolfe’s infamous retweet, as it appears in the scribd cache, marked Central Daylight Time:

    RT @RepWeiner @GennetteNicole http://yfrog.com/h25m3luj >> Anthony Weiner tweets X RATED PIC TO FOLLOWER! RT RT RT Fri May 27 2011 23:34:09 (Central Daylight Time) via web

    That’s the time of the retweet. There is a whole mystery about the time of the original tweet.

    In the Ladd interview, Dan Wolfe had to be asked twice about what exactly happened. He only answered it the second after 1 1/2 hours, and basically what he said is a pack of lies. Or at least not consistent with a number of other things. He claimed Lee Stranahan took him too literally when he said it was deleted within seconds. He claimed it was not an actual retweet because Weiner had deleted it already. Only it is all wrong.

    There are caches at the Smoking Gun of what allegedly are what Dan Wolfe sent to Breitbart on the night of May 27/28.

    Smoking Gun page, dated June 2, that contains links to files that allegedly originate with Dan Wolfe and which the Smoking Gun seems to say were sent to Andrew Breitbart

    They are hard to get your computer to read and even harder to print or save. To see them you can click on the links. Do not then press the back button to see the originating Smoking Gun page, or you will lose the whole page, and go back to the previous page, but press enter or refresh. To save or print, the best way is maybe to press PrtSc (to put the contents of the screen into the clipboard) and switch over to Microsoft Word and press Ctrl-V.

    Among the files are 1) what purports to be a twitter search for the thread repweiner and 2) what purports to be a search for tweets left by RepWeiner.

    The text search for repweiner says the yfrog tweet was left “3 minutes ago” The next previous tweet that came from Weiner is about being on the Rachel Maddow show (not the Seattle 545 tweet or retweet) and is dated 6 hours ago.

    The search for tweets left by Weiner has the yfrog tweet occurring “25 minutes ago” and has three tweets after that. One by Weiner, complaining that the Tivo ate his hockey game , datedd “21 minutes ago” which would be one minute after the previous screen capture, a RT of a commiserating post from someone about that being a tragedy, dated “20 minutes ago” (the original tweet would not be there because this is a search only for tweets *by* Anthony Weiner. and then another tweet by Weiner, dated “17 minutes ago” again to the same person again saying how bad it is “just kill me now” The Rachel Maddow tweet is no longer the previous Weine tweet. Now TweetCongress could probably verify this and say when any of these tweets were left. It could be that the Maddow tweet was deleted by Weiner because it was past the time, but if so it would
    very odd to not also have deleted the yfrog tweet. It could mean that he hadn’t yet seen the Yfrog tweet. Weiner himself claimed in his interview with Wolf Blitzer that it suddenly popped up while he was tweeting about hockey which would make sense if what saw first was the retweet. Of course also the search for repWeiner could have been edited and skipped any messages between 16 minute ago and 6 hours ago which is big gap for a search for any tweets containing repweiner, and besides didn’t Gennette retweet the Seattle 545 tweet less than 6 hours before 11 PM or 10 PM central time as the case may be?

    As for how Weiner could have tweeted this without knowing it there was a claim by Milowent and cannonfire, apparently true, that if you sent a picture to Yfrog via email Yfrog then issued a tweet with the URL and also with anything on the line. This was supposed to have been a way that Weiner could have been “hacked” or rather the picture could have bene planted by his enemies, but the big flaw with that (besides Weiner’s acknowledgement that the picture was his and he sent it) was that to do so, you’d need to know the secret yfrog e-mail adress. But that is a way that Weiner could have done it, and it is less simple mistake than trying to send a DM and somehow a public message like as if Weiner knew nothing about Twitter at all and t may not be plausible slip of the finger or the mind.
    June 1 cannonfire post in which Milowent shows in the update, it is possible to upload a picture to yfrog without being logged in, which then goes out as a tweet and even can contain text

    http://forum.anchorcove.net/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=3010

    The only problem is, the word None. Now there could be several explanation as to why the word none is missing from the May 27 tweet.

    A) @genette was used as the subject in Weiner’s upload, but @pumapower was used in a different field – the body of the message – by Milowent

    B) Perhaps it was invisible, like maybe a space character, or a character followed by a backspace

    c) If the text is very long it gets dropped from the tweet. Since it appears in the beginning of the message the programmer cannot truncate it so he might decide in that case to drop the words in the subject header.

    There’s another thing I’m wondering.

    Milowent wrote:

    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.”

    I don’t have any idea what Milowent’s source is for this. At first I was thinking this is a record of uploads to Yfrog. Yfrog pages are public but they are not findable. But this is a list of of tweets. May 5 is when Weiner started sending more expplicit pictures to Meagan Broussard. Could Patriotusa76 have seen them Now The Smoking Gun seems to imply that the previous pictures that Weiner also deleted after May 27 were innocuous, But the Dan Wolfe email to Breitbart (also at the Smoking Gun) seems to imply they are not.

    I don’t know — On May 5 Patriotusa76 said there are pix. Dd links get tweeted o May 5 – but patriotusa76 held back because he was looking for the identity of the mistress?
    f

    Sammy Finkelman (d3de3a)

  212. Any direct answers to the questions to Lee, above, somewhere else?

    SarahW (af7312)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.6209 secs.