Weiner Makes It Official — But I Still Have Some Questions
NEW YORK Anthony Weiner has tossed his hat into the race for New York City mayor, joining a crowded field and formally beginning an attempt to come back from a scandal that forced him to resign from the House of Representatives.
After weeks of speculation, the disgraced former congressman made it official with a YouTube video.
I have a few questions I think he should be asked. Start with the DMs he sent to a high school girl in Delaware, and the creepy “cape and tights” line that he used with her — a line he also used with an adult woman with whom he exchanged sexually explicit messages.
As I noted in a June 11, 2011 blog post titled Weinergate: Five Is Not Two:
- On Wednesday, June 8, the New York Post was told that the girl was telling her mother that there had been only two G-rated messages:
The girl’s mother, whose name is being withheld, told The Post Wednesday that Weiner sent nothing obscene — and sent only two brief messages to her daughter about seeing him during an April school trip to the Capitol. . . . The mom said she pointedly questioned her daughter about whether Weiner sent her anything obscene, and the girl swore it was all G-rated.
Note: this is not a claim that she showed her mom messages, but that she had told her mom the messages were G-rated. And that there were only two.
- On Thursday, June 9, 2011, this blog published proof that Weiner had sent the girl the second message quoted at the top of this post: a reference to Weiner being a Superman in cape and tights. This direct message seemed especially creepy given that Weiner had employed identical “cape and tights” imagery as a grooming line for a woman with whom he had exchanged explicit sexual messages…
- On Friday, June 10, 2011, now that the “cape and tights” line was out of the bag, all of a sudden we were being told that there had been five direct messages, and not two. Their alleged content was described in the New York Times, and the creepy line “I came back strong. Large. In charge. Tights and cape shit …” was edited to read: “I came back strong … Large. Tights and cape. …” Readers were not informed that Weiner had included an expletive in his message to the 17-year-old high school junior — much less that the “[t]ights and cape shit” line resembled a line that Weiner had used with an adult woman with whom he had sexted.
It is an open question whether Weiner went down the same road with the high school girl that he went down with the Vegas blackjack dealer — or whether he would have, at some point, if he had not been found out.
I think it’s high time these questions were explored.
Modern Americans seem to have forgotten that mayors and presidents occupy an executive position, where they will be expected to actually run things and get things done. It isn’t a popularity contest or a beauty pageant. These guys aren’t chosen to represent us. And I’d add that responsibility and trust ought to figure large in the evaluation process, such as it is.
What qualification does Anthony Weiner have for any executive position?
Amphipolis (d3e04f) — 5/22/2013 @ 7:48 amNone whatsoever, Amphipolis. And I think it’s way past time for us to keep allowing these creeps to continue in the public arena after they bpull this crap. Is this really the best the Dems can do? Is this really the best we all can do?
Hoagie (3259ab) — 5/22/2013 @ 8:26 amThere are 5 candidates plus running in the primary. Weiner, Controller John Liu whose close aides were recently convicted of campaign funding violations, City Ciouncil Speaker Catherine Quinn, former Controller ad 2009 mayoral loser Bill Thompson, and Public Advocate Bill DeBlasio, whose married to a ex-lesbian
Sal Albanese, not one of the leading five, called a press conf to say weiner should pay the cost of the special election that elected Bob Turner. Just for the publicity.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 5/22/2013 @ 8:32 amI think people behind John Liu may have been responsible for the sockpuppets.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 5/22/2013 @ 8:33 amSo let’s say that you are a conservative in NYC and your choices for a candidate come down to Weiner, the various representatives of ethnic grievance groups, and some socialist backed by the public employee unions. Is there a scenario where you would hold your nose and vote for Weiner? And let’s say, just for sake of argument, that you were forced to vote — you can’t just sit it out or write-in someone else.
At the end of the day, I have so much contempt for Weiner that I still don’t think I could vote for him under those circumstances. I would have to try to choose the candidate who will prove to be the least likely to get his or her agenda implemented post-election.
JVW (23867e) — 5/22/2013 @ 8:42 amThere are also Republicans. B|(Besides former Dem State Sen leader Malcolm Smith who tried to briBE REP county leaders to run in the primary – I guess he’s out)
We have
1) Former Bronx Borough President Adolfo Carrión, Jr. and Obama Administration Regional Director of HUD’s New York and New Jersey Regional
Office, now a Republican
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolfo_Carri%C3%B3n,_Jr.
2) Chairman and CEO of Red Apple Group and Gristedes Foods, who was clued into the sting operation operation involving Malcolm Smith and is just in general not good
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Catsimatidis
3) Former Giuliani deputy mayor and other positons, as well as recently MTA head Joseph J. Lhota.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_J._Lhota
Maybe the only good one in the bunch. Some people didn’t want New York City to get bad and got him into tgeh race even though it meant resigning as MTA head not lonmg after he had been appointed.
All the Democrats would damage policing and education.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 5/22/2013 @ 8:47 amExcept maybe for Albanese
Here is the Wikipedia article on Lhota:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_J._Lhota
His campiagn web site: http://joelhotaformayor.com/
Wikipedia article on former City Council member Sal Albanese
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sal_Albanese
His web site: http://www.salalbanese2013.com/
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 5/22/2013 @ 8:49 amI’ll leave the serious stuff to Patrick and others.
Me, I’ll stick to the infantile puns.
“After a long refractory period, Weiner is stirring again, arousing media interest. Will this be easy, Mr. Weiner? No. Hard.”
Mitch (341ca0) — 5/22/2013 @ 8:50 amThis week’s New yirk scandal: Assembnly member Vitoi Lopez is resigning, Speaker Sheldon Silver not in trouble for bypassing ethics procedures earlier before anotehr set of women complained about him,. There might be al issue involved in the secret settlement.
http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/pervy-brooklyn-assemblyman-vito-lopez-announces-resignation-article-1.1347030
http://polhudson.lohudblogs.com/2013/05/17/gloria-allred-calls-for-sheldon-silvers-ouster/
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/sheldon-silver-repeating-mistakes-vito-lopez-ex-staffer-article-1.1351084
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 5/22/2013 @ 8:56 amWeiner is trying to avoid taking any questions, you know.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 5/22/2013 @ 8:56 amOf course Weiner’s “man of the people” video doesn’t mention his Park Ave apartment being paid for by lobbyists.
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/luxe_on_his_side_B1j7VxzVuwhwa8aSoHxLPJ
Bugg (ba4ca9) — 5/22/2013 @ 9:13 amI’ll get to see more photos and video of Huma, yay! (On the news, on the news!)
Say what you want about Chicago, it’s not New York.
nk (875f57) — 5/22/2013 @ 9:13 amRight nk. And besides that they talk funny in New Yawk. 🙂
elissa (cb940d) — 5/22/2013 @ 11:18 amI’d rather vote for a ham sandwich than a wiener.
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 5/22/2013 @ 11:44 amCampaign slogan: “No Pee-Pee Jokes!”
mojo (0583bf) — 5/22/2013 @ 11:50 amSammy Finkelman
Colonel Haiku (146aeb) — 5/22/2013 @ 12:16 pmare you/have you been member
of Ant Schlong’s paid staff?
Stones! Please don’t mention “ham sammich”, its lunch time on West Coast!
Colonel Haiku (8e79c6) — 5/22/2013 @ 12:20 pmThe thing both sad and amazing at the same time is that Anthony Weiner apparently cannot picture himself in any other profession or endeavor than “politics”. Yes. We have a self-appointed political class in this country. And it is a real problem.
elissa (cb940d) — 5/22/2013 @ 12:26 pmelissa,
I think Weiner can “picture himself.”
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 5/22/2013 @ 12:31 pmHeh, E.S.
elissa (cb940d) — 5/22/2013 @ 12:33 pmSorry, Colonel.
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 5/22/2013 @ 12:34 pmDidn’t mean to elicit you to think of lunch.
How about if I amend it to say that I’d vote for a nice tall glass of Sam Adams over a wiener.
Mayor Ant Schlong… Nice ring, doncha think?
Colonel Haiku (d9226e) — 5/22/2013 @ 1:03 pmDo not underestimate this weiner person—he is stiff competition.
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 5/22/2013 @ 1:15 pmI have a question for you guys about Weiner – do you all think David Vitter should step down?
I think Weiner should go away, but I also think Vitter should have stepped down long ago.
Let’s see who has principles here – do we make jokes and vilify pervs on principle, or do we only do it when it serves our political interests. Who’s first?
Mahalia Cab (0dd32b) — 5/22/2013 @ 1:57 pmThe problem with Weiner is not particularly the thing that he did – although maybe it could be, if it went further than he admitted. Patterico notes he may have cultivated a 17 year old girl.
The problem with Weiner is that he is abig liar and has nothing to say.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 5/22/2013 @ 2:03 pm11. Normally a executive branch official can’t earn extra money. this does not apply to a woman who works for Hillary Clinton and is married to Anthony Weiner.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 5/22/2013 @ 2:06 pm16. Comment by Colonel Haiku (146aeb) — 5/22/2013 @ 12:16 pm
16.Sammy Finkelman
are you/have you been member
of Ant Schlong’s paid staff?
What is Ant Schlong?
Something connected to Monty Python?
I was once accused of maybe having authored Twin Peaks.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 5/22/2013 @ 2:08 pmMahalia, Mahalia, Frankly I don’t care if Weiner runs or not. But a lot of democrats do care about it and wish he’d just go away quietly after resigning from congress in disgrace. Future voters and donors will ultimately decide about him and his character. (As they had the chance to do with Vitter.) Why the hell would Vitter even consider “stepping down’?
elissa (cb940d) — 5/22/2013 @ 2:19 pmMahalia Person,
How is Senator Vitter allegedly a “perv” ? Is it because he saw an escort ?
In your world, that makes him a “perv” ? Seriously ?
On the other handIn the other hand, former Congressman Weiner was sending photos of his junk to young chicks. He even was contacting a 17 year old high school girl.That’s not even on the same planet as seeing an escort. Then again, you’re not from this planet, so you probably wouldn’t understand the difference.
And Mahalia Person, we all have no doubt that your “concern” about lecherous members of Congress preying on women extends to the late Mary Jo Kopechne, right ? I’m sure you’ve spent your entire adult life blasting Teddy Kennedy for Chappaquiddick, not to mention JFK for having a proverbial rotating door to his Senate office and then the Oval Office.
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 5/22/2013 @ 2:23 pmWeiner actually needed to resign because he was making false claims about his email being hacked, and he implied Andrew Breitbart as the culprit.
You’re a lefty, so maybe making false claims to law enforcement is not such a big deal to you.
New York, and Weiner…..
askeptic (b8ab92) — 5/22/2013 @ 2:26 pmSort of has a ring to it.
23. Comment by Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 5/22/2013 @ 1:15 pm
Do not underestimate this weiner person—he is stiff competition.
Well, he’s got the nacking of Bill Clionton obviously, but that can only help him a little bit with money, which he’s got anyway, or getting somebody to work for him/
weiner doesn’t poll above 15% in the polls (that may be polls that don’t count undecided) Even without weiner a runoff was likely (you get a runoff if no one polls above 40% – in 2005 Weiner narrowly escaped a runoff he had decied after being counseled by Schumer and otehrs not to contest.)
Weiner could make the runoff if all the top finishers are tightly bunched around 16%, or at least all those besides the leader.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 5/22/2013 @ 3:09 pmQuinnipiac: Anthony Weiner’s Poll Position Holds Firm
Maybe there’s hope.
Weiner wins the runoff with Catherine Quinn and loses to Republican Joe Lhota, who wins his primary. But I kind of don’t like the way he wins.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 5/22/2013 @ 3:18 pmNotice the totals in the poll only add up to 91%.
There must be 2% or 3% for Sal Albanese.
By the way, the election company is offering to help the Board of elections count the vote in the first primary for lots of money – or else it will all be chaotic and they may not be able to give the results in time. The runoff is only two weeks later, and now we have paper ballots. No more lever voting machines. There is a machine that will mark the paper ballot that few people use.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 5/22/2013 @ 3:22 pmmahalia cab
Colonel Haiku (455265) — 5/22/2013 @ 4:24 pmteh scab what keeps on oozing
Preparation “H”
I saw what you did there, Col.
elissa (cb940d) — 5/22/2013 @ 4:33 pmOnce a creepy pervert, always a creepy pervert. Who would vote for this assclown? Oh, yeah…a bunch of brain dead NYC liberals.
Funeral Guy (51a2fe) — 5/22/2013 @ 4:33 pmSHOCKA!
More false equivalencies from Mahalia Cab.
Was David Vitter’s twitter feed hacked too?
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 5/22/2013 @ 4:34 pmMahalia – Let’s talk about principles. Was Bill Clinton’s twitter feed hacked?
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 5/22/2013 @ 4:36 pmThank God that he only threw his ‘hat’ into the ring!
Icy (d259a5) — 5/22/2013 @ 5:27 pmI was once accused of maybe having authored Twin Peaks.
Comment by Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 5/22/2013 @ 2:08 pm
— Didn’t you?
Didn’t you . . . ?
Icy (d259a5) — 5/22/2013 @ 5:29 pmIsn’t it cute how Mahalia will throw out a question as if she/he/whateverthef*ckitis is actually willing to have a back-and-forth discussion?
Icy (d259a5) — 5/22/2013 @ 5:32 pmThe perfect Dimocrat team, 2016: Weiner/Holder
mojo (8096f2) — 5/23/2013 @ 11:08 amCuomo Spanks Weiner – Shame on us if we elect Anthony Weiner Mayor of NYC.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 5/23/2013 @ 12:16 pmThey elected Cuomo governor, what shame is left?
nk (875f57) — 5/23/2013 @ 12:17 pmnk – I make no excuses for New Yorkers.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 5/23/2013 @ 12:24 pmViva la difference!
It’s okay to be a sitting Senator and see a prostitute.
It’s okay that Vitter requested the prostitute dress him up in diapers? That’s not a perv in your book?
So it’s the cover up that you care about? Isn’t prostitution a crime in DC? What principles we have – the act doesn’t matter the party matters.
Remember, I’m not covering for Weiner or Clinton, or Ted Kennedy (whose education bill, made with Bush has ruined a generation). But you are apologizing for Vitter because he “only” saw a ho.
(But watch this demonstration)
So none of you have any problem whatsoever with Eliot Spitzer then, right? Did he need to step down in your eyes? Remember, you have already defined yourselves above….
Mahalia Cab (efd129) — 5/23/2013 @ 12:34 pmPersonally Weiner’s abuse of power, like his attack on Goldline, because they had the effrontery of supporting Beck, just like Spitzer’s reign of terror, against certain businesses and not others, weigh larger against him.
narciso (3fec35) — 5/23/2013 @ 12:41 pm“Remember, I’m not covering for Weiner or Clinton, or Ted Kennedy”
Mahalia – Yes you are. This post is about Weiner. Instead of leaving it about Weiner you felt it necessary to make a false comparison to something which occurred with a Republican Senator. Keep it going, if you don’t believe Clinton and Kennedy should also have resigned you are indeed covering for them.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 5/23/2013 @ 12:42 pmComment by Mahalia Cab (efd129) — 5/23/2013 @ 12:34 pm
So none of you have any problem whatsoever with Eliot Spitzer then, right? Did he need to step down in your eyes?
He didn’t really have to step down, but i did have a problem with him.
All the way back in 1998. (Typos corrected)
Date: 09-15-98 (18:23) Number: Unassigned Ref: NONE
To: ALL
From: SAMMY FINKELMAN
Subj: Primary election
I should have posted thos before, but the problem in this election (for me) is that it is very easy to tell whom NOT to vote for, but not who
to vote for.
For Senator: NOT Charles Schumer. He is very dishonest. I had trouble deciding who I should. Geraldine Ferraro has a bad past and Mark Green –
is disappointing. I once talked to Mark Green when he was on a radio show. Mentioned I’d voted for him the primary in 1986 but not the general elction.
I saw a quasi debate. Schumer is most informed, but I know he is a liar. I once saw him give a speech to an audience in the yeshiva of Flatbush
on Avenue J by E.17th st (around 1989 when taht was in his district) in which he told some story aboput he was the most pro-Israel Congressman there was. Something about a vote. I’m sure it was set up.
The lesson was phony. Beth Gilensky of the Jewish Action Alliance never had any help from him and Carol Moore also dealt with him about Waco.
Ferraro had the most sense – at least on campaign finance where she realized that there has to be clean money too. Mark Green once proposed
dollar for dollar rebates but seems to have forgotten it. His position on Clinton is like that of Bill Mazer, I think. Not all the way down
the line actually like Schumer. Ferraro seemed to be thinking of this like a court case. I think this time she might be running without the
kind of support she had in the past and might be more independent.
For Governor: NOT Peter Vallone. He has run the City Council like a boss. Betsy McKoy Ross was my favorite but I wonder. I don’t want Charles Hynes either. Didn’t know about Larocca. I decided to go with Betsy Ross.
For Attorney General: NOT Elliot Spitzer. He argues he has a good record, but A*** A**** [BBS member] reminded me or told me rather a few years ago in some message that the prosecution of the Gambino brothers didn’t have such a good result.
Now, he’s a down the line defender of Clinton. He
also has the most money, just like Vallone and Schumer. Maybe on principle I should vote against the person who has raised the most money, at least when nothing specially good is known about him.
I also don’t want Cartherine Abate – Mafia connections. That leaves Oliver Koppel and Evan Davis. Steve Abranmowitz knows that Evan Davis
was a lawsuit classmate of his. I’ve actually received mail from Evan Davis and none from the others. He used to work for Cuomo. Not so good,
but apparently looks honest. The New York Times endosed Koppell. They always endorse incumbents or the one with the longest record. David
might stand a better chance than Koppell.
The trouble with all these races is that I detest the Republicans in that race too: Pataki, D’Amato and that guy who is now Attorney general,
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 5/23/2013 @ 1:50 pmSDennis Vacco. They are hacks at best. So, of course is Peter Vallone, Elliott Spitzer and Charles Schume(both of the last two, intelligenet
liars)
Didn’t catch the typos at the end.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 5/23/2013 @ 1:51 pmMahalia never fails to bring the asshattery.
JD (403e89) — 5/23/2013 @ 1:58 pm46. Trust me–I don’t stand in “defense” of any of the aforementioned dirtbags of either party past or present. However, the key point that Mahalia clearly ignores, does not know, or chooses not to accept, is that Sen. Vitter is now in his second term. He won both a primary and a general election in 2010, long after his sexual hi-jinx were known to his family, his constituents, and America. Ted Kennedy was elected numerous times after he killed a woman.
Voters decide. That’s why personally I couldn’t care less if Weiner runs for mayor of New York City despite his lies, his public humiliation and (what I consider to be) his creepy obsessions. Strangers comparing the relative “perviness” of pols on a blog is just stupid. One way or the other the people of new York will decide what’s best for them with respect to the announced mayoral candidates. Just as the people in his state decided about Vitter.
I don’t think he can win, and I do think Anthony Weiner will come to regret his decision both for himself and his family. The campaign will be brutal. But it’s not my problem. Not sure why Mahalia thinks it is his/hers.
elissa (36db97) — 5/23/2013 @ 3:14 pmGov. Cuomo coming down hard on Weiner’s candidacy plus the Drudge headline “Premature election–Cuomo slaps Weiner” is just a taste of the headlines to come.
(heh, just toooo easy)
elissa (36db97) — 5/23/2013 @ 4:01 pmThe new York Daily news has quite alot about weiner today (including running an op-ed piece by him in which just abbout eveyrthiung he says is faulty)
One was what the headline might have been had he not announced at midnight. (not actually truie since they devoted a couple of pages to the tornado yesterday) It was on page 13.
There was also a cartoon of seven candidates.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 5/23/2013 @ 4:42 pmIt looks like we may be going back to lever voting machines for this election. I saw a little squib on page 2 of the New York Daily News. The state legislature is close to passing a bill allowing it. Paper ballots are not required by federal law in a non-federal election. The election wouldn’t work with the new system.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 5/23/2013 @ 4:43 pmPatterico’s Pontifications » Weiner Makes It Official — But I Still Have Some Questions
cementine的日记 (67a591) — 5/24/2013 @ 4:10 am“Remember, I’m not covering for Weiner or Clinton, or Ted Kennedy”
Mahalia – Yes you are. This post is about Weiner. Instead of leaving it about Weiner you felt it necessary to make a false comparison to something which occurred with a Republican Senator. Keep it going, if you don’t believe Clinton and Kennedy should also have resigned you are indeed covering for them.
daley, elected officials caught up in sex scandals are comparable, full stop. You have partisan blinders on. Invoking Vitter is wholly appropriate here if you guys are treating a Republican caught with his pants off differently than a Democrat. You are, it’s proven already above, so now we just have to see how long it takes for you to admit it, if ever.
What Vitter did was worse because a US Senator is more powerful and therefore more vulnerable to be blackmailed and compromised. Weiner’s hijinks did not see any fluids exchanged, therefore he did not put his wife’s physical health (or life) at risk like someone who shags hookers. Remember here, I’m not apologizing for Weiner, I think he’s a narcissistic, power hungry schmuck who should have disappeared for at least five years after lying on TV. But if you describe him as a creep and not Vitter, you have selective principles and there’s no excuse around it.
This thought experiment went exactly as I thought – the apologies came out for Vitter, splitting hairs. As we discuss the moral viability of Weiner’s comeback we see daley saying not to look at the fact that Vitter withstood calls for his ouster after he solicited whores to dress him in diapers. Notice he said “something occurred” to euphemize the Republican’s indiscretion. Elephant is also guilty of same, saying “he saw an escort” instead of saying “he screwed a whore”.
To elissa, your whole line of defense – the voters forgave Vitter, therefore he gets a clean slate – can now be used against your pals who sit here in judgment of Clinton and Kennedy who were also re-elected. But also realize Vitter never could have ben re-elected if the donors, partisan media and party bosses held him to the standard that they are now using against Weiner. So it’s a minor point because I was simply saying Frey and his followers are not being consistent in condemnations, based on pure partisanship. If Frey posted an article condemning Vitter before he was re-elected, you’d have me dead to rights, but since he did not, the criticism stands – party over principle is the rule here.
I think you came the closest, mentioning in passing that Vitter was among the “dirtbags” mentioned, but this only puts you at odds with the others who faithfully adhere to Reagan’s 11th Commandment.
Mahalia Cab (ac99bb) — 5/24/2013 @ 1:00 pm“daley, elected officials caught up in sex scandals are comparable, full stop. You have partisan blinders on.”
Mahalia – Absolute comedy gold!
You are the commenter who cannot admit somebody on the left did something bad without adding a BUT clause to compare it to something somebody on the right did. It is offensive for you to accuse somebody else of having partisan blinders on when that is your only mode of commenting.
Hack
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 5/24/2013 @ 1:08 pmNo, Mahalia, I do have you dead to rights on the issue of “hypocrisy” that you tried so unsuccessfully to start a fight with. You just haven’t been able to figure out why. That’s your problem. And you are stretching the elastic of your laughable “what ifs” to the point of breakage. POP!!!To rational people comparisons in order to be valid have to be, you know, reasonably comparable. At the rate you’re going I’m surprised you forgot to bring up Grover Cleveland. 🙂
As I’ve already said, if you’re a New Yorker and you want to vote for Anthony that’s fine with me. Not my problem.
elissa (9070ef) — 5/24/2013 @ 1:27 pmweiner’s claim to have been hacked has affected real people. if nyc wants a liar running its government, they deserve the inevitable corruption they will get.
my question would relate to weiner’s payments to ‘investigators’ that continued after his resignation. i am not curious about his perversions. i know he’s a creep.
dustin (01508e) — 5/24/2013 @ 1:59 pmThompson’s not that bad for a Democrat. Four years ago he became the first D I’d voted for in 25 years. I don’t vote in D primaries, but if he somehow makes it through to the general, and the Rs put up another Giuliani or Bloomberg, I might well consider voting for him again.
Milhouse (3d0df0) — 5/24/2013 @ 2:52 pmMahalia is just angry that Senator Vitter didn’t give her a better tip !
Elephant Stone (6a4946) — 5/24/2013 @ 3:53 pmDo any women here want to denounce Elephant Stone’s misogynist comment above? My opinions and comments make me a whore? Is this okay with you guys?
This place reeks with partisan hypocrisy – you have all failed to show principle after Frey took continuing shots at Weiner with his “questions”. But instead of defending Weiner, I denounced him repeatedly, AGREEING that he should have lost his place in politics for his actions.
Then, I simply asked for a roll call on Sen. Vitter who kept his seat in Loiusiana but certainly could be tried in the same court of public discourse we felt it fine to discuss Weiner in. Do we owe it to simple consistency to weigh in on Vitter just to show that we are not setting up two tiers of moral outrage depending on party?
Invoke Cleveland if you like, he was 49 when he married his wife of 21 (was that a big deal in 1886?) But for pete’s sake, don’t pretend you didn’t hear the question and slither on. I like elissa’s comments the best – I don’t care, whatever, do what you like, no sweat…
daley, you don’t seem to be understanding what I am saying. Why is it partisan blinders if I say both Weiner and Vitter should step down? Who am I being partisan for in the call for strict moral principles applied consistently?
I am not trying to start a fight with you guys just trying to help you realize your media is playing you. If they post Weiner criticisms – for sexual misconduct, mind you, not politics – but you don’t see the same articles for Mark Sanford or Sen. Vitter, you become mules for unprincipled, partisan propaganda. I think elissa realized this when she took the fifth on Vitter and wished this thread would just end.
Mahalia Cab (c3784d) — 5/28/2013 @ 2:26 pmMahalia Cab, you fill the comment threads with long-ago debunked conspiracy fantasies and outright fabrications about G.W.Bush and you rail about “partisan hypocrisy”.
Lucky for you, irony poisoning is not fatal.
SPQR (768505) — 5/28/2013 @ 2:45 pmOh, give it a rest Mahalia. You’re so all over the map with your insights and hypocrisies and “helpful” comments that it is to laff. And you did not even pick up the applicable Grover Cleveland reference, did you? History was not your best subject, maybe?
http://www.theawl.com/2010/02/ye-olde-sex-scandals-grover-clevelands-love-child
elissa (2bf39d) — 5/28/2013 @ 2:47 pmYou would think simple odds would dictate something would be correct,
narciso (3fec35) — 5/28/2013 @ 2:47 pmRemember here, I’m not apologizing for Weiner
Right, squirrel.
Vitter was wrong. Full stop. Yet he didnt try to blame someone hacking his twitter. Nor did he try to blame Breitbart. Nor did he send weinertweets to underage girls, or strangers. But by all means, continue to flog Vitter. And Clinton. And JFK. Etc. you are really quite transparent.
JD (df45ac) — 5/28/2013 @ 2:47 pmSPQR – Mahalia wails and gnashes teeth and rends her garments over perceived hypocrisy, but apparently has no problemo with her own intentional dishonesty. In her screwed up metrics, perceived invented hypocrisy is worse than intentional dishonesty.
JD (df45ac) — 5/28/2013 @ 2:50 pmWell, your comments and opinions make you an idiot, that’s for sure.
On the thread about the DoJ targeting James Rosen…
https://patterico.com/2013/05/20/fox-news-reporter-targeted-as-criminal-suspect-by-obama-doj-for-publishing-leaks/#comments
…you said:
Really, a fallacy?
I responded:
This comparison is the height of idiocy, and you idiots don’t even realize you’re making my case. In the past reporters were treated as witnesses in leak investigations. Judith Miller went to jail because she refused to testify against Scooter Libby as a witness.
That’s how it used to work.
Under Obama reporters like Rosen are no longer treated as witnesses in leak investigations. For the very first time they are treated as criminal co-conspirators. This is something no other President has done. Not even Nixon dared to do it.
And you are too stupid to notice the difference.
But don’t worry. I’d never call you a whore. That would be an insult to whores. You lack the basic integrity and intelligence whores have to have to survive in that business.
ES, you should be ashamed of yourself for making that comparison!
Steve57 (9b1cdb) — 5/28/2013 @ 2:51 pmSteve – their comparison failed on many levels – honesty, being actually comparable, squirrel, look something shiny, and basic asshattery.
JD (df45ac) — 5/28/2013 @ 2:54 pmJD, I’m still gobsmacked at the mind-numbing stupidity it has to take to even attempt the Judith Miller/James Rosen comparison.
Starting with the fact that the judiciary is an entirely separate branch of government than the executive. Then it gets worse (or hilarity ensues, depending upon your point of view).
Steve57 (9b1cdb) — 5/28/2013 @ 3:01 pmYour opinions and comments are precisely what makes you not a whore, Ms. Cab.
See, I can have some beers and play Jenga in a Bangkok bar with a Thai hooker and put up with her comments and opinions, perhaps even finding them entertaining and insightful, for an entire afternoon.
You, Ms. Cab? Not a chance.
ES, you really need to retract that statement in which you equated whores with Mahalia Cab.
Steve57 (9b1cdb) — 5/28/2013 @ 3:06 pmJust to clarify, I don’t think we know for sure whether Mahalia Cab is a Ms. or a Mr. As was pointed out so graphically and delightfully a few years ago in a great cartoon, “on the internet nobody knows you’re a dog”.
elissa (2bf39d) — 5/28/2013 @ 3:13 pmelissa, comparing MC with a dog?
askeptic (b8ab92) — 5/28/2013 @ 3:15 pmWhat do you have against dogs?
elissa, no I never knew about the Cleveland love child scandal, but that would be analogous to Schwarzenegger, John Edwards and a few other Senators.
JD, thanks for being the first to admit Vitter was wrong, full stop.
Steve, nice try I said persecuting reporters, not specifically charging them as co-conspirators. Of course the Bush DoJ would never bother her, she was doing the bidding of the VP, selling the fake war. She was on their side but we didn’t know it until we found out the source was Libby.
And the lack of denouncing Elephant was noted – you guys put up with one of yours using anti-female ad hominem attacks, provided it’s against an ideological opponent. No principle, only partisanship.
Mahalia Cab (9a97f6) — 5/29/2013 @ 1:37 pmWeiner-Mahalia 2016!
Colonel Haiku (ee5253) — 5/29/2013 @ 1:42 pmdenouncing weiner
Colonel Haiku (0e505e) — 5/29/2013 @ 1:50 pmdemocrat child molester
sad cape and tights sh*t
R.I.P. Jack Vance, Science Fiction Grand Master
Icy (76748a) — 5/29/2013 @ 1:53 pmI wasn’t aware that Mahalia Cab has ever denied being a female.
Icy (76748a) — 5/29/2013 @ 2:09 pmMahalia Cab, still too stupid to understand that contempt of court has nothing to do with any administration since the judiciary is a separate branch of government.
It thinks it can lie its way out of it’s past stupidity with this stupidity:
Which of course ignores the fact the Bush DoJ “would never bother” the reporters and news organizations such as the WaPo and NYT who really did harm national security by exposing ongoing, highly productive classified programs such as foreign prisons and the SWIFT financial tracking operation.
Why? Because of the first amendment, that’s why. One can’t plausibly state that these individuals and organizations whom the Bush administration and even some Democratic congress members pleaded with to stop the publication of this devastating information were “doing the bidding of the VP.” The were not on Bush’s side; quite the opposite.
But even in her lame attempt to be dismissive she exposes her own lies.
Her sole use of the word persecution on the previous thread was to refer to the Clinton administration’s treatment of NYT reporter Jeff Gerth.
And that treatment did not include going to a federal judge and accusing Gerth of engaging in criminal activity so they could tap his phones and read his emails.
Her/his/its attempts to portray the Obama administration as acting no differently than previous administrations only highlight just how different the Obama administration really is.
No other administration ever attempted to criminalize reporting before. Only this administration.
Mahalia, you are stupid beyond words. I look forward to your next attempt to climb out your hole by digging deeper. I especially enjoy your attempts to act superior (“Nice try, Steve) before demonstrating you’re a raving lunatic. Just like I enjoy your accusations of partisanship while you’re trying to make the exact sort of case only a rabid partisan would even attempt.
And yes, calling you a whore is an insult to whores. I denounce ES for linking you to that group in any way.
Steve57 (9b1cdb) — 5/29/2013 @ 2:15 pmActually Mahalia isn’t really digging deeper. It’s more like it hit bedrock and now is just hitting itself in the face with the shovel.
Steve57 (9b1cdb) — 5/29/2013 @ 2:17 pmSteve, I’ll ignore the ad hominem stuff and see if you can debate substance. The judiciary doesn’t bring the cases, they administer them and enforce the law and in the Miller case it was a grand jury investigation under a special prosecutor looking to find a leaker – sound similar? This took place during the Bush presidency – one reporter jailed under 1972 Supreme Court precedent and another threatened. Ironically, the White House wasn’t pushing for the persecution of Miller and her colleague, because, as I said above, they WERE the criminals the reporters were protecting from law enforcement.
You said “No other administration ever attempted to criminalize reporting before. Only this administration”
…so let’s compare – we have a case where a reporter actually went to jail during the Bush tenure, with another sentenced as well for failing to reveal sources. In that case, it was a Reagan-appointed judge leveling a heavy handed contempt charge for refusing to reveal a source – and as we know today, the reporters were actually protecting White House officials who had outed a covert operative in retaliation towards the author of a NY Times op-ed writer. But around the same time, White House officials also exploited Miller as a propaganda mule, planting fake reports about WMD which informed a pivotal Congressional vote to authorize military force.
In the current case, Obama and Holder threatened to charge a Fox reporter as a co-conspirator in a leak about North Korean nukes.
I think treason leading to 5,000 dead US soldiers is worse, and I agree with Bush Senior who said exposing a CIA op is also treason (before he found out who did it). All this said, I am not defending Obama, I want to see him and Holder investigated and impeached for shredding the Constitution.
So the similarities and differences are interesting to discuss when you are not degrading your arguments with personal attacks, but the point of my comments is to put your anti-Obama tirades in historical context.
Obama’s actions are only made possible by the environment of lawlessness created when we did not investigate Bush or Cheney’s crimes. Even Reagan’s crimes were prosecuted with over a dozen convictions in Iran-Contra, and Clinton also was impeached and censured for his crimes. So look at the big picture and overarching principles, not just the latest round of partisan attacks, and you’ll see the continuous hubris of presidents is only growing.
But if you ignore the silly stuff like Benghazi and the IRS and look at the serious stuff like the illegal surveillance, the NDAA, kill lists and illegal rendition, you’ll see a fusion of Bush and Obama policies that transcend party and define the battle as those who understand and defend the Constitution and those who are willing to piss it away because they were scared of Osama bin Laden.
Mahalia Cab (0e09f9) — 6/10/2013 @ 1:30 pm“…so let’s compare – we have a case where a reporter actually went to jail during the Bush tenure, with another sentenced as well for failing to reveal sources”
Mahalia – Look at your words. Miller went to jail not for her reporting, but for her refusal to reveal sources. Fitzgerald knew the leaker in the Libby case, he just lied to the Supreme Court and the Justice Department about it.
Holder named Rosen a potential co-conspirator and flight risk explicitly because of his reporting. They knew who his source was.
Completely different circumstances.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 6/10/2013 @ 2:20 pmMahalia Cab, once again you can’t keep anything straight. During the Bush admin, the “persecution” of Miller was over her refusal to testify, not for reporting.
SPQR (768505) — 6/10/2013 @ 2:21 pmJudith Miller was the recipient of a separate leak than the leak that went to Robert Novak, which was published.
But actually Judith Miller was the cause of the leak, because she had asked Scooter Libby to find out why it was that the CIA selected Joe Miller to go to Niger.
The answer that came back from the CIA, which was a lie, was that this was because his wife, Valerie Plame worked for the CIA and had suggested him. Once this was told to Libby this word that Joe Wilson was married to someone high up in the CIA and that she had had arranged for him to go to Niger spread throughout higher levels of the government.
The truth was Joe Miller was selected so that he could come back with a report that would not debunk the CIA claim that Saddam Hussein had tried to buy yellowcake from Niger. He reported that they couldn’t have gotten away with it. But the claim never was that he had actually bought it. This claim was actually disinformation from Saddam, because if he had tried to buy uranium ore, and what’s more had failed to obtain it, that meant his nuclear weapons program was set back all the way to zero!
But it wasn’t zero – he still had reprocessed uranium, which he was afraid to start using because he would get bombed. What’s mnore Iraq has its own uranium ore.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 6/10/2013 @ 2:33 pmComment by Steve57 (9b1cdb) — 5/28/2013 @ 1:48 pm
Uhh, no, Sammy. There was never any DoJ accusation against Judith Miller. She was never accused of committing a crime. She was called as a witness against Scooter Libby. When she refused to testify she was found in contempt. </I.
That is all correct, but I think the reason Scooter lied was to protect her because shje could, theoretically, have been accused of espionage because she had actually caused him to ask a question of the CIA.
I am not talking why she went to jail, but why he went to jail. (why he committed perjury)
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 6/10/2013 @ 2:36 pmI think Al Sharpton is going to endorse Weiner, if it could make a difference, or if Weiner has a chance.
Weiner is worrying himself for nothing.
Bill Clinton has this all arranged.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 6/10/2013 @ 2:38 pmLibby lied to protect Miller …
Argh. I need to find a brick wall to pound my head against for relief.
SPQR (768505) — 6/10/2013 @ 2:41 pm“Judith Miller was the recipient of a separate leak than the leak that went to Robert Novak, which was published.”
Sammy – Why would Miller leak to a rival reporter?
Who did Armitage leak to?
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 6/10/2013 @ 2:45 pmArmitage leaked to Miller and Novak,
narciso (3fec35) — 6/10/2013 @ 2:47 pmSammy – Seek help. Do you know Ron Brynaert by any chance?
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 6/10/2013 @ 2:48 pmso that he could come back with a report that would not debunk the CIA claim that Saddam Hussein had tried to buy yellowcake from Niger
Only one problem sammy, the CIA never made that claim, British Intelligence did, and it was true!
askeptic (b8ab92) — 6/10/2013 @ 3:02 pmShe was on their side but we didn’t know it until we found out the source was Libby.
Outright lying doesn’t do much for your credibility, or lack thereof, Mahalia.
But if you ignore the silly stuff like Benghazi and the IRS
There is nothing silly about either o the above. And you are contemptible for suggesting so.
JD (b63a52) — 6/10/2013 @ 4:29 pmdaley and SPQR, protecting her sources was just one task in her capacity as a reporter. The reason they wanted her source was because of the nature of the reporting she had been doing. She and her reporting are inseparable in this case, it’s not like she was a supermarket cashier picked up off the street and asked to testify. So I think I still have it straight.
Sammy brings up yet another similarity in the Miller vs. Rosen cases – if true, Miller pro-actively solicited privileged information from Libby. Rosen also solicited information from his source. The difference is that Obama was looking to hold Rosen accountable for this and Bush didn’t mind because Miller was shielding illegal activities coming from Cheney’s office.
Mahalia Cab (5a41c4) — 6/11/2013 @ 11:53 amMahalia Person, I think you watch too many “Law & Order” reruns where all of your kooky conspiracy theories get solved in 45 minutes.
Ah, yes, even your favorite television shows have a utopian aspect to them.
How cute !
You should know that Joe Wilson’s wife wasn’t working as an undercover agent at the time that Richard Armitage told Robert Novak who she was.
She was working at the headquarters in Langley, VA as a desk jockey.
You DO KNOW that foreign spies sit roadside and photograph the automobiles (and their license plates) of all the incoming/outgoing traffic to the headquarters at Langley, right ?
You do know that C.I.A. desk jockeys are often followed by foreign spies, and sometimes even approached in the parking lot at the local supermarket or dry cleaners for purposes of espionage, right ?
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 6/11/2013 @ 12:15 pm“The reason they wanted her source was because of the nature of the reporting she had been doing.”
Mahalia – Who is “they”.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 6/11/2013 @ 12:20 pmMahalia is still angry she did not get a Fitzmas present.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 6/11/2013 @ 12:22 pmThis is about as heartwarming as when Catiline ran for consul.
narciso (3fec35) — 6/11/2013 @ 12:28 pmComment by Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 6/11/2013 @ 12:15 pm
Joe Wilson’s wife wasn’t working as an undercover agent at the time that Richard Armitage told Robert Novak who she was.
He only knew that because of the question that Scooter Libby had asked the CIA at the prompting of Judith Miller. The CIA’s explanation of why Joe wilson was picked was then spread through the higher levels of the government.
She was working at the headquarters in Langley, VA as a desk jockey.
The significance of that is, the law about not revealing the names of CIA agents did not apply to her.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 6/11/2013 @ 12:37 pm88. “Libby lied to protect Miller…”
Comment by SPQR (768505) — 6/10/2013 @ 2:41 pm
Argh. I need to find a brick wall to pound my head against for relief.
Why else did you think he lied?
At the time when he lied about never telling anyone, I don’t think it was known that Judith Miller had gotten the information. She never published it.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 6/11/2013 @ 1:03 pm92.Comment by askeptic (b8ab92) — 6/10/2013 @ 3:02 pm
so that he could come back with a report that would not debunk the CIA claim that Saddam Hussein had tried to buy yellowcake from Niger
Only one problem sammy, the CIA never made that claim, British Intelligence did, and it was true!
No, it wasn’t true – it was based on forged documents that originated in Italy.
http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/03/14/sprj.irq.documents/index.html
These forgeries were probably deliberately designed (by Iraqi intelligence,, which I think was the source of the forgery, as Italy had no reason to do this) to be bad so that in case they backfired on Iraq, they could be debunked.
The CIA was vouching for it. And it shouldn’t have:
This is just one example of something really rotten in the CIA for years,
And it really came from, not British intelligence, but Italian military intelligence.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niger_uranium_forgeries
What was true that Britain had indeed said it, and maybe were talking about other countries in Africa too.
Now what people don’t understand is that this actually weakened the case against Saddam Hussein, because it put at least 10 years away from a nuclear bomb. It somehow was played as strengthening the case against Saddam Hussein, because it would show he was still interested – but who doubted that?
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 6/11/2013 @ 1:19 pmComment by Mahalia Cab (5a41c4) — 6/11/2013 @ 11:53 am
Sammy brings up yet another similarity in the Miller vs. Rosen cases – if true, Miller pro-actively solicited privileged information from Libby. Rosen also solicited information from his source. The difference is that Obama was looking to hold Rosen accountable for this and Bush didn’t mind because Miller was shielding illegal activities coming from Cheney’s office.
The difference is nobody had ever done this before. In the case of Miller, Libby was facing, not the Attorney General, but a special prosecutor!
That could have caused him to worry about posisble criminal prosecutions, even if it would be breaking new ground.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 6/11/2013 @ 1:22 pm“Judith Miller was the recipient of a separate leak than the leak that went to Robert Novak, which was published.”
Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 6/10/2013 @ 2:45 pm
Sammy – Why would Miller leak to a rival reporter?
I think she asked some other sources, who in turn told other reporters. But I think Scooter Libby didn’t know anybody knew, still less, how it is she came to know.
In any case, it was found out that she was one of the reporters who had been told that Joe Wilson’s wife worked for the CIA.
(Joe Wilson and the people who said this was a terrible thing never bnrought out the reason some reporters were told that valerie Plame worked for the CIA – that she allegedly was the reaon he got picked to go on that trip to Niger. they didn’t want people to look into it. They pretended that this was an attempt to get back at Joe Wilson.
The subject was changed.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 6/11/2013 @ 2:00 pmWho did Armitage leak to?
Robert (Bob) Novak.
But Armitage only knew it in the first place because of the sequence of events which Scooter Libby had started, at the behest of Judith Miller.
This had resulted in the CIA creating a cover story for why Joe Wilson was selected to go to Niger.
In reality, Valerie Plame had nothing to do with that.
Now the point is, if Valerie Plame was NOT the reason Joe Wilson was selected, and really she wasn’t, his selection had no obvious reason, and the whole way he and the CIA handled this issue of Saddam Hussein and uranium, was deeply dishonest.
JOE WILSON DID NOT DEBUNK THIS STORY – HE KEPT IT ALIVE.
Which is what the CIA wanted.
Joe Wilson’s New York Times op-ed piece in July 2003
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/06/opinion/what-i-didn-t-find-in-africa.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm
mistated what he had reported – or perhaps I should say mischaracterized because what he had reported back became known. He didn’t file a written report. In the Op-ed piece he claimed it the CIA must have reported back that it was all probably not true. Which they in fact, didn’t.
Joe Wilson wrote he concluded that it was highly doubtful that any such transaction had ever taken place.
That, however, was not the question. The question was if Saddam Hussein had tried
to get uranium ore from Niger. Libby had strongly doubted it was true. Or Judith Miller had.
Joe Wilson only said no uranium could actually have gone to Saddam Hussein because this was monitored too well.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 6/11/2013 @ 2:08 pm