RSS Feed Menu
Has there ever been more manufactured and phony hype about a certifiable non-issue than so-called WeinerGate? If so, then I’m hard pressed to recall what that issue might be.
Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-New York), of course, is accused of… Well, it’s not clear what, exactly, Weiner’s being accused of. His Twitter account apparently was hacked, or used by a trusted friend or employee for illicit purposes. And so, a close-up shot of a man’s crotch in underwear was sent from his account to a woman in Seattle.
By contemporary standards, the shot is pretty lame and tame. And, as soon as the Congressman realized the pic had been sent from his account, he disavowed and deleted it. The woman from Seattle, likewise, immediately repudiated the notion that she was some sort of love interest of Weiner’s.
“I am a 21-year-old college student from Seattle,” Gennette Cordova wrote in last Sunday’s New York Daily News.
I have never met Congressman Weiner, though I am a fan. I go to school in Bellingham where I spend all of my time. I’ve never been to New York or to DC.
The point I am trying to make is that, contrary to the impression that I apparently gave from my tweet, I am not his girlfriend.
Nor am I the wife, girlfriend or mistress of Barack Obama, Ray Allen or Cristiano Ronaldo, despite the fact that I have made similar assertions [of admiration and respect] about them via Twitter.
There have never been any inappropriate exchanges between Anthony Weiner and myself, including the tweet/picture in question, which had apparently been deleted before it reached me.
Case closed, right? I mean, things happen; accounts get hacked (or sometimes misused by trusted friends and employees); we all realize that; and so we move on.
Well, no, because to impassioned partisan bloggers, both Left and Right, any such incident is a chance to score political points. It’s a chance to beat up the other side, bloody them politically, and pile on the points for your team. And so this non-story quickly — nay, immediately – became the latest “SCANDAL!”
The highly influential blogger Robert Stacy McCain, for instance, has been all Weiner all the time, with countless stories about “WeinerGate,” all breathlessly imputing wrongdoing or a cover-up by the Congressman.
Now, I genuinely like and admire Stacy McCain. He’s one of my New Media heroes. As a lone journalist, he’s done more with his own website, The Other McCain, than many newspapers and magazines do with a staff of twenty reporters and commentators. He is a force of a nature, a dynamic personality, a superb reporter, a sharp analyst, and a highly entertaining blogger.
But Stacy: Come on! Gimme a break! There’s nothing to this story! At worst, the Congressman is guilty of having taken and sent via Twitter a pic of his underwear-covered crotch. That may be tasteless, but it’s hardly a crime.
In any case, my friend, let he who is without sin cast the first stone. Remember this pic of you, which is all over the Internet?
It’s clear, I think, that Weiner himself never sent this lewd pic to the 21-year-old college student in Seattle. However, others with access to his account or the pic perhaps did. We just don’t know — and we really shouldn’t care.
I do know, from personal experience, that Twitter accounts can and do get hijacked. That happened to me, in fact, not so long ago. All of a sudden I got a number of tweets and direct tweet messages telling me that my account had been hacked.
Apparently, a third-party Twitter application that I had adopted had enabled someone to access my account and to send my followers a lewd message. A kind Twitter follower told me exactly what to do to remedy the situation: Delete all third-party applications and change my password, he told me.
The point is that Twitter accounts are hardly Top Secret venues protected by inviolable, ironclad security protocols. In fact, quite the opposite: They are open-source, public venues that are quite transparent and penetrable. That’s why no one -– including especially the Congressman — uses Twitter to convey or protect national security secrets.
In the new social media, security and privacy are oftentimes non-existent, or at least severely limited. Fine. We all get that.
Still, that hardly warrants the type of breathless and intense media coverage of “WeinerGate” that has so consumed the blogs and even many legacy journalists.
Partisan and ideological blogging is fine and even welcome. In fact, I myself partake in the sport (here at FrumForum and elsewhere) on a routine and regular basis. But when you fire your weapon, you better be damn sure you’re striking a legitimate target. Anthony Weiner’s hacked or misused Twitter account is not a legitimate target. Time, then, to move on. Time to look and aim elsewhere.
John Guardiano blogs at www.ResoluteCon.Com, and you can follow him on Twitter: @JohnRGuardiano.
“It’s clear, I think, that Weiner himself never sent this lewd pic to the 21-year-old college student in Seattle.”
No it is not clear…
It’s certainly probable it wasn’t him, given the facts. But it’s 100% clear that anyone with a life has better things to do, and more important things in politics to pay attention to.
Perhaps people just can’t resist the opportunity to say Weiner in connection with a sex scandal. I know that’s the only reason I am…
No. What drove this story is Weiner. Weiner stated he couldn’t say whether or not it was his crotch. He didn’t say “no its not me because I don’t photograph my penis.”
Thats what people wanted to hear. But he said he wasn’t sure. Wrong answer. THATS whats driving the story – not his name or anything else.
Why is the only ‘right’ answer that it is not a picture of him?
Maybe it *is* a picture of him, that was part of a private prank between himself and friends, his wife, family, whomever, and he doesn’t want to lie, but he doesn’t want to turn a private thing over and over in public either.
Whatever. The tweet was taken down. The recipient has been clear in that there is no connection. We’ll forget this as soon as some other scandal presents itself.
“Anthony Weiner’s hacked or misused Twitter account is not a legitimate target. Time, then, to move on. Time to look and aim elsewhere.”
Ah, but it’s no longer about his Tweet, or even his willy, or what he does with all those gal followers. It’s about a man who is one of the top thousand power brokers in the USA, a man who earns his silky suits and upper-bracket income for nothing but talk, admit he isn’t sure if that photo is of his man-unit.
I believe you epitomize the ideal partisan hack. Well done wear your badge with pride.
Not at all. Last month’s clown was Newt Gingrich.
As one of Guardiano’s most vociferous critics, I just want to give him credit for this contrarian-themed piece.
That said, I don’t agree with it. We need to hold our leaders accountable for their actions. And the problem here isn’t what Weiner did, it is how he is handling the situation.
“Handling” the situation?
I really don’t see what your point is. That we should hold Weiner “accountable” for a fumbled response to a silly non-issue? For his poor PR skills?
Right….
Yfrog the photo hosting site involved yesterday suspended certain parts of their operation because of security breaches. Coincidence?
“TNR’s James Downie hired renowned forensic image analyst Hany Farid, who maintains an extensive database digital cameras, phones etc, to analyze the picture that “Dan Wolfe” & Breitbarf used to start this entire “controversy”. Farid found that the photo does not match any device in his entire database, but photographs previously taken by Rep. Weiner and uploaded to his Yfrog account do in fact match the Blackberry profile for his phone. This proves that the picture was not taken with Representative Weiner’s Blackberry, and/or the picture has been manipulated.
These developments are the final nails in this story’s coffin, and prove that Breitbarf and his Flying Monkey Brigade have (once again) been pushing a manufactured and fake “controversy” of their own making.”
H/T DK
He can’t deny its his crotch! I can deny it. You can deny it. 99.99% of the whole damn world can deny it, but he can’t?
What an amazing frigging coincidence that the hacker caught the person in 0.01% group that can’t deny it.
The evidence is pretty damn strong that Weiner did not send the picture. What happened to John:
Apparently, a third-party Twitter application that I had adopted had enabled someone to access my account and to send my followers a lewd message.
Is what happened to Weiner, the evidence is very strong. The metadata on the picture (that catalogs such information as date of the picture) was missing, in fact it was manipulated in such a way that the type of camera that was used is not known. Why Weiner would do this for his own picture before he would send it out is inexplicable. In additon there was an individual who predicted that there would be a “scandal”, and lo and behold he happened to be there to screencap a yfrog site that hosted that picture. He quickly notified Breitbart, who ran with it.
The picture itself was never sent via Twitter, the recipient never recieved it, and not one other of his 45,000 followers claimed to have seen it. Kind of strange co-incidence that a Conservative blogger, who now has gone into hiding, just happened to be there to see the picture and screen cap it.
He also twittered himself bragging how he nailed a congressman with a fake picture without realizing that a journalist would monitor his tweets, when the focus came on him he deleted his accounts but the journalist himself screencapped it.
All the information is available at Mediate, Smoking gun, etc. and I gave a far more detailed account here at Frumforum if anyone is interested I will link to it.
Finally, the only people who could have seen this picture since it was not sent over twitter and was set up as a @ instead of D was the girl, Weiner, and a person who followed both of their accounts. Again, something that would have had to be a freak occurance (why would a conservative blogger follow a young woman in Seattle via twitter and follow Weiner? It was only to set the scheme up)
JG, this article is very big of you (sorry, couldn’t help myself). Unfortunately, the media gets paid based upon exposure and the more salacious, the more people look. That’s not a Left/Right thing, the media wants attention and a stupid sex story is even better than a serious one.
The problem with the Congressman is two-fold. His responses to the questions were bizarre and led to more ridicule. Second, he has set himself up as the attack dog against the Conservatives. If it had been a GOP House member, I suspect that Weiner would be calling for that person’s resignation. Some of this is if you live by the sword, you also get skewered.
By the way, if he did send the picture, he’s an idiot.
“Now, I genuinely like and admire Stacy McCain.”
Well, there’s your problem right there. A well-known Neo-Confederate rarely has something admirable to say. Check out a collection of the ‘wisdom’ of Stacy McCain here:
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/34951_Meet_Robert_Stacy_McCain_Neo-Confederate_Wacko_Extraordinaire
A sample (McCain is the author of this quote):
“[T]he media now force interracial images into the public mind and a number of perfectly rational people react to these images with an altogether natural revulsion. The white person who does not mind transacting business with a black bank clerk may yet be averse to accepting the clerk as his sister-in-law, and THIS IS NOT RACISM, no matter what Madison Avenue, Hollywood and Washington tell us.”
(Full text linked)
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/bizarre/dan-wolfe-anthony-weiner-weinergate-632095
And as to why Weiner doesn’t press charges, his twitter was never hacked, and if he did he would open himself up to discovery as to his own personal life. The guy just got married last year, lord knows what he did when he was single, why allow a defense team to use his previous sex life against him?
Here is a little from the smoking gun:
Wolfe’s reticence apparently has been triggered by the fallout from a May 27 tweet emanating from Weiner’s account that was sent to a 21-year-old college student in Washington State (that tweet included a link to a now-infamous underwear photo). The Weiner tweet and the accompanying photo was spotted late Friday night by Wolfe, who tipped Big Government, the conservative blog run by Andrew Breitbart.
For months, Wolfe and several Twitter sidekicks have excoriated Weiner, 46, in the harshest terms. They have criticized his looks, claimed his marriage is a sham, and accused his wife of having ties to al-Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood. On May 5, Wolfe floated a rumor that compromising photos of a “big time” congressman were in the hands of a “top 5 Right Wing blogger.” He tweeted, “@RepWeiner are you this Congressman?” He reprised this photo rumor in a May 11 tweet.
As the Weiner story began to spread over the weekend–and detractors started accusing him of somehow hacking Weiner’s accounts–Wolfe balked when Breitbart sought to arrange a conference call to discuss how to further exploit and advance “Weinergate.” In e-mails sent from his Yahoo account, Wolfe asked, “Why does he need to speak with me for this?” and “I’m just not sure why he needs to talk to me. Why is talking necessary?”
He also noted that, “I am having major personal problems right now getting worse by the minute.”
In a subsequent May 30 e-mail, Wolfe expounded on these troubles, explaining why he wanted to avoid speaking with his Twitter cronies. “I have ALOT of personal problems I didn’t want to go into–but as I become the focus of this I am more and more afraid this will all come out.”
Whats the big deal? A congressman twittering his penis is a big deal. A congressman putting a photograph of his crotch on yfrog is a big deal. Have you ever put your crotch on yfrog? YouTube? Photobucket? Flicker? Yea, I’m thinking a congressman putting his penis in web space is a big deal. And how the hell did it get into web space if he didn’t put it there?
Its not his? Well he won’t say that. He’s not sure. I know its not mine. You know how I know? There’s not a picture of my penis in existence. You would think, other than porn actors, that would be the case for most people and especially, elected officials. I would bet you 99% of the world could deny ownership from the simple fact they don’t photograph their crotch. Then take away the other 0.99% for the simple fact that “it isn’t my underwear or junk.” But somehow this 99.99% doesn’t include Weiner so he can’t say he’s sure its not him.
You really don’t get the big deal? Really?
nwahs, exhibiting complete lack of understanding again. Even according to the official report Weiner only tweeted the picture to ONE person, not everyone, the only person who could have seen it had to be simultaneously following both Weiner and that woman.
Anyway, the guy who did it CONFESSED already on his own twitter account, found out the press is on him and now is running scared.
Now as to the picture, he said any picture can be manipulated and it can be, I can put a donkey head on a picture of you, you would have no way to be sure that body was yours especially if I manipulated the picture in some way.
Anyway, he is being lawyerly like. If it was a private picture of his that he kept stored on a public server and was hacked into and stolen, why would he want to admit that? It is also a reason why I don’t store pictures on line.
And my wife and I have taken racy photos, I keep them on a separate hard drive for security not connected to my computer for these very reasons. If I didn’t and someone hacked into my computer and posted that, that would be MY fault?
Why is Weiner photographing his junk and putting it in web space? Like it or not, a congressman uploading his crotch to web space is a story, and if it was a Republican congressman, the press would be outside of his office with pitchforks and torches.
“Anyway, the guy who did it CONFESSED already on his own twitter account, found out the press is on him and now is running scared.”
Where is that confession?
Because I Know What’s News : The Other McCain // Jun 3, 2011 at 8:45 pm
[...] Posted on | June 3, 2011 | View Comments var addthis_product = 'wpp-257'; var addthis_config = {"data_track_clickback":true,"ui_language":"en"}; “Has there ever been more manufactured and phony hype about a certifiable non-issue than so-called WeinerGate?” – John Guardiano, “Weinergate: What’s the Big Deal?” Frum Forum [...]
Chris Balsz,
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/05/29/980400/-Breitb…
This is one that has a ton of info.
And here is a long, disturbing article headlined; Andrew Breitbart Did Not Run ‘Weinergate’ Evidence Which Turned Out To Be Fake
http://www.mediaite.com/online/andrew-breitbart-did-not-run-weinergate-evidence-which-turned-out-to-be-fabricated/
This defends Breitbart that he was an active participant in the Wolfe scam, so no one can say I am out to smear conservatives, this guy Wolfe is a complete nobody as you will read.
And all of that would have been significant if Weiner simply said “thats not me.”
The story is he said it could be him and taken out of context. Now when the picture is a woody, you damn sure want to explain what the hell you mean by that. Again you don’t see the forest for the trees. The story is propelled by Weiner’s responses, not the picture. Had Weiner said “nope – not me, I don’t do crotch shots” your points would have some merit. Weiner’s vague responses supersede all of that. Weiner’s behavior in employing PI’s instead of police supersede contentions it was someone else who tweeted it. Weiner’s consistent characterization of it as a prank makes one wonder, “was this picture in your uploads for some reason, and why do you refuse to say its not you?”
Thats what matters at this point.
I don’t see a confession there. But if Breitbart and pals committed a felony then its time the FBI stepped in.
http://iowntheworld.com/blog/?p=78348
And here is one last item.
At this point the most plausible explanation is that Wolfe hacked into yfrog, and sent the picture in order to imagine he would bring down Weiner. It seems like Breitbart had no idea.
Why Weiner doesn’t go after Wolfe, I don’t know except I imagine he doesn’t want to have to deal with discovery going through his personal life.
Since it seems almost 100% certain he did not go through the laborious process of posting something on yfrog to post on twitter while hacking into the metadata of the picture to obscure the date, time, and model of camera, all the while it just happening to be at the exact same moment Wolfe was monitoring both Weiner and the girl in question in order to screencapture a photo, which was quickly deleted…well, the whole chain of events is unbelievable.
It was not tweeted, no one else besides Weiner and Wolfe saw the photo, the girl herself claimed she never got the photo.
I don’t find that plausible at all. Your source says Breibart, “Dan Wolfe” and some other blogger were synchronized and using Twitter, Facebook and yfrog all at once.
Your “most plausible” scenario puts all the blame for a hoax on a man with no name- “Dan Wolfe” – who can’t sue for libel any more than “Betty Crocker”. You exonerate the obvious boss of such a coordinated effort. You pretend nobody touched a communications software. That very neatly leaves it up to Mr. Weiner to forgive and forget, and imagines nobody can sue for libel or has any duty to call in the authorities. Bogus, dude. If a felony was committed then I want heads on a stick.
Is your contention that someone hacked yfrog and tweeted a private junk shot of Weiner’s or that someone hacked into yfrog and uploaded a junk shot to Weiner’s account?
If someone else uploaded that photo, why couldn’t Weiner say “nope – not me?”
Balsz, on one article I read a few days ago a reporter claimed he screencaptured the photo of Wolfe bragging about what he did. I never saw it, but I can’t imagine the reporter would lie about that. I honestly can’t remember his name and unfortunately I can’t find the frumforum thread from before since they only save articles and not news feeds.
but read the mediaite article.
“But if Breitbart and pals committed a felony then its time the FBI stepped in.” But Breitbart didn’t commit a felony (at least none that can be proven)
The mediaite article is clear about that, however it does crucify Wolfe. Here is a little part:
the Under-Aged Participants That Add Clarity And Exoneration
It was Betty who pointed out the activities of Dan Wolfe (@patriotusa76) and his clique, including a man named Mike Stack (@goatsred). She had a lot of information that I could not verify, but those facts that were independently verifiable formed the basis of our reporting on Wolfe Sunday afternoon. Wolfe and Stack, along with several others, had engaged in a campaign of harassing young, mostly-underage girls who were being followed by Rep. Weiner, as well as a constant stream of vitriol, homophobic innuendo, and rumormongering against Rep. Weiner. Betty was one of those young girls, and their unwanted attention, she says, caused her to shut down her Twitter feed.
Betty’s mother (we’ll call her Mrs. Betty) says that she and her husband monitor all of Betty’s internet usage, and were incensed by this group’s behavior. Rep. Weiner, she confirms, never contacted Betty privately, with the exception of a Direct Message welcoming her to his Twitter stream, a message Mrs. Betty assumed was automatically generated.
A high school friend of Betty’s, whom I will call Veronica (she’s a minor), was also contacted, via Twitter, by a member of the group, Mike Stack (@goatsred). For personal reasons I won’t go into, Veronica saw a means of getting attention, and agreed to follow @Goatsred so that they could speak privately. She told him that she and Betty had incriminating Direct Messages from Rep. Weiner, a claim she now admits was false, and which she made without Betty’s knowledge.
Look, you have a sleazy guy named Dan Wolfe, who just happened to know the Weiner was going to send the photo weeks in advance and happened to be there the exact moment it happened, and who also harrassed some underage girls…
I mean, if Weiner is guilty, he is the luckiest man on the earth for having such a scumbag stalking him. But be honest, pervert claims he had picture of Congressman and then is the man who just so happens to screencapture the photo who also harasses teenage girls over the word of a sitting Congressman.
The congressman wasn’t sure if it was his junk! Do you get the implications of that? What if someone said “We have a picture of a shadowy figure robbing a bank. Can’t see the face, but is it you?” I’m sure he could say “no, I don’t rob banks.”
You don’t get this?
You’re equating having a penis with robbing banks?
Chris Balsz, can you read? He exonerates Breitbart, where does it say it was Breitbart.
Look at the Headline: Andrew Breitbart Did Not Run ‘Weinergate’ Evidence Which Turned Out To Be Fake
DID NOT RUN.
nwahs: If someone else uploaded that photo, why couldn’t Weiner say “nope – not me?”
You too can’t read. If he has his own private pictures stored online and this guy hacked into it, then how can Weiner say it was not him? He DENIED tweeting it. Look, if you broke into my house and stole some private videos of my wife and me but my face is nowhere seen nor hers I would not want to say it was me, especially if I were a public figure but I could not honestly say it was not me.
Did he tweet the photo? The evidence is overwhelming he didn’t. It was on his yfrog account. It is easy to hack into yfrog. Watch the one link I put up.
Honestly, some people will believe what they want to believe no matter the evidence. I hate Breitbart but it seems he was tricked and he did the upstanding thing in cutting off Wolfe and not running salacious material.
I could be like Nwahs and say, arrest Breitbart. But that would be bullshit.
If Weiner is not guilty of sending the tweet, he is under ZERO obligation to say anything.
As to Wolfe, they have his personal email account, go to smoking gun and read the letter. If that is his real name or not I suspect it won’t be long before we find out what it is.
Or is smoking gun lying, and mediaite, and the photography expert from Dartmouth?
And as a sidenote, I presented evidence from a recognized expert and nwahs categorically said, no he is not an expert on the other thread. At which point I knew he was a lost soul.
No. You presented some soup blog having to do with metadata, and I told you the guy is no expert. But you do lie a lot.
And if he keeps his junk on the web for safe keeping, he should have just said so. I guess people would want to know why a congressman keeps pictures of his junk on a web space. I mean the only reason people put pictures on a web space is to post it somewhere.
[i]“Chris Balsz, can you read? He exonerates Breitbart, where does it say it was Breitbart.
Look at the Headline: Andrew Breitbart Did Not Run ‘Weinergate’ Evidence Which Turned Out To Be Fake”[/i]
So you repudiate your own dailykos source, that said Breibart wasted no time and started tweeting on it at 12:24 am? You’re not posting “facts” capable of examination outside the context of your narrative? You’re just telling a story?
““But if Breitbart and pals committed a felony then its time the FBI stepped in.” But Breitbart didn’t commit a felony (at least none that can be proven)”
It can’t when the victim refuses to ask for an investigation. But generally, ya prove conspiracy by arresting a technician and then letting him plead down in exchange for testimony against the mastermind.
Your narrative is just tooooooo pat.
“Oh Rep. Weiner is the victim, he did nothing but have a little fun, just naughty enough to completely explain why he’s willing to let the matter drop. And we know who did it, and why, but, nothing really illegal happened, just unethical and for the innocent victim’s sake we gotta forgo any punishment of the guilty party, though you should bear in mind who he’s with for future reference. Speculation that actual crimes occurred has no basis in facts, we don’t have to cooperate in a search for those facts unless we admit those facts exist, and we all need to Move On anyhow. Of course the right-wing asshole millionaire with a hundred lawyers did nothing wrong at all.”
All that’s missing is for “Dan Wolfe” to be shot resisting arrest.
Nobody spends two weeks trying to gin up a story without some idea where they’re going to peddle it. They didn’t take it to the Enquirer, who actually pays fast and nice for scandal. According to your links they kept going to Breibart.
This could be the least interesting comment thread I’ve ever seen on FF. Even skimming the argument almost put me to sleep — and I just woke up.
Coffee. You need coffee.
I agree… and I’d also recommend you guys stop referring to it as his “junk”. I haven’t seen the photo, but my understanding is that no part of his actual genitals (or anything other than his legs and abdomen) are exposed. So, this is no more picture of his junk thank any picture of him in, say, a bathing suit. This is a controversy over whether this guy had a photo of himself in his underwear stored somewhere on line?! I have thousands of photographs of myself on-line. None of them are in any way salacious, but I can’t say with any degree of certainty that I’m not in my underwear in any of them… For example, when my daughter was born, my wife was constantly photographing me holding her… could one of those shots have been taken in the morning, before I put my pants on? Almost certainly. Would I be able to identify myself if you cropped out just my lower abs and upper thighs? Not a chance. So… if such a crop were to wind up on the net and someone said “is this you?”… I’d have to say “I don’t think so.”
As it happens, I try not to store any of my data (photos, music, etc) locally… I keep everything in the cloud. I’m sure I’m the exception and not the rule at the moment, but that is going to change in the next few years.
I suggest you look at the picture and then come modify your post. Its a junk shot, without a doubt.
Balzs, my DAILYKOS??? Look, I provided various links to the story so you can read and make up your own mind, but the end result is that all provide credible evidence that Weiner was not lying when he said he did not send the tweet.
Really, my Dailykos??? So I suddenly own EVERYTHING that was written EVER on Dailykos because I linked to a article that had a credible detailing of the events.
If Dailykos speculates that Breitbart was in on it, that is their business, but that does not mean that Wolfe himself is innocent.
And as I said before, if Weiner is “guilty” of sending a private picture to a woman who herself claimed to never receive it and happened to have a person monitoring him who predicted Weiner would do just such a thing and who has acted suspicious as hell, well only a fool would not consider it enough reasonable doubt that Weiner is not guilty. Now if Weiner wants to bring charges against Wolfe for what he himself said he viewed as nothing but a prank, that is his business. I can certainly see why Weiner doesn’t want to have to go through a trial for what he considered a prank. Especially since he would open himself up to discovery. And if it was the act of this Wolfe guy with a few of his loser buddies, there would be no big fish to bring down. Bringing down a complete nobody would not be worth the hassle of having his own private life turned upside down.
That would be the same Daily KOS that intimated the John Edward affair allegations were right wing smear?
My, how they learn from their mistakes.
To John Guardiano,
I agree with your viewpoint. This whole thing is stupid, and merely distracts from more substantive matters. “We can’t come to an agreement on the debt limit, we’re too obsessed with Rep. Wiener’s crotch.”
“The highly influential blogger Robert Stacy McCain…”
Who? Never heard of him.
Weiner is a disgrace of a Jewish race. Only disgraceful Liberal Jews cannot see it. People like him get ellected only by people on drugs.
Red menace is the voice of the Savage (Weiner) Nation.
Well I agree with John, I really could care less about any of these scandals real or imagined.
Well, Guardiano the Broken Clock is right twice a day but wrong the rest of the time and this is one of those instances. Can’t say I blame Stacy McCain, Breitbart & co. though. These are hard core partisans and the Wiener distraction is VERY useful to the GOP side right now, right after the NY-26 fiasco.
MARCU$
“Who? Never heard of him.”
Well, for context, remember that Guardiano considers himself a “top conservative on Twitter”, and “never heard of him” is practically his tagline.
The only person who has the right to complain about this is the person who received the photo. She isn’t upset about this. After that it’s just a media-fueled story. Is it a little creepy? Yep. But since I get at least one weird email per week from someone whose facebook account was hacked, the idea that this was someone hacking his account seems plausible. Too bad it didn’t occur to Weiner to do an outright denial even though he wasn’t sure what had happened. It seems that our media would prefer a definitive lie over an uncertain truth.