June 1, 2011 / Brooklyn news
The 'Mouth' goes mute! Weiner humbled in Twitter underwear scandal
By Gary Buiso and Kimberly Lightbody
for The Brooklyn Paper
http://www.brooklynpaper.com/stories/34/22/all_weinergate_2011_6_3_bk.html
_
ck the hometown paper comments

Lier are having a field day on Weiner. Just maybe ohioorrin was sending the twitter pic.

nope not moi. i like weiner's politics. and breitbart the smear artist is involved whom i despise.

I predicted this two weeks ago. No one as any idea how to get us out of this economic mess, so we are gonna see tons of this distraction crap whether it is true or false. We are not stupid. if we are expected to get all excited about this stuff and forget the economy, medicare, tax cuts for the rich and oil substities; ya better get some naked women, a marching band and maybe some crack cocaine in the pic. And the circus has come to town.

Rachel, what an outstanding, detailed technical analysis of the Weiner (alleged) pic and how it could've been altered. Same for the Twitter account. Could ya get those same folks to analyze the birth certificate? I didn't think so.

Good one beeam, I only suspected you were a racist... now I know you're one. She didn't have the U.S. certify that the crouch pic was Rep. Weiner's like the BC, not to mention the 80 versions that the conservatives have been demanding, well until recently anyway. Killing Bin Laden will stifle the racist hoards of teabaggers, at least for a little bit.

Not sure how you would suspect that Politideth...it's beeeam very first post?

Re reg anyone? Amazing one's first post is to come here of all the vine and complain about TRMS. Unaffiliated?

It sounds to me Rachel is appalled by the Republicans and how they are extending this little problem of the liberal Representative.

Wonder the response if it was sent from Palin's online account. My gosh, you guys had over 200 postings just because she ate pizza with Trump and rode in a bus. I suspect if it was Palin or Bachman, you'd be all a "twitter" with excitement and responses.

Good call, Maggie. Could be....the misdirection is familiar. As is the initial "poking of the stick"

I know he did come back as someone and Tyler banned him again...that one will return over and over and over.

I've got a hunch some others have returned as well, but if they follow COH this time, OK. If not, they will be creating new identities constantly. Must be really really meaningful for them to do this stuff, only to be banned.

I think that is sad.

They entertain themselves with their barbs of self perceived cleverness?

It's not against the CoH to re register it's the other deal...once banned...you may not return under another name. It's over and they will hunt down the ISP and keep banning.

Good to know, I hadn't thought of that.

It's all over the vine. A hard core righty was suspended...and she was like number five on the top of the seeder list...don't ask...and while she was suspended she logged on under another account....banned her and all her isp's for life. They don't mess around with that.

hey Maggie, The state hospital cant track all their client's internet activity it seems, but i wish they did a better job ensuring they take their meds. I love a good debate, but how do you debate fiction? Peace VP

They can't stand Weiner because he's got a spine. That's the only reason they're all pissing themselves happy that their doberman Breitbart's decided to take a chunk out of him, despite the guy's dirtbag reputation.

He has a spine? Did you not watch the press conference? "I didn't tell anyone the truth because I was embarrassed?" That's a spine?

Agreed. He grew a "spine" when he finally saw that his lies had become too heavy to support their own weight.

The big question now is, "what is the appropriate thing for him to do?" Let's look at how repubs handled similar issues. Rep. Chris Lee, who tweeted a shirtless pic of himself, resigned almost immediately. On the other hand, Sen. David Vitter, who paid for high priced hookers in DC for years, not only didn't resign, but got a standing ovation from fellow repubs when he walked into the Senate chambers after the obligatory "mea culpa" speech, and he is still there. Sen. John Ensign took months before he resigned over banging his campaign staff member and then paying hush money through his parents to keep it quiet. He only resigned when the Ethics Committee published the results of their investigation and forwarded it to the Justice Department.

So, which way to go? Personally, I feel that while this "transgression" wasn't all that bad compared to those of people like Ensign or Edwards, (he didn't apparently break any laws), it does show an appalling lack of judgement on his part. Granted, politicians seem to be excelling in displaying appalling lacks of judgement lately, such as trying to kill Medicare and Social Security, or refusing to raise the debt limit, but even so, I don't know that I would have much respect for him after this debacle.

If he continues to serve the people he represents well and doesn't actually break the law, he should be entitled to be as much of a f***-up as he wants to be. Politicians in office who are guilty of criminal malfeasance (Bush and the rest) should not be exonerated for being devoted family men. Compare Bush and Clinton, who was actually better for the country? Screw that!

Freedom of the press?

But maybe you're right, and he should have left ACORN to setting up underage brothels.

LOL at you very hard!

thanks for the morning belly laugh eap1.

Of course Cantor and Fox want to talk about this. As long as the media are focusing on Weiner, it's not driving the Republicans' approval numbers down by discussing the attempt to kill Medicare.

Pilot, why do you think that underage prostitution is funny?

eap1, nothing funny about that!!!

i am Laughing AT YOU!!!!!! and you are the Joke.

Pilotshark, darlin': DNFTT. eap's one of 'em.

Andrew Breitbart is the King of the Trolls and ought not to be fed, either.

*nods at Carolinalady* exactly :)

Carolinalady always makes me wonder why southern women seem to be so much smarter than the southern men. Any thoughts on that, my fan-wielding friend?

Carolina,

Thanks, I will keep that in mind.

i do like to LOL at the Cult trolls, with out replying directly at them.

Pilot, they did in fact do that. I don't see the joke. Are you denying that they did?

I mean surely no matter how much you obviously hate Breitbart, you have to agree with them getting exposed doing that. Or are you only in favor of freedom of the press when it suits your needs?

I suggest we all take a stand and DNFTGDT's. Do not respond...do not address...

I see there is a new one trolling right now on a couple of threads.

I'm quite fond of the ignore feature.

F&F the Cult Trolls!!!

yes UFFdaguy guess its Delta Tau Chi cult troll name is California militia.

You people amaze me. Just because someone has a differing opinion they're a troll?

Well I guess you guys can just keep high fiving each other on how smart you are and how dumb everyone else is. So much for being free thinkers.

Me too Haddie, works great! I cannot see it, no response ;-I

Yep Uffy...I agree on that one. What amazes me is that they all say it's because they differ in opinion. They fail to realize it is the manner in which they deliver their opinion. I have seen you conduct yourself in civil discourse all over this blog Uffy...and I am always learning from that sort of dialogue.

So...just in case I haven't already...Thank you Uffdaguy :)

So calling someone a troll is civil discourse. Thanks for the clarification Maggie. I agree with eap. I have been called a troll here myself just because I may offer a different slant on a topic here. I never use names - not even terms like "Repub" or "Dem" - just state how I think or feel. Still get called names. Sure there may be a stray stupid comment by someone that is way off base, but that can come from all sides of the politcal spectrum. The VAST majority are of the same thought patterns and I really think some people here just can't believe that someone with an alternative view would dare blog here the the Maddow site. Isn't the liberal left suppose to be the side that has the "big tent" with all the diverse walks of life/thought? Sometimes not so much - at least here.

Thank you Maggie, but we both know I lost my cool a couple of weeks ago and took a one day ban for my moment of weakness. I did learn at that time that the ignore button, although not something I use often, has become essential once someone demonstrates to me that they have absolutely no interest in real conversation. I have only used it on two people so far, and amazingly enough, Katy isn't one of them. I genuinely enjoy the give and take of opposing opinions, but too often it seems that it degenerates into the same kind of foolishness that now engulfs Washington.

Yes, the ignore feature is a good tool. Not sure if I should be happy that it takes three spins of the mouse wheel to scroll through my ignore list, though.

There is obviously value in interacting with people we don't agree with, so it's a question of where to draw the line, and that's a personal decision. I'm all for using the ignore feature. It helps to keep the peace, but only to the extent that it's being used, and used intelligently.

There is a fairly stable and sizable body of regulars commenting on the blog. Would it be useful to have an informal nomination of candidates for being ignored and, barring strong disagreement, everyone ignores that person? Or, maybe a better question, would that even be desirable?

So ignore people that don't agree with you. Do you also stick fingers in you ears and go "la la la la la la la"? Yeah, that's the ticket, just read and respond to all the other cheerleaders that think just like you. Kinda like the Tea Party isn't it? One sided thought and block out any dissenters. So democratic.

Skip, the two people I ignore have proven they like nothing better than to lie, distort, and agitate. They are the first people I have ever ignored in the 4 years I have been on blogs. There are plenty of other people on here I don't always agree with, but they at least try to argue their points in an adult manner. That is all I have ever asked.

I've never called you a troll skip...and we've never really engaged in any conversation that I recall. Agree with eap all you want...I ignore that from months ago when he/she was personally rude to me...didn't like my response to something and made a personal comment about me rather than the merit of my post. I happen to agree with Carolinaladywithfan and you eap...*shrug*

So ignore people that don't agree with you.

No, I ignore people who personally insult on a regular basis.

My point is...there is no point in civil discourse or attempting it when one does not behave civilly...hence ignore. These dynamics are about perception...just because we differ in perceptions and world views...does not mean the conversation cannot be civil. Don't make it personal...and don't bait people...that should also be a CoH violation in my opinion, however gray an area it may be.

Is eap one of them? I don't see anything dishonest or childish on his comments. His tone, to me, is not agitating either. I am sure you're right about people here that may distort or agitate but eap is not one of them. In fact I've only seen a couple of folks like that here and they were more on the left/liberal side.

I do agree with some here that this is really not much of a story while there is so much more important things to discuss. I do find it curious that some here have somehow determined that it was a prank or a truly compromising situation. Since I highly doubt there will ever be an investigation - informal or otherwise - that none of us will really know the true facts.

That's a complete fabrication from Maggie skip. I've been called names a hundred times here and I only inferred something. These people are looking for an excuse to not listen. You can go back post after post and see me asking them why they can't respond without calling names. They have no interest in civil discourse with those they don't agree with.

Skip, I'm not going to name names, because in my book, it's over, and there is no need to fan the flames of a dying ember. Just know that I enjoy discussing issues with you and several other folks on here who are to the right of me, (but then again, I'm a pretty far left leftie, and proud of it).

Actually, not true. I confront people who I disagree with. But when the conversation turns into a merry go round where I defend my arguments, they make accusations, I ask them to defend their arguments, they respond with ad hominem attacks...round and round and round and round, then that person is a troll and a waste of my time and energy. And for the record, the last time I got banned it was for four weeks. Liberals don't get special treatment here. And this is not a democratic establishment. Freedom of the press may be a constitutional right, but there is a code of honor here on Newvine.

skip, I use ignore only after a line is crossed. I have only about 5 on ignore. You are not one of those, so although we disagreed and you thought I was labeling you a Republican, I respect differing opinions. I can see how that is provoking you and my aim is not to provoke people, but I want to get my viewpoints across.

I think many people here would like me to stop engaging with opposition. Trolling is not disagreeing, it is throwing bait designed to inflame a war.

I sometimes get on a footing of how we all are being trained to label people by what they say (or type). I wish I were perfect, but I'm not. The people I have on ignore are because they said something provocative that I do not want to be provoked into flaming people.

I recall that the episode was about Katy posting a very graphic written account of a medical procedure (an abortion) on the blog. Some of us objected...instead a link with a warning would have been more appropriate imo. Anyone on the side of that being okay on that day in my book was not okay. Let the burning embers fade.

The idea that liberals get special treatment here is a joke indeed.

Trolling is not disagreeing, it is throwing bait designed to inflame a war.

Exactly...I never called eap a name...but I did suggest he stfu when saying he knew where I stood on an issue. Downhill from there.

The idea that liberals get special treatment here is a joke indeed.

kind of like the liberal press gives special treatment.

eap is a very special case. That is all I have to say. He is a very special case.

@eap Breitbart's not part of 'the press' and even if he was, that freedom is not absolute; there is such a thing as libel, altho i can recognize that you don't (want to) understand that.

as a judge just got thru saying to Breitbart's protegé, O'Keefe, can't hide illegal activity behind the First Amendment.

He's just as much part of the press as Rachel is. And libel is almost impossible to sue for if you're a public figure.

I honestly don't see anything wrong with what O'Keefe has done. What's the difference in that and any news organization doing undercover investigating. There are a lot of reporters who've made names for themselves doing that.

... altho i can recognize that you don't (want to) understand that.

I will unbend enough, just enough, to respond to this. Rachel doesn't libel. ESPECIALLY when dealing with the opposition, Rachel always and deliberately asks if she has presented the facts fairly and accurately. The few times that her guests claim to be misrepresented by her, they were partisan had axes to grind and were far more concerned aboit bum-rushing their message through than answering questions and having a civil back and forth.

Breitbart is a political hit man. A character assassin in the court of public opinion. Libel and slander are his stock and trade. Both of which are criminal, as is fraud.

Investigators came to the conclusion that evidence that would have exonerated ACORN was on the cutting-room floor. But of course by then ACORN had been long dead. Which was the whole point after all.

http://judiciary.house.gov/hearings/pdf/CRS-ACORN091222.pdf

The same with Shirley Sherrod. Artfully edited her statement was made to sound like she was bragging about discriminating against a white farmer. The White House over-reacted, and she had been fired long before the facts were shown to be what they were. Breitbart is an amoral political hitman. Criminal.

I honestly don't see anything wrong with what O'Keefe has done.

I bet not. That really doesn't speak well at all for your own moral compass.

What's the difference in that and any news organization doing undercover investigating.

They tried to perpetrate their charade under the guise of gonzo journalism. But not even Hunter S. Thompson would have given their attempt the dignity of calling it journalism. O'Keefe tries to marry gonzo journalism with Ashton Kutchner's Punk'd and Borat. He and his cohorts have had alot of legal trouble because of his "work," but as he is still walking free I'd say he's not had enough. He is no journalist or investigator.

There are a lot of reporters who've made names for themselves doing that.

Really? Name them.

So every time that someone calls Potter on her accuracy it's a partisan hack? So she never libels because she disagrees with them? I don't get your point. You're assuming that every time she disagrees who she's disagreeing with is wrong. So that makes it not libel? Wow, that's convenient...

Chris Hansen, John Stossel, Donal MacIntyre. You do know that they KKK was brought down by undercover work right? Undercover work is pretty American.

As far as ACORN is concerned, prove it. Prove that they weren't attempting to aid in underage prostitution. I have pretty conclusive proof that they were. Feel free to prove me wrong. By the way, who are the investigators that you're speaking about?

So you're blaming Breitbart for the President over reacting? Maybe the president should do his due diligence. I mean, that would be the responsible thing to do right?

What's wrong with what O'Keefe did? Please, give my moral compass some guidance.

I guess I don't see the difference in Breitbart and Martin Bashir.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z5-S3RRfgyo

Its like trying to get a blind man to read an eye chart and he insists that he can. I'm not playing with you. Back into the "ignore" box with you.

I've put three people on ignore in all the time I've been on Newsvine, and eap1 was the third.

Thanks don, no intelligent argument. All that talk and you can't back it up.

Yeah, not that eap is childish I mean the intelligence is obvious as well as educated however...it's the baiting language...dances on the edge of the CoH...and expects all to...what...believe his every word and if we don't we are not educated or immature?

Maggie, we all bait here. It's human nature.

eap1 Ignoring author

I love debating...with people who know how to debate.

I guess I am in a mode to de bait.

CITIZENS calm yourselves. The biggest difference between here and a conservative blog is that one can make a contrary post without getting 600 responses of paint peeling vitriol.

Uffdaguy: ...evidence that would have exonerated ACORN was on the cutting-room floor. But of course by then ACORN had been long dead. Which was the whole point after all.

'what can we get away with right now?'

I disagree, something is being done about it! By ignoring the fact that major corporations and Wall Street have been using tax dollars to boost their profits over the last 12 years to make up for the lack of consumer activity during that time, people miss the true problem. Our monetary system is the true failure. The money we think has left the economy has just been redirected to the wealthy. At the same time, it coast more money to start or compete with big businesses. People are working for far less, but rich Americans are able to keep more of their money. While less jobs are available for people who want work, tax revenues are shrinking. That means government regulations are also shrinking. Our monetary system backs this up by keeping us in debt, and not supporting the American workers! The broader the world economy, the easier it is for American corporations to wash their money out of U.S. tax revenues. Capitalism is just the mask for Totalitarianism. Privatization means NOT A DEMOCRACY! Sarah Palin is right in that we need to take our country back, but she and others are on the wrong side of the issue. The Federal Reserve, World Bank, and I.M.F. are all apart of the steady decline of the U.S. economy. These entities create 3rd world countries by keeping people under privileged. Kill the social safety net and we go right to the truth! More power to the few, less rights for the many. Think about how much it cost for a collage education today. That is the way to a decent living here in the todays world, if you chose the right field of study. Going to school has become like playing the lottery. Please keep asking questions! Please demand answers! I personally need to know others feel the same way I do! Thank you!

T, it's a show, it's televison. There has to be a degree of drama, sex scandal, comedy etc....mixed with some political controversy. I know, we are all pissed about the economy and the fussing and fighting on both sides. Don't take T.V. to seriously.

Dont fall for the distractions...The people have to stay focused on the real issues..the rest is just entertainment. Peace

I look at it like the boss says you have to say "thank for using XYZ" before hanging up with a customer.

This is a sad reality, I would rather have the Maddow (and others) Show with the occasional bothersome stories than not have them. It could get kind of boring too, I like how the cocktail moment and moment of geek are included, too. Those might be irritating to some folks.

Like I would say "thank you for using XYZ" if it meant keeping my job. I wouldn't say "vote for Newt", but I would say that.

I thinks it's okay that she asked it, I mean she is trying to be objective to some degree. I like how Rachel isn't an attack dog, but more of a journalist with an opinion about politics. Breitbart anything should be taken with a huge grain of salt... dude's a pathalogic liar.

Agreed. While it's better to watch TRMS online without the full-length ad breaks, ExxonMobil Geodude is even more annoying than those Cisco geeks.

I also agree with kleptco & Tperky. The freak-show Republicans are amusing, but they don't go a long way toward explaining who creates & maintains these manufactured crisis, and their motivations for doing so. I'm grateful that past shows have delved into the Koch Brothers' machinations, but these Republiclowns are just the diversion they need to keep, uh, machinating. And, while I understand Rep. Weiner's need to equivocate on the "Is it yours?" inquiry, I'm still not satisfied with the purposefully vague answer (which he has already given elsewhere).

I don't like them either, JD; nor do I like the ones about how doing all this domestic production on things like oil sand will help us here in the US exclusively. But stopping the ads? I don't agree.

These multinational, hugely profitable companies enjoy subsidies from my tax dollar, and they pay no federal taxes to the US. Let them spend all the money they will sponsoring shows I like! There's a mute button on both my tv and my PC.

I understand and agree with you Haddie. I didn't look at it that way and I always mute these commercials. Thank goodness for my ability to look at an issue from another point of view put forth by a thinking person. TRMS is at the top of my list of political news outlets and I just felt a little slimy after seeing these commercials and felt I had to at least say something. Great screen name btw.

muted ads arent a bother

They've got to get paid somehow.

And criminal. If the tweet was deleted almost immediately, then the individual who got the retweet HAD to be the perpetrator. And who's there with the deep pockets and media clearinghouse for slander? Breitbart. A fence is as much a criminal as a thief.

Vast right wing conspiracy...Be afraid, be very afraid!

I am.

To bad the jobs they speak of are non existant. They say jobs jobs, and then put through abortion, anti gay nonsense, and now wiener, weiner... I feel a bit dirty, but you get the point.

Nice analogy, Ali. Perfect.

Hey, Cantor, why don't you get with your buddy, Boner....I mean Boehner and answer this question for us........WHERE ARE THE JOBS??? You even mention it in this little Obama Bash of a TV appearance. That the American people are concerned about jobs. Is that why you people have done nothing but attack women's rights since you've been elected? You unbelievable hypocrites. I hope every one of you get voted out. WHERE ARE THE EFFING JOBS?

Cantor, Ryan, and Boehner all work for people who just want to be able to keep more of their money,and the more jobs they create, the less they get to keep.

Dude, you have to understand that you have a large group of Americans who only watch Fox. these sound bites have not credibility anywhere else but there. Go to Fox today and watch...and then you are gonna feel like you need to shower. Really ...I tried to watch and I felt very dirty and alone.

I think it is safe to say we are expeirencing the clash of Paralell Universes. No two sides could be this far apart on what we see right i front of us. Could we?

We're all just being used and lied too! There are snakes on both sides of the fence. Some are just dressed like worms. We have to let everyone know we hear and see them slithering about. If not may we all be damned! This is war against us. Are our fighters truly out numbered by the few who identify as Republicans?

Are our fighters truly out numbered by the few who identify as Republicans?

Interesting questioning there Michael...food for thought.

I agree Uffy, yes again with all you've said...but I also somehow think...this must have been a slow week for news.

How could it be a slow week for news when Caribou Barbie is taking her summer bus trip? If she doesn't run for president now, she will probably face charges from the FEC for using campaign funds for personal use.

One can hope eh?

She won't run...unless she can sort out how to raise a ton of money...which she can...and then use it for her personal...er...you know. Man it would be so priceless for her to get in some legal trouble over her actions. That's the only Palin news I want to hear about frankly.

For being such a stupid @%*#! she has figured out how to steal money from her followers...which does kinda crack me up. Contribute baby contribute.

She is following the same tactics as televangelists, who make tens of millions each year from gullible followers.

I really don't see her running...she won't take the pay cut involved in being president. I'm sure she also knows she'll be creamed by her fellow rethugs in the very first debate, and that kind of humiliation she won't be able to blame on the "lamestream" media.

Yes, and in her heart of hearts...she knows...she is incapable of doing the task that would be at hand. She wants the attention...not that responsibility.

If you think about it, this is likely her last hurrah. Repubs don't fear her like they once did, she is no longer considered a kingmaker, and it seems extremely unlikely she will run. If she does, she'll be obliterated early in the primary season, which will send her fading star crashing to the ground. Don't expect Caribou Barbie to have any real impact after 2012, unless it is the impact of her cratering "career".

:) check this out...for a giggle

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/opinions/benson/

That was a GREAT cartoon! I especially like how they captured Caribou Barbie's crazed expression. For the sheer nutiest look though, I think Bachmann has her beat. I'm always waiting for the nice orderly in the white coat to come and give her her daily medication.

By saying he doesn't know, isn't he acknowledging that he might take pictures of himself in his underwear? What possible reason would there be for that?

In my imagination, he did it b/c his wife likes it, or they both do. There's nothing wrong with that, and it explains why he seems so embarrassed but won't deny it.

I guess I'm just old school then, as I've never had the urge to take a pic of myself in my undies. Of course, that is also meant to preserve the functionality of the camera! :0)

My read on his negative flat out denial that it is not he in the shorts...is that perhaps it is he...PS'd or not...and does not want that to be proved hence making him a liar if he denies it. Everyone knows we don't like lying politicians.

It's weird news...and like vultures the media anticipate and perch on the political branches to see what breaks stupid or scandalous.

This was a complaint filed by the repugnicans against a failed TP candidate. Why, exactly, would this story be worth anything more than the four sentences given it by the Associated Press? I feel like I wasted fifteen seconds of my life just verifying the story.

Christine WHO?

Christine WHO?

That would be me. She's me, so I'm her...or something.

How do you know all this as actual fact? I am not saying he did it or not, but you seem to know beyond a resonable doubt that this was a definite breach. I must have missed that press conference. Seriously, if there was a determination by someone or some organization based on an investigaton (and not just Rep. Weiner saying so) I would like to know. I'm not trying to be smart or flippant either. Was there a true determination?

Skip

Guessing that`s why Wiener obtain counsel and a company that checks into hacking.

Skip, have you quit beating your wife?

Skip, Don thinks he's being clever.

In these situations there's handy little Buddhist concept called "mu" (unask the question.) The question is unanswerable so please ask a question that has an answer.

It seems to me that if Weiner really thought he was hacked he'd have the FBI investigate. Him downplaying it as a prank seems like a pretty clever way of acting like it's not a big deal and then not having to pursue this with the federal authorities. I know that if I was him I'd at least try to make my spouse feel better about the situation and have the FBI put it to rest.

In the end it doesn't really matter if he did it or not. He's a liberal with no principles and therefore can't be called a hypocrite. If he were a conservative with a history of promoting family values he'd be getting crucified right now. But he's not so he can pretty much get away with anything that's morally questionable.

Classy response Don - what grade are you in. I guess your code of honor in your comment above (#4.27) does not have a very high standard.

Actually, not true. I confront people who I disagree with. But when the conversation turns into a merry go round where I defend my arguments, they make accusations, I ask them to defend their arguments, they respond with ad hominem attacks...round and round and round and round, then that person is a troll and a waste of my time and energy. And for the record, the last time I got banned it was for four weeks. Liberals don't get special treatment here. And this is not a democratic establishment. Freedom of the press may be a constitutional right, but there is a code of honor here on Newvine

So what part of your comment above are you going by? Apparently your comments are a waste of time and energy. I guess going by your code I should ask you to defend your comment, but since I am not married you cannot defend it. Congratulations are in order though. You will be the first and only time I will use adolescent languare here when I will call you a name. You Donny are the true troll here.

And Pilotshark, thank you for the update. I did not know he hired counsel on this matter. Good to see we may get to the bottom of this :)

@skip there was no reasonable doubt and the determination was made the moment Breitbart became part of it.

So nothing has be determined. I don't quite follow the Breibart part though. Is he the one that brought up the tweet or was it out there already. I honestly have not been following this silly story super-close and am not sure how it surfaced. So is what Saddler is saying true - that someone confessed to hacking his twitter acct? And is that BEFORE or after the alleged photo was sent. I mean did someone come foward and admit that hey hacked his twitter and sent the photo to the girl?

Skip, this is some weird non-guilt by association tactic. They're implying that if Breitbart has something to do with this, Weiner must be innocent.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=heasnJY8HMM

That's...interesting. Particularly the part about Breitbart starting to ask questions. Of course, if Breitbart had any integrity, he'd have asked questions first.

You see it my way! To the lowest bidder goes the spoils! Then you can overcharge everyone else! Including tax payers!