I only ask that question in reference to this post over at Hot Air, where Ed writes that both he and Allah have stayed away from Weinergate because neither had any opinion about it. Huh? I don’t get that line of thinking. To be perfectly clear, I didn’t have a strong opinion on the story when I wrote our first Tatler post about Weinergate. It all seemed too coincidental, but it was reasonable to make allowances for the possibility that he’d been hacked. It does happen; I’ve been hacked once myself, but all the hacker did was send out spam emails to some of my contacts. They certainly didn’t try anything as elaborate as what Weiner initially alleged. And actually, I started writing the big timeline post as a way to get my own arms around the facts so I could figure out what seemed most likely to be true, and then to have one place to go to and return to, to get at the undisputed facts, as apart from the conspiracy theories and so forth. I wanted to get the timeline straight in my own mind, and help others do the same. I always thought that that was one of the things blogging is for: Investigate, test theories, get commenters and readers involved to bring their own views and expertise to bear. We’re not gatekeepers; bloggers are facilitators.
And by the way, if Weiner really was hacked (which, contra Ed’s post, Weiner is no longer claiming) this was a very sophisticated hack. I don’t mean in the way they hacked him, but what they did once they had hacked him. They didn’t just send out spam, as most hackers do. They apparently didn’t even hack his email, which would be the most useful thing for a spammer to hack. They hacked his Facebook and maybe twitter, according to Weiner’s second version of events, and sent out one message to one specific person in Weiner’s twitter follow list, and that one specific message was designed to look like it came from him as a private message to her. And they did this late on a Friday night on a holiday weekend, when few were likely to even see it. But with 45,000 followers it was reasonable to think that someone might see it, just not a whole lot of people. If this was a hack (which Weiner said on Friday, but isn’t saying now), it’s either one of the most devious political dirty tricks ever devised — in a non-election year, no less, and against a rep. in a safe seat — or it’s the work of some very sophisticated folks, possibly foreign and hostile intel, waging some type of cyber warfare against a sitting federal official. That kind of action, by the way, the Pentagon may now consider as an act of war against the US, with all the military implications that go along with that.
So in calling this a hack, which Weiner did as his very first public response on Friday night (but has backed off from since), Weiner inadvertently made this story a much bigger deal than the pic would imply. This was a legitimate story to pursue, from the start.
Update: Note to Nathan Goulding at NRO: Do your homework. The recipient of the photo was not a “random recipient in the internet.” She was one of only 91 people Weiner had taken the action of following. They already had a connection, based solely on that fact, a connection the enabled direct messaging. Not random. At all. And he had done a shout out to her time zone, on the opposite coast from him and his district, on Friday — and we know she saw that, because she retweeted it. Again, not random.
And where do you get the idea that politicians don’t do dumb things?
I know there was a lapdog media breathless account of a married congressman sending a picture with his shirt off to a woman.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/congressman-chris-lee-resigns-shirtless-photo-posted-internet/story?id=12878937
This picture sent seems a bit more offensive, by most people’s standards. There is also some suggestion that he has some connection to a woman with a porn background of some sort.
Roger said something about high school girls.
The lapdog media seemed to think that resigning one’s seat was appropriate for the Republican congressman.
Whatever the standard for reporting and judging…it seems to me, should be the same standard regardless of political affiliation.
And, if it’s a news story for the Republican official, then it is a news story for the leftist Democrat.
If it’s a hoax, a prank, a hacker or if it is a married man sending lewd photos to college aged girls, it is now a matter of public interest. I know this, because that’s what the lapdog media said on the subject.
The difference is that folks have expectations about Republicans’ behavior. This is exactly what I expect from a Democrat. meh.
Since when is a blogger obligated to blog a story he or she chooses not to follow? Hot Air gave references to several blogs that are covering the story. Ed and Allah aren’t “stopped” from blogging the story; they simply have better things to do than follow a titillating story about an otherwise unremarkable Democratic Congressman from New York.
Unremarkable? Weiner is one of the progressives’ main spokesmen. He is very interested in seeking higher office, maybe mayor of NY, probably senator or even higher. He’s young, linked to the Clintons, very much in the mix. And he’s on TV slamming Republicans All. The. Time. He’s not “unremarkable,” and he would probably be the first to tell you that.
If I was anymore “involved” I’d be sending in my comments via bicycle messenger.
Ed and Allah … known weenies.
These two would have given Bill Clinton a pass … after he lied under oath.
HotAir is not hot. It’s Tepid.
I was sputtering, SPUTTERING when I read Nathan Goulding’s piece at NRO and I am really put out with Daniel Foster for defending him and taking the commenters to task for being incredulous. The commenters are your bread and butter, Daniel, if you happen to read this, which you SHOULD to get up to speed.
Bryan, Nathan needs to READ YOUR COLUMNS. I think he needs to take his piece down at NRO and retract his ridiculous, childlike notions that because the coed sounds sincere, well, gee golly gosh! what she says must be true!!!
And where do you get the idea that politicians don’t do dumb things?
Unfortunately, voters do dumber things by electing them. The only reason our Congress is infested with low lives is we put them there to “represent” us, to govern us, to pass laws to lord over us while exempting themselves with waivers.