There is something that has me deeply disturbed about the recent Breitbart “scandal”.
One thing that is clear to me is that Breitbart and his minions were behind this, and have been attempting to set Congressman Weiner up for a long time now. But other than that fact, there is a lot that I don’t understand.
Hacking is, or at least can be, a federal felony punishable by as many as ten years in jail. There’s one felony.
Sending explicit images of genitalia (and whether the infamous bulge shot would count would be something a prosecutor would determine, but I would imagine this would fall under a statute in Washington State or in NY as sexual harassment or even sexual assault) is extremely serious. Most likely, that’s another felony.
Further, what Breitbart did is falsely accuse Congressman Weiner of attempting to have an affair, or at least engage in extremely inappropriate communication with a college student in Washington. That’s an attempt to jeopardize the Congressman’s marriage.
So far, there are at least two felonies attributable to Breitbart’s conduct, as well as an attempt to destroy a marriage.
This is no laughing matter.
So why is Congressman Weiner, as far as every report has shown, refusing to go to the FBI? Why is he now treating this as a prank?
Breitbart is, as much as anyone else besides Rush Limbaugh, the leader of the tea-baggers. He’s who they blindly follow, and take their marching orders from. And according to Representative Weiner, Breitbart has committed at least two felonies and attempted to destroy Weiner’s marriage. So Congressman Weiner has a chance to pursue justice against a man who has hacked into his account and attempted to threaten his marriage, but is instead treating this as a prank. Why?
Instead of going to the FBI or the Capitol Hill Police, Congressman Weiner is now calling this a prank, says he’s loathe to treat it as anything more, and hired an attorney? Why would the victim of hacking need an attorney? A prosecutor, who of course doesn’t need to be hired by a private party, could take care of the criminal charges.
Think about it from the perspective of the college student in Washington who was sexually harassed by Andrew Breitbart or one of his minions. Why not seek justice for her? Why not contact the FBI?
This isn’t adding up at all.
7:23 AM PT: I'm being defamed in the comments as a "concern troll", which is unbelievable. I'm starting to question YOUR commitment to sparkle motion.
Who am I? I'm not a concern troll. I'm the voice in your head that you're trying to drown out. That voice that asks you;
(1) Why did Weiner tweet, "thats545inSeattle" a few hours before the explicit image went out to someone in, Seattle? Was that also a Breitbart hack?
(2)Is this normal behavior for a victim of a crime to hire an attorney? Weiner has never been camera shy before. Why won't he talk about this now?
(3) If this was a hack, why was Weiner able to take the image down immediately, and start posting right after? He hadn't posted anything for a few hours before the "hack" (oh, that's right - now it's just a prank. guess law enforcement doesn't have to be involved). What a coincidence! He was signing on the exact same time as the hackers!
(4) Weiner was following only 91 people (despite having about 40,000 followers) before this incidence. One of the 91 was the individual in Seattle to whom the tweet was sent. What a coincidence!
(5) Weiner now has a chance to bring down the head of the tea-baggers, Andrew Breitbart himself, and is instead saying that he is "loathe to treat this as anymore than a prank".
(6) Strange thing for a hacker to send it, wouldn't you say? If some malicious hacking GENIUS, who was able to simultaneously crack the password for Weiner's twitter and yFrog accounts, and send the image to one of the 91 people Weiner was following and had just given a shout-out to, why send this tame image?
Add it all up, friends.
Here's the thing. You call me a concern troll, and question my commitment to Sparkle Motion, but the bottom line is this:
You know I'm right. Chris Lee claimed the same thing, HACKERZ DID IT! It was ridiculous then, and it's ridiculous now. The only difference is that we like Congressman Weiner.
7:38 AM PT: Once more update - even as I am defamed as a Concern Troll, just check out the poll.
You all know it's true. The hacking story is ridiculous. Why even pretend that you believe it? What happened to speaking Truth to Power?
8:04 AM PT: Look at that poll! Some great numbers for Occam's Razor, and it looks like "unclear" is about to pass "THE HACKAZ DID IT!!!!".
I wonder why? Could it be because, if it was indeed hackerz, Rep Weiner should be pursuing this and not laughing it off? Or perhaps its because he earlier tweeted a shout out to Seattle. Maybe I'll make a new poll.
TRUTH TO POWER!
8:10 AM PT: For the record - Rep Weiner made NO other tweets referencing West Coast time or Seattle before the one three hours prior to the HACKERZ incident. Check his own twitter feed if you don't believe it.
- The voice of reason.
- Daaaaaaamn look at that poll!
8:17 AM PT: A true sign that the "HACKERZ DID IT!" side doesn't believe their own arguments: they hide comments pointing out the folley in believing that this was just a prankish hack.
Dennis Kucinich 2012!
8:45 AM PT: Alright, I know that we have had our moments of disagreement. I have been called a troll and even worse in these comments.
But that's okay. I forgive each and every one of you. Life is about love, and forgiveness.
Ask yourself this: if this was a hack, why is his office refusing to say whether the photo is indeed of Representative Weiner?
Commmmme on, Kossacks. We're better than this. The HACKERZ DID IT! charge never made sense, and now it definitely doesn't make sense.
http://dailycaller.com/...
8:54 AM PT: Two quick stories to check out:
First, from the NYPOST: "Too many coincidences in Weiner's Tale"
http://www.nypost.com/...
Second, from the Daily Caller (sister publication of DailyKos): "Was it Weiner? Spokesman won't say if congressman pictured"
http://dailycaller.com/
9:12 AM PT: Truly the conduct of an innocent person. Refusing to comment as to whether he sent the tweet, and refusing to talk about it at all.
http://dailycaller.com