bbinacan (1000+ posts) Tue May-31-11 08:23 PMhttp://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1205523
Original message
I hate to say it but Weiner may be fried
Edited on Tue May-31-11 08:34 PM by bbinacan
I've watched a number of the video links posted on DU. One CNN story struck me and reminded me of Edwards. Weiner was asked a very simple question...Did you send the picture. His answer was pure Edwards. This will not end well for him I fear. What a dumbass.
Do me a favor and watch this.
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/rep-weiner-has-angry-exchang... /
It blows me away how they can watch Weiner in just about any circumstance and see a totally different man than we do. We literally see a prick, they see a great man who speaks truth to power. It's mind boggling.H5 for speaking truth. They are the expendable minions, loyal unto death. To them, ideology overrides all other considerations. The crime committed doesn't matter, it is more important to stay in office.
It blows me away how they can watch Weiner in just about any circumstance and see a totally different man than we do. We literally see a prick, they see a great man who speaks truth to power. It's mind boggling.
Maru Kitteh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Tue May-31-11 08:56 PM
Response to Reply #24
35. It never matters where it started - only where it ends.
If he can't answer "did you send the picture" then it may not end well for him.
bbinacan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Tue May-31-11 09:32 PM
Response to Reply #35
61. Yep! n/t
Canuckistanian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Tue May-31-11 11:15 PM
Response to Reply #35
105. That's true
I'm starting to get a bad feeling about this.
TheMadMonk (1000+ posts) Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Wed Jun-01-11 01:30 AM
Response to Reply #35
120. He can answer. Problem is whether or not he can answer the obvious...
...follow up question of who he thinks might have sent it or caused it to be sent.
We ALL know who figures prominently on any list of likely suspects. But without evidence, a "baseless allegation" is suicide.
Maru Kitteh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Wed Jun-01-11 01:35 AM
Response to Reply #120
121. So why not answer the first. If he can answer, answer what he can. Call for a proper investigation
of what he cannot answer. Hiring lawyers is not "investigating." It's hiring people who want to keep getting paid to find what you WANT them to find.
TheMadMonk (1000+ posts) Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Wed Jun-01-11 03:14 AM
Response to Reply #121
127. Circumstances prevent him giving any proper/honest answer.
The ONLY answer he can give to these questions is no answer at all. Not half an answer. Not just the bits he can answer.
Anyone who caves into demands to provide negative proof is asking for trouble. If the media had any POSITIVE evidence at all that Weiner was responsible for the sending of the offending tweet, then it would be using that evidence. Without any evidence all they can do is keep pushing for an official statement of denial. And the opportunity for a whole lot of He says, She says and what aren't they saying now.
And official investigation, would mean that the story can be kept alive indefinitely in the form of progress (and lack of progress) news reports.
Maru Kitteh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Wed Jun-01-11 03:18 AM
Response to Reply #127
128. Bull. "I WELCOME authorities and ask them to investigate this crime." Proper and honest.
Nothing difficult, ambiguous or legally evasive about that at all.
It blows me away how they can watch Weiner in just about any circumstance and see a totally different man than we do. We literally see a prick, they see a great man who speaks truth to power. It's mind boggling.
It blows me away how they can watch Weiner in just about any circumstance and see a totally different man than we do. We literally see a prick, they see a great man who speaks truth to power. It's mind boggling.
TheMadMonk (1000+ posts) Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Wed Jun-01-11 01:30 AMBreitbart? And what is the reasoning behind it, if so?
Response to Reply #35
120. He can answer. Problem is whether or not he can answer the obvious...
...follow up question of who he thinks might have sent it or caused it to be sent.
We ALL know who figures prominently on any list of likely suspects. But without evidence, a "baseless allegation" is suicide.
You know it's a lame story when even most of the DUmmies ain't buying.
:lmao:
TheMadMonk (1000+ posts) Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Wed Jun-01-11 03:14 AM
Response to Reply #121
127. Circumstances prevent him giving any proper/honest answer.
The ONLY answer he can give to these questions is no answer at all. Not half an answer. Not just the bits he can answer.
Anyone who caves into demands to provide negative proof is asking for trouble. If the media had any POSITIVE evidence at all that Weiner was responsible for the sending of the offending tweet, then it would be using that evidence. Without any evidence all they can do is keep pushing for an official statement of denial. And the opportunity for a whole lot of He says, She says and what aren't they saying now.
And official investigation, would mean that the story can be kept alive indefinitely in the form of progress (and lack of progress) news reports.
Good Lord, how many ways did madmonk have to twist to come up with that?(http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e387/LockandLoadA7X/Pretzel.jpg)
Cindie
graywarrior (1000+ posts) Tue May-31-11 10:07 PM
Response to Original message
79. One word
Koch.
Just sayin'.
Nye Bevan (1000+ posts) Tue May-31-11 10:18 PM
Response to Reply #79
89. I think it's spelled "cock", but yes, that's what's in the picture (nt)
Edited on Tue May-31-11 10:19 PM by Nye Bevan
Apparently the little weasel said today that he 'couldn't say for sure whether it was really him in the pic,' but the obvious implication of that is, yes, he did have a picture of his puptent in that allegedly-hacked ( :whatever: ) photo archive.
I think his defense will be 'yeah that's my junk -- but some hacker sent it out on the intertubes, not me !'
And the lesson is don't take pictures of your junk.
This just keeps getting better, doesn't it?
Ohhhhhh, yeah!
:-)
And the lesson is don't take pictures of your junk.
Indeed - two laws of the intertubes
1) All links eventually lead to porn.
2) Anything that might be considered pornographic on a device connected to the internet will end up on the internet.
and/or viruses...
Cute Co-ed: "Ah declare!
Senator Weiner, is that a banana in yo little ole undies, or are y'all jes happy to see m...Hey! Its a banana!"
Cute Co-ed: "Ah declare!
Senator Weiner, is that a banana in yo little ole undies, or are y'all jes happy to see m...Hey! Its a banana!"
More like a gherkin.I've seen all the famous photos of Lindsay Lohan, Britney Spears, and Paris Hilton, but have so far avoided the Weiner wiener.
From what Ive seen, wouldn't a hacker have posted a more graphic photo?Oh, good Lord, I hope he doesn't.
Weiner's office calls police (http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2011/06/02/weiner-says-hes-done-talking-about-twitter-photo-time-to-get-back-to-work/)
A reporterette tried to get an interview with him at his DC office and his chicken$hit staff called the po-po on her.
Behaving more and more like a perp every day, isn't he ?No, just more people are seeing him for what he really is.