WeinerGate Twitter Hoax is Beginning to Unravel! I Told You Stupid Fucks!!!

[Liar]

If I were confronted with such a picture and asked if it was me, all I could say would be, "Maybe, I've never actually seen it from that angle."

I'd offer an ultimatum. Let me show my junk live on Meghyn Kelly's show (might need her around to sport she same quasi erection that's in the picture) to settle the question once and for all, or we all agree to drop the topic.

 

[Joeybagadonuts]

Joeybagadonuts do you think he lied when he stated with certitude that he did not send the tweet?

And if so, does it make sense that he lies about that but refuse to lie about whether the pic is his? Wouldn't it be easy to say "no, I don't recognise that picture"?

I'm not exhonerating him or anything. Just using the same rhetoric as you did.

What I think, based on lisening to his interviews is that he is being truthful that he didn't send the pic.

I think his computer was hacked and that either the pic is of him and he knows that, the pic is of him and it's been photoshopped, or the pic is of some other guys boner and he knew it was on his computer.

 

[bronzeage]

I'd offer an ultimatum. Let me show my junk live on Meghyn Kelly's show (might need her around to sport she same quasi erection that's in the picture) to settle the question once and for all, or we all agree to drop the topic.

Many years ago, the Governor of Louisiana was Edwin Edwards. He was known as the Silver Zipper. There was a story printed in one of the newspapers stating Edwards had five women brought to his hotel room in one night. A reporter asked Mrs. Edwards for a comment. She said Edwin could never do five women in one night.

The Congressman's wife should look at the photo and settle this for us.

 

[Drixxx]

If your wife ever asks you if you've ever cheated, you go ahead and tell her that you can't say with certitude that you haven't, thinking that's the same as saying no.

Me, I'll stick with "no."

Weiner isn't married to "some guy on the internet" or some no talent, lucky sperm club winner like Luke Russert. The burden of proof is always on the accuser. This "prove you're not a witch" meme is exactly how a con man like Breitbart manipulates your average Fox viewer.

 

[IrezumiKiss]

What I think, based on lisening to his interviews is that he is being truthful that he didn't send the pic.

I think his computer was hacked and that either the pic is of him and he knows that, the pic is of him and it's been photoshopped, or the pic is of some other guys boner and he knew it was on his computer.

This is what I'm thinking, too.

He possibly did something naughty in private, thought he was safe and got lax, someone close or connected to him got the dope and is either using it to fuck him over or sold it to someone who wants to fuck him over. If there were more pics, we would've seen them by now. OR they were waiting for a full-out denial in order to put him on blast even further with more salacious shots. My theory is, since he took the middle road on this, anything that comes out now will only confirm that he's being fucked with. Of course, he's still gonna have to take an "L" on it socially, but people are fickle when there's no definitive.

Never, ever let other people get a hold of any of your mobile electronic shit without you in the room.

 

[Liar]

What I think, based on lisening to his interviews is that he is being truthful that he didn't send the pic.

I think his computer was hacked and that either the pic is of him and he knows that, the pic is of him and it's been photoshopped, or the pic is of some other guys boner and he knew it was on his computer.

My guess is simpler.

I think it's his junk, he had it on his yfrog account. Possibly just to send to the missus. He borrowed a computer somewhere to tweet and forgot to log out. Whoever logged in next, decided to poke around, found crotch shot gold, and refused to pass up a golden opportunity for lulz. There was a story the other day of a NYT reporter who did just that but had luck with the next user.

That's my Occam's razor. Human error rather than a deliberately hacked PC. He is evading answer because coming out clean would mean admitting one private thing ("Hi America. I'm a US representative. Here's my cock") and one professionally embarrassing thing ("Hi America. I'm a US representative. I'm abysmally careless with my social media accounts"). And denying it all would mean risking that it comes out later anyway and he's exposed as a liar.

 

[LadyFunkenstein]

I don't understand this story. I honestly can't understand why it matters if he sent some woman that picture. He isn't even nude in it. If anything, he is avoiding the crime of embarassment, right? Isn't that the punchline to this story? Should he or should he not be embarrassed is what everyone is debating, right?

 

[garbage can]

I don't understand this story. I honestly can't understand why it matters if he sent some woman that picture. He isn't even nude in it. If anything, he is avoiding the crime of embarassment, right? Isn't that the punchline to this story? Should he or should he not be embarrassed is what everyone is debating, right?

Funky, no. Drixx needs to prove that this low life is innocent, even though noone gives a fat rats fuck.

Tell me Funky, do you care if Little Weenie published a cumshot???

 

[Sonny Limatina]

Weiner isn't married to "some guy on the internet" or some no talent, lucky sperm club winner like Luke Russert. The burden of proof is always on the accuser. This "prove you're not a witch" meme is exactly how a con man like Breitbart manipulates your average Fox viewer.

You totally understood.

 

[about_average]

I have no idea of the background of this person, but here's a blog that describes a way for anyone to do what Weiner is accused of doing, knowing nothing more than his yFrog email address using a documented feature of yFrog.
http://cannonfire.blogspot.com/2011/06/weiner-affair-close-to-solution-but-i.html

Of course, if it's an accurate description of using the MMS feature, it blows away yFrog's "We take security very seriously" statement. Which I knew was likely hogwash anyway.

I'd test it myself, but I don't have a yFrog or Twitter account.

 

[Karen Kraft]

My guess is simpler.

I think it's his junk, he had it on his yfrog account. Possibly just to send to the missus. He borrowed a computer somewhere to tweet and forgot to log out. Whoever logged in next, decided to poke around, found crotch shot gold, and refused to pass up a golden opportunity for lulz. There was a story the other day of a NYT reporter who did just that but had luck with the next user.

That's my Occam's razor. Human error rather than a deliberately hacked PC. He is evading answer because coming out clean would mean admitting one private thing ("Hi America. I'm a US representative. Here's my cock") and one professionally embarrassing thing ("Hi America. I'm a US representative. I'm abysmally careless with my social media accounts"). And denying it all would mean risking that it comes out later anyway and he's exposed as a liar.

Yeah, that sound about right to me.

As for my general opinion, I really don't care if that's his junk and he sent it out from his private "hockey scores" twitter account. What the fuck makes that MY business, right? Who cares? Perhaps he wanted to send it to Gene and sent it to Jean by mistake. Smart move: On Day ONE, clearly tell the truth, in person, on camera, and never take questions about it again.

Playing word games with CNN reporters is never a good idea.

 

[Karen Kraft]

I don't understand this story. I honestly can't understand why it matters if he sent some woman that picture. He isn't even nude in it. If anything, he is avoiding the crime of embarassment, right? Isn't that the punchline to this story? Should he or should he not be embarrassed is what everyone is debating, right?

Exactly.

Why should any of us care what the guy's junk look like, right?

... or whether he's sloppy in his personal electronic communications?

 

[Powertone]

no talent, lucky sperm club winner like Luke Russert.

wow . your seething rancor for this kid knows no bounds . say hi to charlie rangel for me .

 

[Karen Kraft]

wow . your seething rancor for this kid knows no bounds . say hi to charlie rangel for me .

I loved it when Charlie Rangel was discussing the minimum wage with John Stossel. Stossel explained how a higher minimum wage creates greater unemployment among groups with less education and fewer skills. But ole' Charlie stood his ground. Hahahahahaha.

 

[Drixxx]

You totally understood.

Yes I do understand that Weiner doesn't owe you or anybody an explanation. The burden of proof is on the accuser. What you don't understand is that you are being played by low life con artists.

 

[Drixxx]

wow . your seething rancor for this kid knows no bounds . say hi to charlie rangel for me .

I really don't expect you understand what quality journalism when you see it. It's not ambush interviews of high profile political figures or celebrities and having them deny wrong doing on camera. That's tabloid sensationalism. Quality journalism is collecting facts, not denials.

 

[Joeybagadonuts]

Yes I do understand that Weiner doesn't owe you or anybody an explanation. The burden of proof is on the accuser. What you don't understand is that you are being played by low life con artists.

Aren’t you tired of being lied to by politicians?

Don’t you think that Bill Clinton sounded like an idiot when he said he didn’t inhale or “I didn’t have sex with that woman?”

 

[Drixxx]

Aren’t you tired of being lied to by politicians?

Don’t you think that Bill Clinton sounded like an idiot when he said he didn’t inhale or “I didn’t have sex with that woman?”

Lies about personal private behavior is expected. Especially if they involve others.

Do you know one person who doesn't lie about their sex habits and their drug usage? Outside of porn stars and Charlie Sheen I don't know of any.

 

[Joeybagadonuts]

Lies about personal private behavior is expected. Especially if they involve others.

Do you know one person who doesn't lie about their sex habits and their drug usage? Outside of porn stars and Charlie Sheen I don't know of any.

That's why they have to be more careful than us.

They look stupid and lose credibility when they get caught.

 

[Drixxx]

That's why they have to be more careful than us.

They look stupid and lose credibility when they get caught.

Credibility on their private personal sex habits? Give me a break. All the examples you listed were partisan political attacks from the opposition. There was no victim coming forward seeking justice. Only Republican skullduggery. You really have to start thinking for yourself and recognize when you're being used.

 

[Colonel Hogan]

There was no victim coming forward seeking justice.

Yeah, I guess that's why they called it Clinton v. Jones.

 

[Drixxx]

Yeah, I guess that's why they called it Clinton v. Jones.

Are you really this ignorant of recent history?

Before the case reached trial, Judge Susan Webber Wright granted President Clinton's motion for summary judgment, ruling that Jones could not show that she had suffered any damages.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paula_Jones


The "I didn't get flowers" victim? Seriously?

 

[Joeybagadonuts]

Credibility on their private personal sex habits? Give me a break. All the examples you listed were partisan political attacks from the opposition. There was no victim coming forward seeking justice. Only Republican skullduggery. You really have to start thinking for yourself and recognize when you're being used.

O.K I’m going to try one last time to communicate with you on this issue. It doesn’t appear that he has broken the law and I don’t think anyone around here is arguing that. It would have been in his best interest to say to his constituents, that he hasn’t broken the law and that he didn’t attempt to send that picture to the young woman. When asked if the picture was of him or came from his pic file, rather than to lie or attempt evade the question, I would have preferred that he said that that is a personal matter and on principle, will neither confirm nor deny that it is a pic of him.

As for me being manipulated by the media, the first I heard of the story was when he gave an interview. I felt manipulated by him. That is what bothers me and I think everyone else.


I don't expect that at this point you will agree with anyone but hey man, it's your trip so have fun with it.

 

[Colonel Hogan]

Are you really this ignorant of recent history?

Before the case reached trial, Judge Susan Webber Wright granted President Clinton's motion for summary judgment, ruling that Jones could not show that she had suffered any damages.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paula_Jones


The "I didn't get flowers" victim? Seriously?

Speaking of "recent history" you made a factual statement within the past hour and fifteen minutes that the sexcapades of Bill Clinton involved "no victim coming forward to seek justice."

Paula Jones filed suit in an effort to seek justice for the alleged sexual advances of Clinton.

The ultimate disposition of the case does not alter the fact that your factual statement about no one coming forward to seek justice was in error.

I know how much you wish you hadn't embarrassed yourself. I really do. But you did.










PS -- My favorite part was how the Supreme Court ruled 9 - 0 against Clinton's claim that a sitting President was entitled to absolute immunity from civil litigation arising out of events which transpired prior to his taking office.

Just some more of that history you like so much.

 

[Drixxx]

O.K I’m going to try one last time to communicate with you on this issue. It doesn’t appear that he has broken the law and I don’t think anyone around here is arguing that. It would have been in his best interest to say to his constituents, that he hasn’t broken the law and that he didn’t attempt to send that picture to the young woman. When asked if the picture was of him or came from his pic file, rather than to lie or attempt evade the question, I would have preferred that he said that that is a personal matter and on principle, will neither confirm nor deny that it is a pic of him.

As for me being manipulated by the media, the first I heard of the story was when he gave an interview. I felt manipulated by him. That is what bothers me and I think everyone else.


I don't expect that at this point you will agree with anyone but hey man, it's your trip so have fun with it.

This is the problem. You accepted in the context which was presented by the media. A scandalous accusation from an unknown source and a denial from the accused. A denial plus speculation equals gossip. Not facts. Real news organizations gather evidence and present facts. Not gather denials, opinions of said denial and engage in wild speculation.

Now it appears there has been a coordinated effort from convicted criminals to smear Weiner that includes contacting underage girls and engaging them in conversations of a sexual nature about the congressman. Will the media pick up on this story? I doubt it.