Congressman Weiner's inappropriate tweet

Neally said:
Then you should be doubly suspicious as to why Weiner wouldn't report the incident to the police rather than the smoke and mirrors way he's handling it.
Click to expand...

Not really, no! You lot are really clutching at straws. Speculation is not evidence.

GB
 
TraneWreck said:
Weiner's twitter feed is likely maintained by his staff as well as used by him, personally.
Click to expand...

IIRC, Weiner told Rachel Maddow that he writes his own tweets, and as far as he knew no one on his staff had access. Something like that.
 
This whole thing will be worth it if someone important utters the phrase "the alleged penis" in public.
 
The member in question looks suspicious to me (not the member of congress, the other member). It looks like the attachment point is too far to the right.

Could it be a fake salami?

If it is -- and I will bow to others' photo analysis here -- then it might be a woman in the picture.
 
Just so everyone is clear: The only person involved in this incident whose "suspicious behavior" were supposed to scrutinize is Weiner.

That Wolfe and Breitbart might have and continue to behave suspiciously is to be written off as irrelevant.
 
A Laughing Baby said:
Slightly off topic, but I think the guy who handled a situation like this the best, strangely enough, was the one who was "hiking the Appalachian trail." When it came out, instead of lying his ass off, he came out and said "I love this woman, I'm going to do what I can to make it work, sorry if that bothers you." That takes a certain degree of understanding of the situation.
Click to expand...

Except for the part where he lied about the Appalachian trail bit. A lie is a lie whether before or after being caught out.

Weiner has equivocated, but there is as yet, no evidence that he has lied.

GB
 
Gandalfs Beard said:
Except for the part where he lied about the Appalachian trail bit. A lie is a lie whether before or after being caught out.

Weiner has equivocated, but there is as yet, no evidence that he has lied.

GB
Click to expand...

Of course. I just mean that typically you see the politician trot out their visibly upset wife and say "I love my wife, I'll never make a mistake like this again, she loves me, etc." It took at least a little bit of fortitude to say, "Look dude, this is how my life is. I'm gonna try and make the best of it."
 
Nova Land said:
Surely the appropriate apples-to-apples comparison would be women-who-are-neither-politicians-nor-journalists-whom-Weiner-follows with men-who-are-neither-politicians-nor-journalists-whom-Weiner-follows. Yes?
Click to expand...

So, what you are saying, and correct me if I'm wrong here, is that Weiner has told you personally that he is a bi-sexual perv? Fascinating.
 
johnny karate said:
Just so everyone is clear: The only person involved in this incident whose "suspicious behavior" were supposed to scrutinize is Weiner.

That Wolfe and Breitbart might have and continue to behave suspiciously is to be written off as irrelevant.
Click to expand...

Exactly. I would only add that there is no reason to question Breitbart's motives when he is just reporting the facts.
 
johnny karate said:
Just so everyone is clear: The only person involved in this incident whose "suspicious behavior" were supposed to scrutinize is Weiner.

That Wolfe and Breitbart might have and continue to behave suspiciously is to be written off as irrelevant.
Click to expand...

Actually, you are utterly wrong. When a "story" is broken by someone known for producing fiction, that is where the investigation should focus. Breitbart has no credibility at all, and that's a fact.

All you have on Weiner is speculation.

GB
 
Gandalfs Beard said:
Not really, no! You lot are really clutching at straws. Speculation is not evidence.

GB
Click to expand...

Gandalfs Beard said:
When will you lot learn that speculation is not evidence?

GB
Click to expand...

When will you learn to read? I never claimed speculation was evidence. My quote that you criticize was in regard to suspicious behavior. Something that is painfully obvious with Weiner's handling of this event.
 
Brainster said:
This story is not about Dan Wolfe, and it's not about Breitbart, no matter how many times you try to shift the focus.
Click to expand...

The only "focus shifters" on this thread are the ones pretending that Breitbart and his gang have any credibility whatsoever. Which says a lot about your own lack of credibility.

GB
 
Gandalfs Beard said:
Actually, you are utterly wrong. When a "story" is broken by someone known for producing fiction, that is where the investigation should focus. Breitbart has no credibility at all, and that's a fact.

All you have on Weiner is speculation.
Click to expand...

Sorry, perhaps I didn't make my intention clear. I was being ironic about the brand of skepticism we're getting from some of Weiner's accusers.
 
And here's the $64,000 question for anyone assuming Weiner's guilt that still remains unanswered:

After denying he sent the tweet, and denying he knows the girl, why wouldn't he simply deny the photo was of him?
 
johnny karate said:
After denying he sent the tweet, and denying he knows the girl, why wouldn't he simply deny the photo was of him?
Click to expand...

Perhaps because he's worried that it could be proven that it's him.

I don't really see anyone arguing that he had a relationship with Cordova. So that only leaves him with one lie which he's hoping can't be proven: that he didn't send the tweet.
 
marplots said:
The member in question looks suspicious to me (not the member of congress, the other member). It looks like the attachment point is too far to the right.
Click to expand...


Perhaps there is one thing about this which we can clear up. Let me ask you (and others) a question: what part of the picture is it that you think is the penis?

From reading people's comments, I get the impression that some people are talking about the flesh-colored item in the lower right. That, I am pretty sure, is the leg of the person who is wearing the underwear. The penis is not visible; but there is a bulge visible under the cloth which look like an erect penis could be directly underneath the cloth there.
 
Ziggurat said:
Maybe he has sent it to other people before. Maybe it can't happen but he's worried that it could, because we often don't know what is and isn't possible.
Click to expand...

You're suggesting that Weiner - if he's guilty - is being evasive on this particular issue based on the infinitesimal chance that if he lies about it, he could be caught in that lie.

And yet - again, if he's guilty - he is perfectly comfortable denying he knows the girl or sent the tweet, two lies that stand a much greater likelihood of being disproven by a third party.

So if Weiner did in fact tweet a lewd photo to a college coed, why would he adamantly deny only certain aspects of the incident, and not simply categorically deny the whole thing?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom