Congressman Weiner's inappropriate tweet

Dr. Keith said:
And yet the core of your position is that he is stupid for not reporting the crime if he didn't send the tweet, therefore he sent the tweet?
Click to expand...

At best, one could argue that it's circumstantial evidence (which depends on an accumulation of such evidence which is lacking here) to the possibility that he was acting (or rather not acting) out of guilt. I've already suggested a feasible scenario that would explain that guilt even if he didn't send the tweet.
 
TraneWreck said:
Please. You have Andrew Breitbart + an allegation that a Congressman did some cosmically stupid on a level that exceeds the Favre standard.
Click to expand...

I really don't think so. Favre sent an actual picture of his wang to a person in the media. Rep. Weiner allegedly sent a picture of his underpants to a person not in media. I think it's pretty clear which one was more boneheaded.
 
Ziggurat said:
The fact that it would be stupid to do something doesn't mean that a person won't do it. I mean, have you met humans?
Click to expand...

But isn't that one of the premises of your argument? Isn't your argument pretty much the following?

p1 if he didn't send the tweet, his inaction is unreasonable
p2 he always acts reasonably
C therefore he sent the tweet
 
Dr. Keith said:
And yet the core of your position is that he is stupid for not reporting the crime if he didn't send the tweet, therefore he sent the tweet?
Click to expand...

If he did it, it's obvious that the tweet thing is something he did on his own. But he's got a staff, he's been in contact with his lawyer, he's had time to consider a course of action and even change that course of action. Doing something stupid, on your own, on the spur of the moment simply isn't equivalent to a continuing decision to act stupidly when you have plenty of people around you to tell you not to act so stupidly.

And if he really is just that stupid and his staff can't get him to smarten up even with time to consult and deliberate, then that's perhaps even worse.
 
Newtons Bit said:
I really don't think so. Favre sent an actual picture of his wang to a person in the media. Rep. Weiner allegedly sent a picture of his underpants to a person not in media. I think it's pretty clear which one was more boneheaded.
Click to expand...

Ah, the eternal debate. Which is dumber:

1) Sending a picture of your naked penis to someone you sort of know and have institutional control over because she works for the orginazation in which you hold a great deal of power, or

2) Sending a picture of your penis hidden under boxer shorts to someone you don't know at all and have no control over.

Truly, we could argue for decades about which was the more stupid.

I am waiting for someone to use that NASA camera treatment they used to find Bush' wire in the debates:

story.jpg


To see if the penis in the controversial tweet was circumsized.

If you see foreskin, it could not have been him.

Not quite Johnny Cochran (no pun intended), but I think it'd get an acquital.
 
TraneWreck said:
You report all your viruses to the police?
Click to expand...
Hacking is very different than a virus. Wiener continues to maintain that his account was hacked: "I know for a fact that my account was hacked". Hacking incidents most certainly should be reported to the police.

The U.S. Capitol Police so far have not opened an investigation into the matter.

A former Justice Department computer crimes prosecutor said it would not cost much to request an investigation from the FBI. The former official said if Weiner had called the FBI when the story broke, the public would already know where the Tweet originated. Though Weiner said the incident did not constitute a federal crime, the former official said multiple federal crimes would have been committed if somebody did hack into his account -- and it could lead to years behind bars.
Click to expand...
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/06/01/rep-weiner-knocks-questions-lewd-photo-says-wont-distracted/

He has repeatedly said he would not allow the incident to distract him from his job, yet if he would have contacted the FBI initially, and if he was hacked, all this would be behind him. Instead he lawyers up and won't give straight answers in his interviews. Now if he was hacked it might make sense to get a lawyer to get a lawsuit going against the person, but first you have to have the evidence, which is why you contact the police first.
 
JoeTheJuggler said:
But isn't that one of the premises of your argument? Isn't your argument pretty much the following?

p1 if he didn't send the tweet, his inaction is unreasonable
p2 he always acts reasonably
C therefore he sent the tweet
Click to expand...

You made the point better than I did. Thanks.
 
TraneWreck said:
Oy. Seriously?

Weiner either had a prior relationship with the woman or didn't. If he didn't then however he targeted her, he was sending a picture of his wang to a person who could have reacted in a million different ways, including turning the picture over to the press herself.

That would be preposterous.
Click to expand...

I tend to agree here, provided it is understood that "prior relationship" is a fairly loose term and could just mean "flirted online" to the point where he felt comfortable showing her a photo of a left-leaning member of Congress.
 
Results from the test on yFrog. I was able to create a yFrog account using some old twitter account I had.

http://twitter.com/#!/search/realtime/unabogie

I sent an email to the yFrog address, which is an email they create for you when you sign up. I included some info like text in the email and a subject but it appears that step wasn't necessary. If you look at my Twitter account, it appears I posted an image of a deer and that image appears in my list of photos as if it came from me. Nowhere in this is it displayed that the image came from someone else.

I consider this solid evidence.
 
Unabogie said:
Results from the test on yFrog. I was able to create a yFrog account using some old twitter account I had.

http://twitter.com/#!/search/realtime/unabogie

I sent an email to the yFrog address, which is an email they create for you when you sign up. I included some info like text in the email and a subject but it appears that step wasn't necessary. If you look at my Twitter account, it appears I posted an image of a deer and that image appears in my list of photos as if it came from me. Nowhere in this is it displayed that the image came from someone else.

I consider this solid evidence.
Click to expand...


To be clear (and ask a stupid question): If you had my twitter account (which isn't difficult to find if I have a few thousand followers), you could have sent someone a picture of whatever you pleased and it would look like I sent it?
 
Unabogie said:
Results from the test on yFrog. I was able to create a yFrog account using some old twitter account I had.

http://twitter.com/#!/search/realtime/unabogie

I sent an email to the yFrog address, which is an email they create for you when you sign up. I included some info like text in the email and a subject but it appears that step wasn't necessary. If you look at my Twitter account, it appears I posted an image of a deer and that image appears in my list of photos as if it came from me. Nowhere in this is it displayed that the image came from someone else.

I consider this solid evidence.
Click to expand...

You are correct. I just added a picture of minecraft to your yfrog account and it looks identical to the format of the bulge picture. You put @test in both the subject line and the body of the email. If you do just the body it will look like you're tweeting that picture to the person in your email body. And it's identical to what happened to the Rep.

Case closed. The man is innocent I say!
 
Bjorn said:
To be clear (and ask a stupid question): If you had my twitter account (which isn't difficult to find if I have a few thousand followers), you could have sent someone a picture of whatever you pleased and it would look like I sent it?
Click to expand...

That's exactly what happened. I sent an email to my yFrog account from a completely different email address. And it appeared in my list of photos and posted to my Twitter account without any action from me.
 
That's an interesting exploit, and I'm amazed that it hasn't been used on famous people sooner. I'm seriously baffled that someone hasn't made Taylor Swift goatse millions of fans or something.
 
Newtons Bit said:
You are correct. I just added a picture of minecraft to your yfrog account and it looks identical to the format of the bulge picture. You put @test in both the subject line and the body of the email. If you do just the body it will look like you're tweeting that picture to the person in your email body. And it's identical to what happened to the Rep.

Case closed. The man is innocent I say!
Click to expand...

If one of you dweebs posts a picture of your dick, my career in politics is over.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom