I’m loath to tread into the murky waters of ‘Weinergate,’ but there are some theories on both sides that don’t make sense. So here’s a summary of what we know:
This actually happened. There are some that are saying that the yfrog screenshot was manufactured. Well, here’s a link to the [Google cache of the] yfrog image page, and a direct link to the image. There was definitely — without a doubt — a picture posted to Rep. Anthony Weiner’s yfrog and Twitter account that has since been removed. The image (5m3lu.jpg) shows up on yfrog’s website, pointing to Weiner’s account. And the timestamp — 3 days, 14 hours ago — matches up with when this all went down.
On the other side, in an attempt to prove Weiner himself must have posted this, the question has been raised, “If this wasn’t Weiner, how would a hacker also have access to his yfrog account?” This is easily explained away if you notice the big “Login with Twitter (no signup required)” button on yfrog’s website:
A hacker with access to Weiner’s Twitter account would by extension have access to his yfrog account.
Was there a “link” between Cordova and Weiner? Yes: He started following her on Twitter a couple months ago. Had their relationship matured to the point where he felt comfortable direct messaging her a picture of his bulging package? Probably not: Her statement rings too true. (She is also back on Twitter and probably has a book forthcoming.)
So what happened? After the alleged hack — or prank — Weiner went on the defensive: He deleted everything on yfrog, hired a lawyer, and dodged questions in front of the cameras. These are not the actions of a man who has been the victim of a hack attack.
There are a couple of possibilities:
-
He actually did this. If this is the case, he should be banned from using The Interwebs for doing one of the dumbest things possible.
-
He was actually hacked. If this is the case, it opens up more questions than it answers. (Why has no one taken credit for it? Why hasn’t Weiner pledged to hunt down this guy, seeing as this story isn’t going away?)
-
This was posted to his account by someone who had access to his account — a borrowed phone or laptop in the hands of a prankster friend, or jealous girlfriend, who discovered this photo.
He’s not acting like he’s innocent, but sending this photo to a random recipient on the Internet is just as hard to believe. Until Capitol Police get involved — which doesn’t seem likely at this point — we may never know.
UPDATE: To quell the rage of commenters who think I’ve given Weiner a pass on this, I do think the media will (and needs to) continue to cover this now that everyone has finished drinking beer and barbecuing. It’d certainly be easy enough for him to clear this all up: he could ask Twitter and yfrog to release the IP address and any related information regarding the offending posts. The longer this hangs around, the more he’ll look guilty.
UPDATE II: This looks really, really bad for Weiner. Does anyone need any more evidence?
Check out this interview of the Weiner:
External Link
Guilty, guilty, guilty.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"Had their relationship matured to the point where he felt comfortable direct messaging her a picture of his bulging package? Probably not"
This is your first error in your analysis. I think he was comfortable enough to send her a naughty photo. He was following her Twitter account so he could send private messages and photos.
He meant to send the photo only to her, but used the wrong code and sent it to everyone on his list. He instantly knew what he had done, he had caught the hacker instantaneously, because he was the "hacker".
This is a lot more than an innocent "prank". Whoever did this made Anthony Weiner look like a sex pervert or deviant. Isn't it important that Weiner defend his honor and report this to the FBI and put the "hacker" behind bars?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseTHere is more to the story.... apparently, Rep Weiner has an affinity for following young women on Twitter. One of which (at least) happens to be a adult video star. And he is comfortable enough to send her a private message too. This wouldn't necessarily be a problem, except that Weiner was married roughly a year ago.
If I had to guess, I would say that he sent the pic in question, but thought he was sending a DM..maybe he was in a hurry. Either way, his new wife can't be too happy, and the sooner he comes clean, the better.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse(CAPTCHA: "later gator")
I don't know much about what went down, but I do know that if you do a Google Image Search on "5m3lu.jpg", the results are kinda funny. Any appetite I had for carrots is now gone, though. (SFW)
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuseshe was hardly a random recipient on the internet ... he friended her and he has less than 100 friends ...
no random and not a stranger ...
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"but sending this photo to a random recipient on the Internet is just as hard to believe"
I looked up naive in the dictionary and your picture was next to it. Or else, you haven't been paying attention because if you had, you'd know that the recipient was not "random." She was, in fact, one of the ninety or so people that the congressman was following.
And finally, you place an extraordinary amount of weight on your ability to determine whether her statement "rings true." She had, in fact, tweeted that Weiner was "her boyfriend," and he had released a tweet with a note for the time in her time zone (Seattle.)
Folks who don't know what their doing don't really add much. Why not read up on some of the sites by the folks who actually did the work that you're now sponging off?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseQuote: "He’s not acting like he’s innocent, but sending this photo to a random recipient on the Internet is just as hard to believe."
Are you serious? You obviously haven't been paying attention. The woman is not some internet random, but one of a small number of people he had chosen to follow on twitter (even before the night in question). She had also written about meeting famous people on twitter, joked about Weiner as being her boyfriend, and he tweeted what time his tv interview would be on in Seatle, where she lives.
Random?
Hardly.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseHe clearly meant to direct message her (d followed by handle) and accidentally made it public (@ followed by handle). Or he had another anonymous account and got them confused, or his browser auto entered the login for the public account and he thought he was in the other one.
These explanations fit the facts far, far better than the theory from his camp. If he was hacked he would, like any right thinking person, immediately contact the Capitol Police, make sure the woman was aware it wasn't him, make strong statements to the press, etc., not lawyer up. Also, if his verified Twitter account was hacked, wouldn't Twitter shut it down until an investigation was complete. If it was hacked once couldn't it be hacked again?
We need one set of rules about how these things are handled for both Republicans and Democrats.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseOr, perhaps he had plans to hire the young lady onto his campaign staff, impregnate her while his wife is dying of breast cancer, deny he is the father, conceal the pregnant mistress in a secure, gated community, have a loyal campaign staffer falsely claim to be the father, admit to being the father right before his wife dies, and use campaign funds to pay for the whole stinking mess....but then thought that sending the young lady a picture of his BVD'd Johnson sounded less risky.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseGiven the hay that Congressman Weiner and his fellow Democrats made out of Christopher Lee's shirtless photos, he should be banned from more than the interwebs.
The only hacking in this case is the political hackwork being done by Journolists covering for their statist hero.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIs not the most probable genesis for the posting of the picture that Weiner himself posted it? The fact that he claims not to have done so is entitled to zero weight, at least until something more substantive is provided -- for example, what about an alibi ("I was at the opera, and here are the ticket stubs")? At this point, it's really hard to understand why anyone is crediting his unsupported denial, or even bothering to discuss it.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThis glosses a little too quickly over the question of why he was following her on Twitter. Her statement is that they have never met, and Rep. Weiner hasn't offered any explanation for the link there. It is pretty strange that a 21 year old college student that has never met him would be one of the relatively few people he follows on Twitter. There COULD be an innocent explanation there. But since none has been offered, I think it is reasonable to assume less innocent reasons.
As for the question of whether the "relationship" had matured to the point where a picture might be exchanged, Mr. Goulding seems charmingly naive about the present mores of internet flirtations. One can argue that an older man like Rep. Weiner would know better than to quickly let a dalliance develop with a college girl he hardly knows. But one could have made the same argument about Bill Clinton.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseHe will work with OJ to hunt down the real culprit.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseShe called Weiner her "boyfriend". He gave a shout out to "Seattle time" on when he was appearing on Maddow that day, which she re-tweeted shortly before the dic pic went out. The hack occurred at basically the same time he was on twitter and the he wrestled control back from the hackers in record time.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseHe was trolling for some action and slipped. We all know it, just admit it already.
Then we can move along, because we all know nothing will happen to a Democrat. They're the party that tolerates rapists so long as they vote the party line.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseYikes, this is a much better summary of what we know:
External Link
It's not the biggest scandal on planet earth but geez, NR....
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseYou don't "friend" people on Twitter. You "follow" them. Following someone on twitter doesn't imply that you know each other.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbusePathetic guys.
"Random recipient"?
Have you -looked- at the people -he's- following?
Hint: They aren't prominent journalists.
If he's -hacked-, the IP records would exonerate him in the span of a phone call. If, you know, he didn't -know- he hadn't been "Hacked" and wasn't trying the fling-poo method of finding an excuse.
Pathetic.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbusePathetic guys.
"Random recipient"?
Have you -looked- at the people -he's- following?
Hint: They aren't prominent journalists.
If he's -hacked-, the IP records would exonerate him in the span of a phone call. If, you know, he didn't -know- he hadn't been "Hacked" and wasn't trying the fling-poo method of finding an excuse.
Pathetic.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIs this a joke?
Her statement rings "too true?"
How about the fact that she deactivated her Twitter account and started a new one less than 24 hours later? What that means is we will NEVER know whether or not she had ever DM'd with Weiner. I asked her several times on Twitter (www.twitter.com/nicktjacob) and she refused to answer.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse