Scandal Puts Focus On Role of Bloggers (WaPo on FR, NCPAC and MD4Bush)

Washington Post ^ | 02/11/05 | David Snyder and Matthew Mosk

[conservative in nyc]

The Web site began as a sort of Internet boutique for like-minded conservatives and libertarians, suspicious of federal power and angry at President Bill Clinton.

Started in 1997 by a reclusive California conservative, freerepublic.com saw its membership blossom with Clinton's impeachment and the election of George W. Bush. Attention to the site reached a zenith last fall, when a "freeper" -- the group's moniker for its bloggers -- first discussed flaws in documents CBS News used in a report critical of Bush's National Guard service.

---Snip---

One participant working under the handle MD4BUSH, whose identity is unknown, drew Steffen into a private conversation and appeared to coax him to share more details about his role in spreading the rumor. Copies of those chat room e-mails were later provided to The Washington Post.

The Oct. 18 conversation began with MD4BUSH complimenting Steffen and saying how obvious it was that the rumors about the mayor were true. Steffen, writing under the name NCPAC, replied:

"I don't look for the MO'M [O'Malley] story to hit for a little bit yet. . . . However, a lot of what everyone knows about MO'M is because of work that has occurred. It's been a wild ride."

MD4BUSH later probed further:

"Your saying that my dentist knows [about the rumors] because of work you did? Wow, I must say, I'm impressed. I mean really, everyone knows -- how did that happen?"

[HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity]

Should prove interesting to establish where that handle leads back to.

[exDem from Miami]

Jim, is WaPo violating any FR copyrights by publishing this material in toto? Sauce for the goose, etc.

[HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity]

Uh...yeah.

Caveat Freepor

[Lazamataz]

A careful review of MD4BUSH's comments shows two things: One, his most outrageous comments were unswervingly directed at NCPAC, presumably so NCPAC would agree with them and give the Washington Post more ammunition. And two, if you read carefully, you can see the liberal caricature of what a conservative is, emerge.

MD4BUSH is clearly a mole. We should create a series of suggestions for high-profile freepers and post it as an article, perhaps give a link to the article during initial sign on.

[advance_copy]

I didn't know they were private messages. Does anyone know haw the WAPO got them?

Nope, but the WaPo had them before they published the story that quoted them (obviously). It looks to me like MD4BUSH is a Compost reporter, which is unethical (not identifying yourself as a reporter up front). Either that, or someone hacked them, which has legal implications (Maryland and Federal laws against hacking).

[boxerblues]

MD4Bush posted some strange postings himself

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1246101/posts?page=27#27

[MEG33]

Great find!..he was wanting everyone exposed..

[Lazamataz]

You have gelled some interesting thoughts together, but we need to extract conclusions from them, and decide on course of action that will help our people -- and hurt theirs.

[conservative in nyc]

As far as I know, the Washington Post didn't reprint any of the FReepmail "in toto". They summarized and excerpted.

According to the time stamps, the FReepmail was posted on Free Republic by MD4BUSH about 30 minutes before the WaPo article was posted here by Crush Kerry (which is not necessarily 30 minutes before the WaPo article was posted on its website). It was first without any emphasis, and twice later underlining the parts that I'd characterize as most harmful to NCPAC.

Them's the facts. Draw whatever conclusion you wish. I'm waiting for more evidence before coming to one.

[Rightly Biased]

I've been saying it for a while we are scaring them and showing the MSM how far behind the stream they really are.

It scares them,

How many times has FR broke major news stories? I can't even keep track anymore.

We are what the Red states turn to for info.

It scares them.

Remember punkindogs manifesto?

It scares them.

Rathergate?

It scares them.

But we aren't scared we'll be here long after their gone.

[arasina]

Good post, Alia.

Side note: Television reporters have always used 'on-air' names, but not always for the purpose of personal privacy. (Quite a few of them DO, however...usually the females.) It's just that news directors don't find 'Eyewitness News with Junie Hausenfraus and Bart Doolittle' very promotable.

[nicmarlo]

Sorry, this site is temporarily unavailable! The web site you are trying to access has exceeded its allocated data transfer

[opocno]

Late to the thread, but maybe somebody in the WaPo is MD4Bush - the ultimate troll.

[arasina]

Remember punkindogs manifesto?

Have to defend my pal Pukin Dog here again. He doesn't like being called PUNKIN. :o)

[advance_copy]

I think I've found a time stamp for the original Compost article quoting NCPAC's FReepmail. Yahoo puts a time stamp on news articles and it shows up here:

http://news.search.yahoo.com/news/search?ei=UTF-8&p=ehrlich&pstart=1&b=34

Note that the story (#34) shows a time stamp of 8:05pm from 2/8/05. I'm pretty sure that's eastern time. But even if it is pacific time, that's 11:05pm (too early for them to have used MD4's public post of NCPAC's e-mail).

[Lazamataz]

In short, we are like any PUBLIC forum....., one big happy dysfuctional family with some crazy uncle Elmo types whom we would prefer to keep locked in the upstairs closet. However, since we cannot...,(nature of a free bbs), just remember, WE ARE STILL WINNING, even if sometimes some bile spewing leftoid gets a snapshot of a wart or two.

It is wise to remember this. We are winning, even if we have occasional setbacks.

[Rokke]

Just a thought, but has anyone tipped Drudge off to this? After all, an attack on the new media is an attack on Drudge. And a story involving old media reporters entering internet sites to generate rumours to report as news in their own papers opens the opportunity for some pretty juicy headlines.

[kiki04]

But why waste time trying to "infiltrate" a group you don't agree with? why don't these people get a life!!!!

[Antoninus]

Matthew Mosk

David Snyder

Well, perhaps it's time that we did a little digging into these two, eh? Apparently, the private lives of reporters is now fair game. A brief google search on these two guys indicate that both have more than a passing interest in "gay" politics. That could just be a function of them writing for a homo-promo rag like the WaPo, but considering how "closetted" homo reporters have been covering for their "out" political and religious buddies who get themselves into trouble, the angle might be worth investigating.

[HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity]

Nothing rational or logical about a dedicated liberal kook.

The controversy is being discussed today on:

WBAL.com

You can listen LIVE: http://www.wbal.com