Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Scandal Puts Focus On Role of Bloggers (WaPo on FR, NCPAC and MD4Bush)
Washington Post ^ | 02/11/05 | David Snyder and Matthew Mosk

Posted on 02/10/2005 10:41:44 PM PST by 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?"

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...


TOPICS: Extended News; Free Republic; News/Current Events; US: Maryland
KEYWORDS: compost; ecpa; freerepublic; gannon; kristinn; md4bush; media; mediabias; msm; ncpac; odoherty; omalley; ryanodoherty
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 701-709 next last
To: GAGOPSWEEPTOVICTORY
"Well, he did say his wife was a liberal in one of the exchanges"

You mean this one:

Karl Rove on the Tony Snow Show (Confident!)

Posted by MD4Bush to NCPAC
On News/Activism 10/14/2004 3:15:13 PM CDT · 100 of 102

There was a great article in the atlantic (lib mag my wife reads) about Rove. The writer whines all about Rove’s tricks, but they work and he is a genius. He got a rumor started about this dem judge who gave a lot of money to a charity for kids, so they took those pictures of the judge with the kids and said he was a gay pedophile. It worked.

121 posted on 02/10/2005 11:57:22 PM PST by Rokke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: MEG33
I'm starting to think I understand what loose lips sinks ships mean..even the most well intentioned folks can get hurt. What galls me is that the washington post might have accepted what they perceive as copies of a private freepmail..I'd like to know how they can prove it wasn't altered in someway. Of course, if the originals in the sent folder haven't been deleted...
122 posted on 02/10/2005 11:57:30 PM PST by Freedom2specul8 (Please pray for our troops.... http://anyservicemember.navy.mil/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: BigSkyFreeper
That's a coincidence. The person gets banned and this article pops up.

Nah, he was just banned. I peeked at his homepage earlier this evening. Which was certainly a pretty lazy job of impersonating a good Freeper.

I wonder what his registration details were...

123 posted on 02/10/2005 11:57:35 PM PST by PianoMan (and now back to practicing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet
I think Jim/John's best course of action is to quietly do whatever research/archiving necessary and wait for someone who was damaged by this entrapment to subpoena the records.
124 posted on 02/10/2005 11:58:00 PM PST by BreitbartSentMe (Ex-Democrat since 2001)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: conservative in nyc

"Please think before you post"

That's exactly the point I was trying to make.


125 posted on 02/10/2005 11:58:07 PM PST by CyberAnt (Where are the dem supporters? - try the trash cans in back of the abortion clinics.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: HAL9000

ECPA has this exclusion:

It shall not be unlawful under this chapter for a person
not acting under color of law to intercept a wire, oral, or electronic communication where such person is a party to the communication or where one of the parties to the communication has given prior consent to such interception unless such communication is intercepted for the purpose of committing any criminal or tortious act in violation of the Constitution or laws of the United States or of any State.

Seems like it'd be an out...


126 posted on 02/10/2005 11:58:22 PM PST by LibertarianInExile (NO BLOOD FOR CHOCOLATE! Get the UN-ignoring, unilateralist Frogs out of Ivory Coast!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: MEG33

You got some of that too, did ya? ; )


127 posted on 02/10/2005 11:58:30 PM PST by DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet (Humina, humina, humina...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: Dr.Zoidberg
Yeah, I wish I'd taken the blue pill now.

Hope the decisions that were taken were correct. I'm moving on...

128 posted on 02/10/2005 11:58:37 PM PST by HAL9000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: Bush_Democrat

Gotcha.


129 posted on 02/10/2005 11:59:16 PM PST by DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet (Humina, humina, humina...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: Rokke

That would be the one. Well, reads a liberal magazine could be distinguished from being a liberal. But, play the percentages here..


130 posted on 02/10/2005 11:59:57 PM PST by GAGOPSWEEPTOVICTORY
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: LibertarianInExile
where such person is a party to the communication or where one of the parties to the communication has given prior consent to such interception

We just don't know. The Washington Post didn't say.

A crime may or may not have been committed.

131 posted on 02/11/2005 12:00:22 AM PST by HAL9000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: HAL9000
Seeya later then, I'm going for a nice cup of tea myself.
132 posted on 02/11/2005 12:00:41 AM PST by Dr.Zoidberg (Children classics updated for Islam, "If you're happy and you know it, go Kaboom!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: conservative in nyc
Talked to Kristinn tonight and he told me of the interview he had given for this piece. He wasn't sure what the angle was going to be.

I looked at MD4BUSH posts and he sure doesn't post like I would imagine an agent proveucater or mole would. I'll ping him to see if he will weigh in on (1)the reasons for his FReepmail to NCPAC and (2) if he forwarded NCPAC's replies to others or otherwise has any thoughts on how the private FReepmail was exposed.

The Baltimore Sun is now declaring war with Free Republic over the rumor. However, long-time posters on the Baltimore Sun's own web forum said that the rumors were repeatedly posted on that forum long before any known FR posting.

Click here to read a current discussion from BaltSun forum and indicating that the rumors were on that forum long before they appeared on Free Republic.

Apparently, the Sun would take down the posts, but perhaps one or more less prominent references to the rumors still remain on some old postings.

Any FReepers want to help find proof that the Baltimore Sun (BS) published the O'Malley rumor on its website talk forum before Free Republic? Click here and try to locate posts in the local news forum that are in July of 2004 or earlier and that mention the rumors.

TRICK: Apparently, BS pulled down threads specifically about the rumors. Therefore, the titles are unlikely to directly reference the rumors. Instead, any remaining posts of the rumors are likely to be down-thread.

The rumors coincided with the conviction of O'Malley's buddy and police commissioner Norris for using city funds for his mistress (mistresses?). Thus, a thread about the police corruption may have, buried within it, a comment about the Mayor behaving similar to the womanizing commissioner.

(And for the record, I don't endorse the O'Malley rumor nor even believe it. My point is to show that the BS website started this terrible plague of unsubstantiated, irresponsible postings, not FR.)

133 posted on 02/11/2005 12:03:30 AM PST by BillF (Fight terrorists in Iraq & elsewhere, instead of waiting for them to come to America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rintense

Ping -- just in case. Thought you might want to see this thread.


134 posted on 02/11/2005 12:04:07 AM PST by Kay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: BigSkyFreeper

Other way around. This article popped up and within the hour, MD4BUSH got banned or suspended.


135 posted on 02/11/2005 12:05:11 AM PST by conservative in nyc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: BigSkyFreeper

The article popped up before he was banned..I did a name search before I saw the frmail posted and link...and the thread and the poster were still alive...I finally pushed abuse..Seemed like that frmail post was made to gloat when the story broke..a real gentleman.
The thread he posted on was from Oct.


136 posted on 02/11/2005 12:06:45 AM PST by MEG33 (GOD BLESS OUR ARMED FORCES)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: conservative in nyc; Jim Robinson
That's what another FReeper claimed on the 11:14PM thread that has since been deleted. I don;t remember who did. Do you remember who it was, nunya bidness?

Yes, it was me. I brought it to JimRob's attention as well. Clearly the guy was laying the groundwork on 2/08 for another salvo from the press by leaking confidential freepmails, although one-sided. It's only by the mentioning of MD4Bush's screename in the Post article that both of us tracked his posts, now pulled.

I'm sure Jim is reviewing his options and for the time being it's better that the thread got pulled.

Welcome to the new media.

137 posted on 02/11/2005 12:07:45 AM PST by nunya bidness
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: MEG33

Exactly what I found.


138 posted on 02/11/2005 12:07:56 AM PST by Kay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]

To: MEG33
Publishing freepmail is a no no..

Naturally. It's opening up your private life to everybody. Unless you can really trust the person your FR mailing with, the best course of action is to divulge as little as possible on all fronts, including private life.

139 posted on 02/11/2005 12:08:35 AM PST by BigSkyFreeper (Smoke-free since January 16, 2005)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet

I saved it for a book...Grin


140 posted on 02/11/2005 12:08:42 AM PST by MEG33 (GOD BLESS OUR ARMED FORCES)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 701-709 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson