The unofficial thread for credit to DU's Anthony Weiner skeptics.

[TheWraith]

As pipi_k said in another thread, people who are innocent don't evade questions, which has been twigging some people out since the beginning of this. Unfortunately on DU, being a skeptic on this subject usually got people accused of being supporters of Breitbart, clueless, gullible, or all of the above. Since those skeptical of Weiner's behavior have now been borne out, I thought it might be useful to have a "credit where credit is due" thread.

[LiberalLoner]

1. I agree. The skeptics were right. Those of us who hoped he was just being framed,

were wrong.

[DFab420]

13. Yup we were wrong, but at least I don't have to celebrate

believing what Andrew Breitbart had to say..

I would much rather eat crow on this issue then stand proud about believing something that scumbag has said....

[Doctor Hurt]

2. What's to credit?

I still don't see what the issue is here.

Did he admit to sexting this particular woman? I didn't hear if he did or not.
Or did he just admit to sexting people in general?

I don't recall him being asked about that.

And frankly, he can perv however he wants, as long as everyone consents.

[TheWraith]

Yes, he admitted to sending the original photo that started this.

There was no hacking.

[Doctor Hurt]

5. Ah. Odd that she denied it.

Oh well. Still don't care much.

[LiberalLoner]

9. It goes to his credibility as a politician. It goes to his character.

These things do matter because character matters. We need to feel we can trust our politicians. Maybe that's an unrealistic hope...

[Dreamer Tatum]

3. As a "clueless shill," thank you. nt

[JoePhilly]

4. Quilty unitl proven innocent is how it should always be. nt

[TheWraith]

15. Yes, but that's not the same as browbeating anyone who doesn't drink the kool aide.

Lately even agreeing that his responses were questionable, or that the hacking story didn't hold up, was enough to get you labeled a shill for Breitbart.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

6. thanks !!

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[originalpckelly]

8. And the crime here:

He resigned, and it was only a shirtless pic. You could see that shit at a beach.

[GCP]

10. Bull

The skeptics were calling out his non-denial denials. Nobody was aiding and abetting Breitbart, an effective liberal asset derailed himself.
Talk about a straw-man argument.

[DFab420]

11. Yay a thread for people to say "I told you so!!" wooO!!

I guess it's a plus to believe Andrew Breitbart first??

Sorry I gave Wiener the benefit of the doubt..

But yea credit is where credit is due..congrats on teaming with Breitbart everyone!! WOOOoOO....

:sarcasm:

[frylock]

19. someone else who isn't big enough to admit when they're wrong

[AngryOldDem]

22. First mistake: Giving a politician any benefit of any doubt.

When they do shit like this and then get caught, the first impulse -- no matter how stupid -- is to cover their ass despite the fact that said cover will be torn off forthwith, with exponentially bad consequences to boot. It's a lesson we all learn as kids: Lying only. makes. things. worse.

Gee...even people on **our** side of the aisle can fuck up like this -- it's not just the GOP. Who woulda thought?

(And, like it or not, at the end of the day, Breitbart -- as reprehensible as he is -- *was* right.)

[Renew Deal]

12. His initial answer about the weiner picture set off alarms

It was weird enough to not trust him

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[TheWraith]

16. Actually, I semi-regularly post such threads after the conventional wisdom goes toes-up. nt

[Rex]

17. Well then I apologize...keep it up!

Skeptics on just about ANYTHING, get treated like atheists on crack around here!

[Maru Kitteh]

18. The clencher for me was when he had lawyers, not authorities "investigate."

and thanks, I appreciate it. I'm not happy about being right about this one. I am however happy that I didn't let a letter behind his name color my thoughts or affect my ability to apply logic.

[AngryOldDem]

20. Yep.

And after a long, hard day at work, I admit I'm having quite the laugh at all the "Move along, nothing to see here" threads.

What was Weiner thinking (note I'm not asking with what was he thinking)? That if he lied about what he did, eventually the whole thing would just blow over? How well has THAT worked for the hundreds of politicians who have tried that in the past?

I'm watching the replay of his presser on O'Donnell and all I have to say is: :nopity:

[apocalypsehow]

21. Yep - and all the "troll" accusations I saw flying around here at the slightest disinclination to

accept the Congressman's non-denial denial at absolute face-value, no-questions asked. I'd like to see some walk-back from the folks who indulged in that petulant behavior, though since the vast majority of those posts were (properly) deleted, I'll doubt we'll see much in way of penance for that.