Friday, June 02, 2006

Thoughts on the Investigation

In May, the Connecticut political blogosphere had a month that ranged from excellent to troubling. Excellent, in that many bloggers attended the Democratic and Republican state conventions, and delivered interesting, thoughtful and up-to-the-minute coverage of those events. We faced a test of our mettle as citizen journalists, and I believe we did quite well. New technologies have allowed the easy upload of picture and, most importantly, video to our sites, which greatly enhances the quality and interest level of blogs and Web-based news organizations. Many of Connecticut's political blogs found national attention for their coverage of the Lamont campaign and Lamont's strong showing at the convention.

More troubling, of course, was the series of pro-Lieberman postings made to this blog under the names of prominent Democrats Harry Reid and Barack Obama, which began on May 4th and continued through May 7th, which, at the behest of another poster, has apparently triggered an FBI investigation.

Although the postings themselves were ultimately harmless and easily forgotten, and I find it unlikely that anyone from the Lieberman campaign was involved or that any laws were violated, we need to consider how to deal with this sort of thing.

Firstly, I have received several requests from posters to contact Blogger and ask them to divulge the identities of posters, or to trace them through IP addresses. I will not do this, unless compelled by law. There is a certain level of privacy and anonymity expected by users of the Web, and, while that privacy is largely an illusion, I will do whatever I can to protect it here.

Secondly, if you suspect that a particular posting is out of line, offensive or possibly illegal, please report it to me and I will consider whether or not to delete it. You can "report" by emailing me or simply by posting. I try to read every comment posted, especially those addressed to me. If I decide that the posting is offensive or violates campaign laws, I will remove it. I have been a lax moderator in the past. I will be more mindful of possible ethical breaches in the future.

Thirdly, it shouldn't have to be said that posting as someone you are not is wrong, and Web communities have long frowned on this practice. A derivation of a popular figure's name is acceptable, but the name with no embellishments, additions or substantive and visible alterations is not (i.e., "Mmmm Jodi Rell" is fine, "Barak Obama," misspelled as it is, is not). We are usually very good at policing ourselves and at shunning or dismissing those who don't comply with the rules of the Web-based society we have created. Again, if this happens, please report it to me and I will delete the offending posts and re-issue this statement about identity stealing. The problem can also be reported to Blogger, who can take more concrete action such as revoking memberships.

I believe that these less extreme actions are more effective in discouraging this sort of behavior while still keeping this blog and others viable forums than what took place. I am deeply concerned about the ramifications of those actions, and by the possible precedents set. How long will it be before we start siccing the law on one another, and not just on potential violators of campaign laws?

Make no mistake: if I suspect for a moment that this sort of nightmare will happen, I will shut this site down and delete its archive.

What's done is done, and we are left to deal with the consequences. Somewhere, the FBI may be either knocking at the door of a frightened kid who posted something stupid, reading the words we type on this site, or, more likely, throwing this whole investigation into the trash. We can't stop what has been set in motion.

We can, however, decide not to let paranoia, political zeal and anger allow us to undermine and possibly destroy all the remarkable progress this medium has made over the past year.

As of now, I consider the matter closed. The investigation may bear fruit, at which point we will deal with it. However, it is my hope that we can move on from this. We have an exciting and historic campaign season ahead of us, and I believe that blogs will play a crucial role in shaping it. Let's take what we can from this incident, without recrimination, blame or anger, and then move forward together into our future.

80 comments:

BRubenstein said...

GC....With all due respect..

You aren't a lawyer with the education and expertise to know whether the law was broken or not.Would you want a plumber deciding on YOUR library codings at work? The same principle applies here.

Secondly and more importantly, your reference that it probably was a "frightened kid" who did the posting flies against the facts. The poster knew i was at the national convention...knew of my state party role and other things about me that only a experienced political operative would know.

What you do as the blog administrator is your decision and i respect it, but please do not assume facts not in evidence or spout about what is legal or not without any education or backround in the law.

TSCowperthwait said...

Well said, GC. I came upon this blog a little more than a month ago and began posting comments because I enjoyed the political dialogue. When reading written words it is always difficult to tell the tone of the person's comments (are they being sarcastic, sincere, excited, annoyed, etc.). Perhaps in the future we will all police this site better.

GC, I think it goes without saying that we all appreciate your time and effort in operating this blog. As one of the individuals posting under my actual name I am not affected by the privacy issues that many seek while posting, but it is greatly appreciated that you place such a level on everyone's desire for privacy.

I think that most of us want to move on and get back to what this site is supposed to be -- discussion of the political issues affecting this state. However, it appears from the first comment posted in response that this is not the case for everyone...Unfortunate!

Genghis Conn said...

BR...

This could kill us. It probably won't, but it could. The FBI? What a mess.

Next time, report to me or Blogger first.

Genghis Conn said...

TSC,

You said "When reading written words it is always difficult to tell the tone of the person's comments (are they being sarcastic, sincere, excited, annoyed, etc.). Perhaps in the future we will all police this site better."

I'm hoping that this is the case. Successful groups on the Web do a good job of this (Wikipedia, for example, despite having a few well-publicized problems, is largely just as accurate and more comprehensive than most print reference sources). I'll do my part, too. Thanks for your thoughts.

Mmmm Jodi Rell said...

I am just excited that I got a shout out on the front page. That made my day. Thanks GC!

cgg said...

GC, I'm glad to hear that you won't turn over IP's unless compelled by the law.

Mr. Reality said...

I don't know about this. Why do I get the feeling that this is just another overblown Don Michak story that really is no big deal.

Mr. Reality said...

I don't know about this. Why do I get the feeling that this is just another overblown Don Michak story that really is no big deal.

BRubenstein said...

GC..i didnt intend to CLp or you that is not my motive.

I will contact you or Blogger if it happens again or something similiar.

As of today i may well be leading the league in CLP for most attacks ( personal and otherwise) against a blogger)

Pssst..Keith..you need to try harder...

mod.dem.like.jfk said...

GC- Good last word on the subject. I've just read all of this and I wanted to add something. I do think, that there is something broader here beyond impersonation and satire...

Public officials in this country have been historically open to libel as are public figures, i.e. those who hold themselves out to the public. In our universe, candidates and elected officials would fall into that category, but not necessarily their staff, with the exception of the staff that speaks to the media. I'm concerned that too often on this and other blogs staff members and "non-public figures" have comments made against them. This goes on both sides of every campaign, I reference specifically comments made about Lamont and Lieberman staffers weight in the past.

Truth squad mentioned in an earlier post that a licence to blog was not a licence to say anything, I agree (and so does the law as I have read it). Even with respect to public officials when comments are writen that are so eggregious they can still be deemed as libel...some of the things said about Nancy Dinardo in the past I feel would fall under that category. Lawsuits in this regard are increasingly common with celebrities.

Bloggers, however, is a new to this area of law. I suppose that with respect to bloggers, an argument can be made that by posting as yourself in a public forum, you are holding yourself out as a public figure...I'm not entirely sure I buy that argument, at best I think it is unsettled law in a new medium. Still, even in that regard, I would imagine that the above exeption would also apply to highly egregious offenses made as well.

I don't think these are necessarily questions related to whatever pending investigation that there may be, but as some have insinuated that there could be law suits, it is definitly worth noting some of the other legal issues at play here that I thought people should be aware of.

And not that it makes me an expert, but I do have a degree from an acredited law school and did some general research to refresh myself on these issue before making this post.

bluecoat said...

BR: glad to see an SDSer working with the FBI after all these years; this is a much better use of the FBI's time than tracking down student protestors or what they were doing out in Michigan -Where's Hoffa? Who Cares?June 2, 2006 Hartford Courant editorial - recently. Good luck!!!
:-))

demwithdough said...

I simply cannot believe that someone went to the FBI for something said on a blog - im simply flabbergasted.

Someone with sking that thin should walk around with a suit of armor. IN addition, I find the first comment in response to your very well put posting to be offensive in many ways - especially in its arrogance. And lawyers wonder why they are among the most hated profession?! Sounds like the type of person who would go to a fundraiser and attempt to sue the fundraiser's beneficiary for more than the event brought in for some silly reason or another - ahhh our litigious America - love it or leave it.

OH MY GOD!!! What did I just write? There's a knock at my door...hope its not the Homeland Secu...krjEGEUBGFwubvg.lBwerulgbruiowbn

Nothing just happened to me, this is still demwithdough and not a federal agent - IM glad that good Americans trust the government enough to rat out members of their community to preserve freedom for everyone. Because if you don't rat out your neighbors - then the terrorists win.

Please dont sue me. Please dont sue me. Please dont sue me. Please dont sue me. Please dont sue me. Please dont sue me. Please dont sue me. Please dont sue me. Please dont sue me. Please dont sue me. Please dont sue me. Please dont sue me.

ctkeith said...

Let this be a lesson to all posters here.

If you come here, use your real name,Be as honest and forthright as possible and are abused by those who hide behind their user names and Others names(even Senators) GC will pick the side of the abuser over the Honest person.

If GC had an ounce of ethics we'd already know who perpertrated what might be a crime.Rowland would be proud of this site.

A Different Anonymous (No! Really!) said...

So tell me, has ctkeith been a family name for long, you deliciously, if unintentionally, ironic sack of crap?

CTColonial said...

Question:

If Lamont would have garnered the majority of delegates, would this have ever happened? Sore loser perhaps?

Just throwing it out there....

The Architect said...

I think it's ironic that a former SDSer has sent the FBI bloodhounds on a wild goose chase involving comments on a political opinion site. If anyone should respect the fact that the FBI shouldn't be snooping around monitoring political debate in this country, it should be him.

I guess it's OK if they (liberals) are the ones pulling the levers of power, but no good when anyone else is.

demwithdough said...

" So tell me, has ctkeith been a family name for long, you deliciously, if unintentionally, ironic sack of crap?"

LMAO - That's just rich.

GC - stick to your guns and your gut. Your original thoughts are right.

bluecoat said...

like you ctkeith, I don't use my real name here; maybe pople know who you are but I don't and quite frankly I don't care who you are as it is the discourse and idea sharing i seek.s. I had a problem with the Senator Reid, Boxer and Obamma posts because when challenged at least one of these posters who had sig'd their name as a US Senator claimed to be real and US Senators are known to blog and show up on the 'who's on' as well. I thought that was wrong if they were in fact impostors as apparently they were.

That said nobody is forcing you to post here or even visit this site. The host gets to make some of the rules. Blogging is relativley new and GC is helping to set the standard even if I haven't always agred with his approach as I imagine it's possible he may have not liked mine from time to time.

bluecoat said...

If anyone should respect the fact that the FBI shouldn't be snooping around monitoring political debate in this country, it should be him. says the Architect who should stick to architecture since his statement shows he is ignorant of the basis and content of the complaint by BR.

Goon Squad said...

If I've said it once I've said it a thousand times -

Anonimity Breeds Contempt.

and apparently Anonimity now Breeds the F.B.I.

ctkeith said...

If you're to stupid to use google thats your Problem.Unlike you two,I've never tried to hide my identity.

Of course my post was reffering to Bruce,who whether you like it or not,has had a much higher level of success in politics than any other poster here and brought more here than just the blather you 2 have.

A Different Anonymous (No! Really!) said...

Uhoh, now I feel picked on by somebody hiding behind their user name. Quick, get me the FBI.

Oh, and Google.

cgg said...

To suggest that GC has no ethics is beyond the pale. He's been very open about this situation, how he handled it, and how he'll handle issues that come up in the future. The FBI hasn't even contacted him to request the offending IP.

blueper said...

GC, thank you for a very thoughtful post. Even though I lean a bit (actually more than a bit) to the left of you, I have found your work creating this blog community to be magnificent.

True, the spinning that goes on here from obvious operatives is pretty transparent ("I heard that candidate X is wonderful to dogs and will soon be winning a Nobel prize...), but often that's part of the charm.

Unfortunately, I think that your concern that "this could kill us" is true. Posting here is fun. Insulting another participant is fun. Debating politics is fun. But if I have to worry that one of your most prolific posters is going to try to find out who I am; it is not fun.

I'm not worried about the FBI, but I am concerned about maintaining my privacy.

I don't respect FBI informant as a person or a lawyer (his initial response to ,but he has a lot of money and (apparently) a lot of time. I don't need to be on his shit-list. What little dealing I have had with him in the real world have been quite enough, thank you.

So, I think you have a problem. I sincerely hope you have a solution.

BRubenstein said...

I didnt question GC's ethics..just his decision.

Keith TY for the commentary...as far as i know my success or failures in politics may or may not be at a higher level then all the other posters..i can't tell, since unlike me most( a few dont hide) hide behind fake s/n names, something i refuse and will not do.

bluecoat said...

BR is not an informant!!! He's a lawyer though with a very narrow complaint - impersonation as I understand it - about a series of posting on this public information platform. I am curious to see how this plays out - or even if I understand the issue correctly.

ctkeith said...

GC should have asked the person to come foward voluntarily but let it be known that if they didn't he would do all he could to expose said person.

Bruce should have been treated by the host as a valued member but instead GC chose to protect someone we know now was an obvious liar.

The publicity involved in this incident now is going to force the FBI to get a warrant and find out if the person responsible and their intent.

GC may want this to be over but his actions,or lack there of,make that less likely not more.

A Different Anonymous (No! Really!) said...

CGG:

Unfortunately, nothing is beyond the pale for ctkeith. He's subtle as a cowpat, approximately as intelligent and considerably less personable. Attacking Genghis is his usual MO. And don't bother chiding him because in ctkeithworld he is never - ever - wrong, and he never - ever - leaves ctkeithworld.

BRubenstein said...

Bluecoat...next they will say im a traiter and un-american and should be detained at Gitmo...accusing me of being an informant is just...sick..i found deceitful and libelous postings...and simply reported it to the proper authorites and asked that they investigate...next they will also accuse me of taking part in 9/11 and for the downturn in the stock market.

bluecoat said...

Anybody remeber that GC is in the library science business??? the PATRIOT Act??? BR is questioning GC's decision and GC is apparently standing by it fro now - what's wrong with that in the USofA???

bluecoat said...

Changed my mind on that; I don't like to joke about what's gone on or not gone on at Gitmo; but BR the informant charge was just plain ignorant; agreed.

cgg said...

BRubenstein, I wasn't referring to you but CTKeith. I have no opinion about your stance or actions mostly because I feel like we're not getting the whole story yet.

CTKeith, you may not agree with GC's actions but that does not mean he has no ethics. And as I've said before, if you dislike him that much why bother posting here?

BTW has any other news outlet (besides blogs) picked up this story yet? Google news isn't turning anything up.

turfgrrl said...

GC,

Well said, and your assessment is spot on. "A nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood of ideas in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people." -- John F. Kennedy

bluecoat said...

To change the subject for a minute Jodi is throwing water on another fire in Rell urges New London to give deeds to Fort Trumbull homeowners

disgruntled_republican said...

bluecoat-

Well she has to do something, the legislature ignored it. Also, this isn't the first time she has tried to resolve this...

Aldon Hynes said...

I believe that Genghis has responded wisely to the ongoing issues of anonymity and pseudonymity in online communities, particularly as it relates to inappropriate behavior. I can understand Bruce’s feeling that he has been wronged. The attacks on him were inappropriate and damaging to the community. He may well be right about “leading the league in CLP for most attacks”. I am grateful for him in talking that role. It was a position I felt that I had a lock on previously when I was posting more frequently.

It may well be that in this case contacting the FBI was appropriate. I don’t know enough of the details, and personally, really don’t want to. Nonetheless, with my civil libertarian leanings, I am always uncomfortable when legal actions are used to moderate speech, even when the speech is inappropriate.

<snark>
As I read through the discussion, I couldn’t help but wonder if Genghis has already received a national security letter requesting information and forbidding him to speak about the request.

Finally, blueper commented, “Insulting another participant is fun”. However, being insulted isn’t particularly fun. I guess it’s all just fun and games until somebody gets their eye poked out.
</snark>

Aldon Hynes said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
A Different Anonymous (No! Really!) said...

Aldon (punk), I don't remember you being insulted that much (candyass). Maybe I just have a bad memory (weenie).

But honestly (lie, lie, lie), come back (jerkface) and post like you used to (hypocrite DeStefano mouthpiece).

We miss you (like herpes)!

A Different Anonymous (No! Really!) said...

Legal disclaimer for the humor impaired: The preceding was intended to be moderately amusing. If, in fact, you were not amused, please contact the nearest representative of a federal law enforcement agency and register a vigorous complaint, then make sure you have enough tinfoil to make a new hat; your old one is clearly not blocking the Freemason's thoughtrays any longer.

Gabe said...

Well, it's not Monty Python...

BRubenstein said...

Aldon...Ive replaced you a and Keith as the blogger who gets personally attacked the most...and that's fine with me.

you said the community was damaged when in fact the community and i were damaged by the libelous posting of " harry Reid"

Be that as it may,whoever posted as the Senator tried to confer an unfair benefit on the Lieberman campaign and when asked by a blogger if he was the real harry Reid..he said he was.whether or not anyone believed the posting is immaterial here...the federal and state statutes speak to the " attempt" to confer a benefit by assuming someone's identity, which clearly happened in this case.

All i did was request an investigation which is my right to do as a citizen when i feel the law may have been broken and there is no other way to get "redress" of the situation.When i complained..all false postings from the " Senators" have stopped.
Its clear that the intent of the poster was to innterrut and influence people to not support anyone who challenges Senator Lieberman.

Blueper can continue to feel that " insulting is fun"..until he is insulted..then he will cry and whine.

Additionally

A Different Anonymous (No! Really!) said...

Something is damaged, alright ... brain-damaged. SDS Brucie seems to have taken one hit too many from the I Am Somebody bong.

The only one crying and whining here is you -- another delicious irony that, as usual, has escaped your notice.

And as long as we're adding irony to the blood, let's not let this one get by: ctkeith says GC should have asked the person to come foward voluntarily but let it be known that if they didn't he would do all he could to expose said person and Brucie says [I] simply reported it to the proper authorites and asked that they investigate but of course what really happened is Brucie went ballistic and toddled off to the FBI instead of either (1) ignoring like normal people would have or (2) talking to GC about it like he should have if it really mattered (which it didn't).

Since Brucie did go to the FBI, ctkeith, how in the hell could Genghis have "asked the person to come foward voluntarily"? And was the FB-f'in-I really the "proper authorities" for this tempest in a doll-size teacup?

The answer seems painfully obvious. I therefore expect you both to deny it utterly.

BRubenstein said...

a diff anon...they were the only proper place to ask.

Secondly...your tone is dismissive...go play with Jerry Falwell at Liberty College, since you are the one assuming facts not in evidence.

WHen you do something in politics for real..let us know...until then you might as well be selling sandwiches in Bushnell Park to me.

Don Pesci said...

“All I did was request an investigation which is my right to do as a citizen when I feel the law may have been broken and there is no other way to get "redress" of the situation. When I complained… all false postings from the “Senators" have stopped. It’s clear that the intent of the poster was to interrupt and influence people to not support anyone who challenges Senator Lieberman.”

Hey Rubenstein. In this very posting, Genghis Conn suggested two ways that in the future you might “redress the situation”: 1) contact him before contacting the FBI, 2) contact Blogger if you are seeking to apply sanctions against obnoxious bloggers -- preferably before contacting the FBI. You acceded to those suggestions today. As a competent lawyer, you are familiar with these various paths of redress. Why did you not take a path less destructive in the first instance? Even if it were the intent of the poster you ratted out to the FBI to influence people to support Lieberman rather than your preferred candidate for governor, Ned Lamont, that intent is no more criminal than your intent to convince people not to support Lieberman. The whole point of blog sites such as Mylelfnutmeg, among others, is to sway political opinion. So what?

DeanFan84 said...

Why should Bruce have contacted Genghis? I very forthrightly called out "Harry Reid", said it was wrong, yet Genghis did nothing while it happened over and over for several days.

Plus, Bruce has supplanted Aldon, me, CTKeith, and McArdle as being the designated dumpee for the community to pick on. "Harry Reid" did a nasty smear against Bruce, and nobody did anything about it.

Thus, why should Bruce have bothered contacting Genghis? fwiw.

Brass Anon said...

I don't want to slander anyone, but if BR and CtK are the voices of the Lamont campaign, then I'm voting for Joe, war or no war.

BTW, in order to state a claim for relief on this type of defamation claim, don't you have to prove damages? What are the damages?

And one other thing, how does Hairy Reed endorsing Joementum help Joe get the convention endorsement? Who among us is a fan of that ineffectual leader? And when I say "ineffectual" I mean it in the most non-libelous way towards Hairy Reed.

Don Pesci said...

DeanFan. At this point, I don't think Rubenstein would want to admit that he ratted out a fellow blogger to the FBI because the blogger "smeared him." That position is simply not high-minded enough to elict pity as the most dumped uopn blogger in these parts. Better stick to the agreed upon script. Now, Rubenstein seems to be a reasonable fellow. The Abe Lincoln solution to this problem would entail snowballs at a hundred feet, rather than the solution Rubensten has chosen. It's still not too late to do the right thing. Why don't you do your pal a favor and tell him to call the dogs off? God!!! You know, you can always ANSWER your critics without balling to mama.

Don Pesci said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Don Pesci said...

DeanFan. This is exactly what you said to "Harry Reid":

"Harry Reid--
I hope you know that what you are doing is wrong. I presume everyone will recognize you as one of Joe's lame-ass staffers, but assuming identities is still taboo."

So, even then -- when you called "Harry Reid" out -- you knew he was not the real Harry Reid; why else would you have presumed that everyone "will recognize you as one of Joe's lame-ass staffers?"

Are supposed to believe that Rubenstein -- an accomplished lawyer and anti-Lieberman agitator -- unlike you, lacked the wit to recognize that the writer of the letters that "smeared" him WAS NOT the real Harry Reid.

Sorry, everyone here has to much respect for Rubenstein's intelligence to swallow the imposture. In some ways this imposture is far more artful that "Harry Reid's" attempt at satire.

You do know, of course, that writing under pseudonyms is the oldest form of satire -- and the most effective. It is only remotely related to lying and slander. Bullying, thought, is always in fashion.

It's not too late.

Aldon Hynes said...

ADA (NR!) It is posts like yours that are (the sort of attacks we ought to be having) so harmful.

We need to focus on (lightening up and having some fun) serious political debate.

Unfortunately, too many people don't have anything intelligent to say and resort to poorly written senseless attacks. (Thanks for providing an illustration of a well written attack)

I wish I had more time to spend on this and other blogs (but they don't have WiFi at Burger King, and I probably couldn't blog while making fries anyway. At least BK pays better than most political gigs).

The Architect said...

Don,
If he contacted Blogger or GC, he wouldn't have gotten all this attention. That's what this is all about.

A Different Anonymous (No! Really!) said...

Aldon you wanker, my friend, if you are reduced to making fries at BK greasy goodness because blogging isn't paying the bills DeStefano and Lamont are such cheap bastards then I suggest it's time to reconsider your career path.

Come over to the dark side Republicans Republicans Republicans we have all the money and all the guns and soon we will have all the votes. Aldon, it is your destiny.

Together we can rule the Internet ... Search your feelings Republicans Republicans Republicans we have all the money and all the votes. You know it to be true.

Aldon, I am your father ..........

DeanFan84 said...

If you guys aren't dying to find out if "Harry Reid" was a lame-ass Lieberman staffer in disguise, you have no sense of drama.

Again, can someone contact Ken Dagliere, and get him on the record that it wasn't him. As an ordained priest, I'm sure he wouldn't lie.

And Brass Anon, you were always going to find some excuse to vote for Lieberman. It's laughable that you want to indict Lamont for CTKeith and BRubenstein's rabid support, yet you conveniently forget about Joe Lieberman's friend, --Sean Hannity, William Buckley, Perle, Wolfowitz, Bolton, and the rest of the Neo-Cons. Oh well.

BRubenstein said...

brass anon...im not involved with the Lamont campaign.

Its obvious you arent a lawyer or you would know what damges are and the types of action in which you dont have to show damages to get a recovery...

Now do us a favor and go pay a few bucks to hear Rowland's motivational speech in Waterbury.

BRubenstein said...

Don Pesci...the difference between me and " harry Reid" is that i didnt use a deceitful name of a US Senator to influence anyone and when asked state that he was Harry Reid. I only post in my real name..too bad you dont.

Frankly, if you couldnt see that difference, then you arent worth talking too.

BRubenstein said...

Don Pesci...you win the moron of the month award in that i didnt rat anyone out...as soon as i asked for an investigation..i made it public...i could easilly post on a false name like you and in the dark write to the feds...and say nothing..in which case no one would have known. I chose the honorable course, which you wouldnt understand in 100 years.

Now stop crying and go complain to the complaint department because you are getting very upset over all this and i wouldnt want you to get sick and enroll yourself in a hospital over all your angst.

BRubenstein said...

Architect...

I dont need the attention...unlike you ive run campaigns and/or had senior roles in them...while the only thing you run..is your mouth.

BRubenstein said...

Don Pesci...I OWN YOU

A Different Anonymous (No! Really!) said...

Rubenstein: The only thing you own is a pathetic ego and a laughable persona ... and the only one who doesn't know it is you.

The hell of it is whoever claimed to be Harry Reid was right: You are uniformly despised and a universal laughingstock. Having the FBI investigate won't change that.

Console yourself if you must with your claims of being a high-level "operative" -- a term no one who actually works in this business uses -- and a $500-an-hour lawyer who can't type or spell. Whatever gets you through the night, as I believe someone used to sing ...

BRubenstein said...

a diff anon: you are pathetic...making personal comments and having the balls of a chipmonk,hiding behind a fake s/n.

Someday maybe you will be a man.

DeanFan84 said...

Diff Anon--

You are exactly that which you criticize. Get off your high horse, and look in the mirror.

Hate to break it to you. You're no better than the rest of us.

ctkeith said...

Hey Look,

Don Pesci got more responses here than he has in a month on his own Blog.

I guess maybe you should rename the Pesci Blog " playing with Myself" with all the attention your not Getting there.

Don Pesci said...

Hey Rubenstein, just curious: How did you find out Don Pesci was not my real name? Of course, if you KNOW its not my real name, you must know what my real name is. What is it?

You started out you messages "with all due respect." That didn't last too long, did it? This intemperate language will not improve your law practice. Why don't you and your minions get some manners?

Don Pesci said...

ctkeith

I could paper your living room wall with thr responses I've gotten in thirty years of column writing -- to be sure, none as spicy as your. And when did you say you wanted to grow up?

Authentic Connecticut Republican said...

ctkeith said...
Hey Look,

Don Pesci got more responses here than he has in a month on his own Blog.


So I took a look; and indeed Pesci has oodles more response on his blog than you do Keith on yours!

BRubenstein said...

Don Pestie..

My law practice doesn't need as much improving as your mouth does.

I saw your blog...the traffic in it is like as bad as the Sahara desert...i guess you are as much of a bore in your blog as you are in here.

Don Pesci said...

Hey Rubenstein. You don't like answering questions, do you? You haven't answered a single one I've put to. Good thing you're not on a witness stand.You left a note on my bog: It says I OWN YOU. What's that mean? ou don't own diddlysquat. I LOVE BULLIES.

bluecoat said...

BR: it's amazing that some of these people actually seem to think you forced the FBI to investigate the information you provided your complaint...

A Different Anonymous (No! Really!) said...

bluecoat says some of these people actually seem to think you forced the FBI to investigate the information you provided your complaint

I don't know anyone who thinks that ... but let's bear in mind we have only the word of the relentlessly self-promoting BRubenstein, high-powered "operative" and $500-an-hour lawyer (and he will take every opportunity to tell you so) that the FBI is, in fact, investigating.

GC says he hasn't been contacted.

The FBI won't confirm it.

No one else is reporting jackbooted internet cops knocking down their door.

And frankly, if I had some whack-a-doo like SDS Brucie on the blower singing me a sad song about he was personally libeled by a blogger impersonating Harry Reid and Barack Obama, I'd promise to investigate it too, just to get him off the damn phone. (My notes, of course, would immediately thereafter be consigned to the circular file.)

Let's see how hard this "investigation" is pursued before making any more out of it.

bluecoat said...

Obviously you are expert enough on this stuff there ADA to comment on my note to BR. I stand flabbergasted. Thanks

BRubenstein said...

a diff anon..why do you call me a wack a do..when i am probably much more educated,make more money and function in politcs,work and in life at a much higher lever then you do or will ever do.I bet you are some young kid staffer with pimples on your face eatting cheese wiz and spam sandwiches for lunch with warm milk and jello.

BRubenstein said...

Bluecoat..i can't help it if the political and intellectual level of these negative posters is lower than a whale belly.Let them think what they wish.Most have no experience in politics other then shooting off their mouths in this blog and others like Pestie Pesci...the ones with alot of experience like " disgruntled rep.." and others that i respect, have kept quiet.

BRubenstein said...

Bluecoat..i can't help it if the political and intellectual level of these negative posters is lower than a whale belly.Let them think what they wish.Most have no experience in politics other then shooting off their mouths in this blog and others like Pestie Pesci...the ones with alot of experience like " disgruntled rep.." and others that i respect, have kept quiet.

BRubenstein said...

Don Pesci..i don't answe dumb questions..if you wish to ask me questions...give me a call if you have the balls.

A Different Anonymous (No! Really!) said...

bluecoat: I know enough to spot a one-source, Don Michak special when I see it. All I'm saying is, the whole story is hung on BR's assertion that the FBI is investigating -- no one else is confirming -- or, to be fair, denying.

BR: You're simply beneath comment.

bluecoat said...

ADA: if that's 'all you are saying' then you probably can delete all the other comments you made above on the thread - I guess you were just developing your thoughts out loud on the blog. OK, fine.

Don Pesci said...

Hey Rubenstein. My questions were an invitation to you to share your perceptions with the entire blogging community. If you don't want to answer them, fine. It's your choice. Glad, in cay case, to have your admission on the record that some cat had got hold of your usually unrestrained tounge. First you rat out someone to the FBI. Then you take the fifth. Nice.,

BRubenstein said...

Don Pestie...i didnt rat anyone out nor did i...or do i plead the 5th...see my prior posting...and do us a favor...stop crying and whining...its never pretty when a adult like you does that.

A Different Anonymous (No! Really!) said...

How desperate is BR to have the last word?

BlogDawg1 said...

I am looking for some good online detective resources for a ratings & review website and believe or not, yours popped up when I searched for online detective blogs. I read some of the stuff here -- could help. You can check out my online detective reviews at Online Detective Reviews