GOP Questions Newspaper's Role With 'MD4Bush'

WBAL TV ^ | 11/02/05 | Staff

[Anti-Bubba182]

Actually Most of the emails were published in the paper or posted on FR.

[HAL9000]

Never gonna happen.

It could happen, with one phone call.

[icwhatudo]

MD4BUSH SPREAD RUMOURS THAT MARYLAND SEN BARBARA MIKULSKI IS A LESBIAN. THIS IS A FACT INGNORED BY EVERY STORY DONE ABOUT THIS AFFAIR. WHY IS IT WRONG FOR STEFFEN TO ACHIEVE A POLITICAL GOAL SPREADING SEXUAL INNUENDO ABOUT OMALLY... BUT ITS OK FOR A DEM OPERATIVE TO "OUT" MIKULSKI (attempting to warm up to Steffen) TO ACHIEVE A POLITICAL GOAL????

(Pardon my posting this on all MD4BUSH threads but I'm hoping some media type will call Mikulski's office for her feelings on being used in such a way by a fellow democrat.)

[Anti-Bubba182]

I doubt it, but you might write Jim Robinson a FRmail about it.

[nunya bidness]

True MD4Bush did spread those rumors about Mikulski but it's more significant that MD4Bush colluded with Matthew Mosk of the Washington Post in an attempt to paint Governor Ehrlich as directing the deliberate spreading of rumors that Mayor O'Malley "cheats on his wife".

In fact, Ryan O'Doherty, Communications Director of the Maryland Democrat Party, spread the rumors.

[HAL9000]

Since this matter came to Jim's attention, he's done everything exactly right. He restored the thread. He preserved the evidence in the log files. He's has refrained from any premature disclosures, but indicated that he can produce the evidence in response to a subpoena. He's following the developments and reading our discussions, and I'm confident that he'll continue to handle the situation correctly.

[DBeers]

"Also Wednesday, the operators of The Free Republic Web site told the 11 News I-Team that they are now considering their legal options because their policy prohibits their Web site users to share account information with a third party, something MD4Bush apparently did."

Filing a lawsuit would probably allow discovery even if the case is later dismissed or even lost... Discovery might prove quite revealing and or potentially motivate the WaPo to want to settle.....

[Southack]

"The participation of the Washington Post makes this story exponentially more interesting than it would be otherwise. Their "journalistic ethics" (or more accurately the lack of them) are on display for all to see. With the problems the NYT has been having, the WaPo may be on the way to being the most influential paper in the country."

The WaPost has admitting using the userid and on-screen name of someone who publicly claimed that Senator Mikulski is a lesbian.

The WaPost has schemed to publish private emails, and the WaPost has falsely attributed rumor-mongering comments made by their on-screen user name as if they were instead made by a GOP poster (NCPAC).

[Just Lori]

With stink this strong, there MUST be a Democrat turd nearby.....
This story has legs, and they're moving!


Oh mannnnn what a visual! A turd with legs trying to run away. LMAO.

[counterpunch]

FreeRepublic needs to take down the Washington Post just as we took down Dan Rather and Mary Mapes.

[evad]

Because they were in Freepmail- not actual public postings.

Now that make sense.

What's interesting at this point is we really don't know whether MD4Bush is the guy they say he is.

[kevkrom]

Looks like in both cases, there's an exception if either party (sender or recipient) grants access to a third party, so this shouldn't apply to the Post unless they accessed the account without MD4BUSH's permission.

[evad]

Hey...makes a good tag line.

[evad]

In fact, Ryan O'Doherty, Communications Director of the Maryland Democrat Party, spread the rumors.

Fact is, we really don't know yet that MD4Bush is Ryan O'Doherty.

[The_Victor]

Looks like in both cases, there's an exception if either party (sender or recipient) grants access to a third party, so this shouldn't apply to the Post unless they accessed the account without MD4BUSH's permission.

Unless you consider the username/password the property of Free Republic. In which case any of us sharing that info without FR permission would be a violation of FR rules. I'm still not sure how the law fits into the equation, but I'll bet that's why JR is seeking legal council.

[kevkrom]

Sharing the login info is definitely a violation of the FR terms of use. However, it is not illegal based on the law sections I was replying to, because it falls under the exceptions granted to parties who receive permission of either the sender or recipient to access and view.

Unethical? Yes.

Violation of the FR terms of use? Certainly.

Illegal? Looks like no.

[The_Victor]

Even if the info shared is the property of Free Republic? It's tantamount to giving away protected corporate information. The username/password is not out property, but is provided to us under specific terms. Sharing that info is the same as giving away a corporate secret. The company I work for would certainly pursue legal remedies if I gave away my username/passwords to a third party, beyond having me fired.

[kevkrom]

Again, I'm only responding to an earlier post that referenced two sections of law. Under those sections, what was done was defined as an exception to the criminal violations listed.

There may be other applicable laws -- but the two sections cited do not apply in this case.

[The Old Hoosier]

They were apparently Freepmails.