Skip to comments.Web Site Operator Sounds Off On MD4Bush
Posted on 12/15/2005 3:52:26 PM PST by conservative in nyc
The operator of FreeRepublic.com has had little to say of the MD4Bush mystery -- until now.
WBAL-TV 11 News I-Team lead investigative reporter Jayne Miller reported the operator of FreeRepublic.com holds the biggest clues to the identity of the Internet user MD4Bush. They include e-mail accounts and electronic log-in information.
The operator of the conservative Web site has not yet spilled all the beans, but he has made it clear that he believes he owes nothing to MD4Bush in terms of protecting privacy.
In a lengthy posting early Thursday morning, Jim Robinson, the operator of the California-based FreeRepublic.com, explained why he is now willing to allow information about the Internet user MD4Bush to become public.
Last October, MD4Bush used private e-mails on Free Republic's Web site to coax a former aide to Gov. Bob Ehrlich, Joe Steffen, into discussing the personal life of Baltimore Mayor Martin O'Malley.
On Wednesday, relying on a source familiar with the postings, the 11 News I-Team revealed the e-mail addresses associated with the MD4Bush account. They include "email@example.com," which was used to open the account. That address was then changed to "firstname.lastname@example.org," and then changed again to "email@example.com."
The O'Doherty e-mail address is the same one listed to Ryan O'Doherty at the time he worked for the Maryland Democratic Party. O'Doherty has denied any connection to MD4Bush.
The 11 News I-Team also learned Thursday of other changes to the MD4Bush account. Miller said that in addition to the e-mail registration address on the MD4Bush account, the sign-on password had changed twice -- once in October 2004 and a second time in mid-January this year, just weeks before the Steffen story broke.
In his posting Thursday, Robinson claimed MD4Bush breached the agreement with Free Republic, arguing that MD4Bush targeted Steffen from the start by ...
(Excerpt) Read more at thewbalchannel.com ...
More at the link.
"§ 2701. Unlawful Access to Stored Communications
(a) Offense.--Except as provided in subsection (c) of this section whoever
(1) intentionally accesses without authorization a facility through which an electronic communication service is provided; or
(2) intentionally exceeds an authorization to access that facility; and thereby obtains, alters, or prevents authorized access to a wire or electronic communication while it is in electronic storage in such system shall be punished as provided in subsection (b) of this section. "
"User Account Confidentiality: User agrees to protect user's account and password and not to disclose account information to any third party."
The WP did exceed an authorization to access FR by using anothers password(Forbidden under the Users Agreement which govern the access of users) to access FRmails and did not make any attempt to determine the rules of access to FR or presumably they would not have improperly used anothers password. They flat did violate section 2b of 18 U.S.C. 2701 in that they did not view, or observe the rules if they did view them. If the reporter was unaware of 2b of 18 U.S.C. 2701 it won't help. A professional at a large newspaper should know or should have asked.
Are you a lawyer, or do you just play one on the internet?
If you reach in a haystack and pull out a needle...What are the odds the haystack is loaded with needles?
No, I looked up the law on a previous thread. I doubt if anything is done on this angle, but a federal prosecution would circumvent MD legislature footdragging and six covering.
Interesting what a search of Bugmenot turns up for FR usernames & passwords.
It would be delicious if Jim Robinson could win a lawsuit against the vile Washington Post. Delicious, and just.
In his posting Thursday, Robinson claimed MD4Bush breached the agreement with Free Republic, arguing that MD4Bush targeted Steffen from the start by directing the very first MD4Bush posting to Steffen.
He accused MD4Bush of planting false rumors on the Web site, an apparent reference to the new dirt MD4Bush added to the O'Malley rumor story.
Jim Robinson is right. Furthermore, Steffan did not play to those rumors; but rather attempted to pan them away, and down. Steffan wasn't playing. Nontheless, the mere FACT that a bear-trap had been laid for Steffan (and ultimately for Gov Erhlich), the trap came in PROXIMITY to Steffan was sufficient for the Democrats and WaPO to assert that Steffan was "guilty" of rumormongering.
egads.. I've just outlined the classic "girl fight" script. And to think, it was schemed by the Democrats -- a girlish sort of "game". Yech!
Ah, the very thought of the comPost having to pay JR.......delicious!!!!
That would, but it would take a fortune to sue the WP. I was thinking more along the line of a criminal prosecution. I doubt if the feds would take an interest, but by my reading
there appears to have been a violation of law.
Interesting, isn't it? Some of those shared accounts appear to be active (.e.not "banned/suspended).
Remember, some of those shared accounts might not really be shared. Like Number 24. All it takes is one vindictive idiot to cast doubt about your good FReeper name.
Any FR username that appears on Bugmenot is presumptively (rebuttable) a troll.
Yep, middle school girl plot, yet done by supposed adult males.
Oh,the irony of that. May it be so!
He could have stayed at a Holiday Inn Express....
True enough but see post #21 too.
Very good chance of that...
However, conservative in NYC makes a related point in post #20 on this thread.
It was indeed a bumper crop for Zot at FR this year. ;-)
Don't look for much out of the gutless weasels in the DOJ.
I don't. If they ever do anything with the law it is not likely to involve the Washington Post or other big news outfit, whatever their violations.
Operator? You're an OPERATOR?
Well whoathunkit! ;)
You can't say that often enough. Steffan NEVER spread any rumors in any of the public threads, and I think I have read all of them. MD4BUSH tried to egg him on, and Steffan refused to bite.
The entire Washington Post story, that Steffan spread rumors about the Mayor of Baltimore or others, is a LIE. A big, fat lie. A setup that didn't work, yet they pretended it did. Even WBAL, which has written a number of factual stories on this scandal, has not always made that clear.
If you want on this ping list, please freepmail me!
Bump for stupid Dems.
One ringy dingy. Two ringy dingies...
There is a 'rat in that mousetrap
Or saved a whole lot of money, by switching his car insurance to GEIKO.
"You can't serve papers on a rat."
"A rat writ, writ for a rat."
LOL. If it ain't this Ryan dude, then MD4Bush doesn't exist
I have read just enough about this issue to know that it is serious and that there are two FR members who post here involved. I am curious and have a question. Each time someone posts a new thread about the issue, this is the common statement made in each post that describes the core of the matter.......
"Last October, MD4Bush used private e-mails on Free Republic's Web site to coax a former aide to Gov. Bob Ehrlich, Joe Steffen, into discussing the personal life of Baltimore Mayor Martin O'Malley. "
So here's my question/confusion. If this MD4Bush person coaxed (or tricked) this Steffen person into discussing something he shouldn't have, why the preoccupation with finding out who MD4Bush is? Isn't who he is irrelevant? I would think that the focus would be on the other person (steffen) who allowed themself to be tricked into doing something they shouldn't have? Given his position, it seems rather odd to me that he would let his guard down and behave in such an unprofessional manner, especially on a website.
Can someone please clarifiy this for me so that I can understand?
"Can someone please clarifiy this for me so that I can understand?"
I doubt that any one could, given what you have posted.
As Jim already pointed out, Steffen didn't rise to the bait -- but even if he had, why do you think that he ought to get in trouble for spreading false rumors, but not the person who was actually originating them (MD4BUSH)?
Thank you for the explanation! I see where my confusion lies as that bit of text is terribly misleading for someone not familiar with all that has happened. It should read,
"Last October, MD4Bush used private e-mails on Free Republic's Web site (IN AN ATTEMPT) or (IN AN UNSUCCESSFUL ATTEMPT) to coax a former aide to Gov. Bob Ehrlich, Joe Steffen, into discussing the personal life of Baltimore Mayor Martin O'Malley. "
The way it is currently written purposefully implies that Mr. Steffen is in the wrong.
Again, thank you for the clarification and for not minding that I asked.