Web Site Operator Sounds Off On MD4Bush

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 "ryanrock2004@yahoo.com," which was used to open the account. That address was then changed to "rodoherty@mddems.org," and then changed again to "brianwaverly@yahoo.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 ...

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?

Actually, the coaxing didn't work. NCPAC didn't post anything damning. The scandal is that the Maryland Democrat Party and the Washington Post colluded in an attempt to entrap NCPAC into saying something against O'Malley. It didn't work, but they ran with it anyway, printing mostly lies. The mere association with FR and hints of being connected to a supposed rumor campaign on FR (there wasn't one) was apparently enough to do the trick. It's the Big Lie routine. By the way, the rumors actually started several years ago on the Baltimore Sun's readers forum. And some say O'Malley's wife was actually involved in spreading it.

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.

Kimberly

You raise a reasonable question, which has stayed alive because not even WBAL's fair and factual coverage has always mentioned all the facts.

1. A Washington Post reporter and a Maryland Democratic party operative, presumably with the blessing of their respective bosses, appear to have set up a trap to catch Steffan in and use Steffan to smear his boss, Governor Erlich.

2. The Dem operative signed up at FR and began to troll on threads concerning rumors about the Mayor of Baltimore. Many of these rumors were public property, were mentioned in the press earlier, and were going around the grapevine, so FR had nothing to do with starting them.

3. In the public threads, MD4BUSH repeatedly spreads rumors himself and tries to egg Steffan on to agree with him. Steffan consistently refuses to bite.

4. MD4BUSH privately sends freepmails to Steffan egging him on with these rumors, and in these private exchanges it is reported that Steffan also refuses to bite. In other words, MD4BUSH's only "crime" was to visit FR, but he never used FR for political purposes and never smeared any Democrats or even attacked them for proven misbehavior or corruption. Evidently he visited FR because he enjoyed the site or wanted to keep up with the news, but he never used it for political purposes in any way, although there was in fact no reason why he should not have, as long as he spoke the truth.

5. The Washington Post suddenly burst out with a story saying the Steffan had been spreading rumors and slander against the Mayor, probably at the governor's bidding. Steffan immediately fell on his sword and resigned, to keep any lying mud away from Erlich.

6. In doing this, it developed that the reporter who wrote the article had been given the password so he could access the Dem operator's private email. He lied in his first column about what the email contained. He lied that he did not know who the Dem operator was. He lied about the presumed fact that the Dem operator had given him the password. Instead, he finally "admitted" that he got the password from an intermediary, but he didn't know who the intermediary was, or MD4BUSH either. The chances that any of that is true are vanishingly small.

7. In doing this, the Dem operator and the Washington Post reporter violated the rules of FreeRepublic, which do not allow users to share their accounts or passwords with others. They also appear to have conspired to violate the communications laws, and therefore to have committed several criminal acts. Unfortunately, all the prosecutors are Democrats, and therefore they appear to be uninterested in investigating these serious alleged crimes.

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.