Rep Anthony Weiner was accused of sending an inappropriate photo of himself to a 21 year old model. What was a small 'tempest in a teapot' increased as he did not give straight answers to the press. Here is what he told CNN followed by statements and prior analysis in bold type.
Here, he was shown the picture of himself:
"I didn't send any Twitter picture, " he said, adding that the photo might have been manipulated.
Note that additional words give us additional information. He did not say "I didn't send any picture" but he added "any twitter picture" which indicates that he may have sent a picture, but he does not consider it a "twitter" picture. Was the original picture not meant for "twitter"? This is how deceptive people respond. Instead of giving a straight denial, they use additional words as an attempt to distract.
"It certainly doesn't look familiar to me, but I don't want to say with certitude to you something that I don't know the certain truth," Weiner told CNN in an interview.
Note that looking "familiar" to him is not the same as saying "it isn't me." If the photo is an inappropriate picture as alleged, he would know whether or not he posed for such a photo; therefore, this is a weak denial. He does not say "it isn't me" only that it "certainly" doesn't look "familiar" to him.
Note that "but" is considered important as it may rebut that which was just said:
"I don't want to say with certitude" indicating that he doesn't want to do something.
"I don't know the certain truth" would indicate that it has truth, but in his mind, just not a "certain" truth.
Is there a different truth in his opinion? It is these type of answers that cause the press to continue to chase after him.
He must decide, politically, if it is worth the publicity.
"I didn't send any Twitter picture, " he said, adding that the photo might have been manipulated.
Note that additional words give us additional information. He did not say "I didn't send any picture" but he added "any twitter picture" which indicates that he may have sent a picture, but he does not consider it a "twitter" picture. Was the original picture not meant for "twitter"? This is how deceptive people respond. Instead of giving a straight denial, they use additional words as an attempt to distract.
Had Rep Weiner said "yes, I sent it. I shouldn't have." the controversy may have gone away, but his deceptive answers (see below) provoked the press into further followup.
We do not have the quote on manipulating the picture but it sounds much like the many deceptive denials we have heard in the past, including "I have been wickedly manipulated by treacherous friends" from the fallen TV evangelist Jim Bakker.
I've been pretty responsive': A touchy Rep. Anthony Weiner yesterday refuses to answer questions about his penchant for linking to sexy online admirers like the one above.
Note the sensitivity in how responsive he has been: "pretty" responsive, which gives room for being even more responsive. This additional word tells us that he has likely not been fully responsive, which woud cause us to learn what questions has he not responded to.
" Was it from you or not," demanded CNN's Capitol Hill producer Ted Barrett.
Because previous denials were not made plainly, this type of question allows the subject to give an honest reply.
To which the squirming Weiner replied:
"If I were giving a speech to 45,000 people and someone in the back threw a pie or yelled out an insult, I would not spend the next two hours of my speech responding to that pie or that insult.
Note that the question is not answered; therefore, Statement Analysis says: The question whether or not it was him, is a sensitive question to the subject.
Note also that his response is in the future/conditional tense; relating to something that has yet to take place. This is a second point of sensitivity to the question.
"I would return to the things that I want to talk about to the audience that I want to talk to. That is what I intend to do this week."
Note that here he tells us what he would do, and what he wants and intends to do. He does not, however, say that he will not talk about the growing scandal, only that he intends to talk about other things. Many times we intend to do something only to change our mind. The subject leaves this open as a distinct possibility.
Then in another cringeworthy exchange, the Brooklyn-Queens Democrat unloaded a snarky insult instead of saying why he didn't pass on to Capitol Police his claim that his Twitter account had been hacked -- which would be a federal crime.
For this local politician, he is now in a position where he is either lying, or has failed to report a federal crime. In what began as a small controversy has grown in the New York media more so as he has not given a straight answer.
Given his refusal to issue a straight denial, and that he has avoided a direct question, the question put to him should be considered sensitive.
. below: his wife
“I was hacked. It happens to people,” Weiner told CNN Monday night. “This is a prank, not a terribly creative one, and it’s a distraction.”
Note that "I was hacked" is first person singular, and past tense and a strong statement. However, is it specifically referencing this controversy?
"It happens to people" shows weakness; first by being passive ("it happens") and secondly by referring it to "people", not himself. Note that "people" is gender neutral. Note that passivity is used to conceal responsibility. The question arose whether or not the picture was of him, which may mean that if he was "hacked" he may know who did it, especially if he sent the picture to the alleged hacker. We would want to learn why he reported this in a passive manner.
"It happens to people" would have been stronger had he said "I was hacked. It happened to me". Why the need to follow up with "it happens to people"?
"It is a prank" does not tell us who did the pranking. Is this because he is the prankster who sent a picture of himself somewhere, only to have it put online?
He disparages the prank as "not terribly creative" which suggests that he considers it somewhat creative, but not "terribly" creative.
"it's a distraction" is also passive as he does not say who is being distracted and what the person or persons distracted, are being distracted from.
The passivity indicates sensitivity to the subject responsible for posting the picture.
Gennette Cordova, the alleged target of Weiner’s tweet, said in a statement Sunday to the New York Daily News that even though she’s a “fan” of Weiner – who was also following her on twitter – she has never met the congressman.
“ There have never been any inappropriate exchanges between Anthony Weiner and myself, including the tweet/picture in question, which had apparently been deleted before it reached me,” she said.
Note that she says "inappropriate" exchanges which may indicate that Rep. Weiner and this young woman have exchanged messages. What does she consider "inappropriate" would need to be explored.
“ I cannot answer the questions that I do not have the answers to. … I also do not have a clear understanding as to how or why exactly I am involved in this fiasco.”
Note that she recognizes that it is a "fiasco" but only does not have a "clear" understanding, which indicates that she does possess some understanding of how and why she is involved. Note that she puts "how" before "why"; as order shows priority.
Weiner, 46, is married to Huma Abedin, an aide to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
Internet security experts said the controversial post could have easily been done by someone with access to the congressman’s accounts. But they also say it’s plausible that an unauthorized person infiltrated the system.
“Those things get hacked the simplest ways,” Alan Paller, director of the SANS Institute for Computer Security Training, said of Twitter and Facebook accounts.
“It’s either shoulder surfing, where someone stands behind you when you sign in, or they just guess,” he said. “They figure out what your user name is, which is usually your name, and then they just try your wife’s name, your kid’s name, your wife’s birthday for the password or just keep trying until they find one.”
Paller said more advanced hackers, who take over an individual personal computer or network, could install a keystroke logger to commandeer a Twitter or Facebook password. What happened in Weiner’s case remains to be seen.
If a hacker was responsible for the post, it wouldn’t be the first time.
A 25-year-old Frenchman hacked into President Obama’s Twitter account last year and was later arrested.
And hackers broke into Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin’s personal email account in 2008, exposing cell phone numbers and other private information.
As a crime, it would need to be reported as such, something that CNN sought to learn from Rep. Weiner.
Note the sensitivity in how responsive he has been: "pretty" responsive, which gives room for being even more responsive. This additional word tells us that he has likely not been fully responsive, which woud cause us to learn what questions has he not responded to.
" Was it from you or not," demanded CNN's Capitol Hill producer Ted Barrett.
Because previous denials were not made plainly, this type of question allows the subject to give an honest reply.
To which the squirming Weiner replied:
"If I were giving a speech to 45,000 people and someone in the back threw a pie or yelled out an insult, I would not spend the next two hours of my speech responding to that pie or that insult.
Note that the question is not answered; therefore, Statement Analysis says: The question whether or not it was him, is a sensitive question to the subject.
Note also that his response is in the future/conditional tense; relating to something that has yet to take place. This is a second point of sensitivity to the question.
"I would return to the things that I want to talk about to the audience that I want to talk to. That is what I intend to do this week."
Note that here he tells us what he would do, and what he wants and intends to do. He does not, however, say that he will not talk about the growing scandal, only that he intends to talk about other things. Many times we intend to do something only to change our mind. The subject leaves this open as a distinct possibility.
Then in another cringeworthy exchange, the Brooklyn-Queens Democrat unloaded a snarky insult instead of saying why he didn't pass on to Capitol Police his claim that his Twitter account had been hacked -- which would be a federal crime.
For this local politician, he is now in a position where he is either lying, or has failed to report a federal crime. In what began as a small controversy has grown in the New York media more so as he has not given a straight answer.
Given his refusal to issue a straight denial, and that he has avoided a direct question, the question put to him should be considered sensitive.
. below: his wife
“I was hacked. It happens to people,” Weiner told CNN Monday night. “This is a prank, not a terribly creative one, and it’s a distraction.”
Note that "I was hacked" is first person singular, and past tense and a strong statement. However, is it specifically referencing this controversy?
"It happens to people" shows weakness; first by being passive ("it happens") and secondly by referring it to "people", not himself. Note that "people" is gender neutral. Note that passivity is used to conceal responsibility. The question arose whether or not the picture was of him, which may mean that if he was "hacked" he may know who did it, especially if he sent the picture to the alleged hacker. We would want to learn why he reported this in a passive manner.
"It happens to people" would have been stronger had he said "I was hacked. It happened to me". Why the need to follow up with "it happens to people"?
"It is a prank" does not tell us who did the pranking. Is this because he is the prankster who sent a picture of himself somewhere, only to have it put online?
He disparages the prank as "not terribly creative" which suggests that he considers it somewhat creative, but not "terribly" creative.
"it's a distraction" is also passive as he does not say who is being distracted and what the person or persons distracted, are being distracted from.
The passivity indicates sensitivity to the subject responsible for posting the picture.
Gennette Cordova, the alleged target of Weiner’s tweet, said in a statement Sunday to the New York Daily News that even though she’s a “fan” of Weiner – who was also following her on twitter – she has never met the congressman.
“ There have never been any inappropriate exchanges between Anthony Weiner and myself, including the tweet/picture in question, which had apparently been deleted before it reached me,” she said.
Note that she says "inappropriate" exchanges which may indicate that Rep. Weiner and this young woman have exchanged messages. What does she consider "inappropriate" would need to be explored.
“ I cannot answer the questions that I do not have the answers to. … I also do not have a clear understanding as to how or why exactly I am involved in this fiasco.”
Note that she recognizes that it is a "fiasco" but only does not have a "clear" understanding, which indicates that she does possess some understanding of how and why she is involved. Note that she puts "how" before "why"; as order shows priority.
Weiner, 46, is married to Huma Abedin, an aide to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
Internet security experts said the controversial post could have easily been done by someone with access to the congressman’s accounts. But they also say it’s plausible that an unauthorized person infiltrated the system.
“Those things get hacked the simplest ways,” Alan Paller, director of the SANS Institute for Computer Security Training, said of Twitter and Facebook accounts.
“It’s either shoulder surfing, where someone stands behind you when you sign in, or they just guess,” he said. “They figure out what your user name is, which is usually your name, and then they just try your wife’s name, your kid’s name, your wife’s birthday for the password or just keep trying until they find one.”
Paller said more advanced hackers, who take over an individual personal computer or network, could install a keystroke logger to commandeer a Twitter or Facebook password. What happened in Weiner’s case remains to be seen.
If a hacker was responsible for the post, it wouldn’t be the first time.
A 25-year-old Frenchman hacked into President Obama’s Twitter account last year and was later arrested.
And hackers broke into Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin’s personal email account in 2008, exposing cell phone numbers and other private information.
As a crime, it would need to be reported as such, something that CNN sought to learn from Rep. Weiner.
No comments:
Post a Comment