Anthony Weiner | News | Twitter

Watch: Rep. Anthony Weiner 'Can't Say with Certitude' That Lewd Twitter Photo is Not Him


Congressman Anthony Weiner's remarks to MSNBC's Luke Russert today will likely only perpetuate discussion regarding a lewd Twitter photo that was sent from his account to a 21-year-old student follower over the weekend. Weiner tells Russert he "can't say for certitude" that the photo isn't of him, and continues to say that his account was hacked.

Says Weiner: "I was the victim of a prank."


Visit for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy


Feed This post's comment feed


  1. @BC: Chris Lee's situation was different. He was in favor of the government intruding into people's personal lives and in favor of DADT, all the while lying about himself in e-mails that were made public.

    While I don't see his lying as hypocritical, but rather as consistent (after all, he demanded that gay people lie in order to be allowed to their jobs, so he seems to believe that "dishonesty is the best policy"), my issue is with the numbskulls who vote in favor of someone like him. I don't demand that he resign, but I do think that he deserves to held up to the type of government scrutiny that he insists on imposing on others.

    As for Weiner, he's never been in favor of government intrusion into people's private lives.

    And what is the big deal about the photo? It's not (as Josh2727 suggested) a photo of his genitals; it's a badly-angled accidental-looking pic of a sideways swipe of a pair of gray jockey shorts and a little portion of the thigh of someone wearing them.

    If you had showed me this photo a week ago and asked if it was me, I'd have said, "I don't think so, but how could I know?" I could easily imagine an old college roommate snapping a photo like this for a laugh when I wasn't looking. There's not even a belly-button in the photo or anything that would make the owner of the shorts identifiable.

    Shepard Smith asks how Weiner could possibly not know for sure. If I were to show Shepard Smith (or anyone) an out-of-focus shot of about a third of someone's foot in a gray sock, could you tell for certain that it is or isn't your own foot? If you've ever owned a pair of gray socks anytime in the past 20 years, would it be possible to know that no one had ever taken a millisecond to take a shot of your foot as you were about to put a shoe on?

    Even if it is his shorts and thigh in the photo, as JP said, it's not the existence of such a photo that should bother anyone, it's the intentional sending of such a photo in an inappropriate context.

    I agree with Weiner that this is not a matter of national security.

    Posted by: GregV | Jun 1, 2011 7:05:56 PM

  2. GregV - thanks for a short and completely accurate description of what the real issues are with this - and there aren't a hell of a lot of them. anybody who thinks he should resign over this is an idiot. unless he's lying of course; then it's over for him - but i doubt if it will be.

    Posted by: ant | Jun 1, 2011 7:36:16 PM

  3. How is that photograph lewd? It's a clothed penis. No swimsuits allowed now?

    Posted by: Andalusian Dog | Jun 1, 2011 7:36:44 PM

  4. A lot of people experienced taking pictures of their private part at some points in their life(gay or straight). And honestly my facebook account was hacked once. It was kind of scary to notice that my account was controlled by a stranger from a remote location somewhere. So this guy can be very unfortunate, because he is a politician.

    Posted by: Akira | Jun 1, 2011 8:36:09 PM

  5. I've (unfortunately) seen pictures of the Governorator out at the beach wearing clothes skimpier than that underwear. He didn't release the picture and hasn't been sexually harassing anyone with them, and I honestly doubt if the pictures are even of him.

    He's dumb to still talk about this issue, but to the suggestion that he resigns: hell to the know. He's done nothing wrong -- and, in fact, was illegally hacked and thus was the actual victim here. Are we so puritanical that we can't allow or support a politician who we may or may not have seen a little more of than we'd be used to seeing at the office?

    This is exactly the kind of stuff I hate about this country, and it's exactly this kind of ridiculous persecution on sexual matters that's led to the entire LBGT community being second class, at best, during the entire course of American history and longer.

    Posted by: Ryan | Jun 1, 2011 10:01:11 PM

  6. The reporter was a smug jackass. Weiner is brilliant.

    Posted by: nikko | Jun 1, 2011 10:21:56 PM

  7. Oh who cares? Who hasn't sent a dick pic across the Internet? Why is this such a big deal? I'd vote for him either way.

    Posted by: Max | Jun 1, 2011 10:22:37 PM

  8. Oops, I used the word sl*t in my previous comment, guess that's a no-no cause it was censored.

    Why on earth does anyone care whose clothed weiner was tweeted? It's amusing and titillating to consider whether this was really Weiner's weiner, for about five minutes. After that it's just yet another demonstration of the juvenilization of the American media, encouraged by the hypocritical American public. The only disgrace will be if he were to resign over something so trivial.

    @BC: For Weiner to resign (never mind the difference in circumstances) just because Lee resigned would be the dumbest reason ever for leaving office. Should he also jump off a bridge if Lee made the decision to do that? Politicians are big--sometimes stupid--boys. Each one gets to make his own decision. Frankly, I was glad to see Lee go because of his terrible politics; how he cheated on his wife wasn't my concern.

    Posted by: Ernie | Jun 1, 2011 11:26:34 PM

  9. This isn't news it's nonsense. Why does anyone care?

    Posted by: Bear | Jun 2, 2011 1:10:54 AM

  10. All I have to say is that if that photo qualifies as "lewd", you really need to upgrade to a better grade of pornography.

    Posted by: Dave | Jun 2, 2011 1:45:44 AM

  11. I missed the whole thing until today. It didn't seem like anything worth reading.

    To put the whole thing in perspective, however, you might want to read the articles about people hacking into various people's google accounts, mostly high-level politicians and various political activists. It was done by social engineering and phishing, not by finding a security issue with google's gmail service.

    If he had a picture of his underwear intended for his wife, boyfriend, lover, what-have-you, that's his business. It's possible that someone broke into his account/cellphone/computer and sent it. It's also possible that he owns some gray underwear and can't tell if it was his or whether someone simply snapped a cellphone photo after he was working out in a gym (and maybe used photoshop to enhance it).

    Posted by: Bill | Jun 2, 2011 2:02:25 AM

  12. I know what MY dick looks like, and what my underwear looks like too. Just sayin'.

    Posted by: Jack M | Jun 2, 2011 9:07:10 AM

  13. @Ernie - I guarantee you were a giddy little boy when a republican got caught. Beacause as much as you attack me for being partisan, you know you are 1000 times more partisan than I am. I would be calling for a Republican to resign for LYING as well. Not for the picture, but for LYING. Larry Craig should have resigned. I'm glad Chris Lee resigned. Mark Foley. There are tons of them. On both sides.

    And herein lies the double standard. If a republican did this, you'd all be yelling for him to resign. Weiner KNOWS this is his picture and he keeps playing games that it might be or it might not be. If he would have just said, "Yeah, that's me and someone hacked my computer" that would be the end of it and it all would go away.

    This isn't about politics, it's about judgment. Poor judgment. As a sitting member of congress, you should not be sending pictures of your erect penis, clothed or unclothed, to anyone. We all know that anything put into cyberspace can be found by someone.

    THIS may not be a matter of national security, however, what if this same "hacker" hacks another congressperson's account and Tweets something that IS of national security interests? What if the hacker sends a Tweet regarding Lybia or terrorism? If he got into one account, whats to stop him (or her) from getting into another? The FBI has said that all he needs to do is call them and they will have this solved in 5 minutes. He is refusing to do that. That in and of itself is fishy to me.

    Posted by: BC | Jun 2, 2011 12:24:40 PM

  14. Oh my, BC, you don't really understand the problem people have with Republicans around here, do you?

    We didn't call for Larry Craig's head (no pun intended) for wanting to have sex, awkwardly located or not. We wanted his head BECAUSE HE WAS TRYING TO ENGAGE IN SEX WITH A MAN WHEN HE CONSISTENTLY VOTES AGAINST GAY ISSUES IN CONGRESS.

    I thought it was funny and stupid when the other congressman was caught with a Craigslist ad for women with his shirt off. But there was no call for him to "resign in disgrace." Heck, that shows he's a real human, rather than those that hide behind their family, a soldier and a flag to prove they're a "real" patriotic American and then destroy the civil rights of others.

    So Weiner, if he did it, or if it's actually his picture, is stupid, and it's funny. But those who think he should resign as a tit for tat (again, no pun intended) same deal for Democrats miss the point. Yet again. Ad nauseum.

    Posted by: Gavin | Jun 2, 2011 3:52:06 PM

  15. Dan Wolfe is messing his pants now that this whole thing has landed back in his lap with a resounding "thud".

    Weiner will have the last laugh. He and Jon Stewart will have great fun making Breitbart and his cronies look like fools.

    Posted by: PDQ | Jun 2, 2011 6:55:07 PM

  16. "And herein lies the double standard. If a republican did this, you'd all be yelling for him to resign."

    Actually, BC, no I wouldn't. You're completely wrong. If a Republican had been in this situation, I most certainly would not have called on him to resign. It's a trivial incident, regardless of his political party and whether or not that's his weiner.

    I'm glad to see several of the anti-gay Republicans you mention out of office, not because they got caught in sex scandals, but because they're anti-gay. I'm surprised you aren't a "giddy little boy," as you put it, when pro-straight-family (i.e. anti-gay) politicians have their hypocrisy exposed along with their icky parts. Or are anti-gay policies ok when they're Republican, as most are?

    Weiner is definitely pro-gay, not a hypocrite, as far as I can tell, so I want him to remain in office because his politics are good and because what they're trying to bust him for is silly beyond words. And when people claim--oh it's not the picture, it's the lie--that's complete BS. It's the hint of sex not the lies that the media drools over; they then try to justify their prurient interests by playing the lying card, which is in itself a lie.

    BTW, unlike you, I don't pretend not to be partisan. I am anti-Republican, because I disagree with the Republican party's platform almost entirely, and because they are working against the rights of gay people--that includes you, my friend--every single day. If Republicans want to tweet their little tweeters, however, I couldn't care less.

    Posted by: Ernie | Jun 2, 2011 7:07:30 PM

  17. « 1 2

Post a comment


« «Watch: San Francisco Giants Release 'It Gets Better' Video« «