When Andrew Breitbart hijacked Rep. Weiner's press conference Monday, he boo-hooed into the microphone for the press contingent about "vindication" and his expectation that apologies should come from Rep. Weiner and just about everyone else on the planet. That unleashed a torrent of abuse from Breitbart's followers toward anyone who had ever spoken the truth about Breitbart: He lies, and lies routinely. Breitbart's message was clear: All shall bow down to the Great and Mighty Breitbart and forget everything that has gone before: Shirley Sherrod, Don Giljum and Judy Ancel, ACORN, Abbie Boudreau , and more. I think not, especially when he follows his pathetic demand for paeans from his detractors with this:
Near the end of the segment, Breitbart was able to push aside his tenderhearted feelings for Weiner in favor of noble feelings for the women he sexted. In fact, Breitbart’s feelings were so noble, he threatened Weiner with blackmail. “I know how politics works,” Breitbart said. “I know how the politics of personal destruction works. I know how the private detectives work. Don’t go after Meagan (presumably Meagan Broussard, the woman interviewed by Hannity). Don’t go after the other girls and I’m paying attention. And that’s all I can say.”
Behold, the conservative Mafia in action. How laughable is it for him to want to 'protect' those innocent women, those poor little girls when he routinely sends messages out to women he does not know like this one? I intentionally do not use my last name when I blog because my family does not deserve harassment for my politics. Or perhaps this one, where he identifies the location of my former office in public? The conservative Mafia doesn't start or end with their thuggish little floods of my Twitter stream. I'm a blip. But now he's brutalizing Joan Walsh, who dared to write this:
I've heard that Andrew Breitbart mentioned me when he took over Weiner's press conference today. But Weiner's confession doesn't change anything I wrote here: I always acknowledged Weiner could be lying about the story, but when the tweet's intended recipient denied having any kind of sexual relationship with him, I believed her, and I said so (I did this on Twitter, by the way). Despite what Breitbart claims, I never accused him or his journalistic empire of "hacking," fabricating the Tweet, or naming the woman in question. You can read my Twitter stream here.
Making sure Salon editor Joan Walsh understands that he and his devotees think he made her "his bitch" automatically disqualifies him from further consideration as anything more than a bully and a thug waving his man parts around for anyone who might care.
Even as Breitbart appeared on Hannity touting his deep, deep concern for women who might have been somehow victimized by consensual receipt of a lewd photo from the good Congressman, he posted this to Joan Walsh:
Now there's a statement that proves how much Breitbart cares about women. It's raw. It's honest. And it's a lovely picture of the bully that Andrew Breitbart is. It's also not the only one. Here's another:
So pardon me if I don't get all choke-jawed and teary-eyed about believing he was lying this time, especially after all the other times he's lied and remains unapologetic. Judy Ancel and Don Giljum are still waiting for their apology for Big Government's shameless effort to smear them with dishonest edits. Did Breitbart physically edit the video? I doubt it, since he's all about being the big media guy and all. But Big Government is still his site. Perhaps he might want to make right what he published that was just so wrong. But no. He won't.
Nor will Dana Loesch, who still stands by her editorial decision to allow dishonestly edited videos of two university professors stand without any correction or apology. Confidential to Loesch: Perhaps some reading comprehension is in order before you start smearing Joan Walsh with the same brand of ugly you put on those professors.
And here we have the intrepid Andrew Breitbart claiming that he absolutely DID NOT intend for that blackmail photo to be captured and released online. Yes, indeedy, Mr. Breitbart swore up and down that it was stolen -- STOLEN -- right out from under his nose by a secret camera in the studio where he was passing it around. Um...not so secret, maybe? (watch the dude in the background behind the camera Mr. Breitbart is preening for) Little Green Footballs has a factcheck of his "official statement" (aka "official CYA lie")
Tell me again about how Andy didn't want that photo to get out in public. Tell me a fairy tale. Tell me I'm about to find a million dollars under my pillow. But please, do not ever tell me to believe Andrew Breitbart or give him any benefit of any doubt ever.
No, Andrew Breitbart is not entitled to an apology, nor will he get one from me until he steps up and apologizes to my face for trying his particular brand of bullying blackmail on me using my kids and former employer. As for Joan Walsh, she's not apologizing either, nor should she. Breitbart sees others through the lens of himself -- narcissistic with a nasty cruel streak, and I see no reason to enable him.
He got one story right. Big deal, compared to the countless others he and his Big Government employees have intentionally gotten wrong. When he starts apologizing with some real humility to those he has destroyed, maybe then.
And that, my friends, will be when hell freezes over. The conservative Mafia does not apologize; they extort. Or threaten to.
Meanwhile, I keep waiting for someone -- anyone -- in the mainstream press, or perhaps Breitbart himself, to mention Justice Clarence Thomas and his corrupt association with Citizens United (the organization). The silence is deafening.
If Andrew Breitbart wants to be considered legitimate in the eyes of the media and the netroots, perhaps he should begin with a careful look at Justice Thomas' financial disclosures, and lack of them. That would be too much like legitimate news reporting. Right, Andy?