The Glenn Greenwald story has been all over the blogosphere today. I posted what I considered (and still consider) to be the most likely scenario given all the known (and unknown) facts of the story revealed to this point. Later Paul addressed one of the responses to my post here.
There’s been a significant development…
In a response to my post (and Glenn’s denial) at Ace Of Spaces I found a link to one of the many bloggers who went scurrying to their logs or comment listings to search for the IP address associated with Glenn’s residence in Brazil. One such blogger was Verum Serum, who noted the following:
Update 7/20: Don’t miss this scoop from Ace of Spades HQ. It appears Mr. Greenwald has been defending himself around the web using aliases. I wasn’t worthy of one of Mr. Greenwald’s “special defenders”, however I checked the logs and discovered that Mr. Greenwald did come by. He arrived 9 minutes after I published this post, looked at my “About” page, then went back to the post itself and exited. The referrer was Technorati “Glenn Greenwald blogs” a real time list of every blog mentioning Glenn. Apparently, he keeps a pretty close eye on anyone who might be using his name in vain.
That Verum Serum post was published 7/19, so the visit from “Glenn” occurred Wednesday around noon.
Unless Verizon has seriously expanded its coverage area, I’m pretty sure that Glenn Greenwald was in America when that visit was made. I know this because I got an e-mail from him this evening and checked the headers.
Of course it’s possible that Greenwald himself made that visit to Verum Serum, then packed his bags and headed off to the airport; caught a red-eye to arrive in New York this morning; situated himself at home then “conveniently” responded to an e-mail he imagined I would be sending. Or he could have disconnected from the cushy wireless network and made an incredibly expensive international call to dial-in to a slow dial-up connection and to respond to my e-mail, knowing that I would look at the headers and deduce that the message came from a US ISP…
Seems kind of far fetched, no?
On the other hand, someone at Glenn’s house, with a strong affection for him and his blogging persona, and oblivious to the timelines presented in the previous paragraph, may have been doing what they do every day – tracking mentions of their favorite blogger and checking out what’s being said about him.
An excellent case has been made that all comments in praise of Greenwald have come from the same source IP address. The case that has not been made is that they came from Glenn himself.
If it turns out (as appears likely) that he was not in Brazil when every single “sock puppet” comment was made then the increasingly convoluted theories being advanced to explain the story fall apart, because (at this point) the claims still seem to be that ALL the comments were made by Glenn.
Think back to the Rathergate story. Remember the straining on the left to prove that there was some device from the 1970’s that could have produced those memos? Machine by machine each new theory was shown to be improbably then impossible. In the end the simplest solution – that the documents were created in Microsoft Word – was shown to be not only the cleanest explanation, but also the only possible explanation.
That’s where this is headed…
Update: In the event that I’m wrong about Greenwald’s location this week, it in no way invalidates my contention that the only thing proven in this whole affair is that the comments in question come from a single IP address. The author of the comments has not been established, and I suspect they never will be. I’ll use a little example to illustrate.
Last night I was sitting in the living room with my my wife, who was on the other side of the room. We were both working on our own individual laptops. Since we have a $49 Linksys wireless router installed, to the outside world we are coming from the same IP address. I’ve got no idea what she was actually doing online, but if she was reading and commenting on blogs, A) I wouldn’t know, B) Someone might be able to piece together my association with her comments if I too had commented at a site she commented at, and C) The chances of her knowing about (B) are exactly 0%. You could say she made a comment or I made a comment, but you would never be able to prove which of the two of us left a comment.
Update 2: I was wrong about his location – seriously wrong. Prompted by a different kevin‘s comment below, I went back and re-examined the headers from the e-mail and found something I’d overlooked; an originating address that matches Glenn’s residence in Brazil. The Verizon address was an intermediary SMTP server. E-mail header reading is always a bit tricky, but it generally will give up the originating machine; the trick is to parse through all the extra junk and figure out the source.
We return you back to all the particular points we’ve made about the case to date.
Tell me, Mantis, is there a goddamned thing you actually KNOW, or is it all “it could be this way, ergo it must be this way”?
Considering I never said it “must be” any way, and I don’t assume all of things you accuse me of, your posts here are all flailings at strawmen. I don’t know who made those pseudonymous comments any more than you do. I am inclined to believe Greenwald based on what I’ve seen. You assume a great deal more than I do, including that two computers cannot be in use at Greenwald’s home (“Protective Boyfriends were just stealing the computer between his postings”). He never claimed anyone stole his computer, you assumed that because either it didn’t cross your mind that two computers could have the same IP, or you’re full of shit. Can you guess which one I think is true?
The point is that neither of us know. I’m inclined to believe Greenwald when he says someone else in his household made the comments, probably the boyfriend. You’re inclined to believe he made the comments himself. Where I take issue with you is all the bullshit you sling to support your conclusion despite the lack of evidence.
I know of quite a few couples who blog or comment on blogs and would readily come to their partner’s defense, either under their own name or anonymously if that was how they normally post. It’s seems to me that the explanation that Greenwald’s boyfriend is not a blogger, but reads his blog and sometimes comments either there or on other blogs, anonymously, is entirely reasonable. It may not be true, but it’s reasonable. Why he would post under different names on different blogs, I don’t know. In any case, unless you get some evidence that conclusively backs up your assertions, I’m going to assume you (and Pat, and Dan, and Bob) are on a silly obsessive witch hunt in order to, as Pat says, “bring this douchebag down”. Good luck.
By the way, why is the boyfriend magic, exactly? Because he may be commenting anonymously/pseudonymously? I do that, am I magic?
it is what is most likely. certainly the most likely scenario is that it is Greenwald himself. and Greenwald (or the boyfriend or any of the pseudonyms) has not attempted any clarification. this could easily be resolved if GG was willing to answer various questions such as does he have a router, two computers in house, did he or the boyfriend make the posts, were they both in the house all day or not.
Why should he be compelled to do so? Is it not possible that he does not want to involve the boyfriend, who if he was making the comments was trying to remain anonymous, any more than he already is? Is it not possible that the boyfriend made the comments without Greenwald knowing about it, and Greenwald is kind of pissed at him for creating this whole mess due to his amatuerish blog commenting, and he doesn’t want to air his dirty laundry across the blogosphere? There are a great deal of possibilities here, but many on the right (excepting Kevin, of course), are anxious to condemn him for something they can’t prove he did.
Why he would post under different names on different blogs, I don’t know.
and pretend to be emailing Glenn to get his answers to questions in a false attempt to distance himself from him. so did GG email the boyfriend sitting in the same house?
and pretend to be emailing Glenn to get his answers to questions in a false attempt to distance himself from him. so did GG email the boyfriend sitting in the same house?
Or he lied about the email because otherwise he would have info that would closely link him to Greenwald, which he did not want. Maybe. If so, though, it’s like I said, very amateurish.
and this is not a court of law and beyond a reasonable doubt is not the standard here. the question is credibility. as many of us get a good bit of our information and opinion/analysis from blogs, i believe it is important to point out where the author seems to be a fraud. i have seen enough to shift the burden to Greenwald.
and this is not a court of law and beyond a reasonable doubt is not the standard here. the question is credibility. as many of us get a good bit of our information and opinion/analysis from blogs, i believe it is important to point out where the author seems to be a fraud. i have seen enough to shift the burden to Greenwald.
And I’m willing to bet that you have never seen Greenwald as credible, and your motivation is not to see that credibility is maintained in the blogosphere, but rather to go after Greenwald because you don’t like him, most likely because of your politics. Just a guess, though.
I would also note that if you are in fact concerned about getting quality analysis/opinion and information, it would behoove you to try to make substantive objections to Greenwald’s writing, not to claim he has no credibility because he used pseudonyms while commenting on other blogs. How does that in any way affect the substance of his writing? Are you really saying that if Greenwald provides analysis of a ongoing constitutional law case his analysis is not credible because he posted information (accurate information, I might add) about his CV under a different name? How does that compute?
By the way, I post comments under a name other than my given one. Does that make my comments incredible, M?
as one of my posters pointed out, Greenwald’s defenders used to offer up his resume as proof that he was right about substantive issues. I.e., they offered his personal credibility as evidence his substantive points were true.
Now that his credibility is in dispute, they whine, “Deal with his *substance.*”
What substance? Bush sucks? The extremists are plotting to round liberals up and shoot them?
BTW, I never said it was *impossible* the Magic Boyfriend wrote these messages. (I have dubbed him this in honor of the Magic Bullet.) I said it was very unlikely, and that there is absolutely no evidence for it. If he’s been making posts, why doesn’t Glenn point out some of his work so we can compare with the sock-puppet posts?
But the fact that something is just barely possible hardly makes it the “most likely scenario.”
And given the chain of assumptions one must make to even make this possible, I’d say Occam’s Razor favors the Greenwald explanation, not the Obsessively Protective Native-Speaking-Englsh Brazillian-But-Obsessed-With-American-Politics Magic Boyfriend theory.
By the way, I post comments under a name other than my given one. Does that make my comments incredible, M?
Mantis, certainly not. and anonymity is not the issue here. i have no idea what Ace of Spades’ real name is, but i read him regularly. and obviously, i simply post under an initial (i need to come up with a less lame pseudonym myself). although i do believe those who choose to identify themselves carry more credibility.
you have continued to post here as Mantis, Ace as Ace, Kevin as Kevin, me as M, etc. it would be different however, if you created 4 different identities here simply to counter another commenter. that would be disengenuous, and yes drastically reduce your credibility. i can at least deal with one consistent “Mantis.”
as to your earlier question, i actually don’t think i have ever read a Glenn Greenwald post, only recently having seen his name start to pop up at various places. i don’t know if he was credible in the first place. i’m not inclined to bother to find out now for someone self-important and simultaneously insecure enough to need the adulation and support of ficticious fans. (and glancing at his blog, his posts look very long, and i have a short attention span. not Instapundit short, but short.) regardless, i imagine that i would not like his politics. i don’t like those of Kos either, but wouldn’t see him stooping to this kind of thing. if someone like the Powerline guys or Ace started to do this, i like to think that i would feel the same way. although perhaps different sides have to help keep the other in line, which is not necessarily a bad thing. scrolling the comments to GG’s brief and buried post on the subject, clearly many of GG’s fans (to the extent they actually exist independent of GG) don’t seem bothered in the least.
as one of my posters pointed out, Greenwald’s defenders used to offer up his resume as proof that he was right about substantive issues. I.e., they offered his personal credibility as evidence his substantive points were true.
Now that his credibility is in dispute, they whine, “Deal with his *substance.*”
Ah, “they”. No point in arguing the point made when you can lay the old “guilt by association” noose on someone, eh Ace? Please point to any place where I claimed Greenwald was right about substantive issues because of his resume. You won’t find one, because I don’t do appeals to authority. Enough of that strawman.
What substance? Bush sucks? The extremists are plotting to round liberals up and shoot them?
Great sum-up of Greenwald’s writing. Let’s see if I can do the same for your blog. What substance? Greenwald’s teh Ghey? I like tits? Helen Thomas is ugly? (Sorry, I had to scroll down quite a bit to get past your total obsession with Glenn Greenwald)
I said it was very unlikely, and that there is absolutely no evidence for it.
You have not said why it is unlikely, however. And you have provided absolutely no evidence that Greenwald made the comments either.
If he’s been making posts, why doesn’t Glenn point out some of his work so we can compare with the sock-puppet posts?
Well, I speculated about that above, but why don’t you ask Glenn?
But the fact that something is just barely possible hardly makes it the “most likely scenario.”
Both scenarios are equally as likely at best. I would say Greenwald’s explanation is more likely because he has no qualms about defending himself under his own name. Given that you admittedly know nothing about the boyfriend other than his nationality, your assessment of “barely possible” seems pretty damn empty.
And given the chain of assumptions one must make to even make this possible, I’d say Occam’s Razor favors the Greenwald explanation, not the Obsessively Protective Native-Speaking-Englsh Brazillian-But-Obsessed-With-American-Politics Magic Boyfriend theory.
What chain of assumptions? That Greenwald’s partner knows how to speak and write in English? Wow, that’s a whopper. Btw, I’ve read the comments in question, and they are merely about Glenn’s book and Glenn’s blog; they reveal no obsession with American politics. If there is an obsession there, it is with Glenn Greenwald. Hard to imagine that coming from his boyfriend. Inconceivable!
So, how ’bout those Cubs?
Can’t we just agree that Greenwald is a complete tool? His supposed credibility was blown by the fact that he has long touted himself as some sort of center-right intellectual, but he can no longer stand idly by while Bushitler ruins the country (Can you say Andrew Sullivan?)
M,
Ok, I can see your argument on credibility. I will note that from what I’ve seen the commenter used different names on different blogs, but used the same name within each blog, but I don’t know if that lessens the offense any (at least within the blog there’s consistency). I may be wrong on this, there are a lot of posts (an obscene amount, in fact) on this topic.
There are a few interesting things in your post though:
i don’t like those of Kos either, but wouldn’t see him stooping to this kind of thing.
You can’t see Kos doing this, but you can see Greenwald doing it, even though you admittedly do not read his blog?
scrolling the comments to GG’s brief and buried post on the subject,
It’s the fourth post down on the first page, how is that buried? Further, it’s over 2000 words long? How is that brief?
In any case if it turns out that he didn’t leave the comments, that his partner or someone else did, either with his knowledge or without, does his credibility still suffer? Or is he, as Ace puts it, “complicit in the deception”?
So, how ’bout those Cubs?
Can’t we just agree that Greenwald is a complete tool?
Agreed.
My Give-A-Shit meter is pegging so low, it’s digging a hole towards China right now.
Mantis,
sorry, i’ve been on the road.
You can’t see Kos doing this, but you can see Greenwald doing it, even though you admittedly do not read his blog?
you’re right. that point doesn’t make a lot of sense. i don’t really read Kos either. i was just trying to pick someone whose politics i was pretty sure i don’t agree with. i suppose anyone could do it. i can see Greenwald doing it only because the evidence that i have seen seems clear enough. i suppose i would be inclined to give someone whom i have read for a long period of time more of the benefit of the doubt. i still think i would lose a lot of respect for that person.
It’s the fourth post down on the first page, how is that buried? Further, it’s over 2000 words long? How is that brief?
regarding what i referred to as his brief and buried post on the subject, the subject that i was referring was the sock puppetry allegation. it was a 2000 word post defending himself from all sortsof attacks that i didn’t know anyone was making. the sock-puppet defense was only 2 paragraphs at the very end of that long post that really didn’t directly address the issue.
In any case if it turns out that he didn’t leave the comments, that his partner or someone else did, either with his knowledge or without, does his credibility still suffer? Or is he, as Ace puts it, “complicit in the deception”?
if Ace is living somewhere in his mother’s basement (as is likely) and it comes to light that he has her going around under different identities touting how he is one of the top bloggers in the world and that anyone who disagrees that his posts on time-travelling sandwhiches are the best deli related posts ever are just jealous, i would probably visit his moron-blog much less. it doesn’t take much credibility to post on dungeons and dragons, but it takes integrity to post about Mr. Paul Anka. in fairness, it would probably take someone who didn’t like Ace to bother looking into something like that.
clearly by the time he posted his defense, he knew that either he or his partner (much less likely in my opinion) had been making ingratiating comments about GG all over the place. if the latter were the case, he could probably prove it quite easily and just admit that this ifs really embarrassing. that it was the partner rather than Greenwald seems unlikely at best. that it was the disengenuous partner AND Greenwald knew nothing whatsoever about it seems much less likely.