So The Underpants Sniffer BriteBart was, in fact, lashing out against Weiner, against his word to NOT post the photos online, implying IF Weiner wanted to fight he would when he turned around and POSTED them online as the sniveling little closeted Underpants Sniffer he is?Maybe if Weiner had not called Breitbart's honesty into question and if he had not accused Breitbart of a crime he didn't commit, Breitbart would not have had to show all the evidence to clear his name? Again, I couldn't be Breitbart. But he is definitely not the guilty party in this incident.
You know, I don't recall Congressman Weiner ever being on Capital Hill without a whole entourage of colleages and staffers around him.
This photo is rather poignant:
![]()
Weiner accused Breitbart of a federal crime on national television. He did so to cover his own ass knowing full well Breitbart was totally innocent. And Breitbart DID NOT post the picture he said he would not post. He has been completely exhonerated by the radio staff who did post it who are explicit that he neither expected nor gave permission for the staff to have that photo. And for whatever it is worth, there were those still accusing Breitbart of making claims he couldn't back up. Well he backed up his claims.
If there weren't people so determined to destroy Breitbart because he dared expose one of their beloved heroes--and if the 'hero' had not been so willing to accuse somebody of a crime to save his own ass--things would not have gone so badly for Congressman Weiner.
But you back somebody like Breitbart into a corner with untrue accusations of criminal activity, one cannot blame Breitbart for setting that matter straight.