UPDATE: Tucker Carlson ADMITS he sent the fake Keith Olbermann emails

[Tx4obama]

Tucker Carlson ADMITS he did it !!!

Carlson sent fake ‘Olbermann’ emails to Philly columnist

SNIP

Carlson, reached by phone Tuesday night, confirmed he impersonated Olbermann in the email responses to Bykofsky.
"Could you resist?" Carlson said. "It was just too funny. The flesh is weak."
Carlson said he didn't expect the email exchange to be published.

Full article here: http://tinyurl.com/23c6589

[sakabatou]

1. Time for a suit

[me b zola]

49. Yes n/t

[lsewpershad]

55. Yes

Keith should sue the bastard

[Blue Owl]

60. Need a bow tie with that suit?

n/t

[Bluebear]

2. Keith, call one of the "trial lawyers" that Carlson & his ilk hate.

SUE.

[de novo]

53. Absolutely.

[laughingliberal]

3. Kick nt

[Skittles]

4. weak

what he did is sheer cowardice and it would not matter WHO he was impersonating - this an extremely serious ethics breech

[SpiralHawk]

21. Republicon propaganda pimps don't do ethics

Rather than ethics they substitute -- as you would expect -- Republicon Family Pharisee Values. And as Americans well know, you just can't go any lower than that...

[Supersedeas]

31. when pushed....they call it comedy...or satire...or some other lame alibi...when really

it's just the same dirty political RW shit.

Watergate...that was just some funny stuff.

Plamegate...that was just teasing.

Florida, Catherine Harris, and the Supreme Court...the joke is on us.

[butterfly77]

42. That is not the only place ...

trolls are impersonating they are all over Du and other progressive/liberal sites planning for the next election...

[proud patriot]

89. totally weak

[EmeraldCityGrl]

5. Not only is this a civil lawsuit it sounds criminal.

[crazyjoe]

40. Oh Please... "CALL IN THE NATIONAL GUARD!!"

[Wednesdays]

47. Really...there's nothing to see here

Move along.

[me b zola]

51. Excuse me?

Some conservative bastard poses as a national Liberal figure and speaks to defame that national figure...and you want to marginalize it?

[tblue37]

70. It is a serious offense. He could have cost KO his job and totally ruined his

reputation. That sort of thing leaves him open to a major lawsuit and quite possibly criminal charges!

[datasuspect]

81. actually people get prosecuted for cyberstalking for less than this.

[crazyjoe]

82. really, give me an example of someone being prosecuted

for something less than this.

[datasuspect]

83. do your own goddamned research

i don't even know you and you're asking me for shit.

[Name removed]

85. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

86. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[boppers]

95. Lori Drew.

She wasn't even impersonating a real person.

[crazyjoe]

99. BWAHAHAHA!!!!

That's what I thought.......nothin

[boppers]

104. You asked for an example of prosecution for something lesser, and got one.

:shrug:

[awoke_in_2003]

93. libel...

and defamation of character are criminal matters.

[crazyjoe]

100. so is robbery and insurance fraud, what's your point?

[Exilednight]

101. Tucker, is that you? You're the only person who would come on here and defend this shit. n/t

[crazyjoe]

102. show me where i defended tucker carlson....you can't because i didn't

My point is, what he did was juvenile, stupid, and typical of a republican knucklehead. What it isn't is the crime of the century.
People think he should be sued. In order to sue you need damages, Keith was not harmed by this retarded act. People think he should go to jail...really? What's the charge, pranking a liberal commentator. Just trying to add a little reality into the thread. For this I get called names and accused of being a troll.
What we should be doing is plotting our revenge......

[Exilednight]

103. Damages do not have to be shown for identity theft. All you need is proof of malice intent. n/t

[awoke_in_2003]

105. my point is...

someone pointed out the fact that this could go to criminal court, you made the wise ass comment "call in the national guard", implying you didn't believe criminal court could hear it. I pointed out that they could. My other point- won't say it, it would be a personal attack.

[Posteritatis]

6. The petard fields are ripe! Harvest time! (nt)

[Hannah Bell]

7. wtf? fire that no-talent, no-brain preppie twit.

[polmaven]

24. Only problem with that is...

He works for Faux Noise now. The encourage this type of behavior rather than fire people for it.

[Terra Alta]

32. Exactly. Faux isn't going to fire him.

In fact, he will probably get a nice raise.

[Hannah Bell]

68. yes, that *is* a problem. brownshirts running the media is a big problem.

[polmaven]

88. Personally,

he was fired from my living room a very long time ago.

[tavalon]

8. Ouch. bowtie boy, that's gonna be expensive

You think you're flesh was weak before, wait until the lawyers take their pound or two.

[Ramulux]

9. This dude has a sick obsession with Keith

[Hissyspit]

10. Fucker Carlson once again proves he's a sleazeball.

[Cass]

11. Creepy. It was pretty bizarre for him to buy that domain name to begin with

but this takes it to another level of weirdness. Sounds like Tucker has some issues, to put it mildly.

[The Backlash Cometh]

35. Do you have any idea how anyone traced the purchased to Insanity?

Did he purchase the name at a time when he thought that nobody could those kind of who is'?

[TexasObserver]

12. He shouldn't have admitted.

I don't know the criminal laws (state or federal) on such conduct, but it's very possible he violated a law against posing by email as a third person. At a minimum, he's opened himself up to civil liability. I hope Olbermann sues him.

[whistler162]

20. Doubtful since he has been upfront and honest(relative word)

from the start that he is [e-mail] not Keith Olbermann. Bykofsky screwed up by believing the internets don't lie, a quick google would have brought up the Daily Caller articles.

[TexasObserver]

58. I have no doubt he can be successfully sued for misrepresenting his identity.

The only question is whether he can be criminally charged, something I won't know unless I research the additions to the law on the subject the past two years, which I don't intend to do.

Duping another person is not a defense, any more than using any other kind of fraud. Under your approach, a person who has a criminal record of fraud could defend himself by saying "my record as a fraud can be found on the internet, if you go look for it." That's not a defense to fraudulently misrepresenting oneself.

[deacon]

13. k + r

[tanyev]

14. Exhibit A, your honor.

[lame54]

15. almost as funny as that teabaggers "satire" Obama letter

[whistler162]

16. 2 highly intillegint people exchanging barbs!

Bykofsky it is called source checking

Bow tie man just stupid

[blondeatlast]

17. "Carlson said he didn't expect the email exchange to be published."

Sue the bastard, Keith--and in your settlement offer, demand that he start wearing the bowtie again (and for heven's sake, don't stop there)!

What a twit.

[ellie]

18. Jesus, grow up Tucker

[cbdo2007]

19. He'll just say it was "satire" and get off the hook.

[beac]

22. You know that pathetic has-been was PRAYING that those emails would be published.

He did everything but write "PUBLISH THIS!" at the bottom. I'm assuming he thought his little "prank", once exposed, would endear him to the Teaturds and other wingnuts. Looks like his desperate clawing for relevance might be a little bit costly-- Olbermann should ask for his settlement in bow-ties and then burn them on the air. :rofl:

[Jim__]

23. Carlson is typical of born-rich conservatives.

His frat-boy years were the peak of his life.

[Dappleganger]

25. Stupid motherfucker.

I hope that Olbermann sues his puny flat ass.

[City Lights]

26. How pathetic.

Poor Tuckie must have a miserable life to resort to something like this. I hope his wife and kids are proud of him! Such values to be teaching one's children. :eyes:

[TuxedoKat]

27. Wow, he's 41 years old

you'd think he'd have better judgment by now. Pathetic.

[JitterbugPerfume]

28. Hey Tucker

Jealousy eats at the soul. Now it is going to eat at your bank account when Olbermann sues your bow tie off.

[backscatter712]

29. I don't suppose Griffin's going to indefinitely suspend him...

No, IOKIYAR...

[SidDithers]

30. K&R..nt

Sid

[Chorophyll]

33. K&R. nt

[The Backlash Cometh]

34. Oh, just another silly good ole boy tactic. ha-ha.

It's nothing like fraud or anything that would stick.

[formercia]

36. Tucker should have spoken to his Attorney first.

Dumb shit.

:rofl:

I hope Keith cleans his clock.

[Cleita]

37. Weird sense of humor.

But conservatives laugh about really hurtful things. Remember Bush turning the WMDs into stand up comedy? Sick!

[crazyjoe]

38. lets get a grip people, this is kinda funny.

Carlson did KO a favor, he was able to actually say what Keith wanted to say. It's out there now so it really doesn't matter who said it.
Oh, and nobody is getting sued, nobody is going to jail, and nobody is going to "beat up" Carlson. Sometimes I wonder if I'm on Democratic Underground, or junior high underground.

[sufrommich]

39. "It's out there now so it really doesn't matter who said it."

That's a pretty low bar you've set for yourself.

[crazyjoe]

41. uhh...ok.....what?

[sufrommich]

43. What part of my post didn't you understand? nnt

[crazyjoe]

46. I understood none of it, maybe you could explain.

[sufrommich]

50. Are you OK with Tucker Carlson putting words in KOs

mouth because you like the message? How in the world do you KNOW this is what KO was thinking. Nothing about your post makes any sense other than trying to minimize a conservative pundit disguising himself as a liberal pundit.

[Name removed]

52. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Renew Deal]

61. It is kind of funny. It's also kind of fraudulent

I don't know why Carlson is allowed to cybersquat on Olbermanns name.

[arthritisR_US]

67. Wow, I don't find it funny in the least. Fucker Carlson's behaviour was

completely adolescent and the fact you find it funny, well I find that rather junior high school.

[crazyjoe]

44. what is the problem we have with this again???

In one email, "Olbermann" says that Griffin is "not my boss (thank god), nor is he intellectually qualified to be...I'll be anchoring on election night 2012, long after Phil Griffin has moved on to a job for which he's actually qualified, perhaps on QVC."

"I could have Phil Griffin fired tomorrow if I felt like it, trust me. And if he keeps yapping about me in public, I may. For the moment, however, keeping Phil around is like having a drunk chimp in the office -- more amusing than threatening."

[blondeatlast]

54. The problem, sir, is that there is no way in hell I would purport to know what is

in YOUR mind and no decent person would purport to be you and send an e-mail lambasting your boss under your name.

[tkmorris]

56. Hint: You don't want to be too obvious

Second hint: You are being WAY too obvious.

[tblue37]

71. He could have cost KO his job with that sort of nonsense. That is no minor thing. nt

[LanternWaste]

80. Fraud.

"what is the problem we have with this again???"

Fraud.

Although, if this is as entertaining and as humorous as you purport it to be, would you please be so kind as to post your full name and DOB? I'd like to send out some emails in your name... or is it only "funny" when it happens to other people?

[crazyjoe]

84. anyone with access to a linux machine can send an email using

any name/domain they wish. but, i don't want to confuse you, so let's just say maybe the guy from the paper should confirm who he is talking to.

[boppers]

98. Linux has nothing to do with it. At all. Linux didn't exist in 1982.

All you have to do is know your way around SMTP, have a TTY.... (and have a SPF ignorant relay/waypoint, if sending to a smarter server).

Here:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc821

[tigereye]

45. what an ass.

[Fuzz]

48. Petulant little child.

[JackRiddler]

65. No. Adult felon.

[thereismore]

57. OK. Let us now send the REAL Carlson away into retirement. nt

[JackRiddler]

76. A few months in prison would be better.

[deutsey]

59. The mind is weak.

His is, anyway. What an idiot.

[JackRiddler]

62. This is not a prank or a stupid act. It is crime.

[formercia]

63. That's the point some people don't understand

Methinks.

[JackRiddler]

64. Yes, once again dirty tricks of the Watergate/COINTELPRO type are trivialized as "pranks"

[formercia]

74. And the spinmasters try to shift the discourse to one of humor.

Frat rat mentality.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

73. Oh, they DO understand, but the thing is...

"Must minimize bad shit done by our side! MUST! Spin spin spin!"

[arthritisR_US]

66. what is the crime? civil/misdemeanor? The whole thing really

pisses me off but I can't figure out the crime. :shrug:

[JackRiddler]

75. Impersonation...

You think it's legal to disguise yourself as another person and do things that damage that person?

Certainly there's a civil case, but depending on the states involved there may be a criminal case as well.

This is dirty politics involving crude, undeniable deceptions. It's the kind of thing done by the Nixon campaign by the likes of young Karl Rove, and more recently by Breitbart et al. in the ACORN, Sherrod Brown and other affairs.

IMPERSONATION, entry from Law Encyclopedia:

http://www.answers.com/topic/impersonation

The crime of pretending to be another individual in order to deceive others and gain some advantage.

The crime of false impersonation is defined by federal statutes and by state statutes that differ from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. In some states, pretending to be someone who does not actually exist can constitute false impersonation. For example, suppose Bill attempts to evade prosecution for a crime by giving the arresting officer a fictitious name and address. In Colorado, where " person who knowingly assumes a false or fictitious identity and, under that identity, does any other act intending unlawfully to gain a benefit for himself is guilty of criminal impersonation," Bill could be charged with a crime (Colo. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 18-5-113(1) ). In this situation, the benefit Bill hopes to realize is avoiding prosecution, so that element of the offense has been satisfied. To be charged, the defendant does not need to seek a monetary benefit from the impersonation.

In New York, giving only a fictitious name does not constitute false impersonation. Under New York law, criminal impersonation is committed when an individual "mpersonates another and does an act in such assumed character with intent to obtain a benefit or to injure or defraud another" (N.Y. Penal Law § 190.25 ). In other words, it is illegal to impersonate a real person, but not a fictitious one. Thus, if Carol forges Ann's name on checks made out to Ann so that Carol can cash the checks, Carol could be guilty of false impersonation — but only if Ann is a real person. Such laws are designed to protect innocent people from the losses they may incur owing to the wrongful acts of others and to restore any loss of dignity and reputation they may have suffered as a result of impersonation.

Most state laws also provide that the impersonation of a public official is a criminal act. In Texas, impersonating "a public servant with intent to induce another to submit to his pretended official authority or to rely on his pretended official acts" is a crime (Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 37.11 ). Depending on the jurisdiction, the public servant being impersonated does not always have to actually exist. For example, suppose Carl pulls over a driver, shows her a fake police badge, and reprimands her for speeding but tells her that he will not arrest her if she pays him $50. Carl's actions constitute the crime of false impersonation, in addition to any other crimes, including extortion, that may apply to the situation. Thousands of criminal reports are filed every year by individuals victimized in various ways by persons impersonating police officers.

Under federal law, pretending to be "an officer or employee acting under the authority of the United States" in order to demand or obtain "any money, paper, document, or thing of value" can result in a fine as well as imprisonment for up to three years (18 U.S.C.A. § 912). Like state false impersonation statutes, the federal law also seeks to protect interests such as the dignity and prestige of individuals, especially those who hold federal office. Federal statutes also prohibit other types of impersonation, including pretending to be a U.S. citizen; pretending to be a U.S. officer or employee attempting to arrest or search a person or search a building; pretending to be a creditor of the United States or a foreign official; and pretending to be an agent or member of 4-H or of the Red Cross.

[arthritisR_US]

79. it looks like it falls just short of a federal crime because Keith isn't an

officer or federal employee nor was Carlson trying to extract money. But, couldn't the little bugger be arrested for some kind of mischief?

[nightgaunt]

92. The crime behind the "joke"

Well put to have the facts. Impersonation isn't a joke and its not funny. Except among crimenogenically minded people. Those who have a touch of sadism in them. The ones who readily laugh at the misfortunes of others. Hard line fascist or any other kind of authoritarianism finds a grip in such cold hearted people. (Why it works so well in place like Germany and Russia and Guatamala over the years.) Ones who revel in the narrow hyperemotionalism of the straight and narrow. Laugh of this is a significant error. I hope Mr. Olbermann does something about this theft and misrepresentation of his person.

Oh and the color of their shirts may be either starched white or blue.

[Posteritatis]

87. Wire fraud. (nt)

[SoCalDem]

69. "Could you resist?" .....Um...YES!

He's getting a little old (and insignificant) to keep playing that
youthful rascally guy"...:puke:

I hope Keith's lawyers sue him BIGTIME

It's defamation of character at the least.

[Pisces]

72. Idiot frat boy who never grew up!

[Divine Discontent]

78. he forgets, there are still courts... I hope he loses several hundred grand in a suit, and I hope he

gets smacked with some type of charge. he's such a juvenile ass.

[NoSheep]

77. hubris.

[jimlup]

90. I always expected that Tucker was an idiot

This proves it

[Blacksheep214]

91. I wonder what Jon Stewart will have to say!

No love lost there!

[Jakes Progress]

94. Tells you a lot about his character that he doesn't think it was wrong.

[Liquorice]

96. I'm not surprised that he wrote them, but I thought he'd blame it on someone else. What a weasel. nt

[Atman]

97. Nothing will happen except that he'll get a promotion and maybe a ne prime time show.

This is the GOP remember. They live for their lies.