Bizarre, a top pentagon official harasses a nanny on his Capitol Hill block.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He twice STOLE something from the same person. He could have left 50 notes and I would be more likely to let him get off easy, but the combination of harassment and active stealing something twice makes him seem unhinged.

Yet you're not neither prosecutor nor judge. Setting aside the fact that there no such thing as passive theft, what do you think an appropriate punishment would be at this point based on what is publically known, bearing in mind he has been placed on administrative leave while the Zpentsgin conducts its own inquiry? Shall we go the Sharia route and cut off his hand? Or simply lash him with a stick Singaporean style? Perhaps you want to go all High Sparrow in him and impose a walk of atonement down Pennsylvania Avenue?

It seems like you've posted a few times not-quite-defending this guy, but attacking a lot of straw men (e.g., "how dare you suggest he lose his pension"). It almost seems like you're a not so good PR person trying to deflect attention. A PR person like... the subject official?
My advice: get off DCUM and fix your life. Get a hobby. Or just watch more TV. Netflix is less than $10/month and can keep you out of trouble.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:His punishment was a slap on the wrist. This is theft. Asshole.

It's more than theft. It was harassment too. The family and nanny no longer feel as safe in their homes. I wouldn't either. This douche should have been arrested.

+1

I wonder about those who are trying to minimize his calculating and bizarre behaviors.

I'm guessing one or two people that know this guy showed up. DCUM was pretty united in thinking he is a jerk and all of a sudden defenders showed up.

Yep. Maybe even the guy himself or his wife.

He's not fit to be a public servant.

Salem Witch Trials. He didn't betray the public trust or engage in official misconduct. He didn't slash any tires or torch the van. Heck, he didn't even ill off a Chicago sunroof. He was exposed as being a world class dick in his personal and professional lives, pilloried by anonymous posters on social media, his career is in shambles, and a judge has determined that his record will be expunged if he pays the fine and performs community service. Moreover, the WP felt compelled to publish unnecessary details such as the assessed value of his residence and what he hsppened to be watching on TV, which are hardly a matter of newsworthy investigative journalism. How many times and in what other ways does he need to be punished so you can feel better about yourself? Get a life and move on.

What does it say about your life that you are defending this loser on an anonymous board? The fact that he was stalking and menacing a babysitter is what makes it newsworthy. Pick on someone your own size.

Please point to anything in my post which indicates that I am defending this man. I do find it ironic that anyone is demanding that he be fired or stripped of his retirement pay two decades after having left the Army. IMO it's the same type of unhinged and obsessive judgementalism that landed Whitman is the spotlight. And isn't it a pretty low bar if we're now prepared to take away retirement pay earned in the service of our country anytime a veteran is found guilty of a misdemeanor? Or does this standard only apply to some select group of veterans based on the value of their home and GS level?

I didn't advocate for him to lose his retirement pay. There are many of us in this thread. You're calling this a witch hunt because he's been shamed on social media and his career is in shambles. It seems like a fitting reward for someone who was trying to interfere with the nanny's ability to do her job.

For the sake of playing Devil's Advocate, I'm not sure there's any basis to conclude that he was trying to interfere with the ability of the nanny to do her job. On street parking for household employees is a convenience that did not exist prior to the much-abused VPP system being implemented after the Nationals moved to their new stadium. Capitol South Metro is two blocks away. How do I know? Our nanny takes Metro every day. To be clear, I'm not defending or excusing Whitman's actions but find the visceral responses equally unnerving.

Okay. Having strangers discuss his shitty behavior is just as unnerving as his shitty behavior. He must be a very good friend of yours.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He twice STOLE something from the same person. He could have left 50 notes and I would be more likely to let him get off easy, but the combination of harassment and active stealing something twice makes him seem unhinged.

Yet you're not neither prosecutor nor judge. Setting aside the fact that there no such thing as passive theft, what do you think an appropriate punishment would be at this point based on what is publically known, bearing in mind he has been placed on administrative leave while the Zpentsgin conducts its own inquiry? Shall we go the Sharia route and cut off his hand? Or simply lash him with a stick Singaporean style? Perhaps you want to go all High Sparrow in him and impose a walk of atonement down Pennsylvania Avenue?

It seems like you've posted a few times not-quite-defending this guy, but attacking a lot of straw men (e.g., "how dare you suggest he lose his pension"). It almost seems like you're a not so good PR person trying to deflect attention. A PR person like... the subject official?
My advice: get off DCUM and fix your life. Get a hobby. Or just watch more TV. Netflix is less than $10/month and can keep you out of trouble.

You might make a more accurate guess after consulting a Magic-8 ball.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He twice STOLE something from the same person. He could have left 50 notes and I would be more likely to let him get off easy, but the combination of harassment and active stealing something twice makes him seem unhinged.

Yet you're not neither prosecutor nor judge. Setting aside the fact that there no such thing as passive theft, what do you think an appropriate punishment would be at this point based on what is publically known, bearing in mind he has been placed on administrative leave while the Zpentsgin conducts its own inquiry? Shall we go the Sharia route and cut off his hand? Or simply lash him with a stick Singaporean style? Perhaps you want to go all High Sparrow in him and impose a walk of atonement down Pennsylvania Avenue?

It seems like you've posted a few times not-quite-defending this guy, but attacking a lot of straw men (e.g., "how dare you suggest he lose his pension"). It almost seems like you're a not so good PR person trying to deflect attention. A PR person like... the subject official?
My advice: get off DCUM and fix your life. Get a hobby. Or just watch more TV. Netflix is less than $10/month and can keep you out of trouble.

You might make a more accurate guess after consulting a Magic-8 ball.

Might. Or I might be spot on. Interesting that you left that possibility open.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:His punishment was a slap on the wrist. This is theft. Asshole.

It's more than theft. It was harassment too. The family and nanny no longer feel as safe in their homes. I wouldn't either. This douche should have been arrested.

+1

I wonder about those who are trying to minimize his calculating and bizarre behaviors.

I'm guessing one or two people that know this guy showed up. DCUM was pretty united in thinking he is a jerk and all of a sudden defenders showed up.

Yep. Maybe even the guy himself or his wife.

He's not fit to be a public servant.

Salem Witch Trials. He didn't betray the public trust or engage in official misconduct. He didn't slash any tires or torch the van. Heck, he didn't even ill off a Chicago sunroof. He was exposed as being a world class dick in his personal and professional lives, pilloried by anonymous posters on social media, his career is in shambles, and a judge has determined that his record will be expunged if he pays the fine and performs community service. Moreover, the WP felt compelled to publish unnecessary details such as the assessed value of his residence and what he hsppened to be watching on TV, which are hardly a matter of newsworthy investigative journalism. How many times and in what other ways does he need to be punished so you can feel better about yourself? Get a life and move on.

What does it say about your life that you are defending this loser on an anonymous board? The fact that he was stalking and menacing a babysitter is what makes it newsworthy. Pick on someone your own size.

Please point to anything in my post which indicates that I am defending this man. I do find it ironic that anyone is demanding that he be fired or stripped of his retirement pay two decades after having left the Army. IMO it's the same type of unhinged and obsessive judgementalism that landed Whitman is the spotlight. And isn't it a pretty low bar if we're now prepared to take away retirement pay earned in the service of our country anytime a veteran is found guilty of a misdemeanor? Or does this standard only apply to some select group of veterans based on the value of their home and GS level?

I didn't advocate for him to lose his retirement pay. There are many of us in this thread. You're calling this a witch hunt because he's been shamed on social media and his career is in shambles. It seems like a fitting reward for someone who was trying to interfere with the nanny's ability to do her job.

For the sake of playing Devil's Advocate, I'm not sure there's any basis to conclude that he was trying to interfere with the ability of the nanny to do her job. On street parking for household employees is a convenience that did not exist prior to the much-abused VPP system being implemented after the Nationals moved to their new stadium. Capitol South Metro is two blocks away. How do I know? Our nanny takes Metro every day. To be clear, I'm not defending or excusing Whitman's actions but find the visceral responses equally unnerving.

Okay. Having strangers discuss his shitty behavior is just as unnerving as his shitty behavior.

So why are you following the thread and posting?

[Anonymous]

Scum, welcome Mr./Mrs. Whitman to the thread.

FYI, your lawyer and PR person would probably say it's a bad idea for you to be posting here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He twice STOLE something from the same person. He could have left 50 notes and I would be more likely to let him get off easy, but the combination of harassment and active stealing something twice makes him seem unhinged.

Yet you're not neither prosecutor nor judge. Setting aside the fact that there no such thing as passive theft, what do you think an appropriate punishment would be at this point based on what is publically known, bearing in mind he has been placed on administrative leave while the Zpentsgin conducts its own inquiry? Shall we go the Sharia route and cut off his hand? Or simply lash him with a stick Singaporean style? Perhaps you want to go all High Sparrow in him and impose a walk of atonement down Pennsylvania Avenue?

It seems like you've posted a few times not-quite-defending this guy, but attacking a lot of straw men (e.g., "how dare you suggest he lose his pension"). It almost seems like you're a not so good PR person trying to deflect attention. A PR person like... the subject official?
My advice: get off DCUM and fix your life. Get a hobby. Or just watch more TV. Netflix is less than $10/month and can keep you out of trouble.

You might make a more accurate guess after consulting a Magic-8 ball.

Might. Or I might be spot on. Interesting that you left that possibility open.

I also left open the possibility that I was DB Cooper or the Zodiac Killer and that I cleaned out Al Capone's vault before Geraldo opened the door. I think you may be on to something here, Inspector Clouseau.

[Anonymous]

For the sake of playing Devil's Advocate, I'm not sure there's any basis to conclude that he was trying to interfere with the ability of the nanny to do her job. On street parking for household employees is a convenience that did not exist prior to the much-abused VPP system being implemented after the Nationals moved to their new stadium. Capitol South Metro is two blocks away. How do I know? Our nanny takes Metro every day. To be clear, I'm not defending or excusing Whitman's actions but find the visceral responses equally unnerving.

So the question becomes how did the nanny's use of the VPP system become an inconvenience for him? Metro isn't an option for everyone, and the employers were working within legal parameters to provide care for their child.

I get that parking is an annoyance for a lot of people in this city, but why does that excuse illegal behavior?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Scum, welcome Mr./Mrs. Whitman to the thread.

FYI, your lawyer and PR person would probably say it's a bad idea for you to be posting here.

What else am I gonna do until the heat is off. Going to the mattresses can be hard on a guy like me. Heck I can't even walk around my block without people staring and pointing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He twice STOLE something from the same person. He could have left 50 notes and I would be more likely to let him get off easy, but the combination of harassment and active stealing something twice makes him seem unhinged.

Yet you're not neither prosecutor nor judge. Setting aside the fact that there no such thing as passive theft, what do you think an appropriate punishment would be at this point based on what is publically known, bearing in mind he has been placed on administrative leave while the Zpentsgin conducts its own inquiry? Shall we go the Sharia route and cut off his hand? Or simply lash him with a stick Singaporean style? Perhaps you want to go all High Sparrow in him and impose a walk of atonement down Pennsylvania Avenue?

It seems like you've posted a few times not-quite-defending this guy, but attacking a lot of straw men (e.g., "how dare you suggest he lose his pension"). It almost seems like you're a not so good PR person trying to deflect attention. A PR person like... the subject official?
My advice: get off DCUM and fix your life. Get a hobby. Or just watch more TV. Netflix is less than $10/month and can keep you out of trouble.

You might make a more accurate guess after consulting a Magic-8 ball.

Might. Or I might be spot on. Interesting that you left that possibility open.

I also left open the possibility that I was DB Cooper or the Zodiac Killer and that I cleaned out Al Capone's vault before Geraldo opened the door. I think you may be on to something here, Inspector Clouseau.

Or just a run of the mill loser. I'm really open to any of the possibilities.

[Magic_8_Ball]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He twice STOLE something from the same person. He could have left 50 notes and I would be more likely to let him get off easy, but the combination of harassment and active stealing something twice makes him seem unhinged.

Yet you're not neither prosecutor nor judge. Setting aside the fact that there no such thing as passive theft, what do you think an appropriate punishment would be at this point based on what is publically known, bearing in mind he has been placed on administrative leave while the Zpentsgin conducts its own inquiry? Shall we go the Sharia route and cut off his hand? Or simply lash him with a stick Singaporean style? Perhaps you want to go all High Sparrow in him and impose a walk of atonement down Pennsylvania Avenue?

It seems like you've posted a few times not-quite-defending this guy, but attacking a lot of straw men (e.g., "how dare you suggest he lose his pension"). It almost seems like you're a not so good PR person trying to deflect attention. A PR person like... the subject official?
My advice: get off DCUM and fix your life. Get a hobby. Or just watch more TV. Netflix is less than $10/month and can keep you out of trouble.

You might make a more accurate guess after consulting a Magic-8 ball.

Reply hazy try again

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

For the sake of playing Devil's Advocate, I'm not sure there's any basis to conclude that he was trying to interfere with the ability of the nanny to do her job. On street parking for household employees is a convenience that did not exist prior to the much-abused VPP system being implemented after the Nationals moved to their new stadium. Capitol South Metro is two blocks away. How do I know? Our nanny takes Metro every day. To be clear, I'm not defending or excusing Whitman's actions but find the visceral responses equally unnerving.

So the question becomes how did the nanny's use of the VPP system become an inconvenience for him? Metro isn't an option for everyone, and the employers were working within legal parameters to provide care for their child.

I get that parking is an annoyance for a lot of people in this city, but why does that excuse illegal behavior?

Straw man. Is there anyone who is defending the unlawful act of stealing someone's tags or said that breaking the law shouldn't have consequences? The only thing I've heard is something in the WP to the effect of Whitman is claiming he didn't know the car belonged to a neighbor's nanny and thought it was someone who worked on the Hill -- as if this somehow justified his actions. It also doesn't make a great deal of sense given the interplay between the Pentagon and Hill and the fact there apparently was some sort of Spanish prayer document on the dashboard: I am left to wonder how many times he had reported this to 311 before taking the matter into his own hands and the risk/reward calculation which led him to do so and then store the evidence in his own trunk. Seems to me he was more or less asking to be caught if you do something three times and have to mess around with someone else's ride for 47 minutes. What what he hoping to accomplish? It's fascinating from a psychological standpoint.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He twice STOLE something from the same person. He could have left 50 notes and I would be more likely to let him get off easy, but the combination of harassment and active stealing something twice makes him seem unhinged.

Yet you're not neither prosecutor nor judge. Setting aside the fact that there no such thing as passive theft, what do you think an appropriate punishment would be at this point based on what is publically known, bearing in mind he has been placed on administrative leave while the Zpentsgin conducts its own inquiry? Shall we go the Sharia route and cut off his hand? Or simply lash him with a stick Singaporean style? Perhaps you want to go all High Sparrow in him and impose a walk of atonement down Pennsylvania Avenue?

It seems like you've posted a few times not-quite-defending this guy, but attacking a lot of straw men (e.g., "how dare you suggest he lose his pension"). It almost seems like you're a not so good PR person trying to deflect attention. A PR person like... the subject official?
My advice: get off DCUM and fix your life. Get a hobby. Or just watch more TV. Netflix is less than $10/month and can keep you out of trouble.

You might make a more accurate guess after consulting a Magic-8 ball.

Might. Or I might be spot on. Interesting that you left that possibility open.

I also left open the possibility that I was DB Cooper or the Zodiac Killer and that I cleaned out Al Capone's vault before Geraldo opened the door. I think you may be on to something here, Inspector Clouseau.

Or just a run of the mill loser. I'm really open to any of the possibilities.

I surpassed run-of-the-mill quite some time ago, thank you.

[Anonymous]

Magic_8_Ball wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He twice STOLE something from the same person. He could have left 50 notes and I would be more likely to let him get off easy, but the combination of harassment and active stealing something twice makes him seem unhinged.

Yet you're not neither prosecutor nor judge. Setting aside the fact that there no such thing as passive theft, what do you think an appropriate punishment would be at this point based on what is publically known, bearing in mind he has been placed on administrative leave while the Zpentsgin conducts its own inquiry? Shall we go the Sharia route and cut off his hand? Or simply lash him with a stick Singaporean style? Perhaps you want to go all High Sparrow in him and impose a walk of atonement down Pennsylvania Avenue?

It seems like you've posted a few times not-quite-defending this guy, but attacking a lot of straw men (e.g., "how dare you suggest he lose his pension"). It almost seems like you're a not so good PR person trying to deflect attention. A PR person like... the subject official?
My advice: get off DCUM and fix your life. Get a hobby. Or just watch more TV. Netflix is less than $10/month and can keep you out of trouble.

You might make a more accurate guess after consulting a Magic-8 ball.

Reply hazy try again

M8B for the win.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

For the sake of playing Devil's Advocate, I'm not sure there's any basis to conclude that he was trying to interfere with the ability of the nanny to do her job. On street parking for household employees is a convenience that did not exist prior to the much-abused VPP system being implemented after the Nationals moved to their new stadium. Capitol South Metro is two blocks away. How do I know? Our nanny takes Metro every day. To be clear, I'm not defending or excusing Whitman's actions but find the visceral responses equally unnerving.

So the question becomes how did the nanny's use of the VPP system become an inconvenience for him? Metro isn't an option for everyone, and the employers were working within legal parameters to provide care for their child.

I get that parking is an annoyance for a lot of people in this city, but why does that excuse illegal behavior?

Straw man. Is there anyone who is defending the unlawful act of stealing someone's tags or said that breaking the law shouldn't have consequences? The only thing I've heard is something in the WP to the effect of Whitman is claiming he didn't know the car belonged to a neighbor's nanny and thought it was someone who worked on the Hill -- as if this somehow justified his actions. It also doesn't make a great deal of sense given the interplay between the Pentagon and Hill and the fact there apparently was some sort of Spanish prayer document on the dashboard: I am left to wonder how many times he had reported this to 311 before taking the matter into his own hands and the risk/reward calculation which led him to do so and then store the evidence in his own trunk. Seems to me he was more or less asking to be caught if you do something three times and have to mess around with someone else's ride for 47 minutes. What what he hoping to accomplish? It's fascinating from a psychological standpoint.

How would he have been able to spot the Lexus to Minivan swap if he hadn't identified the driver with some particularity?