Stay in Touch

Check out CL's Book

Weiner Word Salad

Anyone for another serving of Weiner word salad?

Sorry guys, I can’t look away! I’m fascinated by the flamboyance of Anthony Weiner’s narcissism. It’s not just grandiose — it’s baroque! He’s soOooo colossally full of himself, judging even by skeevy politician standards. How does that scrawny little body support that humungous inflated head of his? (Insert obvious joke… we’ve seen quite enough of his “inflated head,” thank you very much.)

From an interview with Mr. Weiner in TODAY’S New York Daily News:

Denis Hammill: There is no one you are sexting now?

Weiner: “You can quibble about beginnings, middles and ends but what we’re talking about is over a year ago.”

“Now” is quibbling? He can’t confirm or deny if he’s finished sexting strange women? Not even TODAY?

Notice, he qualified it with “what we’re talking about” is over a year ago. Right. We’re only talking about the stuff we KNOW about. And the stuff we know about was last winter (and last time I checked the calendar, January was not a year ago). But the stuff we DON’T know about? Like… um, now? Yeah, that’d be quibbling.

It gets better!

Q. The Daily News reported on Sunday that you spent campaign cash on hiring a private investigator and a lawyer to look into the hacking of your Twitter and email account when you knew there was no hacker. That it was you who’d sent the sexual tests. Care to respond?

A. It was after. I told the reporter it was wrong that I’d done it after.

Q. After what?

A. After I’d left Congress. After I had admitted I had sent the texts. We needed to hire lawyers. We needed to hire other professionals to gather up information. Remember the House speaker had initiated an Ethics Committee investigation. We needed to secure all our hard drives and everything else. So that story is wrong. Well, 85% of it was after I left Congress anyway.

Q. You didn’t hire a private investigator to see who’d hacked your account?

A. No, the lawyers hired the investigator.

Yes, the problem was the Ethics Committee who necessitated hiring the lawyers who hired the investigator. You following that? If they hadn’t started an investigation, why there would be no need to hire professionals!

The problem isn’t what I did. The problem is how you responded. Is that mindfuck familiar to any of you, chumps? And how you responded compelled me to do MORE bad things.

Q. To see this woman (Sydney Leathers) you were sexting with get her 15 minutes in public must have hurt Huma, no?

A. Well, we look at less of that stuff than you might imagine. It’s not as if we sit around leafing through the tabloids. But we don’t have to. The level of venom directed at Huma has been so misdirected and unfair. Look if someone thinks I did something wrong, and a lot of people do, and I’m one of them, then I think it’s perfectly reasonable to say I will never vote for that bum again. But to somehow make this something that Huma did is just not fair.

Really Anthony? Make this something Huma did? Isn’t that EXACTLY what you did by implying your second round of cheating had to do with challenges in your marriage? Didn’t you speak all about these recent troubles in the Royal “We”? And didn’t you hide behind your Huma shield to field questions about your sexting problems?

Yeah, making this about Huma is really unfair. You should know.

Q. Is there yet another woman’s shoe about to drop in this campaign?

A. I have no idea. These are people who I thought were friends, people I trusted when I communicated with them. But who knows what they might do now. But none of it is new. It’s all old stuff. So I’ll be in this race for at least the next 44 days. And I think I can win.

People I thought were FRIENDS?!!! People I TRUSTED???

No, you mean people you sent penis pictures to, you dickwad. This is victim language! Oh, poor Anthony. If another shoe drops, it’s only because those people he thought were friends aren’t friends any more. Traitors! You think you can trust people, ya know? I wonder how Huma feels about him describing his sext buddies as friends and trusted confidantes? Yeah, real remorse there.

I hope New York City hands you your ass, Weiner.

Oh, and speaking of asses, check out Ms. Leather’s badonkadonk. I am going to resist making snarky comments about a 23-year-old woman’s summer bikini readiness. Who am I to stand in judgment as a 46-year-old crone of squidginess? I do not rock the bikini look myself. (I did, however, one baby and 20 years ago — which is more than I can say for Ms. Leathers.)

I will only say that the hallucinatory power of kibbles must be great. Whatever she’s smoking to make her think she’s pinup material must be the same crack Anthony Weiner is smoking to make him think he’s New York City mayor material.

Put the pipe down and retreat from the spotlight, you two! It’s embarrassing!



Ask Chump Lady

Got a question for the Chump Lady? Or a submission for the Universal Bullshit Translator? Write to me at [email protected]. Read more about submission guidelines.
  • Cl…
    I must admit I am “hungry” for more Weiner Word Salad…. all since I have cut out carbs. Keep it coming !

  • Amen CL!!!…. listening to this guy is like listening to my ex… shudders :/
    Poor girl I hope she runs…

  • I admit I’m a little fascinated by women (and men though I see more women) who get involved with famous/powerful people. Do they really find that actor/politician/rapper/other public figure attractive or are they interested in 15 min of fame?

      • Gwenneth Paltrow as the chump? NOOOooOOOO — as if we don’t have bad PR already. She’s synonymous with stuck up, laughable self righteousness. People love to hate her. Goop! Why couldn’t Pink be the chump? Why don’t they cast some bad ass? Why do we get all 89 lbs of Gwenneth Paltrow?

        Poor sex addicts. Forced into monogamy with Gwenneth.

      • notice they don’t start the story with whatever happened 5 years ago that sent him into these sex addict meetings in the first place. That would just be too depressing and we’d see what an evil piece of crap he is. I guess at least they do touch on it at some point with whatever he was doing on the computer (or was it phone?) late at night.

        Ugh. In a way I guess it’s good to see a hollywood perspective on romance that isn’t just all “happily ever after” but the premise of sex addiction is the wimpiest way of tackling the subject (not sure I believe sex addiction even really exists, but what do I know?). It’s the easy excuse for his cheating (he’s an addict! he can’t help it!) rather than show us cheating as a character flaw.

        And it’s kinda creepy (talking about the subway, video camera guy). So, I’ll just stick to watching the happily ever after takes on romance. Rather than some movie that glorifies settling for a guy like this…

      • Oh, gawd. Really? A romantic comedy about sex addicts? This trailer makes it look like they’re just quirky adorable people with impossibly expensive and hip NY apartments. And the Mark Ruffalo character is just going to go away for a while and get it straightened out so he can objectify Gwenyth’s character in her ultra expensive lingerie and uber-expensive and impossible to achieve unless you have the money and time body.
        Sick. They should be ashamed and have to actually see what it’s like to live with someone who has an addition to porn and stranger hook-ups and what it does to one’s self esteem to be their partner.

    • I guess Weiner comes quick. Poor Huma. I mean, really, what IS the point of keeping this guy? He can’t keep it up long? REALLY? He’s a pompous, lying, cheating windbag of dysfunction AND he’s bad in bed? “Clingy” too?

  • Weiner is the original Salad Shooter of cheater word salad and won’t *stop* shooting his mouth off, it seems. “He slices! He dices! He evades your questions, evokes pity for his wife, and emits a never-ending series of excuses!”

    Also, Ms. Leathers? Another disturbed person, IMO, though her youth might be a mitigating circumstance. But comparing her to Huma (crass perhaps, but unavoidable)? She’s yet another exhibit in the case for the proposition that cheaters always “affair down.”

  • Oh! Oh! Here’s a video from 2007, Anthony Weiner singing, “If I Only Had a Brain.” I. Sh*t. You. Not.

  • You can’t imagine sitting at the breakfast, lunch and dinner table, with CNN in his face and having to squirm through Weiner news. He doesn’t DARE venture a comment. How would ANY man like being dumped in the same pool with scum like this?

  • Oh my daughter’s recently revealed cheater (one week!) must be taking notes.

    On day two (post D-day) she sent him a list of questions. Among them was when did the affair(s) begin/end. Simple question, right? And his response was:

    Officially with the adultery?

    • I predict he will eventually get to: “Define affair.” “Define begin” Define “end.” Etc., etc., etc., ad nauseum. As if the procedural complexities that go along with discussing the matter might put a chump off caring that the person he or she trusted most in the world just stuck a rusty knife right between their shoulder blades.

      Define knife. Define between. Define shoulder blades.

      Just . . . . barf.

  • I wonder what kind of self-talk he gives himself. Maybe he could become a “How to Have Unshakable Confidence” coach once he loses the mayoral election…

  • Yeah, those simple post-affair questions either seem to stymie or offend the cheater. Mine was offended by such questions as “Are you still in contact with her?” and “Is there any chance she’s pregnant with your child?” He said he felt attacked by the questions, and therefore didn’t feel very much like answering them (poor little victim). Had to force himself to answer anyway, ‘cuz he’s that kind of stand-up guy. Gag.

    Getting offended by my rational response to the truly offensive things he was doing in secret — is that classic projection? It’s mindfuckery at the very least.

    McJJ, your daughter’s cheater must think that if he slices and dices definitions (“Hmm,” he thinks,” does she mean ‘When did I start fucking this woman,’ or ‘When did I first start wanting to?'”), he might be able to shave months off the technical length of the affair. All so he won’t look quite so douchey.

    These idiots will look for any way to minimize what they did. They have this idea that it matters AT ALL to you that the affair was only 12 months instead of 14.

    • Am I the only chump here who didn’t ask a lot of questions. The answers to those I did ask were so minimizing and dodgy I just lost my appetite for it.

      • No, I didn’t ask a lot of questions — I just assumed the worst, and wasn’t far off.

        • What is the point in “asking questions”, “inviting open discussions”, “expecting remorseful sorry” et all, anyways? When you know: “they don’t mean what they say”. Observing their actions is still better than any dialogue, whatsoever!

      • I asked a few. The answers were verifiable lies to my face. Didn’t ask any more.

      • No, but I haven’t served my cheater yet.

        Anyway, I have thought long and hard about the whole business of what I’d like to know about the affair. I think that I don’t really need to know anything more than it occurred. The why it occurred will involve blame-shifting and gas-lighting. I really don’t want to engage with him on that level. I’d rather write the narrative along the lines of the fact that I’m devastated, I realize that he loves her more than marriage to me, and I’m going to let him go. Please sign the following financial agreement and we can make this pretty cheap and easy.

        Frankly, that’s all I care about now. I want the share of his retirement, the dogs, and half the equity from the house in cash so I can buy my own modest place or fixer-upper. Also the title of the car I drive.

    • This is what I tell x when he minimizes or acts like Jan was sooooooooo long ago, ancient history practically (that was when I caught him texting her – remember, YOU are the one that I love), I say to him there are two kinds of people, ones that can cheat and ones that can’t. You are the former and I’m the latter. End of story, and marriage.

    • You are so Correct RS!

      “The problem isn’t what I did. The problem is how you responded. Is that mindfuck familiar to any of you, chumps? And how you responded compelled me to do MORE bad things.”

      I relived this conversation every time he cheated, drank, cut himself, punched holes through the walls, etc. I am way too familiar with this convo than Id like to admit!!

  • Pathetic beyond comprehension … but some people will do anything for their brief blast of fame. It’s a sick ejaculatory thrill.

    If I’m not mistaken, Huma wore (had the gall to wear?) a dress very similar to Michelle Obama’s during a recent appearance with her devoted-to-his-dick husband … Michelle wore that dress on a day when she and *her* devoted husband were photographed in a genuine loving embrace …

    ANR — I didn’t ask a lot of questions. There was no point; his answers were all lies and evasions. Dodgy is the word … skeezy is another.

    • When she told me her loaning hundreds of thousands to her fuckbuddy had nothing to do with their illici affair, and seemed sincere, I just figured she was so good at lying to herself she couldn’t distinguish the truth from lies.

      • Ya know, she’s got NPD, but she’s not stupid. They know they are lying. They know the difference. The problem is that they are “above” having to tell the truth. There’s always multiple rule sets going on. Those rules that apply to everyone else, and the singular rule for them that simply states “I do what I want, when I want, how I want, and fuck everyone else”. NO ONE is the boss of me. Me, myself, and I – the holy trio. I love me some me. What’s yours is mine, and what’s mine is mine.

        They don’t lie to themselves, and they are typically not stupid or blind. They just don’t give a shit.

          • But …. Isn’t the whole point of lying that people believe your lie? And this one was just so … unbelievable. Why tell a lie nobody could believe?

            • Yeah, I know man. It’s hard to remove the rules of logic in these situations. “Why tell a lie that nobody could believe”… that would require thoughtful consideration, and most people would then stop themselves. It’s just arrogance. It’s like, yeah I’m lying, but whatever.

              I’m one of those chumps that pressed for the truth, and just basically called her shit on every lie that came out. I asked questions I already knew the truth about. Probably a mistake, in hindsight. I should have just gathered up the evidence I had, hired a PI to get more and bottom some things out, and launched a broad-side legal offensive while her pants where literally “down”. Instead, I offered a way out if she would just level up. Nah. I think I automated the application of spackle.

              • Chumpman, don’t beat yourself up. When we are being emotionally strangled, it is impossible to to think about investments in the future. I remember being unable to think at all…I was numb to everything except feeling the pain. Hindsight is truly 20/20.

                My foresight did not kick in until the anger took over. It was not until that point that I could begin to formulate a plan. And yes, I stupidly wanted him to come clean. I wanted to know the dirty deeds.

            • “Boy, what *is* it with you people? You think not getting caught in a lie is the same thing as telling the truth.” Robert Redford in 3 Days of the Condor

              My favorite old movie. They lie to spin their story and if nobody’s there to call them on it, it eventually becomes “The Truth”.

              • Great point. When a student in my pet snake’s graduate class, he often spouted that, “is it a lie if you don’t tell the truth, or is it a lie if you don’t tell ALL of the truth.” Should have known how his ticker tocked at that point.

  • The fact that each of us can relate to AW’s buffoonery and that it rings true in our ears and minds with things we heard from our buffoons really makes it funny. It’s all backwards, upside down, sideways and just plain cray cray.

    I can’t thank you enough CL for posting this comedic tragedy as every time you do, it makes me laugh and cry at the same time.

    It surely helps put things in perspective. It would be so much fun to flog AW while being asked questions every time he gives a nonsensical reply. I would love to see what he sees when he looks in the mirror, that would be a fun SNL skit. It’s astounding!

    Ha! Thanks so much for the laughs and the tears.

  • Weiner is so unbearably narcissistic, so arrogant and such a mind fucker it’s beyond belief. He reminds me of my ex. Just looking at him makes me wish someone would punch him right in the face.

    • I totally get the punch him in his face, I would love to do that. But the arrogance part, I am not feeling from him, I find him kind of comical in his replies due to the obviousness of his bs, it’s farcical.

  • “Huma shield”….. every weiner needs a Huma shield.

    Trojan Huma shield….press conference not included.

    • She also like isn’t good at talking.

      It’s interesting that when she was caught her first reaction was but I thought it was off the record.

  • As of 6 AM NY time, his new slogan is “I Won’t Quit”.
    I know his campaign manager quit but don’t you think someone should have told him that the new slogan leaves too much to the imagination?
    “I Won’t Quit” what?
    I wont quit sexting….so I am telling you all now so when it happens again I can tell you I said so?
    I want to see him thrown out of the city; so embarrassing.

  • I think what makes him fascinating (and appalling) is that he is running for office and he still can not to a decent apology. If ever you would want to take responsibility and show remorse, this is it. But he is incapable of it.

    P.S. I am looking forward to a CL letter to Hera someday – maybe for the book?

  • Just wanted to say that the bikini picture resonates with one of OW’s Facebook postings.

    I have said it before, I think, that I am no t convinced that STBX has a personality disorder. Certainly he’s behaving narcissistically, but all affairs are narcissistic. However, OW is a flaming NPD. She constantly has to tell people how men lust after her, how random men strike up conversations with her as a way of demonstrating their interest. She reminds me of a woman I knew about 10 years ago who went after only married men. She’d always talk about how Married Man X wanted her. She could just tell. She was pretty convinced that all married men wanted her, and she was okay with sleeping with them, too.

    I know that I always distrusted men whom I termed “danger boys” back when I was younger and just starting to date. These were the guys who had a bit of the “bad boy” in them. They were spontaneous without thinking of consequences, skirted the rules, were willing to take the dare regardless, etc. In retrospect, I think I sensed that they sparkled, and this sparkle was just to attract women, so I tried to avoid them. STBX didn’t sparkle in this way.

    But there must be women who send out the sparklies: the bad girls, the ones who let you know that they are up for anything and consequences be damned. OW and Weiner’s little side-piece both seem to send out those vibes.

    Some guys must get the message, though. STBX was OW’s supervisor. One of OW’s male colleagues, a man in his late 20s, had just gone through a terrible divorce after his wife cheated on him and left him for a body builder. OW, soon after she was hired, made a pass at this guy, who promptly turned her down–setting up significant tension in the office. The male staffer knew of this woman’s reputation, and as he told my STBX, “you need to be able to respect yourself in the morning.”

    • “you need to be able to respect yourself in the morning.”

      Love it!!!

    • Sending out those vibes-ha! The scent of trashiness. My x’s across-the-street OW let him know all right. We were all part of a neighborhood summer party scene, so I watched her in action many times. For starters, nude paintings and posters all over her den that look just like her, constantly drunk (laughing and falling off the end of the deck!), inviting everyone to go in her den and ‘smoke’, putting her hand in my x’s front pocket to search for her house key, and my favorite- grabbing her crotch and squeeling ‘I really have to pee!’.
      Yep, pretty sure cheaters know what all those signals mean! BTW, I’m not a prude, at all, but I like to have a LITTLE class.

  • Slogan for the Weiner campaign:
    Just what we need…another dick head in government…

  • This Weiner guy is a PATHETIC LOSER! And, his wife is high on hopium and believing in unicorns while wearing rose colored glasses. She is seat-belted in on the Chump Wagon! Poor woman! Somebody get her a glass of common sense – quick!

  • This has got to be the best thing I’ve read in months! I think we should stage a huma intervention. Weiner’s a douche.

  • Any comments on Salon’s (and Fleshbot’s) Lux Alptraum on how she’s ‘Rooting for the “other woman”?’ at

    Lux’s article has a point. I don’t advocate “rooting” for Leathers, as a chump myself, that just feels icky, but read her closing paragraph:

    “Weiner may feel the need to lie — to himself and the rest of us — about the truth of his impulses, and Abedin may feel the need to put on a brave face and attempt to prop up her both her marriage and her husband’s career as they rapidly disintegrate before her eyes. But Leathers, at least, is happy to acknowledge all parties for exactly who they are — and happy to accept them, flaws and all. She’s not perfect, but at least she’s willing to be held accountable — a trait, I might add, that our politicians could use more of.”


    • I liked the comment on there that said “Taking a dump outside is honest too, but it’s still disgusting.”

      No one in that story is admirable, IMO. Weiner, because he’s a narcissistic freak. Huma because she’s a super chump. And Leathers because she’s exploiting her 15 minutes of fame and feels zero remorse for being an OW.

      How exactly is she being held accountable? She posted her story anonymously, was outed, and then decided to cash in on tabloid notoriety.

      Thought it was a bit harsh on Huma (which is saying a lot coming from me). The author says Huma’s “enabling” made Weiner a pathological liar. Puh-lease. He’s a been a pathological liar since forever. Huma didn’t make him a wing nut. She’s the object of pity because she stays with him.

  • >
    %d bloggers like this: