Last week, Mitt Romney was forced to admit he had been using a fake Twitter account under the name Pierre Delecto in order to defend himself from media attacks on the social media platform. The account was opened the account in July of 2011, just one month after Romney announced his run for president.
A reporter for Slate, Ashley Feinberg, uncovered the Pierre Delecto alternate account, which is under the handle @qaws9876. She went hunting for the secret account after the senator mentioned its existence to the Atlantic in a profile published Sunday.
President Trump’s son, Don Jr, was quick to deride the now senator over the creepy account.
“If Mitt Romney had any guts the would would take on media directly rather than with a fake twitter account, but he doesn’t. He only says things that will ingratiate him to the same MSM that destroyed him during his failed run.
They’re using him and he doesn’t even get it. Sad!”
If Mitt Romney had any guts the would would take on media directly rather than with a fake twitter account, but he doesn’t.
He only says things that will ingratiate him to the same MSM that destroyed him during his failed run.
They’re using him and he doesn’t even get it. Sad! https://t.co/jJ40tafMHB
— Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr) October 21, 2019
Pierre Delecto has 702 followers, and the account has only tweeted 10 times. In all of those occasions, he was replying to other tweets and he defended himself in a majority of them. Romney told McCay Coppins of The Atlantic that he created “Pierre Delecto” to lurk and basically defend himself against trolls. The account is now set to private.
Cole Stryker has an opinion piece up at NBC entitled Mitt Romney’s secret Twitter account, Pierre Delecto, should be defended, not condemned. I tend to agree with both Stryker and Don Jr.
Styker states: “We all deserve an outlet for private personal expression. And if a senator is disallowed his, who is to say yours isn’t next?”
He is correct, to an extent. I firmly believe in freedom and liberty. There should be nobody saying that Mitt has no right to an anonymous account ans pseudonym. But at the same time, should an elected public servant who decides to join the public discourse use such? Especially one who is as prominent in the public discussion as Mitt Romney?
Stryker goes on to say:
“Politicians and other public figures mostly choose to forgo the luxury of anonymous expression, but for the first time in history, the rest of us plebs are at risk of losing our anonymity as well. Doxxing and the practice of snitching to employers have raised the stakes for public engagement, and thoughtless remarks from the distant past can come back to bite us, as journalists have recently discovered. In other words, you are your timeline, and anything you say can be used against you in the court of public opinion.
A quote often, but perhaps falsely, attributed to the 17th century French Cardinal Richelieu goes, “If one would give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest man, I would find something in them to have him hanged.” Thank God he and his aides lived four centuries too early to bend the Wayback Machine to their will.”
Believe me, I get it. I understand WHY the senator would chose to use an anonymous account. I do have problems with the way he used it. It is one thing to put your opinion out there, it is another to use it to defend yourself from the media, pretending to be someone else.
If Mitt was participating in discussions on some of the issues, that would be one thing. But to defend himself? Eh…coward.
AND… Pierre Delecto? Yeah. Different name dude. It made EVERYONE think IMMEDIATELY of Carlos Danger, and that is not all….