Gawker none-too-subtly threatens Kyrsten Sinema

Sinema is in the doghouse with ultraliberals, including the people who write for Gawker, because she refuses to support specific left-wing policies and proposals. Sinema opposed, for example, President Joe Biden’s multitrillion-dollar “Build Back Better” spending scheme. She also opposes the abolition of the legislative filibuster. In response, the far Left has gone after Sinema with all manner of invective, criticism, and intimidation, including now this Gawker article.

“Last month, we filed a public records request for Arizona Sen. Kyrsten Sinema’s divorce papers,” staffer Tarpley Hitt wrote. “The request came back with many enlightening insights, such as that the Congresswoman … kept her 1997 Nissan Maxima SE when she [divorced] in 1999.”

The report added, “The records also included some other intriguing information. Specifically, they included Sinema’s Social Security number, bank account information, and driver’s license number.”

What public interest does this story serve? Surely Gawker doesn’t expect us to believe the Maricopa County court’s filing and records collections methods merit coverage by a national news outlet.

There is something else going on here.

Take, for example, the following line: “Anyone modestly familiar with navigating legal databases can obtain a United States senator’s Social Security number for $11 in processing fees.”

The article also included a particularly telling passage, which read: “You can do a lot with a Social Security number. Unfortunately, if the number in question isn’t yours, most of what you can do with it is a felony. For example, we were hoping to run a credit report on Sinema. But that seems to be illegal. … We also considered wiring a deposit of $0.69 into her bank account. No theft there. It’s more like a campaign donation, and every dollar counts. But the legalities seemed iffy, and none of the lawyers Gawker contacted for comment were interested in indulging our largely stupid game.”

The unspoken message seems clear: We’re not saying you should try to get a copy of Sinema’s private information. But if you feel so inclined, here’s how to do it. Also, we’re not saying you should do anything nefarious with her data. But if you feel so inclined, here’s a list of all things you can do.

“Out of respect, we won’t be publishing her number,” Hitt wrote.

Sure. “Out of respect.” Gawker brags it has obtained Sinema’s private information. It details how you, the reader, can find said information. It then makes sure to note the senator’s personal data can be used to make her life difficult. But it’s not going to release the information itself — “out of respect.”

Wink! Wink!

In reality, the article’s breezy criticisms of Sinema, which are ever-present in the story, give the game away.

“You’re probably familiar with Social Security numbers,” the story added. “These nine-digit identifiers were created in 1936 as part of the New Deal, FDR’s suite of public works programs and financial reforms that laid the foundation for America’s weakening social safety net — and one that, if Sinema’s current voting record is any indicator, she would have likely opposed.”

Look, we get that you don’t like the senator. You hate her because you are a bitter partisan and she doesn’t toe the party line. You also just so happen to have her private information, which you yourself won’t release but will explain instead how it can be found and weaponized. It’s all a little too obvious.

“Sinema believes it’s important to know about Social Security numbers,” the article concluded. “We agree. It is important to Know Your Social Security. In this case, it just happens to be hers.”

Wink! Wink!