Slashdot Mirror
Fake Hacker Found Guilty Following Gutsy Mitt Romney Extortion Scheme (softpedia.com)
An anonymous reader writes: "Michael Mancil Brown, 37, of Franklin, Tennessee, faces up to thirty years in prison, a fine up to $250,000, and orders of restitution to victims, because of a daring stunt he pulled off in 2012 that involved fake hacking the PricewaterhouseCoopers consulting firm, and US presidential candidate Mitt Romney. Back in 2012, Brown had the bright idea to write a letter alleging to have hacked PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) servers and stolen tax documents prior to 2010 for Mitt Romney and his wife, Ann," writes Softpedia. The "hacker" asked for $1 million in Bitcoin, and after publishing details about his fake hack online, he almost received it from a "third-party," but not before the FBI arrested him and then uncovered his lie. Last Friday, Brown was found guilty and then convicted of six counts of wire fraud and six counts of using facilities of interstate commerce to commit extortion.
I'm wondering what the "victim" had to hide, to be willing to pay $1 million for it...
This guy is facing a 25 year prison sentence and yet banksters who took down our economy by their playing in the casino got no prison time. We have 2 kinds of justice in this country, one for the uber rich and one for the rest of us.
Committing a crime in a country with robust law enforcement takes bravery...
But this extortionist is not merely "gutsy" — the "stunt" is also described in the write-up as "daring"... Carefully selecting terms and adjectives for (not so) subtle spin — while remaining factually correct — is what they teach in journalism classes. But some people are just natural — Vladimir Putin's weaponized propaganda organization would be most interested.
When the subject is described as "gutsy" and "daring", the punishment seems excessive — even if only to subconsciousness. Were it "plucky" and "outrageous" and a "crime" (or, better yet, a "felony"), rather than a "stunt", you'd be less likely to develop any sympathy for the criminal.
It also helps prevent any sympathy for the victim of the crime — see, it is Mitt Romney's own fault, according to many posters here, not all of them anonymous. (Should not have worn so short a skirt, if he did not want to be raped.)
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
I remember how Joe Biden, in describing the huge undertaking by hundreds of intelligence and support people, along with the on-the-scene deployment of SEAL Team 6 to actually do the deed of killing Bin Laden in his Pakistani sanctuary ... Biden described Obama's decision to follow the intel team's advice as "the gutsiest thing I've ever seen." That word appears to be in danger of no longer meaning anything at all like it used to, and might be worth a second thought on the part of editors and public figures, if this is how it's going to be put to use. Thank you for reading this gutsy comment.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
"Reagan was one of the best presidents of the last 50 years"
You can't be serious. I'd put him in the bottom three of that period.
His was the most corrupt administration in my lifetime. Have you forgotten Ollie North's conviction for destruction of evidence? Have you forgotten all the pardons George H. W. Bush granted for Reagan's people, including the Secretary of State?
When he wasn't corrupt, he was just horrible. His AIDS policy ("let the queers and drug addicts die") resulted in the poisoning of the blood supply, killing thousands.
Then he went and laid a wreath at the burial plots of the Waffen SS. He couldn't be bothered to even visit any concentration camp sites.
I'm hoping you're just ignorant.