Slashdot Mirror
DNC Hacker Releases Clinton Foundation Documents (washingtonexaminer.com)
An anonymous reader writes: Following a report that Russian hackers penetrated the DNC's database, a hacker, who identifies himself as "Guccifer 2.0" after a popular Romanian hacker who hacked various American political figures, most notably Hillary Clinton and her private server, has published documents on Tuesday that he says came from the party's digital files. The documents detail Clinton's weaknesses as a candidate, and include a collection of negative press clips about the Clinton Foundation and a list of defenses against attacks on her private email use. Washington Examiner reports: "Another document, titled '2016 Democrats Positions Cheat Sheet,' listed major policy issues and indicated where Clinton, Bernie Sanders, Martin O'Malley, Jim Webb, Lincoln Chaffee, Elizabeth Warren and Joe Biden -- all former or possible rivals for the Democratic nomination -- stood on each issue." The documents contain information ranging from how the Clinton Foundation and its allies should respond to criticisms of the Clinton Foundation's revenue sources to how Chelsea Clinton wasn't able to answer questions about Clinton Foundation donations and other instances in which Bill Clinton was called a "sexual predator" for his past indiscretions. Even though the cybersecurity breach was blamed on the Russian government, the Kremlin has denied any involvement. The DNC also has yet to confirm or deny the authenticity of the leaked documents.
Torrent Magnet Link to the Documents
Every time a story is posted about this it includes the claim that Guccifer hacked into Clinton's server.
IT NEVER HAPPENED!
Guccifer guessed password reset questions, he lacked the technical skills to actually hack a server.
Guccifer loved the notoriety of "hacking" famous people, he would never have broken into Clinton's server and then not published anything or told anyone because the emails were "not interesting".
Guccifer is in now in jail, is it so hard to believe that the hacker who publicly gloated over hacking famous people would now decide to make an unverifiable claim that he hacked the infamous emails of a super famous politician?
He's just trolling for attention and /. is obliging.
I stole this Sig
Putin's just showing he likes Trump, after all one dictator can recognize a rising dictator. He'd love to see America in Trumps meglomaniac hands, the US would alienate all it's traditional allies and he's destroy our military power in short order invading countries that insult him.
I think it's about time Trump demands the release of Chelsea's long form birth certificate so that we can better determine the true nature of the relationship between Bill and Hillary.
Is it really hacking when the password is "Trumpsucks"?
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
Watch the press not talk about it, as they focus on something happening with the Kardashians or Paris Hilton.
Or Trump saying something stupid ... again ...
And you reek of someone reading off talking points trying just a little too hard to act disinterested. Yet you are completely misinformed because of your "what difference does it make now" bullshit. Gee, who else does that sound like.
I guess they changed it. When I logged in, the first password was FuckBernie. An internal password was ClintonsDNC
>> Watch the press not talk about it, as they focus on ... again ...
> Trump saying something stupid
That's Trump's playbook. He spent way less than most candidates, and got much more coverage. One of his books has a chapter about publicity. It can be summarized as "be outrageous, the press is always looking for a story that's not boring." It's LITERALLY his playbook, available on Amazon.
My state is solidly Republican, so my vote couldn't possibly affect whether Hillary or Trump wins.
However, in this election the Libertarian candidate is polling higher than ever. Both major parties have to notice this and think about adopting some libertarian views next time. I can encourage this by voting Libertarian. No, the Libertarian won't get elected this time, but the Republicans and Democrats WILL notice "gee, a lot of voters like libertarian policies. Maybe we should think about offering those voters some of what they want."
However, in this election the Libertarian candidate is polling higher than ever. Both major parties have to notice this and think about adopting some libertarian views next time.
It happened after Perot.....both parties got serious about the deficit after that. Didn't last very very long, but it was good while it lasted.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
There is some excellent analysis and commentary here, focusing on the metadata and and how it exposes the political/financial connections.... I *highly* recommend you scroll down and go thru the comments there, keeping in mind the Clinton foundation was accepting multi-million dollar gifts from mideastern countries while she was arranging arms deals as Secretary of State. BTW the site I linked is starting to remind me more and more of the old Groklaw.
I always see things like that and wonder whether anyone, anywhere can play a higher level of game.
The person releasing the documents could have thought through what would happen. Knowing and with reasonable prediction, he *could* have placed some false and condemning documents in with the stash - something that would be outrageous if true.
For the right and subtly-constructed data, the press would leap on it in a heartbeat and it be a sensation for a few days. Then it would be roundly disproven, and then it would cast doubt on all the other documents.
The end result would be a lot of people chaotically talking about that specific candidate for a few days. Depending on the persuasion dimension, that could be crafted to be good or bad for the chosen candidate. Misleading identity would be bad for the candidate: something that causes the public to give the candidate a derogatory nickname. Misleading facts would be good for the candidate: cause a lot of talk, easily dis-proven, and doesn't apply to their persona.
All we really see in this world is straightforward and transparent actions.
I'd like to see someone hatch a conspiracy or elaborate prank on the world, just to show that there are people who can do it.
The Russian word for truth is "Pravda" or " "
Ironic, isn't it?
What's the defense for starting a civil war in Syria against all recommendations of the Department of Defense that directly aided ISIS and other Islamic extremist groups, killed 400k people, displaced millions of migrants, and then taking at least $10 million in donations from the Saudis who were the only ones to gain from the whole ordeal?
You sure we're talking about the same Syria? I don't recall the US starting any civil wars there. Iran and Russia have been helping Assad while Turkey was actually giving some help to ISIS, but the US has generally been on the sidelines.
I stole this Sig
Or, there was an economic boom in the mid to late 90s, reducing the deficit.
I would expect they would try to release something that would be harmful to Hillary's campaign. None of that really sounds particularly earth-shattering, there. Even if the Russian government might feel that Clinton is a better candidate for their agenda (in spite of Drumpf's high praises for Putin), I would expect that the Russian hacker would find it useful to bash Clinton if for no reason other than to make the Kremlin look bad.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
Or, there was an economic boom in the mid to late 90s, reducing the deficit.
That's definitely part of it, but it's not normal for politicians to get money and not spend it. There was a real focus on both sides of the aisle to reduce the deficit, that lasted through the Gore/Bush election (but Bush trashed it, and it hasn't been an issue since).
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Grats on drinking the kool-aid. She talks out both sides of her mouth. Watch when she actually takes impromptu questions and has to think about what to say. She'll give a speech to one group of people one day, saying one thing, then the next day in front of a different crowd, say the opposite. She has scandal after scandal following her and all she can say is "vast right wing conspiracy". Her email scandal was all about hiding information from the public. Her foundation is a scam. There's till the linger of whitewater. She has no idea what the truth is. 100% politician for the sake of being a politician.
As for her experience, she lost her right to practice law, she accomplished nothing special as a carpetbagger Senator (the only reason she ran was to bolster her credentials to run for President), her watch as Secretary of State was a disaster and is a major part of the problems in the Middle East today. Yes, you can blame Bush for what he did, but you cannot wish away what you inherit and expect that completely disengaging will make things magically better. She left a power vacuum that imploded the region that was somewhat stable and recovering. From some of the released emails, it appears that Obama didn't even trust her as an adviser and left her out of policy meetings. Her record is a farce.
Please list her accomplishments. What has she excelled at other than occupying important sounding positions?
What's the Russian word for "reset"? Preferably the snootiest, most elitist usage.
You take away the bible thumpers and you've lost 30% of the GOP.
Play Command HQ online
I would expect the Clintons are pretty good these days at not leaving anything damning in documents, though I'm sure they're thinking more about legal discovery than hackers.
Play Command HQ online
Perhaps, but it is the bible thumpers who are driving away Libertarians who otherwise would flock to the GOP.
Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
Politicians like to think short term, because most of the voters only think short term. Worrying about what will happen 10 years from now will lose you the election even though it's the sort of thinking smart people would like the politicians to have. When times are good politicians ignore the deficit, except in order to bring up how bad it was in the past under a different party. When times are bad they point to the deficit, build up panic, then trot out their standard tried-and-failed approaches to reduce it. For Republicans, when times are good you refund taxes, when times are bad you cut taxes. For Democrats when times are good you restore programs cut in the past, and when times are bad you add in programs to help people who are hurt by the bad times. Or you get a centrist that is hated by both sides (Jerry Brown in CA who tries to be more fiscally prudent than the democrats want but isn't into wholesale government dismantling like the republicans want).
True, we were doing good and you can point to both sides of the aisle for helping there. But then we went to war and spent more money than we had on it all while being told "just go about your daily business as if we weren't at war, otherwise the terrists win."
ASCII-7 is overkill. Baudot was good enough for grandpa so it's good enough for me!
We do not have proof that this document is legitimate, but for the sake of the discussion, I'll assume it is.
This document is NOT some attack document produced by Hillary opponents, Republicans, etc.
In the US, political parties and candidates generally do "opposition research" on their opponents to find all their weaknesses in order to maximize the effectiveness of political attacks and messaging - which is obvious...... but then knowing that the other side is doing the same thing, the parties and the candidate's own campaign teams do that same research on their own side in order to see what their opponent is more likely to find and use against them.
This document appears to be the document the Democrats themselves generated about their own candidate, thus outing the weak points in Hillary that the Democrats expect any opponent to try to exploit. That does NOT mean these are her only vulnerabilities. One of the problems of such reports is that they are from the very side that supports the candidate, which by definition means they are from the very team that thinks the candidate is wonderful.
Had the document been a Republican document or, as some would pretend, a Russian document, then I'd wager that there'd be a whole lot more stuff in there
It is all sooooo sad about Russia.
Putin the evil KGB man persecuted and sabotaged all your nice friends like Chodorkovsky, Nuland, Abramovitch, Timoshenko and the like. All they wanted to do is to have a little freedom to loot Russia's resources and transfer the money to New York and London. A nice little bit of freedom to make money, can't these Russians just comply with that ?
Really evil people these KGBers and the ordinary Russians ! They simply do not allow you nice chaps to rape them.
Time to inflame the U.S. sheeple so that they will fight for New York's Interests in Russia. Such a big country must belong to NY, just like Nigeria, that is only reasonable.
You don't buy someone off and then throw the money away by revealing it.
Sounds like my state except mine is solidly Democrat. I have been telling everyone in my state who isn't going to vote for Hillary to instead vote for Gary Johnson since voting for a republican presidential candidate in my state is just like throwing your vote away.
Time to offend someone
Please list her accomplishments. What has she excelled at other than occupying important sounding positions?
She's got a ton of shit done, all of it fucking people over. It's not that she's not accomplished, it's that what she accomplishes is evil and we'd like her to accomplish a lot less.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
I'd like to see someone hatch a conspiracy or elaborate prank on the world, just to show that there are people who can do it.
Trump 2016
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
How about, just maybe for a change, I know most people might consider silly and many others consider it worthless, maybe, just, maybe, HONESTY.
Nah, honesty as the best qualification for a politician, what a stupid idea. Right down there with those other stupid ideas, like INTEGRITY, can have that any of that either.
So let's all sing the "Hopey Changey Song", just imagine it in Sarah Palin's voice, here don't imagine it https://www.youtube.com/watch?....
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
reality would like a word with you, but doesn't have the time to type everything up for the 20 millionth time. so here:
https://slashdot.org/comments....
https://slashdot.org/comments....
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
Good advice, and this applies no matter what direction your state votes, and no matter your own political orientation.
If you're conservative and you live in California where all your state's electors will go to Hillary no matter what, you should still vote Libertarian.
If you're liberal and you live in California, you should also vote Green. You're not going to let Trump win, Hillary's getting all your state's electors anyway.
If you're liberal and you live in whatever solid-red state raymorris here is from, you should still vote Green. Hillary's not winning there anyway.
-Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of all Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
Oh, you're such a pard.
His ignorance covered the whole earth like a blanket, and there was hardly a hole in it anywhere. - Mark Twain
You mean you have one neighbor. Not countries on the other side of the planet from them. And that neighbor having "islamic extremists" in it - something American Exceptionalists bomb with gusto, but not on their borders. So, you were deflecting?