Apparently the Lieberman campaign is pushing a story that we have coordinated an attack against their website. Not a chance. Here'’s the unqualified statement Sean Smith has called for.
If Senator Lieberman's website was indeed hacked, we had absolutely no part in it, denounce the action, and urge whoever is responsible cease and desist immediately. It is our sincerest wish that everyone planning to vote for Ned Lamont or Joe Lieberman does so today.
Tim Tagaris
Internet Communications Director
Ned Lamont for U.S. Senate
Tuesday, August 08, 2006
Lamont Responds...
I just spoke to Tim Tagaris and he unequivocally stated to me that the Lamont campaign had no part in any hack attack. Here is the campaign's full statement:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
32 comments:
I'm waiting now for the Smith denouncement of the great hamburgler caper /snark
This episode illuminates the whole campaign, Joe flailing desperately with attack after attack, lamont quickly and efficiently knocking them out of the park each time!
So that's that, right? The Lamont campaign has denounced the hacking of Lieberman's site, which is what the Lieberman campaign asked for. End of story.
Unless, of course, they spy a chance to make some more hay out of this.
"Apparently the Lieberman campaign is pushing a story that we have coordinated an attack against their website."
Please show me where in Sean Smith's statement they allege that Lamont had anything to do with it. The statement calls on Lamont to denounce it, nothing more. Cheap shot by Tagaris, but consistent with the Lamont camp's reaction to Jane Hamsher and her disgusting, racist anti-Joe propoganda.
Keep this up and youmay actually give people to vote Republican. No matter how much paople may agree on issues, it's pretty hard to support people who are so filled with hate and anger.
I guess implying that someone is racist is okay though....
D_R:
A. I supported Malloy, as you should well know being as how we write for the same site.
B. Did I stumble into the Malloy and Destefano are doing dirty tricks" thread?
Funny how I don't remember you being inside my head, either then or now.
Break out your cigars, the birth of the Lieberman Independent Bid has begun. Joe will say the he will "not allow another election to be stolen from him" I paraphrase.
Also, curiously, even after Sean Smith's statement, MSNBC did a Breaking News on this web thing- and quoted a senior Lamont staffer as blaming Joe2006 for not paying his bills.
Lamont is not behind this, but for any staffer to have made that statement without the facts is irresponsible. Despite what Tageris said, the earlier statement has clouded the picture.
Welcome to the politics of electronic destruction.
ct_husky - Anon. 1:19 here. I did not see the Chris Matthews interview, but I take your word for it. Smith, who I do not have a high opinion of to say the least, should not be balming the Lamont camp without proof. I do think that my initial comment is fair, however, given that I believe the Tagaris quote was in reaction to the Lieberman press release.
With respect to the whole issue, I do think Lamont has a greater responsibility regarding internet activity, in general, than he is willing to take. Let's face it, the internet & bloggers, plus his $3 million made this race. He has benefited greatly by the blogger community as a whole, and cannot simply say he knows nothing about it ala his reaction to Jane Hamsher. He needs to denounce such hateful (possibly criminal) activity loud and clear, and not through a spokesperson. He must do it directly, in my opinion.
"It’s amazing what 3 million people can do when they are annoyed enough! Jew Loserman you are so done! Like your website – Under Construction! Ha! more like under Destruction! Move On!
— Move On Attack"
That's the most recent posting on the Lamont site. When you click on "Move on" you are directed to MoveOn.org
Who's writing this stuff?
Maybe one of the techies on loan to Lamont can uncover the anti-semetic author. Please note: I am not assuming it is anyone connected with the Lamont campaign. But this garbage is dirty tricks at its worse.
Absolutely disgusting. This is getting ugly. I only hope the polls close before something really nasty happens.
TG: You have made the most insightful comment yet. Both sides are playing politics, obviously. Lieberman in implying that there is a Lamont connection, and Lamont in overstating Lieberman's comments.
Lamont, without responding or prodding, should have denounced this activity as soon as he heard of it. He did not do that. Just as he did not do that regarding the Hamsher bit. That is a sad trend, which, in my opinion, makes ole Ned look just like every other typical pol.
MSNBC is still running with a source in Ned's campaign saying that the site went down because Joe didn't pay the bills.
This must be corrected by Ned's people immediately because there is no evidence to support this claim.
Joe did not frag himself. His GOTV effort is being disrupted- his communications with the media are being disrupted.
Ned will take a hit on this in the general- they botched a hot potato in an uncharacteristic way. By being careless and somewhat dishonest.
This is a state that likes to play fair- a state that didn't like the 2000 election results. Joe's sainthood may yet be restored. Ned's people need to be unequivocal about this.
From the Hartford Courant @ 1:45 PM:
"Sen. Joe Lieberman accused his challenger's supporters of hacking his campaign's Web site."
Anon 1:59, "Lamont, without responding or prodding, should have denounced this activity as soon as he heard of it."
Did you even read the post you are commenting on? That's exactly what they did.
The answer to this nefarious plot, this dastardly deed which has skackled our great state...follow the flow, the traffic flow from which all knowledge flows, at a vast travel stop...Willington is the answer, Willington.
Don...
Another comment reads "Worry not, I can’t imagine anyone falling for his jewish tricks" and links to "Your Mom's Panties Sniffed Here".
Since nothing like that has appeared on any Lamont related forum before, it's safe to assume it's either a straight-out internet troll or a supporter of Lieberman's, who is attempting to tar Lamont.
Don Pesci - go back and read that thread that you cited as an example of Lamont supporters acting poorly - it seems pretty clear that the person in question is a Lieberman supporter parodying Lamont supporters...
Fat guy - Did you read the statement above? Do you want Ned to come to your living room and tell you? That is unequivical!
Sean Smith on MSNBC with Matthews:
This was a denial of service attack- it was proceeded by a vandal message on the website that said Joe2006 did not pay the bills, says categorically they paid their bills. They are asking for a swift investigation.
Liz Dupont-Diehl responds by saying she hopes Joe gets website back up, does not want to suppress turn out. Ned wants nothing to do with this. Changed the subject.
Matthews says that an electronic disruption that hurts Joe's GOTV will matter a great deal if the election is close. Could cost Joe 1,000 votes. (Don't know where he pulled that from, but I suspect it was from a body part.)
Republicans are eating this primary up. Would it be too paranoid to suspect that some mayhem-maker may have done this just to pour gasoline on the fire? What's Charles McGee up to?
No, nice try, though. Lamont's spokesman only denounced it in repsonse to the Lieberman release. Ned should have spoken on this earlier, and not through his spokesman. That was my point, which you either did not understand or did not care to read.
Gabe,
I'm just telling you that the first reaction was botched- and botched to the point that a major news outlet is totally confused.
That's Ned's campaign's fault.
The statement is irrelevant, because the entirety of the message out there AT THIS MOMENT is not "unequivocal", to use your words.
I'll be totally honest with you, if this costs Joe Lieberman a single vote, I'd be awfully surprised. Nobody uses email for GOTV, and phonebanking ops are already set up. Any communications with field staff on ED would be by telephone anyway.
At some point, we should ask, cui bono?
FGMS - You are 100% correct!
This is it- Joe claims any close loss is an illegitimate election. He needs to do it gently. Saying that there were shenanigans, and that it's necessary for a do-over (the general). And ask Lamont to continue to join with him in denouncing dirty tricks.
National Dems may be more tolerant of a Joe indie run if there were untoward election shenanigans. They still remember -and even run on- disenfranchisement and the 2000 election. (RFK, Jr is still beating the drum about Ohio in 2004.) Connecticut August 2006 now joins the ignominious roster.
I don't think all of this "G. Gordon Lamont" talk is helpful to anyone.
Cui bono?, indeed, anon 2:19. For those of you who missed out on your Latin it means "Who benefits?" I think it hurts Joe today, helps him immensely with a general.
The story will now be "Ned Lamont wins, BUT [fill in blank with bad thing.]" Instead of "UPSET!" or "Lamont defies the odds! Insurgent campaign upsets CT politics!"
A question for our wonderful moderators- have you been getting and editing out the same offensive vitriolic language that's appearing on the Lamont site's blog? Just curious to know.
Hey - sorry I spelled something wrong. Doesn't change the fact that the Lieberman campaign popped off half-cocked and accused "its political opponents" of hacking its site sans evidence...
The major news outlets are confused because they are stenoing instead of reporting. Why aren't they asking their tech reporters?
Gabe, I didn't see a spelling error.
MSNBC had their tech guy on, explained the whole thing start to finish. I don't think there's a dispute here about what happened anymore.
Gabe -- it seems pretty clear that the person in question is a Lieberman supporter parodying Lamont supporters...
It seems so to me also. But seeming is not good enough here. When the technology exist to discover the author, why should anyone speculate? The author may be someone who wants to sabotage both campaigns, or it may be someone who is disturbed by the barely concealed anti-semitism of some of Lieberman's detractors. Can't we all agree that we should find out who it is and expose and prosecute the person? You cannot have civil discourse on these terms.
Random comments:
I've posted here and elsewhere my condemnation of the alleged hack attacks on the Lieberman site. I've had sites attacked, and I know that it sucks. If anyone reading this knows anyone involved in any attacks, please, get them to stop, including contacting authorities.
As to the troll who has been posting in the comments on the official blog, that Don Pesci mentioned, the troll has posted many inappropriate comments and has been banned.
Post Script to Don.
The technology does not exist to find out who posted the offensive comments. I have tracked the IP address, so we can tell where it was posted from.
The comments were posted from someone using an 'Elk Hills Power' computer.
Elk Hills Power is a project of Sempra Generation, a wholly owned subsidiary of Sempra Energy.
It is worth noting that empolyees of Sempra is one of the largest blocks of donors to Sen. Lieberman's campaign.
I do not know anything more about who was using that computer, and since, while it was obnoxious, it does not appear to have been illegal, I do not have reason or resources to pursue it further.
Aldon
Okay, if you say Aldon; but none of this should prevent a report to the FBI, right? It seems to meet Brubenstein's definition of a prosecutable offense: confers benefit, close to election, etc. We can argue later about who conferred the benefit to whom.
Has anyone else heard that the MoveOn.org effort for the Nebraska Senate race has been cancelled? Supposedly, a bunch of Conn. field people were going to be moved there to help Sen. Ben Nelson, but he's now in real trouble over claiming property tax exemptions for "farmland" that was little more than his hunting cabin. Could be a Republican pickup now.
Post a Comment