Tuesday, August 08, 2006

Sean Smith Denounces Attack on Lieberman Website

Hoo, boy.

"For the past 24 hours the Friends for Joe Lieberman’s website and email has been totally disrupted and disabled, we believe that this is the result of a coordinated attack by our political opponents. The campaign has notified the US Attorney and the Connecticut Chief State's Attorney and the campaign will be filing a formal complaint reflecting our concerns. The campaign has also notified the State Attorney General Dick Blumenthal for his review."

"We call on Ned Lamont to make an unqualified statement denouncing this kind of dirty campaign trick and to demand whoever is responsible to cease and desist immediately. Any attempt to suppress voter participation and undermine the voting process on Election Day is deplorable and has no place in our democracy."

Update: See a message from Dan Geary in the comments. He's right. Whoever is doing this should cut it out.


ct_husky said...

The same way Lieberman should have denounced the fracas at Ted's last week? Smith's right though (man do I feel gross for saying that), IF it was hacked, it is a poor showing by whoever would do something like that. I can't stress that IF enough though.

FatGuyinMiddleSeat said...

Who's going to be the first to accuse Joe of doing this himself to set himself up as a victim? I'll pay for your first day of hospitalization.

Ned is not responsible for this- but it is a late hit from some hacker and he should condemn it. Could be from anywhere in the world, though- unless Joe's team has forensic evidence already.

Does Dr. Lee do computer crime?

Anonymous said...

Sean Smith is blaming this on the Lamont campaign? Get real. Many of them are amateurs, but they're not idiots.

bluecoat said...

the last time Henry Lee was credible was when Ronald Reagan was President.

Jim said...

I don't suppose Sean Smith has any evidence of Lamont supporters being responsible?

Or is this like his accusations that Lamont is hiding something b/c he won't release he tax return?

Smit is a nasty, desperate, vicious unprincipled little troll, throwing crap at the wall to see what sticks.

Not surprising he works for Lieberman.

disgruntled_republican said...

I got the following information from my good feriends at Golden Consulting Group:

Whois Server Version 1.3

Domain names in the .com and .net domains can now be registered
with many different competing registrars. Go to http://www.internic.net
for detailed information.

Domain Name: JOE2006.COM
Whois Server: whois.bulkregister.com
Referral URL: http://www.bulkregister.com
Status: ACTIVE
Updated Date: 14-jun-2006
Creation Date: 23-jun-2002
Expiration Date: 23-jun-2007

As you can clearly see, the URL was bought on 6/23/02 and is good through 6/26/07 so lets put the "joe didn;t pay his bill" rumors to rest, shall we?

ct_husky said...

DR, unless I'm mistaken though, there's a distinct difference between registering a URL and paying an outside company to host your site on their server. I think the "didn't pay the bill" arguement focuses on the latter.

Anonymous said...

Joe Rove-rman
quit your whining and pay your bills....

disgruntled_republican said...

Perhaps I am not down with the computer lingo but I am told that this proves the site should have been active....and looking at the top, it says "server"

FatGuyinMiddleSeat said...

Lanny Davis in today's OpinionJournal:

"Now, in the closing days of the Lieberman primary campaign, I have reluctantly concluded that I was wrong. The far right does not have a monopoly on bigotry and hatred and sanctimony. Here are just a few examples (there are many, many more anyone with a search engine can find) of the type of thing the liberal blog sites have been posting about Joe Lieberman:
• "Ned Lamont and his supporters need to [g]et real busy. Ned needs to beat Lieberman to a pulp in the debate and define what it means to be an AMerican who is NOT beholden to the Israeli Lobby" (by "rim," posted on Huffington Post, July 6, 2006).

• "Joe's on the Senate floor now and he's growing a beard. He has about a weeks growth on his face. . . . I hope he dyes his beard Blood red. It would be so appropriate" (by "ctkeith," posted on Daily Kos, July 11 and 12, 2005).

• On "Lieberman vs. Murtha": "as everybody knows, jews ONLY care about the welfare of other jews; thanks ever so much for reminding everyone of this most salient fact, so that we might better ignore all that jewish propaganda [by Lieberman] about participating in the civil rights movement of the 60s and so on" (by "tomjones," posted on Daily Kos, Dec. 7, 2005).

• "Good men, Daniel Webster and Faust would attest, sell their souls to the Devil. Is selling your soul to a god any worse? Leiberman cannot escape the religious bond he represents. Hell, his wife's name is Haggadah or Muffeletta or Diaspora or something you eat at Passover" (by "gerrylong," posted on the Huffington Post, July 8, 2006).

• "Joe Lieberman is a racist and a religious bigot" (by "greenskeeper," posted on Daily Kos, Dec. 7, 2005).

And these are some of the nicer examples."

Dan Geary said...

Hi, I'm the developer of joe2006.com; I'd like to clear up a couple things:

the website has suffered from a variety of attacks, including two episodes of "de-facing" where a hacker identifying himself as "ThHacker" performed a code/SQL injection and replaced the index page.

This current attack is at this time continuing to disrupt display of the site and email communications for Sen. Lieberman, his staff and volunteers doing their job on election day.

In the short-term here, you may find some dark form of glee - but consider this: If you have any appreciation for the way that the internet has opened communications and dialogue and expanded the reach of candidates of all stripes; this is a very, very dark day regardless of where you stand in this particular election.

I ask you to set-aside for a moment the personal hatred on display here and stand for protecting the electoral process and the promise of the expansion of democracy on the internet. Consider the fundamental change to politics on the internet if security, not reaching voters must now become the primary objective for the interactive component of any campaign.

I respectfully ask that you help spread the word, whether this attack is from an overzealous supporter of Mr. Lamont or whoever it is. I urge you to call for whoever this is to cease the attack and let the election unfold in the way that Connecticut's voters choose when they stand before the voting machines.

rc said...

ok why the hell was the site up last nite? hmmm?

This is just a last minute crying foul game to save their losing hide.
Once burnt, twice shy. Lieberman campaign could easily have moved to a very secure host after the first incident and when their site came back on. Excuses my friends. Typical of Joementum.

I predict after an investigation, all arrows would point back to Joe's incompetent web team.


Hey all - Just got an email from the DCCC signed by Sen. Barack Obama that expresses support for Mr. Murphy in the 5th, but NOT for Mr. Courtney in the 2nd...

Even the Dems know that Simmons is an intelligent, valued, and critically important member of Congress and serves D2 and all of Connecticut fairly, decisively, and well.

Gabe said...

D_R - The "didn't pay his bills" message was from last night's fiasco. Today's seems to be completely seperate...

Gabe said...

Although maybe not, the Lieberman campaign seems to be saying that this is one 24 hour long coordinated attack...

Hopefully more information will come out soon...

disgruntled_republican said...

No server host is going to boot anyone with over a million dollars in the bank. Last night or today Gabe, it doesn't matter.

Anonymous said...

"OLDTIMENFIELDEM" --- Obama picked a grand total of FOUR Democratic candidates across the country to support in his email.

I think even you'd agree that there are more than four competitive House races this year. In fact, the one thing that Obama's four have in common is that while they're raising money, they're still trailing their Republican opponents in fundraising.

Courtney is already outraising Simmons, so he isn't on the list.

Anonymous said...

Dan, thanks for posting on the blog. I don't think taking down Joe's website helps anybody. As a Lamont supporter, I wish you the best of luck getting it back online. (Out of curiosity -- why are you posting here instead of trying to fix the problme?)

Charles Gaba said...


Perhaps I am not down with the computer lingo but I am told that this proves the site should have been active....and looking at the top, it says "server"

With all due respect, you don't have the slightest idea what you're talking about.

The "Whois Server" just tells you which computer is giving out the registration information.

The "Name Servers" are basically the computers which are hosting the domain name.

IF a website hosting client fails to pay their bills on time, the hosting service often will suspend their account temporarily. This does NOT mean that the website files, pages, photos, etc have been deleted, it usually just means that access to those files is cut off until the amount due is paid, at which point the hosting company reactivates the account.

In other words, just because the DOMAIN NAME is paid for through 2007, that doesn't mean that the WEB HOSTING has been paid for through that time. These are two separate things. As a metaphor, just because your driver's license is paid for through next year, that won't stop your car from being reposessed if you miss a payment.

As it happens, in this case, it *appears* (according to another comment) that it truly is a Denial of Service attack of some sort. No one in the Lamont campaign could possibly be stupid enough to do something like this, though; it would destroy him in the General election.

Anonymous said...

The lunatic left strikes again, they know theyre not going to win, so they resort to this trash. Things like this are a hallmark of thier style, and the people that are propping up a loser like Ned Lamont.

Aldon Hynes said...

I know that Tim has responded about the attack on the Lieberman site, so let that stand as the official campaign response. Let me respond personally, as a website developer.

I have had many sites that I run attacked in the past. It is no fun.

I will take Dan at his word that this is some sort of attack and not merely the result of the extraordinary volume that a campaign with this level of attention will gather, and I will repeat his request:

Please, cease the attack and let the election unfold in the way that Connecticut's voters choose when they stand before the voting machines.

Genghis Conn said...

I'm with Aldon, here. Whoever is attacking the Lieberman site should cut it out. If the point is to somehow hurt Lieberman or help Lamont, neither is happening. It just makes things uglier.

Anonymous said...

Since this primary is even getting coverage on the BBC it seems possible that some random hacker with no political ties simply saw a high profile target and went for it. To assume an attack came from the opposition is somewhat premature.

It does seem to fit in Joe's larger implication that the Lamont campaign is really being fueled by a bunch of online rabble rousers rather than actual unhappy citizens of CT though, making the release somewhat convienent.