Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Democrats Security United States Databases Government Privacy News Technology

DNC Hacker Releases Clinton Foundation Documents (washingtonexaminer.com) 156

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.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

DNC Hacker Releases Clinton Foundation Documents

Comments Filter:
    • by inode_buddha ( 576844 ) on Tuesday June 21, 2016 @09:52PM (#52363859) Journal
      There is some excellent analysis and commentary here [nakedcapitalism.com], 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.
      • by Okian Warrior ( 537106 ) on Tuesday June 21, 2016 @10:11PM (#52363969) Homepage Journal

        There is some excellent analysis and commentary here [nakedcapitalism.com], 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.

        • 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

        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by hey! ( 33014 )

          Well, with a politician as un-charismatic as Clinton, it doesn't take much to generate a scandal; if you were going to salt the documents then all it would take is light hand.

          That said, having looked at them myself I see no actual revelations. The strategy documents you could easily reverse engineer from the commonplace lines of attack the Republicans have been using and the public responses. The donor list contains no revelations, either.

          So the document corpus doesn't appear to have been salted. It's ju

        • 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.

          Why go through all that trouble when you can just run a Word doc through a fax machine [wikipedia.org] and the media will buy it?

      • by plopez ( 54068 ) on Tuesday June 21, 2016 @11:55PM (#52364367) Journal

        I often think of the foreign emoluments clause of the US Constitution. If a corporation is controlled by the leadership of a foreign country and a gift is accepted, or campaign contribution, is that a violation?

        • I hope not. Bill Clinton's first campaign for President, while he was still governor, was partially funded by the Chinese government, or so some close to his campaign said years ago. I don't think anyone really cares who gives candidates money. What the person that gets the money does after being elected si what matters. Bill Clinton never raised a stink about the Chinese hacking into our national labs computers, stealing state secrets. That's where the outrage should have been directed. I suspect that Hill
          • He did have to return a rather large sum of money that turned out to have come from an active duty Chinese Colonel. I think it was $300,000 in his second campaign, but it may have "only" been $100,000. I forget.

            On a side note, American Colonels don't make that kind of money.

          • by plopez ( 54068 )

            The foreign emoluments clause only applies at the Federal level.

        • Yes, yes it is.
      • "the Clinton foundation was accepting multi-million dollar gifts from mideastern countries while she was arranging arms deals as Secretary of State."

        Was it intentional or unintentional that you forgot to mention the two separate oversight processes to approve those contributions in order to avoid conflict of interest? There was one approval process in State and one in the White House.

  • Not Again (Score:4, Informative)

    by quantaman ( 517394 ) on Tuesday June 21, 2016 @08:23PM (#52363385)

    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 think he wins troll of the year, since he was happy to be extradited here....

  • by rahvin112 ( 446269 ) on Tuesday June 21, 2016 @08:28PM (#52363417)

    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.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 21, 2016 @09:20PM (#52363721)

      As opposed to RIGHT NOW, where many of our current allies (Israel) are already alienated, our military is in shambles, and every time a Muslim kills a lot of Americans, the President rushes on TV to lecture us about Islamophobia. Oh and workforce participation is an all-time low, income inequality is horrible, food stamps way up, illegal immigration way up, and economic growth sucks. But it's racist to point any of this out.

      • by dywolf ( 2673597 ) on Wednesday June 22, 2016 @10:05AM (#52366011)

        -we have more allies than just Israel. and most of them were alienated by bush the lesser, and those relationships repaired by Obama.
        -our military is in NO WAY in shambles
        -labor participation is dropping regardless of anything any one does. it has to do with the boomers retiring, not the economy.
        -inequality is horrible, but its not thanks to the current occupant, but rather the past several decades of structural issues in the economy
        -maybe you forgot, but the economy crashed a few years ago. of course stamps are up, and will remain up until people get back to where they were. that's what they are for
        -illegal immigration is at an all time low. deportations at a record high. next immigration across the Mexican border is flowing the other way....back to mexico.
        -economic growth does not suck, and has been positive for 74 consecutive months. the last president to do this well with the economy was Clinton.
        -its racist because they're mostly false claims directed at the black guy because he's black

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      WTF, Trump is the most dovish President...ever. The neocons - you know, the ones who started all the wars - dumped him like a hot potato and endorsed Crooked Hillary. Alienating allies...like Obama has done such a good job of? You people really are delusional, aren't you?
    • 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.

      Trump isn't going to be invading anywhere is he gets impeached on day one.

      • Please point out the "High Crimes and Misdemeanors" that Trump has committed, which would get the US House of Representatives to vote on Articles of Impeachment on "day one."

        Yeah, I didn't think so. He may be an asshole, and you may not like him - that's perfectly fine. But don't throw around terms and processes that have actual legal meaning that you don't understand.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    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.

  • 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.
    • by Boronx ( 228853 )

      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.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      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 candi

Vax Vobiscum

Working...