Frist Staffer is Fall Guy for Republican Hack into Democrats Computers

[dmcowen674]

2-6-2004 Key Frist Staffer to Resign Over Leak

WASHINGTON - One of Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist's key staffers will resign Friday because of an investigation into how Republicans gained access to Democratic memos concerning opposition to President Bush's judicial nominees.

Manuel Miranda, who worked for the Tennessee Republican on judicial nominations, has been on leave since late last month because of the investigation into how Democratic memos stored on a computer server shared by Judiciary Committee members ended up in GOP hands.

He told the same newspaper in January that investigators were looking at work he performed for the Judiciary Committee before he joined Frist's office. "There was no stealing," he said. "No systematic surveillance. I never forwarded these memos ? period."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wonder if he has been read his Miranda rights yet?

 

[CADsortaGUY]

There was no "hacking" by Republicans. There may have been "unethical access" but the information was freely available. From my understanding - the other side had access to the Republican files too.

Anyway - I think the most interesting thing about all this is what the documents actually said. The whole "dangerous" Estrada thing and other tactics to be used by Democrats.

Focus on the supposed "hacking" though - instead of the content though - whatever helps you sleep at night.

CkG

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

As much as it pains me to agree with CAD, there was an extensive report on NPR about this. It was a matter of clicking and opening, not hacking. Now perhaps they should not have looked, but hell I would have and so would everyone I can think of.

 

[Czar]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
There was no "hacking" by Republicans. There may have been "unethical access" but the information was freely available. From my understanding - the other side had access to the Republican files too.

Anyway - I think the most interesting thing about all this is what the documents actually said. The whole "dangerous" Estrada thing and other tactics to be used by Democrats.

Focus on the supposed "hacking" though - instead of the content though - whatever helps you sleep at night.

CkG

so there would be nothing wrong with in your eyes if it were Democrats stealing files from the Republicans?

 

[xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx]

<whine>waaaahhhhh...misleading title....waaaahhhhhh....</whine>

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Czar

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
There was no "hacking" by Republicans. There may have been "unethical access" but the information was freely available. From my understanding - the other side had access to the Republican files too.

Anyway - I think the most interesting thing about all this is what the documents actually said. The whole "dangerous" Estrada thing and other tactics to be used by Democrats.

Focus on the supposed "hacking" though - instead of the content though - whatever helps you sleep at night.

CkG

so there would be nothing wrong with in your eyes if it were Democrats stealing files from the Republicans?

Did you not read what I posted?

"There may have been "unethical access" but the information was freely available."

That still doesn't mean the contents of what was leaked isn't important.

CkG

 

[Gaard]

Does the importance of the info collected somehow have a bearing on any 'unethicalness' of the act?

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Gaard
Does the importance of the info collected somehow have a bearing on any 'unethicalness' of the act?

I don't believe anyone said it did. And I don't think it does.
I do however think that attention needs to be paid to the contents of them though. People need to see who is pulling the strings and controlling the process - which some of these papers clearly show.

CkG

 

[jahawkin]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
There was no "hacking" by Republicans. There may have been "unethical access" but the information was freely available. From my understanding - the other side had access to the Republican files too.

Anyway - I think the most interesting thing about all this is what the documents actually said. The whole "dangerous" Estrada thing and other tactics to be used by Democrats.

Focus on the supposed "hacking" though - instead of the content though - whatever helps you sleep at night.

CkG

Though there may have been no "hacking," unauthorized access of Dem. memos by the Republicans was an illegal act. The fact that they did it for a year and leaked multiple memos to rightwing media for publication shows how slimy they really are. I think you hit the daily double here - Republican behavior was completely unethical AND illegal.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: jahawkin

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
There was no "hacking" by Republicans. There may have been "unethical access" but the information was freely available. From my understanding - the other side had access to the Republican files too.

Anyway - I think the most interesting thing about all this is what the documents actually said. The whole "dangerous" Estrada thing and other tactics to be used by Democrats.

Focus on the supposed "hacking" though - instead of the content though - whatever helps you sleep at night.

CkG

Though there may have been no "hacking," unauthorized access of Dem. memos by the Republicans was an illegal act. The fact that they did it for a year and leaked multiple memos to rightwing media for publication shows how slimy they really are. I think you hit the daily double here - Republican behavior was completely unethical AND illegal.

And this claim of "illegal" is backed up by?

CkG

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: WinstonSmith
As much as it pains me to agree with CAD, there was an extensive report on NPR about this. It was a matter of clicking and opening, not hacking. Now perhaps they should not have looked, but hell I would have and so would everyone I can think of.

Not me Winston. I believe it's immoral to pry into other people's business. I wouldn't even read your post cards if I delivered your mail, not that I could pass a post office exam with dislexia, mind you.

 

[jahawkin]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

And this claim of "illegal" is backed up by?

CkG

Federal code. Accessing stuff you're not supposed to on government computers is a crime. It doesn't matter if you hacked to get it or not.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: jahawkin

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

And this claim of "illegal" is backed up by?

CkG

Federal code. Accessing stuff you're not supposed to on government computers is a crime. It doesn't matter if you hacked to get it or not.

Please provide it, I haven't seen anything that states the action was "illegal".

CkG

 

[jahawkin]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: jahawkin

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

And this claim of "illegal" is backed up by?

CkG

Federal code. Accessing stuff you're not supposed to on government computers is a crime. It doesn't matter if you hacked to get it or not.

Please provide it, I haven't seen anything that states the action was "illegal".

CkG

Link

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: jahawkin

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: jahawkin

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

And this claim of "illegal" is backed up by?

CkG

Federal code. Accessing stuff you're not supposed to on government computers is a crime. It doesn't matter if you hacked to get it or not.

Please provide it, I haven't seen anything that states the action was "illegal".

CkG

Link

And? From what I understand - authorization wasn't bypassed. It was out there for all to see - files from both sides. "unauthorized" doesn't cut it IMO. Unethical? sure. "illegal" - good luck.

CkG

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: jahawkin

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: jahawkin

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

And this claim of "illegal" is backed up by?

CkG

Federal code. Accessing stuff you're not supposed to on government computers is a crime. It doesn't matter if you hacked to get it or not.

Please provide it, I haven't seen anything that states the action was "illegal".

CkG

Forget it JH,

It's very possible CAD works in the Bush Administration, he defends everything any Republicans do as if his life depends on it.


Link

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: jahawkin

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: jahawkin

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

And this claim of "illegal" is backed up by?

CkG

Federal code. Accessing stuff you're not supposed to on government computers is a crime. It doesn't matter if you hacked to get it or not.

Please provide it, I haven't seen anything that states the action was "illegal".

CkG

Link

Forget it JH,

It's very possible CAD works in the Bush Administration, he defends everything any Republicans do as if his life depends on it.

Actually no, I don't work for or in the Bush Administration. I've already stated that accessing the files you know to be of someone elses - is "unethical". Whoever accessed them or ordered them to be accessed should be dealt with. The problem here is that some people are trying to make this out to be something that wasn't.

Also - there still is the unresolved(or even barely mentioned) issue of what some documents contained. But I'm sure those will just be overlooked since people really don't care about what they say.

CkG

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: WinstonSmith
As much as it pains me to agree with CAD, there was an extensive report on NPR about this. It was a matter of clicking and opening, not hacking. Now perhaps they should not have looked, but hell I would have and so would everyone I can think of.

Not me Winston. I believe it's immoral to pry into other people's business. I wouldn't even read your post cards if I delivered your mail, not that I could pass a post office exam with dislexia, mind you.

There are two issues I think. One is the use of "hacking" which infers breaking into some encrypted or password files, and from what I understand, that didn't happen. Apparently there was literally an icon for the file that when clicked opened the thing. I would have clicked on it.

Now the other is, should that info have been used? I don't think so, but then on the other hand I don't work for Washington politicians (and am glad of it )

 

[Gaard]

CAD,

They should be 'dealt with' even though it's not illegal? Suggestions?

Newsflash! The words politician and unethical aren't strangers. If these guys are 'dealt with' for being unethical, should every unethical politician be 'dealt with' in the same manner?

If I left my front door open and somebody walked in ...?

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Gaard
CAD,

They should be 'dealt with' even though it's not illegal? Suggestions?

Newsflash! The words politician and unethical aren't strangers. If these guys are 'dealt with' for being unethical, should every unethical politician be 'dealt with' in the same manner?

If I left my front door open and somebody walked in ...?

The probe will be able to determine some semblance of what behavior was unacceptable. At this point it's too soon to know who did and knew how much.

But also your analogy is a tad flawed. It'd be more like sharing a working space and looking at your co-workers notes - since there seemed to have been open access to documents going both ways.

CkG