BREAKING - Guccifer 2.0 Hacked Clinton Foundation!

originally posted by: Vasa Croe
Hmmm....Pay to Play...that seems suspicious to me as a folder they would actually have in their server....I smell some shenanigans going on here.

Hillary Clinton and her staff don’t even bother about the information security.

The burning question I have is WHY?

...and how is anything that can incriminate her STILL UNSECURED?

Shenanigans indeed.

Welp, that's it i guess. You all are sick enough that you want to invade peoples privacy simply to "one up" Hillary then be my guest. I certainly can't stop you, but when the shoe is on the other foot... you have no right to complain.

In previous hacks by guccifer 2.0 he has shown emails that use the term.

"Pay to Play"

pjmedia.com...

originally posted by: jonsoup
Omg, did you really just link a site with peoples private info. What is wrong with you people?? You all are monsters.

What "private" information? Are you worried that nearly every single major financial institution in the country has donated to the Clinton Foundation in significant amounts? What part of "monster" and who it applies to do you not understand here?

And hey! Welcome to ATS! You've been here a whole month now and nearly ALL your posts are about the election, pro Clinton and anti Trump! I see you're having a good time.

originally posted by: thinline
John B Wells had a guest that was talking about security and what's classified.

The guest said that about 10% of what's classified should be classified and the rest is shady stuff. When you classify shady stuff, not for the sake of the republic but for the sake of your pocket book and reputation, then you are asking for hacks.

It is also a felony to use the classification system in the USA to hide shady or illegal operations, just like Obama and Eric Holder did with "Fast and Furious", but since everyone of consequence is still in their back pockets, they continue to get away with the blatantly overt corruption of this country.

a reply to: schuyler

Actually i've been here on and off since 2010! Also, PRIVATE INFO on private citizens. Regardless of your leaning you should have been able to at least respect that.

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan
I'd love for this to be true, but I'm afraid it'll turn out to be a hoax.

Especially intriguing is the idea that banks kicked back money from their TARP funds.

Some of the banks didn't need those TARP funds. My understanding was that all of the big banks were called into a meeting and told they would take funds whether they needed them or not so that the banks who did need funds would be protected.

I wonder if this is true, if the demand for kickbacks came at the same time or later on? Then that begs the question ... if this is true ... was it ever about "protecting" the banks that needed bailing out or was it always a giant Democrat money laundering scheme to begin with?

originally posted by: jonsoup
Welp, that's it i guess. You all are sick enough that you want to invade peoples privacy simply to "one up" Hillary then be my guest. I certainly can't stop you, but when the shoe is on the other foot... you have no right to complain.

What you mean like that time when a New York newpaper published the entire registry of firearms owners in the state with their private information because the paper felt people "had a right to know"? Or what about that time the IRS illegally leaked Romney's tax information?

The shoe has been on the other foot.

Leaking clintons medical records would be personal information- if I'm not mistaken, these are clinton foundation files- files from the non profit organization/charity that somehow is very much involved in funding her election campaign.

a reply to: ketsuko

What you mean like that time when a New York newpaper published the entire registry of firearms owners in the state with their private information because the paper felt people "had a right to know"? Or what about that time the IRS illegally leaked Romney's tax information?

I obviously don't approve of leaking private info, so why bother bringing that up? Unless your next sentence was gonna be "and no one involved had any problem with that" I fail to see your point.

originally posted by: jonsoup
a reply to: ketsuko

What you mean like that time when a New York newpaper published the entire registry of firearms owners in the state with their private information because the paper felt people "had a right to know"? Or what about that time the IRS illegally leaked Romney's tax information?

I obviously don't approve of leaking private info, so why bother bringing that up? Unless your next sentence was gonna be "and no one involved had any problem with that" I fail to see your point.

So at what point is it whistle blowing and at what point is it leaking?

Maybe when we fasten a whistle over the leak ...?

originally posted by: jonsoup
a reply to: schuyler

Actually i've been here on and off since 2010! Also, PRIVATE INFO on private citizens. Regardless of your leaning you should have been able to at least respect that.

Uh huh. Sure. What "private" information on what "private" citizens? I'm sure you already know that political contributions by private citizens over $100 are not private at all but are public domain. Your name, address, amount, and who you gave to is available on the Internet for all your neighbors to see. There's nothing illegal about it.

originally posted by: ketsuko
I wonder if this is true, if the demand for kickbacks came at the same time or later on? Then that begs the question ... if this is true ... was it ever about "protecting" the banks that needed bailing out or was it always a giant Democrat money laundering scheme to begin with?

Those possibilities aren't mutually exclusive. Crooked people tend to be opportunistic about stuff like this. In Detroit when Kwame Kilpatrick was the mayor, kickbacks & pay-to-play were SOP. If you wanted to do business with the city, you had to slip some money into Da Mayor's pocket. Kwame eventually got caught and served a stint in prison.

Hmmm, "Pay for Play" file makes me feel like the DNC set this up purposely hoping someone would hack it, then they would track the hack back... I dunno... Just seems like an odd folder name... Was there also a "clubbing baby seals" folder too?

Seems odd...

Well....the site is hard down. I don't think anyone got the file downloaded as it was around 800MB from what I could tell prior to it crashing.

Hopefully he will have another link up soon that will stay up.

originally posted by: Vasa Croe
Hmmm....Pay to Play...that seems suspicious to me as a folder they would actually have in their server....I smell some shenanigans going on here.

In other emails, they openly referred to "Pay to Play letters" and having a system to manage them. It's not necessarily suspicious that they would call the folder that.

It's also worth considering what they mean when using the term "Pay to Play". This might easily be written confirmation that the donor is getting an evening of fun and frolics at one of Hillary's marathon naked Twister sessions (or whatever incentives she has been offering donors, private lunches, cheese and whine evenings, etc) rather than more sinister stuff.

Download link is too overloaded right now.. Been trying for the past 20 minutes.

Also.....
There were emails with the subject line "Pay to Play" so why is it such a stretch to believe there wouldn't be a folder by that name?

a reply to: EvillerBob

It's also worth considering what they mean when using the term "Pay to Play". This might easily be written confirmation that the donor is getting an evening of fun and frolics at one of Hillary's marathon naked Twister sessions (or whatever incentives she has been offering donors, private lunches, cheese and whine evenings, etc) rather than more sinister stuff.

NOT an image I needed, and I'm not sure how anything gets more sinister than that.

Also, if you think your system is secure, this is what you do. Why hide it?

Information is slowly trickling in from different news sources. Looks like there were some big name Dems linked to funneling the Tarp funds. Link

Barney Frank
Carolyn Maloney
Chris Van Hollen
DCCC
James Clyburn
John Larson
Luis Gutierrez
Mel Watts
NANCY PELOSI
Paul Kanjorski

THEY ALL FUNNELED TARP FUNDS TO THEIR PACs!
This is DEVASTATING News for Democrats!
Thanks to the weak cyber security of the Clinton Foundation!

Poor Nancy Pelosi just can't get a break!

If they would all just stop being so corrupt and actually go serve the time in prison they deserve, they'd get the break they need.