UPDATE ON THE ATTACK ON THE LIEBERMAN CAMPAIGN WEBSITE per joe2006.com

[elehhhhna]

Thisis what pops up this morning:

UPDATE ON THE ATTACK ON THE LIEBERMAN CAMPAIGN WEBSITE

STATEMENT FROM SEAN SMITH: "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."

[skooooo]

1. Liars....

Lamont didn't do this.

Where was Joe in denouncing the phone jamming REpublicans did in 2004?

[elehhhhna]

2. Where was Joe's fat mouth in Fla 2000 ?11!!!1 Seriesly.

[LaurenG]

3. Lamont already did that, in fact I believe he had Joe's web-pages

running on his (Lamont's)website last night. I'll see if I can find the transcript. I think it was an interview on msnbc but if may have been cnn. I'll see if I can find it.

[Norquist Nemesis]

10. He sure did! I was really impressed that Lamont would do that

and carry his opponent's pages. If Joe continues the nasty attacks, send him a bill for server time. LOL!

[Hubert Flottz]

4. I hope this bites Joe and his cronies on the ass!

Damned Conspiracy Nuts!

[izzybeans]

5. Wow they have no trouble placing an attack on their website however.

[elehhhhna]

8. yep.

[DoYouEverWonder]

6. At what point do these lies

become grounds for slander charges?

[me b zola]

7. Sleezebag LIEberman

Lamont has not only addressed the issue in a statement, but he also helped sleezy Lieberman get his sight hosted last night cause stupid joe was crying about his stupid sight.

FU joe.

[zbdent]

9. Didn't they already claim that Lamont had nothing to do with it?

I thought I saw something last night where the Lieberman groups admitted it had no foundation whatsoever for the claims ...

Wormtongue must be whispering in Joe's ear again ...

[Junkdrawer]

11. I still get the Under Construction message...

http://www.joe2006.com

[rodeodance]

12. Why label it an attach in the subject line if it is still up in the air?

[elehhhhna]

Damn, now it says "suspended".

[cynatnite]

13. Oh, for...

:crazy:

Lieberman website goes down.
Lieberman campaign blames Lamont.
Lamont denies charge and offers help.
Lieberman accepts help so their site will be seen.
Accusation is proven false.
Lieberman campaign continues to blame Lamont after losing race.

:eyes:

[Junkdrawer]

14. The corporate media is still cleverly lying for Joe...

The truth is that Joe exceeded the bandwidth that $14.95/mo buys. Rather than address this issue, the corporate media keeps insisting that Joe was "paid in full". Well, yeah, but $14.95 sill does NOT buy enough bandwidth and using it up is NOT a DoS attack.

[Junkdrawer]

17. Links:

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/08/08/lieberman.website/index.html

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/14245779

[cynatnite]

15. Here's a screen shot...

http://www.joe2006.com/

[Junkdrawer]

16. I don't get that. n/t

[blogslut]

18. If this is how they plan to win in November

They're starting off with lies. Lieberman's site went down because his "internet consultant" paid for crappy $15.00 hosting and it crashed.