As I noted in the previous message, at the very least it put the sooper sekrit Romney returns back into the news cycle.
I guess they’d have to weight the options of “definitely released” vs “want’s the million to go away”.
But the question does make me wonder about Romney’s side being behind it. IF they bought bitcoins in advance and this event runs them up to double the value, they could actually cash out the ‘safe’ bitcoins to pay the million and not loose any money over the whole deal. But, PWC would be taking a big black eye over this for them.
Even if no big players on either side take any action, it should be interesting to see if the general populace takes it up, like voting for American Idol or something.
A million doesn’t seem like much to ask for, but what do I know? I’ve no idea what a bitcoin is.
They won’t get paid. The Republicans and Democrats are both cooperating with the investigation and nobody else is going to pay up- for one thing it’d be throwing away a million dollars because the thieves may be arrested and they can’t confirm their “goods” are genuine. And paying for the tax returns might be trafficking in stolen goods.
My response to the OP:
I really hope that is not true. It would be a horrible invasion of privacy.
As much as I think the world should see Mitt’s returns, this would not even be close to the proper way. Legally, Mitt has every right to hide his financial doings.
But as levdrakon suggests, individuals may start chipping in a few bucks at a time. The hackers/hoaxers made a point that the money didn’t have to be deposited in one lump sum, leaving the door open for American Idol style voting, as lev said.
My guess is it’s a hoax and the people behind it figure anything they get is free money (assuming they have a way to launder the bitcoin deposits). But who knows? Maybe they have pulled off a heck of a break-in.
So if someone pays them to release the returns, they make money.
If someone pays them to NOT release the returns, they make money.
If nobody does anything, they make no money. What is wrong with this business model?
Nothing, as far as I can see (other than it being, you know, wrong and illegal and stuff). If it’s a hoax, they have expended no effort so they can’t lose. Nobody gives them a bitdime? Meh, they go back to the office in the morning. If they have the goods and no one pays, they still get the satisfaction of being shit disturbers and affecting the election when they release the data. As long as they think they aren’t going to jail (big assumption), there’s no downside.
FWIW at the bottom of the pastebin post - they have the following
As much as a part of me hopes this story is true - I tend to think the vagueness of the claims suggests it is a fake. Why not provide something more than a signature and two vague clues. It would certainly get more press if they would have released a page or two with the numbers redacted.
According to the wall street journal blog - these were dropped off in person - which is kind of ballsy. Also they claimed to have 20 years of the returns which is (if memory serves) the supposed number of years Romney provided to the McCain campaign.
If they are, in fact, supporters of Mr. Obama (or opponents of Mr. Romney) then they have already done what they meant to do. Namely, bring the public eye back to the lack of release of Mr. Romney’s tax returns.
Scurrilous politics in the 21st century.
Huh. Bitcoin itself was breached yesterday, with a loss of much of the available inventory of bitcoins. I have only a very vague notion of how bitcoin works, so I don’t know how this fits in to the tax return story. More here: $250,000 worth of Bitcoins stolen in net heist.
They might, but given the situation I don’t think a lot of people will be inclined to give. The authorities are already on the case and nobody knows if the documents are real anyway.
I so want this to be true.
$1 million is chump change for either campaign or camp of followers.
If I were PWC I WOULD NOT confirm the breach - regardless, I’d be stonewalling, so I don’t think you’ll get any joy from that area.
And from all those spy documentaries I’ve seen, I know that it’s not all that difficult to get into a building and copy files.
Or more seriously, if someone has the balls, a bit of inside knowledge and maybe a sympathetic contact to be able to get access to the files doesn’t strike me as being outside the realms of possibility. It would take luck, and may not be complete files, but enough to be usable does strike me as highly possible.
Ok. Putting money into the account is pointless, since there’s no reason to believe the perps. So neither fund will hit $1 million. The perps won’t be caught because they won’t bother to access their Bitcoin bin. The password will be released on Sep 28: Republicans will predictably and legitimately cry foul and the Dems will piously and appropriately distance themselves from criminal behavior. The returns will reveal that Mitt had an offshore bank account and received Amnesty for illegal behavior. Scenario. The returns will be studied and will fail standard forensic tests. They are forgeries.
Modification: law enforcement might add something to pot. There might be enough there for the perps to try to capture. Which would make them vulnerable. I seriously doubt whether the total will amount to anything over $200,000, and suspect that it will be less than $20,000.
The fact that Romney won’t release his returns will imply that he has something to hide, though the preceding may actually take some of the heat off of him. Ironically.
Weirdly, I agree with your assessment.
I suppose we will all just have to wait to see what happens.
As we always do because, after all, this is just a message board on the Internet.
It is not as if any of us have assets on the ground.
…
Or do we?
I was wondering about that. If the pro-publish account looks like it’s going to win, could the Romney campaign (or a sympathetic superPAC) just kick in enough to keep the encryption keys withheld? They’d probably want to time it just right, like sniping on eBay.
Bitcoin itself was not breeched. Bitfloor, a Bitcoin exchange had a backup server hacked and a bunch of wallet keys were stolen and the coins were then transferred out of those wallets. It’s like a bank being robbed versus the Fed being robbed or a US mint being commandeered.
Another scenario. The files are released. Their authenticity is questioned. Perps are arrested. What are they charged with? Were the files stolen or not?
They can always claim that only the first message (with no monetary demands) was theirs. The second could have been from someone else simply trying to extort some Bitcoins.
Are they charged with breaking and entry, thus validating the returns, or not?
Supposing the $1m in Internet Funbucks is deposited. It’s impossible to remove without being traced, if I’ve understood correctly - but would it need to be, if the act of depositing makes the value of everybody else’s Bitcoins rise?
It would be like forcing someone to buy 1000 shares of Apple. Share price goes up, lots of people cash in, nobody can tell who orchestrated it.
Or am I completely on the wrong path here?