There's a wide degree of technical understanding in any chain of communication, and no I'm not paranoid to believe that every mistatement or misunderstanding is premised on a "lie".
A lot of folks jump to conclusions when something goes wrong with their site.
For example, I administer the domain name and name servers for Green Delaware and www.greendel.org, and have done so for years. The site had a technical glitch recently, and the guy who runs the site was convinced it was the result of recent political action undertaken by Green Delaware, and was made a target by press coverage of the action.
The actual problem - I had missed a renewal notice for the domain name, and it had briefly lapsed.
Traffic can really screw up a lot of things, and it can be interpreted as a code failure.
The Kucinich site is on a shared server with 489 other websites - that's as many as 489 other people who can change files on that server.
But to give you another example... During the 2004 campagin when Cheney mis-spoke and said "factcheck.com" instead of "factcheck.org", I made a call to the Factcheck.org folks on the other side of town to see if they wanted to get the traffic that was pouring in. They were having a hard time keeping their site going as it was, in part due to the controversy that arose from our having directed the factcheck.com traffic to the website of George Soros (which at the time was entitled "Why we must not re-elect George Bush). The other call I made was to the Soros' people to make sure they weren't pissed off about the traffic. Their position was "We aren't asking for it, but we are putting extra capacity online to deal with it."
A good political story can send traffic through the roof, and Kucinich does not have dedicated hosting.
It's something I've seen happen:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/president/2004-10-06-cheney-error_x.htm
The lawyer, John Berryhill, said Wednesday that the company's owners — whom he declined to name — are not fans of Bush or Cheney. When they saw the number of users clicking on "factcheck.com" start to soar Tuesday night, they feared the traffic would "crash" their computer. But they also saw a chance to tweak the president and vice president.
<...>
At "factcheck.org," — the site Cheney wanted people to see — the number of "visitors" also soared Wednesday. At various points in the day the organization's computer crashed because of excess demand. Brooks Jackson, the Web site's director, said Wednesday's traffic far exceeded 63,000, the most visitors in a day previously.
What's your experience with this kind of situation?