This is the same old song and dance with these Communists Democrats. They violate law and policy, and then blame other people for crimes they commit. Former DNC chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz admitted that she violates official information security policy. However, as usual, she will not accept responsibility and blamed the House of Representatives chief administrative officer for not stopping her.
While that should have been done by the admin, the violation is hers and hers alone.
In an appropriations hearing on Congress' administrative budget in May, Wasserman Schultz admitted to violating security policies "for years and years and years." Then she decided to question just how much House admins know about her internet usage.
If you recall, she was head of the DNC when tens of thousands of Democrat emails were accessed and later published by Wikileaks, which led to her resigning the DNC and moving over to help the Hillary Clinton campaign. Those emails seem likely provided by murdered DNC staffer Seth Rich.
Wasserman Schultz's IT (information technology) aide Imran Awan is currently being investigated for theft and channeling data from members of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, Committee on Homeland Security and Committee on Foreign Affairs.
“If a member is using an application outside of the House infrastructure and the protection of the, [of] our cybersecurity network, they’re in violation of House policy?” she asked John Ramsey, the House’s information security officer at the hearing on the legislative branch’s budget, in the previously unreported May 17 appropriations hearing.
“Of the House Policy 17, yes ma’am,” Ramsey responded.
“So Members are not supposed to be using Dropbox?” Wasserman Shultz asked.
“Not according to the policy,” Ramsey replied.
Wasserman Schultz then blamed House authorities for not stopping her and questioned their commitment to cybersecurity.
“I am more than happy to admit that I use Dropbox," she said. "I have used it for years and years and years. It is not blocked. I am fully able to use it."
“So there is a vulnerability in our network in spite of the fact that you say that you’ve taken steps to address it,” she continued. “And there is not enough of a — of a policy that — that applies across the board. And you need to make sure that you tighten up your rules and policies so that you can really take and assure us that you take seriously protecting our network.”
So, she openly admits to violating policy, but then instead of taking responsibility for her reckless behavior, she blames the fallible system for her gross security violations.
It seems that she then wanted to know just how much people are being monitored, not that she cared that ordinary Americans are constantly illegally monitored by the central government in open violation of the Fourth Amendment.
“Are members monitored?” she asked. “Do, does the office examine whether members are following these rules? How is it enforced?”
“And, you know, how do you make sure that, if you are concerned as you say you are about protecting the information on the House IT network, how are you actually enforcing that and making members aware” of the policy? she added.
“I’m asking you how have you communicated with members of Congress about the use of outside applications and whether or not their usage of outside applications is compliant with the posted policy?” she continued.
Rep. Ramsey replied, “When the policy came out, ma’am, we had sent some targeted communications out to the various IT systems administrators that service … the members," indicating that Awan had not provided her the proper information, which led to her violating policy.
So, her alleged ignorance was apparently due to a bad IT person, one whom she simply relabeled as "adviser" instead of firing him after he was banned from the House network.
“OK. Safe to say that you have not,” she said. “Wouldn’t you think that you would have a policy where you inform every single member and that we actually have a meeting with each member’s tech person so that you can inform them exactly what the rules are, what is allowable, what is not allowable?”
"We do inform every IT person, IT administrator in every congressional office," said Chief Administrative Officer Phil Kiko.
Luke Rosiak reports at The Daily Caller:
Imran Awan is suspected of funneling sensitive House data offsite onto secret servers wholesale, federal employees have said, which is a much broader breach but one that technically overlaps in some ways with how Dropbox works.
After Awan began working for Wasserman Schultz in 2005, three of his relatives, including a 20-year old brother, as well as his best friend, appeared on other House members’ payrolls at salaries on par with congressional salaries. They have collected $4 million since 2010 despite being rarely seen.
House authorities told members’ chiefs of staffs on Feb. 2 that the Awans were targets of a criminal probe, and other members fired them.
In the same May 17 hearing, Wasserman Schultz lamented that members didn’t have the maximum ability to exert pressure on the chief of the Capitol Police because he reports to an independent board. Not all of that board’s members report to the House Committee on Appropriations’ legislative subcommittee, of which she is one of eight members.
The disgusting way that Wasserman Schultz turns the tables to play the victim while chastising her colleagues is sickening enough, but even more so is that her colleagues will more than likely not do one thing to deal with her to rein her reckless and arrogant behavior in.Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, & Twitter. You can also get Freedom Outpost delivered to your Amazon Kindle device here.