Talk:Democrat IT scandal
Started 2 days ago and already #13 on Google.
Here's my theory: Wasserman Schultz took advantage of loopholes in House IT regulations, and the weak law enforcement agency policing Capital grounds, to spy on and manipulate her party member colleagues to get herself elected DNC chair. Some colleagues were part of the apparatus (Meeks, Fudge, perhaps a few others). Other Democratic Members may have wittingly or unwittingly hired the Awans on Schultz, Meeks, or Fudge's recommendation, or did so to curry favor with Schultz.
When Imran reached the approximate maximum number of clients one IT staffer by appearance could reasonably handle, his brother and their two wives were brought on to register with the House HIR office and be granted user rights and permissions over more Congressional Democrat Member-clients. Being granted full unsupervised access to 80 members over a dozen years was copied onto flash drives and offloaded on an outside server, which the Wasserman Schultz machine than had copies of files from the House Intelligence, Homeland Security, and Foreign Affairs Committee. The taxpayers were billed for the rate that the Awans' were paid for the information DNC and Wasserman Schulz obtained. Information is power, and Wasserman Schulz used this information and power, not only to hand out favors to Superdelegate compatriots, it could also be used to keep them in line. As well as power and influence peddling, both among private sector donors, but in the foreign policy sphere, as well.
The only question is, What did the Awan's do with the money? since they had unpaid bills and were broke all the time? I suspect possibly two causes: (1) they were inept money managers, and (2) a portion of their taxpayer-funded salaries may have been kicked back into Wasserman Schulz fundraising machine.
Then there is also the question of a propensity for violence, which they threatened, but we need more information.
And one final area of investigation: did Imran uncover the internal breach in DNC servers? since there is a definite link between him and the DNC? And were Imran and Abid out for a walk at 4am in the morning on July 10, 2016? RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 17:43, 4 June 2017 (EDT)
Capitol Police & American Democratic? System
I checked on the Capitol Police, said to be under the legislative branch; strange since its function is clearly executive in nature, & the president is supposed to be over the executive. I found that the chief of the capitol police has over him a committee, not of Congress at all so far as I can see in any administrative capacity. There is a committee or board over him of 4 persons, one of whom is the chief himself. The other 3 are Sergeant of Arms of Senate, Sgt of Arms of the House, & the Capitol Architect, appointed by the president. So it looks like the Capitol police are practically a 4th branch of govt, independent from the other 3, except for ability of congress to pass laws regarding them, & vote or withhold budget. The 2 sergeants are elected by Congress. So I suppose they could elect someone else. I don't know if that would nullify their election. I suppose the president could replace the architect. The US govt is awfully Byzantine. There are several police forces in DC: Parks Police, Metro Police, Capitol Police, Secret Service, 2 Sergeant at Arms Police forces, Private Police even, & Supreme Court Police (w/ Uniformed Services, Protective Services, Threat Assessment Unit, Background Investigation Unit, Honor Guard, Key Response Squad,HazMat/Bomb Response, & Canine Unit). Should I add in the Pentagon, US Army, Coast Guard, & Marine Barracks alone covering 6 acres?)
- Our Constitution set up a Byzantine govt, a mixed constitution. The article refers to an American Democratic System. I think that is technically wrong, but permissible. So I don't know if the author wants to change it to American Republic System. Actually the USA is not & never has been any democracy since mostly the people do not vote laws, as in ancient Athens. We elect representatives who somewhat make laws. But IMHO we are ultimately an oligarchy. Actually we have a mixed constitution with 4 main elements: 1) monarchy president, 2) Republic Congress, 3) unelected oligarchy of judges who claim to make the final laws and be superior both to president & congress, & 4) bureaucracy: many, many unelected agencies churning out like millions of rules constantly (FCC, social security, Homeland Security -- each of them BTW may have their own police force, like the Postal Inspectors -- I think I read that Homeland Security has 240,000 employees & 200,000 contractors). And of course all of this is confounded by State governors, legislatures, & local governments down to your Home Owners Assn. (Thunkful2 (talk) 01:25, 3 August 2017 (EDT))
- Yes it's definitely an interesting and Byzantine area to examine. I read today about the House Administration Committee which I guess oversees or employs the Capitol Police. Don't forget the DC municipal government - a city council with an executive & municipal courts - is under the authority of the Congress. Until 1871, the US Congress acted as the DC city council as well. Now it retains veto power over any city ordinance. Technically speaking, the House Oversight Committee should have jurisdiction over the DC city police, and have the power to make direct inquiries to the homicide unit in a cold case matter (it wouldn't be done in open session). I'm sure there are legal hurrdles they'd have to overcome, but the Congress itself has direct control over DC, per the Constitution. Wikipedia has a few interesting articles[ on it. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 02:05, 3 August 2017 (EDT)