EXCLUSIVE: FBI Seized Smashed Hard Drives From Wasserman Schultz IT Aide’s Home

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Wehrwolfen, Jul 23, 2017.

  1. squidward

    squidward Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2009
    Messages:
    37,112
    Likes Received:
    9,515
    Trophy Points:
    113
    One wouldn't know unless they looked at the server. Is this hard for you?
     
  2. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    153,338
    Likes Received:
    39,002
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Because Lynch told Comey it was not an investigation so drop it?
     
    squidward likes this.
  3. TRFjr

    TRFjr Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2013
    Messages:
    17,331
    Likes Received:
    8,800
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Spoliation of evidence
    The spoliation of evidence is the intentional, reckless, or negligent withholding, hiding, altering, fabricating, or destroying of evidence relevant to a legal proceeding.[1] Spoliation has three possible consequences: in jurisdictions where the (intentional) act is criminal by statute, it may result in fines and incarceration (if convicted in a separate criminal proceeding) for the parties who engaged in the spoliation; in jurisdictions where relevant case law precedent has been established, proceedings possibly altered by spoliation may be interpreted under a spoliation inference, or by other corrective measures, depending on the jurisdiction; in some jurisdictions the act of spoliation can itself be an actionable tort.[2]

    The spoliation inference is a negative evidentiary inference that a finder of fact can draw from a party's destruction of a document or thing that is relevant to an ongoing or reasonably foreseeable civil or criminal proceeding: the finder of fact can review all evidence uncovered in as strong a light as possible against the spoliator and in favor of the opposing party
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spoliation_of_evidence
     
    Zorro and squidward like this.
  4. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    153,338
    Likes Received:
    39,002
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    That's not a definition that is a law which applies to destruction of evidence and it does not require that evidence be under a subpoena to be evidence. If I destroy business records because I am under investigation and I believe they may be evidence I committed a crime I can be charged with destroying evidence. It doesn't have to be under a subpoena it only has to be shown I had a reasonable expectation it was the subject of an investigation.
     
    Last edited: Jul 25, 2017
  5. grapeape

    grapeape Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2015
    Messages:
    16,812
    Likes Received:
    9,326
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Holy crap batman. Podesta was on Gmail, so he didn't have access to the server, ONLY to his email box. The 3 Clinton staffers who were also hacked were on other public domain email servers. Email servers are application servers, and only allow access to the application level.

    And how would you know that there was Malware on the DNC network if the DNC refused them access ?
     
  6. grapeape

    grapeape Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2015
    Messages:
    16,812
    Likes Received:
    9,326
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So it has to be identified, both as evidence, AND as a possible criminal proceeding. Which legal proceeding are we talking about in this case ?

    FTR, we all know they destroyed it to cover someones A$$. Im not debating nor defending that
     
  7. grapeape

    grapeape Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2015
    Messages:
    16,812
    Likes Received:
    9,326
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No they don't. I've been an engineer for 25 years, and if you know how attacks work, you know what you need to do. The "server" in this case was worthless. All of the email released came from an email application level attack, NOT from a "server" based attack. Thats why they weren't subpoenaed in the first place.

    Look, I'm not defending the DNC in any way. Im just pointed out facts that the server was not "needed". Not for phishing attacks. And had the FBI thought they needed them, they would have subpoenaed them for testing.
     
  8. Rosa Parks

    Rosa Parks Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2017
    Messages:
    7,095
    Likes Received:
    3,091
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The FBI requested them several times and were denied.

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...s-to-access-dnc-servers-podesta-s-device.html
     
    PrincipleInvestment likes this.
  9. Smartmouthwoman

    Smartmouthwoman Bless your heart Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 13, 2009
    Messages:
    55,907
    Likes Received:
    24,863
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    Last edited: Jul 25, 2017
    ChrisL and PrincipleInvestment like this.
  10. Thought Criminal

    Thought Criminal Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2017
    Messages:
    18,135
    Likes Received:
    13,224
    Trophy Points:
    113
    ChrisL and Smartmouthwoman like this.
  11. BestViewedWithCable

    BestViewedWithCable Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2010
    Messages:
    48,288
    Likes Received:
    6,966
    Trophy Points:
    113
    yup, pretty much
     
    PrincipleInvestment likes this.
  12. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    153,338
    Likes Received:
    39,002
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Podesta was just one of the hacks that exposed his emails and DNC emails and yes the FBI believed at least one of the DNC servers had been hacked and could have been the source for emails.

    "“The F.B.I. thinks the D.N.C. has at least one compromised computer on its network and the F.B.I. wanted to know if the D.N.C. is aware, and if so, what the D.N.C. is doing about it,” Mr. Tamene wrote in an internal memo about his contacts with the F.B.I. He added that “the Special Agent told me to look for a specific type of malware dubbed ‘Dukes’ by the U.S. intelligence community and in cybersecurity circles.”"
    https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/13/us/politics/russia-hack-election-dnc.html

    I'm sure the FBI has had good reasons to repeatedly request access to the servers.
     
    PrincipleInvestment likes this.
  13. Mrlucky

    Mrlucky Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2017
    Messages:
    4,964
    Likes Received:
    3,679
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The smashed hard drives were seized by FBI and are evidence. It doesn't really matter what was on the drives. Smashing them is fairly incriminating though any data retrieved would be useful. You also questioned the server. I say servers. These guys always backup all client data usually on servers located in the USA but probably not leased by the DNC. The FBI will find more information there.

    If you have been following in post #8 I questioned money paid and that I thought any actual IT work was being done from Pakistan. The FBI did follow the money and have arrested the IT Aide on BANK FRAUD.

    Soon after Imran began working for Wasserman Schultz in 2005, four of his relatives appeared on the payroll of other Democrats at inflated salaries, but Democratic staffers said they were rarely seen at work. They collected $4 million in taxpayer salaries since 2009.

    The left has a lot to answer for. This is just the tip of the iceberg.

    http://dailycaller.com/2017/07/25/wasserman-schultzs-it-aide-arrested-trying-to-flee-the-country/
     
    PrincipleInvestment, Zorro and ChrisL like this.
  14. Zorro

    Zorro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    76,435
    Likes Received:
    51,248
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Wasserman Schultz aide arrested trying to leave the country. “A senior House Democratic aide confirmed Awan was still employed by Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) as of Tuesday morning. But David Damron, a spokesman for Wasserman Schultz, later said that Awan was fired on Tuesday.” Why was he still on the payroll?
     
    PrincipleInvestment likes this.
  15. Zorro

    Zorro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    76,435
    Likes Received:
    51,248
    Trophy Points:
    113
  16. Mrlucky

    Mrlucky Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2017
    Messages:
    4,964
    Likes Received:
    3,679
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I heard her excuse was because Awan had her password and knew too much. FOX reported that.
     
    Zorro likes this.
  17. Zorro

    Zorro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    76,435
    Likes Received:
    51,248
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ouch! They sure don't mind spending our money on their blackmail needs, do they? Throw Debbie over the barrel and the family pretty much has free rein of the place, DNC Servers, Democrat IT as well as the US House Bank?

    But, The Russians!
     
    Last edited: Jul 27, 2017
  18. Texas Republican

    Texas Republican Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2015
    Messages:
    28,121
    Likes Received:
    19,405
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Wait a minute .... Democrats destroying e-mails, wiping hard drives clean (with a cloth?), etc.

    I've seen this rodeo before.
     
    Zorro likes this.
  19. Zorro

    Zorro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    76,435
    Likes Received:
    51,248
    Trophy Points:
    113
  20. Zorro

    Zorro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    76,435
    Likes Received:
    51,248
    Trophy Points:
    113
    MIAMI HERALD: Wasserman Schultz kept paying tech expert suspected of stealing House computers.

    When a computer expert who worked for congressional Democrats was accused of stealing computers and data systems in February, members of Congress cut him loose within days, leaving Imran Awan with no supporters five months later.

    Except for Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

    The Weston Democrat has not explained in detail why she continued to employ Awan until Tuesday when she fired him — after he was arrested on bank-fraud charges at Dulles International Airport in Virginia attempting to board a flight to Pakistan.

    And she has not elaborated on what work Awan did for her after he lost access to the House computer network.

    She declined to answer questions about Awan in Washington on Wednesday, and her spokesman, David Damron, accompanied her to the House floor while instructing a reporter that Wasserman Schultz would not take questions about her former employee.

    Background: Wasserman Schultz aide arrested trying to leave the country. “A senior House Democratic aide confirmed Awan was still employed by Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) as of Tuesday morning. But David Damron, a spokesman for Wasserman Schultz, later said that Awan was fired on Tuesday.” Why was he still on the payroll?

    Related: Debbie Wasserman Schultz Tries to Distance from Staffer Who Took $100k from Iraqi Politician.

    Flashback: House IT Aides Fear Suspects In Hill Breach Are Blackmailing Members With Their Own Data.

    Congressional technology aides are baffled that data-theft allegations against four former House IT workers — who were banned from the congressional network — have largely been ignored, and they fear the integrity of sensitive high-level information.

    Imran Awan and three relatives were colleagues until police banned them from computer networks at the House of Representatives after suspicion the brothers accessed congressional computers without permission.

    Five Capitol Hill technology aides told The Daily Caller News Foundation’s Investigative Group that members of Congress have displayed an inexplicable and intense loyalty towards the suspects who police say victimized them. The baffled aides wonder if the suspects are blackmailing representatives based on the contents of their emails and files, to which they had full access.

    “I don’t know what they have, but they have something on someone. It’s been months at this point” with no arrests, said Pat Sowers, who has managed IT for several House offices for 12 years. “Something is rotten in Denmark.”

    A manager at a tech-services company that works with Democratic House offices said he approached congressional offices, offering their services at one-fourth the price of Awan and his Pakistani brothers, but the members declined. At the time, he couldn’t understand why his offers were rejected but now he suspects the Awans exerted some type of leverage over members.

    There’s no question about it: If I was accused of a tenth of what these guys are accused of, they’d take me out in handcuffs that same day, and I’d never work again,” he said.

    This stinks.

    Another flashback: Wasserman Schultz Threatened Capitol Police Chief For Gathering Evidence On Her IT Staffer’s Alleged Crimes.

    https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/271204/
     
  21. Zorro

    Zorro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    76,435
    Likes Received:
    51,248
    Trophy Points:
    113
    PrincipleInvestment likes this.
  22. Talon

    Talon Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2008
    Messages:
    46,673
    Likes Received:
    26,230
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    PrincipleInvestment likes this.
  23. Crownline

    Crownline Banned at Members Request

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2016
    Messages:
    6,472
    Likes Received:
    6,537
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I don't think she is hot.
     
  24. Thought Criminal

    Thought Criminal Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2017
    Messages:
    18,135
    Likes Received:
    13,224
    Trophy Points:
    113
    #EaseDebbie'sBurden
     
    Talon likes this.
  25. Zorro

    Zorro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    76,435
    Likes Received:
    51,248
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'd agree, but when is the last time a Congressional Committee actually did something useful or effective at a hearing? They look to me to be a colossal waste of time, and likely by design.

    I'd say a Grand Jury and a US Attorney, but Sessions, whose big issue is apparently expanding Assess Forfeiture (!?) has her brother (!?!) assigned to the the case! So WTH?

    I can't even...

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]Pamela Moore @Pamela_Moore13

    The Assistant US Attorney overseeing the Awan family investigation is Steven Wasserman, the brother of Wasserman Schultz!

    4:24 PM - Jul 26, 2017
     
    HB Surfer likes this.

Share This Page