Congress is quietly moving to tighten its security as many shun media coverage of the Democrat’s IT scandal.
Politico reported that the U.S. House of Representatives is holding member-only “listening sessions” this week. These private meetings will cover solutions to possible cyber-security leaks of congressmen’s emails and other data, alleged theft of hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of computer equipment and much more. All of this is related to a group of IT administrators, mostly from Pakistan, who worked for more than 40 Democrats in the House, but who were tossed off the House computer network last February by Capitol Police.
Imran Awan, his brothers, wife and the other members of this crew of House IT administrators worked as shared employees for various congressmen. They didn’t work for one of the six pre-approved IT contractors the House recommends. They were private contractors. It is unclear if any of them underwent background checks in order to obtain these positions.
“The Committee on House Administration has been conducting an internal review on shared employees, specifically in the IT field. As a part of that process, the committee is hosting two identical bipartisan member-only listening sessions the week of November 13,” said committee spokeswoman Erin McCracken.
Politico also downplayed the exposure the IT administrators represented by reporting: “Several hardline conservatives and right-wing bloggers have seized on conspiracy theories related to the investigation, claiming that Awan had access to Wasserman Schultz’s emails while she was chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee and that he, not Russia, was behind the leak of thousands of DNC emails during the election. The intelligence community, including the CIA and FBI, has said conclusively that Russia was behind the hacks as part of its widespread attempt to influence the 2016 election.”
That’s an opinionated and declarative statement from a publication that should know this is a complex topic. Even The Nation, which is hardly staffed with “hardline conservatives” or “right-wing bloggers,” questioned the Russia narrative in 4,500-word article. (This isn’t shocking, as The Nation endorsed Bernie Sanders for president in 2016, not Hillary Clinton.)