I was in IT long time I can tell you for these guys to do thier jobs they had to access to a lot. I’m talking e-mail boxes mail servers home directories, shared directories file severs back up appliances a lot of data. We are under attack from Muslim terrorists leave it to the Rats to bring in Muslim IT guys.
I’m sure you know a heck of a lot more than I do, in terms of the minutiae of maintaining such a system; the various admin permissions etc; etc; I only know vague generalities.
And I am sure that over ten years, someone in that position would have all manner of time to wander and poke around...and it certainly doesn’t seem to be the case that any of these cong people were in much of a mood to say “we can’t allow you access to that” even IF there was such a layer or layers of permissions; and even if they did, wouldn’t that act as a tempting target for these Awan types? And hey, maybe they used passwords just about as skillfully as Podesta. Ya think?
But over and above all that, once on the DNC server, there’s no question at all that there was in essence a direct pipe into HRCs server and the information contained thereon.
I mean, the whole thing about the HRC server is the idea that this top secret information she left on the kitchen table as it were, it’s an abstract crime/non-crime because she just violated a law here and there. There is never the consideration and as far as I know, nobody has even hinted at the idea that actual operations were jeopardized thereby. No surprise, there’s never a consequence where the Clintons are concerned.
There were as I understand it 600 emails from the Benghazi consulate or whatever it was “we are largely undefended” “We’re not at all secure here”...has anyone asked the question, “how many emails like this would have to be intercepted for an enemy to get the idea that ‘they’re not defended’?
.