Darrell Issa: This time you've gone too far

The BBQ Pit
101

By the way, here is the full transcript of Rep. Elijah Cummings’ letter to Issa. I will excerpt parts relevant to the discussion:

I will concede that Cummings is definitely worried about what could happen and finds that to be a scarier prospect than what Issa had already done.

However, it seems obvious to me that Cummings indeed feels that Issa has been cavalier with sensitive information. He is leaving it out for anyone to see (my 11 year old does that with his stuff all the time) and giving it to people who Cummings and the rest of the committee don’t even know, and he makes it quite clear that damage has been done by these actions.

So feel free to disagree with me. But you’re also disagreeing with the Ranking Member of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform who gets the same information that Issa receives and is in a much better place to judge how “sensitive” it is and how much potential damage can - and already possibly has - been done by Issa being Issa.

102

Moving goalposts from “Issa compromised the web site’s security”, aren’t you?

Cumming’s letter is all about partisan insinuations. No proof, or even indication, that Issa in any way released any “security-compromising” information about the web site to anyone he shouldn’t have.

Can you point out exactly where he “makes it clear that damage has been done”? Is it because Cummings has some kind of expertise to decide what is “sensitive” information when Issa says it isn’t? What are his technical credentials exactly (or the credentials of experts he brought in to determine the sensitivity of this information)?

103

Not if documents related to the design of the web-site were left unattended.

104

You have definitely moved the goalposts here, though you’ve at least now offered some valid support for criticizing Issa. You’re still writing checks your cites can’t cash, though; it is certainly not clear that “damage has been done by these actions.”

105

Were the original goalposts not that he compromised the website’s security?

It’s not my fault that a bunch of people seem to think that the only way to compromise the website’s security is to release the codes.

106

Yes, and you were, originally, wrong. The article you cited showed no actions by Issa that “compromised the website’s security”.

Here’s an article from today: Hackers: HealthCare.gov still riddled with potential security issues

Cybersecurity researchers slammed HealthCare.gov’s security during a House hearing on Thursday, saying the site is still riddled with problems that could put consumers’ sensitive health details at risk.
Note: they are doing this without seeing any of the documents Issa has gotten. They are testifying in front of the House Science Committee - one that Issa has nothing to do with. First time these guys testified was Nov 19th - again, before Issa got any documents, and their testimony that the web site is riddled with security problems had nothing to do with those documents.

So - your claim that Issa, by pointing out that the web site is insecure, is saying something new or particularly illuminating for hackers is absolutely wrong. The “hackers” don’t need Issa.

Saying that a web site is insecure is like saying that your house has doors and windows. You know, possible points of access for robbers and kidnappers. So, everyone, John_Stamos’_Left_Ear’s house has doors and windows! There, I just committed a horrible crime of “compromising” your home’s security.

107

No, I wasn’t originally wrong. What I said was true.

What happened was I made am assertion and was asked to provide a cite, so I did. This is a fairly frequent thing in this forum.

Its not my fault that you knew far less about the situation than I did. But I’m very glad I could eradicate your ignorance.

You’re welcome.

108

Man, even people on your side think your assertions are idiotic.

109

That’s pretty untrue since I am pretty confident Representative Cummings is on my side.

110

To recap:

My original assertion:
[QUOTE=John_Stamos’_Left_Ear]
Once again, Darrell Issa has compromised security with his bullshit antics, this time the security of the Obamacare website and all of the millions who have put sensitive information there
[/QUOTE]

My citation:
[QUOTE=Rep. Elijah Cummings]
Another concern is the security of documents in the custody of the Committee… (T)here have been two separate occasions last week when sensitive documents were left unattended in unlocked rooms accessible by the public. Although I understand that your office believes these documents are not sensitive, one was produced to the Committee in encrypted, password-protected format, and both were marked as sensitive documents that require special handling.

A third concern relates to providing access to sensitive information to individuals outside the Committee… Based on your statements, it is unclear who these outside experts are, who they work for, and who they may be affiliated with, raising concerns about what they may do with the information. If they do not work for the government or any of its contractors, it is unclear what contractual or other restrictions they are under not to disclose this sensitive information further. There have been multiple reports about organizations and individuals who are deliberately targeting the Healthcare.gov website for malicious purposes. The risk that this information could get into the wrong hands increases dramatically as more individuals gain access to it, particularly when these individuals are under no obligation to safeguard it.
[/QUOTE]
So, Issa has left encrypted, password-protected documents laying around unattended in public places.

Issa has shared this information with third parties who have not been vetted by the committee - the committee doesn’t even know who they are.

And let us examine my other citation. Your honor, I call to the stand Rep. Darrell Issa himself! audible gasp from the courtroom Rep. Issa, please repeat what you said to CBS News reporter Sharyl Attkisson in your interview that she conducted:
[QUOTE=Rep. Darrell Issa]
Remember, Sharyl, this is not about your application being compromised. This is a system, exchange and portal, that lets me go into the Department of Homeland Security, lets me go into the IRS … Social Security. Think about what’s at Social Security, what’s at IRS, what’s at Department of Homeland Security. That’s the vulnerability.
[/QUOTE]
If this was true - that the healthcare.gov website was so insecure that a hacker could jump into even more federally operated websites with even more sensitive information (it’s not, but let’s pretend it is for a moment) - why would a responsible person publicize this in the media?

A responsible person wouldn’t because a responsible person would say “we need to get this fixed” and after it was fixed then feel free to issue your “I saved the day” press releases, because doing it that way doesn’t make the target these websites already might have get any bigger.

I’m done defending this. If you want to whine any more, Terr, I suggest Similac. It’s perfect for helping crying babies sleep.

111

You’re an idiot. I am glad your co-leftists on this board realize it too. End of discussion.

112

But I have to point out, that if they really did leave the documents behind in a conference room, well, I’ve seen people fired for less.

113

Yeah. Or for sharing sensitive information with unknown third parties. Or for screaming from the rooftops that all federal websites are inter-connected and insecure (when neither is the case).

And that’s just what Issa did with regard to healthcare.gov information. It doesn’t even include the shit he’s already pulled - shit that has everyone nervous to even give him information because he makes like Edward Snowden with subpoena power.

114

That can get you fired in the real world, too. We can’t throw out any papers, and most of them have to go into the locked bin for on-site cross cut shredding. I don’t think I’m supposed to answer a family member who asks, “How’s work?”

115

Another post from the prolific poster Rep. Cummings who calls out Issa for essentially accusing then-Secretary Of State Hillary Clinton of treason.
[QUOTE=Rep. Elijah Cummings]
The definition of treason is the betrayal of allegiance owed to one’s country, and your statements seem to accuse former Secretary Clinton of this offense. You suggest that Secretary Clinton directed the Secretary of Defense of the United States to intentionally withhold military assistance that may have saved the lives of one of her own ambassadors and three other brave Americans serving their country. Your accusations are beyond the pale, and you should immediately retract them and issue a public apology.
[/QUOTE]
This is a response to remarks during a GOP fundraising dinner in Concord, NH earlier this week:
[QUOTE=Rep. Darrell Issa]
We need to have an answer of when the secretary of defense had assets that he could have begun spinning up. Why there was not one order given to turn on one Department of Defense asset? I have my suspicions, which is Secretary Clinton told Leon (Panetta) to stand down, and we all heard about the stand-down order for two military personnel. That order is undeniable. They were told not to get on — get off the airplane and kind of stand by — and they’re going to characterize it wasn’t stand down. But when we’re done with Benghazi, the real question is, was there a stand-down order to Leon Panetta or did he just not do his job? Was there a stand-down order from the president who said he told them to use their resources and they didn’t use them? Those questions have to be answered.
[/quote]
. In a Four Pinocchio response, the Washington Post Fact Checker says:
[QUOTE=Glenn Kessler]
It is correct that Issa poses a series of questions, but his repeated use of the phrase “stand down” and his personalizing of the alleged actions (“Secretary Clinton;” “Leon”) leave a distinct impression that either Clinton or Obama delivered some sort of instruction to Panetta to not act as forcefully as possible. He even incorrectly asserts that not a single order was given to use any DOD asset. One could argue the response was slow, bungled or poorly handled. But Issa is crossing a line when he suggests there was no response — or a deliberate effort to hinder it.
[/quote]
I’m sure that Terr will be along any time now to defend his hero Issa. :cool:

116

I read that support for Trump may drag down Darrel Issa. Couldn’t happen to a nicer guy.

The Wikipedia article on Issa is interesting. He is the wealthiest currently serving member of Congress. He was once accused of grand theft auto. Suspicious timing of a large insurance purchase and a fire raised suspicion of arson though no charges were ever filed. His legislative record is hardly helpful: He opposes all tax increases, any attempt to mitigate AGW (though he claims to “believe” in it). One of his legislative accomplishments was “a bill to allow a slightly taller height limit for penthouses in the District of Columbia.”

And now Colonel Doug Applegate has a real chance to take California’s 49th District! :slight_smile: It’s much too soon to break out the champagne, but wouldn’t it be wonderful if Nancy Pelosi takes up the gavel in the House again?

117

My sister is a political activist in Orange County, and one of her most prominent roles at the moment is a behind-the-scenes person working on Applegate’s campaign.

118

Yes Issa, it’s like if you had lied about mass rape by the Libyan military in order to justify an intervention that would destabilize the region.

119

That sounds bad. Who did that? Was it Applegate?

120

Just can’t stay on topic, can you?