FBI Seized Smashed Hard Drives From Wasserman-Schultz IT Aide’s Home - UPDATE: arrested trying to flee the country

[bcking 3,157]

2 minutes ago, IAMX said:

A special thank you for putting that into my head. 

hehe I'm just saying, we don't know what she was trying to protect. 

 

While she could utlimately be a Manchurian Candidate-type spy, I think it is more likely that her crimes (whatever they are) have gotten mixed up in a case involving something else. She tried to separate it. We'll see what the FBI finds (or maybe we won't...).

Edited July 26, 2017 by bcking

[IAMX 3,055]

3 minutes ago, bcking said:

hehe I'm just saying, we don't know what she was trying to protect. 

 

While she could utlimately be a Manchurian Candidate-type spy, I think it is more likely that her crimes (whatever they are) have gotten mixed up in a case involving something else. She tried to separate it. We'll see what the FBI finds (or maybe we won't...).

I doubt she's a spy too, but her connections should have her likely in jail and nowhere near sensitive information.

[Dashinka 24,799]

3 hours ago, IAMX said:

Its weird I thought threatening people investigating you for not handing over evidence of their investigation was called obstruction.

Leftist Dems cannot obstruct.  That is a rule.

 

[bcking 3,157]

1 minute ago, IAMX said:

I doubt she's a spy too, but her connections should have her likely in jail and nowhere near sensitive information.

What is on her laptop may make her end up in jail. Just having hired the guy, if there is no evidence she knew what he was doing, shouldn't put her in jail. As I said, Trump is going to need to rely on a similar argument for himself. You can't be 100% responsible for what subordinates do.

 

I wouldn't end up in jail if it turned out a resident working under me was secretly injecting patients with feces and I had no idea. I would feel horrible about it and would probably spend hours trying to figure out if I could have known somehow, but I don't think I would be guilty.

[Dashinka 24,799]

2 minutes ago, IAMX said:

I doubt she's a spy too, but her connections should have her likely in jail and nowhere near sensitive information.

It'll be like Hillary.  DWS will be utterly inept, and an all around idiot in doing what she did, but no reasonable prosecutor would ever pursue charges.

 

[bcking 3,157]

3 hours ago, IAMX said:

Its weird I thought threatening people investigating you for not handing over evidence of their investigation was called obstruction.

She wasn't asking them to hand over evidence in their investigation. She was trying to argue that her own personal laptop wasn't under investigation unless they were investigating her specifically, so she should be able to get it back.

 

Unfortunately I would side with the FBI here. It's like if I left my laptop in a crime scene. It may end up being not involved at all, but I can't just demand it back until the FBI is done with it. She seemed to think there was a law claiming she could request it back, which goes beyond my knowledge.

[IAMX 3,055]

1 minute ago, bcking said:

She wasn't asking them to hand over evidence in their investigation. She was trying to argue that her own personal laptop wasn't under investigation unless they were investigating her specifically, so she should be able to get it back.

 

Unfortunately I would side with the FBI here. It's like if I left my laptop in a crime scene. It may end up being not involved at all, but I can't just demand it back until the FBI is done with it. She seemed to think there was a law claiming she could request it back, which goes beyond my knowledge.

Threatening people is not a request.

 

If all that transpired was a request, this wouldn't even be an issue.

Edited July 26, 2017 by IAMX

[bcking 3,157]

2 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

It'll be like Hillary.  DWS will be utterly inept, and an all around idiot in doing what she did, but no reasonable prosecutor would ever pursue charges.

 

What do you think DWS has done, other than hire the guy? Heck she may not even have been directly responsible for his hiring. I'm sure she likely has other people who take care of that.

 

If a cleaning person at the White House turned out to be a secret Russian spy, Trump wouldn't be responsible for "what he did" (hire the cleaning person). 

[IAMX 3,055]

Just now, bcking said:

What do you think DWS has done, other than hire the guy? Heck she may not even have been directly responsible for his hiring. I'm sure she likely has other people who take care of that.

 

If a cleaning person at the White House turned out to be a secret Russian spy, Trump wouldn't be responsible for "what he did" (hire the cleaning person). 

He's well involved in the DNC.

 

That should cause significant concern, especially in light of all this hysteria about foreign involvement in the US.

[bcking 3,157]

2 minutes ago, IAMX said:

Threatening people is not a request.

Yes I agree, and I agree she shouldn't have threatened.

 

I was just saying she wasn't threatening them and telling them to stop their investigation (which would be trying to obstruct their investigation). She was trying to separate her laptop from the investigation, by using some law that she believes exists that protects Congresspeople's belongings from being confiscated unless the Congress person is under investigation. I don't know the details of that law or why it doesn't apply (or if it even exists).

 

EDIT: Going to a noon conference again. Have fun guys. Maybe something new will come out in the next hour.

Edited July 26, 2017 by bcking

[IAMX 3,055]

1 minute ago, bcking said:

Yes I agree, and I agree she shouldn't have threatened.

 

I was just saying she wasn't threatening them and telling them to stop their investigation (which would be trying to obstruct their investigation). She was trying to separate her laptop from the investigation, by using some law that she believes exists that protects Congresspeople's belongings from being confiscated unless the Congress person is under investigation. I don't know the details of that law or why it doesn't apply (or if it even exists).

Obstruction isn't merely telling someone to stop an investigation. It's also attempts to mess with evidence involved in an investigation. She clearly has stuff on that computer she doesn't want others to see. 

 

And don't you dare say what you said before again. 

[IAMX 3,055]

9 minutes ago, bcking said:

Yes I agree, and I agree she shouldn't have threatened.

 

I was just saying she wasn't threatening them and telling them to stop their investigation (which would be trying to obstruct their investigation). She was trying to separate her laptop from the investigation, by using some law that she believes exists that protects Congresspeople's belongings from being confiscated unless the Congress person is under investigation. I don't know the details of that law or why it doesn't apply (or if it even exists).

 

EDIT: Going to a noon conference again. Have fun guys. Maybe something new will come out in the next hour.

Have fun. Slow summer here. 

[Dashinka 24,799]

9 minutes ago, IAMX said:

Threatening people is not a request.

 

If all that transpired was a request, this wouldn't even be an issue.

It is a bit narcissistic, but I doubt anyone one on the Left notices.

[IAMX 3,055]

5 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

It is a bit narcissistic, but I doubt anyone one on the Left notices.

I have no idea on that, but I mean.. the left is in an uproar about the sanctity of the elections.

 

This person was tampering with the Democrats very own primaries, Hillary takes her in to lead her own failed Presidential campaign, and now this.. 

 

It's just funny how quiet the Dems, their supporters, and those hysterical about fake Trump-Russia news are about this circumstance. Not unexpected. That's why you don't give these people an inch on the conspiracy stories. It's clear this is all nothing to do with election integrity and foreign influence (to which this case has huge implications on both of those matters), just people upset they didn't get their way in the elections.

Edited July 26, 2017 by IAMX

[IAMX 3,055]

1. Awan has been a staffer for Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) and other top congressional Democrats since 2004:

UPI reports more than 24 different Democratic House offices used Awan’s services. Awan’s time with Wasserman Schultz included her entire tenure as chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee. Estimates are that Awan and his family received more than $4 million from House Democrats since 2009.

 

2. Awan was still employed by Wasserman Schultz’s office until he was arrested Tuesday night:

According to Fox News reporter Chad Pergram, the former DNC head’s office only terminated him after authorities moved in for the arrest as Awan tried to make his way out of the country via Dulles International Airport despite his being publicly under investigation for what appear to be embezzlement and fraud allegations

 

3. Wasserman Schultz has “inexplicably protected” Awan for months:

The Daily Caller News Foundation’s Luke Rosiak, who has been spearheading this story since February, reported in May about Wasserman Schultz’s appearing to threaten Capitol Police Chief Matthew Verderosa with “consequences” if he did not return a laptop Awan owned that his officers had seized.

 

4. Despite declaring bankruptcy in 2012, Awan wired $283,000 ahead to two people in Faisalabad, Pakistan, before making his break:

According to court charging documents reported in Politico, Awan fraudulently obtained $165,000 as a home equity loan from the Congressional Federal Credit Union before making the wire transfer.

 

5. Awan’s own family is at loggerheads with him:

Awan brought his brothers and wife with him into the congressional IT business. The family business, however, may not have been a happy one. The brothers’ stepmother is reportedly suing Awan for wiretapping and threats to have her family arrested in Pakistan. Awan’s own father, who is suspected of being caught up in his son’s fraudulent financial dealings, appears to have changed his name to avoid being associated with him.

 

6. Awan threatened a veteran family to get back the smashed hard drives and other computer equipment now at the center of the investigation:

Awan and his family rented their Lorton, Virginia, home to a married couple. The Marine veteran husband told the Daily Caller he found “wireless routers, hard drives that look like they tried to destroy, laptops, [and] a lot of brand new expensive toner” in the garage.

“They recycled cabinets and lined them along the walls. They left in a huge hurry,” he continued. “It looks like government-issued equipment. We turned that stuff over.”

Imran Awan and his family then reportedly began trying to terrorize the Marine veteran and his Navy officer wife into returning the equipment, calling them repeatedly, arriving at the home three or four times, and threatening to sue if the equipment was not returned. Instead, the family turned the material over to the FBI.

 

7. In 2014, CNN published an op-ed by Awan about the perils of “Islamophobia.”

In “Opinion: ‘The Muslims Are coming!’ Why Islamophobia Is So Dangerous,” Awan openly mocked Western news outlets that publish stories on issues that are “used by the far-right into vitriolic hate against Muslims.” 

..

CNN was all too happy to publish Awan’s dressing down of “threatening comments that are both extremely inflammatory and promote Islamophobia.”

Curiously, Awan’s defense attorney in his present case appears to have opted for the same rhetorical strategy. “This is clearly a right-wing media-driven prosecution by a United States Attorney’s Office that wants to prosecute people for working while Muslim,” Chris Gowen, Awan’s attorney, told Politico.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/07/26/7-fast-facts-imran-awan-wasserman-schultzs-jailed-vendor/

 

I'm thankful for the family he threatened not giving him the stuff and turning it over to the FBI instead. True patriots.

 

While that "hurr durr u just hate Muslims" strategy might work on the left, it won't work in court.

Edited July 26, 2017 by IAMX