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

[Dashinka 24,799]

5 hours ago, 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). 

If a member of the WH staff was found to be a foreign spy, and worse yet, a Russian spy, the MDL would not let us hear the end of it regardless of who hired the person.

[bcking 3,157]

48 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

If a member of the WH staff was found to be a foreign spy, and worse yet, a Russian spy, the MDL would not let us hear the end of it regardless of who hired the person.

That's a big deal, even in this case. I'm sure that will be investigated and I would hope everyone involved would want it investigated, including DWS.

 

I'm not saying DWS is not in a bad spot. I just don't think there is anything to suggest she knew what they were doing and I don't think her threat regarding her laptop (while I agree she shouldn't have threatened) was in an effort to obstruct the FBI's investigation into Awwan (sp?). I think she was stupid for making a fuss, and I do agree it is suspicious regarding what OTHER things are on her laptop, but I don't think it's related to the bigger case.

[Dashinka 24,799]

11 hours ago, bcking said:

That's a big deal, even in this case. I'm sure that will be investigated and I would hope everyone involved would want it investigated, including DWS.

 

I'm not saying DWS is not in a bad spot. I just don't think there is anything to suggest she knew what they were doing and I don't think her threat regarding her laptop (while I agree she shouldn't have threatened) was in an effort to obstruct the FBI's investigation into Awwan (sp?). I think she was stupid for making a fuss, and I do agree it is suspicious regarding what OTHER things are on her laptop, but I don't think it's related to the bigger case.

Regardless, based on the precedent set by the MDL and their media allies regarding the entire Russian narrative, we need a 1-2 year investigation of DWS with leaks from anonymous sources to fan the flames, and maybe some committees in Congress to act like they are doing something.

[bcking 3,157]

1 hour ago, Bill & Katya said:

Regardless, based on the precedent set by the MDL and their media allies regarding the entire Russian narrative, we need a 1-2 year investigation of DWS with leaks from anonymous sources to fan the flames, and maybe some committees in Congress to act like they are doing something.

The election wasn't even a year ago. The people "prolonging" the investigation is the FBI. It's not like they come out and said "hey guys we're done" and then the MDL screams "keep looking". In fact I'm pretty sure Comey or someone else had been quoted commenting on the average length of an FBI investigation and so far the Russian one is well within that. I could be wrong on that.

 

I would want the investigation to take as long as it needs to take. I don't pretend to be an expert on the subject so I wouldn't want to suggest to the FBI to shorten or lengthen it. They do what they need to do.

[Boiler 46,121]

Good to see we all agree that an in depth investigation is needed, I would not want to put a time line on it, probably the tip of the iceberg.

[Dashinka 24,799]

1 hour ago, bcking said:

The election wasn't even a year ago. The people "prolonging" the investigation is the FBI. It's not like they come out and said "hey guys we're done" and then the MDL screams "keep looking". In fact I'm pretty sure Comey or someone else had been quoted commenting on the average length of an FBI investigation and so far the Russian one is well within that. I could be wrong on that.

 

I would want the investigation to take as long as it needs to take. I don't pretend to be an expert on the subject so I wouldn't want to suggest to the FBI to shorten or lengthen it. They do what they need to do.

Umm, that is exactly what is happening.  The minute this dies down, the MDL/Leftist Media begins a new narrative attack all while ignoring their own sides ties to the Russian, but what else is new.

[bcking 3,157]

Just now, Bill & Katya said:

Umm, that is exactly what is happening.  The minute this dies down, the MDL/Leftist Media begins a new narrative attack all while ignoring their own sides ties to the Russian, but what else is new.

When has the FBI stated they are finishing up the investigation and someone (left or right) pushes them to keep going? The FBI decides how long to investigate.

 

They confirmed their investigation into Hillary's email server in August 2015, and it concluded approximately 1 year later. By that standard the Russian election investigation can keep going until around November before it is even remotely unusual.

 

I assume that is what you are suggesting when you say "that is exactly what's happening".

[Dashinka 24,799]

5 hours ago, bcking said:

When has the FBI stated they are finishing up the investigation and someone (left or right) pushes them to keep going? The FBI decides how long to investigate.

 

They confirmed their investigation into Hillary's email server in August 2015, and it concluded approximately 1 year later. By that standard the Russian election investigation can keep going until around November before it is even remotely unusual.

 

I assume that is what you are suggesting when you say "that is exactly what's happening".

The whole Russian narrative investigation started back in July 2016, so we have reached an anniversary already.  This is according to that angel James Comey.

[IAMX 3,055]

7 hours ago, bcking said:

When has the FBI stated they are finishing up the investigation and someone (left or right) pushes them to keep going? The FBI decides how long to investigate.

 

They confirmed their investigation into Hillary's email server in August 2015, and it concluded approximately 1 year later. By that standard the Russian election investigation can keep going until around November before it is even remotely unusual.

 

I assume that is what you are suggesting when you say "that is exactly what's happening".

The issue with Clinton is prematurely ending an investigation. Kinda arouses suspicion. 

 

With Trump, it's the prolonging of investigations and repeatedly doing one with clearly no criminal wrongdoing.

 

So I mean.. the approach you're talking about would be fantastic if we assumed naively that all sides had the best intent.

Edited July 27, 2017 by IAMX

[Dashinka 24,799]

On 7/26/2017 at 0:35 PM, bcking said:

I think it is still a stretch to say that DWS herself "May have given muslim brotherhood top secret information".

 

Employees who worked for her look like they have ties and may have been supplying information. That doesn't imply DWS herself was involved in their transfer of information. Trump would hope for the same argument to hold true for him when the special investigation is done. People who worked for Trump may have discussed with Russians how to manipulate our elections to help him win, but Trump is going to be relying on the fact that there is not yet evidence (to our knowledge) to suggest that he personally knew about it. People can't be 100% responsible for their subordinates in all things. I realize some people on the "left" may believe Trump is 100% responsible for everything every employee of his does, but I don't think that. 

 

I think what is more likely in this situation is DWS has information on that laptop that she doesn't want to be made public, and possibly even doesn't want the FBI to look at. Nude photos, evidence of bribes, intimidation or whatever. We are just speculating at this point what it is. They very well may be serious things she wants covered up, but I'm not going to jump to the conclusion that she was trying to cover up the fact that she is a secret muslim brotherhood spy. It seems like she was just trying to get them to give back HER laptop. She wasn't trying to cover for the guy. 

At work we have a program that allows us to not need to get a camera cover on our phone(s) if we take a class and allow security (randomly) to check our photos occasionally.  If one is in that program and they also keep questionable photos that is their issue.  Security could not care less if they find explicit photos as long as there are no confidential photos on your device(s).  As to DWS, if she does have questionable material on her government issued devices, that is on her, she cannot keep these from being viewed during an investigation.

12 hours ago, IAMX said:

The issue with Clinton is prematurely ending an investigation. Kinda arouses suspicion. 

 

With Trump, it's the prolonging of investigations and repeatedly doing one with clearly no criminal wrongdoing.

 

So I mean.. the approach you're talking about would be fantastic if we assumed naively that all sides had the best intent.

The FBI allbut said she was guilty.

[IAMX 3,055]

3 hours ago, Bill & Katya said:

At work we have a program that allows us to not need to get a camera cover on our phone(s) if we take a class and allow security (randomly) to check our photos occasionally.  If one is in that program and they also keep questionable photos that is their issue.  Security could not care less if they find explicit photos as long as there are no confidential photos on your device(s).  As to DWS, if she does have questionable material on her government issued devices, that is on her, she cannot keep these from being viewed during an investigation.

The FBI allbut said she was guilty.

It's funny because the left latch onto conspiracies yet have no idea what overwhelming proof is..

 

 

 

 

Nothing suspicious here to the left.. but someone talks to Russia, works for a globalist company that wants business from Russia, or has someone in their family who has anything to do with Russia, or has a Russian sounding last name.. impeach Trump! 

 

Clearly the left have no idea what corruption is, and tie it specifically to whether or not its a Democrat, Republican, etc.

Edited July 28, 2017 by IAMX

[CarlosAndSveta 808]

Here is a different viewpoint on this story:

 

http://crooksandliars.com/2017/07/how-imran-awan-became-biggest-wingnut-fake

[Cyberfx1024 7,980]

59 minutes ago, CarlosAndSveta said:

Here is a different viewpoint on this story:

 

http://crooksandliars.com/2017/07/how-imran-awan-became-biggest-wingnut-fake

Good viewpoint on some stuff about how the other side sees things. But I have seen some inconsistencies about things. First, that he declared bankruptcy because he was bad with money and he didn't actually launder it to Pakistan. I think he did launder the money AND took out loans for nice things, but he then did not want to pay for them so he declared bankruptcy. I think this idea holds merit because this is a widely common practice. 

[smilesammich 10,727]

1 hour ago, CarlosAndSveta said:

Here is a different viewpoint on this story:

 

http://crooksandliars.com/2017/07/how-imran-awan-became-biggest-wingnut-fake

the need to mislead with the title in the op speaks volumes.

[Dashinka 24,799]

5 minutes ago, smilesammich said:

the need to mislead with the title in the op speaks volumes.

Yes, because this piece by an obscure alt left website says it all.