Home Depot’s co-founder Bernie Marcus took a shot at Democrats during an interview with Fox News on Saturday. Marcus attacked Democrats for their lack of understanding the basic fundamentals of economics.
But let’s be real first. If socialists understood even a microscopic amount of economics, they wouldn’t be socialists and ridiculous things like Oregon voters literally voting themselves a tax increase (on healthcare insurance policies and hospitals, nonetheless) would never happen. Democrats bank on emotions without any regards to facts or evidence. Now that we’ve gotten that out of the way, it’s easy to see why Marcus said Democrats “don’t have any brains.”
“Democrats, use your stupid brains. You don’t have any brains and don’t understand what happens,” Marcus said on Fox News on Saturday. “This is not going to turn overnight. Corporations are not going to open 14 buildings overnight. Come on, give me a break, you’ve got to use your brains,” he said, referring to improvements in the economy. According to The Hill, Republicans have said the recently passed GOP tax plan is helping the middle class, pointing to bonus announcements from companies such as Home Depot.
The home improvement retailer announced last week it would be doling out $1,000 bonuses for employees who have worked at Home Depot at least 20 years. Hourly employees who have worked for the retailer less than two years can expect a $200 bonus. Workers who have been at the company for 10 years to 14 years will get $400. Meanwhile, Democrats keep arguing that tax breaks only help the wealthy and corporations.
Representative Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, a Democrat from Florida,came under fire after she downplayed the $1,000 bonuses a number of companies have announced. “I’m not sure that $1,000 — which is taxed, taxable — goes very far for almost anyone,” she said. So what she’s saying is taxation is theft? The government is stealing part of their rightly earned bonuses? That’s what we heard…
Hopefully, the left will get it together. They look like toddlers throwing a tantrum because they don’t understand the simplest of economic math. How on earth did a group of elitists convince their followers that the government stealing from people is a good thing? It just goes to show how powerful propaganda can be.
After a leaked excerpt from her new book “Hacks: The Inside Story of the Break-ins and Breakdowns That Put Donald Trump in the White House” revealed that Donna Brazile feared for her life after the murder of former DNC employee Seth Rich, Axios has reported that Brazile provides more grist for what her former political allies have dismissed as “right wing conspiracy theories” in the book’s introduction.
Nestled among the usual platitudes about thanking friends and family, Brazile dedicates her book to Rich’s memory, describing him as a close colleague and “patriot”.
Rich was murdered in July 2016, two weeks before Wikileaks released a trove of emails stolen from the DNC’s servers that, among other embarrassing details, suggested that the DNC was engaged in widespread rigging of the 2016 Democratic primary to favor “front-runner” Hillary Clinton.
“In loving memory of my father, Lionel Brazile Sr.; my beloved sister, Sheila Brazioutlanle; my fearless uncles Nat, Floyd, and Douglas; Harlem’s finest, my aunt Lucille; my friend and mentor, David Kaufmann; my DNC colleague and patriot, Seth Rich; and my beloved Pomeranian, Chip Joshua Marvin Brazile (Booty Wipes). I miss y’all."
Rich, 27, a former data analyst at the DNC, was fatally shot while walking home late at night in Washington, D.C. The police believe the shooting was a robbery gone wrong. But Brazile says in her book that she was “haunted” by Rich’s death because she feared shadowy elements associated with the Clinton campaign may have played a role in his death as retribution for leaking the emails.
As Newsweek points out, media reports had characterized Rich as a low-level staffer, and his parents wrote in an opinion piece for The Washington Post in May claiming the idea that their son leaked the emails to Wikileaks was ridiculous because his position didn’t grant him access to sensitive data.
Brazile mentioned Rich during a Sunday appearance on ABC News’s This Week with George Stephanopouloson Sunday. She told the host about her critics: “They don’t know what it was like to be over the DNC during this hacking. They don’t know what it’s like to bury a child. I did: Seth Rich."
During the interview, Brazile softened her claims that the DNC rigged the primary (though, tellingly, party leaders have said they will reexamine the role of “joint-fundraising agreements” which Brazile alleged helped the Clinton campaign assert financial dominance over the DNC). She also said that her critics in the party can “go to hell."
"I"m not on the payroll, George. I care about my country. I care about our democracy," Brazile said. "And I say go to hell, because why am I supposed to be the only person that is unable to tell my story?"
Through spokesman Brad Bauman, the Rich family said in a statement, “Since Seth was murdered, Donna Brazile has been a great friend to the Rich family and has been extremely supportive of the family’s efforts to find Seth’s killers."
Of course, Democrats have lined up to rebut Brazile’s claims. More than 100 former Clinton campaign aids signed an open letter accusing Brazile of falling for “Russia-fueled propaganda” in what appears to be a feeble attempt to discredit her.
Already, a trove of bombshell allegations included in the book have been widely reported thanks to leaked excerpts, and a teaser chapter that Brazile published as an essay in Politico. For example, Brazile revealed that she considered replacing Clinton and running mate Tim Kaine with Joe Biden and Corey Booker after Clinton fainted at the 9/11 memorial. She also levied accusations of sexism and racism at former Clinton staffers, and - most shockingly of all - revealed that the Clinton campaign took advantage of Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s absentee leadership of the party to make the DNC financially dependent on Clinton.
The Democratic Party"s nominal support for "identity politics" has once again been exposed as little more than hollow virtue-signaling...
By now, it’s become clear that the Democratic party establishment installed Donna Brazile has the head of the DNC expecting her to be an obedient stooge who would turn a blind eye to the endemic corruption and mismanagement inside America’s oldest major political party. Unfortunately for them, Brazile had no intention of keeping quiet when she discovered that Obama’s negligence had left the party in debt, effectively allowing the Clinton to play a deciding role in doling out resources, setting strategy and myriad other issues.
A year after Trump’s upset victory over Clinton poleaxed the Washington establishment and smug Democratic elitists who felt it was their candidate’s god-given right to effortlessly slide into office despite being one of the most unpopular major-party candidates in recent memory, Brazile is speaking out in a new book, excerpts from which have been published in Politico and the Washington Post.
In one detail printed today by WaPo, Brazile recounts how Clinton’s top aides repeatedly disrespected and demeaned her, which she equated to being treated like a slave.
Brazile alleges that Clinton’s top aides routinely disrespected her and put the DNC on a “starvation diet,” depriving it of funding for voter turnout operations.
As one of her party’s most prominent black strategists, Brazile also recounts fiery disagreements with Clinton’s staffers — including a conference call in which she told three senior campaign officials, Charlie Baker, Marlon
Marshall and Dennis Cheng, that she was being treated like a slave.
“I’m not Patsey the slave,” Brazile recalls telling them, a reference to the character played by Lupita Nyong’o in the film, “12 Years a Slave.” “Y’all keep whipping me and whipping me and you never give me any money or any way to do my damn job. I am not going to be your whipping girl!”
Over the past two days, Brazile has revealed how former DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz effectively ceded control of the party to the Clinton campaign, which looted funds from state party organizations and restricted the money flowing into the DNC after agreeing to pay off most of its debt.
She also revealed that she considered replacing Clinton with Joe Biden after she collapsed during a ceremony at the 9/11 memorial. But most shockingly of all, she said that she feared for her life after the murder of DNC staffer Seth Rich, which she feared may have been planned by nefarious elements from within the party.
(COMMONDREAMS)— In an explosive and “deeply disturbing” piece for PoliticoMagazine on Thursday, former interim chair of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) Donna Brazile drew upon her brief experience at the organization’s helm to reveal the extent to which the 2016 nomination process was “rigged” in favor of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
In her account, Brazile details the deep “internal corruption” of the DNC, the role the ostensibly neutral governing body played as a “fundraising clearing house” for the Clinton team, and how those dynamics unfairly handicapped primary challenger Bernie Sanders.
Many of the DNC’s most deeply embedded issues, Brazile notes, spring both from former chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s poor management and former President Barack Obama’s neglect, which left the committee deeply in debt.
In August 2015, the Clinton campaign—along with the joint fundraising vehicle with the DNC, the Hillary Victory Fund—came to an agreement with the committee to begin to pay off this debt, which had soared to $24 million. In exchange, the DNC’s finances were placed “fully under the control” of the Clinton team, “which seemed to confirm the suspicions of the Bernie camp,” Brazile writes.
“When the party chooses the nominee, the custom is that the candidate’s team starts to exercise more control over the party,” Brazile observed. “This victory fund agreement, however, had been signed…just four months after Hillary announced her candidacy and nearly a year before she officially had the nomination.”
Brazile goes on to describe the terms of the agreement, which she describes as “unethical”:
The agreement…specified that in exchange for raising money and investing in the DNC, Hillary would control the party’s finances, strategy, and all the money raised. Her campaign had the right of refusal of who would be the party communications director, and it would make final decisions on all the other staff. The DNC also was required to consult with the campaign about all other staffing, budgeting, data, analytics, and mailings.
Brazile concludes the piece, which is an adapted excerpt from her forthcoming book, by detailing a conversation she had with Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) shortly after she found the “cancer” at the heart of the DNC—this so-called “Joint Fundraising Agreement.”
“How much control Brooklyn had and for how long was still something I had been trying to uncover for the last few weeks. By September 7, the day I called Bernie, I had found my proof and it broke my heart,” Brazile writes. “I explained that the cancer was that she had exerted this control of the party long before she became its nominee….Bernie took this stoically. He did not yell or express outrage. Instead he asked me what I thought Hillary’s chances were.”
Unsurprisingly, Brazile’s account immediately caught fire on social media, provoking a mixture of outrage and vindication—particularly given that it comes from a “stalwart” establishment insider who admitted to passing debate topics to the Clinton team during her time as a CNN contributor.
“Shame on the DNC, on Hillary Clinton, and every Democratic operative responsible for this bullshit. What a mess,” The Intercept‘s Shaun King wrote on Twitter.
If you ask ANYONE who is close to operations of the DNC today they will tell you that things are still a complete mess there financially. https://t.co/oMpb6K1pbi
“Since the election, it is not clear that the DNC has dealt with these problems yet,” writes Clio Chang of Splinter News, building on King’s point. “Tom Perez was installed as DNC chair over Keith Ellison, a move that was largely seen as giving Democratic elites more control over the party….The DNC is not doomed to repeat the problems of the past, but from Brazile’s account, it’s clear that the organization requires a major reckoning.”
This article was chosen for republication based on the interest of our readers. Anti-Media republishes stories from a number of other independent news sources. The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not reflect Anti-Media editorial policy.
The mysterious case of Imran Awan, Debbie Wasserman Schultz"s now indicted former IT staffer, continues to grow more interesting by the day. As we"ve noted before, Awan and his wife, Hina Alvi, have so far only been charged with bank fraud and conspiracy though new allegations of wrongdoing seemingly surface on a daily basis.
Now, the latest revelation comes via an exclusive report from The Daily Caller which suggests that Awan may have been fired only after Capitol Police discovered a "secret server" being housed by the House Democratic Caucus.
A secret server is behind law enforcement’s decision to ban a former IT aide to Democratic Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz from the House network.
Now-indicted former congressional IT aide Imran Awan allegedly routed data from numerous House Democrats to a secret server. Police grew suspicious and requested a copy of the server early this year, but they were provided with an elaborate falsified image designed to hide the massive violations. The falsified image is what ultimately triggered their ban from the House network Feb. 2, according to a senior House official with direct knowledge of the investigation.
The secret server was connected to the House Democratic Caucus, an organization chaired by then-Rep. Xavier Becerra. Police informed Becerra that the server was the subject of an investigation and requested a copy of it. Authorities considered the false image they received to be interference in a criminal investigation, the senior official said.
Data was also backed up to Dropbox in huge quantities, the official said. Congressional offices are prohibited from using Dropbox, so an unofficial account was used, meaning Awan could have still had access to the data even though he was banned from the congressional network.
Awan had access to all emails and office computer files of 45 members of Congress who are listed below. Fear among members that Awan could release embarrassing information if they cooperated with prosecutors could explain why the Democrats have refused to acknowledge the cybersecurity breach publicly or criticize the suspects.
According to the DC, the "secret server" was discovered when California Congressman, and chair of the House Democratic Caucus, Xavier Becerra asked to have his server wiped clean (you know, like with a cloth) in advance of his departure to take his new seat as Attorney General of California.
On Jan. 24, 2017, Becerra vacated his congressional seat to become California’s attorney general. “He wanted to wipe his server, and we brought to his attention it was under investigation. The light-off was we asked for an image of the server, and they deliberately turned over a fake server,” the senior official said.
“They were using the House Democratic Caucus as their central service warehouse … It was a breach. The data was completely out of [the members’] possession. Does it mean it was sold to the Russians? I don’t know,” the senior official said.
Capitol Police considered the image a sign that the Awans knew exactly what they were doing and were going to great lengths to try to cover it up, the senior official said. The House Sergeant-at-Arms banned them from the network as a result.
The senior official said the data was also funneled offsite via a Dropbox account, from which copies could easily be downloaded. Authorities could not immediately shut down the account when the Awans were banned from the network because it was not an official account.
“For members to say their data was not compromised is simply inaccurate. They had access to all the data including all emails. Imran Awan is the walking example of an insider threat, a criminal actor who had access to everything,” the senior official said.
Meanwhile, these latest allegations come after Congressman Trent Franks (R-AZ) appeared on Fox News yesterday to share his prediction that the Awans could be working on a broader immunity deal with prosecutors in return for a "significant" and "pretty disturbing" story about Debbie Wasserman Schultz.
“I don’t want to talk out of school here but I think you"re going to see some revelations that are going to be pretty profound. The fact that this wife is coming back from Pakistan and is willing to face charges, as it were, I think there is a good chance she is going to reach some type of immunity to tell a larger story here that is going to be pretty disturbing to the American people.”
"I would just predict that this is going to be a very significant story and people should fasten their seat belts on this one."
This all follows speculation that surfaced last week suggesting that even if the Awans were originally acting to protect/extort Debbie Wasserman Schultz, that may have all changed on April 6, 2017 when Imran seemingly led U.S. Capitol Police directly to her laptop. PerThe Daily Caller:
A laptop that Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz has frantically fought to keep prosecutors from examining may have been planted for police to find by her since-indicted staffer, Imran Awan, along with a letter to the U.S. Attorney.
U.S. Capitol Police found the laptop after midnight April 6, 2017, in a tiny room that formerly served as a phone booth in the Rayburn House Office Building, according to a Capitol Police report reviewed by The Daily Caller News Foundation’s Investigative Group. Alongside the laptop were a Pakistani ID card, copies of Awan’s driver’s license and congressional ID badge, and letters to the U.S. attorney. Police also found notes in a composition notebook marked “attorney-client privilege.”
The laptop had the username “RepDWS,” even though the Florida Democrat and former Democratic National Committee chairman previously said it was Awan’s computer and that she had never even seen it.
The laptop was found on the second floor of the Rayburn building — a place Awan would have had no reason to go because Wasserman Schultz’s office is in the Longworth building and the other members who employed him had fired him.
Of course, we"re certain this is just more attempts to "criminalize behavior that is normal."
Last week the Washington Examiner reported that Hina Alvi, the wife of Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s now-infamous former IT staffer Imran Awan, had struck a deal with federal prosecutors to return to the U.S. where she currently faces charges of conspiracy and bank fraud. The deal with prosecutors mandates a return to the U.S. during the “last week of September 2017” and is structured so that she will not be arrested in front of her children.
Now, if you’re the cynical type, then it might have struck you as somewhat odd that Alvi would agree to return from Pakistan, the place to which she successfully fled specifically to avoid the charges she now seems to be embracing.
But, at least according to Congressman Trent Franks (R-AZ) who appeared on Fox News recently, there may be more to Alvi’s return than meets the eye as he predicts that the Awans could be working on a broader immunity deal with prosecutors in return for a “significant” and “pretty disturbing” story about Debbie Wasserman Schultz.
“I don’t want to talk out of school here but I think you’re going to see some revelations that are going to be pretty profound. The fact that this wife is coming back from Pakistan and is willing to face charges, as it were, I think there is a good chance she is going to reach some type of immunity to tell a larger story here that is going to be pretty disturbing to the American people.”
“I would just predict that this is going to be a very significant story and people should fasten their seat belts on this one.”
Of course, this follows speculation that surfaced last week suggesting that even if the Awans were originally acting to protect/extort Debbie Wasserman Schultz, that may have all changed on April 6, 2017 when Imran seemingly led U.S. Capitol Police directly to her laptop. Per The Daily Caller.
A laptop that Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz has frantically fought to keep prosecutors from examining may have been planted for police to find by her since-indicted staffer, Imran Awan, along with a letter to the U.S. Attorney.
U.S. Capitol Police found the laptop after midnight April 6, 2017, in a tiny room that formerly served as a phone booth in the Rayburn House Office Building, according to a Capitol Police report reviewed by The Daily Caller News Foundation’s Investigative Group. Alongside the laptop were a Pakistani ID card, copies of Awan’s driver’s license and congressional ID badge, and letters to the U.S. attorney. Police also found notes in a composition notebook marked “attorney-client privilege.”
The laptop had the username “RepDWS,” even though the Florida Democrat and former Democratic National Committee chairman previously said it was Awan’s computer and that she had never even seen it.
The laptop was found on the second floor of the Rayburn building — a place Awan would have had no reason to go because Wasserman Schultz’s office is in the Longworth building and the other members who employed him had fired him.
DWS’s story on the now-infamous laptop has ‘evolved’ over the months…originally it was apparently her laptop back when she decided to threaten the U.S. Capitol Police Chief but later, after he stood his ground, DWS backtracked saying she had never seen the laptop and it never belonged to her.
Wasserman Schultz used a televised May 18, 2017 congressional hearing on the Capitol Police budget to threaten “consequences” if Chief Matthew Verderosa did not give her the laptop. “If a member loses equipment,” it should be given back, she said.
Verderosa told her the laptop couldn’t be returned because it was tied to a criminal suspect. Wasserman Schultz reiterated that, while Awan was a suspect, the computer should be returned because it is “a member’s … if the member is not under investigation.”
She changed her story two months later, claiming it was Awan’s laptop — bought with taxpayer funds from her office — and she had never seen it. She said she only sought to protect Awan’s rights. “This was not my laptop,” she said August 3. “I have never seen that laptop. I don’t know what’s on the laptop.”
For those who missed DWS threatening the cops for a laptop that apparently didn’t even belong to her…it’s good entertainment.
So what say you…big nothing burger or are the walls closing in on DWS?
Featured Image: U.S. Congressman Trent Franks speaking at a campaign rally for State Treasurer Doug Ducey at the Yavapai County Courthouse in Prescott, Arizona. (Gage Skidmore/Flickr)
Last week the Washington Examiner reported that Hina Alvi, the wife of Debbie Wasserman Schultz"s now-infamous former IT staffer Imran Awan, had struck a deal with federal prosecutors to return to the U.S. where she currently faces charges of conspiracy and bank fraud. The deal with prosecutors mandates a return to the U.S. during the "last week of September 2017" and is structured so that she will not be arrested in front of her children.
Now, if you"re the cynical type, then it might have struck you as somewhat odd that Alvi would agree to return from Pakistan, the place to which she successfully fled specifically to avoid the charges she now seems to be embracing.
But, at least according to Congressman Trent Franks (R-AZ) who appeared on Fox News recently, there may be more to Alvi"s return than meets the eye as he predicts that the Awans could be working on a broader immunity deal with prosecutors in return for a "significant" and "pretty disturbing" story about Debbie Wasserman Schultz.
“I don’t want to talk out of school here but I think you"re going to see some revelations that are going to be pretty profound. The fact that this wife is coming back from Pakistan and is willing to face charges, as it were, I think there is a good chance she is going to reach some type of immunity to tell a larger story here that is going to be pretty disturbing to the American people.”
"I would just predict that this is going to be a very significant story and people should fasten their seat belts on this one."
Of course, this follows speculation that surfaced last week suggesting that even if the Awans were originally acting to protect/extort Debbie Wasserman Schultz, that may have all changed on April 6, 2017 when Imran seemingly led U.S. Capitol Police directly to her laptop. PerThe Daily Caller:
A laptop that Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz has frantically fought to keep prosecutors from examining may have been planted for police to find by her since-indicted staffer, Imran Awan, along with a letter to the U.S. Attorney.
U.S. Capitol Police found the laptop after midnight April 6, 2017, in a tiny room that formerly served as a phone booth in the Rayburn House Office Building, according to a Capitol Police report reviewed by The Daily Caller News Foundation’s Investigative Group. Alongside the laptop were a Pakistani ID card, copies of Awan’s driver’s license and congressional ID badge, and letters to the U.S. attorney. Police also found notes in a composition notebook marked “attorney-client privilege.”
The laptop had the username “RepDWS,” even though the Florida Democrat and former Democratic National Committee chairman previously said it was Awan’s computer and that she had never even seen it.
The laptop was found on the second floor of the Rayburn building — a place Awan would have had no reason to go because Wasserman Schultz’s office is in the Longworth building and the other members who employed him had fired him.
DWS"s story on the now-infamous laptop has "evolved" over the months...originally it was apparently her laptop back when she decided to threaten the U.S. Capitol Police Chief but later, after he stood his ground, DWS backtracked saying she had never seen the laptop and it never belonged to her.
Wasserman Schultz used a televised May 18, 2017 congressional hearing on the Capitol Police budget to threaten “consequences” if Chief Matthew Verderosa did not give her the laptop. “If a member loses equipment,” it should be given back, she said.
Verderosa told her the laptop couldn’t be returned because it was tied to a criminal suspect. Wasserman Schultz reiterated that, while Awan was a suspect, the computer should be returned because it is “a member’s … if the member is not under investigation.”
She changed her story two months later, claiming it was Awan’s laptop — bought with taxpayer funds from her office — and she had never seen it. She said she only sought to protect Awan’s rights. “This was not my laptop,” she said August 3. “I have never seen that laptop. I don’t know what’s on the laptop.”
For those who missed DWS threatening the cops for a laptop that apparently didn"t even belong to her...it"s good entertainment.
So what say you...big nothing burger or are the walls closing in on DWS?
Former U.S. House IT aide Imran Awan pleaded not guilty Friday to federal charges that he and his wife lied on an application for a home equity loan, as prosecutors dropped hints about a broader probe of Awan and his family members related to their computer work in recent years for Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) and a series of other Democratic lawmakers in the Congress.
A federal judge also agreed to return $9,000 seized from Awan when he was arrested at Dulles Airport in late July, as the feds and Awan’s legal team agreed to ensure that the money is used only to pay for the cost of Awan’s legal defense.
While the existing case against Awan and his wife, Hina Alvi, is related to whether they did not tell the truth on a loan application to a Capitol Hill credit union – documents in the matter again suggested at a larger investigation, possibly relating to more than just matters of bank fraud.
In a letter about evidence in the case, U.S. Attorney Channing Phillips described the probe as one that involved, “voluminous discovery,” citing items that were found in a Congressional office building back in April, which seemingly may have belonged to Awan.
This "laptop bag" found in April could well be the piece of equipment that had drawn the interest of Rep. Wasserman Schultz earlier this year, when she verbally berated the Capitol Hill Police chief at a House budget hearing, demanding that an item be returned to her office.
“I think you’re violating the rules when you conduct your business that way,” Wasserman Schultz said bluntly, as she told the chief that he should “expect that there will be consequences.”
From prosecutors, this evidence letter was the first official confirmation that there were items found on Capitol Hill which had a direct link to Imran Awan.
Still unclear is what exactly that earlier investigation has uncovered.
In a hearing before Federal Judge Tanya S. Chutkan, the judge refused to allow a citizen investigator from Indiana to join the case; he claimed he could provide evidence to the feds that shows a broader misuse of government resources by Awan and his family during their Capitol Hill employment.
Judge in #Awan hearing wants request to grant Awan more freedom in writing. Will issue ruling by Oct 6
Awan, his wife, and several of their relatives were barred from the Congressional IT system in February, as Democratic lawmakers quickly fired them from part-time IT jobs – but Capitol Police and investigators have still not formally said what problem led to that decision.
Unlike other Democrats who had employed the family members, Awan and his wife, Hina Alvi, were kept on the payroll by Rep. Wasserman Schultz – Alvi until she returned to Pakistan with their children in early March, while Awan was paid until he was arrested and charged with bank fraud.
Newly released payroll figures from the U.S. House of Representatives show that Awan was paid $5,000.01 as a “shared employee” in the second quarter of 2017 by Wasserman Schultz.
That was more than the $1,494.45 that Wasserman Schultz had paid Awan in the first quarter of this year.
At today’s hearing, Awan’s lawyers asked that he be allowed to venture up to 100 miles from home, as he evidently is now driving for Uber, as a way to make money.
The judge asked for written arguments to be filed on that request. The next hearing for Awan is set for October 6.
The lawsuit brought about by Bernie Sanders supporters against the Democratic National Committee and its former chairperson Debbie Wasserman-Schultz has been dismissed after a court conceded that the DNC and Wasserman-Schultz rigged the primaries—but were well within their rights to do so—seriously.
After first assuming all the plaintiff’s allegations were true, for the purposes of weighing their claims, Judge William Zloch dismissed the lawsuit on several grounds. The plaintiffs alleged fraud on the part of the DNC in three different ways:
1. The DNC did not remain unbiased as evidenced through the DNC emails Wikileaks published.
2. Donors to the DNC were defrauded because they donated to Bernie Sanders as a Democrat candidate and the fix was in for Hillary Clinton.
3. The potential for identity theft was demonstrated when the DNC failed to keep its database of donors and their personal information confidential.
As Michael Sainato writes in the Observer, Zloch, dismissed the lawsuit after several months of litigation during which DNC attorneys argued that the DNC would be well within their rights to rig primaries and select their own candidate. “In evaluating Plaintiffs’ claims at this stage, the Court assumes their allegations are true—that the DNC and Wasserman Schultz held a palpable bias in favor Clinton and sought to propel her ahead of her Democratic opponent,” the court order dismissing the lawsuit stated.
Zloch concluded the plaintiffs failed to prove they were materially affected by the alleged bias with which the DNC engaged. He wrote:
“The Court must now decide whether Plaintiffs have suffered a concrete injury particularized to them, or one certainly impending, that is traceable to the DNC and its former chair’s conduct—the keys to entering federal court. The Court holds that they have not.”
The overwhelming opinion of those who have actually read WikiLeaks’ leaked DNC email database appears to be that the DNC, Wasserman-Schultz, and the mainstream media all colluded to ensure Clinton would earn the DNC nomination. This was evident on numerous occasions, many of which were caught on live video and openly admitted.
As The Free Thought Project has extensively reported, influential donors to the DNC are suing their political party for fraud in the 2016 presidential election where they say their candidate, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, was discriminated against. High-ranking members of the DNC, by way of Wikileaks’ DNC email publications, were caught favoring Hillary Clinton over Sanders and actively working to subvert his chances at winning the party’s nomination.
Judge Zloch dismissed the lawsuit on technicalities (several of the plaintiffs lived outside of the court’s jurisdiction) and precedents (donors to nonprofits have no legal recourse as to what the organization does with the donations). Zloch never really addressed the claims of the plaintiffs, only whether or not they had a legal claim for damages.
Zloch admonished the plaintiffs his court was not the place to air their grievances. Instead, they should have done so at the ballot box, inside the DNC, and to work inside the system—a system they clearly believe to be rife with corruption. Zloch wrote:
“This Order, therefore, concerns only technical matters of pleading and subject-matter jurisdiction. To the extent Plaintiffs wish to air their general grievances with the DNC or its candidate selection process, their redress is through the ballot box, the DNC’s internal workings, or their right of free speech—not through the judiciary.”
Zloch dismissed the case against the DNC and Wasserman-Schultz by declaring, “the Court finds that the named Plaintiffs have not presented a case that is cognizable in federal court.”
One of the plaintiffs in the case, Jared Beck, went off! Here’s what he had to say in response to the dismissal and it’s epic! His rant starts at the 9-minute mark.
His reaction describes the deaths of process server Shawn Lucas, DNC data manager Seth Rich, and Assistant U.S. Attorney Beranton Whisenant alludes to the Deep State, and points the finger of blame at the Military Industrial Complex.
“What really disappoints me about our society, H.A., is the fact that we had two witnesses die in this case, and I still have these f***ing people who call themselves ‘journalists’ mocking us… denigrating us for being concerned about that.
Ya know, it goes beyond a lack of awareness in this country. This country has a vicious, corrupt core… and the MOST vicious, corrupt people are sitting in D.C. right now, running the show and forming the media elite and establishment that surrounds and protects them, and promulgates their bullshit all over the airwaves.
And I am sick and f***ing tired of living in this country and having those be the people that run the show.
We see our clients lose in court, all the time. We see them get shafted by the healthcare system, get shafted by this country, and nobody in this country gives a f*** about them, who’s in the leadership…
Let me tell you something: I know that those problems… the problem in this country, in terms of corruption… I know that it’s so deep-seated… It’s taken root over many, many decades, and it’s not going anywhere any time soon.
But my HOPE—my hope in filing this lawsuit was that at least it might be some kind of spark to get things rolling, so that by the time my kids are adults in this society, they’re not living under an immoral, oligarchic, tyrannical piece-of-shit government that f***ing goes to war in MY name, with my tax dollars, on a perpetual basis and f***ing incinerating people, and I have NO f***ing channel to STOP it.
And as an American, I am ashamed. I am ashamed to call myself an American.
And let me tell you something else: There were people in Nazi Germany who didn’t know what the f*** was going on, either… They were f***ing clueless. They were f***ing brainwashed. And I’m not making this comparison because of any bullshit comparison between Trump and Nazism that’s going around that the mainstream media wants you to believe.
What I’m talking about is the REAL government we have in this country.
And in my view, they are morally equivalent, or worse, than the government of Nazi Germany… Because they’ve been going on longer, and they’ve been f***ing over not just everybody in THIS country, but around the world.
And I’m f***ing sick of it, as a human being.”
The dismissal of the DNC voter fraud lawsuit of 2017 will go down in history as a whimper in the annals of unsuccessful movements against the Deep State and its actors. But, perhaps, Beck’s comments will remain as a testament to just how powerful the establishment is, and the lengths to which they will go, including allegedly murdering anyone who gets in their way.
The lawsuit brought about by Bernie Sanders supporters against the Democratic National Committee and its former chairperson Debbie Wasserman-Schultz has been dismissed after a court conceded that the DNC and Wasserman-Schultz rigged the primaries—but were well within their rights to do so—seriously.
After first assuming all the plaintiff’s allegations were true, for the purposes of weighing their claims, Judge William Zloch dismissed the lawsuit on several grounds. The plaintiffs alleged fraud on the part of the DNC in three different ways:
1. The DNC did not remain unbiased as evidenced through the DNC emails Wikileaks published.
2. Donors to the DNC were defrauded because they donated to Bernie Sanders as a Democrat candidate and the fix was in for Hillary Clinton.
Advertisment
3. The potential for identity theft was demonstrated when the DNC failed to keep its database of donors and their personal information confidential.
As Michael Sainato writes in the Observer, Zloch, dismissed the lawsuit after several months of litigation during which DNC attorneys argued that the DNC would be well within their rights to rig primaries and select their own candidate. “In evaluating Plaintiffs’ claims at this stage, the Court assumes their allegations are true—that the DNC and Wasserman Schultz held a palpable bias in favor Clinton and sought to propel her ahead of her Democratic opponent,” the court order dismissing the lawsuit stated.
Zloch concluded the plaintiffs failed to prove they were materially affected by the alleged bias with which the DNC engaged. He wrote:
“The Court must now decide whether Plaintiffs have suffered a concrete injury particularized to them, or one certainly impending, that is traceable to the DNC and its former chair’s conduct—the keys to entering federal court. The Court holds that they have not.”
The overwhelming opinion of those who have actually read WikiLeaks’ leaked DNC email database appears to be that the DNC, Wasserman-Schultz, and the mainstream media all colluded to ensure Clinton would earn the DNC nomination. This was evident on numerous occasions, many of which were caught on live video and openly admitted.
READ MORE:Former CIA and NSA Officials Just Joined Forces & Debunked the Russian "Hack" Conspiracy Thoery
As The Free Thought Project has extensively reported, influential donors to the DNC are suing their political party for fraud in the 2016 presidential election where they say their candidate, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, was discriminated against. High-ranking members of the DNC, by way of Wikileaks’ DNC email publications, were caught favoring Hillary Clinton over Sanders and actively working to subvert his chances at winning the party’s nomination.
Judge Zloch dismissed the lawsuit on technicalities (several of the plaintiffs lived outside of the court’s jurisdiction) and precedents (donors to nonprofits have no legal recourse as to what the organization does with the donations). Zloch never really addressed the claims of the plaintiffs, only whether or not they had a legal claim for damages.
Zloch admonished the plaintiffs his court was not the place to air their grievances. Instead, they should have done so at the ballot box, inside the DNC, and to work inside the system—a system they clearly believe to be rife with corruption. Zloch wrote:
“This Order, therefore, concerns only technical matters of pleading and subject-matter jurisdiction. To the extent Plaintiffs wish to air their general grievances with the DNC or its candidate selection process, their redress is through the ballot box, the DNC’s internal workings, or their right of free speech—not through the judiciary.”
Zloch dismissed the case against the DNC and Wasserman-Schultz by declaring, “the Court finds that the named Plaintiffs have not presented a case that is cognizable in federal court.”
One of the plaintiffs in the case, Jared Beck, went off! Here’s what he had to say in response to the dismissal and it’s epic! His rant starts at the 9-minute mark.
READ MORE:BREAKING: FBI Makes Stunning Reversal, Reopens Clinton Investigation After Discovery of New Documents
His reaction describes the deaths of process server Shawn Lucas, DNC data manager Seth Rich, and Assistant U.S. Attorney Beranton Whisenant alludes to the Deep State, and points the finger of blame at the Military Industrial Complex.
“What really disappoints me about our society, H.A., is the fact that we had two witnesses die in this case, and I still have these f***ing people who call themselves ‘journalists’ mocking us… denigrating us for being concerned about that.
Ya know, it goes beyond a lack of awareness in this country. This country has a vicious, corrupt core… and the MOST vicious, corrupt people are sitting in D.C. right now, running the show and forming the media elite and establishment that surrounds and protects them, and promulgates their bullshit all over the airwaves.
And I am sick and f***ing tired of living in this country and having those be the people that run the show.
We see our clients lose in court, all the time. We see them get shafted by the healthcare system, get shafted by this country, and nobody in this country gives a f*** about them, who’s in the leadership…
Let me tell you something: I know that those problems… the problem in this country, in terms of corruption… I know that it’s so deep-seated… It’s taken root over many, many decades, and it’s not going anywhere any time soon.
But my HOPE—my hope in filing this lawsuit was that at least it might be some kind of spark to get things rolling, so that by the time my kids are adults in this society, they’re not living under an immoral, oligarchic, tyrannical piece-of-shit government that f***ing goes to war in MY name, with my tax dollars, on a perpetual basis and f***ing incinerating people, and I have NO f***ing channel to STOP it.
And as an American, I am ashamed. I am ashamed to call myself an American.
And let me tell you something else: There were people in Nazi Germany who didn’t know what the f*** was going on, either… They were f***ing clueless. They were f***ing brainwashed. And I’m not making this comparison because of any bullshit comparison between Trump and Nazism that’s going around that the mainstream media wants you to believe.
What I’m talking about is the REAL government we have in this country.
And in my view, they are morally equivalent, or worse, than the government of Nazi Germany… Because they’ve been going on longer, and they’ve been f***ing over not just everybody in THIS country, but around the world.
And I’m f***ing sick of it, as a human being.”
The dismissal of the DNC voter fraud lawsuit of 2017 will go down in history as a whimper in the annals of unsuccessful movements against the Deep State and its actors. But, perhaps, Beck’s comments will remain as a testament to just how powerful the establishment is, and the lengths to which they will go, including allegedly murdering anyone who gets in their way.
READ MORE:Seth Rich Named as WikiLeaks" Source, Not Russia — "Clinton Team Blocking Murder Investigation"
A federal judge this week dismissed a class action lawsuit brought against the Democratic National Committee and its former chairwoman, Debbie Wasserman Schultz. But not before confirming what was already widely suspected: That the DNC rigged the 2016 primary to favor the eventual nominee, Hillary Clinton.
Amazingly, the DNC’s attorneys never bothered refuting the lawsuit’s claim that the primary process was biased against Clinton’s rival, Bernie Sanders.
Instead, they argued that the DNC has a right to conduct primaries however it chooses, and, furthermore, that Sanders supporters knew the primaries were rigged, therefore relieving the DNC of any responsibility it might’ve had.
“DNC attorneys claim Article V, Section 4 of the DNC Charter—stipulating that the DNC chair and their staff must ensure neutrality in the Democratic presidential primaries—is “a discretionary rule that it didn’t need to adopt to begin with.” Based on this assumption, DNC attorneys assert that the court cannot interpret, claim, or rule on anything associated with whether the DNC remains neutral in their presidential primaries.”
And…
“The Court would have to find that people who fervently supported Bernie Sanders and who purportedly didn’t know that this favoritism was going on would have not given to Mr. Sanders, to Senator Sanders, if they had known that there was this purported favoritism.”
Jared Beck, one of the attorneys who filed the lawsuit, argued that DNC effectively defrauded Sanders’s donors and supporters by acting against its charter’s imperative to conduct a neutral primary.
In his ruling, Federal Judge William Zloch, dismissed the lawsuit after siding with the DNC’s attorneys – but not before confirming the plaintiff’s allegation that the DNC demonstrated a “palpable bias” against Sanders during the primary, according to the NYO.
“In evaluating Plaintiffs’ claims at this stage, the Court assumes their allegations are true - that the DNC and Wasserman Schultz held a palpable bias in favor Clinton and sought to propel her ahead of her Democratic opponent,” the court order dismissing the lawsuit stated.”
Zloch explained that the plaintiffs’ attorneys were unable to prove that Sanders supporters suffered a “concrete injury” because of the DNC’s actions. He added that the scope of the case fell beyond his court’s jurisdiction.
“The Court must now decide whether Plaintiffs have suffered a concrete injury particularized to them, or one certainly impending, that is traceable to the DNC and its former chair’s conduct—the keys to entering federal court. The Court holds that they have not.” The court added that it did not consider this within its jurisdiction. “Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction, possessing ‘only that power authorized by Constitution and statute."”
Florida attorneys Jared and Elizabeth Beck filed the initial civil complaint on July 28, 2016, alleging that a cache of hacked DNC emails published by Wikileaks had revealed a DNC that was plotting to swing the primary in Clinton’s favor. Democrats responded with a motion to dismiss, which has now been sustained.
The dismissal has probably spared both the DNC and Wasserman Schultz from embarrassing scrutiny. But the former DNC head isn’t out of the woods yet. Now that former DWS staffer Imran Awan has been arrested while attempting to flee the US and charged with four counts of fraud, there’s a possibility that DWS might be called to testify about why she kept Awan and several of his family members on her publicly funded payroll even after learning that they were under federal investigation.
The U.S. Marine who discovered smashed hard drives and other electronics in the garage of a rented home owned by indicted DNC IT staffer Imran Awan is outraged over claims of ‘Islamophobia’ from Debbie Wasserman Schultz.
Andre Taggart turned the damaged equipment over to the FBI, which is investigating the former Wasserman Schultz employee for a variety of suspected crimes, including procurement fraud, violations of the congressional IT network, and using an off-site server to divert data.
When former DNC chairman Schultz claimed that U.S. Capitol Police are only investigating a ‘persecuted’ Awan due to Islamophobia, Taggart - a Democrat, called BS and decided to speak up.
Taggart told The Daily Caller News Foundation’s Investigative Group Wednesday that “it was amazing” that Wasserman Schultz, a Florida Democrat, describes Imran as a victim of religious discrimination by law enforcement. Taggart rented the Northern Virginia home of Awan, who had frantically moved out after learning authorities were onto him.
“It pisses me off,” said Taggart, a black Marine who says he votes Democrat. He believes Wasserman Schultz is crying wolf and devaluing the meaning of genuine discrimination, while also exposing herself and the nation to risks.
The day after the Daily Caller reported that Taggart had found and turned over the damaged equipment to the FBI in July, Imran attempted to flee the country, only to be arrested by the FBI at Dulles International Airport. The Awans had transferred and smuggled nearly $300,000 out of the U.S. before Imran’s arrest.
Taggart’s identity was originally withheld when the Daily Caller broke the story about the smashed hard drives in July, however the Democrat marine said he made the decision to come forward because he is concerned that ‘fellowDemocrats are making a grave mistake by ignoring a scandal with serious criminal and national security implications,’ reports TheDCNF.
“I’m absolutely disgusted with everything going on in the country right now, mostly because of right-wing conservatives, butwith respect to this situation, political affiliation is irrelevant,” said Taggart.
In addition to the four counts of fraud in relation to a Home Equity Line of Credit Imran Awan and his wife fraudulently applied for and subsequently sent to Pakistan, the Awans are suspected of a variety of other offenses – up to and including sending classified information to foreign enemies of the United States.
“Him, his wife, his brother, all working down there — there’s no way they could do this without help. If we can drag Trump and his wingnuts through the mud for the Russia influence that they are having, then it’s only fair that we also expose this s–t,” said Taggart.
Lawsuit!?
When Imran Awan discovered that Taggart was holding onto the damaged equipment from his rented garage, he threatened to sue to get it back. Awan also listed the house for sale right after signing a multi-year lease.
“They took advantage of us,” said Taggart.
Awan relative Syed Ahmed told The Daily Mail “for the sake of money they would have done anything… [Imran] might have been selling this information.”
BothJudge Napolitanoand Lt. Colonel Tony Shaffer have said that their intel sources believe the Awans were spying on congress and selling information:
We"ve written frequently over the past couple of months about the litany of unanswered questions surrounding the mysterious case of Debbie Wasserman Schultz"s (DWS) IT staffers. Why did DWS seemingly threaten the chief of the U.S. Capitol Police with “consequences” for holding equipment that was confiscated as part of an ongoing legal investigation? Why did DWS keep Awan on her taxpayer funded payroll all the way up until the day he was arrested by the FBI at Dulles airport while trying to flee the country to Pakistan? What, if anything, does the Awan family know about the DNC hacks that may have caused DWS to act in this way?
Now, Andrew McCarthy III, the former assistant U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York who led the prosecution against Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman and eleven others for the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, says there is "something very strange" about the recent indictment filed against Imran Awan and his wife Hina Alvi in the District of Columbia.
In a National Review article, McCarthy points out that it"s not what"s in the indictment that is necessarily surprising but rather what is seemingly intentionally omitted. For instance, McCarthy points out that "the indictment appears to go out of its way not to mention" that Imran was apprehended while in the process of fleeing the country, a fact that would seem to be the best evidence available to prove the fraud charges.
Let’s say you’re a prosecutor in Washington. You are investigating a husband and wife, naturalized Americans, who you believe have scammed a federal credit union out of nearly $300,000. You catch them in several false statements about their qualifications for a credit line and their intended use of the money. The strongest part of your case, though, involves the schemers’ transferring the loot to their native Pakistan.
So . . . what’s the best evidence you could possibly have, the slam-dunk proof that their goal was to steal the money and never look back? That’s easy: One after the other, the wife and husband pulled up stakes and tried to high-tail it to Pakistan after they’d wired the funds there — the wife successfully fleeing, the husband nabbed as he was about to board his flight.
Well, here’s a peculiar thing about the Justice Department’s indictment of Imran Awan and Hina Alvi, the alleged fraudster couple who doubled as IT wizzes for Debbie Wasserman Schultz and many other congressional Democrats: There’s not a word in it about flight to Pakistan. The indictment undertakes to describe in detail four counts of bank-fraud conspiracy, false statements on credit applications, and unlawful monetary transactions, yet leaves out the most damning evidence of guilt.
In fact, the indictment appears to go out of its way not to mention it.
Why would prosecutors leave that out of their indictment? Why give Awan’s defense a basis to claim that, since the indictment does not allege anything about flight to Pakistan, the court should bar any mention of it during the trial? In fact, quite apart from the manifest case-related reasons to plead instances of flight, a competent prosecutor would have included them in the indictment simply to underscore that Awan is a flight risk who should have onerous bail conditions or even be detained pretrial.
Then there is the case of Imran"s wife, Hina Alvi. When she fled the country back in March she was detained by U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents with over $12,000 cash in her luggage, technically a crime by itself if not properly disclosed, but was allowed by the FBI to leave the country despite having been under investigation for months.
We must also ask, again: Why did the FBI allow Alvi to flee? Before she boarded her March 5 flight to Qatar (en route to Pakistan), agents briefly detained her. U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents had already searched her baggage and found $12,400 in cash. As I have pointed out, it is a felony to move more than $10,000 in U.S. currency out of the country unless one completes the required government report (see sections 5316 and 5322 of Title 31, U.S. Code). There was no indication that she did so in the complaint affidavit submitted to the court when Awan was arrested last month (see FBI complaint affidavit, pages 8–9).
By the time Alvi fled, the Awans had been under investigation by various federal agencies for at least three months. The FBI was sufficiently attuned to the Awans’ criminality that its agents went to the trouble of chasing Alvi to the airport. If she didn’t fill out the required form, she should have been arrested for the currency violation. Is it possible that, rather than arresting her, federal agents instructed her to complete the form on the spot? One would hope not, but even in such an unlikely event, Alvi would undoubtedly have made false statements about the provenance of the cash. That would also have been a felony, providing more grounds for her arrest. Why let her go, especially when, as its agent told the court in the aforementioned affidavit, the FBI “does not believe that ALVI has any intention to return to the United States”?
And then there is just the continued secrecy surrounding the case. Why did the U.S. Attorney"s office decide against filing a press release in a case that has garnered significant national attention? Why was the case filed in a district where DWS"s brother has been an assistant U.S. attorney for many years?
To begin with, it is not the easiest thing to get one’s hands on the indictment. The case is being handled by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia. There is no press release about the indictment on the office’s website, though U.S. attorneys’ offices routinely issue press releases and make charging documents available in cases of far less national prominence. (I found the indictment through the Orlando Sentinel, which obtained and posted it in conjunction with the paper’s report on the filing of charges.)
By the way, the U.S. attorney’s office is currently led by Channing D. Phillips, an Obama holdover who was never confirmed. Still awaiting Senate confirmation is Jessie Liu, nominated by President Trump in June. Meanwhile, Steven Wasserman, Representative Wasserman Schultz’s brother, has been an assistant U.S. attorney in the office for many years. I have seen no indication that he has any formal role in the case, notwithstanding some cyberspace speculation to the contrary. What is clear, however, is that the office is low-keying the Awan prosecution.
The indictment itself is drawn very narrowly. All four charges flow from a financial-fraud conspiracy of short duration. Only Imran Awan and his wife are named as defendants. There is no reference to Awan-family perfidy in connection with the House communications system.
Of course, we"re sure it"s probably nothing but at least one former U.S. Attorney says "there is something very strange going on here."
The full Grand Jury indictment can be viewed here:
The walls may be closing in on Debbie Wasserman Schultz after her former IT aide, the one who was arrested by the FBI at Dulles airport last month while trying to flee the country to Pakistan via Qatar, has officially been indicted by a grand jury on four counts including bank fraud and making false statements.
As Fox News points out, the charges include Awan"s wife Hina Alvi and are tied to allegations that the pair conspired to make false statements on applications for home equity lines of credit and then sent the proceeds of those loans to individuals in Pakistan.
Imran Awan, a former IT aide for Democratic Florida Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, was indicted Thursday on four counts including bank fraud and making false statements.
The grand jury decision in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia comes roughly a month after Awan was arrested at Dulles airport in Virginia trying to board a plane to Pakistan, where his family is from.
The indictment also includes his wife Hina Alvi.
The indictment itself, which merely represents formal charges and is not a finding of guilt, addresses separate allegations that Awan and his wife engaged in a conspiracy to obtain home equity lines of credit from the Congressional Federal Credit Union by giving false information about two properties – and then sending the proceeds to individuals in Pakistan.
So why is the real estate angle important? As we noted previously, title companies, unlike individuals, can wire large sums of money to international bank accounts without arousing the suspicions of federal investigators.
Title companies can wire large sums abroad without attracting the suspicion Imran did at the bank, and with Hina — the nominal sole owner of each of the houses — residing in that country, it would be natural to send the proceeds to her.
In addition to the three houses sold or slated to be sold since June 20, Imran’s lawyer, Chris Gowen, told The New York Times that the $283,000 wire in January was preceded by other similar transfers to Pakistan. “Gowen said the transfer represented the latest payment by his client for a piece of property he was buying in the country,” The Times reported.
Gowen would not tell TheDCNF whether the proceeds of the $360,000 June 20 home sale were wired to Pakistan, nor where the income from the two upcoming sales would go. The office of the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia declined to comment on whether it would block the disbursements.
The value of the known homes that have been sold since November or are currently being sold is $1.8 million. There is also the $283,000 January wire transfer from the Congressional bank, in addition to previous wires of unknown amounts that Imran’s lawyer acknowledged.
Since Imran’s lawyer said the January wire of nearly $300,000 was the latest in a series of wires, the transfers may have been about moving money from the $4 million in House payments or other sources.
As background, Imran was first employed in 2004 by former Democrat Rep. Robert Wexler (FL) as an “information technology director”, before he began working in Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s office in 2005.
The family was paid extremely well, with Imran Awan being paid nearly $2 million working as an IT support staffer for House Democrats since 2004. Abid Awan and his wife, Hina Alvi, were each paid more than $1 million working for House Democrats. In total, since 2003, the family has collected nearly $5 million.
In total, Imran"s firm was employed by 31 Democrats in Congress, some of whom held extremely sensitive positions on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Meanwhile, as we noted before, it is still unclear whether the bank fraud charges are just a placeholder for other charges that are yet to come.
While details are scarce, media reports have alleged that Awan and his brothers potentially ran a procurement scheme in which they bought equipment, then overcharged various House members that employed their IT firm. Meanwhile, some congressional technology aides have alleged that the Awan’s were blackmailing representatives based on the contents of their emails and files, due to the fact that these representatives have displayed unwavering and intense loyalty towards the former aides.
Of course, one of the most intriguing parts of the Awan narrative has continued to be why former DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman-Schultz decided to keep him on her taxpayer-funded payroll right up until his arrest and whether that decision had anything to do with the whole DNC / Hillary email scandals that erupted last summer.
Perhaps we are finally getting closer to an answer...
A defiant Debbie Wasserman Schultz sat down with the Orlando Sentinel, telling the paper that she stands by her decision to keep Pakistani IT staffer, and personal friend, Imran Awan on her payroll six months ater he was fired by members of congress and banned from the House computer network.
“I believe that I did the right thing, and I would do it again,” Wasserman Schultz said Thursday in an exclusive interview with the Sun Sentinel. “There are times when you can’t be afraid to stand alone, and you have to stand up for what’s right.”
Schultz added “It would have been easier for me to just fire him.”
Debbie Wasserman Schultz on Awan: "I did the right thing, and I would do it again - It would have been easier for me to just fire him" pic.twitter.com/XeSVeybfXf
Imran Awan was finally fired by Wasserman-Schultz after he was arrested at Dulles airport on charges of bank fraud while actively trying to flee the country, after wiring nearly $300,000 to Pakistan. Awan’s wife, Hina Alvi fled the country in after having been stopped at the airport in March with an undeclared $12,000 in cash, and reportedly allowed to board her flight after an order by former FBI Director James Comey and deputy director Andrew McCabe.
Of course, nothing to see here…
“Wasserman Schultz said the Awan case is getting so much attention from conservative media outlets because they’re attempting to distract people from the investigation into whether President Donald Trump’s campaign colluded with Russia to influence the 2016 election. “Any opportunity they can to pull people’s eyes and ears away from that they take.” –Orlando Sentinel
No, sorry Debbie – your Pakistani Muslim Brotherhood-linked IT friends having access to top-secret Intel committee computers is a bit more, shall we say – tangible…
Of note
The Awans were “shared employees,” hired by multiple Democrats for IT work whenever it was needed – floating all over the place doing all sorts of work on House members computers. Democrats Juaquin Castro, Cedric Richmond, Andre Carson, Jackie Speier, Tammy Duckworth, and Louis Frankel all employed the Awans.
According to Judge Andrew Napolitano, the Awans had access to the email of every member of the House, and SOLD INFORMATION.
After they were fired from the offices of two House Democrats, Politico reported that one of the brothers, Imran Awan, and his wife Hina Alvi, are personal friends with Debbie Wasserman Schultz – who presided over the DNC during the email hack currently blamed on the Russians.
What other interesting things do we know about the Awan case and DWS?
Reportedly stole over $100,000 in computer equipment from House members… months later, smashed computer equipment was seized by the FBI from the garage of a house the Awans owned and rented out.
Shortly after the criminal probe was revealed in February, Imran abruptly moved out of his longtime home on Hawkshead Drive in Lorton, Va., and listed it for rent on a website that connects landlords with military families.
The new tenants were none other than a retired Marine and his active duty Navy wife. In the garage, they found “wireless routers, hard drives that look like they tried to destroy, laptops, [and] a lot of brand new expensive toner.”
Imprisoned their stepmother, spied on her with electronic devices, and denied her the right to see her dying husband – then carted her to Pakistan to collect her inheritance, which they proceeded to extort.
THREE DAYS before U.S. Capitol Police told House members about the Awans, their stempmother called Fairfax County, Virginia police report she was imprisoned in their house – kept from her husband’s deathbed. Oh, and they were bugging her with listening devices.
A relative described the woman’s life as being completely controlled by the brothers for months while they schemed to take their father’s life insurance. –Daily Caller
After their father died, the Awans carted their stepmother to Pakistan to collect.
Sent sensitive information to the Muslim Brotherhood
Ran a shady car dealership Called Cars International A, LLC (CIA) whose debts a Democrat Rep paid
In addition to nosing around highly sensitive data in Congress, the Awans ran a shady car dealership that wasn’t paying it’s bills. After one of their vendors threatened to sue them, Rep. Theodore Deutch started paying the guy.
Rep Theo Deutch (D-FL) paid a disgruntled vendor the Awans owed money. Weird.
The brothers had numerous additional sources of income, all of which seemed to disappear. While they were supposedly working for the House, the brothers were running a car dealership full-time that didn’t pay its vendors, and after one — Rao Abbas — threatened to sue them, he began receiving a paycheck from Rep. Theodore Deutch (D-FL), who like Wasserman Schultz represents Florida.
Imran Awan, (whose lawyer oddly mentioned ‘pizzagate‘ in a post-arrest statement), subscribed to YouTube channel “Seven Super Girls” – which has over 12 billion views, and features children performing in sexualized ‘bits.’
Despite all of the above, Debbie Wasserman Shultz maintains that she “did the right thing,” and would do it again - claiming any and all inquiry into her ever-so-honest Pakistani IT staff is simply a diversion from Russia.
