Breaking: Debbie Wasserman-Schulz' IT staffer arrested while trying to flee US

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Or maybe it's not on the front page of the post for the same reasons your comet ping pong story wasnt on the front page -- because it is a made up story intended to distract and deflect.

Made up? Not so much.......The people were employed in IT at generous salaries. The wife moved to Pakistan with family. Charges against the family and the one still here has an ankle bracelet. What is made up about this?

What charges have been made against the family? I haven't heard of any charges other than the bank fraud charge against Imran Awan.

And you believe all this is not worth the coverage? How much more do you need to get WP report? Some Russian ties I guess. Ties with Pakistan would not do it.

My issue is not with coverage, but with accuracy. Posters should not write about "Charges against the family" when there aren't any. I also have issues with posters like you who ignore perfectly clear posts and reply with a bunch of unrelated drivel.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:http://dailycaller.com/2017/08/04/wasserman-schultz-says-laptop-she-sought-to-keep-from-police-was-awans-not-hers/

Turns out the computer that she hired a lawyer to get back was not hers.....it was Awan's. She sure fought hard with Capitol police over it. This smells more and more.

She says the laptop was purchased with government funds from her office. So, it is neither hers nor Awan's.

Now she admits that. She certainly did not admit it when she spoke to Capitol Police Chief at the budget hearing. She kept saying it was her property--or "a member's property" something like that. Her story has changed.

This! Words matter, unless you are Democrat

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:http://dailycaller.com/2017/08/04/wasserman-schultz-says-laptop-she-sought-to-keep-from-police-was-awans-not-hers/

Turns out the computer that she hired a lawyer to get back was not hers.....it was Awan's. She sure fought hard with Capitol police over it. This smells more and more.

She says the laptop was purchased with government funds from her office. So, it is neither hers nor Awan's.

Now she admits that. She certainly did not admit it when she spoke to Capitol Police Chief at the budget hearing. She kept saying it was her property--or "a member's property" something like that. Her story has changed.

This! Words matter, unless you are Democrat

Farting in a windstorm. MoC get an allocation for purchases. Show me where she allegedly claimed that the laptop was her personal property, purchased with her own personal funds.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Or maybe it's not on the front page of the post for the same reasons your comet ping pong story wasnt on the front page -- because it is a made up story intended to distract and deflect.

Made up? Not so much.......The people were employed in IT at generous salaries. The wife moved to Pakistan with family. Charges against the family and the one still here has an ankle bracelet. What is made up about this?

What charges have been made against the family? I haven't heard of any charges other than the bank fraud charge against Imran Awan.

And you believe all this is not worth the coverage? How much more do you need to get WP report? Some Russian ties I guess. Ties with Pakistan would not do it.

My issue is not with coverage, but with accuracy. Posters should not write about "Charges against the family" when there aren't any. I also have issues with posters like you who ignore perfectly clear posts and reply with a bunch of unrelated drivel.

DP. Is this a new standard for the political forum, that posters should not write about xyz, unless they have evidence? How does "speculation" fit into that when there isn't any credible evidence?

Wouldn't that significantly cut the endless hate threads we have every day? I am not sure if that would be a good thing, or a bad thing for your business.

We should all clearly understand what your wishes are.

[Anonymous]

Speaking of accuracy, why did DWS hire an outside lawyer to get back Awan's govt computer back from the Capitol Hill police?

"After the exchange with Capitol Police Chief Matthew Verderosa, Wasserman Schultz fought to block access to the laptop so vehemently that she hired an outside law firm to argue constitutional issues, an exceedingly rare step."

http://dailycaller.com/2017/08/04/wasserman-schultz-says-laptop-she-sought-to-keep-from-police-was-awans-not-hers/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:http://dailycaller.com/2017/08/04/wasserman-schultz-says-laptop-she-sought-to-keep-from-police-was-awans-not-hers/

Turns out the computer that she hired a lawyer to get back was not hers.....it was Awan's. She sure fought hard with Capitol police over it. This smells more and more.

She says the laptop was purchased with government funds from her office. So, it is neither hers nor Awan's.

Now she admits that. She certainly did not admit it when she spoke to Capitol Police Chief at the budget hearing. She kept saying it was her property--or "a member's property" something like that. Her story has changed.

This! Words matter, unless you are Democrat

Farting in a windstorm. MoC get an allocation for purchases. Show me where she allegedly claimed that the laptop was her personal property, purchased with her own personal funds.

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/politics/fl-reg-wasserman-schultz-police-chief-threat-20170525-story.html

She questioned the chief about equipment "owned by a member of Congress" and should be returned to that member--or words to that effect.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Or maybe it's not on the front page of the post for the same reasons your comet ping pong story wasnt on the front page -- because it is a made up story intended to distract and deflect.

Made up? Not so much.......The people were employed in IT at generous salaries. The wife moved to Pakistan with family. Charges against the family and the one still here has an ankle bracelet. What is made up about this?

What charges have been made against the family? I haven't heard of any charges other than the bank fraud charge against Imran Awan.

And you believe all this is not worth the coverage? How much more do you need to get WP report? Some Russian ties I guess. Ties with Pakistan would not do it.

My issue is not with coverage, but with accuracy. Posters should not write about "Charges against the family" when there aren't any. I also have issues with posters like you who ignore perfectly clear posts and reply with a bunch of unrelated drivel.

DP. Is this a new standard for the political forum, that posters should not write about xyz, unless they have evidence? How does "speculation" fit into that when there isn't any credible evidence?

Wouldn't that significantly cut the endless hate threads we have every day? I am not sure if that would be a good thing, or a bad thing for your business.

We should all clearly understand what your wishes are.

Just read the quoted conversation. If you are not capable of understanding that, you are not up to participating in this forum.

[Anonymous]

Does anyone know which private law firm was hired by DWS to get back Awan's computer? Could it be the same firm that is now representing him on his arrest and tied to the Clinton's?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone know which private law firm was hired by DWS to get back Awan's computer? Could it be the same firm that is now representing him on his arrest and tied to the Clinton's?

Yet again, the plot thickens! Popcorn, please.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Love you Jeff, however I continue to see a pattern with your comments over the years on DCUM. You are always quick to question something that makes a Democrat look bad, yet at the same time quick to jump on the fake news about anything to do with this Russia story. This Awan arrest is big and will eventually connect all the missing pieces that Mueller is investigating.

FWIW popcorn is my favorite snack!

i find Jeff to be pretty reasonable for a partisan. I think he is less obsessed than most dems with the Russia sorry and he definitively dismissed the worst conspiratorial garbage coming out of it.

kiss ass much?

[Anonymous]

At the very least DWS will be eventually be charged with:

1. Obstruction of Justice for her continued resistance (including hire a private law firm) on the Capitol Hill Police to look at Awan's computer.
2. Circumventing House protocol when Awan was banned from the House computers as an employee and DWS changing his status to a "consultant" to get access.
3. Making false statements to the Capitol Hill police on the possessed computer being a member of congress when in fact it was Awans.

Anyone have some salt to spice up the taste of my popcorn?

[Anonymous]

Question is, Why did DWS risk everything to protect Awan?
What does he have on her?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:At the very least DWS will be eventually be charged with:

1. Obstruction of Justice for her continued resistance (including hire a private law firm) on the Capitol Hill Police to look at Awan's computer.
2. Circumventing House protocol when Awan was banned from the House computers as an employee and DWS changing his status to a "consultant" to get access.
3. Making false statements to the Capitol Hill police on the possessed computer being a member of congress when in fact it was Awans.

Anyone have some salt to spice up the taste of my popcorn?

This is 100% correct. Thank you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At the very least DWS will be eventually be charged with:

1. Obstruction of Justice for her continued resistance (including hire a private law firm) on the Capitol Hill Police to look at Awan's computer.
2. Circumventing House protocol when Awan was banned from the House computers as an employee and DWS changing his status to a "consultant" to get access.
3. Making false statements to the Capitol Hill police on the possessed computer being a member of congress when in fact it was Awans.

Anyone have some salt to spice up the taste of my popcorn?

This is 100% correct. Thank you.

It's only correct is your living in Kellysnne Conway's reflective universe we're everything is opposite, truths are lies and, legal is illegal.

[Anonymous]

I almost feel sorry for Debbie. Her hair must be in a real tizzy these days.