‘Be sure your sin will find you out.’ The sort of scripture passage that makes anyone playing fast and loose with power and responsibility lay awake at night.
If that’s the case, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz has got to be buying Melatonin from Costco by the pallet these days.
That Awan brothers case has NOT been quietly swept under the rug.
You didn’t think we had all forgotten about that scandal, did you?
While Democrats wagged their fingers at us about the importance of protecting our election security against the big bad Russians, they had hired IT workers with an extremely sketchy work history that were accessing sensitive Congressional documents by the terabyte.
And did we mention that (for some reason) DWS kept them working for her LONG after other Congressional staffers had cut them loose? In fact, it wasn’t until they were arrested trying to board a plane to Pakistan that she officially fired them.
We remember pretty clearly that time she spoke pretty threateningly to law enforcement that had one of her laptops in her possession. It stood out as a red flag to the rest of us, maybe now we know why.
Judicial Watch has been holding some feet to the fire on this case. Specifically, FBI feet.
Here’s an update they gave us that got drowned out while we were all swept up in the BullSchiff Circus of Impeachment.
A hearing was scheduled for December 13th, 2019 after the FBI had failed to comply with FOIA requests.
Here’s what they were asking for:
The hearing was ordered in accordance with a November 2018 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit, which was filed after the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) failed to respond adequately to two separate FOIA requests (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:18-cv-02563)).
Judicial Watch’s first request, filed on May 26, 2017, sought:
All records related to any investigations or preliminary investigations involving former congressional IT support staffers Abid Awan, Imran Awan, Jamal Awan, and Hina R. Alvi. As part of this request, searches should of records [sic] should include, but not be limited to, the FBI automated indices, its older manual indices, and its Electronic Surveillance (ELSUR) Data Management System (EDMS), as well as cross-referenced files.
All records of communication sent to or from FBI employees, officials or contractors involving the subjects in bullet item 1.
The timeframe for the requested records is May 2015 to the present.
Judicial Watch’s second request, submitted on July 3, 2018, sought:
All records related to any investigations or preliminary investigations involving former congressional IT support staffers Abid Awan, Imran Awan, Jamal Awan, Hina R. Alvi and Rao Abbas. As part of this request, searches of records should include, but not be limited to, the FBI automated indices, its older manual indices, and its Electronic Surveillance (ELSUR) Data Management System (EDMS), as well as cross-referenced files.
All records of communications, including but not limited to emails (whether on .gov or non-.gov email accounts), text messages, instant chats or messages on the Lync system, sent to or from FBI employees, officials or contractors involving the Awan brothers, Ms. Alvi and Mr. Abbas. Records of communications searched should include but not be limited to those between FBI officials, employees and contractors and officials with the Capitol Police, the Office of the Inspector General of the House, and the Office of the Chief Administrative Officer of the House.
Here’s what they were told about their requests:
In August 2019, the DOJ told the court that it would begin producing records by November 5, 2019. After producing no records, on November 13, 2019 the agency told Judicial Watch that it was having “technical difficulties,” and in a recent email claimed that “difficulties with the production remain.”
In a joint status report filed on December 5, 2019, Judicial Watch reported to the court that the DOJ claimed in a phone call that it was now unable to produce any records to either of the FOIA requests “because the agency was waiting for some unspecified action by Judge [Tanya S.] Chutkan in some other matter so as to avoid having to produce records in this case.” In that same report the DOJ told the court that Judge Chutkan is “presiding over a related sealed criminal matter” that prohibits the government from releasing the requested FOIA information. [Emphasis added] Source: JudicialWatch
That FBI sure does seem to have themselves some recurring problems with transparency, don’t they?
What could possibly explain it?