Sessions Slams Rahm For ‘Unprecedented Violent Crime Surge In Chicago’ In Response To Sanctuary City Lawsuit

Looks like AG Sessions is taking a break from busting potheads and not indicting Loretta Lynch for lying under oath about her email accounts.

In response to a much anticipated lawsuit filed by the city of Chicago this morning to prevent the Trump administration from withholding federal funds from sanctuary cities, Jeff Sessions hit back in a scathing letter directed at mayor Rahm Emanuel.

The lawsuit asserts that the new federal policies to withhold money from sanctuary cities forces the nation’s third largest city to choose between its constitutional rights and federal funding, claiming “These new conditions also fly in the face of longstanding City policy that promotes cooperation between local law enforcement and immigrant communities.”

The policies also include a requirement that local law enforcement agencies give federal authorities 48 hours notice before releasing anyone wanted for immigration violations.

Democratic Mayor Rahm Emanuel said on Sunday that the city would sue, escalating a pushback against an immigration crackdown launched by Republican President Donald Trump’s administration. –Bloomberg

Sessions hits back

Jeff Sessions did not mince words. In a response issued hours later, the Attorney General said that ‘no amount of federal taxpayer dollars will help a city that refuses to help its own residents‘ (boom) – an admonishment over Chicago’s out of control crime rate.

Letter below:

“No amount of federal taxpayer dollars will help a city that refuses to help its own residents.

“The Mayor complains that the federal government’s focus on enforcing the law would require a ‘reordering of law enforcement practice in Chicago.’ But that’s just what Chicago needs: a recommitment to the rule of law and to policies that rollback the culture of lawlessness that has beset the city.

“This administration will not simply give away grant dollars to city governments that proudly violate the rule of law and protect criminal aliens at the expense of public safety. So it’s this simple: Comply with the law or forego taxpayer dollars.”

Parents in California are sending their children to the ‘Bay Area Rainbow Day Camp’ for Transgender and ‘nonbinary’ children as young as FOUR YEARS OLD – where curious ‘gender expansive’ kids can play with each other in a ‘community of peers that will provide a safe space for the exploration of gender identity and expression.’

For children 13-17, ‘camp Kickin’ It’ offers a ‘social day camp for gender non binary, questioning, genderqueer, and trans teens to explore Bay Area activities and gender identity in a safe space in a community of their peers.

Via Fox News:

The camp seems like any other. Children arrive with a packed lunch, make friendship bracelets, sing songs and get silly. But each day at check-in, campers make a nametag with their pronoun of choice. Some opt for “she” or “he” while others choose “they” or something else.

And enrollment at the camp is booming. The number of children at the San Francisco Bay area camp has tripled to about 60 youngsters, from age 4 to 12, since it opened three summers ago, with kids coming from as far away as Los Angeles, Washington, D.C. and even Africa. There is talk of opening branches of the camp across the country.

Founded by Sandra Collins, mother of a transgender 9 year old, the Rainbow Day Camp is the ultimate safe space.

“A lot of these kids have been bullied and had trauma at school. This is a world where none of that exists, and they’re in the majority,” Collins said. “That’s a new experience for kids who are used to hiding and feeling small.”

Specialists consulted

‘Gender specialists’ say the camp’s popularity reflects the increase in children coming out as transgender at young ages – a phenomenon credited to greater awareness of LGBT issues, as well as parents noticing that their kids are showing signs of ‘gender dysphoria,’ or distress about their gender.

Enabled or encouraged?

It’s tough to find widespread agreement outside of California’s ‘gender specialists’ on the topic of gender dysphoria at a young age. In a June article by three medical experts entitled “Growing Pains: Problems with Puberty Suppression in Treating Gender Dysphoria,” the authors write that allowing a child to explore transgenderism and other ‘gender fluid’ identities ‘may drive some children to persist in identifying as transgender when they might otherwise have, as they grow older, found their gender to be aligned with their sex.”

In fact, the authors posit that “the interference with normal pubertal development will influence the gender identity of the child by reducing the prospects for developing a gender identity corresponding to his or her biological sex.”

Let’s just let kids be kids? 

While many would say sending kids as young as age four to a transexual summer camp is child abuse, perhaps the camp for older 13 – 17 year olds – in the throes of puberty and raging hormones – isn’t such a bad idea, especially considering the vast difference in suicide rates in supported vs. unsupported youths who later identify as their non-biologicial gender.

Via Fox:

Studies show transgender adults have higher rates of suicide and depression than the general population. A 2016 study by the University of Washington’s TransYouth Project, published in the journal Pediatrics, found trans children who live as their preferred gender and are supported by their parents have the same mental health outcomes as other kids their age.

Meanwhile, it’s 2017 and we’re talking about transgender children. Discuss.

Government watchdog group Judicial Watch has found that 11 California counties have more people registered to vote than there are eligible citizens of voting age – a number which varies from 102 percent up to 144 percent.

The numbers from publicly available voter registration records break down as follows:

“Imperial (102 percent), Lassen (102 percent), Los Angeles (112 percent), Monterey (104 percent), San Diego (138 percent), San Francisco (114 percent), San Mateo (111 percent), Santa Cruz (109 percent), Solano (111 percent), Stanislaus (102 percent), and Yolo (110 percent).”

However, when Judicial Watch contacted Los Angeles county in June, the total number of voters stood at 144  percent of the total voting-age residents. With roughly 8 million adults of voting age, no including those ineligible to vote such as felons, that roughly amounts to a potential three million ineligible voters in Los Angeles alone.

Judicial Watch found 11 California counties that had more registered voters than voting-age citizens.

Potentially massive election fraud. pic.twitter.com/ovHSmfGzZT

— /pol/ News Forever (@polNewsForever) August 6, 2017

While this doesn’t necessarily prove the case for election fraud, it suggests at minimum that California and other states need to clean up voter registration lists. To that end, Judicial Watch is threatening to file a Federal lawsuit over the discrepancies.

“California’s voting rolls are an absolute mess that undermines the very idea of clean elections,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said. “It is urgent that California take reasonable steps to clean up its rolls. We will sue if state officials fail to act.”

In April, Judicial Watch sent notice-of-violation letters threatening to sue 11 states having counties in which the number of registered voters exceeds the number of voting-age citizens.  The states are: Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina and Tennessee.

On July 18, Judicial Watch filed a lawsuit against Montgomery County and the Maryland State Boards of Elections under the NVRA. The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, Baltimore Division (Judicial Watch vs. Linda H. Lamone, et al. (No. 1:17-cv-02006)). –Judicial Watch

Dear Secretary Padilla:

From public records obtained on the Election Assistance Commission (“EAC”) 2016 Election Administration Voting Survey (“EAVS”), and through verbal accounts from various county agencies, eleven (11) counties in California have more total registered voters than citizen voting age population (CVAP) calculated by the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2011-2015 American Community Survey. This is strong circumstantial evidence that California municipalities are not conducting reasonable voter registration list maintenance as mandated under the NVRA.

This letter serves as statutory notice that Election Integrity Project California, Inc., a registered non-profit corporation in California, and Judicial Watch, Inc., will bring a lawsuit against you and, if appropriate, against the counties named in this letter, if you do not take specific actions to correct these violations of Section 8 within 90 days.

The following information explains how we determined that your state and the counties named are in violation of NVRA Section 8 and the remedial steps that must be taken to comply with the law.

1. Eleven California Counties Have More Total Registered Voters Than Citizen Voting Age Population

Based on our review of 2016 EAC EAVS report, the 2011-2015 U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey, and the most recent California total active and total inactive voter registration records, California is failing to comply with the voter registration list maintenance requirements of Section 8 of the NVRA. For example, a comparison of the 2011-2015 U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey, and the most recent California active and inactive voter registration records shows there were more total registered voters than there were adults over the age of 18 living in each of the following eleven (11) counties: Imperial (102%), Lassen (102%), Los Angeles (112%), Monterey (104%), San Diego (138%), San Francisco (114%), San Mateo (111%), Santa Cruz (109%), Solano (111%), Stanislaus (102%), and Yolo (110%). Our own research shows that the situation in these counties is, if anything, worse than the foregoing data suggest. For example, we contacted Los Angeles County directly this past June. At that time, county officials informed us that the total number of registered voters now stands at a number that is a whopping 144% of the total number of resident citizens of voting age.

2. The NVRA Requires You to Undertake Reasonable Efforts to Maintain Accurate Lists of Eligible Registered Voters

3. Failure to Comply with NVRA Subjects You to Lawsuits and Financial Costs

In passing the NVRA, Congress authorized a private right of action to enforce the provisions of the NVRA, including Section 8. Accordingly, private persons may bring a lawsuit under the NVRA if the violations identified herein are not corrected within 90 days of receipt of this letter.

4. Avoiding Litigation

We hope you will promptly initiate efforts to comply with Section 8 so that no lawsuit will be necessary. We ask you and, to the extent that they wish to respond separately, each county identified in this letter, to please respond to this letter in writing no later than 30 days from today informing us of the compliance steps you are taking. Specifically, we ask you to: (1) conduct or implement a systematic, uniform, nondiscriminatory program to remove from the list of eligible voters the names of persons who have become ineligible to vote by reason of a change in residence; and (2) conduct or implement additional routine measures to remove from the list of eligible voters the names of persons who have become ineligible to vote by reason of death, change in residence, or a disqualifying criminal conviction, and to remove noncitizens who have registered to vote unlawfully.

5. Production of Records

Finally, pursuant to your obligations under the NVRA,15 your office and, to the extent that they keep records separately from your office, each county named in this letter, should make available to us all pertinent records concerning “the implementation of programs and activities conducted for the purpose of ensuring the accuracy and currency” of California’s official eligible voter lists during the past 2 years. Please include these records with your response to this letter.

I hope that the concerns identified in this letter can be resolved amicably. However, if we believe you do not intend to correct the above-identified problems, a federal lawsuit seeking declaratory and injunctive relief against you may be necessary. We look forward to receiving your prompt response.

Sincerely,
JUDICIAL WATCH, INC.
s/ Robert D. Popper
Robert D. Popper
Attorney, Judicial Watch, Inc.

Pedo defending Salon.com, who last year deleted an article written by a pedophile in order to publish a hit-piece on Milo Yiannopoulos before reveling in his short-lived downfall, looks to be in serious financial trouble.

After being evicted in late 2016 for a $90,000 late payment, their landlord is now suing the digital publisher for over $700,000 of the unused portion of their five-year lease through September 2019.

Salon had been paying over $300,000 a year to Vbgo Penn Plaza for offices at 31 Penn Plaza, near Madison Square Garden.

By the fall of 2016, according to a suit filed recently in Manhattan state court, Salon had already fallen behind in its rent covering the period from July 2016 to Sept. 30, to the tune of $90,565. Vbgo said it evicted Salon in December and now is trying to get the struggling Web media company to pay up for the rest of the lease. –NY Post

Running at an accumulated deficit of $126 million, Salon’s Democrat investors – most notably Pelosi family friend and Salon board member William Hambrecht – the company’s second largest investor, can’t be happy.

The liberal propaganda rag has been home to democrat operatives Sidney Blumenthal and James Carville – as well as David Brock, and Salon’s ardent defense of liberals go all the way back to the Whitewater and Monica Lewinsky scandals – where Salon writers went to bat for Bill Clinton.

Pedo Safe Space

Salon has been pushing the pro-pedophilia agenda for some time. Contributor Todd Nickerson, a self professed pedo, said “I WOULD engage in sex play with a child… I will never deny that,” and “…consensual sex play likely wouldn’t be traumatic or mess kids up so much if society didn’t make a big deal out of it,” posits that society should embrace pedophiles as long as they promise never to act on their urges.

For better or worse — mostly worse — we have this sexuality, and unlike with most sexualities, there is no ethical way we can fully actualize our sexual longings. Our desires and feelings, if we are to remain upright, are doomed from the outset. –Todd Nickerson

In closing

Salon, their Democrat owners, and their pedophile propaganda are but a mere symptom of a much larger problem of normalizing abusive degeneracy. With any luck they won’t be around much longer.

(operating statistics and background provided by @Fourth_Legion) 

Silicon Valley liberals are suffering from dramatic meltdowns in response to an anonymous Google engineer’s 10 page document currently going viral, titled ‘Google’s Ideological Echo Chamber,’ which offers a scathing criticism of the company’s ‘anti-conservative’ and ‘left-leaning’ internal culture.

Labeled an ‘anti-diversity screed’ by Gizmodo, the treatise calls for Google to replace it’s politically correct ‘diversity initiatives’ with ‘ideological diversity,’ and suggests that the gender pay gap between men and women isn’t entirely related to bias against women – and is instead partially attributable to biological differences between genders.

Internal article circulated at work today describing how gender rep gap in SW is due to biological differences btwn men/women.

— Sarah Adams (@sadams007) August 4, 2017

Read below (emphasis added): 

Reply to public response and misrepresentation

I value diversity and inclusion, am not denying that sexism exists, and don’t endorse using stereotypes. When addressing the gap in representation in the population, we need to look at population level differences in distributions. If we can’t have an honest discussion about this, then we can never truly solve the problem. Psychological safety is built on mutual respect and acceptance, but unfortunately our culture of shaming and misrepresentation is disrespectful and unaccepting of anyone outside its echo chamber. Despite what the public response seems to have been, I’ve gotten many personal messages from fellow Googlers expressing their gratitude for bringing up these very important issues which they agree with but would never have the courage to say or defend because of our shaming culture and the possibility of being fired. This needs to change.

TL:DR

• Google’s political bias has equated the freedom from offense with psychological safety, but shaming into silence is the antithesis of psychological safety.
• This silencing has created an ideological echo chamber where some ideas are too sacred to be honestly discussed.
• The lack of discussion fosters the most extreme and authoritarian elements of this ideology.
• Extreme: all disparities in representation are due to oppression
• Authoritarian: we should discriminate to correct for this oppression
• Differences in distributions of traits between men and women may in part explain why we don’t have 50% representation of women in tech and leadership. Discrimination to reach equal representation is unfair, divisive, and bad for business.

(click here to read in it’s entirety)

Google Response

Google’s VP of Diversity, Danielle Brown, issued a milquetoast response:

“Many of you have read an internal document shared by someone in our engineering organization, expressing views on the natural abilities and characteristics of different genders, as well as whether one can speak freely of these things at Google. And like many of you, I found that it advanced incorrect assumptions about gender. I’m not going to link to it here as it’s not a viewpoint that I or this company endorses, promotes or encourages.

Diversity and inclusion are a fundamental part of our values and the culture we continue to cultivate. We are unequivocal in our belief that diversity and inclusion are critical to our success as a company, and we’ll continue to stand for that and be committed to it for the long haul. As Ari Balogh said in his internal G+ post, “Building an open, inclusive environment is core to who we are, and the right thing to do. ‘Nuff said.”

SJW’s in a tizzy

Via ZeroHedge:

The 10-page Google Doc document was met with furious derision from a large majority of employees but Jaana Dogan, a software engineer at Google, tweeted that some people at the company at least partially agreed with the author; one of our sources said the same. While the document itself contains the thoughts of just one Google employee, the context in which they were shared — Silicon Valley has been repeatedly exposed as a place that discriminates against women and people of color — as well as the private and public response from its workforce are important.

“The broader context of this is that this person is perhaps bolder than most of the people at Google who share his viewpoint—of thinking women are less qualified than men—to the point he was willing to publicly argue for it. But there are sadly more people like him,” the employee who described the document’s contents to me said.

Numerous Google employees expressed their outrage about the paper:

That garbage fire of a document is trash and you are wonderful coworkers who I am extremely lucky to work with.

— Andrew Bonventre (@andybons) August 4, 2017

Please don't let the grunting slobbery of a few outweigh the strong support you have by many many more people. We're here.

— Louis Gray (@louisgray) August 4, 2017

To summarize

Presumably conservative Google engineer has had enough of the company’s internal SJW bullshit and pens 10 page document suggesting the company stop alienating conservatives.

Deciding introspection is out of the question and the author must simply be a racist, Google SJW’s reject the letter in it’s entirety and instead throw a gigantic tantrum.

Where have we seen this before?

Loretta Lynch has been busted using an alias to communicate with DOJ officials, per a breaking tweet by Kim Dotcom last night. The revelation comes after internet sleuths sifted through a new release of FOIA requested emails by the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) last week (link here to PDF) and found an email from “Elizabeth Carlisle” to colleagues, thanking “to all who worked on this.”

BREAKING: Did Loretta Lynch use an alias to communicate with DOJ officials and why? Who is Elizabeth Carlisle? Dear Internet, investigate! pic.twitter.com/oqngTKDhLY

— Kim Dotcom (@KimDotcom) August 5, 2017

Here’s what internet sleuths pieced together: 

And as Jim Hoft of The Gateway Pundit reported last night, users in Reddit’s  “The_Donald” forum discovered that “Lizzie Carlisle” was Lynch’s grandmother’s name – Lizzie Carlisle Harris!

The hunt now begins for all communications with Loretta “Elizabeth Carlisle” Lynch…

Sneaky

Meanwhile, this isn’t the first case of a high level Democrat using an alias. Contained within leaked emails released by Wikileaks during the 2016 election is an email from then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to “Dianne Reynolds” – later identified as daughter Chelsea Clinton, from the night of the Benghazi attack. Of note, Hillary tells Chelsea that the attack was conducted by an ‘Al Queda-Like’ group, and not an ‘angry mob’ protesting over an anti-Islam YouTube video, as the Obama administration told the American Public.

Not only was this top-secret information that Chelsea wasn’t cleared to know, it suggests that high level Democrats and/or their families employed aliases in order to covertly communicate.

What was Chelsea's security clearance when Hillary told her Chris Stevens was killed by an "Al Queda-like" group? Surely this was top secret pic.twitter.com/7u81hMgQpt

— ZeroPointNow (@ZeroPointNow) July 10, 2017

Which begs a few questions

Why are top Democrats using aliases to communicate with each other? How many other former government officials or their family members have done so? And what does this mean for any current investigations into the previous administration?

Tarmac Meeting

Another bombshell revealed in ACLJ’s release concerns several of the emails obtained address the secretive “tarmac” meeting between Bill Clinton and Loretta Lynch, which happened right around the time the Obama administration began issuing FOIA requests to unmask the Trump team.

Per ACLJ:

One with the subject line “FLAG”was correspondence between FBI officials (Richard Quinn, FBI Media/Investigative Publicity, and Michael Kortan) and DOJ officials concerning “flag[ing] a story . . . about a casual, unscheduled meeting between former president Bill Clinton and the AG.” The DOJ official instructs the FBI to “let me know if you get any questions about this” and provides “[o]ur talkers [DOJ talking points] on this”. The talking points, however are redacted.

Another email to the FBI contains the subject line “security details coordinate between Loretta Lynch/Bill Clinton?”

On July 1, 2016 – just days before our FOIA request – a DOJ email chain under the subject line, “FBI just called,” indicates that the “FBI . . . is looking for guidance” in responding to media inquiries about news reports that the FBI had prevented the press from taking pictures of the Clinton Lynch meeting. The discussion then went off email to several phone calls (of which we are not able to obtain records). An hour later, Carolyn Pokomy of the Office of the Attorney General stated, “I will let Rybicki know.” Jim Rybicki was the Chief of Staff and Senior Counselor to FBI Director Jim Comey. The information that was to be provided to Rybicki is redacted.

Lynch had previously said that the tarmac meeting was ‘unscheduled’ described as ann ‘ambush’ by former President Bill Clinton, and that she ‘wouldn’t do it again.’

UPDATE: Jordan Sekulow discusses

.@ACLJ Jordan Sekulow discusses newly released documents on Loretta Lynch & Bill Clinton’s tarmac meeting. #FakeNews media tried to bury. pic.twitter.com/5ZMoYflNFD

— Nick Short ?? (@PoliticalShort) August 6, 2017

Between the tarmac meeting and new evidence that Lynch’s meeting with Clinton was scheduled and coordinated, it appears a cadre of former high ranking Democrats have some explaining to do, again.

h/t Cuchulian

New White House Chief of Staff Gen. John Kelly is bringing sweeping changes to the chaotic West Wing, after six months of chaos and ball fondling at the hands of former Chief of Staff Reince Priebus, the WSJ reports.

The retired 4-star Marine General is instituting strict new rules – affecting everything from focus in meetings, to loitering outside the Oval Office, to the chain of command and who gets to speak with whom.

In sharp contrast to Reince Priebus’ 8:45 AM open-door senior staff meetings with a TV on in the background – often veering off track, Kelly has instituted a sharp 8AM start time with no distractions.

Per the WSJ:

“a small group of senior officials talked with President Donald Trump about plans to take on Beijing over intellectual-property theft. When a side debate broke out between two top aides, the new White House chief of staff ordered the pair out of the room.

Return, John Kelly told them, once your differences are resolved, according to a person familiar with the exchange.”

Fox News contributor Charles Krauthammer issued a stark warning to America last night in an interview with Tucker Carlson, calling the idea of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s witch hunt and the slow march towards impeachment “a catastrophic mistake.”

In an earlier Fox segment, Krauthammer responded to news that Mueller had impaneled a grand jury for the investigation, saying “Tonight’s news is not just a threat to Trump and his entourage but it is [a threat] to constitutional stability.”

He later told Carlson, “The danger here, the pity here is that we’re still discussing the legitimacy of an election of a president, 6 months in. That is never healthy for a democracy,” Krauthammer added “This has never happened to us, and that’s why I hope people would tread carefully.”

Power to the people

During yesterday’s rally in West Virginia – the state won by the largest margin – President Trump gave a particularly rousing speech, painting a picture of corrupt, Russophobic D.C. politicians trying to invalidate a fair election, rendering their votes meaningless. Trump told the crowd “We didn’t win becaues of Russia. We won because of you.”

Krauthammer’s take was that Trump’s packed rally was a reminder to the establishment that true power lies with the citizenry. “I think that the appearance that he did in W. VA tonight is a way of saying “my numbers may be down, but I command a formidable army,” adding “I think we should be treading very carefully here. This is where we are. We’re sort of sleepwalking into this.”

Tucker: From the very first day, people were saying we’re gonna take him out, now this investigation looks like it has the potential to do that. If that were to happen, some of these voters might conclude that they’re not really allowed to pick their own President.

Krauthammer: That’s why I think we’re really headed into really choppy and dangerous constitutional waters. We know what the Democrats want to do, they want to get control of the House, and on day one they’re going to start impeachment.

In July, up to 25 House Democrats reportedly began working on a bill to start impeachment proceedings against Trump – though the proposal has yet to be sponsored.

 Mueller Time

While discussing the Robert Mueller’s deep-dive investigation into whether or not the Trump team colluded with Russia, Krauthammer reminded viewers that any investigation needs to start with evidence of an actual crime.

Now, I happen to think, as you know I opposed the Trump candidacy. I don’t think he’s very well fit for the presidency. But fitness is not a reason for impeachment and removal. High crimes are. Here we have a prosecutor looking for high crimes.

With Watergate you started with a crime and then you tried to find out how it happened. Here, they’re looking for a crime, perhaps they’ll find one – I don’t know. Collusion is unseemly but it ain’t a crime. 

This is an investigation in search of a crime. Show me the crime, I’m open to empirical evidence. If they show it, I’ll be open to say well maybe this ought to be prosecuted. But as of now, it is something that’s closing in, and it is very dangerous. –Charles Krauthammer

Krauthammer is absolutely right. The Mueller investigation was based on the flimsy Comey memo, much like the Russian interference probes in the House and Senate are largely based on a largely discredited report.

As Trump loyalists are purged by Natl. Security Advisor H.R. McMaster, and General John Kelly insulates the President – much like Nixon’s final weeks, one can’t help but wonder if we are truly living in a banana republic if a democratically elected President can be removed from office simply because the establishment doesn’t like him.

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

— ZeroPointNow (@ZeroPointNow) August 3, 2017

And fire him she did, eventually

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

DWS Threatened the Chief of DC Capitol Police over a laptop used by the Awans and found in a corner of the House building.

#DebbieWassermanSchultz threatens DC Police Chief over not returning Arwan Bros laptop. "there will be consequences" https://t.co/2phDMnvWq5 pic.twitter.com/e2wkBJSaim

— ZeroPointNow (@ZeroPointNow) May 25, 2017

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.

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.

The #AwanBrothers owned a car dealership called "CIA" in court documents. You can't make this stuff up. pic.twitter.com/25jhN6BfL1

— ZeroPointNow (@ZeroPointNow) July 26, 2017

Subscribed to pedo-centric YouTube channel featured on Tosh.0

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…

Special prosecutor Robert Mueller has impaneled a federal grand jury as part of his investigation into the Trump campaign and it’s possible involvement in Russian interference during the 2016 election, according to the Wall St. Journal.

Via WSJ:

The White House issued the following statement in response:

“Ty Cobb, special counsel to the president, said he wasn’t aware that Mr. Mueller had started using a new grand jury. “Grand jury matters are typically secret,” Mr. Cobb said. “The White House favors anything that accelerates the conclusion of his work fairly….The White House is committed to fully cooperating with Mr. Mueller.”

CNBC: White House issues statement on WSJ report that says Mueller has impaneled grand jury in the Russia probe. pic.twitter.com/KtGYXcI5sS

— Josh Caplan (@joshdcaplan) August 3, 2017

According to CNBC – Trump lawyer John Dowd told NBC News the president’s legal team has been “cooperating with Bob Mueller and his staff since the first of June because we’re trying to get this thing over and done with.”

Meanwhile, CNN has reported that Mueller is also looking into Trump and his associates’ finances, combing through for possible financial ties with Russia – something Trump previously told the NYT was a “red line” in the investigation.

And hey, while we’re at it – a bipartisan group of senators just put forth legislation to prevent the president from getting rid of the special counsel.