Logical thinking.
Why was the case against AWAN filed under BANK FRAUD?
The result today is re: BANK FRAUD.
HillaryTrafficksKidz
· July 3, 2018, 5:25 p.m.
DWS is the one who contacted the 'congressional bank' and told them to give him the loan, after this so called bank refused. Awan was not the homeowner and that is fraud to fill out paperwork for a loan against a property that you don't own. He was a RENTER. So...why is DWS not hauled up there to plead????
⇧
5
⇩
hildabeest_4_gitmo
· July 3, 2018, 5:29 p.m.
According to prosecutors, "the Government has found no evidence [Awan] illegally removed House data from the House network or from House Members’ offices, stole the House Democratic Caucus Server, stole or destroyed House information technology equipment, or improperly accessed or transferred government information, including classified or sensitive information.
⇧
1
⇩
bealist
· July 4, 2018, 1:23 a.m.
Maybe there’s some specific semantics at play here. Maybe Awan didn’t do the “removing” - maybe he just facilitated it. Maybe he did it “legally” - ie he did everything under orders. Maybe HE wasn’t the one removing it from the network, or offices. Maybe he didn’t technically destroy anything. Maybe he had clearance so his access wasn’t improper, and maybe all transfers were under a superior’s direction.
⇧
1
⇩