44 Democrats Exempted Pakistani IT Aides From Background Checks

Lovely. Freaking lovely.

According to a bombshell report from the Daily Caller, 44 Democrats exempted Pakistani IT aides from background checks. These are the same IT aides who “later allegedly made ‘unauthorized access’ to congressional data.”

Nothing to see here. Nope. Not at all.

All of them appear to have waived background checks on Imran Awan and his family members, even though the family of server administrators could collectively read all the emails and files of 1 in 5 House Democrats, and despite background checks being recommended for such positions, according to an inspector general’s report. The House security policy requires offices to fill out a form attesting that they’ve initiated background checks, but it also includes a loophole allowing them to simply say that another member vouched for them.

By the way, one of the Democrats who exempted these IT aides? Debbie Wasserman Schultz. But red flags? Eh, who cares? Screw ’em.

Among the red flags in Abid’s background were a $1.1 million bankruptcy; six lawsuits against him or a company he owned; and at least three misdemeanor convictions including for DUI and driving on a suspended license, according to Virginia court records. Public court records show that Imran and Abid operated a car dealership referred to as CIA that took $100,000 from an Iraqi government official who is a fugitive from U.S. authorities. Numerous members of the family were tied to cryptic LLCs such as New Dawn 2001, operated out of Imran’s residence, Virginia corporation records show. Imran was the subject of repeated calls to police by multiple women and had multiple misdemeanor convictions for driving offenses, according to court records.

Again, they never caught any of that, because no official background check was ever conducted.

If a screening had caught those, what officials say happened next might have been averted. The House inspector general reported on Sept. 20, 2016, that shortly before the election members of the group were logging into servers of members they didn’t work for, logging in using congressmen’s personal usernames, uploading data off the House network, and behaving in ways that suggested “nefarious purposes” and that “steps are being taken to conceal their activity.”

Interestingly enough, Wasserman Schultz is ALL FOR background checks when it suits her political purposes. She recently introduced a bill that would require people to undergo a background check every time they purchase bullets.

“You do not have the right to bear bullets,” according to Debbie McFrizz. The Second Amendment doesn’t explicitly refer to bullets. Sure, it refers to “arms,” but you won’t find the word “bullet” or “ammo” in there. Obviously, the founders meant UNLOADED arms. They were talking about guns for DISPLAY PURPOSES. Isn’t that obvious?

The worst part? The ridiculous Ammunition Background Check Act (that’s what they’re officially calling it) has 36 Democratic co-sponsors. I wonder if any of them are part of the same 44 who ditched the background checks on those Pakistani IT aides…

h/t Daily Caller