A.G Barr indicts 8 for funneling money to many prominent democrats

FAKE NEWS.

I don't and won't believe it even if you show me facts. I'll just dispute them and say FAKE NEWS.

GO TEAM!

originally posted by: LordAhriman

Sorry about your luck. I won a $1000 Amazon gift card when I clicked it!

That is nothing, I just need to send 5,000 so that 15 million can be sent to my bank account... I win!

originally posted by: MiddleInsite
FAKE NEWS.

I don't and won't believe it even if you show me facts. I'll just dispute them and say FAKE NEWS.

GO TEAM!

So just another day on ATS for you?

Here's a source that is not an infected sight AG Barr Indicts 8 For Funneling Millions in Foreign Donations to Schiff and Hillary

Earlier today, an indictment was unsealed against the CEO of an online payment processing company, and seven others, charging them with conspiring to make and conceal conduit and excessive campaign contributions, and related offenses, during the U.S. presidential election in 2016 and thereafter.

Assistant Attorney General Brian A. Benczkowski of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division and Assistant Director in Charge Timothy R. Slater of the FBI’s Washington Field Office made the announcement.

A federal grand jury in the District of Columbia indicted Ahmad “Andy” Khawaja, 48, of Los Angeles, California, on Nov. 7, 2019, along with George Nader, Roy Boulos, Rudy Dekermenjian, Mohammad “Moe” Diab, Rani El-Saadi, Stevan Hill and Thayne Whipple. The 53 count indictment charges Khawaja with two counts of conspiracy, three counts of making conduit contributions, three counts of causing excessive contributions, 13 counts of making false statements, 13 counts of causing false records to be filed, and one count of obstruction of a federal grand jury investigation. Nader is charged with conspiring with Khawaja to make conduit campaign contributions, and related offenses. Boulos, Dekermenjian, Diab, El-Saadi, Hill, and Whipple are charged with conspiring with Khawaja and each other to make conduit campaign contributions and conceal excessive contributions, and related offenses.

If true, this will be a very interesting holiday season to be sure.

Not sure but Nader was given immunity to testify in the Mueller investigation and this guy is dirty. He funneled 3 .5 million to HIllary in 2016 but at the same time was setting up meetings with Erik Prince (Blackwater) and Don Jr.. He is linked to Psy-Op who is linked to Cambridge Analytica...

This is all fall out from the Mueller investigation so maybe we will see some more dots connected.

This is the same story that Vasa Croe posted about earlier this month.

Turns out that the FTC also won a judgement against Khawaja to the tune of over 100 million dollars as well as being granted title to a property they owned which has an impressive house that was built from 2014 to 2016.

if she is innocent ok she has nothing to worry about.....,.....,... that is such a big if tho. Do you remember when she was kicked off the watergate commission for being too corrupt? Or when she laughed about a lie detector's accuracy after getting man accused of rape off. When she said what difference does it make after the Benghazi attacks with our weapons?
How about when she sold our uranium to Russia?

Can you positively show that she is not a corrupt criminal? Please share your research with us perhaps you might even be able to change a mind.

You are aware of how Vince Foster died right? How about the recently revealed cause of Seth Rich and the whole plot to take him out and then make up a complete fiction on how Russia hacked her e-mails. That last one we are lucky they did not consider it an act of war. How about her responsibility for taking out Ghadafi for what wanting to go on a gold standard and drill into an aquifer so his country could have water.

Be careful when condoning socio-pathic behavior it is like actually committing the acts yourself.

How about you jut give one example of how she was ever a decent and caring person who did not intentionally decimate an entire country (Haiti) Show one example where she was an actual role model who displayed compassion and caring attributes and not a vile disgustingly corrupt "alleged coven leader" as those who can see clearly know she is.

Just one you can do it scour the internet and find something somewhere where she did not take advantage of anyone and did something selfless.

Good luck I patiently await your your reply and am aware that to find what I asked it could take years, decades, or even centuries to find. Even then I will wait for your proof in my next life.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Klassified

She likely has nothing to be guilty about.
More than likely. Positively.

a reply to: 727Sky

I'm glad the Electoral College system meant that (anyone) won instead of Hillary Clinton, but I have never understood why people use the argument that people surrounded by more open land should be more strongly represented.

It shouldn't be a matter of more densely-populated areas being more or less heavily represented. Every person's vote should be weighed equally.

I don't understand why winning 51% of a state's popular vote means getting all of its electoral vote.

Whoever gets the most votes, should be the president. The EC system exemplified that not everyone's votes count equally in the United States (again - THANKFULLY, in this case.)

I don't care how many counties someone wins. A county with 6000 residents is representative of a lot less people than a county with 7 million residents. Anything less than dorect democracy is robbing citizens of their democracy.

a reply to: dogstar23

cite where we have ever been a pure democracy please.

It was put into place to make certain every area of the country has a voice at the table or we would end up with a handful of places deciding the election every time. As it is you have to run one of the worst campaigns ever (Hillary) to not win as a democrat.

If you want to argue that EC pts should be divided by the percentage of votes earned that would make a lot more sense for a change rather than a pure democracy.(IE mob rule)

BS.

See above.

a reply to: dogstar23

Many states would leave the union quickly if two or three populous states were able to select each president based on majority rule. Candidates would no longer campaign anywhere but those few populous states and ignore the rest of the country. We were warned over 2400 years ago by the Athenian philosopher Plato about the tyranny of the majority (or mob rule) that would arise out of direct democracy and how it would inevitably result in tyranny. America was founded as a constitutional republic with three branches of government as a hedge against democracy because of many of the founding fathers were well aware of Plato's discourse. James Madison spent the year before the Constitutional Convention reading two trunkfuls of books on the history of failed democracies sent to him from Paris by Thomas Jefferson.

originally posted by: dogstar23
a reply to: 727Sky

I don't understand why winning 51% of a state's popular vote means getting all of its electoral vote.

That is not an EC issue; the EC does not dictate how a state award their allocated electors.

Most (not all) states have individual chosen to be winner take all. It gives their state more punching power not to devid their votes.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
BS.

See above.

No it is not BS.
The DoJ has confirmed this on their own site.
Millions of dollars was funneled from foreigners to support the Democrat (Hillary's) run for President and House/Senate seats
Eight people have been indicted and now it remains to be seen who knew what and when.

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Gryphon66
BS.

See above.

No it is not BS.
The DoJ has confirmed this on their own site.
Millions of dollars was funneled from foreigners to support the Democrat (Hillary's) run for President and House/Senate seats
Eight people have been indicted and now it remains to be seen who knew what and when.

I'm glad this is happening but I suspect it will end with those who funneled the money. Our dirty politicians will claim they had no knowledge of that and come out unscathed. In the end, it's business as usual.

Full 53 count inditement for those interested PDF:
cdn.cnn.com...

There are even more details in the full document image linked above for those interested in digging past press releases and news clips on the subject.

a reply to: dogstar23

The problem with that is the tyranny of the majority which is EXACTLY why the Founders did not set the US up that way. Under that system everyone's vote does not count equally, unless you belong to the majority group (Urban vs rural) you have no voice. We actually need to go in slightly the opposite direction. i would prefer an electoral college system where each county got a percentage of the EC vote based on their percent of the population. As of right now Red counties in Cali have no voice. If we went to a strict popular vote no rural area would have a voice.