WHO is Lying?: Jeh Johnson or Debbie Wasserman-Schultz?

Houston...we have a problem.

So, yesterday, Jeh Johnson, former Homeland Security Secretary, testified under oath that Debbie Wasserman-Shultz's DNC turned down his agency's offer to help protect it's network after warning it about the hack.

Now, it seems DWS is calling Johnson a liar (while he was under oath)...saying his agency never contacted her DNC.

SOMEONE is lying.

WHO?

...and WHY?

Thoughts, ATS?

For my money...they're both crooked...but we have to consider that Johnson WAS under oath when he made his statement and DWS was not.
....So there's THAT.

Could it be that BOTH may have separate reasons to lie?

BEST SOLUTION (IMO): Put Debbie under oath and ask her again.

Jeh Johnson testifies DNC rejected DHS help on hack

Former Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson testified Wednesday that the Democratic National Committee last year turned down his agency's offer to help protect its network despite being warned about a hack.

www.foxnews.com...

Debbie Wasserman Schultz: FBI, DHS never contacted me about DNC hack

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla., said Wednesday that neither the FBI nor any other government agency contacted her about the hacking of the Democratic National Committee's computer networks.

"At no point during my tenure at the DNC did anyone from the FBI or any other government agency contact or communicate with me about Russian intrusion on the DNC network.

www.washingtonexaminer.com...

a reply to: IAMTAT

I'd have to learn a lot more about the guy before I can come up with any ideas. DWS in my opinion is almost as corrupt as they can come. Doesn't make what she said less genuine but there is good reason to question that b****es statement.

Are Debbie's lips moving?

Then yep, she is full of sh*t

a reply to: IAMTAT

I automatically assume both are lying.

But, I think Schultz is feeling the heat more so than Johnson right now.
So maybe she wasn't specifically contacted, but I'm sure the DNC was.

Oh also notice that she said "Russian intrusion" and since there is no evidence that Russia hacked into the DNC and it was most likely Gucciffer.
So technically according to politician logic, she isn't actually lying.

a reply to: IAMTAT

Because Debbie has such a great track record... the possibility that she would testify to anything under oath and lie without hesitation is more than just a possibility, it's a likelihood.

Boy do I have strong distaste for Wasserman-Schultz. Even her name is f*cking annoying and sounds like someone with a Tonya Harding complex - dishonest, only out for themselves, and morally corrupted. F you Debbie.

a reply to: IAMTAT

The DNC is lying. It does happen but federal agents tend to not lie very much. In court and under oath, less.

a reply to: IAMTAT

This is pretty obvious. DWS said nobody contacted her. Johnson didn't claim that he reached out to her personally.

What we have here is DWS trying to employ plausible deniability. I wouldn't trust her as far as I could throw her on this. She was clearly asleep at the wheel. She was the one leading the organization, the buck stopped with her.

a reply to: IAMTAT

This is awkward.

In my timeline, Jeh Johnson & Debbie Wasserman-Shultz died shooting politicians during baseball practice.

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: IAMTAT

This is pretty obvious. DWS said nobody contacted her. Johnson didn't claim that he reached out to her personally.

What we have here is DWS trying to employ plausible deniability. I wouldn't trust her as far as I could throw her on this. She was clearly asleep at the wheel. She was the leading the organization, the buck stopped with her.

And we all know how honest Debbie Schulz is...

DWS is a paragon of virtue...just like Hillary

-Chris

a reply to: IAMTAT
Sorry but when Wasserman-Schultz talks I think it's a given that she is lying!

a reply to: Christosterone

You won't get an argument from me on that one. If you're trying to somehow impress me with calling either DWS or HRC a liar, you're not. I don't have a problem acknowledging when people lie. That seems to be more of a problem with the those supporting the absolute most prolific liar in the recent history of American politics.

If you want to impress me with how "woke" you are, wake up to the fact that Donald Trump lies more than those two and any dozen other politicians combined. Then explain why you seem to care so much about the lies from those two and not at all about the far larger body of lies from Trump.

I never understood why political agents aren't required to be under oath from the time they take office until they leave office...Like how would that be a bad thing? At the very least they should always be considered under oath when speaking about any official business. Seems the only ones who benefit from them not being under oath until called in to testify would be themselves...Surely not we the people though.

Hey gang...
Let's stick with Jeh and Debbie...and keep the lid on member bickering and name calling.

a reply to: IAMTAT

So this week Under Oath means likely telling the truth but two weeks ago when it was James Comey that same Under Oath didn't mean anything.

a reply to: theantediluvian

Atlantean,

How many times do I have to tell I do not speak millennial...
"Woke" is not in my vernacular...
And I don't appreciate needing to use urban dictionary to translate your every post...

-Chris

Well the obvious answer is Donna Brazile. Right?

It's incredible to me that the MSM almost never mentions this class action lawsuit against the DNC for defrauding Bernie Sanders and his supporters, especially given the new developments surrounding the actions of Debbie Wasserman Schultz herself.

A court document filed this week with the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida by their attorneys said that they received a call for information about the case from the office of Wasserman Schultz, a Democratic congresswoman from Florida, and claimed that it sounded like the caller used a voice changer.

According to attorney Elizabeth Lee Beck: "At 4:54 p.m. today [June 1], an individual called our law office from '305-936-5724.'" That number is the contact phone number for Wasserman Schultz's Aventura office in Florida.

DNC lawsuit now includes claim that someone in Debbie Wasserman Schultz's office used voice changer

I would love to be a plaintiff's attorney in this suit because I would dipose the s**t out of DWS on everything from collusion with the Clinton campaign to Seth Rich.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: IAMTAT

So this week Under Oath means likely telling the truth but two weeks ago when it was James Comey that same Under Oath didn't mean anything.

Please show me where I said that his testifying under oath meant I believed Johnson was telling the truth.

I only highlighted the fact that he did. It seemed germane to the discussion.


Seriously, Silly, there's enough REAL material here to discuss honestly, without having to make up things by intentionally mis-characterizing my OP.

Someday, someone will make the requisite porn parody of this incident. In keeping with the Debbie Does Dallas theme, this one will be called Debbie Does Dishonesty. Who knows? Dishonesty might even be a hot chick.

Video of Johnson's testimony.
I doubt there exists one of DWS, but clearly
The DNC refused to allow the server to be examined.

Gee I wonder why?
That said DWS is a woman with a lot to hide,
nefarious activity and many lies on record.