Yesterday, the Sun Sentinel reported that after weeks of dodging questions about the scandal surrounding her indicted IT staffer, Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz finally came face-to-face with the media yesterday and answered questions... Kind of. Her cautious and defensive answers raise serious concerns about her continued poor judgement.
We broke down the biggest takeaways that should have voters’ alarm bells sounding:
1) DWS stands by her belief that she did nothing wrong by keeping Awan on payroll while he was under investigation.
“He’s not my staffer. He no longer works for me. And when he was arrested, I terminated him,” she said. “I kept him on the payroll during the time that he was not arrested and not charged with anything. And that was because, as I said, that I was concerned about the violation of his due process rights and also that there were racial and ethnic profiling concerns as well.”
2) DWS doubled down on her claim that the FBI and Capitol Police investigating Imran Awan are racist.**
“I was concerned about racial, ethnic and religious profiling.”
3) DWS claimed ignorance when asked about the suspicious circumstances under which Awan wired hundreds of thousands of dollars to Pakistan.
“I don’t know anything about his personal finances, and so it’s not something that I am really able to comment on.”
4) DWS refused to comment on allegations that Awan was fleeing to Pakistan and selling information to the Russians.
“I don’t have any thoughts…”
5)DWS refused to vouch for Awan’s innocence when asked.
“I have been concerned throughout this process that like any other American that he is given due process and that the system be allowed to work and once that process occurred, once he was arrested and charged with a crime, then I was certainly satisfied that he was getting the due process that he needed, and I terminated [him]. But before that, when he was not, I wanted to make sure that I stood for making sure that someone’s rights were protected. It was important for me to do that.”
**Does this mean DWS thinks her fellow Democrats were complicit in racial profiling by firing Awan? If anyone is able to get a straight answer out of her, we’d love to know.
Elections House 2018