@on the cusp I hadn't thought of that. Good point. OK, that makes the not-killing him part make sense, but why was he arrested and given a lawyer rather than being given a bunk in a basement in Langley or some detention center somewhere? Also, it still doesn't resolve the question that's riling my brain: how could a cartel with as much power as the Clinton/Bush cartel feel threatened?

I mean, let's say it's information, something really damning. Who is going to publish it--maybe Wikileaks, I guess? But even if they did, why would the Clintons and the DNC need to care? Is there really a bad enough revelation that they would ever get even a slap on the wrist from our massively corrupt legal system? or our massively corrupt media? What is it? Pedophilia? Human trafficking of children? Weapons deals with Russia or the Islamic State?

#12.1 This guy is not the only person who has the info.

@on the cusp My brain is also having a hard time processing somebody as corrupt as this Awan guy suddenly wanting to sell info to Wikileaks for $$ when he was already working for people who were forking the money over bigtime. Can Wikileaks really outbid Clinton/Bush Inc?

Maybe he found something about how they planned to destroy Pakistan. Even criminals have their limits.

#12.1 This guy is not the only person who has the info.

@WoodsDweller First off, awesome Rick James/Dave Chapelle reference.

Second off, I absolutely know I'm speculating my ass off, mainly because I can't make the elements of this story fit into a coherent whole, whether a fictional one or one based in reality. I literally do not comprehend this data as part of a pattern, apart from the obvious pattern that DWS is so corrupt she stands out from the background of Clinton corruption as something special. So my brain keeps trying to come up with a framework that will hold all the pieces of data in reasonable relation to one another.

I like your stab at it a lot. There's definitely a logic to it. The bit about the Russian metadata bugs me a little bit--seems like the CIA or NSA would absolutely be the best candidates for doing that, and who in those organizations would both attach that forged data AND hand it on? It would have to be somebody who both hates Hillary Clinton and wants to go to war with Russia. That almost makes sense. Somebody who agrees with her insane PNAC policies--and wants to discredit Wikileaks--but also would love to embarrass her. Also, the bit about why he's in the public eye at all, why this was done as an arrest in public is a bit shaky, unless they were well and truly taken by surprise at the fact that he was the one doing it, and HAD to nab him at the airport b/c he was already on his way out.

However, if your speculation is correct, it would imply that the FBI really is still independent of the forces I'm lately calling The Cartel.

#12.1
And I'm enjoying the hell of out this.
Wild speculation #1: Awan was the one who stole the DNC emails. He did it as a crime of opportunity, not as part of his work for DWS/Clinton.
Wild speculation #2: This one isn't so wild - Awan sold it to a middleman (and was well paid for it). There could have been a chain of middlemen, ending with someone (likely spooks from the nation state of your choice) who delivered it to WikiLeaks (for free). The forged Russia metadata was attached somewhere in this chain of middlemen.
Wild speculation #3: The Clintons just found out who stole the emails. They are pissed. That's what spooked Awan. His protection is now coming for him, and the money he got for that data isn't looking like such a great deal now.
Wild speculation #4: El Trumpo tweeted a couple of days ago about investigating the Clintons again. Sessions might want to regain some favor by reopening the investigation with new evidence. If nothing else it provides more misdirection in the daily news cycle.
Wild speculation #5: Everybody wants Awan. The Feds got him first, which is why he didn't suicide with two rounds to the back of the head. Issue: why wouldn't he be in protective custody? Now he's too high profile to simply drop dead, so the Clintons assigned a handler for him.

If Awan sings, RussiaGate is shown to be BS, the Clintons lose their propaganda, and pressure is removed from El Trumpo.

@snoopydawg

I dunno - Putin cut back on the military budget so he could blow money on pensions for his people; might have none to spare for bribery, the silly loser. And that's precisely the sort of disgraceful behaviour 'up with which TPTB will not put'.

(Please tell me this doesn't require a snark mark here, of all places?)

Why Putin of course, you silly woman.

#12.1

@Linda Wood
but it doesn't make sense.
Smashing the drives is just common sense, like remembering to take your passport and a change of underwear.
Setting yourself up for an arrest is needlessly complicated. You can't be sure you'll actually get arrested (though I suppose if he doesn't get arrested he gets out of the country), and more importantly you can't tell who is going to do the arresting, someone who wants you dead or someone who might keep you alive.
Instead you get a lawyer, contact the FBI, and tell them you have a story to tell in return for protective custody. Maybe smash the drives anyway, and have another copy somewhere safe so that you have it to bargain with.

#12.1
smashed his hard drives and tried to flee the country in order to get arrested so he wouldn't be killed. But he's not in custody, is he?

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/07/25/feds-arrest-it-staffer-for-wa...

… Awan, 37, of Virginia, pleaded not guilty Tuesday to one count of bank fraud during his arraignment in federal court in Washington, D.C. He was released but will have to wear a GPS monitor and abide by a curfew.

Well, at the very least he's become a public figure and if he disappears it will be more scandalous now.

@Linda Wood @Linda Wood @Linda Wood

I'd read that he'd discovered he was about to be arrested for bank fraud, among other things? Is this not accurate? I've no way of verifying anything...

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jul/26/wasserman-schultzs-pakis...

Dems cry Islamophobia, as Wasserman Schultz’s Pakistani IT guy arrested

By Cheryl K. Chumley - The Washington Times - Wednesday, July 26, 2017

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s top information technology guy, the Pakistani-born Imran Awan — who was under investigation by the FBI for theft and cybersecurity-tied abuses — was arrested at Dulles International Airport as he tried to flee the country. ...

... Awan is the same guy who has made big bucks on the back of taxpayers for years, all while having largely unfettered access to computer-stored data from House Democrats. Can you say security breach? He’s also the same guy who just made a curious transfer of $283,000 to two individuals in Pakistan from his Longworth House Office Building, as reported by the Daily Caller News Foundation. He’s also the same guy whose wife and children just left America for Pakistan, reportedly carrying more than $12,000 in cash.

And he’s also the same guy who’s been under FBI investigation for some time for allegedly double-billing House members for items like computers, iPads and other technological equipment. He had quite a racket going on; Awan’s two brothers and their wives also served as IT staffers for House Democrats — for the last 10 years or so. ...

... Between the time Awan started working for Wasserman Schultz in 2005 and his family members were let go, earlier this year, they had collectively earned more than $4 million in tax paid salaries. In February, House members were alerted to potential for abuse and let go Awan’s family members. ...

... Agents with the U.S. Capitol Police, Border Protection and the FBI stopped him Tuesday at the airport, where he was headed to Pakistan by way of Qatar.

Part of the investigation involves what information the family had access to, and what they did with it. Awan, for instance, has been charged with fraudulently taking out mortgages as part of one of several alleged financial schemes — conducted at a time when he had access to emails and files of dozens of members of Congress and to information tied to Wasserman Schultz’s former Democratic National Committee organization. Feds also think the family may have put sensitive House information on the “cloud,” leaving it open for others to view. ...

Edit: of course, the official reasons for arrest might/might not cover the issue (no idea, obviously) but the mix of '...U.S. Capitol Police, Border Protection and the FBI...' given as the arresting agents struck me as being rather interesting.

Re-edit to add the rather obvious note that he seems just up the Clinton's alley as regards blatant venal criminality.

#12.1
smashed his hard drives and tried to flee the country in order to get arrested so he wouldn't be killed. But he's not in custody, is he?

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/07/25/feds-arrest-it-staffer-for-wa...

… Awan, 37, of Virginia, pleaded not guilty Tuesday to one count of bank fraud during his arraignment in federal court in Washington, D.C. He was released but will have to wear a GPS monitor and abide by a curfew.

Well, at the very least he's become a public figure and if he disappears it will be more scandalous now.

@Socialprogressive

Although when the stack of bodies becomes a subject of public notice, they tend to get buried under a blizzard of Big Lie repetitions... I hate that that still works on so many.

#12.1

for not killing him is because too many bodies are starting to stack up.

@gulfgal98
study shows there were 2 leaks:

https://consortiumnews.com/2017/07/24/intel-vets-challenge-russia-hack-e...

Intel Vets Challenge ‘Russia Hack’ Evidence
July 24, 2017

… Forensic studies of “Russian hacking” into Democratic National Committee computers last year reveal that on July 5, 2016, data was leaked (not hacked) by a person with physical access to DNC computers, and then doctored to incriminate Russia.

… From the information available, we conclude that the same inside-DNC, copy/leak process was used at two different times, by two different entities, for two distinctly different purposes:

-(1) an inside leak to WikiLeaks before Julian Assange announced on June 12, 2016, that he had DNC documents and planned to publish them (which he did on July 22) – the presumed objective being to expose strong DNC bias toward the Clinton candidacy; and

-(2) a separate leak on July 5, 2016, to pre-emptively taint anything WikiLeaks might later publish by “showing” it came from a “Russian hack.”

#14.1 I believe there may have been at least two leakers. The information that went to Wikileaks via Craig Murray was handed over some time after Seth Rich's murder. I get all these leaks mixed up, so I am not sure if those were DNC, DCC, or Podesta. But Seth Rich had access to DNC system only and it has been reported that he somehow gave his leaks to Wikileaks via Gavin McFayden who has since died.

Here is what I found in an article at Counterpunch.

Here’s the scoop from Robert Parry at Consortium News:

“Former British Ambassador to Uzbekistan Craig Murray, has suggested that the DNC leak came from a “disgruntled” Democrat upset with the DNC’s sandbagging of the Sanders campaign and that the Podesta leak came from the U.S. intelligence community….He (Murray) appears to have undertaken a mission for WikiLeaks to contact one of the sources (or a representative) during a Sept. 25 visit to Washington where he says he met with a person in a wooded area of American University. ….

Though Murray has declined to say exactly what the meeting in the woods was about, he may have been passing along messages about ways to protect the source from possible retaliation, maybe even an extraction plan if the source was in some legal or physical danger…Murray also suggested that the DNC leak and the Podesta leak came from two different sources, neither of them the Russian government.

Murray has since said that he did not personally receive documents from the person he met outside American University but characterized his duties in the September meeting as "administrative" which seems to support the information in the Counterpunch article.

@gulfgal98 @gulfgal98 Well, if there were more than one disgruntled DNC employee involved with the leak. or even in Rich's confidence--not at all improbable--Seth Rich getting killed would certainly make him/her want to seek reliable advice.

I got my timeline confused; I thought Craig Murray went to American University before Seth Rich was killed.

Robert Parry is excellent; one of the few real journalists covering this sort of thing we have left.

The Podesta leak looked to me like pretty lameass easy stuff; the guy got phished and gave away his password. If U.S. intelligence is responsible for it, guess whoever was running the phishing software put the info up for sale and somebody in US intelligence bought it--unless our highly paid intelligence community is running lameass phishing attempts as the way to get their data. /facepalm

#14.1 I believe there may have been at least two leakers. The information that went to Wikileaks via Craig Murray was handed over some time after Seth Rich's murder. I get all these leaks mixed up, so I am not sure if those were DNC, DCC, or Podesta. But Seth Rich had access to DNC system only and it has been reported that he somehow gave his leaks to Wikileaks via Gavin McFayden who has since died.

Here is what I found in an article at Counterpunch.

Here’s the scoop from Robert Parry at Consortium News:

“Former British Ambassador to Uzbekistan Craig Murray, has suggested that the DNC leak came from a “disgruntled” Democrat upset with the DNC’s sandbagging of the Sanders campaign and that the Podesta leak came from the U.S. intelligence community….He (Murray) appears to have undertaken a mission for WikiLeaks to contact one of the sources (or a representative) during a Sept. 25 visit to Washington where he says he met with a person in a wooded area of American University. ….

Though Murray has declined to say exactly what the meeting in the woods was about, he may have been passing along messages about ways to protect the source from possible retaliation, maybe even an extraction plan if the source was in some legal or physical danger…Murray also suggested that the DNC leak and the Podesta leak came from two different sources, neither of them the Russian government.

Murray has since said that he did not personally receive documents from the person he met outside American University but characterized his duties in the September meeting as "administrative" which seems to support the information in the Counterpunch article.