Flashback: Wasserman Schultz Threatens Police Chief for Gathering Evidence on Her IT Staffer’s Alleged Crimes

‘I think you’re violating the rules when you conduct your business that way and you should expect that there will be consequences’

This story is cross-posted at our consumer site, Grabien News. Watch it there – without audiomarks.

TRANSCRIPT:

WASSERMAN SCHULTZ: “I’d like to know how Capitol Police handle equipment that belongs to a member or a staffer that’s been lost within the Capitol complex and found or recovered by one of your officers. What happens?”
VERDEROSA: “It’s processed on a PD-81 which is a property record, and depending on the property, depending on how you can legitimately determine ownership, it’s generally turned back over to the owner of a property. If it’s part of an ongoing case, then there are other things that have to occur for that to happen.”
WASSERMAN SCHULTZ: “So if a member says there is equipment that has been lost and you find, it it would be returned to the member?”
VERDEROSA: In a general sense, yes. You have to be able to positively identify the property and be able to establish ownership.”
WASSERMAN SCHULTZ: “And if ownership is established…” 
VERDEROSA: “If it’s part of an ongoing case, then there are additional things that need to be done.”
WASSERMAN SCHULTZ: “But if a member owns the equipment, and there is no ongoing case related to that member, then the equipment is supposed to be returned.”
VERDEROSA: “In a general sense, yes.”
WASSERMAN SCHULTZ: “No, I mean in a specific sense. If the member loses the equipment, says they lose the equipment, and it is found by the Capitol Police, it is supposed to be returned.”
VERDEROSA: “If ownership has been established, it will be returned. If it’s subject to an ongoing investigation, there are additional things –“
WASSERMAN SCHULTZ: “OK, but not an ongoing investigation related to the member. If the equipment belongs to the member, it has been lost, they say it’s been lost and it’s been identified as that member’s, then the Capitol Police are supposed to return it. Correct?”
VERDEROSA: “I can’t give a yes or no answer on that, because I know –“
WASSERMAN SCHULTZ: “It’s a simple yes or no answer. If a member loses equipment and it is found by the Capitol Police or your staff and it is identified as that member’s equipment and the member is not associated with any case, it is supposed to be returned. Yes or no?”
VERDEROSA: “It depends on the circumstances. And if the circumstances are –”
WASSERMAN SCHULTZ: “I don’t understand how that is possible. Members’ equipment is members’ equipment. My understanding is the Capitol Police is not able to confiscate member’s equipment when the member is not under investigation. It is their equipment and it is supposed to be returned.”
VERDEROSA: “I think there are extenuating circumstances in this case, and I think that working through my counsel and the necessary personnel, if that in fact is the case, and with the permission of — through the investigation, then we’ll return the equipment. But until that is accomplished, I can’t return the equipment.”
WASSERMAN SCHULTZ: “I think you’re violating the rules when you conduct your business that way and you should expect that there will be consequences.”

(Via The Daily Caller)

 

Video files
Full
Compact
Audio files
Full
Compact
Similar stories
Fox News: Marine Witness in IT Staffer Scandal Calls Out Wasserman Schultz for Saying It’s Profiling
Wasserman-Schultz Accuses Another Republican of Giving Women ‘Back of His Hand’
Trump: Debbie Wasserman Schultz Is a ‘Terrible Person’
CNN: Debbie Wasserman Schultz Will Not Open Democratic Convention
Fox News: Brazile Hits Wasserman Schultz over Perks that ‘Kept Her Fat and Happy’