The Corner

Law & the Courts

Why Was Wife of DWS’s Swindler Staffer Allowed to Leave the Country?

In the Morning Jolt, Jim nicely outlines the increasingly bizarre story of a family of Pakistani information technologists who became House staffers under the auspices of Representative Debbie Wasserman Shultz (DWS) of Florida, the former head of the Democratic National Committee and a Clinton partisan. Over the years, family members were paid millions of dollars, and there are allegations of fraud, property theft, and potential swiping of information to which they had access on the House IT network.

The entire story merits attention and follow-up, working backwards from yesterday’s arrest of Imran Awan, DWS’s top IT staffer, whom she has gone to great lengths to protect despite the swirling investigation. Awan was bagged trying to flee to Lahore, Pakistan. According to the complaint filed in federal court in support of his arrest, Awan wired $283,000 in January from the Congressional Federal Credit Union to Faisalabad, Pakistan. He has been charged with bank fraud in a scheme involving mortgages on various properties owned by the Awan family. The FBI has also reportedly searched his home, seizing computer hard drives that had been smashed to pieces.

For now, I want to focus on a narrow part of the story. In early March, as Jim details, Imran’s wife, Hina Alvi, suddenly left the country for Lahore, by way of Doha, Qatar. Notwithstanding the return flight she booked for a date in September 2017, the FBI believes that she actually has no intention to return to the U.S. She had abruptly pulled the couple’s three daughters out of school without alerting the school’s staff, and brought them with her — along with lots of luggage and household goods — to Pakistan.

Hina had also been on the House payroll.

I want to draw attention to a detail about her apparent flight. According to the aforementioned complaint, agents of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) found $12,400 in cash when they searched her belongings. Yet, “ALVI was permitted to board the flight to Qatar and she and her daughters have not returned to the United States.” Her husband, Awan, appeared to be headed to join her when he was arrested yesterday.

Why was Hina Alvi permitted to leave? Why was she not arrested?

Under federal law, a person may carry as much cash in or out of the U.S. as she wishes. There are, however, reporting requirements. A Report of International Transportation of Currency or Monetary Instruments must be completed and filed with CBP if the amount of currency being removed from the country exceeds $10,000. An effort to smuggle out such an amount of cash without completing the report form is a felony, punishable by up to five years’ imprisonment. If it is done in conjunction with some other crime (e.g., fraud), or as part of a pattern of illegal activity, the penalty is up to ten years’ imprisonment.

The complaint does not indicate whether Alvi filed the currency-transportation report. I would be very surprised if she did. The form requires the person providing information to identify whose money it is, how the person transporting it came to have it, where it is destined to go, who is to receive it, and so on. Whether a person in the middle of a fraud probe provides truthful information or lies in answering these questions, the answers are usually relevant to the investigation. If she’d filled out the form, you’d expect to find reference to it in the complaint.

So, given the highly suspicious circumstances of her sudden flight from the country, and the indications that the CBP agents had grounds to arrest and detain her, why was Alvi permitted to board the plane and fly to Doha?

Most Popular

Law & the Courts

The March for Life Is a March for Truth

Pro-lifers are marching today, as they do every year, to commemorate a great evil that was done in January 1973 and to express solidarity with its innocent victims. The Supreme Court’s decision in Roe v. Wade eliminated legal protections for unborn children in all 50 states, and did so without any ... Read More
Law & the Courts

The March for Life Is a March for Truth

Pro-lifers are marching today, as they do every year, to commemorate a great evil that was done in January 1973 and to express solidarity with its innocent victims. The Supreme Court’s decision in Roe v. Wade eliminated legal protections for unborn children in all 50 states, and did so without any ... Read More
Law & the Courts

Clarence Thomas Speaks

Those who know Justice Clarence Thomas say that any perception of him as dour or phlegmatic couldn't be more off-base. He's a charming, gracious, jovial man, full of bonhomie and easy with a laugh, or so I'm told by people who know him well. On summer breaks he likes to roam around the country in an RV and stay ... Read More
Law & the Courts

Clarence Thomas Speaks

Those who know Justice Clarence Thomas say that any perception of him as dour or phlegmatic couldn't be more off-base. He's a charming, gracious, jovial man, full of bonhomie and easy with a laugh, or so I'm told by people who know him well. On summer breaks he likes to roam around the country in an RV and stay ... Read More

A Nation of Barbers

It seems almost inevitable that long hair is unwelcome at Barbers Hill High School. There’s a touch of aptronymic poetry in Texas public-school dress-code disputes. When I was in school in the 1980s, at the height of the Satanism panic, the local school-district superintendent circulated a list of ... Read More

A Nation of Barbers

It seems almost inevitable that long hair is unwelcome at Barbers Hill High School. There’s a touch of aptronymic poetry in Texas public-school dress-code disputes. When I was in school in the 1980s, at the height of the Satanism panic, the local school-district superintendent circulated a list of ... Read More
U.S.

Nadler’s Folly

Jerry Nadler must have missed the day in law school where they teach you about persuasion. The House Democrat made a critical error early in the trial of President Trump. He didn’t just say that Republican senators, who voted to begin the proceedings without calling witnesses, were part of a cover-up. He said ... Read More
U.S.

Nadler’s Folly

Jerry Nadler must have missed the day in law school where they teach you about persuasion. The House Democrat made a critical error early in the trial of President Trump. He didn’t just say that Republican senators, who voted to begin the proceedings without calling witnesses, were part of a cover-up. He said ... Read More