Since lawyer Hanif Khatri and Dato Abdul Kadir Jasin answer to any arguments questioning the validity and admissibility of the latest DOJ submission is to challenge anyone to sue them, then it is suggested that both the accused and implicated Tun Dr Mahathir and Syed Saddiq should sue RPK.
In his posting, "Syed Saddiq knew the US-DoJ attack was coming", Raja Petra claimed that Mahathir paid US$5 million to Clinton Foundation to get DOJ to submit the 'flimsy' charges to the US California Court last year.
He implicated Tun Daim and Syed Saddiq. It is claimed also Syed Saddiq told his friends that Mahathir spent RM50 million on the whole foreign attack exercise to topple Dato Najib.
In the earlier posting, "Mahathir is playing his last card in a futile attempt to oust Najib", he merely said millions were spent on the July 20th 2016 announcement and more for the June 15th 2017 announcement.
Dato Khairuddin Hassan and Matthias Chang were revealed as the complainant to DOJ. It is claimed that former AG Loretta Lynch had assisted the earlier submission. She is being implicated as having links to the Clinton Foundation:
Interestingly, TV3's Dato Ashraf Abdullah revealed in his FB that DOJ submission to the court is merely based on complainant and still need to undergo investigation.
It has similarity to the French Court game played by willing-to-be-US-spy Cynthia Gabriel that bombed out with Najib not charged and the issue died already.
In an earlier posting, "The reason why the DoJ made that announcement yesterday", Cynthia Gabriel, Matthias Chang, Sivarasa Rasiah and Clare Rewcastle Brown were accused of assisting acting AG Sandra Brown in the draft preparation and various related activities of the Verified Complaint for Forfeiture.
One legal professional and former investigator (name withheld) told this blogger, it does not look
like a draft written by DOJ because it is too detailed. Despite that, the US dare not take any criminal action.
Many parts do not make sense. As the Malaysian AG said in his statement, there is no proof and seemed to be a recycle the previous DOJ submission. PM's Communication Director explicitly felt it is meant to implicate without evidence. Read Rocky Bru here.
It means many more should sue RPK in the UK or US court.
If they can't do it, then they should stop harping on why Najib did not proceed with the Tuesday lawsuit and PAS's Clare Rewcastle lawsuit. These countries had passed law to allow reporters, and media to slander and lie given the right spin and play of words.
Mahathir too did not sue former WSJ journalist Barry Wain for the damaging book that claimed he was the cause for US$100 billion loss to the country for many of his failed ventures. He wrote about his corruption too.
To be fair to Mahathir, he did tried to sue Najib in Malaysia. High Court ruled that Najib is not public official. So Mahathir is appealing and the date will be after Hari Raya. It is important because it means allegation that Najib is the ultimate decision maker in all 1MDB matters do not hold water in court.
The lawsuit will give opportunity to RPK to reveal proof such donation.
Same with Mahathir's intention to reveal what he has in court. But, that is what one PPBM Supreme Council member told us. Off course, that is if he or she is capable of understanding and reading any English.
Many Malaysians are too quick to take the material in the submission as Gospel truth. For Muslim, it is Quran. Hindu the Veda. Despite not understanding sufficiently what the duck he is talking. Ibrahim Ali not excluded.
The first DOJ submission is not progressing. Does it mean civil court could have better chance since it is based more on probability than requirement of beyond reasonable doubt proof requirement in criminal charges?
Puzzling too is DOJ's concerned with Malaysian peoples' money. Which Malaysians are the DOJ acting for because 1MDB have not lost any money but still remain profitable within the assumed risk profile of the investment.
Is 1MDB supposed to make exorbitant profit and the exorbitant portion taken out by Jho Loh and his money laundering network?
1MDB have not been contacted or investigated by any foreign investigators, including the US. Neither did the DOJ made an official request for evidence with local agencies. US is known to be aggressive in requesting evidences.
If what they have are distorted fact claimed to be leakage materials from the first submission, it is not formal evidence without official request on a Government to Government basis for use as evidence in court. Is that another reason they are taking civil action?
Bet the Mahathir's former Deputy Minister of Justice with legal training from Holiday Inn never thought of.
|Interesting read here|
Read Lim Sian See's Ten observations on DOJ's June 2017 1MDB-related civil suit. He touched also on how the allegation on pink diamond makes no sense. Could DOJ prove the existence by presenting the diamond in court?
The blog Snapshot2016 here claimed too many glaring mistakes in the DOJ latest civil court attempt, including disputing Mahathir-era former AG Tan Sri Abu Talib claim DOJ do not need to consult Malaysia. BigDog here is applying pressure on who was the Malaysian complainant.
On the question of evidences, and to those thinking FBI is so damn great, including certain law enforcement agency looking up to them in such godly manner, FBI failed to trace any laundered money in Mauritius as reported by the critical Independent here.
Duped by Sarawak Report.
If there is seriousness to pursue wrongdoings, it is most welcome. But cut the bullshit spin and cheap political propaganda like dedak, cursing and name calling, running from a debate, wait and see what happen, and Malaysia shamed in the international media.
But it is Mahathir's handy work with George Soros. Mahathir helping his IPP and privatised project cronies. Soros out to wreck Malaysia for one religion agenda.
For the US, ABC News reported:
"The attorneys general of Washington, D.C. (Karl Racine), and Maryland (Brian Frosh) filed a lawsuit in federal court Monday against President Donald Trump, alleging he violated the Constitution by allowing his businesses to accept payments from foreign governments."Frosh was reported by Fox to have said:
... the most salient factor is that when the president is subject to foreign influence, we have to be concerned about whether the actions he's taking — both at home and abroad ...Americans are also concerned with revelation of former FBI Director, James Comey statement in the Senate hearing on Trump with regard to Russian interference in US politics.
They should be concerned with allegation Malaysians are bribing DOJ. To be consistent, they should be concerned with attempt to interfere by their government in Malaysian politics and perhaps, do a blackmail.