Don’t Forget About Cooch, Safa Group, and Faisal Gill

By Loudoun Insider

The voters in November sure won’t.

My final thought on the flawed candidacy of Ken Cuccinelli for ATTORNEY GENERAL of Virginia.

The Safa Group is a close knit group of businesses that were raided several times by federal agents, producing evidence that led to the prosecution of several terrorists (just Google “Safa Group” to see what I’m talking about if you’re unfamiliar).  They were big political donors on the national, state and local scene.  Cuccinelli was the number two receiver of Safa funds in Virginia, behind his good pal, fellow whack-job Dick Black, who introduced him to these people.  Both professed their devotion to these radicals in this WaPo article.  George W. Bush, Hillary Cllinton, and even ethically challenged Jim Moran returned their Safa Group donations after disturbing information came out.  But not Cuccinelli.  In fact he just received money again from them last reporting period.

And don’t forget the ridiculous Faisal Gill fiasco of 2007, when he bussed in scores of non-English speaking Pakistanis to win a horribly flawed convention from Julie Lucas.  Gill had a long history of strange alliances, including working for a convicted terrorist currently in federal prison for trying to provide money for a hit named Abdurahman Alamoudi.  BVBL discussed the Faisal Gill affair here, and the aftermath of that convention here.  BVBL has a wealth of information on Gill, as does Google.  Cuccinelli was a HUGE Gill supporter, and is even mentioned in Gill’s Wikipedia entry.  Horrible judgment for someone who expects to be Attorney General.

Let the chants of racism begin!  I have absolutely nothing against law abiding mainstream Muslims, but I would never want to be a candidate running for Attorney General with these types of connections.  No thanks.  if you don’t think the Dems will use this stuff to good effect, you’re simply out of your mind.

Anybody But Cuccinelli.


  • kelley, I do want to say welcome to the TC world – you’ve been a great addition to the regular crowd.

  • G. Stone says:

    “brownlee for AG. and if you think i’m a moderate, you never met my family, the Attilas.”
    Nice to meet you, Hun.

  • G. Stone says:

    Try to get your mom to drive you to Richmond this weekend , we can hang out.

  • Loudoun Lady says:

    “Here’s the big difference. Brownlee DOES NOT have a story like this to reveal. That’s what we’ve said all along. Please catch up. mmmkay?

    – The Bulletproof Monk”

    We’ll see what is deemed a “story” in the general election, mmmkay? I don’t know if Brownlee has “stories” or not, but I know I won’t be promoting them like LI.

    I don’t need to catch up because I am not looking for a sleazy reason to disqualify any of our candidates. If you want to go on a witch hunt, feel free. It’s not my gig.

  • This process is called vetting, LL. Most parties like to do it before the candidate is selected. The Cooch fanatics just want to ignore such things.

  • Loudoun Lady says:

    Sounds like JP can dish it out but he can’t take it.

  • Loudoun Lady says:

    Vetting=witch hunt in your case, LI.

    You are very good at what you do, so don’t say I never complimented you.

  • It looks like we’ll just have to agree to disagree, LL!

  • Loudoun Lady says:

    Wouldn’t be the first time, and won’t be the last!

  • Jp in VA says:

    I can take it just fine Loudon Lady, in fact look at some other posts, call my ideas wrong, I’m good, call me whatever, just don’t expect to call me “sh** for brains” and try to equate that to telling someone they are wrong on ideas. And to think, I was getting on here to say I just got back from the Convention, and was impressed by KC a little, his people included. They have done a good job. I will not call anyone names, or insult them personally, or use cheesy childish insults, think its counterproductive and childish, but if that makes me “unable to take it”, fine. Again, one way seems to be coming from the same people over and over…. and its tiring, and oh yeah, I apologized to Stone when he pointed out he said he’d vote for any of the three, to which he shot back another slam. So, I seem to be taking it just fine.

  • “I don’t know if Brownlee has “stories” or not, but I know I won’t be promoting them like LI.”
    First off, he doesn’t. Secondly, do you think for a second that if he did the Democrats would even hesitate to turn it on him?
    As LI says…it’s vetting. We do it, or they do it later in the general.

  • Jp in VA says:

    Oh, mom jokes, really elevating the discussion eh Stone. Nice. Yeah, look me up, just let me know where to have my Mom drive me. Would LOVE to meet you.

  • Not John Grigsby says:

    what’s wrong with TAKING money from terrorists groups?

  • G. Stone says:

    “just don’t expect to call me “sh** for brains” and try to equate that to telling someone they are wrong on ideas.”

    I will repeat . You have a comprehension issue.

    Here is what I said. Read it again, comprehend please.

    “Lucky for you that shit for brains can be confused with simple ignorance. I want very bad to believe yours is a case of the latter. I suspect it is.”
    Please note the word confused.

    What does this say ? It says I want and suspect your specific deficit was due to ignorance, not that you had shit for brains.
    However, if you continue I will be forced to reevaluate my position.

  • Loudoun Lady says:

    JP, The thing is you probably would love to meet Stone, and lots of people from the blogesphere. I’m sure you rare a handy dandy fellow, unfortunately you assumed a lot of things about a lot of people and now you are back pedaling. I’m glad you are meeting good KC supporters, there are lots of them, you should take note of this and enjoy the convention.

    BPM, I’m glad you know every nook and cranny of Brownlee’s record. Should he get the nomination I hope you won’t be surprised, and you will have the added benefit of not contributing to the “story”. Vetting, my ass.

  • A Voter says:

    Does anyone know if Brownlee will be voting for a Republican on Saturday or a Democrat in about as week?

    Brownlee has such a great track record in voting for Democrats during their nomination process that it would be a shame to break the trend, now.

  • Loudoun Lady says:

    That’s a vetting or a bed wetting? It’s a pro-Brownlee site, and?????

  • Loudoun Lady says:

    Actually, it’s a anti-KC site, my correction.

    For those of you Cuccinellu supporters that means………..

    yeah, we’re all idiots!

  • Jp in VA says:


  • A Voter…I asked last time, with no reply…

    Are you stupid, or merely attempting to twist the very same intent that’s circulating for “Crash the Party”????

    In EVERY ONE of those votes, he did exactly what the Crash The Party folks are about to do.
    In EVERY ONE of those votes, the Republican candidate was running unopposed.
    In EVERY ONE of those votes, John’s intent was to send the weaker Democrat to face our stronger candidate.

    Stop smearing, stop lying thru your teeth, and stop degrading an otherwise decent discussion.

  • Jp in VA says:

    Reconsider all you want to Stone. I know what I think about you, I’ll go with your a “SH** for brains”, we’ll call it square.

  • “Actually, it’s a anti-KC site, my correction.
    For those of you Cuccinellu supporters that means………..
    yeah, we’re all idiots!”

    So stop acting like it…and refute the finer points the site makes. Brownlee is the choice for November. Plain and simple. He took to lawyering like a duck took to water.
    Evidently, he broke ground on financial damages against OxyContin, and apparently went up against the best attorneys Purdue’s money could buy….and whooped their asses.

    “And consider this—prior to Brownlee’s handling the Oxycontin case, Purdue had won hundreds and hundreds of lawsuits over Oxycontin. The only time Purdue had paid even one dollar was as part of a settlement to the West Virginia AG’s office, and that settlement was only $10 million or so.

    The New York Times claimed that “Purdue suffered a crushing defeat in May at the hands of Brownlee when the company and three top executives pleaded guilty to criminal charges.”

    And it didn’t stop there.

    “In March 2007, after a six year investigation, Mr. Brownlee convicted ITT Corporation, the 12th largest supplier of sophisticated defense systems to the United States military, of violating the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR). ITT was convicted of illegally transferring classified and controlled night vision technology to foreign countries, including China, and agreed to pay $100 million in penalties. Mr. Brownlee was the first federal prosecutor to convict a major defense contractor of violating the ITAR.”

    John operates in the big circles. He has an above average ability. He’s produced results everytime out the gate.

  • LL, he’s going to get the nomination, alright.
    Probably around the second pull.

  • Loudoun Lady says:

    BPM, We shall see and good luck, but may the best man win – KC4AG!

    JP, go have a drink, you obviously need it.

  • Jp in VA says:

    Funny stuff.

  • What in the world are these people going to do with themselves when Cuccinelli loses tommorrow??? I guess we’ll hear how it was stolen from him somehow for the rest of our political lives.

  • Ryan says:

    This garbage needs taken out, where are the trash trucks?


  • anon says:

    Is there anyone reading these posts who believes KC would be the best AG, BUT, he’s unelectable so you are supporting DF or JB?? Please tell me there’s somebody who is a huge Cooch fan but sees that he cannot win in November? Anyone? Hello??

  • Ryan says:

    I don’t believe he (KC) is anymore “unelectable” than any other candidate.

    We should pick the best candidate, not for his “electability” but for what he stands for and what he stands against.

  • anon says:

    So you are saying that even if you did think he couldn’t win the general election, you would still vote for him.
    Steve Shannon thanks you.

  • anon says:

    For what it’s worth, I view a candidate’s electability as extremely important. It’s a necessary quality in a candidate to get my vote – but it’s not sufficient alone to get my vote. Some states are so DEM, or so GOP, that any candidate from that party will win. Then you just pick the one that you like best in the nomination contest and they’ll win. But Virginia is WAY different. If you don’t think your candidate can win, then you need to pick somebody else – regardless of how much you agree with the guy, like the guy, whatever (or the gal!)
    A candidate must win to govern. So electiblilty is a MUST, in my opinion. The fact that you would argue against this really leaves me wondering about your intellect. That was the point of my inquiry. Are there any Coochies who have abandoned their hero and plan to engage in strategic voting?

  • Ryan says:

    I believe in a force beyond the means of humans. A supernatural being, in fact, you may have heard of Him before. His name is Jesus Christ. I believe that even elections are in His hands to do with as He pleases. Psalm 75:7 “But God is the judge: He puts down one, and raises up another.”

  • anon says:

    One other thing, Ryan. Why did you put quotation marks around the words electable and electability? Are they somehow scary words for the Cooch that have to be segregated from your comments so you can ignore them?

    Here you go, Coochies! You may want to look away. . .

    ELECTABILITY!!! Ahhhh!!!

    Funny how that word doesn’t scare Brownlee supporters. . .

  • Jp in VA says:

    So we can thank God for President Obama?

  • anon says:

    Ryan, I’m sure you take your faith very seriously, as I do mine. Different folks are motivated to cast votes for different reasons, that’s for sure. At the end of the voting tomorrow, we’ll have our nominee, and I’ll support him. I would just prefer someone that can actually win.

  • Ronnie's Commandment says:

    Whatever happened to ‘thou shall not speak ill of another Republican?’ Can we please not act like Dems by resorting to personal attacks!

  • Ryan says:

    Yes, God allowed Obama to win. Why? I’ll not know ’till the afterlife.

  • Chris says:

    So will you all now just shut up and get to work for our party’s victory in September?

  • Chris says:

    Should have added that the “electability” card was played by Earl Williams and his supporters against George Allen in 1993.

    Remember how that worked out?

Leave Comment