The wrath of Democrats … continued

ICE Agent Taylor Johnson testifies before Congress. (AP photo via ABC)

Fraudulently manipulate waiting lists, leaving ailing veterans to die? Get a promotion.

Investigate conservative groups seeking tax exemptions? Ho hum.

Jeopardize national security and the lives of overseas operatives by flagrantly using an unsecured email server? Run for president.

Actually do your job and try to block a powerful Washington senator from bending the law to benefit his family and cronies? Get fired, smeared and offered a bribe to keep quiet.

The Daily Caller reports that a Department of Homeland Security agent who tried to block the government handing out green cards to foreign investors with questionable backgrounds — including some who invested in a Las Vegas hotel and casino with ties to Rory Reid, son of Sen. Harry Reid — has been fired, but she refused to accept a $100,000 severance payment that was conditional on her signing a non-disclosure agreement.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement Special Agent Taylor Johnson told Congress this past year that she found gross mismanagement and possible corruption in a program that hands out U.S. visas to foreigners who invest at least $500,000 in American companies. She described the abuse as a threat to public safety.

She also said her investigation was shut down and her firearm and credentials confiscated.

A Daily Caller reporter says an ICE press secretary approached him with what she claimed to be confidential information showing Johnson was dishonest in an effort to smear the soon-to-be former employee. Of course, now those officials are mum because it is a personnel matter.

As for Reid’s involvement, in December 2013 Cause of Action, a group that says it advocates for government accountability, filed an ethics complaint against Reid. The complaint has been ignored.

The complaint accused Reid of using his influence to overturn decisions by ICE that denied visas to foreigners who planned to lend financial support to the renovation of the Sahara Hotel, the now renamed and reopened SLS. The agency had turned down the SLS investor visa applications due to “suspicious financial activity.” The decision was ineligible for appeal.

One official reported getting into a shouting match with a Reid staffer over the denial of those visas.

But that Cause of Action complaint was filed before all the chips were on the table.

Four days after that complaint was filed, the Senate voted to confirm the nomination of Alejandro Mayorkas to become the second in command at the Department of Homeland Security. He was the one who granted the visas after personally talking to Reid. The vote was 54-41. Had Reid not just nuked the Senate rules of filibuster the nomination would have failed to achieve the previously required 60 votes.

Mayorkas was confirmed despite the fact he was under investigation at the time for expediting certain visa applications for certain applicants despite the rejection of those visas by career staffers. Among those seeking foreign investors were Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe and the brother of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Anthony Rodham.

Reid had made a personal call to Mayorkas, according to the Washington Times, who promised him his agency would take a “fresh look” at the SLS visa request. Soon after that the agency expedited visas for about two dozen foreign SLS investors. The Washington Times reported that Federal Election Commission records show executives for two companies involved in the hotel project had made $127,000 in political donations over the previous three elections, mostly to Democrats.

The Cause of Action complaint said, “Despite the fact that these applications were ineligible for appeal, Senator Reid’s efforts to lobby USCIS resulted in the reconsideration and approval of those applications … Even more troublesome is the fact that Senator Reid’s son, Rory Reid, and his law firm, Lionel, Sawyer & Collins P.C., are legal counsel to the SLS Hotel and Casino.”

The Senate Code of Official Conduct prohibits members from acting on matters that in which they have “a political, personal, or financial interest.”

Johnson testified that EB-5 visas were approved in as little 16 days and without “lacked basic necessary law enforcement” screening.

ABC News, in its own investigation, found foreign visa applicants were approved despite “allegations of fraud, money laundering, forgery, and other crimes against them.”

Taylor testimony:




39 comments on “The wrath of Democrats … continued

  1. Corruption is only corruption if a Republican does it?

  2. Nyp says:

    Corruption is corruption, but you’ve got nothin’ in the bag here.

  3. nyp says:

    When you have something new — i.e., an indictment, an ethics finding rather than an ethics complaint, a judgment rather than a statement by a disgruntled ex-employee, let me know.

  4. That is the corruption. There will never be a conclusion. Just as there the investigation was spiked.

  5. nyp says:

    By the Republican-controlled Senate?

  6. I’m afraid Republican-controlled is an oxymoron.

  7. “Move along…nothing to see here” spouts our resident progressive leftist Democrat…after all, we have a gatekeeper at the…Loretta Lynch…she’ll sweep all this under that ever growing lump in the rug at the DOJ.

  8. nyp says:

    So Mitch McConnell and the other Republicans who control the Senate Ethics Committee are all in on the great conspiracy?

    Wow. Who will tell the People?

  9. Mitch McConnell and some of the other Republicans who control the Senate Ethics panel and other committees have long ago proven themselves to be impotent. So along with this administration politicizing the DOJ…the inmates are running the asylum. It’s time for a thorough housecleaning of these lifelong politicians in both the house and senate.

  10. nyp says:

    “Impotent”? What does that mean? There is a process for investigating complaints against Senators. The committee in charge of the process is controlled by McConnell and the Republicans. They obviously found not merit to the complaint.. Are they “impotent”? Or are they in on the great conspiracy?

  11. Anonymous says:

    Oh , ok then

  12. im·po·tent

    1. unable to take effective action; helpless or powerless.
    synonyms: powerless, ineffective, ineffectual, inadequate, weak, feeble, useless, worthless, futile.

  13. Rincon says:

    Seems only the Democrats get challenged here, so I did a quick check on Ted Cruz just for fun. There were several accusations to choose from, so I picked the first easy one. Although he didn’t expedite green cards for big shots, he did send out a mailer that, according to the Des Moines Register, ” …was simply a politically motivated attempt to shame certain people into caucusing by assigning them “grades” and “scores” that had absolutely no legitimacy. In essence, the mailer was a complete lie, from start to finish.” Does that not fit the definition of fraud? Where are the prosecutors?

    I think that anyone who has made it that high up the power ladder has sold his soul somewhere along the line. Continuously pointing out the very real ethical lapses of only one party’s officials imp[lies that the other party’s bosses are clean. Nothing could be further from the truth.

  14. Rincon says:

    Certainly, there is cause for concern. Now that the excrement has hit the fan, it seems likely that if true, the guilty parties will likely be tried. It’s hard to cover up an item that is being investigated by a hostile Congress. If her allegations are true, then Ms Johnson will be also be filing a wrongful dismissal lawsuit. Let’s see if it goes anywhere. If you don’t hear anything about this after a month or two, then it means that the allegations are likely specious. By that time though, who will remember? I know that if that turns out to be the case, we certainly won’t hear about it here.

  15. That’s the best you can come up with on Cruz…that’s laughable. From your linked article: “The Cruz campaign wasn’t the first to use such tactics. In fact, the liberal organization used a similarly deceptive mailer in its support of Barack Obama’s 2012 bid for re-election.”

  16. Barbara says:

    One of the people running Cruz’ campaign in Iowa was a former head of the Iowa elections department. He state the same mailer had been used in several campaigns including Obama’s reelection bid in 2012. Nothing was ever said about the “deceptive or fraudulent” nature of the mailer when used in any other election. It was shown to be effective in getting people to go caucus, so it was mailed to those who had been identified as Cruz supporters in any effort to get them to attend. I would also note that the Register endorsed Rubio. A similar mailer was sent out in New Hampshire and was traced to an organization that had ties to the Rubio campaign. Rubio campaign officials have denied any knowledge or approval of the mailer in NH.

  17. nyp says:

    No such mailer was used in the Obama campaign in 2012. Unlike Cruz, the Obama campaign never suggested that any voter was violating the law by not voting. Nor did any Obama mailer purport to list voting data about the recipients’ neighbors.

  18. hocuspocus13 says:

    Reblogged this on hocuspocus13 and commented:

  19. Rincon says:

    The allegations against Reid, et al are just that – allegations – by a disgruntled employee who was fired. They may be true…or not. The fraudulent campaign literature distributed by Cruz is in black and white.

    My find was only a small example. There are many more. It took about 60 seconds to find another example of fraud of Cruz’s part. According to the Washington Post, Cruz stated that Obama, “…Backed release of the Lockerbie bomber, Abdel Baset al-Megrahi.” After checking Cruz’s source, the Post reported found this statement: “the U.S. wanted Megrahi to remain imprisoned in view of the nature of the crime.” They could find nothing suggesting that Obama said anything to the contrary.

    This article is full of other lies and frauds perpetrated by Cruz. Read it if you wish. It’s pretty easy to find all kinds of accusations of all kinds of misbehavior by just about any major politician, partly because they’re such a bunch of snakes, but also because they make thousands of public statements and are motivated to stretch the truth on a chronic basis. As I said, this space only castigates Democrats. Being a Republican shill is hardly a crime, but just make sure this isn’t your only source of information. It provides a badly distorted view in some cases.

  20. Steve says:

    The problem with Hillary is her discretions are, by far, the most public and publicized.
    And she does very little, if anything at all, to try and change the resulting public perception. This results in very high negative polling.
    The same can be said for Reid.

  21. I’ll put Ted Cruz’s alleged discrepancies up against those of Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and Harry Reid…any old day! Dana Milbank…really?

  22. Rincon says:

    What’s a little fraud if you’re a Republican?

  23. Steve says:

    If it makes the nightly news it becomes fraud, if it doesn’t then they get away with it.
    Hillary makes the news.
    Cruz simply doesn’t get the coverage Clinton does.

    Rincon proved it by showing how much digging needed to be done.

  24. Barbara says:

    I would note there is a world of difference between Hillary Clinton’s “fraud” and the “fraud” allegations against Senator Cruz. The FBI is not investigating Cruz, whereas Hillary needs to have an attorney on speed dial.

  25. nyp says:

    Good luck w/ that one.

  26. Rincon says:

    My point wasn’t that Hillary is innocent. It was that Conservatives give Cruz and almost all Republicans a pass. You’re still making excuses for him.

  27. Rincon says:

    In today’s news: “Even as other candidates — most notably Hillary Clinton and Jeb Bush — have already disclosed years’ worth of private tax returns to dispel questions about their personal finances, Donald Trump, Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio have failed to do the same despite promises to do so,” Failing to be transparent certainly weakens a candidate’s position in my eyes, but breaking a promise is worse. Would you have given Clinton a pass on this had the converse been true?

  28. Steve says:

    “Hillary is innocent”
    Now THAT right there, is HILLarious.

    Chortle, laugh, choke, snort


    Laughing My Ass Off Rolling On The Floor, Biting The Carpet, Scaring The Cat, Nearly Dying By Falling Out Of The Window In Front Of A Guy Who Looks Like Bill Gates, Who Then Horrified, Runs Out On The Street And Is Accidentally Killed By A Yellow Bulldozer


    She got away with stuff, Rincon. That , in no way, makes her innocent……

    chortle, chortle, laugh, snort.
    Rinse, repeat and do it all overt again.

  29. Rincon says:

    Never said she was innocent.

    More on Cruz. From the New Yorker re: a loan from Goldman Sachs: “The Goldman loan, which was for between two hundred and fifty thousand and half a million dollars, wasn’t disclosed to the Federal Election Commission, as it should have been. Rather than publicly acknowledging its existence, Cruz subsequently told reporters that he and his wife had liquidated practically all of their personal savings to help pay for the campaign.” Failed to disclose a loan sure to be controversial and then covered it up by lying about it. Probably big on other Christian values too.

  30. Barbara says:

    Cruz disclosed the loan on his Senate form; forgot to put it on the Fec documents. Both forms were public knowledge at the same time. The loan was at market rates secured by personal assets. He never lied about it; never tried to cover it up.

    Are you seriously trying to compare Cruz’ financial dealings with the Clinton’s?

  31. Steve says:

    Rincon, you taking a page out Hillary’s denial manual?
    Here’s the link to the comment you made just two prior to mine! (heh)

    And here it is all over again, word for word.

    “Rincon says:
    February 12, 2016 at 8:27 pm
    My point wasn’t that Hillary is innocent. It was that Conservatives give Cruz and almost all Republicans a pass. You’re still making excuses for him.”

    You said it! and now you deny it! How Hillaryesque of you!

    Chortle chortle…..

  32. Rincon says:

    English 101, Steve. Saying that, “My point is not that Hillary is innocent.”, says nothing at all about my opinion regarding her innocence or guilt.

  33. Steve says:

    OK, Rincon.

    However, it’s not just Conservatives who don’t hold Cruz’s feet to the fire, it’s also the media.

    Hillary is a much more prolific liar.

  34. Rincon says:

    I think the media will catch up to him if he emerges as the clear front runner. Until now, their efforts have been diluted by the 14 other candidates.

    Don’t know who’s the greater liar yet. Hillary has had more years to lie and more than 25 years of heavy media interest. Not terribly relevant though. A little like comparing the Unabomber to Timothy Mcveigh.

  35. […] was the outrage four years ago when Nevada Sen. Harry Reid twisted arms at the Immigration and Customs Enforcement to reverse a decision that was blocking Chinese […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s