Thanks go to Harold for directing us to this story…
Harry Reid is retiring right? The following story says he may be trying to get out Dodge before the Marshal catches up with him.
” Reid “hosted a meeting between Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ) and Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius. At the meeting, Menendez made the case for his friend and donor, Dr. Salomon Melgen, who was at the time embroiled in what was supposed to be an independent adjudicatory process at HHS involving $8.9 million the department said he overbilled Medicare.”
Reid’s intervention came “immediately after Melgen donated $300,000 to the Senate Majority PAC, a Super PAC that has close ties to Reid. By the end of 2012, Melgen’s donations to the Senate Majority PAC totaled $700,000.”
For his part in that intervention, Senator Menendez has been the subject of an ongoing criminal investigation by the DOJ. Press reports indicate that Menedez is expected to be indicted on charges of public corruption very soon, though last minute negotiation efforts by his attorneys may delay or possibly forestall such action.
The damaging information an independent DOJ investigation could turn up with the exercise of subpoena power on hundreds of investors and business associates involved in the numerous Harry Reid scandals could be substantial.
A recent report by ABC News indicates the kinds of embarrassing information likely to turn up when DOJ investigators start turning over the rocks in Reid’s landscape of insider deals.
One of the 230 foreign investors who obtained a visa in return for investing in the SLS Hotel and Casino of Las Vegas, the company represented by Rory Reid, was linked to child pornography in China. Two others, ABC reported, had knowingly submitted false documentation to the DHS as part of their visa application process.
According to the DHS Inspector General’s report, Reid pressured DHS official Alejandro Mayorkas, (then the head of the department’s United States Citizenship and Immigration Services agency, now Deputy Secretary at DHS) to expedite these questionable visa applications and rush them through without the normal rigorous review.
Given the improper level of scrutiny given these three foreign investors in the casino deal by DHS, it is unclear if the remaining 227 foreign investors in this casino deal are equally suspect.
More ominously, this lack of scrutiny may have allowed foreign investors who pose a national security threat to the country to obtain visas and a path to citizenship.” Source: Breitbart
Let us hope Reid cannot run fast enough or far enough and cannot find a rock low enough to hide under to escape from the law.
Dirtier Harry only succeeded being re-elected last time due to ACORN voter fraud – which was prosecuted in Las Vegas and contributed to the disbanding of ACORN. Unfortunately, all ACORN did was to change their name, and we can expect even more voter fraud in 2016.
There’s dancing in the streets in NV celebrating that Dirtier Harry will no longer be infecting Clowngress.
Hunt every varmint from down wind ceptin’ a polecat
J. Soden: “Dirtier Harry only succeeded being re-elected last time due to ACORN voter fraud – which was prosecuted in Las Vegas and contributed to the disbanding of ACORN.”
Actually, ACORN was charged with voter registration fraud. Employees forged voter registration roles in order to get paid more. ACORN was never charged with casting any fraudulent votes, so I’m not sure what your evidence is for the claim that Reid only succeeded at being re-elected due to ACORN voter fraud.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB124182750646102435
Fraudulent actions by Acorn were indeed cited and a judge threw the book at them for voter fraud,
(abet a small book considering the damage this liberal Democratic BS group caused)
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/08/10/judge-gives-maximum-and-fines-acorn-5000-for-illegal-voter-registration-scheme/
This link, not more than two above and more current supports J.Soden statements just fine. In fact it reflects information that is more current than the link cited by Poster #4. Even though it was reported by Fox 🙂
I can only surmise that J.Sodens post also supports the fact Dem’s turn a blind eye toward any form of community action misconduct and illegal voter-registration scheme in that state or others that would effect election results, in their favor of course.
“The ends justify the means.”
Harry Reid is proud he lied about Mitt Romney’s taxes:
“Not only does Reid not think he did anything wrong, he’s actually proud that his lies might have helped cost Romney the election.
Note: The Washington Post’s fact checker gave Reid “4 Pinocchios” for his claims. PolitiFact gave the claim a “pants on fire” rating.”
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/harry-reid-is-proud-he-lied-about-mitt-romneys-taxes/article/2562300
We are left wondering how different our world would be if Reid hadn’t lied about Romney and Obama hadn’t lied about ObamaCare and that al Qaida was defeated and on the run.
Peggy, I bet Romney would have ben a real president that all races and religions could respect. Obama has made so many blunders I’ve lost count, his social blunders stand out the most like always jumping on the black side before the evidence had been heard. That part is reprehensible.
If my memory serves me right Obama learned about everything going on from the media at the same time we all did. If he doesn’t know what’s going on to prevent the sh** from hitting the fan he’s never been a leader.
Romney’s business experience and accomplishment, and his saving the Salt Lake City Olympics showed he could have done a better job than Obama with his hands tied behind his back and blindfolded.
The middle east is on fire, Iran is about to get the green light for a nuke, the country is polarized over race, wealth, religion, marriage, entitlements vs. jobs, a stagnant economy and we are now $18 trillion in debt after adding over one trillion a year for the past 7 plus years.
God help us if Hillary get in the oval office. She’s as big a liar as Reid and Obama combined.
Hillary Fired for Lies, Unethical Behavior from Congressional Job: Former Boss:
“The now-retired general counsel and chief of staff of the House Judiciary Committee, who supervised Hillary when she worked on the Watergate investigation, says Hillary’s history of lies and unethical behavior goes back farther – and goes much deeper – than anyone realizes.
Jerry Zeifman, a lifelong Democrat, supervised the work of 27-year-old Hillary Rodham on the committee. Hillary got a job working on the investigation at the behest of her former law professor, Burke Marshall, who was also Sen. Ted Kennedy’s chief counsel in the Chappaquiddick affair. When the investigation was over, Zeifman fired Hillary from the committee staff and refused to give her a letter of recommendation – one of only three people who earned that dubious distinction in Zeifman’s 17-year career.
Why?
“Because she was a liar,” Zeifman said in an interview last week. “She was an unethical, dishonest lawyer. She conspired to violate the Constitution, the rules of the House, the rules of the committee and the rules of confidentiality.”
This isn’t exactly news. When her lachrymose performance arguably won her New Hampshire, Zeifman tried to tell people about Hillary’s duplicity. Patterico noticed the effort, but few others picked it up. Zeifman wrote at his website:
After hiring Hillary, Doar assigned her to confer with me regarding rules of procedure for the impeachment inquiry. At my first meeting with her I told her that Judiciary Committee Chairman Peter Rodino, House Speaker Carl Albert, Majority Leader “Tip” O’Neill, Parliamentarian Lou Deschler and I had previously all agreed that we should rely only on the then existing House Rules, and not advocate any changes. I also quoted Tip O’Neill’s statement that: “To try to change the rules now would be politically divisive. It would be like trying to change the traditional rules of baseball before a World Series.”
Hillary assured me that she had not drafted, and would not advocate, any such rules changes. However, as documented in my personal diary, I soon learned that she had lied. She had already drafted changes, and continued to advocate them. In one written legal memorandum, she advocated denying President Nixon representation by counsel. In so doing she simply ignored the fact that in the committee’s then most recent prior impeachment proceeding, the committee had afforded the right to counsel to Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas.”
Continued..
http://nation.foxnews.com/2014/02/25/hillary-fired-lies-unethical-behavior-congressional-job-former-boss
Harold: “This link, not more than two above and more current supports J.Soden statements just fine.”
I really don’t see how. Can you explain it to me?
J. Soden said that Harry Reid was re-elected due to voter fraud. Your link confirms what I said earlier, which is that ACORN was charged with voter registration fraud. There is nothing in your FOX News link about fraudluent votes being cast.
So how that could possibly support the idea that Reid was re-elected due to voter fraud? How can that be true if there was no evidence of fraudulent votes being cast?
I’m not defending Reid; you’re all right that his lies about Romney’s taxes were egregious. (Though, so were many of Romney’s own lies.)
http://www.politifact.com/personalities/mitt-romney/statements/byruling/false/
While I’m not going to get into an argument over whether Romney would have been a better president than Obama, I don’t see how anyone can say that he would have been a less polarizing president. This is a guy who was caught on tape calling half the country “irresponsible” moochers who would never “take responsibility for their lives.” (THAT’s why he lost, btw.) Here was a rich man calling poor people lazy in order to get more donations from rich people. How exactly is that not divisive? How exactly is that not polarizing? How is that not class warfare?
I don’t believe in Hell, but if I did, I would think there’d be a special circle for rich people who make money off of insulting poor people.
More proof this is the most corrupt administration in US history.
Obama, Holder, Reid, Pelosi, Hillary and Lerner all lied and got away with it. I hope the majority remembers this in 2016.
DOJ won’t press contempt charges against Lois Lerner:
“The Department of Justice has decided it’s not going to press contempt charges against Lois Lerner.
Big shock, right?
From CBS News:
The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia will not seek contempt charges against former Internal Revenue Service official Lois Lerner for her refusal to testify before Congress, the Justice Department (DOJ) announced Wednesday.
It has been nearly a year since the House voted to hold Lerner in contempt in a mostly party-line vote. At the time, the charges were referred to the local U.S. attorney. The Justice Department officially informed House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, of U.S. Attorney Ronald Machen’s decision in a letter sent to Boehner’s office Tuesday.
“A team of experienced career prosecutors in the U.S. Attorney’s Office was assigned to carefully assess the referral. After extensive analysis, the team concluded that the House Committee followed proper procedures in notifying Ms. Lerner that it had rejected her claim of a Fifth Amendment privilege and gave her an adequate opportunity to answer the Committee’s questions,” the Justice Department said in a statement. “However, the team also concluded that Ms. Lerner did not waive her Fifth Amendment privilege by making general claims of innocence. The Constitution would provide Ms. Lerner with an absolute defense if she were prosecuted for contempt.”
In other words, she did her duty for the Obama administration by targeting conservatives who opposed the president, so her reward is a get out of jail free card.
This is, without a shadow of a doubt, the most corrupt administration to ever sit in the White House.
There’s a message the federal government is sending out by not pursuing charges against Lerner, and it’s that your First Amendment right to voice your political opinions doesn’t matter.
You need to be a good little lap dog and get with the program, or there will be consequences.
Those hired to do the president’s dirty work are obviously protected, which means the egregious violations the administration carries out will likely go unpunished.”
http://www.youngcons.com/doj-wont-press-contempt-charges-against-lois-lerner/
I’ll bet Senator Menendez is wishing he’d been a lap dog and not spoken out against this administration’s Iran deal.
New Jersey Sen. Bob Menendez indicted on corruption charges:
“The indictment from a federal grand jury in Newark charged the senator with 14 counts, including bribery, conspiracy and false statements, over his ties to Melgen. Melgen also was charged in the case.”
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/nj-sen-bob-menendez-indicted-on-federal-corruption-charges/ar-AAajTeN?ocid=ansnewsap11
Chris writes”I really don’t see how. Can you explain it to me?”
NO,not until your honest enough to see the correlation between the core of the issue and expansions of its misuse.
Thank you, Harold!
Priceless!!
You must read this all the way to the end.
Brothel Sends a Letter to Harry Reid Making Him an Offer He Might Find Hard to Refuse:
http://www.ijreview.com/2015/04/286332-harry-reid-receives-offer-group-prostitutes-host-retirement-party/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=organic&utm_content=ijreview&utm_campaign=Politics
Harold, typically I find that if someone won’t explain something, it’s because they can’t example it.
The “honest” thing to do would be to simply admit that you can’t defend the claim that Harry Reid was re-elected due to voter fraud, since there is no evidence that any fraudulent votes were cast in his race.
Instead you try and reframe the issue as if my rational, fair questions are somehow dishonest. This is a very transparent tactic; I’m not sure why you would think I wouldn’t notice it.
Actually my statements are more than rational, fair and honestly presented. And I would think you could disguise your intent better than you have as well.
So, just because there is not ‘your’ required hard core chiseled in granite media evidence that can be googled, fact checked and linked, then your saying your correct and others are wrong? is that how you are going to try and prove your stand on this?
When will you stop being so ‘Chris’, your style is once again repetitive and built on left leaning denial of Acorns obvious intent.
Do not try to convince myself or others here that there was not any fraudulent votes cast for Reid, he most defiantly benefited from Acorns registration fraud. And as such I stand by my opinion and my support of the other poster.
Acorns fraudulent registration of voters most assuredly put illegal votes in the box for the entire Democratic party, or why else would Acorn bother to register those voters?
Was it so Acorn could generate votes for everyone or anyone other than a Democrat, you know, Acorn was just getting out the vote in general? no real intent on benefiting any specific Democratic candidate, really that’s the position your taking?
You’ll never convince me that Obama was the only reason Acorn did what they did, or that they were just trying get generate interest in the election process, for all parties.
I need you to explain your view of what their was, because it was the Democrat vote they signed up to get Democrats elected(that is Reids party isn’t it?)
Convince me that honest voter turn out was Acorn’s goal and I will have to concede that Reid was elected totally without any illegal votes or through fraudulent manipulation, of which Acorn was found guilty of, correct?
My scenario of illegal votes benefiting Reid happened and the Judge understood Acorns actions as well.
Harold: “So, just because there is not ‘your’ required hard core chiseled in granite media evidence that can be googled, fact checked and linked,”
Wait, are you saying expecting evidence that can be fact checked and linked is an unreasonable standard?
“then your saying your correct and others are wrong?”
I am saying it is wrong to make unfounded accusations. You might be correct that Harry Reid was re-elected due to illegally cast votes, just as I might be correct in accusing Ted Cruz of kicking puppies every night. But absent evidence that can be fact checked and linked to, I wouldn’t make that kind of accusation.
” is that how you are going to try and prove your stand on this?”
You’re making it sound like expecting evidence for accusations is somehow unreasonable or ridiculous. You can’t honestly believe that, can you?
“Do not try to convince myself or others here that there was not any fraudulent votes cast for Reid, he most defiantly benefited from Acorns registration fraud. And as such I stand by my opinion and my support of the other poster.”
Do you understand that an “opinion” based on no facts is, by definition, an ignorant opinion? And that stating that you will never be convinced of an argument no matter how many facts are presented is not something to be proud of?
“Acorns fraudulent registration of voters most assuredly put illegal votes in the box for the entire Democratic party, or why else would Acorn bother to register those voters?”
The Fox News article that you linked to answered this question. They registered dead voters, random names out of the phone book, and even made up names so that they could get paid more, because ACORN was illegally paying them bonuses for getting a certain number of registered voters. You might try reading your own sources.
“Was it so Acorn could generate votes for everyone or anyone other than a Democrat, you know, Acorn was just getting out the vote in general? no real intent on benefiting any specific Democratic candidate, really that’s the position your taking?”
Yes, because that’s the position that the FOX News article that you cited but didn’t read is taking.
“You’ll never convince me that Obama was the only reason Acorn did what they did,”
I never tried to convince you of any such thing; at this point you are just making things up. Again, the motive (according to your own source) was entirely selfish; the employees were trying to get paid more. As far as we can tell from the evidence provided by both of us, getting certain politicians elected was not part of this particular scheme.
Now, if there is another scheme you’re aware of that could have helped Obama or Reid win–hopefully one that involves actual voter fraud, not just registration fraud–I am all ears. See, I am open to changing my mind upon seeing certain facts. I am not going to say that you’ll “never be able to convince me” that Obama or Reid were helped due to voter fraud, because such a statement would not only be ignorant, it would be proudly so. There is no shame in having the ability to change one’s mind upon seeing evidence that contradicts one’s political desires. That’s an attribute, not a sin.
“I need you to explain your view of what their was, because it was the Democrat vote they signed up to get Democrats elected”
Where is your evidence for this? (I’m not saying it doesn’t exist, I’m saying I’d like to see it.)
“Convince me that honest voter turn out was Acorn’s goal”
No, because that has never been my argument. Their goal was to get paid more money.
“and I will have to concede that Reid was elected totally without any illegal votes”
Huh? Now you are going too far in the other direction–you don’t have to concede any such thing. All you’d have to concede is that there’s no evidence of *widespread* illegal voting helping Reid win.
“My scenario of illegal votes benefiting Reid happened”
Citation needed
“and the Judge understood Acorns actions as well.”
The judge did not say what you are suggesting he said. Again, please read the article you cited.
Mr Harold, Life is a lot simpler when ya plow around the stumps,
This Chris fella has a way of spinning yarn that still leaves holes in yer duds that a winters breeze will chill ya.
Yer right son, not a househair’s difference ‘tween what was done and happened.
That Harry Reid was bout as low down as a snakes belly, most folks round these here parts knew it then an most likely folks that paid it no never mind was the problem.
ifn’ it were me, I would just mosey along, cause that boys thinkin’ just aint right