Althouse: "The Obama administration overturned a ban preventing a wealthy, politically connected Ecuadorean woman from entering the United States after her family gave tens of thousands of dollars to Democratic campaigns..."

December 17, 2014

"The Obama administration overturned a ban preventing a wealthy, politically connected Ecuadorean woman from entering the United States after her family gave tens of thousands of dollars to Democratic campaigns..."

"... according to finance records and government officials. The woman, Estefanía Isaías, had been barred from coming to the United States after being caught fraudulently obtaining visas for her maids. But the ban was lifted at the request of the State Department under former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton so that Ms. Isaías could work for an Obama fund-raiser with close ties to the administration. It was one of several favorable decisions the Obama administration made in recent years involving the Isaías family, which the government of Ecuador accuses of buying protection from Washington and living comfortably in Miami off the profits of a looted bank in Ecuador."

Reports The New York Times.

Campaign finance transparency... this is how it works.

45 comments:

alan markus said...: If there aren't any secret routers involved, this ain't no story.; 12/17/14, 10:05 AM
Brando said...: Remember, Eric Holder was the DOJ staffer who engineered the Marc Rich pardon. These are incredibly corrupt people.

I just shudder to think what scum are going to get pardoned in January 2017.; 12/17/14, 10:06 AM
Biff said...: In unrelated news, the NYT has started battlefield preparation for Elizabeth Warren.; 12/17/14, 10:07 AM
n.n said...: At least for funds that can be traced, which accounts for a minor percentage of the whole. It's also evidence that a competing Democrat faction is reemerging in the party hierarchy. I wonder who that could be. Obama may soon join the people he sacrificed under the bus.; 12/17/14, 10:10 AM
mccullough said...: Marc Rich redux. Eric Holder strikes again.; 12/17/14, 10:12 AM
Michael K said...: Ask Bill Clinton about his Haiti investments. It's nothing new.; 12/17/14, 10:14 AM
mccullough said...: I might have to reassess Elizabeth Warren if her people are behind this story. That would be a Michael Corleone-like move against Hillary.; 12/17/14, 10:15 AM
Bob Ellison said...: I am tired.

Black markets and corruption lead to exhaustion. The system collapses. That's what happened to the USSR.

We're on that road.; 12/17/14, 10:16 AM
garage mahal said...: Campaign finance transparency... this is how it works.

Better known as free speech.; 12/17/14, 10:18 AM
BarrySanders20 said...: Obama Doctrine: You can live a life of luxury in Miami as long as several tens of thousands of dollars looted from an Ecuadorian bank is donated to Democrats by your family members.

It's the special 10k(D) visa.; 12/17/14, 10:20 AM
Larry J said...: Best administration money can buy. Just ask them, they'll tell you (for a fee).; 12/17/14, 10:28 AM
Todd said...: Nothing.To.See.Here.

but if there is: Vast Right Wing Conspiracy...; 12/17/14, 10:28 AM
Gahrie said...: What does it matter now?; 12/17/14, 10:30 AM
Mark Nielsen said...: The comments on the NYT piece are gold. There's just got to be a make the Republicans look bad in this story.; 12/17/14, 10:37 AM
Paul said...: But folks!!!!

They didn't waterboard anyone!

Drone assassinations? Yea.

Abandon Afghanistan and Iraq? Yep.

Give guns to Mexican Narco-terrorist to smear the gun owning citizens? Yea, but that's politics.

Look the other way and allow our embassy in Libya to be overrun and Americans killed? Yes, but that's governing!

Take buy offs from donors? Well yea.

Issue dictates by fiat? Yea, so what?

But they didn't waterboard anyone!; 12/17/14, 10:39 AM
FleetUSA said...: How does this come now if it was engineered during the HC do nothing term of office?; 12/17/14, 10:54 AM
Anonymous said...: My suggestion to the Republicans running for President.

Learn intimately and remember every detail of stories like this about the Obama Administration.

Then, when questioned by The New York Times, or the LA Times, or CBS, or NBC, or ABC respond with, "Well, what did your channel do when the Democrats did this?"

Throw it back in their faces.

And then, take a moment to point out to those watching, "Look, I get it. In order to get the 4th estate to cover political corruption, we need to elect a Republican. Vote Republican!"; 12/17/14, 10:56 AM
Anonymous said...: This is exactly why we need more, rather than less, transparency when it comes to campaign finance. If this was all routed through a 501(c) then we never would've known that Hillary was paid a bribe.

Unfortunately, the Republicans in Wisconsin are pushing for more dark money in elections rather than working to rein it in.

What can be done when both the Republicans and the Democrats are working against the average citizen?; 12/17/14, 10:59 AM
Blue Ox said...: Aren't foreign nationals supposed to be prohibited from donating to political campaigns - full stop?; 12/17/14, 11:03 AM
Jason said...: Madisonfella logic: Democrats get exposed as corrupt. Therefore Republicans are bad.

Hey, bro! Did you rail against Obama when he switched off credit card verification to open the floodgate for overseas bribes?

No?

Piss off, tool.; 12/17/14, 11:04 AM
lemondog said...: Well, with Putin allowing Snowden into Russia it kinda balances out.; 12/17/14, 11:13 AM
MadisonMan said...: How does this come now if it was engineered during the HC do nothing term of office?

This story benefits Elizabeth Warren. And every Governor who might contemplate running.; 12/17/14, 11:19 AM
richard mcenroe said...: Chicago Way goes global.; 12/17/14, 11:20 AM
n.n said...: Blue Ox:

The target of campaign finance reform was effectively Americans and American interests, not foreign sovereigns, nationals, and interests.; 12/17/14, 11:36 AM
jr565 said...: This is raw crony politics. not even any attempt to hide it anymore.; 12/17/14, 11:46 AM
Anonymous said...: Inga writes;

This is exactly why we need more, rather than less, transparency when it comes to campaign finance.

Why would we need more transparency?

We have transparency here. We know that her family gave tens of thousands of dollars to Democrat campaigns.

More transparency can't make that any more transparent.

The problem isn't, "Who is giving the Democrats money" in this story.

The problem is, the people giving money are getting a quid pro quo.; 12/17/14, 11:49 AM
Matt Sablan said...: It's very, very, very important, however, that the media look into a Republican staffer who said mean things about the president's daughter. They just never had time to look into this until now.; 12/17/14, 12:11 PM
Matt Sablan said...: "Unfortunately, the Republicans in Wisconsin are pushing for more dark money in elections rather than working to rein it in. "

-- Republicans almost universally approve of TRANSPARENCY in donations. The place where things come in are when Democrats push for LIMITATIONS on donations, effectively silencing the ability of small groups to rival big money donors.; 12/17/14, 12:17 PM
traditionalguy said...: Practice Tip:

Foreigners with money to spare getting US immigration problems fixed through insider contacts is plan A.

Once you use plan B and file legal appeals and you have been turned down you are at the level where it is too late for plan A... bribery.; 12/17/14, 12:21 PM
wpw said...: Interesting - the Administration is playing hardball with Bobby Menendez - telling him to back off on the Cuba opening.; 12/17/14, 1:19 PM
traditionalguy said...: If Obama is not 97% Marxist then he is just fooling us into thinking that Marxism has a good ending other than poverty, mass death and slavery.; 12/17/14, 2:21 PM
Anonymous said...: The Obama administration overturned a ban preventing a wealthy, politically connected Ecuadorean woman from entering the United States after her family gave tens of thousands of dollars to Democratic campaigns, according to finance records and government officials.

So how can the NYT do a major expose on campaign money and illegal immigrant smuggling / visa buying and not tell us if anybody in this family is a citizen and if they aren't, how many felonies that amounts to, both by the family and the Dem Pols who took the foreign cash?; 12/17/14, 3:24 PM
Anonymous said...: Jason said: Hey, bro! Did you rail against Obama when he switched off credit card verification to open the floodgate for overseas bribes?

Sure did. Did you?

I'll even say it again: It is disgusting that foreign money was allowed to flow into the war chests of Pres. Obama and Gov. Walker. Do you denounce that as well or are you ok with the current system?

Curious Drago in VT said: Why would we need more transparency?

We have transparency here

There we do, but here not so much. In Wisconsin, the GOP controls all 3 branches of the government and they are pushing for laws that will increase the use of dark money in state elections.

This isn't a partisan issue. At least, it shouldn't be. Why are you trying to make it into one?; 12/17/14, 4:06 PM
Drago said...: Madisonfella, why do you keep lumping my name in with with other posters?; 12/17/14, 4:20 PM
Anonymous said...: Inga writes:

This isn't a partisan issue. At least, it shouldn't be.

Really?

Because it's the partisan Obama Administration that was using the IRS to target it's political opponents and probably still is.

I'd like to keep my donations private, thank you very much.

Next you'll want transparency in how I vote.; 12/17/14, 4:26 PM
Anonymous said...: eric said: why do you keep lumping my name in with with other posters?

Why do you keep calling me "Inga"?

curious drago said: I'd like to keep my donations private, thank you very much.

Of course you are ok with Walker receiving donations from foreign nationals (because you never have anything bad to say about Republicans, no matter what name you are using to comment under) but did you also support Obama for turning off the credit card verification on his website?; 12/17/14, 4:34 PM
Drago said...: Jesus madisonfella, I (drago) asked why you keep lumping my name in with others.

And it was asked just 2 posts prior to your response.

Your inability to stay focused over 2 short posts begs several questions.; 12/17/14, 5:33 PM
Mary Beth said...: So, if I want to buy a president I need $100k, but I can get a senator for only $30k? Can I just buy one or the other, or do I need to get both? Would I get a discount since I'm actually a citizen?; 12/17/14, 5:46 PM
The Godfather said...: This sounds like an Obama attempt to sink Hillary. Is he really so egotistical that he'd prefer to be succeeded by a Republican?; 12/17/14, 6:24 PM
Gahrie said...: Is he really so egotistical that he'd prefer to be succeeded by a Republican?

Where's your evidence that he intends to be succeeded by anybody?

I believe there is at least a 50% chance that we are going to have to send the capitol police in to evict him.; 12/17/14, 8:40 PM
Mark Caplan said...: Article I, Section 9 of the U.S. Constitution prohibits office holders from accepting any "Emolument" (i.e., bribes) from foreign sources. This is a crackerjack law and should be narrowly construed. But politicians ignore it and nobody seems to care.; 12/17/14, 10:03 PM
Brando said...: It's good to see the media reporting on this, but it really should get more attention and the outlets on the Right should make sure it doesn't get lost in all the Cuba normalization stories (Obama does seem pretty good and covering up one scandal with another bombshell). This is the sort of thing that makes everyone loathe the Clintons--their ability to sell this country out. And the Democrats should be reminded that they should have some options before settling on this corrupt woman as their nominee, while the GOP should have another arrow in their quiver.

This likely quid pro quo is most likely illegal and should be investigated by Congress, and ideally with some Democrats on the committee who aren't beholden to the Clintons to add credibility and demonstrate it's not a partisan hit job. What really made Watergate what it was was not the fact that the Democrats hated Nixon (they already had) but that enough Republicans had no choice but to throw in against him which is the sort of thing moderates noticed. Hopefully the GOP plays this one smart.; 12/18/14, 6:07 AM
Curious George said...: "madisonfella said...

Of course you are ok with Walker receiving donations from foreign nationals..."

Could you supply a source? What are you talking about Penguin?; 12/18/14, 7:00 AM
Jason said...: SECRET ROUTERS!!; 12/18/14, 9:13 AM
Kyzer SoSay said...: I must have missed something in my past lurking. I still am befuddled by the "secret routers" references.

But Dem chicanery is no surprise to me.; 12/18/14, 1:23 PM