Listen to the article
Democratic Leader Questions Need for Probe into Crockett’s Security Guard Hiring
A senior House Democrat is pushing back against calls for an investigation into Rep. Jasmine Crockett’s hiring of a wanted fugitive as a security guard who was later killed during a confrontation with law enforcement.
“I don’t know if that’s the House’s place to investigate,” Rep. Pete Aguilar (D-Calif.) told Fox News Digital in a recent interview. “It depends if she was using campaign money or House resources, but that’s something for House Administration [Committee] to deal with if that’s the case.”
The controversy stems from Crockett’s employment of Diamon-Mazairre Robinson, a 39-year-old who used the alias “Mike King” while working for the Texas congresswoman. Robinson was fatally shot by Dallas SWAT officers in March during a standoff in a hospital parking garage. Police were responding to an active warrant for Robinson after he allegedly impersonated a law enforcement officer. During the operation, authorities recovered 11 firearms, some of which were reported stolen.
Financial records show that Crockett’s office paid Robinson at least $6,300 for security services in 2025 using taxpayer funds from her members representational allowance (MRA), which serves as an operational budget for lawmakers. Additionally, her campaign account paid Robinson $340 for security services in March 2025, according to Federal Election Commission filings.
Crockett has denied any wrongdoing in the matter, stating that her office followed all House protocols when employing Robinson. “There was never any reason to suspect that he wasn’t who he held himself out to be,” Crockett said in a statement released by her office.
The congresswoman has instead pointed to “shortcomings” in the vetting process that failed to identify Robinson’s true identity or uncover his extensive criminal record, which included multiple arrests for theft and probation violations. “We are fortunate that this is someone who used those loopholes without malice,” Crockett noted, adding that a preliminary review indicated Robinson had not committed violent crimes.
When pressed by reporters about whether she knew of Robinson’s criminal history before hiring him, Crockett declined to provide additional comment beyond her initial statement. “I made a statement and I said there would be no additional statements,” she told Fox News Digital.
House Republican leadership has expressed openness to investigating the matter but appears to be proceeding cautiously as more details emerge. House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) told reporters, “I need to get the facts on did he have a background check… but there are processes in place. We’ll look at the possible need to tighten that up.”
Similarly, House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) indicated he was still reviewing the situation when asked about potential Republican plans to investigate.
Aguilar suggested that Republicans might lose interest in pursuing the matter following Crockett’s recent defeat in the Texas Senate primary against state legislator James Talarico. “Jasmine didn’t win, so I assume that they’re probably not going to be focused on her as much,” Aguilar remarked.
The incident has sparked discussions among lawmakers about improving the vetting processes for security personnel. Rep. James Walkinshaw (D-Va.) acknowledged the need for greater scrutiny, telling Fox News Digital, “We need to tighten up the processes around members hiring security.”
The situation highlights ongoing concerns about congressional security protocols and the verification procedures for those employed to protect elected officials. Crockett’s office has not responded to requests for comment regarding how Robinson was vetted before being hired as part of her security detail.
As lawmakers consider potential reforms to security hiring practices, the case underscores broader questions about accountability, oversight, and the processes governing how members of Congress utilize both public funds and campaign resources for security services.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.


39 Comments
I like the balance sheet here—less leverage than peers.
Uranium names keep pushing higher—supply still tight into 2026.
Good point. Watching costs and grades closely.
Silver leverage is strong here; beta cuts both ways though.
Uranium names keep pushing higher—supply still tight into 2026.
If AISC keeps dropping, this becomes investable for me.
Good point. Watching costs and grades closely.
Good point. Watching costs and grades closely.
Nice to see insider buying—usually a good signal in this space.
Good point. Watching costs and grades closely.
Good point. Watching costs and grades closely.
The cost guidance is better than expected. If they deliver, the stock could rerate.
Nice to see insider buying—usually a good signal in this space.
I like the balance sheet here—less leverage than peers.
Nice to see insider buying—usually a good signal in this space.
Good point. Watching costs and grades closely.
Good point. Watching costs and grades closely.
If AISC keeps dropping, this becomes investable for me.
Good point. Watching costs and grades closely.
Nice to see insider buying—usually a good signal in this space.
Good point. Watching costs and grades closely.
Good point. Watching costs and grades closely.
The cost guidance is better than expected. If they deliver, the stock could rerate.
Good point. Watching costs and grades closely.
Production mix shifting toward Politics might help margins if metals stay firm.
Good point. Watching costs and grades closely.
I like the balance sheet here—less leverage than peers.
Exploration results look promising, but permitting will be the key risk.
Silver leverage is strong here; beta cuts both ways though.
Good point. Watching costs and grades closely.
Exploration results look promising, but permitting will be the key risk.
Interesting update on House Democrat Dismisses Probe into Security Guard Killed in SWAT Standoff. Curious how the grades will trend next quarter.
I like the balance sheet here—less leverage than peers.
Good point. Watching costs and grades closely.
The cost guidance is better than expected. If they deliver, the stock could rerate.
Silver leverage is strong here; beta cuts both ways though.
Good point. Watching costs and grades closely.
Exploration results look promising, but permitting will be the key risk.
The cost guidance is better than expected. If they deliver, the stock could rerate.