OPINION: This article may contain commentary which reflects the author's opinion.
The House Office of Congressional Ethics found there is “substantial reason to believe” that Democrat Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez may have violated federal law when she accepted “impermissible gifts” connected to her appearance at the 2021 Met Gala.
Ocasio-Cortez went viral at the time when she attended the star-studded event wearing a dress that had the words “Tax the Rich” across the back of it.
“The nonpartisan watchdog’s board recommended in June 2022 that the House review the allegations against Ocasio-Cortez, according to documents released on Thursday. The Ethics Committee announced in December that it was investigating Ocasio-Cortez, though it did not disclose the subject of its inquiry at the time. The move led to speculation, acknowledged on Thursday, that the review had to do with her attendance at the gala,” according to the Washington Examiner.
AOC, who has denied any wrongdoing, rented the dress for the occasion, as well as accessories and hair and makeup services she received but apparently didn’t pay for until after the formal review had been initiated against her.
The Office of Congressional Ethics concluded that if Ocasio-Cortez “accepted impermissible gifts, then she may have violated House rules, standards of conduct, and federal law.”
Lauren Hilt, a spokeswoman for Ocasio-Cortez, said they are confident the lawmaker did not violate House rules.
AOC’s ‘Tax the Rich’ Met Gala appearance likely violated law: ethics panel https://t.co/yGD6RZScap pic.twitter.com/BQ9UNq2wlC
— New York Post (@nypost) March 2, 2023
Ocasio-Cortez is not the only “Squad” member who found themselves in hot water recently.
Minnesota Democrat Rep. Ilhan Omar’s campaign cash to consultants dropped by millions of dollars after she removed her husband’s firm from her payroll.
Federal filings showed that Omar, a member of the socialist “Squad,” previously paid millions of dollars from her campaign to the E Street Group, a political consulting firm co-owned by her husband, Tim Mynett, during the 2020 election cycle. But after blowback and criticism, Omar cut ties with her husband’s firm.
“But after facing increased scrutiny over the payments, Omar abruptly changed course from her once defiant state and cut off the cash flow to the E Street group shortly before the switch into the 2022 cycle. Now, her campaign pays far less for the same services to various other firms, calling into question the high nature of the E Street Group’s past charges,” Fox News reported.
“Following her husband’s firm’s removal, Omar’s expenses towards similar services fell by around $2 million, according to a review of Federal Election Commission filings. Omar’s committee previously paid the E Street Group nearly $3 million for its work, including advertisements across multiple platforms, direct mail, video production and editing, fundraising consulting, and research, among other services. But during the 2022 election cycle, Omar’s campaign only doled out around $1 million to a handful of Washington, D.C., Minnesota, and California-based firms for those same services, a search of her filings shows,” the outlet added.
Squad member and Missouri Rep. Cori Bush has had the alarm sounded on her by a government watchdog group that is asking the Federal Elections Commission to investigate her payment to her husband for private security services, Fox News reported.
The Foundation for Accountability and Civic Trust sent the complaint to Lisa Stevenson, the acting general counsel for the FEC, on Thursday asking the commission to investigate whether “Rep. Cori Bush and her campaign committee may have used campaign funds for personal use.”
“Bush’s campaign paid her now-husband, Cortney Merritts, $60,000 for security in 2022 despite him not having a private security license, which is needed to conduct such services in the St. Louis region. While Merritts collected the payments, Bush’s campaign also spent $225,281 with PEACE Security and $50,000 with an individual named Nathaniel Davis for personal protection,” Fox News reported.
“It appears Rep. Bush’s campaign may have made payments for services that were unnecessary or above fair market value because of her personal relationship with the payee,” the group said. “If so, these payments would qualify as either impermissible payments to a family member or an impermissible gift.”
“Therefore, we request the FEC investigate whether Rep. Bush converted campaign funds for personal use by paying a salary that was not for bona fide services at fair market value,” it said. “Ultimately, if one or more campaign laws are found to have been broken, we request the FEC hold the respondents accountable.”
Rep. Cori Bush husband was paid $60K for security without license: report https://t.co/xi2cTDz0Tu pic.twitter.com/JYM4oOvLie
— New York Post (@nypost) February 28, 2023
'Squad' Rep. Cori Bush hit with FEC complaint over private security payments to husbandhttps://t.co/TzPZzFfsvB
Political office should not be used to enrich yourself. It should be a selfless act to help your country. #TermLimits #AgeCap— OneSmallVoice 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸 (@SmilingOutrage) March 2, 2023
She made the payments to her husband even as he did not have a license to provide security in St. Louis or anywhere in Rep. Bush’s district.
“With the exception of St. Louis Police Officers, all persons performing a security function in the City of St. Louis must be licensed to do so through the Private Security Section,” the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department said on its website.
