In a report released Friday, the committee said that Ocasio-Cortez “proactively took steps to comply” with House rules, including using personal funds to rent apparel that would typically be gifted or loaned to Met Gala attendees.
But the report states that, “despite Representative Ocasio-Cortez’s significant attempts, the Committee found that she failed to fully comply with the Gift Rule by impermissibly accepting a gift of free admission to the 2021 Met Gala for her partner and by failing to pay full fair market value for some of the items worn to the event.”
The ethics panel said it did not find evidence that Ocasio-Cortez “intentionally underpaid” for costs related to the event, and that “in many instances,” she had relied on a campaign staffer to handle discussions of payment and the advice of her counsel to determine the amounts.
. . . The ethics committee also released a separate report related to Rep. Mike Kelly, a Pennsylvania Republican, and allegations that his wife may have bought stock in a steel company based on confidential or nonpublic information he learned in his role as a congressman.
The committee said that it reviewed allegations referred by the Office of Congressional Conduct and “did not find evidence that he knowingly or intentionally caused his spouse to trade based on insider information.”
But the report said that the panel “did not receive full cooperation from Mrs. Kelly and was therefore unable to determine whether her stock purchase was improper.”
The report concluded by saying that “Representative Kelly should ensure that he and Mrs. Kelly divest of all shares of Cleveland-Cliffs before taking any further official action relating to the company.”
This some bull shit right here.
Exactly, was it more than the jumbo jet? No? Then when Trump gets punished. You can punish AOC for her bullshit.
Sounds like they are flagging her mostly for getting discounts on her clothes for the gala despite taking efforts to do it the right way. Those discounts though went through her staff who she relied on to correctly handle the expenses. So her crime was trusting her staff to relay the costs and make sure that they were fair market price. At the very least, without further evidence that there was intentional or knowing favor taken specifically by her, that is not a violation of ethics on her part. Maybe her staffer was negligent in determining fair price, or maybe they knowingly accepted or solicited discounts for their boss, but that isn’t AOC’s fault even if that is the case. Sounds like maybe they also got her partner in for free, but given how dubious the other concern is, I want to hear more about how that happened. Either way, this is as minor of a concern for me as it comes.
I think the AOC complaint was overall ridiculous, but this particular excuse shouldn’t fly. She ought to be responsible for properly training , instructing, and managing her staff.
No, if her staff took it upon themselves to do something unethical without her knowledge or consent, that does not reflect negatively on her. Particularly as she was demonstrating good ethical behavior by paying for things others were allowed to borrow, trying to pay market price, etc. If she became aware of that sort of behavior and THEN did nothing to correct this, then THAT would reflect poorly on her.
No one is responsible for the unintended, unauthorized and unethical behavior others take upon themselves to do without that person’s knowledge. And the entire point of having the staff is to be able to rely upon them to do things for you which requires an amount of trust. Because if you’re directly involved with, and/or reviewing and confirming that everything they do is exactly right, you may as well be doing it yourself.
My wife’s family owns a fireworks store. We do not specifically train people not to steal, not to hit customers, not to sell drugs in the store, etc. We are not standing over the shoulders of every employee validate their every action nor viewing the cameras every minute of every day to verify they did everything right. That doesn’t mean we are responsible for their actions if they do those sorts of things without our intention, consent or knowledge. If we find out about any of those things, that person is dealt with appropriately. Failing to hold them accountable would be to implicitly permit it, which would make you negligent and indirectly responsible. But only once you know about it and fail to correct it is that the case.