Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Likely Violated Ethics Laws With Met Gala Appearance

[brooklynite]

Source: Forbes

The House Office of Congressional Ethics found “substantial reason to believe” Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) “may have accepted impermissible gifts associated with her attendance at the Met Gala in 2021,” according to documents released on Thursday.

“Rep. Ocasio-Cortez received a series of goods and services which she did not pay for until the OCE opened this review,” according to the review, which cited her dress, makeup, hair styling and transportation.

Ocasio-Cortez’s office acknowledged the tardy payments, but didn’t think they constituted a violate of House rules.

“The congresswoman finds these delays unacceptable, and she has taken several steps to ensure nothing of this nature will happen again,” said Communications Director Lauren Hitt in a statement.

Read more: https://www.forbes.com/sites/zacheverson/2023/03/02/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-likely-violated-ethics-laws-with-met-gala-appearance-says-house-ethics-office/?sh=6d372a893693

---

Reminder that the Ethics Committee and the OCE are Bipartisan.

[The Magistrate]

1. Thanks For The Laugh, Sir

Makes breaking to do the dishes pleasant, that's a bit of nonesense can't easily be topped.

I have it penciled in for six seconds of concern sometime next Tuesday, right after time devoted to worry over some beetle or other somewhere warm....

[yardwork]

69. Don't forget two minutes of outrage because the Biden's ordered the same restaurant dish, Sir.

It's possible somebody "on our side" forgot to wear a flag lapel pin, too.

[sarchasm]

2. No, it is not an ethics violation for politicians to attend the Met Gala

Source: Verify

According to the House rules, a charity event must meet the following criteria:

• They are invited by the event organizer directly and the event organizer is the organization putting the event on, not a monetary event sponsor or table sponsor

• The event’s primary purpose is to raise funds to benefit a qualifying organization, with at least half of the proceeds being tax-deductible charitable contributions.

So, since the tickets were offered to the politicians by the Met and according to the Met, “the event is a fundraiser for The Costume Institute at The Metropolitan Museum of Art and its primary source of annual funding,” politicians accepting the tickets are not in violation of House or New York City policy.

Read more: https://www.verifythis.com/article/news/verify/government-verify/no-it-is-not-an-ethics-violation-for-politicians-to-attend-the-met-gala/536-fd12ed29-b908-4ca2-86ca-b95d40a29fbd

[Igel]

6. It wasn't the ticket.

It was the gift of the dress she wore to it that cost more than my maximum income.

Last year that put me at about 0.1 from the top 20% of households for income, and I'm flying solo.

Wonder if she paid taxes on it.

[DENVERPOPS]

8. It was nothing

compared to the wife of Ronnie Raygun and her rather large collection of designer dresses..........

[FBaggins]

27. When did House ethics rules start applying to the First Lady? nt

[DENVERPOPS]

34. Nancy had serious problems

with the "ethics" people, for receiving and not declaring extremely expensive gifts..... I just assumed that they might be the same ethics folks......

[MayReasonRule]

72. Ah yes, The Narcissist's Prayer

That didn't happen.
And if it did, it wasn't that bad.
And if it was, that's not a big deal.
And if it is, that's not my fault.
And if it was, I didn't mean it.
And if I did, you deserved it.

What-about-isms are Strawmen arguments.

It's posturing on the part of the Nat-C GOP, I get it.
Nonetheless, in order to continue to hold others accountable, it is only equitable and prudent, if we hold our own to the same standards.

May reason rule.

[forgotmylogin]

11. Did she keep the dress?

A lot of times when celebrities wear ridiculous jewelry or an elaborate outfit to an event they are on loan from a designer for the exposure. Most people have little use to keep a Met Gala dress in their closet or wear it again since they're usually instantly recognizable and will either return them or donate to a museum.

Looking forward to the MAGA crowd suddenly deciding to be all militant and judicious about gifting requirements despite being lukewarm to silent about the emoluments clause or political donation rules ripped up and stomped on by TFG.

[Pacifist Patriot]

14. That's what I was wondering. We see way more loans on red carpets than purchases.

[forgotmylogin]

15. I don't think she did. Other stories mention "she paid the 'rental fee' after Repubes brought it up"

Essentially the gist I got was she didn't see invoices or receipts and didn't realize she owed anything - possibly a flub by her accounting office she wasn't initially aware of?

So she corrected the issue once brought to her attention, and apparently did not keep the "rental" dress for herself. Hearings are not needed, nobody was hurt by this victimless gaffe.

It's the same difference between "Whoops, didn't realize I forgot to return this classified document, when can I deliver it?" and "There are no classified documents in my possession despite all your records to the contrary and besides they belong to me anyway."

Witness as Repubes scrape the sides of the bowl looking for things to be outraged about.

[Pacifist Patriot]

16. Oh I didn't think this was anything remotely alarming. It got a massive "ho hum" from me.

[DinahMoeHum]

3. The GOP here is standing on a brick to kick a duck in the ass. . .

. . .and odds are they'll still miss the mark.

[maxsolomon]

77. Filing that one.

Never heard it before!

[FredGarvin]

4. The OCE website has further info on their findings

https://oce.house.gov/search/node/alexandria

Nada

[lapucelle]

18. The report is on the OCE website, as are the relevant documents.

Office of Congressional Ethics:

https://oce.house.gov/reports/investigations/oce-referral-regarding-rep-alexandria-ocasio-cortez

https://oce.house.gov/sites/congressionalethics.house.gov/files/documents/OCE%20Report%20and%20Findings%20Exhibits%201.pdf

https://oce.house.gov/sites/congressionalethics.house.gov/files/documents/OCE%20Report%20and%20Findings%20Exhibits%202.pdf

=================================================================================

There's also a link to the letter released today by the House Committee on Ethics:

https://ethics.house.gov/sites/ethics.house.gov/files/documents/Press%20Release_297.pdf

[Celerity]

5. "Even after OCE's exhaustive review of the congresswoman's personal communications, there is no

record of the congresswoman refusing to pay for these expenses,” said Hitt.

“To the contrary, there are several explicit, documented communications, from prior to OCE’s review, that show the congresswoman understood that she had to pay for these expenses from her own personal funds—as she ultimately did. We are confident the Ethics Committee will dismiss this matter.”

[The Magistrate]

36. Anyway, Ma'am, Now That I Know She's In The Pocket Of 'Big Opera'

I have to radically reorient my political compass....

[CTyankee]

46. "Big Opera"!

thanks for the laffs!

[Farmer-Rick]

71. No telling how corrupt "Big Opera" is.

We must dig into this scheme to not pay for rentals.

[LymphocyteLover]

7. Oh no! Not ethical violations!

Ethics for thee but not for me says the GOP

[YoshidaYui]

9. REPUBLICAN REVENGE POLITICS

They want to own the libs.

[brooklynite]

10. What part of "OCE is bipartisan" was unclear?

The Office of Congressional Ethics (OCE) is an independent, non-partisan entity charged with reviewing allegations of misconduct against Members, officers, and staff of the United States House of Representatives and, when appropriate, referring matters to the House Committee on Ethics. In all but one set of circumstances, the report and findings of the OCE Board must be publicly released.

The OCE has a professional staff consisting primarily of attorneys and other professionals with expertise in ethics law and investigations. The mission of the OCE and its Board is to assist the House in upholding high standards of ethical conduct for its Members, officers, and staff and, in so doing, to serve the American people. Governed by an eight-person Board of Directors, Members of the OCE Board are private citizens and cannot serve as members of Congress or work for the federal government.

Established March 11, 2008, by House Resolution 895, the Office of Congressional Ethics (OCE) is the first ever independent body overseeing the ethics of the House of Representatives. The OCE was formed after members of a congressional task force proposed an independent entity in the U.S. House to increase accountability and transparency. The OCE’s mission is to assist the U.S. House in upholding high ethical standards with an eye toward increasing transparency and providing information to the public.

https://oce.house.gov/about

[YoshidaYui]

12. The OTHER SIDE OF THE AILE HATE US

what part of that is unclear?? i won't believe anything they say.

[emulatorloo]

22. The OCE is independent and non-partisan.

The Office of Congressional Ethics (OCE) is an independent, non-partisan entity charged with reviewing allegations of misconduct against Members, officers, and staff of the United States House of Representatives

At any rate I am sure AOC will get this straightened out.

[MayReasonRule]

73. OCE is independent and non-partisan

Accountability yields credence. There is none without it.

Things will be as they are, however it is that may be.

[brooklynite]

31. "They" didn't say anything

The BIPARTISAN (including Democrats) OCE did.

[The Magistrate]

37. Nobody Cares, Sir

People know the game.

Any Democrat 'respectable' enough for posting to this committee will be the sort who will rule against a Democrat if humanly possible in order to show what a straight arrow type he or she is, and into the bargain, likely has little love for those further to the left.

The triviality here is monumental, taking this seriously is laughable.


"A liberal is a man who won't take his own side in a quarrel."

[brooklynite]

38. First, no Democrat is "voting" against a fellow Democrat...

This is a report prepared by professional staff identifying a violation of the rules. Highly unlikely that there will be any punitive effort, certainly not censure or expulsion in this case.

Second, if you believe any Democratic House members have "little love" for those further to the left, please identify them, and explain what evidence you have that they would respond inappropriately.

[The Magistrate]

39. You're Getting Silly Here, Sir

Staff does what employers wish done, I expect you are positioned to have some awareness of this.

The rest is just a standard troll of the 'do your own research' class.

I think the proper response is 'get bent', but I am not up on the usual practice in such circumstances.

[brooklynite]

47. "Staff does what employers wish done"...

Are you telling me that the House members (certainly the Democrats) don't want an unbiased review of ethics issues?

[The Magistrate]

52. Pretty Much

I do not mind flat statements, prefer them, actually.

Nothing the 'ethics' committee does touches on the real corruptions of our political life, the open and legal bribery all, repeat all, politicians engage in routinely.

Unless you can show me an outrageous vote the young woman has taken against the public interest but in favor of 'Big Opera' or 'Big Couturiere', I am far more interested in the latest college basketball scores, and I never watch basketball, or college sports in general....

[brooklynite]

54. So its okay to take some goodies as long as you vote the "right" way?

Pretty much how Tamany Hall worked.

[The Magistrate]

56. We're Pretty Much Done Here, Sir

I suspect I'd have backed Tammany against the 'good government' goo-goos.

https://www.gutenberg.org/files/2810/2810-h/2810-h.htm

George Washington Plunkett remains a good read, and I commend the link above to anyone with an honest interest in old-school municipal machines.

Show me a connection between the gift and the vote and we may have something to discuss. Otherwise, we're just spinning wheels and I've other things to do. I think you have demonstrated sufficiently your instinct for the capillary here, there's no need to tease it further out.

[MichMan]

58. "Staff does what employers wish done"

AOC said the payment for the services was caused by an ex staffer not taking care of it properly.

Since "Staff does what employers wish done", that must mean that the staffer followed AOC direction and intentionally failed to make the payment.

[The Magistrate]

59. So, You Say The Committee Staff Made A Mistake, Then, Sir?

I agree.

Their time would have been far better spent watching cute kitty videos, or even paint dry.


"Don't try and teach grandma to suck eggs."

[MichMan]

68. No, I wasn't the one that said "Staff does what employer's wish done"

Last edited Fri Mar 3, 2023, 08:35 AM - Edit history (1)

That was you.

I take AOC statement that it was an inadvertant mistake by her staffer at face value. You disagree.

The Ethics committee will do its due diligence and come up with a final report once the investigation is concluded. Likely the matter will be closed.

[emulatorloo]

40. The OCE is investigating George Santos as well. OCE is made up of professionals, not House members

from what I read in description Brooklynite provided. They investigate and then make referrals to the House Ethics committee which is indeed made up of house members.

The OCE has a professional staff consisting primarily of attorneys and other professionals with expertise in ethics law and investigations.

[The Magistrate]

45. So What?

The thing is nonesense, and will continue to be nonesense no matter how people with various axes to grind attempt defenses of it. Its unimportnce is monumental, I much resent the time wasted reading of it, let alone commenting on it. Two motives, and two only, suggest themselves, the first being posturing as 'above partisanship', and the second being dislike for the views of the person targeted.

[emulatorloo]

48. Ok then. You don't care that there is difference between the OCE (ethics law attorneys) and

the House Ethics Committee (5 Dems/5 Republicans). They aren’t the same thing.

I get that you don’t care, which of course is fine.

I expect there won’t be a problem for AOC. There will be big problems for George Santos.

Of course RW media will do false outrage over AOC. I’m not wasting my reading RW media.

Have a good night!

[The Magistrate]

50. That's Right

I suppose I could get around to caring, if other things clear up a bit. We all have a certain amount of concern in hand, I have very little of the stuff, and so am sparing in its use....

[emulatorloo]

53. So true. ' We all have a certain amount of concern in hand' I love how you put that.

Take care!

[The Magistrate]

57. Best Of the Evening To You, Friend

[lapucelle]

23. The OCE is non-partisan and independent.

It made its recommendation to further review the allegations in June of 2022.

The Office of Congressional Ethics (OCE) is an independent, non-partisan entity charged with reviewing allegations of misconduct against Members, officers, and staff of the United States House of Representatives and, when appropriate, referring matters to the House Committee on Ethics. In all but one set of circumstances, the report and findings of the OCE Board must be publicly released.

https://oce.house.gov/about

=========================================================================

REPORT
Review No. 22-8546

The Board of the Office of Congressional Ethics (hereafter “the Board”), by a vote of no less than four members, on June 17, 2022, adopted the following report and ordered it to be transmitted to the Committee on Ethics of the United States House of Representatives (hereafter “the Committee”).

SUBJECT: Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

NATURE OF THE ALLEGED VIOLATION: Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez may have accepted impermissible gifts associated with her attendance at the Met Gala in 2021. If Rep. Ocasio-Cortez accepted impermissible gifts, then she may have violated House rules,
standards of conduct, and federal law.

RECOMMENDATION: The Board recommends that the Committee further review the above allegation concerning Rep. Ocasio-Cortez because there is substantial reason to believe that she accepted impermissible gifts associated with her attendance at the Met Gala in 2021.

VOTES IN THE AFFIRMATIVE: 5

https://oce.house.gov/sites/congressionalethics.house.gov/files/documents/OCE%20Rev.%2022-8546_Referral%20FINAL.pdf

[Marthe48]

13. Do the members of the OCE and Ethics know what they're doing?

After comer added NTSB to the Dept. of Transportation to 'own the libs' I can't take this finding at face value. None of the r's are proving they know their asses from elbows when it comes to reading any of the government guidelines that explain protocol, rules, ethics. Because they are ignorant of their jobs and pretend they know stuff like this only because a Dem got tickets to a charity do.
What did gaetz get from that teenager? What is santos this week? What TN gov. might have dressed in women's clothes?

[emulatorloo]

41. Yes. The OCE is made up of professionals who are experts in ethics law and investigations.

The OCE has a professional staff consisting primarily of attorneys and other professionals with expertise in ethics law and investigations.

From brooklynite’s link to OCE above.

[LudwigPastorius]

17. The specifics of the appearance, and what was permissible, were reviewed by...

the OCE and her lawyer before she went.

She knew what was owed, but only paid after complaints from the service providers caused the OCE to open an investigation.

Democrats have to be better than that.

[dpibel]

19. "reason to believe"..."may have"

So we're at the probable cause stage.

And what would be the consequences if this dreadful tale were true?

Should we expect (or is it hope?) to see AOC cashiered?

Or might this be a bit on the de minimis side, but it sounds pretty awful when you write it out?

[Evolve Dammit]

20. Who the fuck cares. It's not like she stole fucking classified top secret shit, with NO repercussion

Oh wait it's AOC and she's a "squad member." Burn!!

[canetoad]

21. Is this the right dress?

Met Gala 2022. I can see why the Repugs are upset.

[emulatorloo]

42. OCE is made up of non-partisan professionals who are experts in ethics law and investigations.

The OCE has a professional staff consisting primarily of attorneys and other professionals with expertise in ethics law and investigations.

In other words Jim Jordan etc arent on the OCE. There seems to be a misunderstanding of what the OCE. There’s news today that George Santos is being investigated by the OCE.

Obviously there’s no comparison between AOC and Santos - he’s a crook!

[Warpy]

24. Translation: "OK, we'll do a half hearted investigation on that obvious crook Santos

but that Ocasio-Cortez b*** has got to go, too."

What she got was a swag bag. She could have refused it outright but I guess she was curious to see what was in it, what rich people get at their favorite events. Can't say I blame her much.

[Hortensis]

25. Whatever the technical truth, this was expected from those hyenas.

Her supporters should be proud of the enemies she makes and that they've made her name big enough to be worth targeting.

And take this as reminder of the need to vote Democratic -- every election, EITHER we or they will get more power.

As for ethical issues in general, imo the only ethical position is one standard for all.

[MichMan]

29. The House Ethics Committee has 10 members; 5 from each party

Regardless of the make up of the House. Electing more Democrats doesn't change that.

[Hortensis]

32. :) This is happening because the GOP got a majority in the house.

100% predictable, and we all knew it.

This is on all those who care about right and wrong, and good government, but who LET that happen by not voting to stop it -- every bit as much as the depraved fools on the right who are proud of making it happen.

That's good information for those who don't know it yet, though. In this era the ethics committee is an otherwise stalemated tool for the majority party, who, amusingly, are "investigating" weaponization of government. Like a drug cartel "investigating" drug smuggling.

[MichMan]

33. The investigation of AOC started in June of 2022 & was extended in December 2022

It has been in process long before the 2022 election


https://oce.house.gov/reports/investigations/oce-referral-regarding-rep-alexandria-ocasio-cortez

[Hortensis]

35. I remember. And here we are. The "investigation" is being weaponized.

Not that this is big compared to other things they're doing, but they should not be able to.

[Cha]

26. House Ethics Cmte votes to investigate GOP Rep. George Santos, too..

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100217694126

[emulatorloo]

43. Unfortunately facts don't seem to matter. CT about the non-partisan ethics law experts at OCE is

more satisfying I guess.

[betsuni]

49. Yes. This is about the makeup artist and hair stylist not being paid. No CT!

Quite a stretch. The vendors were finally paid, this is no big deal, committee just doing their job.

[emulatorloo]

51. And they'll do their job on Santos, but that will be the real big deal.

He’s unethical and criminal.

[LeftInTX]

63. And he really can't "fix" it

If AOC owed someone money, she should be required to pay them and possibly a fine. Santos?? What on earth do you do with him??

[ificandream]

28. What do you bet this story about AOC will get more play on the Fox site and TV than George Lopez?

If I was in Vegas, I'd put money on it.

[ificandream]

30. Update: Fox front page has big block on AOC, NOTHING on Lopez.

Just pay me...

[emulatorloo]

44. Fox is so predictable. Ugh.

Santos is being investigated for ethical and possible criminal violations. So of course fox won’t say a word about that.

[Cha]

55. Yeah, fox viewers are treated

like Mushrooms.. Fed Shit & Kept in the Dark. :storm

[emulatorloo]

75. ...

You definitely have a way with words.

[Cha]

76. I'm passing that on from

something I read on DU a long time ago!

Mahalo!

[Takket]

60. Fortunately for her, ethics violations are no longer punished in any way

[iemanja]

61. I was recently talking to someone from

A small government agency, and we wanted to take him to dinner. This related to an official visit. He said he’d love to come to dinner but would need to pay for himself. If he can follow ethics laws, so can congresspeople.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

62. K&R

[dchill]

64. Ethics Laws? What are those?

[SuperCoder]

65. Ethics laws?

What about MTG, LB, and McCarthy?

Why don't we prosecute THEM???? Huh?

Bi-partisan my ass.

[Mopar151]

66. They're just sick jealous that they could never pull off that dress!

Or be featured on the red carpet of the Met Gala!

The rest is hairsplitting. How many public figures have had hair and makeup comped as part of an event or TV appearance?

[Woodwizard]

67. I really like her.

But if you are going to be loud and outspoken about what you believe in make sure everything is done by the book. We should not have a double standard.

The right will pull this out for months if not years every time she gets in the news. It was a sloppy thing to do complacency and position is a slippery slope.

[Kid Berwyn]

70. I'll side with AOC.

Liberals and progressives have really bothered rich people and their satraps since the New Deal was new.

[BlueManiac]

74. I'd just

Love to be able to wear that dress and stand on the red carpet for just 10 minutes. Ha-Ha....but I'd have to diet for 10 years to be able to fit in it.