PrintAOC under investigation by House ethics committee
Just yesterday, the New York Post reported that the House ethics committee is investigating New York Democrat Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a.k.a., AOC.
The eight-member congressional committee divulged no details about the investigation, saying only that it had decided to extend its consideration of a matter brought to its attention on June 23, and would announce its ultimate course of action next year.
A statement from the committee read as follows:
рџљЁBREAKING: AOC is under a House Ethics Investigation pic.twitter.com/FFHfinqFJm
— Greg Price (@greg_price11) December 7, 2022
The following is a key part of the statement:
The Committee notes that the mere fact of a referral or an extension, and the mandatory disclosure of such an extension and the name of the subject of the matter, does not itself indicate that any violation has occurred, or reflect any judgment on behalf of the Committee.
Last September, two ethics watchdog organizations filed complaints against AOC relating to her attending last year’s ostentatious Met Gala.
The first ethics complaint was from the American Accountability Foundation ,which stated that since AOC had defined her attendance at the 2021's Met Gala to be part of her official activities, the receipt of gifts fails on both the widely attended event exemption and the charitable entity exemption.
The second ethics complaint was from the National Legal and Policy Center which stated that the infamous “Tax The Rich” dress worn by AOC constituted an impermissible gift because it was “directly related to AOC’s ‘position with the House’ as a highly visible and controversial Member.”
Tickets for the Met Gala are priced from $35,000 to $50,000, while tables go from $200,000 to $300,000. AOC did not pay for her attendance.
AOC’s attendance at the Met Gala was certainly a misuse of power and a conflict of interest.
If she hadn’t been a prominent member of Congress she would not have received a free invite and neither would the designer gift her a dress for the occasion.
It certainly arouses suspicion that a quid pro quo deal was struck.
Perhaps AOC promised the sponsors something in exchange for her Met Gala tickets, table, and dress. Was it a vote for a specific bill or a statement in support of a specific cause or access or something else? We may never know.
The latest investigation is most likely due to complaints from external watchdogs.
AOC’s spokesperson denied any wrongdoing in the following statement.
The Congresswoman has always taken ethics incredibly seriously, refusing any donations from lobbyists, corporations, or other special interests. We are confident that this matter will be dismissed.
We know that AOC is a hypocrite and that her words are usually unrelated to her actions.
She may whine all day about income inequality, protecting minority groups, racism, sexism, transphobia, etc. But when she isn't talking, there is only one cause AOC cares for: herself.
In recent times she has been caught blatantly lying and displaying her hypocrisy.
AOC pulled a Smollett by overstating her “traumatic experience" from the Capitol protests. She claimed Trump supporters were hunting for her and that she feared being killed. Later, it was revealed that AOC wasn't in the Capitol building, but at a nearby office building.
AOC refused to side with the exploited workers of Amazon's Staten Island distribution center who were attempting to unionize. But when they did successfully unionize, AOC attempted to take credit.
AOC ardently supports extreme gun control measures for citizens. But for herself, she spends thousands of dollars and has armed bodyguards; obviously, it is taxpayer money.
AOC supports defunding the police but once again for the police protecting regular citizens. For herself, she demanded around-the-clock police protection around the Capitol building following the January 6 protests.
What is unfortunate is that her inane utterances, her self-centeredness, her hypocrisy, and her potential conflicts of interest present no hindrance to her political career.
She will continue to be reelected in Congress and continue to rise in the Democrat party. Some day she could be House Speaker or Senator or Senate Majority Leader, governor or even president.
These investigations on AOC also reveal the stark difference in standards of probes in D.C. between MAGA Republicans and socialist Democrats.
Unlike AOC, President Trump never has the luxury of the presumption of innocence.
Whenever Trump was subjected to the Mueller probe that lasted for almost two years, Trump was declared guilty by the Democrats.
The details about the probe were revealed from the day of its launch. Throughout the probe, the Democrat PR wing that masquerades as the news media, claimed that the walls were closing in and that Trump would be forced to resign in disgrace.
Since no proof of guilt was discovered, Mueller’s report was purposefully worded ambiguously; it claimed that the investigation did "not conclude that the President committed a crime" however, "it also does not exonerate him."
This is unprecedented, in any court of law, the accused is either convicted or exonerated, and there is no gray area. But this gray area enabled the Democrats to continue the narrative that Trump won in 2016 by rigging the elections.
When the Committee on Oversight and Reform Committee launched an investigation into Trump administration back in 2019, all detail about the probe was released. The basis of the investigation was an article from the Democrat mouthpiece, the Washington Post.
The following is a key excerpt of the statement, which almost declares guilt during the launch of the investigation:
Today, Rep. Elijah E. Cummings, the Chairman of the Committee on Oversight and Reform, sent letters to the White House and 24 agencies requesting information about the Trump Administration’s use of waivers to allow political appointees to continue working on matters they worked on before entering government.
Nowhere in the mission statements for these probes were caveats about the presumption of innocence of the subject being probed. There was also no mention that an investigation does not imply that any violation has occurred, nor does it reflect any judgment of the Committee. There was no concealing the details of the probes. Anyone reading the statement or following the news would presume that Trump was guilty.
The disparity is blatant.
Legal egalitarianism that causes all citizens to be equal before the law is a fundamental tenet of any civilized democracy. The standards for investigations should be uniform and irrespective of whom is being investigated.
When standards are redefined based on the ideology, identity, and political affiliation of the subject, democracy begins to erode.
The damage done by this vile politicization of probes can never be gauged.
