ruhyazenfrdekkplesukuzyi
  • FOUNDED IN 1910
    NEW YORK

The Congressional Staff Ethics Board found that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez violated ethical standards at the 2021 Met Gala

The Congressional Staff Ethics Board has concluded that Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez may have violated ethical standards and legal requirements when attending the 2021 Met Gala, a benefit event at New York's Metropolitan Museum of Art. Let me remind you that at that time a left-leaning congresswoman came to the event in a dress with the inscription: tax the rich. The essence of the claims is not in the inscription, but in the fact that Ms. Ocasio-Cortez did not pay for some of the services provided to her in preparation for the event, that is, these services were provided to her for free, which is contrary to ethical rules, and possibly criminal law. In particular, almost $500 for hair styling, $350 for make-up, about $1000 for renting a dress, handbag and jewelry were not paid (while the cost of rent for unknown reasons was reduced by more than 2 times), more than $5000 for renting rooms in the hotel where the congresswoman was preparing for the event. Some of the debts were paid very late, including those that Ms. Ocasio-Cortez paid after the start of the review by the Ethics Council at the beginning of 22. No clear explanation was provided for the delay, except for the mention that the congresswoman gave the order to pay the bills to the assistant immediately after the event in 21 (however, even collectors began working on some of the debts, that is, it was hard not to know about the existence of the debt).

Interestingly, to comply with all the formalities when attending the event, the congresswoman even hired a lawyer, but, as we see, this did not help. The matter will now be referred to the House Ethics Committee. The representative's office regrets the incident, but believes that the violation was not serious and did not deserve punishment. Also, according to the office, the congresswoman's personal correspondence shows that she did not refuse to pay bills, which indicates there was no intent to violate.

 

Author: Igor Slabykh

https://t.me/uslegalnews

 

06.03.2023