House Ethics Panel Confirms Investigations of Rush, Whitfield

Whitfield: Poised to pounce on EPA.
Billy House
Add to Briefcase
See more stories about...
Billy House
July 25, 2014, 10:33 a.m.

Without provid­ing de­tails, House Eth­ics watch­dogs con­firmed Thursday they are re­view­ing sep­ar­ate mat­ters in­volving wheth­er Reps. Bobby Rush of Illinois and Ed Whit­field of Ken­tucky vi­ol­ated House rules.

Rush, a Demo­crat, him­self ac­know­ledged in a pub­lished re­port in April in the Chica­go Sun-Times that he was un­der scru­tiny over spend­ing from his cam­paign fund and the hand­ling of a $1 mil­lion grant.

And pub­lished ac­counts, be­gin­ning with a story late last year by Politico, have ques­tioned Re­pub­lic­an Whit­field’s sup­port of con­tro­ver­sial an­im­al-wel­fare le­gis­la­tion pushed by his wife, a re­gistered lob­by­ist with the Hu­mane So­ci­ety of the United States. The group’s le­gis­lat­ive fund has donated at least $8,000 to Whit­field since 2011, when his wife began lob­by­ing for it, ac­cord­ing to the pub­lished re­ports.

In a state­ment, Whit­field re­spon­ded that he was “dis­ap­poin­ted that people with a fin­an­cial in­terest in pending le­gis­la­tion have filed a com­plaint against me for my work on be­half of an­im­als.” He did not ex­plain fur­ther, but thanked the com­mit­tee for not­ing in its an­nounce­ment that ‘“the mere fact of a re­fer­ral … does not it­self in­dic­ate that any vi­ol­a­tion has oc­curred, or re­flect any judg­ment on be­half of the Com­mit­tee.”

“As a re­luct­ant par­ti­cipant in this pro­cess, I, too, will re­frain from mak­ing any fur­ther pub­lic com­ments un­til such time as the Com­mit­tee de­term­ines pub­lic state­ments are ap­pro­pri­ate,” Whit­field said.

Fri­day’s an­nounce­ment from the House Eth­ics Com­mit­tee was the first of­fi­cial con­firm­a­tion that he and Rush were both be­ing scru­tin­ized by the pan­el. The joint state­ment by the com­mit­tee chair­man, Mike Con­away, and the pan­el’s top Demo­crat, Linda Sanc­hez, said the cases were both re­ferred by the Of­fice of Con­gres­sion­al Eth­ics on June 10.

A spokes­wo­man for the OCE, which serves as an in­de­pend­ent watch­dog that serves as an ini­tial vet­ter of eth­ics com­plaints, would not com­ment on its find­ings be­hind the re­fer­rals, provided in re­ports to the Eth­ics Com­mit­tee.

Un­der House rules, the Eth­ics Com­mit­tee now has un­til Nov. 10 to de­cide wheth­er it will ex­pand the two re­views by em­pan­el­ing spe­cial in­vest­ig­at­ive sub­com­mit­tees. These sub­pan­els would form­ally con­sider wheth­er the two law­makers broke House rules and, if so, pos­sibly re­com­mend pun­ish­ment. 

Neither Whit­field’s nor Rush’s of­fice had any im­me­di­ate com­ment Fri­day.

But news of the Rush probe came after the a Sun-Times/Bet­ter Gov­ern­ment As­so­ci­ation in­vest­ig­a­tion late last year re­por­ted that he used cam­paign funds for the Be­loved Com­munity Chris­ti­an Church, where he is a min­is­ter and that he did not re­port rent pay­ments for his cam­paign of­fice, pos­sible eth­ics vi­ol­a­tions.

The Sun-Times/BGA re­port also ques­tioned what had be­come of a $1 mil­lion grant that Rush helped se­cure from tele­com­mu­nic­a­tions firm SBC to launch a tech cen­ter in Chica­go. The re­port said it was un­clear where the money went, and that the tech cen­ter has not ma­ter­i­al­ized. Rush was quoted as telling the news­pa­per “every penny of that money went to­ward pro­grams for the Engle­wood com­munity.”

Whit­field, in the Politico story in Decem­ber, de­fen­ded the in­ter­ac­tion between his con­gres­sion­al du­ties and his wife’s lob­by­ing—and said that any­one who doesn’t like it can file an eth­ics com­plaint against him.

What We're Following See More »
CITES CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Lieberman Withdraws from Consideration for FBI Job
3 days ago
THE LATEST
MINIMUM 2 PERCENT GDP
Trump Tells NATO Countries To Pay Up
3 days ago
BREAKING
MANAFORT AND FLYNN
Russians Discussed Influencing Trump Through Aides
3 days ago
THE DETAILS

"American spies collected information last summer revealing that senior Russian intelligence and political officials were discussing how to exert influence over Donald J. Trump through his advisers." The conversations centered around Paul Manafort, who was campaign chairman at the time, and Michael Flynn, former national security adviser and then a close campaign surrogate. Both men have been tied heavily with Russia and Flynn is currently at the center of the FBI investigation into possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.

Source:
BUT WHITE HOUSE MAY USE AGAINST HIM ANYWAY
Ethics Cops Clear Mueller to Work on Trump Case
5 days ago
THE LATEST

"Former FBI Director Robert Mueller has been cleared by U.S. Department of Justice ethics experts to oversee an investigation into possible collusion between then-candidate Donald Trump's 2016 election campaign and Russia." Some had speculated that the White House would use "an ethics rule limiting government attorneys from investigating people their former law firm represented" to trip up Mueller's appointment. Jared Kushner is a client of Mueller's firm, WilmerHale. "Although Mueller has now been cleared by the Justice Department, the White House may still use his former law firm's connection to Manafort and Kushner to undermine the findings of his investigation, according to two sources close to the White House."

Source:
BUSINESSES CAN’T PLEAD FIFTH
Senate Intel to Subpoena Two of Flynn’s Businesses
5 days ago
THE LATEST

Senate Intelligence Committee chairman Richard Burr (R-NC) and ranking member Mark Warner (D-VA) will subpoena two businesses owned by former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn. Burr said, "We would like to hear from General Flynn. We'd like to see his documents. We'd like him to tell his story because he publicly said he had a story to tell."

×
×

Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.

Login