General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsConservative group files ethics complaint against AOC for attending Met Gala
A conservative watchdog group filed an ethics complaint against Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Wednesday, claiming she violated congressional rules by attending the high-priced event.
"There are serious questions about whether or not her ticket donated or purchased with campaign funds was permissible under the code of congressional ethics," said The American Accountability Foundation in a statement. "
"These rules exist for a reason. Without strict adherence, we run the risk of corruption in the halls of Congress and public officials serving others over their constituents. Government has a responsibility to its citizens, and integrity and accountability should be our foremost concern."
-snip-
The American Accountability Foundation claims her attendance should count as an illegal gift since attendees were handpicked by Vogue editor Anna Wintour and the magazine's company, Conde Nast, and therefore not a gift from a charitable organization. However, proceeds from the event typically support the Met's Costume Institute. In 2019, the gala raised $15 million, according to the New York Times, for instance.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/conservative-group-files-ethics-complaint-212837609.html
Sounds like projection to me.
Ferrets are Cool
(21,106 posts)Lovie777
(12,265 posts)Rorey
(8,445 posts)I just can't keep up.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)Rorey
(8,445 posts)It's always fun to hear repukes mention rules when they have long thought they're exempt.
Wounded Bear
(58,656 posts)corollary to an old favorite around here.
MontanaMama
(23,314 posts)What a waste of time and energy.
CrispyQ
(36,464 posts)DFW
(54,384 posts)Republicans can rape, kill, cheat and lie under oath, and with total immunity from prosecution. But if a Democrat attends some high society event, the Republicans are all over it. They should just admit it: they aren't upset about an ethics violation. They are upset because none of THEM were invited!
(And who WOULD invite them? As if we haven't seen a hundred thousand American Flag dresses before!)
LakeArenal
(28,817 posts)As Im sure many of the high profile guests are. They attract the $30,000 ticket buyers.
Actually the Met Gala is supposed to invoke polarizing guests.
fescuerescue
(4,448 posts)I'm a little shocked.
LakeArenal
(28,817 posts)C_U_L8R
(45,002 posts)Just_Vote_Dem
(2,808 posts)Wounded Bear
(58,656 posts)Celerity
(43,382 posts)Nice bedfellows they have.
progressoid
(49,990 posts)Lancero
(3,003 posts)Or II, if you want to use roman numerals.
sheshe2
(83,770 posts)We all know who you are referring to.
We can DU better than that.
George II
(67,782 posts).... VI or VII, or ۵ or ۶ if you want to use Eastern Arabic numerals, or 110 or 111 if you want to use Binary numerals.
Easy peasy.
Nixie
(16,954 posts)And it was done very well. I'm finding the intentional amnesia over how this all started to be amusing.
If you want to hold yourself out as a moral authority on other Democrats and calling speeches "corrupt" and all that other brand-building innuendo, then you should have "clean hands" -- at least in the legal sense of that term. If you want to make a hypocrite of yourself with manipulative innuendo, that's one thing, but you shouldn't give others like the GOP a chance to start picking bones over "rules."
Celerity
(43,382 posts)were comped by the Met itself, for its own fundraiser.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9990919/Vogue-didnt-pay-AOC-attend-Met-Gala-despite-claim-invited-official.html
Metropolitan Museum of Art says that AOC and de Blasio attended Met Gala as guests of the museum.
It's disgusting to see DU'ers parrot RW bullshit talking points and attacks on sitting Democrats.
Nixie
(16,954 posts)The whole basis of the brand-building is selective attacks on "sitting Democrats" or formerly sitting Democrats all to make gain some advantage politically. Talk about disgusting. "Tax the rich" is one such slogan -- with accusations against a former candidate about "wall street" also being part of the brand building. This all started a few years before AOC came along, and it is all tied to a failed senator's campaign. The GOP has run with those attacks in subsequent elections, which I'm sure you are aware of. That should be your concern -- not other Democrats.
Now you're quoting the DailyMail?? I see you are concerned about links that others provide, but you can use the DailyMail? Interesting. From your DailyMail article:
"While the individual's invitations may bear the name of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, the Museum has ceded control over the invitations to a for-profit company, specifically Conde Nast and to its Chief Content Officer, Anna Wintour, Jones wrote."
Your only nit that you're picking is about the tickets being comped, but it covers more than that. Your post is just a distraction as were your pictures of other attendees.
But the article does say AOC left the event with the heir to the Seagram's fortune (a billionaire), who is the nephew of Clare Bronfman, who was "accused of funding NXIVM sex cult." That is from your own link, hence the taint of hypocrisy.
Celerity
(43,382 posts)Bronfman has zero to do with his half- aunt or NXIVM. That is just libelous slander to imply he does. Also there are dozens of heirs to the Bronfman fortune, it isn't like Benjamin is going to get a billion or so at all. Just between his father and his uncle Matthew he has 16 brothers, sister's, 1st cousins and half siblings, and Edgar Sr, his grandfather, had 5 other children. The Bronfman family have been Democratic and Liberal Party (Canada) large donors over the years.
Nixie
(16,954 posts)DailyMail. Heirs to Seagrams are billionaires and she was seen leaving with him. It doesnt matter that he might have to split the billions with some siblings-thats just more distraction on your part, sorry. So she wasnt just there to bolster the working class that she was claiming she was a part of.
But now we see why superficial tangential associations dont mean squat if its AOC, but she can ascribe false motives to others for hanging out with whom they might know and enjoy or want to promote.
Libelous slander. - now you see why people question the messaging from a twice-failed campaign that couldnt even make it past Democrats. Thanks for the outrage about libelous slander.
betsuni
(25,531 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)Celerity
(43,382 posts)designer who is becoming a successful women of colour entrepreneur. She came from a working class background, and struggled for years before founding Brother Vellies in January 2013. Most sources online show her net worth at 2 million usd, which is basically enough to buy a one bedroom flat in a decent part of Manhattan, maybe a small 2 bedroom, as the overall average sale prices rose 12% in the 2nd quarter of 2021, topping $1.9 million. The designers that de Blasio (Dreu Beckemberg) and Carolyn Maloney (Ghassan Antonios) modelled for are also people of colour, btw.
Benjamin Bronfman is an environments and an eco investor, he is the strategic advisor and principal investor with Algae Systems, a carbon capture project and an associate managing director at Global Thermostat, a bio-fuel company. He is worth 100m usd, and he will have to spilt his father's 2.5bn usd fortune 7 ways (he has 6 siblings), so there is little chance he will get to a billion dollar net worth that way. His father was born in 1955, so I highly doubt he is dying anytime soon anyway. Benjamin's grandfather lived to be 84, and one of his great uncles, for instance, Charles, is 90 and still growing strong.
Maloney has attended the Met Gala on multiple occasions, and nary of peep from you and the rest, then or now.
You are all invested in this RW bollocks because only becuase it involves AOC. If you really gave a damn about some shitty ethics charge you would be dragging de Blasio and Maloney as well, as they did the exact same thing, Maloney on multiple occasions.
betsuni
(25,531 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)Celerity
(43,382 posts)PLUS, the very fact that the Daily Mail (NO friend of AOC) is confirming that the Met itself comped her ticket is all the more proof.
Again, you and the others sure are invested in using RW talking points to selectively attack just AOC.
George II
(67,782 posts).....64,000 posts that must be quite an index file, eh? Impressive.
Celerity
(43,382 posts)lapucelle
(18,258 posts)The ethics probe will probably center on whether the sophomore representative received the $70,000 tickets in exchange for promoting a brand or designer.
Link to tweet
Arazi
(6,829 posts)dmr
(28,347 posts)A Republican group said that? ... That is rich!!!
Caliman73
(11,738 posts)There are likely, valid criticisms of AOC, but corruption is very unlikely to be substantive.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)both social media mentions and donations will spike.
Pretty much the same among RW "ethics warriors," of course. Both of them.
gratuitous
(82,849 posts)Let's see, Tom Jones and Matt Buckham, the "brains" behind the AAF are connected to Senator Ron Johnson, Senator Jim DeMint, Cruz for President, Donald J. Trump, and the House Freedom Caucus.
AAF is led by Tom Jones and Matt Buckham. Tom has two decades of political, policy, research, and investigations experience serving in senior legislative and investigatory positions on Capitol Hill as a Senate staffer and as an opposition researcher for campaigns at the local, state-wide, and presidential level.
While on Capitol Hill he served as the Legislative Director for Senator Ron Johnson, ran the opposition research program for Cruz for President, and previously as a Senior Policy Advisor to Senator Jim DeMint. During his time with Senator DeMint, he was part of the oversight team that helped Senator DeMint and his colleagues successfully ban Congressional earmarks. As a subcommittee staff director, he conducted on-going agency oversight and regularly investigated waste, fraud, and abuse in the federal government. His research was crucial in helping Senators defeat flawed presidential nominees and kill wasteful government programs.
Matt has a decade of experience with personnel, policy, and leadership from inside the White House, Congress, and conservative groups. He most recently served Donald J. Trump through January 20, 2021, as Special Assistant to the President in the Presidential Personnel Office, where he identified bold conservative leaders for posts throughout the administration. Previously, he served as a legislative aide to former Senator Jim DeMint (R-SC), Senior Advisor to the House Freedom Caucus, and in various positions with conservative non-profit organizations.
LetMyPeopleVote
(145,243 posts)bullwinkle428
(20,629 posts)that's the most transparent indication of their "sincerity".
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)Celerity
(43,382 posts)AOC was comped by the the Met itself, so was de Blasio and Maloney. There was no ethics violation.
Metropolitan Museum of Art says that AOC and de Blasio attended Met Gala as guests of the museum.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9990919/Vogue-didnt-pay-AOC-attend-Met-Gala-despite-claim-invited-official.html
Nixie
(16,954 posts)They are a for-profit entity. The article says that the Met ceded control to them. So it wasnt the Met that comped the tickets.
Celerity
(43,382 posts)you and others are selectively pushing RW talking points
from my link (and the only reason I used it)
Nixie
(16,954 posts)which is the whole reason the messaging from failed campaigns are questioned the way they are. You are selectively refusing to acknowledge how or why this messaging is rejected by most Democrats. You can't have it both ways -- if you are outraged about RW messaging, then you shouldn't be supporting politicians who hand them this nonsense on a silver platter. That is the whole point, but you ignore the history of it.
Your link says that the Met ceded control of the tickets to Conde Nast, a for-profit entity. That's from YOUR link.
edit to add quote:
[W]hile the individual's invitations may bear the name of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, the Museum has ceded control over the invitations to a for-profit company, specifically Condé Nast, and to its Chief Content Officer, Anna Wintour,' Jones wrote.
He added that 'the New York Times outlines that the Met does not have control over who is invited to the event, but rather the for-profit company, is in control of who gets invited.'
Celerity
(43,382 posts)https://meaww.com/aoc-met-gala-2021-free-ticket-no-charity-tax-the-rich-gown
https://wwd.com/fashion-news/fashion-scoops/nancy-chilton-the-met-costume-institute-1234835663/
So you are the one pushing the RW claptrap, and selectively so, as I do not see you or the others having a go at Maloney or de Blasio, who were also comped in by the Museum. You and the others are only going after AOC. That is the epitome of selective outrage.
Nixie
(16,954 posts)But from your link:
"As of now, it remains a mystery who actually offered to pay for their tickets, with the politicians themselves choosing to keep mum over it."
So it looks like your own links are the problem. You can't say in your links with any certainty what is going on, so quit blaming me for reading YOUR links.
Quit lumping Maloney in with AOC. Her dress was quite generic and fit her role in being invited there. "Tax the Rich" is from a political campaign and is specific to promoting that particular brand -- not anything to do with representing the general public.
Again, if you're so concerned about RW claptrap, then we should not be promoting failed campaigns that do nothing but draw big fat targets on our backs -- targets for crazy RW loons to run with. That messaging has failed with our own electorate. Time to acknowledge that. Let's not give them anymore ammunition. That's how you handle it. Insinuating other Democrats are the problem also failed, by the way....
George II
(67,782 posts)....as pointedly noted in the article, a for-profit company.
George II
(67,782 posts)Additionally, Instagram has only grown in stature within the art and museum spheres. In the past year, the app has increasingly become a research tool for art-buyers, and has been tapped by institutions to host virtual tours and livestreamed events like curator talks.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/03/fashion/what-is-the-met-gala-and-who-gets-to-go.html
Nixie
(16,954 posts)fund the Met.
The last sentence in your post is certainly interesting!
This makes them really excited and makes them feel like they owe her. If they didnt already.
StarfishSaver
(18,486 posts)This is where some new officeholders get tripped up.
If it was a violation, it's not a big deal - not criminal and it won't have serious legal consequences other than a fine and a talking to - but it's awkward, distracting, and unnecessary.
I hope her Chief of Staff and/or scheduler - ran this by Ethics before accepting the ticket. She can't be expected to stay on top of these things, be her staff needs to be all over it to protect her.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)StarfishSaver
(18,486 posts)There probably was not an ethics violation since it's likely that this was considered a "widely attended event" to which Members are permitted to accept tickets, If certain conditions are met. If that's the case, other Members have probably attended over the years with no question or scrutiny. But because of her high profile, AOC drew tremendous attention when she took to the red carpet in her very high profile dress (which, interestingly, may be what makes her attendance comport with the ethics rules - I'll be glad to explain that if you're interested). It was bound to attract scrutiny. I just hope this was indeed within the ethics rules. It won't prevent criticism and accusations, but at least the accusations won't be true
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)I prefer politicians who get things done and who boast about their legislative accomplishments. NOT the number of Twitter followers that they have. That's reasonable, I think.
LetMyPeopleVote
(145,243 posts)It will be interesting to see how this investigation turns out
tonedevil
(3,022 posts)so many DUers joining with the American Accountability Foundation to purport such ridiculous falsehoods about a sitting Democratic Congressperson. If I found myself in such profound agreement with a Republican smear shop I hope I would be able to check myself before wrecking myself.
Initech
(100,076 posts)Come on... what are you guys hiding? Two can play at that game!