Connect with us

Politics

House Committee Opens Investigation into Postmaster General for Alleged Campaign Finance Violations

Published

on

  • The head of the House Oversight Committee announced an investigation into Postmaster General Louis DeJoy over alleged campaign finance violations and whether or not he lied to Congress under oath concerning the matter.
  • The investigation comes after The Washington Post reported that numerous employees of DeJoy’s former business, New Breed Logistics, said DeJoy pressured them into making political donations to Republican campaigns and reimbursed them with bonuses, which is illegal.
  • Campaign finance records show that many employees had never donated before they worked for DeJoy and stopped donating after his company was acquired in 2014.
  • Multiple people also said that the donations allowed DeJoy and his wife to rise in the ranks of the GOP, which eventually lead to him becoming Postmaster General.

Investigation

Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-Ny.) announced Monday that the House Committee on Oversight and Reform, which she chairs, is launching an investigation into Postmaster General Louis DeJoy following reports that he pressured former employees into donating to his preferred Republican candidates and reimbursed them with bonuses.

The allegations were first published by The Washington Post on Sunday, which reported that five employees of DeJoy’s former business, New Breed Logistics, said that he and his aides urged them to “write checks and attend fundraisers” at his mansion in North Carolina, where “events for Republicans running for the White House and Congress routinely fetched $100,000 or more apiece.”

That practice on its own is not illegal, but two other employees “familiar with New Breed’s financial and payroll systems” also told The Post that DeJoy “would instruct that bonus payments to staffers be boosted to help defray the cost of their contributions, an arrangement that would be unlawful.”

One of the employees who spoke to The Post was David Young, the company’s longtime director of human resources, who reportedly had access to payroll records at New Breed from the late 1990s to 2013.

“Louis was a national fundraiser for the Republican Party,” Young said. “He asked employees for money. We gave him the money, and then he reciprocated by giving us big bonuses. When we got our bonuses, let’s just say they were bigger, they exceeded expectations — and that covered the tax and everything else.”

Several employees also told the outlet that New Breed “often distributed large bonuses of five figures or higher.”

Alleged Pressure

Young additionally told The Post that no employees were “ever forced to or lost a job because they didn’t,” but if they did contribute, “their raises and their bonuses were bumped up to accommodate that.”

To that point, some employees told The Post that they were happy to make the donations, like Ted Le Jeune, a New Breed project manager.

“I was of the same political orientation, so it was not coerced in any way and there was no quid pro quo,” he said.

However, according to the report, other employees “said they felt little choice, saying DeJoy had a heavy-handed demeanor and a reputation for angering easily.” 

One plant manager named Steve Moore told the outlet that he felt pressured to contribute to the campaign of former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani — who was running for president at the time — just a few months after he started a job New Breed. 

According to Moore, his manager told him that making a contribution was “highly recommended,” even if he did not attend the event DeJoy was hosting for Giuliani.

“I took that to mean my job is on the line here, or things won’t go smooth for me here at New Breed if I didn’t contribute,” he said. “I didn’t really agree with what was going on.” 

Other employees also told The Post that DeJoy and his aides “made clear that he wanted employees to support his endeavors — through emails inviting employees to fundraisers, follow-up calls and visits to staffers’ desks.”

DeJoy’s GOP Rise

Regardless of whether or not there was pressure, DeJoy’s alleged efforts were highly effective. In an analysis of federal and state campaign finance records, The Post found “a pattern of extensive donations by New Breed employees to Republican candidates, with the same amount often given by multiple people on the same day.”

From 2000 and 2014, 124 individuals who worked for the company collectively gave more than $1 million to federal and state Republican candidates. During the same period, just nine employees gave a combined $700 to Democratic candidates.

That timeline is relevant for a few reasons. First of all, as The Post explains, many of the people who made those contributions had not donated to political campaigns before joining New Breed, and many have not made any more contributions since leaving the company.

The outlet also noted that the donations slowed significantly after New Breed was acquired by the Connecticut-based company XPO Logistics in 2014.

In fact, according to campaign finance records, a year after the sale: “several New Breed employees who had stayed on with XPO were giving significantly smaller political contributions and many stopped making them altogether.”

But that is not the only reason this timeline of events is significant. Many people have also indicated that those fundraising efforts allowed DeJoy and his wife to cement their status and rise in the ranks of the Republican Party.

“Multiple New Breed employees said DeJoy’s ascent in Republican politics was powered in part by his ability to multiply his fundraising through his company, describing him as a chief executive who was single-minded in his focus on increasing his influence in the GOP,” The Post reported, adding that several employees said, “DeJoy reveled in the access his fundraising afforded him.”

As DeJoy’s efforts continued, his wife, Alonda Wos, began receiving political appointments, first as an ambassador to Estonia in 2004 under President George W. Bush, and then as head of North Carolina’s health and human services agency in 2013.

When President Donald Trump took office, Wos was appointed to serve on the president’s commission on White House fellowships in 2017. Earlier this year, Trump also nominated her to be ambassador to Canada.

While testifying before a House Oversight panel last month, DeJoy was explicitly asked if he had repaid executives for contributions to Trump’s campaign, and he forcefully denied doing so.

“That’s an outrageous claim, sir, and I resent it,” he said. “The answer is no.”

Response

That question was specifically related to Trump, and not the new allegations that have surfaced. As noted earlier, DeJoy’s tenure as the CEO of New Breed ended with its acquisition in 2014 — before Trump announced he was running for president.

However, in her statement announcing the investigation, Rep. Maloney said that DeJoy faces “criminal exposure” not only if the allegations that he gave bonuses to people who made political donations turn out to be true, “but also for lying to our committee under oath.” 

Maloney also urged the Board of Governors of the U.S. Postal Service to immediately suspend DeJoy, who she claimed “they never should have hired in the first place.”

Even if he did not perjury himself, some Democrats have argued that these allegations just further contribute to a questionable narrative about DeJoy and his leadership as Postmaster General.

Many Democrats and other critics have accused DeJoy — who personally donated over $1.1 million to Trump’s reelection campaign — of being a Trump crony. He’s been accused of actively trying to prevent the postal service from working effectively and trying to create distrust in the system before the election to line up with Trump’s attacks on both USPS and mail-in voting.

DeJoy has denied those claims, and in a statement to The Post, his personal spokesman, Monty Hagler, said that DeJoy “was never notified by the New Breed employees referenced by the Washington Post of any pressure they might have felt to make a political contribution, and he regrets if any employee felt uncomfortable for any reason.”

Hagler also said that DeJoy “sought and received legal advice” to ensure that he and his employees “complied with any and all laws.”

According to The Post, despite being repeatedly asked, Hagler “did not directly address the assertions that DeJoy reimbursed workers for making contributions.” 

Very notably, when asked during a press conference Monday if he supported the investigation into DeJoy, Trump said, “Sure, sure, let the investigations go.” When asked if he would support DeJoy’s removal if he is found to have committed wrongdoing, Trump responded, “sure.”

Federal violations of the nature DeJoy is being accused of have a five-year statute of limitations, but there is no statute of limitations in North Carolina for felonies, including for campaign finance violations. 

See what others are saying: (The Washington Post) (Forbes) (CNN)

Politics

Biden To Pull All U.S. Troops From Afghanistan by Sept. 11

Published

on

  • President Biden declared Wednesday that he will pull all U.S. troops out of Afghanistan by Sept. 11, which also marks the 20th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks.
  • The Afghanistan war is the longest war the U.S. has ever been in. It has resulted in the deaths of 2,400 American troops, injured and killed almost 100,000 civilians, and cost about $2 trillion.
  • Some praised the decision as a key step to address seemingly endless wars and promote diplomacy.
  • Many experts and defense officials, however, have warned the withdrawal could undermine American goals in the region and embolden the Taliban, which is currently the strongest it has been since the U.S. invasion removed the group from power in 2001.

Biden Announces Troop Removal Amid Growing Violence

President Joe Biden announced Wednesday that he will withdraw all American troops from Afghanistan by Sept. 11, the 20th anniversary of the 9/11 terror attacks that drew the U.S. into its longest war in history.

“We went to Afghanistan because of a horrific attack that happened 20 years ago. That cannot explain why we should remain there in 2021,” Biden said in an afternoon speech. “It’s time to end America’s longest war. It’s time for America’s troops to come home.’’

The decision comes as Biden nears the May 1 deadline set under a February 2020 peace deal by the administration of former President Donald Trump to bring the troops home from the war, which has killed nearly 2,400 troops, injured and killed nearly 100,000 civilians, and cost about $2 trillion.

Biden had previously said that it would be hard to meet the date after taking office, but even with the extended timeline, many experts and defense officials have warned against the move.

The U.S. first entered the war to oust the Taliban government, which was harboring al-Qaeda militants involved in planning the 9/11 attacks. The Taliban was removed within months, but the group still had support in parts of the country and steadily regained territory and strength.

Now, almost two decades later, the group is the strongest it has been since the 2001 invasion, and according to reports, controls or has influence over half the country. The situation has also escalated in the months after Trump, during his last week in office, reduced the official number of troops in Afghanistan to 2,500, which is the lowest level since 2001.

As the U.S. has scaled down its operations, the Taliban has taken control of major highways and tried to cut off cities and towns in surges that have exhausted Afghan security forces. Violence has also ramped up in recent months.

According to a U.N. report released Wednesday, nearly 1,800 civilians were killed or wounded in the first three months of the year, a nearly 30% increase from the same period last year.

Notably, U.S. intelligence agencies have said that they do not believe Al Qaeda or other terrorist organizations present an immediate threat to strike the U.S. from Afghanistan, an assessment that reportedly played a big role in Biden’s decision to withdraw U.S. forces.

However, many experts are more concerned about how the move will impact Afghanistan and its citizens. 

Concerns Over Withdrawal

The Pentagon has warned against removing American troops from the region until Afghan security forces can effectively fight back against the Taliban.

As a result, critics of the plan have argued that withdrawal will leave the forces  — which have limited capacities and until now have been funded and trained by the U.S. — entirely in the dust

Beyond that, many also worry that the move could undermine the entire goal of the 2001 invasion by empowering al-Qaeda operates that remains in the country and who could become emboldened once the U.S. troops left.

Some experts and Afghan politicians have said that withdrawing from the country without a solid peace deal in place could end in concentrating more power in the hands of the Taliban. After a long delay following the U.S. agreement in February of last year, peace talks between the Afghan government and the Taliban finally started up in September.

But those talks have since stalled, partly due to Biden’s win and the anticipation of a possible change in policy under the new administration.

While other countries have recently made moves to restart the talks, and there are a number of possible options on the table, nothing is set in stone. American commanders, who have long said a peace deal with the Taliban is the best security measure for the U.S., have argued that the U.S. will need to use the promise of withdrawing their forces as a condition for a good deal.

Now, the U.S. has taken a major bargaining chip off the table, causing concerns that if a deal is struck, the already weakened Afghan government will make key concessions to the Taliban. Many Afghan citizens who oppose the Taliban worry that if the group secures a role in a power-sharing agreement, it could eventually take over the government and re-impose the harsh rule it imposed before the U.S. removed it in 2001. The leadership was particularly tough on women, who were largely barred from public life.

Politicians Respond

Biden’s decision has sparked a divided front from both political parities, though Republicans have largely remained united against the move.

“It is insane to withdraw at this time given the conditions that exist on the ground in Afghanistan,” Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said Tuesday. “A full withdrawal from Afghanistan is dumber than dirt and devilishly dangerous. President Biden will have, in essence, canceled an insurance policy against another 9/11.”

Many Democrats, however, have argued that U.S. presence in the region is not helping the U.S. achieve its foreign policy goals, and that if withdrawal is based on conditional approaches, the troops will never be able to leave. 

Others have also applauded the plan as a careful solution and will still emphasize diplomatic efforts in the region while simultaneously removing the U.S. from a highly unpopular and expensive war.

“The President doesn’t want endless wars. I don’t want endless wars. And neither do the American people. ” Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said Wednesday. “It’s refreshing to have a thought-out plan with a set timetable instead of the President waking up one morning getting out of bed, saying what just pops into his head and then having the generals having walked it back.”

In a series of tweets Wednesday, Afghanistan’s president, Ashraf Ghani, said had spoken to Biden, and emphasized that the two nations would continue to work together.

“’Afghanistan’s proud security and defense forces are fully capable of defending its people and country, which they have been doing all along,” he wrote.

The Taliban, for its part, has focused more on the fact that the initial timeline had been delayed.

“We are not agreeing with delay after May 1,” a spokesperson said on television Tuesday. “Any delay after May 1 is not acceptable for us.”

It is currently unclear how that stance might affect the situation, especially when it comes to peace deal negotiations.

See what others are saying: (The New York Times) (The Washington Post) (TIME)

Continue Reading

Politics

Matt Gaetz Reportedly Venmo’d Accused Sex Trafficker, Who Then Sent Money To Teen

Published

on

  • A report published by The Daily Beast Thursday alleges that Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fl.) sent $900 through Venmo to accused sex trafficker Joel Greenberg, who then used the funds to pay three young women, including one teenager.
  • Gaetz is currently under federal investigation as part of a broader inquiry into Greenberg, a former politician who has been charged with 33 counts, including sex trafficking an underage girl.
  • Investigators are reportedly looking into the involvement of politicians with women who were recruited online for sex and paid in cash, as well as whether Gaetz had sex with a 17-year-old girl and violated sex trafficking laws by paying for her to travel with him.
  • Greenberg’s lawyer did not comment on the new allegations but said Thursday his client would soon enter a plea deal and implied that Greenberg would testify as a witness against Gaetz. Meanwhile, Gaetz has accused The Daily Beast of spreading “rumors, gossip and self-serving misstatements.”

Gaetz’s Alleged Venmo Payments 

Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fl.) allegedly sent money via Venmo to accused sex trafficker Joel Greenberg, who then used the money to pay three young women, including at least one teenage girl, according to a new report from The Daily Beast.

Greenberg, a former local Flordia politician and an associate of Gaetz, was indicted last summer on 33 counts, including sex trafficking a 17-year-old girl. He initially pleaded not guilty to the charges, but his lawyers said in court Thursday that he would plead guilty as part of a plea deal.

Legal experts say the move almost certainly indicates that Greenberg plans to cooperate as a witness against Gaetz, who is currently under investigation by the Justice Department as part of a broader probe into Greenberg.

According to The New York Times, among other things, the DOJ inquiry is looking into their involvement with multiple women who were recruited online for sex and paid cash, as well as whether Gaetz had a sexual relationship with a 17-year-old girl and paid for her to travel with him in violation of sex trafficking laws.

Investigators reportedly believe that Greenberg met the women through a website for people willing to go on dates in exchange for gifts and money, and then arranged for them to meet with himself and associates including Gaetz, The Times reported.

The new report from The Daily Beast, published Thursday, appears to support this narrative. According to the outlet, which viewed the transactions before they were made private this week, Gaetz sent Greenberg two late-night Venmo payments totaling $900 in May 2018. 

In the text field of the first payment, Gaetz wrote “Test.” In the second, he asked Greenberg to “hit up” a teenager who he allegedly referred to by her nickname. The Daily Beast did not publish the name of the girl “because the teenager had only turned 18 less than six months before.”

The next morning, Greenberg transferred a total of $900 to three different young women using the same app.

One of the transfers was titled “Tuition,” and the other two were both listed as “School.” The Daily Beast also said it was able to obtain “partial records” of Greenbergs Venmo, which is not publicly available.

Those records, the outlet reported, show that the two men are connected through Venmo to at least one other woman who Greenberg paid with a government-funded credit card, and at least two other women who received payments from Greenberg.

Ongoing Investigation

Gaetz, for his part, has not directly addressed the latest allegations. A representative from the Logan Circle Group, an outside PR firm, provided The Daily Beast with a statement from the congressman.

“The rumors, gossip and self-serving misstatements of others will be addressed in due course by my legal team,” the statement said, with the firm also informing the outlet that their lawyers would be “closely monitoring your coverage.”

Greenberg’s defense attorney, Fritz Scheller, also declined requests to comment, but during a press conference Thursday, he implied that the plea deal his client is expected to accept spelled trouble for Gaetz.

“I’m sure Matt Gaetz is not feeling very comfortable today,” Scheller said.

The Daily Beast story also comes amid reports that that the FBI has widened its probe of Gaetz. According to The Times, sources familiar with the inquiry have said investigators are also looking into a trip he took to the Bahamas with other Florida Republicans and several women.

Sources said the trip took place shortly after Gaetz was elected to Congress in 2016, and that the FBI has already questioned witnesses about whether the women had sex with the men in exchange for money and free travel.

It is illegal to trade sex for something of value if prosecutors can provide the exchange involved force, fraud, or coercion.

The Times also reported that investigators are now additionally looking into Gaetz’s alleged involvement in discussions to run a third-party candidate in a State Senate race to make it easier for an associate of his who was running for the seat to win.

The act of recruiting so-called “ghost candidates” who run for office purely to divert votes from one candidate is not usually illegal. However, paying a ghost candidate is normally considered a violation of campaign finance laws.

See what others are saying: (The Daily Beast) (The New York Times) (The Hill)

Continue Reading

Politics

Biden Announces Executive Actions on Gun Violence

Published

on

  • President Biden unveiled several executive actions on Thursday to address gun violence in America, which he described as “an epidemic” and “an international embarrassment.”
  • Biden’s measures include new limits on “ghost guns,” which are built from separate parts and usually do not have traceable serial numbers, as well as stabilizing braces, which functionally turn pistols into more lethal weapons.
  • Biden also said he would direct the Justice Department to publish a model for states to use in implementing “red flag” laws that allow law enforcement or family to petition a court to temporarily block a person in crisis from accessing firearms. 
  • The president characterized these actions as first steps, noting that congressional approval will be needed for his agenda and urging the chambers to take action.

Biden’s Plan for Gun Violence

President Joe Biden announced a series of executive actions on Thursday aimed at addressing gun violence in America.

“Gun violence in this country is an epidemic, and it’s an international embarrassment,” he said in remarks from the Rose Garden. “The idea that we have so many people dying every single day from gun violence in America is a blemish on our character as a nation.”

Among other measures outlined, the president said he will tighten restrictions on so-called “ghost guns,” which are firearms built at home by buying individual parts or kits to assemble guns that often lack serial numbers, making them hard to identify and trace.

Another rule will require devices to meet the requirements of the National Firearms Act if they are marketed as a stabilizing brace that can functionally turn a pistol into a short-barreled rifle. The alleged shooter who killed 10 people in Boulder last month appeared to have used a pistol with an arm brace, which Biden said made the weapon more stable and accurate.

Additionally, Biden will also direct the Justice Department to publish a model for states to use to enact “red flag” laws, which allow family members or law enforcement officials to petition a court to temporarily ban a person in crisis from accessing firearms. He will also as require the agency to publish an annual report on firearms trafficking.

In addition to those actions, the president said that he will nominate gun control advocate David Chipman to head the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, which has not had a permanent director since 2015. 

Finally, Biden also emphasized that his administration will invest in community violence intervention programs. That includes proposing $5 billion for the initiatives over the course of eight years as part of his infrastructure plan.

Mounting Press and Continued Gridlock

Biden’s announcement comes as he is facing pressure from gun control activists and Democrats to act on gun violence following the mass shootings in Atlanta and Boulder.

Many have also condemned the president for not making gun control a top priority for his first days in office, as he promised during his campaign.

According to a recent ABC News/Ipsos poll, 57% of Americans disapprove of the way Biden has handled gun violence so far, and two-thirds “believe reducing gun violence should be a higher priority than protecting the right to own a wide variety of guns.”

Biden, for his part, has repeatedly pressured Congress to take action on gun violence, specifically pointing to two bills passed by the House last month. Both were dead on arrival in the divided Senate. In his remarks Thursday, the president characterized the actions he outlined as the first steps.

“This is just a start, we have a lot of work to do,” he said. “We’ve got a long way to go, it seems like we always have a long way to go.”

However, he also acknowledged that further, substantial action will require the approval of Congress, which he urged to close background check loopholes, ban assault weapons, and narrow protections for gun manufacturers from litigation. 

See what others are saying: (The Washington Post) (NBC News) (USA Today)

Continue Reading