As we've been covering, Rep. Cori Bush (D-MO) is facing numerous scandals and ethics complaints, especially with her using campaign funds to pay her now husband for his security services. Groups like the Committee to Defeat the President (the Committee) are continuing to ramp up pressure on the matter to get answers and hold the Squad member accountable.
The group has not only sent complaints, but also supplements to those complaints, and new ones, to the Office of Congressional Ethics, the D.C. Department of Licensing and Consumer Protection, the Department of Justice and the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department. The Committee is asking for an immediate investigation.
Bush's now husband, Cortney Merritts, was previously paid $60,000 by Bush's campaign. This is despite how he does not a security license in Missouri, as Fox News reported, which also covered the recent pressure campaign from the Committee. His last license had expired over 10 years ago, in 2012. He now claims to be the owner of Vetted Movers.
As if it couldn't get more shady, the recent Fox News reminds how expenditures to do with Merritts changed over time:
Bush's campaign recently switched the language of the payments amid criticism of the arrangement. From the time Merritts initially appeared on the payroll until early April of this year, the campaign marked his checks as "security services."
However, the campaign modified the reported expenditures from "security services" to "wage expenses" in mid-April while the checks remained in identical amounts. They continued using the new language until the end of the most recent reporting period, her filings show.
A supplement came in he form of an August 21 letter from the Committee to the Office of Congressional Ethics, which notes that "[a] careful review of these facts lead to the inexorable conclusion Bush has engaged in unlawful activity."
It looks bad for Bush either way, as the supplement lays out:
First, if these payments were for SECURITY SERVICES as described, Merritts is not licensed to provide such services in the jurisdictions in which Bush might require ongoing security services over the course of a year, namely the City of St. Louis, St. Louis County, and Washington D.C. All require security personnel to be licensed. See St. Louis City Code § 8.75A.010; St. Louis Cnty. Code § 701.115(1); D.C. Code ch. 28, § 47-2839.01(a)-(b); D.C. Mun. Regs. § 17-2100.1(c)- (d). Merritts does not hold a license as a security guard in any of these jurisdictions. See Joe Schoffstall, Cori Bush’s Campaign Paid Her Husband for Security Services—But He Doesn’t Have a Private Security License, FOX NEWS (Feb. 28, 2023).1 Merritts runs a moving company in St. Louis, Missouri, called Vetted Moving and Couriers. See https://vettedmovers.com/. It does not offer any security-related services. Id.
Thus, if the payments were for “SECURITY SERVICES” rendered by Merritts, and those services could not be legally provided by Merritts, then Bush and the Campaign Committee have violated the FEC prohibition on the use of campaign funds to pay for unlawful activity. See 52 U.S.C. § 30109(d)(1)(A). Moreover, the change in purpose description beginning in the second quarter indicates Bush and the Campaign Committee may very well be filing false reports to the FEC to conceal this continued unlawful expenditure.
Conversely, if Merritts did not unlawfully provide “SECURITY SERVICES,” in the first instance, then Bush and the Campaign Committee have engaged in a knowing and willful pattern of filing false reports as to the purpose of the expenditures and have continued making what appears to be little more than unlawful payment to a family member as a means of converting campaign funds to personal use. See 52 U.S.C. § 30114(b)(1).
According to the supplement, Bush's conversion of campaign funds violates House Rule XXIII(2), (6)(b)- (c), which "provides that a Member may not convert campaign funds to personal use in excess of an amount representing reimbursement for legitimate and verifiable campaign expenditures," as well as the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. According to the legislation, "[w[hoever knowingly . . . falsifies, or makes a false entry in any record, [or] document . . . with the intent to impede, obstruct, or influence the . . . proper administration of any matter within the jurisdiction of any [federal] department or agency shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both."
Ted Harvey, the chairman of the Committee to Defeat the President, had strong words in a statement for Townhall about the scandal involving Bush.
"It turns out members of 'The Squad' aren’t the progressive revolutionaries they claim to be; they’re just run-of-the-mill Beltway grifters. Cori Bush is lining her family's pockets at the expense of taxpayers and donors, breaking local and federal laws in the process. She either paid her ex-lover and now-husband to perform illegal work, or just paid him meretriciously. But, either way, she broke the law, and fumbled the cover-up," Harvey said. "Americans deserve better, and our Committee is determined to hold her accountable in Washington, D.C. and back in Missouri, the same way any Republican would be held accountable by the radical Left."
Bush has memorably defended her need for private security based on how she says she has had attempts on her life and "too much work to do." Her message for people also entailed "so suck it up, and defunding the police has to happen."
This is not the only scandal that has led to an ethics complaint being filed against Bush. One was filed early last month over her fundraising antics in which she solicited donations over Twitter based on remarks she made from the House floor when interrupting House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-LA).
Cori Bush defends hiring private security for herself:
— Townhall.com (@townhallcom) August 5, 2021
“Suck it up. And defunding the police needs to happen.” pic.twitter.com/fQU42ZlMsM
Join the conversation as a VIP Member