Conservative group files ethics complaint against AOC for attending Met Gala

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

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]

1. Fark um

[Lovie777]

2. Oh come on ....

[Rorey]

3. Oh, so NOW rules matter???

I just can't keep up.

[NurseJackie]

17. They should always matter.

[Rorey]

20. I agree. I like rules.

It's always fun to hear repukes mention rules when they have long thought they're exempt.

[Wounded Bear]

32. INOKIYAD - It's not OK if you're a Democrat...

corollary to an old favorite around here.

[MontanaMama]

4. Snowflakes.

What a waste of time and energy.

[CrispyQ]

5. They're all sour grapes that she owned the room in that fab dress. -nt

[DFW]

6. Brought to you by the Gotcha Committee of the RNC

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]

7. I assumed that AOC was an invited guest.

As I’m 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]

25. Is that right? Was it really $30,000?

I'm a little shocked.

[LakeArenal]

31. That's what the ticket cost. That why lots of people aware up her back squawking.

[C_U_L8R]

8. Envy! We have 7 deadly sin bingo!

[Just_Vote_Dem]

9. Since when are conservatives interested in ethics? n/t

[Wounded Bear]

33. INOKIYAD - It's not OK if you're a Democrat...

[Celerity]

10. There were DUers pushing this same bullshit attack.

Nice bedfellows they have.

[progressoid]

11. I was just about to post the same thing!

[Lancero]

18. Yep, I can certainly think of 2 people here who will rejoice at that.

Or II, if you want to use roman numerals.

[sheshe2]

45. Attacking a fellow DUer?

We all know who you are referring to.

We can DU better than that.

[George II]

46. Apparently it's several more than just II. In fact it appears to be...

.... 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]

24. No, it was an illustration of the reverse "bullshit attacks" on other Democrats.

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]

27. It is a bullshit RW charge, there was no ethics violation, AOC, Maloney, and de Blasio

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]

29. "attacks on sitting Democrats" Again with the selective outrage and amnesia.

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]

30. Bronfman is Aurora James's BF, not AOC's. Her bf is Riley Roberts.

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]

36. That's funny. That comes from the link you provided...

DailyMail. Heirs to Seagrams are billionaires and she was seen leaving with him. It doesn’t matter that he might have to split the billions with some siblings—-that’s just more distraction on your part, sorry. So she wasn’t just there to bolster the “working class” that she was claiming she was a part of.

But now we see why superficial tangential associations don’t mean squat if it’s 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 couldn’t even make it past Democrats. Thanks for the outrage about “libelous slander.”

[sheshe2]

42. Touche!!!

[betsuni]

52. [phone]

[George II]

48. Bronfman is a billionaire, his designer girlfriend is a millionaire. Roberts is a millionaire.

[Celerity]

54. He is not a billionaire, and his GF, Aurora James (at least get her name right) is an up and coming

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]

51. [phone]

[George II]

47. Daily Mail?

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/daily-mail/

[Celerity]

49. glass houses George

https://upload.democraticunderground.com/10142060210




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]

50. May 2018? Do you have ALL of my posts catalogued and cross-tabbed? WOW! Inasmuch as I have.....

.....64,000 posts that must be quite an index file, eh? Impressive.

[Celerity]

55. is called 'DU search' George, it literally took 10 seconds, as it was the first result

[lapucelle]

59. "Brands" that Maloney has promoted at the gala are the FDNY Burn Center, the 9/11 Bill, & the ERA.

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]

34. Yesterday, today, tomorrow... 🙄

[dmr]

12. "... risk of corruption in the halls of Congress ..."

A Republican group said that? ... That is rich!!!

[Caliman73]

13. I am sure that there will be complete cooperation and nothing will come of this.

There are likely, valid criticisms of AOC, but corruption is very unlikely to be substantive.

[Hortensis]

14. Just more PR for Ocasio. Her national admirers will be so indignant

both social media mentions and donations will spike.

Pretty much the same among RW "ethics warriors," of course. Both of them.

[gratuitous]

15. From the "About" page of the American Accountability Foundation

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.

The American Accountability Foundation is a non-profit government oversight and research organization that uses investigative tools to educate the public on issues related to personnel, policy, and spending. AAF deploys aggressive research and investigations to advance conservative messaging, rapid response, and Congressional investigations; while heavily scrutinizing politicians and establishment organizations, policies, and projects.

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]

16. Thanks for posting

[bullwinkle428]

19. Did they file a complaint against Carolyn Maloney as well? No? Well, I guess

that's the most transparent indication of their "sincerity".

[NurseJackie]

21. That was quite a costume she was wearing, wasn't it? Which designer was she promoting?

[Celerity]

23. Ghassan Antonios

https://antonioscouture.com/the-designer/


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]

37. Your link says that Conde Nast "comped" the tickets.

They are a for-profit entity. The article says that the Met ceded control to them. So it wasn’t the Met that comped the tickets.

[Celerity]

38. The Met comped the tickets to Maloney, AOC, and de Blasio, there was no ethics violation

you and others are selectively pushing RW talking points

from my link (and the only reason I used it)

[Nixie]

39. It's your link. You posted it. You are just getting caught up in your own accusations,

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]

40. the only time Conde Nast is mentioned in that article is a QUOTE from the RW bogus complaint filer

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]

41. LOL, of course they were guests of the museum.

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]

44. Anna Wintour, in charge of invitees, is Chief Content Officer of Conde Nast....

....as pointedly noted in the article, a for-profit company.

[George II]

43. I wonder what interest a for-profit company would have in inviting selected guests? Further....

https://jingculturecommerce.com/the-met-gala-instagram-sponsorship/

Of course, the Met Gala has always relied on corporate sponsorships. But while fashion industry patrons like Donatella Versace and Gucci are expected, tech sponsors have been slowly getting involved in the past 10 years — from Amazon‘s sponsorship of 2012’s Schiaparelli and Prada: Impossible Conversations to Apple’s backing of both 2016’s Manus x Machina: Fashion in an Age of Technology and 2017’s Rei Kawakubo/Comme des Garçons. Instagram joins that line-up, marking one of the Met Gala’s most high-profile tech sponsorships.

The Met Gala is well aware of how social media can massively expand its reach: in 2019, it launched campaigns on Douyin to publicize its big night, a strategy that paid off in millions of views across two days. An Instagram sponsorship cements the event’s ties to social media and by extension, the vast audience on these platforms. And as global travel restrictions continue to limit museum visitorship, making a critical gala night digitally accessible for global viewers would be a boon for engagement.

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

A brand will often invite celebrities to sit at its table, and Ms. Wintour also often invites up-and-coming designers who may not be able to afford a ticket and scatters them around the event. This makes them really excited and makes them feel like they owe her. If they didn’t already.

[Nixie]

53. Great questions! Looks like a lot of corporate sponsorships

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 didn’t already.”

[StarfishSaver]

22. I really hope her staff cleared this with the Ethics Committee before accepting

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]

26. Even the *hint* of being inappropriate is something that must be avoided.

but it's awkward, distracting, and unnecessary.

I think the whole thing was a mistake that opens up a can of worms and will be a big distraction. The GOP "whatabout-brigade" will be out in full force the next time one of their darling conservative stars is skating on thin ice and cracks start to form.

[StarfishSaver]

28. The downside/danger of being a celebrity polician

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]

35. I prefer politicians who get things done and who boast about their legislative accomplishments. NOT...

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]

57. That would have been the prudent course of action

It will be interesting to see how this investigation turns out

[tonedevil]

56. It is sad...

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]

58. Dems should turn around and file a probe against Jared Kushner and Ivanka.

Come on... what are you guys hiding? Two can play at that game!