Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (D-WA) said she believes Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick (D-FL) should leave Congress after a House Ethics Committee adjudicatory subcommittee found that 25 of 27 ethics charges against the Cherfilus-McCormick had been proven following a public House Ethics Committee hearing, the first involving a sitting member since 2010.
Gluesenkamp Perez, one of the first House Democrats to publicly support forcing Cherfilus-McCormick out of the House, wrote Friday morning on X: “You can’t crime your way into legitimate power. Since she was found guilty, she should resign or be removed.”
https://breitbart.slack.com/files/UGMFAAADR/F0APJHADMV2/img_2452.png
Axios congressional reporter Andrew Solender later confirmed on X that Gluesenkamp Perez told him she would support expelling Cherfilus-McCormick from the House.
Perez previously broke with members of her own party in November when she led a bipartisan rebuke of Rep. Jesús “Chuy” García (D-IL) over what she said was an effort that undermined voters’ ability to choose their representatives.
The comments came after the House Ethics Committee announced that an adjudicatory subcommittee found that 25 of the 27 ethics charges alleged against Cherfilus-McCormick had been “proven by clear and convincing evidence” following deliberations that lasted until after midnight.
The finding followed a more than two-year investigation in which committee investigators reviewed more than 33,000 documents, held roughly a dozen meetings, issued dozens of subpoenas, and concluded there was “substantial evidence” she engaged in conduct consistent with the federal indictment and additional misconduct.
Cherfilus-McCormick, who has denied wrongdoing and pleaded not guilty in a parallel federal criminal case, was found by the subcommittee to have committed numerous ethics violations involving campaign finance laws, inaccurate disclosure forms, improper campaign contributions, and using her office to benefit allies.
The House Ethics Committee’s investigative report alleged Cherfilus-McCormick financed her 2022 special election campaign, which she publicly described as self-funded, with money tied to a $5 million overpayment mistakenly made in July 2021 to her family company, Trinity Healthcare Services, by a Florida agency through a FEMA-funded COVID-19 vaccination contract.
Investigators also alleged she later funded her reelection campaign through entities linked to friends and relatives, including consulting groups and a company largely financed by the Haitian government. Prosecutors have also alleged that more than $100,000 of the improperly obtained money was used to buy a 3-carat yellow diamond ring.
During closing arguments at Thursday’s hearing, Rep. Brad Knott (R-NC) rejected the defense claim that Cherfilus-McCormick lacked knowledge of the movement of money tied to her campaign and family business. “But when you add up all the things that she did not know, it absolutely flies in the face of common sense,” Knott said.
Knott then pointed to text messages that he said showed Cherfilus-McCormick was “integrally involved” in the movement of money connected to her campaign. He cited one message stating, “The max is two checks of $2,900. That is why sister had to give money to Nadege for her to make another donation,” and another saying, “The goal is 2 million, at least 1.5 million.”
Knott also quoted an exchange in which Hector Roos (an individual involved in Cherfilus-McCormick’s congressional campaign) wrote, “I suggest you move funds into the campaign account sooner rather than waiting towards the end of the month. This is the one chance to post a big number,” to which Cherfilus-McCormick allegedly responded, “I am not planning on using that amount, just leveraging. I think that’s a good idea.” Knott added that another response said, “Indeed, but no one has to know that.”
“You and I both know that sometimes evidence speaks for itself,” Knott said, arguing that “There was knowledge on her behalf far beyond what you have represented to this committee” and said he did not believe there were “material issues” with the case against Cherfilus-McCormick.
Read the full article here