Tag: joni ernst
Joni Ernst’s Unethical Romances With Military Lobbyists Provoke Concern

Joni Ernst’s Unethical Romances With Military Lobbyists Provoke Concern

ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power. Sign up to receive our biggest stories as soon as they’re published.

Earlier this year, the Air Force revealed that the general who oversaw its lobbying before Congress had inappropriate romantic relationships with five women, including three who worked on Capitol Hill.

Maj. Gen. Christopher Finerty’s colleagues told investigators the relationships were “highly inappropriate” as they could give the Air Force undue influence in Congress. “I honestly felt sick to my stomach,” one said, according to a report about the investigation, “because it just felt so sleazy.”

The Air Force inspector general’s report redacted the names of the women who worked on the Hill.

But one of the women whose relationship with Finerty was scrutinized by the inspector general was Sen. Joni Ernst, according to two sources with knowledge of the investigation. The Iowa Republican and combat veteran is one of the most influential voices on the Hill about the military, and she sits on the Senate’s Armed Services Committee, which oversees the Pentagon and plays a crucial role in setting its annual budget.

Three other sources told ProPublica that around 2019 Ernst had a previous romantic relationship with a legislative affairs official for a different branch of the military, the Navy.

Ernst and the officials were not married at the time and Senate rules do not bar lawmakers from entering into romantic relationships with lobbyists or other legislative advocates. But ethics experts say such relationships can create a conflict of interest, and other lawmakers have been criticized for such behavior in the past.

A former legislative affairs official for the military told ProPublica that people in that role aren’t officially “lobbyists but for all intent and purposes that’s their job. ... From an ethics standpoint, it’s severely problematic.” A former Air Force officer who worked for Finerty said the perception in the office was that his relationship with Ernst “absolutely gave the Air Force undue influence.

”Six sources who worked for the Air Force or in Congress told ProPublica that they had heard about a relationship between Ernst and Finerty and there had been concerns about it for years. The sources spoke on condition of anonymity because they did not have permission to speak publicly or feared for their jobs. One source said that they were told about the relationship by one of the two participants. Two sources said they heard from witnesses interviewed by the inspector general that Ernst was a focus of the investigation.

A spokesperson for Ernst would not address whether the senator had any relationships with military legislative liaisons but said the lawmaker maintained her independence: “The fake news media is clearly too busy gossiping to report the real news that Senator Ernst is focused on cutting waste at the Pentagon. Her votes and work in the Senate are guided by the voices of Iowans who elected her and her constitutional duty alone. Any insinuation otherwise by tabloid ‘journalism’ is a slanderous lie — full stop.”

Finerty’s lawyer also declined to say whether the general had a romantic relationship with Ernst while he was advocating for the Air Force in Congress. “The IG report found no evidence suggesting anything remotely approaching either conflict of interest or undue influence involving General Finerty and anyone on Capitol Hill. Further, the IG report found no law, rule, policy or guidance prohibited any of General Finerty’s relationships. Any suggestion to the contrary would be defamatory.” (The inspector general report said Finerty “wrongfully engaged in inappropriate relationships with multiple individuals” in violation of the code of military justice.) In his interview with the inspector general, according to the report, Finerty defended relationships between people in his office and “members on the Hill” — a term used to describe members of Congress.

The 41-page report documenting the inspector general’s investigation of Finerty was completed in September 2023 but was shared with Congress, and then the public, earlier this year in response to records requests. (The investigation summary, posted on the Air Force’s website, was reported first by Politico, without any mention of Ernst’s involvement.)

At the time of the report’s release to Congress in early January, Ernst’s influence over the Pentagon was on full display, as she sat at the center of one of the Trump administration’s most contentious confirmation battles. Ernst had made statements suggesting she had reservations about President Donald Trump’s nominee for defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, and though she had later made encouraging statements, she had refused to formally back him.

At the time of the report’s release to Congress in early January, Ernst’s influence over the Pentagon was on full display, as she sat at the center of one of the Trump administration’s most contentious confirmation battles. Ernst had made statements suggesting she had reservations about President Donald Trump’s nominee for defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, and though she had later made encouraging statements, she had refused to formally back him.

Serving in the Iowa Army National Guard during the Iraq War, Ernst is the Senate’s first female combat veteran and has pushed to reform the military’s handling of sexual assault cases. Hegseth faced scrutiny over past allegations of excessive drinking and sexual assault, which he denied, as well as criticism for comments he made against allowing women in combat. Then in mid-January, Ernst reversed course under pressure from Trump allies and formally endorsed Hegseth. Her backing was considered pivotal in reviving what had appeared to be a flailing nomination.

The report about Finerty is heavily redacted but provided the following details about the inspector general’s findings. Two of the five women worked for the Pentagon. They include a civilian employee who was married to another officer and an Air Force enlisted member significantly lower down the chain of command than Finerty. Finerty interacted with the three other women on Capitol Hill as part of his legislative affairs work, “mixing his professional and personal roles, thus creating the perception of a conflict of interest.” Finerty sexted two of those women in 2021. He sexted and had an “intimate relationship” with the third, though the report does not say exactly when.

The nature of his relationship with the women varied, from suggestive messages to graphic sexting and photos to physical sex, according to the report. Sources told ProPublica that the inspector general asked witnesses about Ernst, but because of the redactions in the report, it’s unclear which sections, if any, refer to the senator.

The report includes a stark example of Finerty’s legislative advocacy overlapping with his romantic relationship with one of the women on Capitol Hill.

In June 2021, Finerty texted the woman “I was distracted by you being distracted.” Then he sent her a list of “top 5 things to protect if possible,” including a particular fighter jet, radar technology and a system to improve interoperability across the military’s branches.

“What distraction?” the woman texted back. “If I was [redacted] would it be distracting?” She followed up with a series of what the inspector general report described as pornographic pictures.

Finerty told investigators that his romantic relationships with the women on Capitol Hill were proper because all participants were unmarried.

“Those weren’t Chris Finerty’s personal interest items. Those were the five things that were in the President’s Budget that we’re charged to go up there and ensure that we get across the finish line,” he said, according to the report. “I wasn’t saying hey, do me a personal favor and protect these five things. It was, these are the five things that the Air Force has in the President’s Budget that we’re trying to do that we need your help with.”

Many of Finerty’s colleagues who were also working in military legislative affairs took a more negative view. In interviews with investigators, they expressed concerns about the relationships leading to undue influence, other military branches perceiving the Air Force as getting preferential treatment, and other congressional offices worrying they were less likely to receive sensitive information.

The inspector general’s investigation found “several exchanges between Maj Gen Finerty and the women regarding legislative matters” but “no evidence of favors or exchanging of sensitive information by either party.”

Regarding one of the Hill relationships, a colleague of Finerty’s told investigators, “Was there a perception in my office that it was unethical? Yes.” The colleague reported it affected morale and people were “talking about it all the time.”

Justin Elliott and Andy Kroll contributed reporting. Alex Mierjeski contributed research.

Reprinted with permission from Pro Publica


Joni Ernst

Joni Ernst’s Idiotic Lie About Biden And Veterans Ripped Down Live On Air

Reprinted with permission from Alternet

Sen. Joni Ernst of Iowa was clearly playing to the Republican Party's MAGA base when, during a September 1 appearance on CNN, she falsely claimed that President Joe Biden has never thanked U.S. troops who served in Afghanistan for their service. But CNN's Jake Tapper fact-checked the GOP senator on the air, and that segment was followed by additional fact-checking from Tapper's colleague Daniel Dale.

Ernst told Tapper, "What I have not heard from this president is a thank you to those veterans who have served in the Global War on Terror. Not once has he expressed empathy and gratitude to the men and women who have put the uniform on and have fought so bravely overseas the last 20 years to keep our homeland safe. And I feel that by not acknowledging his gratitude for them, he's diminishing their service."

Tapper, however, responded, "I have heard President Biden express gratitude and praise veterans…. Just as a factual matter, I have heard him talk about this."

Ernst, however, tried to claim that while Biden had "acknowledged those that are doing service or had done service at the Kabul Airport during the evacuation, but not over the greater Global War on Terror."

In an article published on CNN's website on September 3, Dale explains, "Ernst's claim is not even close to true. Biden has thanked troops who have served in Afghanistan and Iraq over and over again — explicitly saying 'thank you' and explicitly saying the nation is grateful to them and indebted to them. Biden has also spoken empathetically about the sacrifices made by these service members and their families."

Dale adds, "Biden's public words as president so clearly contradict Ernst's assertion that, for fact-checking purposes, we don't even need to go into detail about his eight-year tenure as vice president — during which, he repeatedly expressed his appreciation for troops who had served or were still serving in Afghanistan and Iraq…. Ernst and her office are entitled to argue that Biden's words about the troops have been insufficient or insincere; that's a subjective claim beyond the scope of a fact-check. But on CNN, Ernst asserted something else: that Biden had never uttered such words at all. And that's plain false."

Dale goes on to cite specific examples of Biden thanking U.S. troops. During an April 14 speech Biden praised the "valor, courage and integrity of the women and men of the United States armed forces who served" in Afghanistan.

Biden, on April 14, said, "I'm immensely grateful for the bravery and backbone that they have shown through nearly two decades of combat deployments. We as a nation are forever indebted to them and to their families. You all know that less than one percent of Americans serve in our armed forces. The remaining 99 percent of them — we owe them. We owe them. They have never backed down from a single mission that we've asked of them. I've witnessed their bravery firsthand during my visits to Afghanistan. They've never wavered in their resolve. They've paid a tremendous price on our behalf. And they have the thanks of a grateful nation."

Dale also notes that during a May 28 speech for Memorial Day, Biden told a major deployed to Afghanistan, "I want to thank you so much — your entire family's service to our country. You're all incredible. You so underestimate how important you are."

Biden, during that May 28 speech, went on to say, "I know that many of you deployed yourselves, probably more than once. Over the past 20 years, our volunteer force and our military families have made incredible sacrifices for this country…. To all the Gold Star families across the country: We will never, ever, ever, ever forget."

Only three days later, during a May 31 speech, Biden spoke at Arlington National Cemetery in Virginia outside Washington, D.C. and spoke of "7036 fallen angels" killed in Afghanistan or Iraq and said, "On this Memorial Day, we honor their legacy and their sacrifice. Duty, honor, country — they lived for it, they died for it. And we, as a nation, are eternally grateful."

Dale quotes a July 8 speech on Afghanistan withdrawal in which Biden said of U.S. troops, "I want to thank you all for your service and the dedication to the mission so many of you have given, and to the sacrifices that you and your families have made over the long course of this war. We'll never forget those who gave the last full measure of devotion for their country in Afghanistan, nor those whose lives have been immeasurably altered by wounds sustained in service to their country. We're ending America's longest war, but we'll always, always honor the bravery of the American patriots who served in it."

Under Trump, Republicans Favored Swift Afghan Withdrawal — And So Did He

Under Trump, Republicans Favored Swift Afghan Withdrawal — And So Did He

Several Republican lawmakers who praised former President Donald Trump's February 2020 announcement that he had struck a deal with the Taliban to end the 20-year-long United States presence in Afghanistan are now placing blame for the country's collapse on President Joe Biden.

That month, Trump signed an agreement with the Taliban which stated that the United States would withdraw around 5,000 troops from Afghanistan.

The Trump administration planned for the withdrawal to be completed by May 1, 2021.

As recently as this past April, Trump suggested the United States should withdraw from the country even earlier than President Joe Biden's timeline, which aimed for a Sept. 11 completion date.

"Getting out of Afghanistan is a wonderful and positive thing to do," Trump said in a statement. "I planned to withdraw on May 1st, and we should keep as close to that schedule as possible."

He added, "I made early withdraw possible by already pulling much of our billions of dollars and equipment out and, more importantly, reducing our military presence to less than 2,000 troops from the 16,000 level that was there."

At the time of his February 2020 announcement, some Republicans lauded the former president for his decision and suggested he had made the right call after decades of U.S. intervention.

In a press release posted to the Republican National Committee's website, the group praised Trump for signing "a historic peace agreement with the Taliban in Afghanistan, which would end America's longest war."

Sen. Joni Ernst (R-IA) said in February 2020 that Trump's agreement with the Taliban to remove American troops was "a sign of progress, & a step toward being able to bring our troops home."

Not every Republican was on board: Texas Rep. Dan Crenshaw criticized the swift withdrawal, claiming in November that the plan "might make some people feel better, but it won't be good for American security."

Still, other high profile Republicans issued praise for the president's deal, including some in his Cabinet.

Then-Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who was involved in negotiating the agreement, tweeted in September 2020, "Met with Taliban Political Deputy Mullah Beradar to welcome the launch of Afghan peace negotiations. The Taliban must seize this opportunity to forge a political settlement & reach a comprehensive & permanent ceasefire to end 40 years of war."

He added, "This effort must be Afghan led."

And in February this year, Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-CO) tweeted criticism of Biden's plan to extend the Trump administration's withdrawal timeline to September, amid a spike in violence in the region. "We've been in Afghanistan for more than half my life. We need to end the endless wars," she wrote.

Since then, many of those same Republicans have changed their tune.

Over the weekend, Taliban forces retook several key cities, including the capital city of Kabul, ousting the U.S. and western-backed government there. As theWashington Post noted, the militants faced little resistance from Afghan forces, prompting civilians to flee en masse to the nearby airport, hoping to be evacuated on U.S. military planes.

On Monday, the RNC, which had once boasted of Trump's deal to withdraw swiftly from the country, tweeted, "With the Taliban takeover of Afghanistan, America is now less safe. This is the latest real world, horrific consequence of Biden's weak foreign policy."

On Sunday, Boebert tweeted, "Joe Biden was in the Senate when America pulled out of Saigon in 1975. He didn't learn."

And in an interview with Fox News on Sunday, Ernst claimed that the country's collapse "is all on President Biden's shoulders."

For his part, Pompeo, who negotiated withdrawal with the Taliban himself, called the group "butchers" after its militants successfully took over the Afghan government, suggesting Biden was to blame for the chaos.

"We demanded a set of conditions and made clear the costs we would impose if they failed to deliver. They haven't," he tweeted. "The deterrence we achieved held during our time. This administration has failed."

Trump himself weighed in on Sunday saying in a statement that Biden should "resign in disgrace for what he has allowed to happen in Afghanistan."

In the wake of the Taliban's takeover, humanitarian groups have been forced to hurriedly organize evacuation plans for Afghan civilians, urging governments to facilitate swift passage for them.

"The Taliban have a long record of abusing or killing civilians they deem 'enemies,'" Patricia Grossman, associate Asia director at Human Rights Watch, said in a statement. "Whether from inside or outside of Afghanistan, governments and UN offices should provide protection and assistance to at-risk Afghans and make processing travel documents and transportation a priority."

The group recommended that deportations be suspended in light of the current situation.

This story was updated to correct the date on Rep. Lauren Boebert's February tweet.

Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation.

Sen. Marsha Blackburn

Koch Networks Using Dark Money To Kill Voting Rights Bills

Reprinted with permission from Alternet

Earlier this year, Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives took a stand against voter suppression when they passed House Resolution 1, a.k.a. the For the People Act — a comprehensive voting rights/election reform bill that now faces an uphill climb in the U.S. Senate under the rules of the filibuster, which requires 60 or more votes for most legislation. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and many other Senate Republicans are vehemently opposed to HR 1, and according to the watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, "dark money" from "the Koch network" is helping to fuel that opposition.

In an article published on May 28, CREW's Meghan Faulkner and Miru Osuga explain, "There's a whole lot of dark money behind the opponents of democracy reform. The Koch network alone has spent tens of millions backing many of the senators who are opposing the For the People Act, which would overhaul campaign finance rules and enforcement and make it harder for dark money groups, like those in the Koch network, to secretly influence our elections."

Faulkner and Osuga note how much "the Koch network" has spent "backing" GOP opponents of the For the People Act, including $5.6 million spent on Sen. Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee, $1.3 million on Sen. Roy Blunt of Missouri, $4.9 million on Sen. Joni Ernst of Iowa, $4.3 million on Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, $5.7 million on Sen. John Cornyn of Texas and $4.3 million on Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas.

"All told," Faulkner and Osuga note, "groups associated with the Koch network have spent over $100 million boosting the campaigns of current Republican senators, none of whom are supportive of comprehensive campaign finance reform. That total doesn't even include millions of dollars in additional dark money spending from these groups that was never reported to the Federal Election Commission."

KochPAC is a political action committee funded by employees of Koch Industries and their allies. Billionaire oligarch Charles Koch, the 85-year-old brother of the late David Koch, has been a major supporter of right-wing causes.

According to CREW, one of the things that troubles "the Koch network" is how "popular" the proposals of the For the People Act are. The bill comes at a time when Republicans in state legislatures all over the United States are aggressively pushing voter suppression bills.

"The Koch network and other dark money groups know exactly how popular this democracy reform is and how much it threatens the broken campaign finance system they depend on," Faulkner and Osuga stress. "That's why they're doing their best to defeat it quietly in Congress, aided by the senators whose campaigns they've boosted with millions of dollars of secret money."

Shop our Store

Headlines

Editor's Blog

Corona Virus

Trending

World