“Suck It Up” Anti-Gun Congresswoman’s Private Security Costs Come Under Rightful Scrutiny

[gwalchmai]

https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/suck-it-up-anti-gun-congresswomans-private-security-costs-come-under-rightful-scrutiny/

This came out last week, but one of the leading and loudest voices calling for more gun control is getting increased scrutiny after she spent nearly $1 million on private security for herself, all while calling for law-abiding citizens to lose their rights and proclaiming avowed support for the “defund the police” movement.

U.S. Rep. Cori Bush (D-Mo.) confirmed to media that she is now facing criminal investigations by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), the Federal Election Commission (FEC) and the House of Representatives Ethics Committee all pertaining to the second-term congresswoman’s alleged misuse of campaign funds to pay for private security services.

“I also believe in transparency which is why I can confirm that the Department of Justice is reviewing my campaign’s spending on security services,” Rep. Bush said after the new investigations were announced.

 

Rep. Bush is the latest – and possibly the most hypocritical – example of “Rights for me, not for thee.” Her gun control activism pushes restrictions on law-abiding Americans and severely limits their ability to protect themselves. In the same breath, she’ll casually explain away why she pays exorbitant amounts for private protection.

“So Suck it Up”

Rep. Bush was first elected to Congress in 2021 in a St. Louis-based congressional district and has supported gun control efforts in Congress whenever she’s given a chance. That’s earned her the endorsement of Everytown for Gun Safety, which makes perfect sense. She’s also one of the biggest proponents of the “defund the police” movement in Congress. She’s remained steadfast in her disdain for the police even after facing backlash for those sentiments in her own party.

“I always tell [fellow Democrats], ‘If you all had fixed this before I got here, I wouldn’t have to say these things,’” Rep. Bush said.

More recently, when asked about claims that the congresswoman was spending campaign funds on a private security detail while also calling for law enforcement to be defunded, Rep. Bush sounded familiar.

“I’m going to make sure I have security because I know I have had attempts on my life and I have too much work to do,” she told media in 2022. “So, if I end up spending 200,000, if I spend… 10 more dollars on it, you know what? I get to be here to do the work. So, suck it up, and defunding the police has to happen.”

The DOJ investigation centers on allegations of how Rep. Bush paid for private security services, including paying her now-husband more than $120,000 over two years from campaign coffers. That individual, according to media, hasn’t even held a lawful “private security license” to operate in Missouri since 2012.

Back home in St. Louis, Metropolitan Police Department Chief Robert Tracy spoke about the crime surge plaguing the city. St. Louis has recorded 20 murders so far in 2024, compared to 11 at this time last year, and is currently understaffed with 334 vacancies with only 24 new recruits in the police academy right now.

Familiar Hypocrisy

If Rep. Bush’s comments about why she’s deserving of private security and other Americans are not sounds familiar, it’s because they’ve been spoken before.

Everytown for Gun Safety – which has endorsed Rep. Bush for re-election due to her support of their gun control agenda – was founded and is funded by billionaire and failed presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg. During his failed 2020 presidential bid, Bloomberg participated in a Fox News Town Hall and his Second Amendment hypocrisy was on full display.

The former New York City mayor fielded an audience question regarding his strict gun control platform while he relies on paid private protection. The question was as stunning as it was simple. “Does your life matter more than mine, or my family’s or these people’s?”

Bloomberg dismissively responded, “Alright, look… I probably get forty or fifty threats every week…That just happens when you’re the mayor of New York City, or very wealthy, or campaigning for the president of the United States. You’re gonna get lots of threats.”

This hypocritical and familiar line of belief should enrage constituents back in Rep. Bush’s district in St. Louis. Not only must they live with threats of criminal violence every day and a severely limited police presence to provide protection, but they also have far fewer options for self-defense due to the gun control efforts by anti-Second Amendment activists like Michael Bloomberg and Congresswoman Bush.

Reckless Representation

The new investigations by DOJ, FEC and House Ethics are at their most basic about campaign finance violations – they aren’t particularly about the Second Amendment. However, a couple of points are worth highlighting about Rep. Bush’s track record and how that voting record affects her voters.

Black women are among the fastest growing demographics for new gun owners in the country over the past three years. That data comes from NSSF retailer survey data, from the National African American Gun Association and other media reporting, including The Cut, which reported “The New Face of American Gun Ownership: Black women are pushing against the (white, rural, and male) stereotype.”

Rep. Bush has a track record of making it more difficult for those law-abiding African American women in her congressional district to obtain a legal firearm. She has supported implementing waiting periods on firearm purchases, expanding background check requirements beyond what is already required by the FBI’s National Criminal Background Check System (NICS) verification process and supports banning the most commonly-owned semiautomatic rifle (Modern Sporting Rifle) available for those constituents to purchase. NSSF data shows there are more than 28 million in private circulation since 1990 and plenty of media reports demonstrate their popularity among Black women who choose the popular firearm for self-defense purposes.

As more details of the DOJ investigation into Rep. Bush’s use of campaign funds to pay for private security come to light, voters will continue to be reminded that the congresswoman believes her personal safety and security is more important than their own and she continues to vote against them. The hypocrisy is a disgusting theme that is all too familiar among some of gun control’s most vocal supporters.

—Matt Manda, NSSF

==================

I hope she and Fanny both get sentenced. BTW, this crap is reading just as the "racists" predicted in the early 60s. 

 

[Huaco Kid]

[El Spicoli]

I am always amazed when people are so quick to follow something just because someone from the govt. says so.   Most CEOs know how to play the govt. like a fiddle.  Most inside the govt., especially elected officials, are really just as dumb as a bunch of rocks.  Crime in St. Louis, like other cities, is atrocious.

 

Psst, it ain't the guns.  

[MO Fugga]

She can shut her whore mouth, and remember where she works. 

[minderasr]

22 hours ago, El Spicoli said:

Most inside the govt., especially elected officials, are really just as dumb as a bunch of rocks.

[railfancwb]

On 2/15/2024 at 9:14 AM, El Spicoli said:

Most inside the govt., especially elected officials, are really just as dumb as a bunch of rocks.

How many “elected” people, especially at the federal level, were selected and placed rather than elected?

[MO Fugga]

11 hours ago, minderasr said:

Chiquita Kruschev.

[gwalchmai]

23 hours ago, minderasr said:

"Acid is groovy! KIll the pigs!"

[railfancwb]

Read somewhere that CongressCritters think they need a raise of $100,000 or so because [high] living costs are SO high.

An alternate idea… increase their pay to $1,000,000 per year AND let them cover ALL discretionary expenses from their pay. Need a research assistant? Need armed security? Frequent transportation to/from your state? Their employees would NOT be federal government employees thus would not be covered by federal employee civil service and other benefits. Each CongressCritter would file Schedule C as part of their Form 1040. Only spend $250,000 on these discretionary expenses? Leaves $750,000 as net earnings. Spend $1,250,000? Oops! Use some accumulated campaign contributions.

Suspect even $3,000,000 each would be a bargain because the government itself would no longer be paying those discretionary costs. 

[janice6]

5 minutes ago, railfancwb said:

Read somewhere that CongressCritters think they need a raise of $100,000 or so because [high] living costs are SO high.

An alternate idea… increase their pay to $1,000,000 per year AND let them cover ALL discretionary expenses from their pay. Need a research assistant? Need armed security? Frequent transportation to/from your state? Their employees would NOT be federal government employees thus would not be covered by federal employee civil service and other benefits. Each CongressCritter would file Schedule C as part of their Form 1040. Only spend $250,000 on these discretionary expenses? Leaves $750,000 as net earnings. Spend $1,250,000? Oops! Use some accumulated campaign contributions.

Suspect even $3,000,000 each would be a bargain because the government itself would no longer be paying those discretionary costs. 

Isn't it pathetic that those that spend our money can't seem to make ends meet on their salary and need to jack up their income to be able to subsist due to the laws and spending they created.  Seems that the culprits are obvious.

[Huaco Kid]

On 2/16/2024 at 8:17 AM, minderasr said:

Drinks water from the toilets:

 

Wins elections in landslides.

[gwalchmai]

9 hours ago, railfancwb said:

Read somewhere that CongressCritters think they need a raise of $100,000 or so because [high] living costs are SO high.

An alternate idea… increase their pay to $1,000,000 per year AND let them cover ALL discretionary expenses from their pay. Need a research assistant? Need armed security? Frequent transportation to/from your state? Their employees would NOT be federal government employees thus would not be covered by federal employee civil service and other benefits. Each CongressCritter would file Schedule C as part of their Form 1040. Only spend $250,000 on these discretionary expenses? Leaves $750,000 as net earnings. Spend $1,250,000? Oops! Use some accumulated campaign contributions.

Suspect even $3,000,000 each would be a bargain because the government itself would no longer be paying those discretionary costs. 

I notice you've exempted them from income tax...

[gwalchmai]

9 hours ago, janice6 said:

Isn't it pathetic that those that spend our money can't seem to make ends meet on their salary and need to jack up their income to be able to subsist due to the laws and spending they created.  Seems that the culprits are obvious.

Criminals are rarely good money managers.

[DAKA]

9 hours ago, Huaco Kid said:

Wins elections in landslides.

Went from broke bartender to multi millionaire in a short time   WHO'S laughing now

[minderasr]

9 hours ago, Huaco Kid said:

Wins elections in landslides.

Water seeks its own level.

[minderasr]

23 minutes ago, DAKA said:

Went from broke bartender to multi millionaire in a short time   WHO'S laughing now

 

[railfancwb]

11 hours ago, gwalchmai said:

I notice you've exempted them from income tax...

Nah… didn’t mention that or FICA/Medicare or CongressCritter insurances and other cash-based benefits. They would need to pay those same as normal people.

Have thought the legislative positions might should be filled by auction rather than election. Let/Require CongressCritters to wear sponsorship jackets such as those worn by NASCAR drivers. Auction proceeds go to - HA - reduce the national debt. Let each winning bidder or consortium compensate the CongressCritters they won. Just as NIL is supposed to do for NCAA sports - move the money from under the table to on the table. 

[gwalchmai]

In truth, politicians would take the jobs even without pay, indeed, they'd pay a premium for them, because the real money's not in the salary & perks.