On Monday, the much-anticipated House Ethics Committee Report on former Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) was released. The 37-page report titled “In the matter of allegations relating to Representative Matt Gaetz” covers a stunning description of the “substantial evidence” that Gaetz “violated House Rules, state and federal laws, and other standards of conduct prohibiting prostitution, statutory rape, illicit drug use, acceptance of impermissible gifts, the provision of special favors and privileges, and obstruction of Congress.”

In November, Gaetz was nominated by President-elect Donald Trump to be the next attorney general and resigned from Congress before dropping his bid. The Florida firebrand’s alleged entanglement in a sprawling series of schemes and crimes — including accusations about illegal drug use, bribes, and allegations he sexually trafficked a 17-year-old girl — brought a lot of noise to his nomination path, already rocky because of the many bridges he burned with his GOP congressional colleagues.

Gaetz’s former friend, former Seminole County Tax Collector Joel Greenberg, is currently in prison serving an 11-year sentence after pleading guilty to paying a 17-year-old girl for sex while also providing her with illegal drugs. In Greenberg’s plea, he admitted that he  “introduced the minor to other adult men, who engaged in commercial sex acts,” although the plea did not mention any specific names of those adult men.

A House Ethics Committee investigation was opened into the allegations and rumors about the “highly damaging” contents of the committee’s report have been swirling for months. Last week, news broke that the committee had taken a secret vote to release its report. As he has throughout, Gaetz denied all wrongdoing and has vowed to seek to have sexual misconduct settlements and other damaging information about his former colleagues released as payback, but in the end there was nothing he could legally do to block the release of the report and it was published by the committee Monday morning.

In the report, the committee noted that normally it would “typically” not release its findings after a Member resigns from Congress, thereby causing the committee to lose jurisdiction, but “there are a few prior instances where the Committee has determined that it was in the public interest to release its findings even after a Member’s resignation from Congress.”

“The Committee does not do so lightly,” the report continued. “In this instance, although several Committee Members objected, a majority of the Members of the Committee agreed that the Committee’s findings should be released to the public.” To obtain that majority vote to release the report, some Republican members of the committee had to cross party lines and vote in favor of release.

It should be noted that the dissenting members’ statement clearly states “we do not challenge the Committee’s findings,” and objects only to the decision to “release a report on an individual no longer under the Committee’s jurisdiction, an action the Committee has not taken since 2006.”

The report goes on at length about Gaetz’s repeated efforts to “engage in obstructive conduct,” as he “continuously sought to deflect, deter, or mislead the Committee in order to prevent his actions from being exposed”  — and then details the evidence that they were able to gather despite his interference.

Below, the seven biggest bombshells from the report.

7. Gaetz used congressional resources in connection to obtaining drugs and paying women for sex.

The “ample evidence” included in the report that Gaetz “purchased and used marijuana” includes how “he appears to have set up a pseudonymous e-mail account from his House office in the Capitol complex for the purpose of purchasing marijuana.”

The report also describes how Gaetz “arranged for his Chief of Staff to assist a woman with whom he engaged in sexual activity in obtaining a passport, falsely indicating to the U.S. Department of State that she was a constituent.” This stood out to the committee because normally district staff handled passport assistance requests and it was “unusual” for the Chief of Staff to be involved.

6. Gaetz “accepted gifts…in excess of permissible amounts,” specifically related to a 2018 Bahamas trip

Many of the allegations center around rowdy parties that featured heavy use of drugs and alcohol, including a specific 2018 trip to the Bahamas. House Rules prohibit gifts valued over $250 received through a personal friendship without formal approval from the committee, among other restrictions. There’s an exemption for “personal hospitality,” meaning receiving food and lodging staying in someone’s personally owned home, but that does not include air travel or stays in a rental property.

Gaetz went on a trip to the Bahamas in September 2018 that was attended by two other men and six women. He “arrived by commercial plane later than the others, who arrived on private planes,” the report states, and they “stayed at a vacation rental booked and paid for by one of the male travelers.” The trip involved Gaetz “engag[ing] in sexual activity with at least four of the women on the trip” and taking drugs, the report states. “The group returned to Orlando on September 16, 2018; Representative Gaetz flew on a private plane with another man and three women, while the remaining individuals flew on another private plane.”

5. Gaetz “used or possessed illegal drugs, including cocaine and ecstasy, on multiple occasions.”

The report describes Gaetz sending text messages to the women asking them to bring drugs to their encounters and sending them money. “Another woman said that she brought cocaine to at least one event with Representative Gaetz and that she witnessed him taking cocaine or ecstasy on at least five occasions,” the report states, and Greenberg also “told the Committee that he would typically provide drugs, such as ecstasy, for events he attended and Representative Gaetz would pay him back in cash.”

“Based on the evidentiary record, the Committee identified at least 20 occasions from the beginning of 2017 through the middle of 2020 where there was substantial evidence that Representative Gaetz met with women who were paid for sex and/or drugs,” the report states, along with testimony about “multiple additional events, trips, or parties” where Gaetz “may have paid women for sex and drugs, although the Committee could not determine the specific dates or locations for all of them.”

4. Gaetz “regularly paid women for engaging in sexual activity with him” — totaling nearly $100,000 paid to at least 15 women

The 42-year-old Gaetz has repeatedly tried to frame his past conduct during his “single days” in his thirties as just hard partying — “It’s embarrassing, though not criminal, that I probably partied, womanized, drank and smoked more than I should have earlier in life,” he tweeted last week — and being “generous” with women he “dated,” writing that he  “often sent funds to women I dated – even some I never dated but who asked.”

The report makes it clear that the understanding between Gaetz and the women was that the monetary payments were for having sex with him.

From 2017 to 2020, Representative Gaetz made tens of thousands of dollars in payments to women that the Committee determined were likely in connection with sexual activity and/or drug use. Payments were made to these women using peer-to-peer payment platforms such as PayPal, Venmo, and CashApp; while Representative Gaetz had accounts in his name on each of those platforms, he also sometimes paid women through another person’s PayPal account, or through an account held under a pseudonymous e-mail account. Representative Gaetz also paid some of the women by check or in cash.

Some of the payments included in the report went to “Woman 1,” who was in a “long-term relationship” with Gaetz “and therefore some of the payments may have been of a legitimate nature,” but the Committee nonetheless concludes that “most” of the payments “were for sexual activity and/or drugs, or for her to pass on to others for such purposes.” Woman 1 asserted her Fifth Amendment rights when questioned about this.

“Many” of the women were “initially contacted” by Greenberg via a website known as “Seeking Arrangement” that “advertised itself as a ‘sugar dating’ website that primarily connected older men and younger women seeking ‘mutually beneficial relationships,'” the report states. “The website was generally understood by many of the women interviewed by the Committee to involve, at minimum, an exchange of companionship for money.”

Gaetz did not have his own account on SeekingArrangement.com, but the young women were contacted through Greenberg’s account — and Gaetz had the login information. The two, who met at the home of Chris Dorworth, a lobbyist and former Florida legislator who resides in Seminole County, would frequently party and travel together and split the costs of the alcohol, drugs, and payments to the women:

Mr. Greenberg indicated he frequently showed the site to Representative Gaetz and that he provided his login credentials to Representative Gaetz. According to Mr. Greenberg, he and Representative Gaetz would split the costs of “drugs, hotel[s], and girls.” For example, the Committee reviewed evidence that such activity occurred in July 2017. Specifically, evidence showed that Representative Gaetz, Mr. Greenberg, and others gathered at a rental property located in the Brickell neighborhood of Miami, Florida for a weekend beginning on July 7, 2017; Representative Gaetz and Mr. Greenberg also spent time in Fort Lauderdale during the Miami stay (during which time Representative Gaetz withdrew at least $1,200 in cash from three different accounts at a single ATM). On June 22, 2017, Representative
Gaetz paid $6,308 for that rental booking. On July 9, 2017, Mr. Greenberg paid Representative Gaetz $1,600 by check; Mr. Greenberg stated the check was reimbursement for a share of the rental. Mr. Greenberg also noted that they met up with another individual for dinner that weekend, and he shared a photo of Representative Gaetz, himself, and the other individual on social media on July 8, 2017.

The Committee received evidence confirming that Representative Gaetz at times personally made payments to women who attended parties with him and Mr. Greenberg, using various peer-to-peer electronic payment services, as well as checks and cash. The Committee’s record also indicates that Mr. Greenberg sometimes paid women for having sex with Representative Gaetz and was sometimes reimbursed by Representative Gaetz. Witnesses indicated that there were times where a lump sum would be sent to one woman, who would then distribute the money evenly among others who attended the parties. Likewise, in one instance Representative Gaetz sent $400 to Mr. Greenberg with the note “Hit up [Victim A]”; Mr. Greenberg then sent two women payments totaling $400, including Victim A.

“Victim A” — the 17-year-old — “recalled receiving $400 in cash from Representative Gaetz that evening, which she understood to be payment for sex,” the report states.

Another anecdote in the report describes “evidence that [Gaetz] understood and shared many of the women’s transactional views of their arrangements:

In one text exchange viewed by the Committee, Representative Gaetz balked at a woman’s request that he send her money after he accused her of “ditching” him on a night when she was feeling tired, claiming she only gave him a “drive by.” The woman asserted to Representative Gaetz that she was being “treated differently” than other women he was paying for sex. The Committee also obtained text messages in which Representative Gaetz’s then-girlfriend informed some of the women who were typically paid for sex that “the guys [Representative Gaetz and Mr. Greenberg] wanted me to share that they are a little limited in their cash flow this weekend . . . [M]att was like[,] if it can be more of a customer appreciation week. . . .”A few months later, she noted that, “Btw Matt also mentioned he is going to be a bit generous cause of the ‘customer appreciation’ thing last time.” Another woman specifically recalled a conversation with Representative Gaetz about issues with Mr. Greenberg’s “following through” with expected payments after Mr. Greenberg’s encounters with her.

Mr. Greenberg told the Committee that Representative Gaetz was aware that the women they had sex
with and paid had met Mr. Greenberg through the “sugar dating” website. Representative Gaetz did not appear to have negotiated specific payment amounts prior to engaging in sexual activity with the women he paid. Instead, the women had a general expectation that they would typically receive some amount of money after each sexual encounter.

The report includes details about Greenberg’s communications with the women, including a text message exchange in which $400 “per meet” is negotiated and Greenberg sends along a photo of the “friend” who will be joining them: Gaetz.

The committee flatly rejects Gaetz’s claim he was just being “generous” to women he dated. “Representative Gaetz took advantage of the economic vulnerability of young women to lure them into sexual activity for which they received an average of a few hundred dollars after each encounter,” the report states. “Such behavior is not ‘generosity to ex-girlfriends,’ and it does not reflect creditably upon the House.”

3. “Nearly every woman” who spoke to the committee had been so drunk or high they couldn’t fully remember the details of events they attended with Gaetz. At least one woman testified the heavy drug and alcohol use “impaired” her ability to fully consent and that she felt “violated.”

From the report:

While all the women that the Committee interviewed stated their sexual activity with Representative Gaetz was consensual, at least one woman felt that the use of drugs at the parties and events they attended may have “impair[ed their] ability to really know what was going on or fully consent.” Indeed, nearly every woman that the Committee spoke with could not remember the details of at least one or more of the events they attended with Representative Gaetz and attributed that to drug or alcohol consumption. The women also discussed instances where Representative Gaetz would try to convince them to have sex with him or Mr. Greenberg: “[H]e would make me feel bad about not having sex with him or [] Joel Greenberg” and that he would say, “Why don’t you want to have sex with me” or “[Mr. Greenberg] looks very sad over there .. .. Make him happy.”Another woman said that their relationship at some point was a “loving friendship,” but over time came to feel like a “task.” A third woman said, “[When I look back on certain moments, I feel violated.” One woman said, “I think about it all the time …. I still see him when I turn on the tv and there’s nothing anyone can do. It’s frustrating to know I lived a reality that he denies.”

2. Gaetz “engaged in sexual activity with a 17-year-old girl” — and the testimony from the victim and other corroborating witnesses is “credible”

Florida statutes impose what is legally known as “strict scrutiny” prohibiting someone 24 years of age or older from having sex with a 16- or 17-year old. It does not matter that the woman did not affirmatively tell Gaetz her age or even if she had misrepresented her age; the law imposes 100 percent of the burden on the adult having sex with someone who might be a minor.

“Representative Gaetz’s actions were in violation of Florida’s statutory rape law,” the report declares. The now-adult woman described as “Victim A” was 17 years old and had just finished her junior year of high school when she attended a party at Dorworth’s home on July 15, 2017. The Dorworth residence is in a gated community with security that requires guests to show their driver’s license to enter and records are maintained of those guests.

Victim A told the committee she was “under the influence of ecstasy during her sexual encounters” with Gaetz at this party, that she and Gaetz “had sex twice during the party, including at least once in the presence of other party attendees,” and she “recalled receiving $400 in cash from Representative Gaetz that evening, which she understood to be payment for sex.”

“There is substantial evidence that Representative Gaetz engaged in sexual activity with a 17-year-old girl,” the report states. “The Committee received credible testimony from Victim A herself, as well as multiple individuals corroborating the allegation. Several of those witnesses have also testified under oath before a federal grand jury and in a civil litigation. Representative Gaetz denied the allegation but refused to testify under oath. He has publicly stated that Victim A ‘doesn’t exist’ and that he has not ‘had sex with a 17-year-old since I was 17.’ The Committee found that to be untrue and determined that there is substantial evidence that Representative Gaetz had sex with Victim A in July 2017, when she was 17 years old, and he was 35…The Committee found no reason to doubt the credibility of Victim A.”

1. The DOJ failed to pursue justice despite overwhelming evidence and impeded the committee’s investigation

Perhaps most damning is the committee’s conclusion that the Department of Justice was an impediment to the investigation and failed the cause of justice by not charging Gaetz with any crimes. The report is unequivocally critical of the DOJ for failing to pursue charges against Gaetz in light of all the testimony and other evidence, and specifically speaks to the chilling effect the lack of action from DOJ on the victims and witnesses:

Most of the women with whom the Committee spoke also gave statements to DOJ and urged the Committee to rely on
those statements in lieu of requiring them to relive their experience. They were particularly concerned with providing additional testimony about a sitting congressman in light of DOJ’s lack of action on their prior testimony. DOJ refused to provide the relevant statements and other significant evidence to the Committee. DOJ cited internal policies about protecting uncharged subjects like Representative Gaetz, general concerns about how DOJ’s cooperation with the Committee may deter other victims in other matters, and various inapposite policies relating to congressional oversight of DOJ itself. DOJ’s initial deferral request and subsequent lack of cooperation with the Committee’s review caused significant delays in the investigation; those delays were compounded by Representative Gaetz’s obstructive efforts. The Committee has determined that its findings must be released without further impediments.

The report discusses some of the women involved who “cited a fear of retaliation from the congressman when declining to speak on the record with the Committee,” and sought to investigation allegations that Gaetz “may have sought to tamper with witness testimony in connection with its investigation or the DOJ’s investigation,” but was once again stymied by the DOJ when the agency “refused to provide a copy of an audio recording in which Representative Gaetz discussed the DOJ’s inquiry with one of the women he paid for sex.”

Victim A was specifically disappointed by the DOJ’s failure to act; the report describes how she “cooperated with DOJ’s investigation for years and was let down by the justice system when reports circulated that DOJ would be unlikely to pursue charges against Representative Gaetz.”

The DOJ also refused to respond to FOIA requests and subpoenas sent by the committee:

After three months without a response despite repeated follow up, the Committee submitted FOIA requests to several relevant DOJ offices, which to date have not been adequately processed. The Committee continued to reach out to DOJ throughout 2023, having still not received a substantive response to its request for information. On January 12, 2024, the Committee received its first correspondence from DOJ on the matter. At that time, DOJ provided no substantive response or explanation for its delay; instead, DOJ simply stated that it “do[es] not provide non-public information about law enforcement investigations that
do not result in charges.” This “policy” is, however, inconsistent with DOJ’s historical conduct with respect to the Committee and its unique role in upholding the integrity of the House.

Thereafter, the Committee determined to issue a subpoena to DOJ to obtain records relating to its investigation of Representative Gaetz. DOJ did not comply with the subpoena by the date required, but suggested it remained “committed to good-faith engagement with the Committee.” In the spirit of cooperation, the Committee provided a list of specific responsive documents, setting out particularized demands to the subpoena. Among the particularized demands was a request for any exculpatory evidence relating to Representative Gaetz. On March 13, 2024, Committee Members met with the Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legislative Affairs and the Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division of DOJ. The DOJ officials again cited no legal basis for failing to comply with the subpoena. DOJ subsequently requested additional context for the Committee’s demands, which the Committee provided. After further attempts at meaningful accommodation of DOJ’s concerns about the breadth of the Committee’s request, DOJ ultimately provided publicly reported information about the testimony of a deceased individual. To date, DOJ has provided no meaningful evidence or information to the Committee or cited any lawful basis for its responses. The Committee hopes to continue to engage with DOJ on the broader issues raised by its failure to recognize the Committee’s unique mandate. As the Committee has told DOJ, the Committee and DOJ should be partners in their shared mission of upholding the integrity of our government institutions.

The Committee initially made a narrowly tailored request for information to Representative Gaetz seeking information limited to the allegations that would not be within DOJ’s jurisdiction—the alleged acceptance of an improper gift and sharing of nude images and videos on the House floor.

Read the full House Ethics Committee report here.

The post 7 Biggest Bombshells in Matt Gaetz House Ethics Report: ‘Substantial Evidence’ of Crimes, Including Statutory Rape first appeared on Mediaite.

from Mediaite https://ift.tt/rFHdWpc