Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Congressman calls for repeat ethics investigation into FEC chairwoman

Ellen Weintraub

A 2017 investigation of FEC Chairwoman Ellen Weintraub for potentially unethical behavior determined she had not violated federal rules.

Paul Morigi/Getty Images

This article has been updated following an interview with Weintraub.

Federal Election Commission Chairwoman Ellen Weintraub has been accused of ethical violations that had been previously leveled — and dismissed — two years ago.

In a series of tweetson Thursday, Weintraub responded to a letter sent that same day by Rep. Rodney Davis, ranking member of the House Administration Committee, requesting an investigation into Weintraub for potential violations of federal ethics regulations.

"It's a retread on a complaint made two years ago by a Koch Brother-funded group," Weintraub told The Fulcrum on Friday afternoon. The inspector general's office looked into it and didn't find any evidence. It's the same stuff all over again."

Davis, a Republican from Illinois, outlined three reasons he believes FEC Inspector General Christopher Skinner should investigate Weintraub:

  1. Using government time and official FEC resources to publish her opinions on political matters.
  2. Discussing issues outside the purview of the FEC in national media appearances.
  3. Refusing to recuse herself from matters involving President Trump, despite a perceived bias against him and "apparent conflict of interest."

"I believe that this pattern of behavior is unbecoming of the FEC Chair and may have possibly violated ethics regulations that we all as federal employees must abide by," Davis wrote.

Weintraub dismissed Davis complaint, noting his letter did not cite any laws that were being broken.

"I'm a public official and I make public statements. It's my job to speak out on issues about the integrity of our elections. To suggest otherwise is nuts," she said.

Two years ago, Weintraub, then a commissioner but not yet chairwoman, was investigated for similar reasons after the conservative group Cause of Action Institute filed a complaint with the FEC's Office of Inspector General. The 2017 investigation found no evidence that Weintraub had violated ethical standards.

On Twitter, Weintraub responded to this latest investigation request by recycling her statement from the first incident: "It is absolutely within my official duties as a federal election official to comment publicly on any aspect of the integrity of federal elections in the United States. I will not be silenced."

Davis acknowledges in his letter that some of the issues he points to were previously assessed in the 2017 investigation, but he believes "they warrant reexamination."

During the last investigation, for instance, a permanent inspector general was not in place at the FEC. (Skinner was named to the position in July.) Davis also noted that the previous inspector general report did not include interviews with all of the commissioners at the time. In Davis' view, the report "lacked a clear legal basis" as well.

And since the last investigation, Weintraub has "continued her pattern of blatant partisan behavior under the guise of her official duties as FEC Chair," Davis wrote.

"And oh my gosh, I go on CNN sometimes. Some of this stuff is just silly," Weintraub said.

An FEC spokesman said the commission does not have information on how the inspector general will move forward and declined to comment further on the situation. The inspector general's office did not immediately respond to a request for comment on whether an investigation into Weintraub will be opened.


Read More

Can Things Get Even Worse for Mike Johnson?

Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-LA) lat the U.S. Capitol on January 7, 2025 in Washington, DC.

(Photo by Heather Diehl/Getty Images)

Can Things Get Even Worse for Mike Johnson?

Two weeks ago, a column in the Fulcrum warned that Speaker Mike Johnson was entering a political season defined by "ritual human sacrifice," noting that in a Trump‑branded GOP, someone must absorb the blame when governing goes sideways. In this context, the "sacrifice" refers to the erosion of institutional norms, accountability, and the potential jeopardy of individual reputations. Jonah Goldberg wrote that "Mike Johnson might as well be tied to a stake in the lion’s den."

That line feels understated now, as cascading crises over the past several days have closed in even further around Speaker Johnson.

Keep ReadingShow less
Trump and Kamala Harris debating for the first time during the presidential election campaign.

Republican presidential nominee, former U.S. President Donald Trump and Democratic presidential nominee, U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris debate for the first time during the presidential election campaign at The National Constitution Center on September 10, 2024 in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

Getty Images, Win McNamee

Trump’s Rhetoric of Exaggeration Hurts Democracy

One of the most telling aspects of Donald Trump’s political style isn’t a specific policy but how he talks about the world. His speeches and social media posts overflow with superlatives: “The likes of which nobody’s ever seen before,” “Numbers we’ve never seen,” and “Like nobody ever thought possible.” This constant "unprecedented" language does more than add emphasis—it triggers fear-based thinking.

Reporters have found that he uses these phrases hundreds of times each year, on almost any topic. Whether the subject is the economy, immigration, crime, or even weather, the message is always the same: everything is either an unprecedented success or failure. There’s no middle ground, nuance, or room for finding common ground.

Keep ReadingShow less
Nicolas Maduro’s Capture: Sovereignty Only Matters When It’s Convenient

US Capitol and South America. Nicolas Maduro’s capture is not the end of an era. It marks the opening act of a turbulent transition

AI generated

Nicolas Maduro’s Capture: Sovereignty Only Matters When It’s Convenient

The U.S. capture of Nicolás Maduro will be remembered as one of the most dramatic American interventions in Latin America in a generation. But the real story isn’t the raid itself. It’s what the raid reveals about the political imagination of the hemisphere—how quickly governments abandon the language of sovereignty when it becomes inconvenient, and how easily Washington slips back into the posture of regional enforcer.

The operation was months in the making, driven by a mix of narcotrafficking allegations, geopolitical anxiety, and the belief that Maduro’s security perimeter had finally cracked. The Justice Department’s $50 million bounty—an extraordinary price tag for a sitting head of state—signaled that the U.S. no longer viewed Maduro as a political problem to be negotiated with, but as a criminal target to be hunted.

Keep ReadingShow less
Money and the American flag
Half of Americans want participatory budgeting at the local level. What's standing in the way?
SimpleImages/Getty Images

For the People, By the People — Or By the Wealthy?

When did America replace “for the people, by the people” with “for the wealthy, by the wealthy”? Wealthy donors are increasingly shaping our policies, institutions, and even the balance of power, while the American people are left as spectators, watching democracy erode before their eyes. The question is not why billionaires need wealth — they already have it. The question is why they insist on owning and controlling government — and the people.

Back in 1968, my Government teacher never spoke of powerful think tanks like the Heritage Foundation, now funded by billionaires determined to avoid paying their fair share of taxes. Yet here in 2025, these forces openly work to control the Presidency, Congress, and the Supreme Court through Project 2025. The corruption is visible everywhere. Quid pro quo and pay for play are not abstractions — they are evident in the gifts showered on Supreme Court justices.

Keep ReadingShow less