Thursday, March 06, 2025

Ethical Concerns Surround Senator Joni Ernst

Ernst, an Iowa Republican, is one of the most influential voices in Congress on military topics. Ethics and military experts say her relationships with top Air Force and Navy officials created potential conflicts of interest.

Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 02:31 PM | 23 COMMENTS | permalink

More

Laying the Groundwork to Defeat Joni Ernst talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/layin ...

[image or embed]

-- Josh Marshall (@joshtpm.bsky.social) March 5, 2025 at 3:13 PM

Comments

FTA:

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.


Why it matters: Pete Hegseth.

#1 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2025-03-05 05:50 PM

Things that make you say, hmmm:

Is This What They Held Over Joni Ernst's Head To Make Her Confirm Pete Hegseth?

www.wonkette.com

#2 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2025-03-05 05:55 PM

Sleazebags.

Corruption...

WAR.........

COMING SOON.

#3 | Posted by Effeteposer at 2025-03-05 06:54 PM

---- off, stooge.

#4 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2025-03-05 09:11 PM

Banging the lobbyists?
Bad look.

#5 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2025-03-06 05:28 AM

How much work was it for her to make her face into a catcher's mitt?

#6 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-03-06 03:35 PM

Ethics are only for Democrats

#7 | Posted by hamburglar at 2025-03-06 03:38 PM

Nobody that matters cares.

#8 | Posted by Angrydad at 2025-03-06 03:56 PM

... Ethical Concerns ...

That's almost a requirement for the Trump administration nowadays, so why should the GOP be concerned about possible ethical concerns of a GOP Senator?

#9 | Posted by LampLighter at 2025-03-06 04:17 PM

"Three other sources told ProPublica "

The mystery sources strike again!

Even is she did have a romantic relationship, neither were married. See Bill Clinton for the poster child.

#10 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2025-03-06 05:20 PM

How much work was it for her to make her face into a catcher's mitt?

#6 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-03-06 03:35 PM | Reply | Flag

How much effort did you put into making your back side a catcher's mitt?

#11 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2025-03-06 05:22 PM

#10
As the story makes clear, the concerns have nothing to do with anyone's marital status.
It's an "undue influence" story.
A real banger.

#12 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2025-03-07 07:32 AM

#10
As the story makes clear, the concerns have nothing to do with anyone's marital status.
It's an "undue influence" story.
A real banger.
#12 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis

Exactly:

ProPublica reports that Ernst " again, one of the most powerful Republicans in the Senate when it comes to military stuff " has had some, shall we say, highly questionable relationships with some very influential Pentagon brass, the types of relationships that could suggest serious conflicts of interest and ethical concerns.

(So no, this isn't just a story about whether Ernst, who is divorced, has been having big old sex with some hot military guys. That would be fine and Wonkette would be Team GO JONI.)

www.wonkette.com

#13 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2025-03-07 08:36 AM

The mystery sources strike again!

#10 | Posted by lfthndthrds

Anytime I read this, I flinch because of the in-your-face ignorance of how things work.

It's called journalism. Facts from what you call "mystery sources" are vetted within the news outlet, usually at least twice, and verified independently. The names of those sources are also known.

Whole generations of dumb@sses never learned how to read critically.

Whole generations of dumb@sses now also think all the world's knowledge is available on the internet.

#14 | Posted by Dbt2 at 2025-03-07 09:01 AM

It's called journalism.

#14 | Posted by Dbt2 at 2025-03-07 09:01 AM | Reply | Flag:

LMAO -No it's not, it's called a hit piece. It's like using the word "allegedly" it relieves the publication of legal retribution. The fact that you don't know this, speaks volumes about how well read you actually are.

#15 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2025-03-07 03:33 PM

"allegedly"

We live in a litigious society. Good journalists always say allegedly.

#16 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2025-03-07 03:35 PM

It's like using the word "allegedly" it relieves the publication of legal retribution.

It's usually because the anonymous sources are not authorized to speak to the press.

You are a big First Amendment guy, right?

What do you think about the government telling government employees that they aren't allowed to speak to the press? Violation of their First Amendment rights or nah?

#17 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-03-07 03:38 PM

What do you think about the government telling government employees that they aren't allowed to speak to the press? Violation of their First Amendment rights or nah?

#17 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-03-07 03:38 PM | Reply | Flag:

Depends on their position and what type of non disclosure they signed. Are gag orders against the 1st?

#18 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2025-03-07 04:05 PM

We live in a litigious society. Good journalists always say allegedly.

#16 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2025-03-07 03:35 PM | Reply | Flag:

And when they write an article that doesn't include the facts they need, they use sources who can't be named. SOS different day.

#19 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2025-03-07 04:06 PM

And when they write an article that doesn't include the facts they need, they use sources who can't be named. SOS different day.

#19 | Posted by lfthndthrds

Name three organizations that you personally trust to give you straight-up information. No spin.

#20 | Posted by Dbt2 at 2025-03-07 05:37 PM

Name three organizations that you personally trust to give you straight-up information. No spin.

#20 | Posted by Dbt2 at 2025-03-07 05:37 PM | Reply | Flag:

You go first, since your asked.

#21 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2025-03-07 08:04 PM

And when they write an article that doesn't include the facts they need, they use sources who can't be named. SOS different day.

#19 | POSTED BY LFTHNDTHRDS

This is laughable coming from the revenge and retribution party.

The press has always sought to protect their sources.
So I agree that is not new but the SOS. What is new is the hate filled maga maroons who go after and harass these brave people who do speak out against them. Which is one of the reasons for Shield Laws.

Whenever I see you maga maroons complain about unnamed sources it is apparent to me that you just wanna dox them or discredit them or have them swatted or even see trumpets harass them or their families. And it's not just the morons like you. The freakin president of the United States is so unethical that he will even target them from his Bully Pulpit.

So again. GFY commie. They don't have to tell you. At least not in California.

#22 | Posted by donnerboy at 2025-03-08 12:26 PM

Name three organizations that you personally trust to give you straight-up information. No spin.

#20 | Posted by Dbt2 at 2025-03-07 05:37 PM | Reply | Flag:

You go first, since your asked.

#21 | Posted by lfthndthrds

Not perfection, but Reuters, BBC, and often and surprisingly al Jazeera.

Your turn. Without bashing mine.

#23 | Posted by Dbt2 at 2025-03-08 07:55 PM

Drudge Retort Headlines

Free Kilmar (125 comments)

CDC: Autism Rates have Risen (111 comments)

Lisa Murkowski: 'We Are All Afraid' of Retaliation (76 comments)

Senator Blocked from Visiting Abrego Garcia in El Salvador (74 comments)

Harvard Rejects 'Unprecedented' Trump Demands over Funding (62 comments)

Speaker Johnson Is Eyeing Big Cuts to Medicaid (29 comments)

Mass Shooting at Florida State University (23 comments)

Blue Origin Flight Showcases Utter Defeat of US Feminism (22 comments)

Trump Bars AP from White House Despite Court Order (22 comments)

Trump Nominee Appeared 150 Times on Russian TV (21 comments)