1
00:00:00,080 --> 00:00:03,720
Speaker 1: In many ways. The fundraising letter from Congressman Rodney Frelinghuysen

2
00:00:03,960 --> 00:00:07,000
Speaker 1: was typical the New Jersey Republican asked for money, of course,

3
00:00:07,360 --> 00:00:10,200
Speaker 1: he also claimed that organized forces were working to thwart

4
00:00:10,280 --> 00:00:13,200
Speaker 1: the conservative agenda. But when he sent the letter to

5
00:00:13,200 --> 00:00:15,480
Speaker 1: a board member at a local bank, farreling Hysen did

6
00:00:15,520 --> 00:00:19,320
Speaker 1: something unusual. Ps He hand wrote at the bottom, one

7
00:00:19,320 --> 00:00:22,439
Speaker 1: of the ringleaders works at your bank. That was a

8
00:00:22,480 --> 00:00:26,600
Speaker 1: reference to Saley av Linda, a senior vice president who's

9
00:00:26,600 --> 00:00:29,120
Speaker 1: active in a group that was pressuring Frelinghuysen to hold

10
00:00:29,120 --> 00:00:32,440
Speaker 1: town hall meetings. Avalenda has since resigned, and she told

11
00:00:32,440 --> 00:00:35,360
Speaker 1: The Washington Post the letter was an attempt to intimidate her.

12
00:00:35,760 --> 00:00:39,400
Speaker 1: The story was first reported by w NYC. With us

13
00:00:39,440 --> 00:00:41,960
Speaker 1: to talk about the letter is Brendan Fisher. He is

14
00:00:41,960 --> 00:00:44,640
Speaker 1: a lawyer at the Campaign Legal Center. We reached out

15
00:00:44,680 --> 00:00:48,880
Speaker 1: to Congressman Frelinghuysen's office to invite the representative onto the show,

16
00:00:48,920 --> 00:00:51,440
Speaker 1: but they have not responded to us. Brendan, thanks for

17
00:00:51,640 --> 00:00:54,880
Speaker 1: joining us tell us. Does it seem as though Congressman

18
00:00:54,880 --> 00:00:59,400
Speaker 1: Frelinghuysen might have crossed some ethical and legal lines here? Well,

19
00:00:59,400 --> 00:01:01,480
Speaker 1: I think you can certainly say that he crossed some

20
00:01:01,520 --> 00:01:05,600
Speaker 1: ethical lines. Um. It's not clear whether he necessarily violated

21
00:01:05,640 --> 00:01:08,240
Speaker 1: a specific ethics law, but that doesn't mean that this

22
00:01:08,720 --> 00:01:11,760
Speaker 1: activity was at all ethical. UM. I think this might

23
00:01:11,760 --> 00:01:15,560
Speaker 1: be in the category of perhaps lawful, but but certainly awful.

24
00:01:16,760 --> 00:01:21,760
Speaker 1: What in these fundraising letters? What is normally the the

25
00:01:21,760 --> 00:01:24,760
Speaker 1: the thrust of them? I mean, is there a hard

26
00:01:24,800 --> 00:01:27,560
Speaker 1: push to get money in in some way? A Are

27
00:01:27,600 --> 00:01:32,440
Speaker 1: they normally more general than this? Um? I think, I

28
00:01:32,480 --> 00:01:35,520
Speaker 1: mean you'll certainly see a broad range of a fundraising

29
00:01:35,560 --> 00:01:39,200
Speaker 1: letters and the content of fundraising letters. UM. And I

30
00:01:39,200 --> 00:01:41,120
Speaker 1: think there's there's two ways of there's two ways of

31
00:01:41,200 --> 00:01:43,960
Speaker 1: viewing what the what the ask was here, what the

32
00:01:44,040 --> 00:01:47,600
Speaker 1: suggestion was here with this handwritten note. One was that

33
00:01:48,400 --> 00:01:51,120
Speaker 1: it was a way of the representatives suggesting to the

34
00:01:51,160 --> 00:01:55,240
Speaker 1: banker that, uh, he should fire this employee for their

35
00:01:55,240 --> 00:01:58,160
Speaker 1: political activity, which does implicate some some ethic clause which

36
00:01:58,160 --> 00:01:59,800
Speaker 1: we can get into. But then the other the other

37
00:01:59,880 --> 00:02:03,640
Speaker 1: is that it was a way of the representatives suggesting

38
00:02:03,640 --> 00:02:06,120
Speaker 1: to the banker that that you're on my naughty list. Um,

39
00:02:06,160 --> 00:02:08,120
Speaker 1: if you want to stay in my good graces, you'll

40
00:02:08,120 --> 00:02:10,040
Speaker 1: give me you'll give me more money for my for

41
00:02:10,160 --> 00:02:13,880
Speaker 1: my campaign. And this goes to the what might be

42
00:02:13,919 --> 00:02:18,480
Speaker 1: described as the bribery versus extortion theories of money in politics.

43
00:02:18,560 --> 00:02:21,840
Speaker 1: One is that under the bribery theory, donors would give

44
00:02:21,840 --> 00:02:24,760
Speaker 1: the candidates because they want something in return. And then

45
00:02:24,760 --> 00:02:27,959
Speaker 1: there's also the extortion theory that candidates shakedown donors for

46
00:02:28,040 --> 00:02:30,679
Speaker 1: money with the threat of some sort of negative action

47
00:02:30,720 --> 00:02:33,200
Speaker 1: if they don't give um. And this sounds a little

48
00:02:33,200 --> 00:02:35,480
Speaker 1: bit closer to the to the latter theory. Um the

49
00:02:35,560 --> 00:02:40,240
Speaker 1: representatives suggesting that you are you're you're on my naughty list,

50
00:02:40,280 --> 00:02:42,799
Speaker 1: you're not in my good graces. One way that you

51
00:02:42,840 --> 00:02:45,720
Speaker 1: can uh, one way that you can curry favor with

52
00:02:45,760 --> 00:02:48,160
Speaker 1: me and get back on my on my nice list

53
00:02:48,280 --> 00:02:50,480
Speaker 1: is by is by giving me money. And it appears

54
00:02:50,480 --> 00:02:53,880
Speaker 1: that that is actually what happened here. So this woman's

55
00:02:53,880 --> 00:02:57,520
Speaker 1: saiy of a Linda wasn't, as I understand it, kind

56
00:02:57,560 --> 00:03:00,000
Speaker 1: of a household name in the eleventh District of New Jersey.

57
00:03:01,120 --> 00:03:04,239
Speaker 1: What what if do we know about how the congressman

58
00:03:04,520 --> 00:03:07,560
Speaker 1: might have made the connection between her as as an

59
00:03:07,560 --> 00:03:10,359
Speaker 1: activist and this this bank that he was listening money from,

60
00:03:10,400 --> 00:03:13,440
Speaker 1: or at least from a from a board member. I

61
00:03:13,520 --> 00:03:15,679
Speaker 1: don't know. I don't know that that's been that that's

62
00:03:15,680 --> 00:03:17,799
Speaker 1: been made public, and I don't know that the representative

63
00:03:17,919 --> 00:03:20,800
Speaker 1: has has said how he found this out. Um. From

64
00:03:20,800 --> 00:03:23,120
Speaker 1: from the reporting that I've seen, it seems like he

65
00:03:23,200 --> 00:03:25,680
Speaker 1: must he or his someone on his campaign must have

66
00:03:25,720 --> 00:03:30,040
Speaker 1: put some effort into tracking this person down. Um that

67
00:03:30,080 --> 00:03:32,040
Speaker 1: they would have had to had to google her name,

68
00:03:32,080 --> 00:03:33,760
Speaker 1: would have had to look at her LinkedIn, would have

69
00:03:33,760 --> 00:03:35,920
Speaker 1: had to look at the uh look at the bank

70
00:03:36,000 --> 00:03:39,800
Speaker 1: website to determine who she was and where she worked.

71
00:03:40,320 --> 00:03:42,480
Speaker 1: So it does appear that there was some some level

72
00:03:42,520 --> 00:03:46,440
Speaker 1: of effort put into this. Uh. And and really, I mean,

73
00:03:46,440 --> 00:03:49,800
Speaker 1: this is this is this is incredibly problematic. It's not

74
00:03:49,880 --> 00:03:52,680
Speaker 1: the role of a member of Congress to tell private

75
00:03:52,680 --> 00:03:54,880
Speaker 1: employers in the district who they should and shouldn't hire.

76
00:03:55,640 --> 00:03:59,400
Speaker 1: She was a senior vice president at this local bank,

77
00:03:59,600 --> 00:04:02,840
Speaker 1: so pretty high up in the bank, and yet she

78
00:04:02,920 --> 00:04:08,360
Speaker 1: resigned shortly after this. Were her reasons for resigning this letter?

79
00:04:09,040 --> 00:04:14,920
Speaker 1: Was she afraid she was being targeted? Uh? That's my understanding. Um.

80
00:04:15,120 --> 00:04:19,920
Speaker 1: It does appear that after after her boss received the letter,

81
00:04:20,440 --> 00:04:23,119
Speaker 1: that she was called into his office, showed her the letter,

82
00:04:23,320 --> 00:04:25,680
Speaker 1: and then she had to write a statement explaining what

83
00:04:25,760 --> 00:04:29,200
Speaker 1: she was involved in and and oddly declaring that she

84
00:04:29,279 --> 00:04:31,800
Speaker 1: was she was a friend of the bank. UM and

85
00:04:31,800 --> 00:04:35,400
Speaker 1: and then reportedly the pressure became worse and she eventually

86
00:04:35,880 --> 00:04:39,560
Speaker 1: she eventually resigned. UM. And it does appear in in

87
00:04:39,680 --> 00:04:43,000
Speaker 1: large part of the problems that that arose in her

88
00:04:43,040 --> 00:04:46,479
Speaker 1: appoyment situation did appear in in large part as a

89
00:04:46,520 --> 00:04:49,119
Speaker 1: result of her political activities, and at least in part

90
00:04:49,240 --> 00:04:53,400
Speaker 1: because a member of Congress UH informed her boss about

91
00:04:53,400 --> 00:04:56,039
Speaker 1: her political activities and put some some level of pressure

92
00:04:56,080 --> 00:05:00,240
Speaker 1: on her boss to to retaliate against her. UM. Don't

93
00:05:00,240 --> 00:05:02,560
Speaker 1: point out we we brushed over this earlier, but there

94
00:05:02,640 --> 00:05:07,880
Speaker 1: is actually a criminal provision at eighteen USC to seven,

95
00:05:07,960 --> 00:05:10,720
Speaker 1: and there's also an analogous provision and how the House

96
00:05:10,760 --> 00:05:14,160
Speaker 1: Ethics Code that prohibits a Member of Congress from influence

97
00:05:14,400 --> 00:05:18,680
Speaker 1: influencing a private entities employment decision on partisan grounds by

98
00:05:18,839 --> 00:05:22,560
Speaker 1: offering or threatening to take or withhold an official act. UH.

99
00:05:22,680 --> 00:05:26,719
Speaker 1: So I think the representative does come close to violating

100
00:05:26,760 --> 00:05:29,320
Speaker 1: this this provision, both this criminal law provision and this

101
00:05:29,400 --> 00:05:33,360
Speaker 1: how the House Ethics provision. UM. The question here, though,

102
00:05:33,520 --> 00:05:38,279
Speaker 1: is whether the representative offered or threatened an official act

103
00:05:38,320 --> 00:05:41,240
Speaker 1: like a vote on legislation or some formal exercise of

104
00:05:41,279 --> 00:05:44,840
Speaker 1: governmental power. Uh. Certainly we can say that the representative

105
00:05:44,920 --> 00:05:48,120
Speaker 1: was attempting to or there's an appearance of representive the

106
00:05:48,160 --> 00:05:51,360
Speaker 1: representative attempting to influence the bank's decision to employ this

107
00:05:51,400 --> 00:05:54,440
Speaker 1: woman based on her partisan political activities. Uh. The question

108
00:05:54,480 --> 00:05:59,040
Speaker 1: is really whether he had offered to make or withhold

109
00:05:59,160 --> 00:06:01,880
Speaker 1: some sort of an official act um And from the

110
00:06:01,880 --> 00:06:04,040
Speaker 1: context of the letter, I don't I don't know that

111
00:06:04,040 --> 00:06:06,640
Speaker 1: that's clear. But we also don't know whether there were

112
00:06:06,800 --> 00:06:11,160
Speaker 1: additional conversations or interactions between the representative and the banker,

113
00:06:12,320 --> 00:06:15,520
Speaker 1: or or if there was additional context here that we

114
00:06:15,560 --> 00:06:19,400
Speaker 1: don't know about. Just from uh that that we just

115
00:06:19,440 --> 00:06:21,679
Speaker 1: don't know about yet, it sounds like there's an awful

116
00:06:21,680 --> 00:06:24,320
Speaker 1: lot we don't know. Let me read. Although we did,

117
00:06:24,360 --> 00:06:27,000
Speaker 1: as I mentioned, invite the congressman or one of his

118
00:06:27,040 --> 00:06:29,680
Speaker 1: representatives onto the show and didn't hear back from them,

119
00:06:29,680 --> 00:06:31,680
Speaker 1: he did provide a statement to w n y C.

120
00:06:31,880 --> 00:06:34,560
Speaker 1: And this is what the statement said. The Congressman wrote

121
00:06:34,560 --> 00:06:36,479
Speaker 1: a brief, an innocuous note at the bottom of a

122
00:06:36,520 --> 00:06:39,360
Speaker 1: personal letter in regard to information that had been reported

123
00:06:39,400 --> 00:06:41,840
Speaker 1: in the media. He was in no way involved in

124
00:06:41,880 --> 00:06:44,120
Speaker 1: any of the bank's business and is unaware of any

125
00:06:44,160 --> 00:06:47,920
Speaker 1: particulars about this employee's status with the bank. Brandon anything

126
00:06:47,960 --> 00:06:51,040
Speaker 1: in there that you hear that that changes the situation

127
00:06:51,080 --> 00:06:55,960
Speaker 1: for you, UM I I don't think so. UM. I mean,

128
00:06:56,040 --> 00:07:00,040
Speaker 1: certainly the Congressman was intending to communicate some sort of

129
00:07:00,080 --> 00:07:03,039
Speaker 1: a message by by taking the time, first of all,

130
00:07:03,120 --> 00:07:07,160
Speaker 1: to apparently conduct research into this uh into this individual,

131
00:07:07,600 --> 00:07:10,680
Speaker 1: and then to put a handwritten note on the bottom

132
00:07:10,720 --> 00:07:13,440
Speaker 1: of this of this fundraising appeal. I would gather that

133
00:07:13,440 --> 00:07:16,200
Speaker 1: that's not standard practice, that the that the Congressman is

134
00:07:16,240 --> 00:07:18,080
Speaker 1: not writing a handwritten note on the bottom of every

135
00:07:18,080 --> 00:07:21,280
Speaker 1: single fundraising appeal that he that he sends, and the

136
00:07:21,400 --> 00:07:25,560
Speaker 1: message was was clearly sent, according to according to reports,

137
00:07:25,600 --> 00:07:28,720
Speaker 1: the as a result of this UH what what the

138
00:07:28,720 --> 00:07:31,560
Speaker 1: Congressman calls an innocuous and brief handwritten note at the

139
00:07:31,600 --> 00:07:35,560
Speaker 1: bottom of this personal letter, um, the recipient of the

140
00:07:35,600 --> 00:07:39,840
Speaker 1: letter called the employee into his office and eventually the

141
00:07:40,400 --> 00:07:44,520
Speaker 1: and eventually the the employee UH quit was pressured was

142
00:07:44,560 --> 00:07:47,480
Speaker 1: apparently pressured into quitting as a results of her political

143
00:07:47,480 --> 00:07:50,120
Speaker 1: activity and as a result of this note from her

144
00:07:50,520 --> 00:07:52,800
Speaker 1: from her elected official Brandon, We're gonna have to leave

145
00:07:52,800 --> 00:07:54,760
Speaker 1: it there. Thank you very much, Brendan Fisher of the

146
00:07:54,800 --> 00:07:57,360
Speaker 1: Campaign Legal Center for joining us on Bloomberg law.