Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

DonViejo

(60,536 posts)
Tue Feb 19, 2019, 12:28 PM Feb 2019

Supreme Court won't allow 'Downton Abbey' ex-congressman to challenge his fraud indictment


Richard Wolf, USA TODAY Published 10:47 a.m. ET Feb. 19, 2019 | Updated 11:16 a.m. ET Feb. 19, 2019

WASHINGTON – A former congressman who resigned under pressure in 2015 after lavish spending that included remodeling his office in the style of the television series "Downton Abbey" failed to win a reprieve Tuesday at the Supreme Court.

Aaron Schock of Illinois, a former rising Republican star first elected to the House of Representatives at the age of 27, had sought unsuccessfully for two years to have part of his fraud indictment dismissed.

The justices refused to hear his case after two lower federal courts denied his effort. Schock, now 37, claims his misdeeds can be considered only by the House, not the courts.

Schock was charged in 2016 of defrauding the government of more than $100,000 by falsifying reimbursement vouchers, as well as filing false tax returns. Federal investigators had dug into allegations that he spent large amounts on personal air travel and office decor.

The young congressman's downfall began in February 2015, when The Washington Post chronicled the renovation of his Capitol Hill office to imitate the decor favored by early 20th century British aristocracy in "Downton Abbey." Schock ultimately reimbursed taxpayers $35,000.

USA TODAY later disclosed that he had spent more than $100,000 on a prior office remodeling, including leather furniture and hardwood floors.

###

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/02/19/aaron-schock-supreme-court/2617572002/?utm_source=feedblitz&utm_medium=FeedBlitzRss&utm_campaign=usatodaycomwashington-topstories
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Supreme Court won't allow...