Aaron Schock goes down

Citing “constant questions” concerning use of taxpayer and campaign funds for private expenditures, Congressman Aaron Schock (R – Downton Abbey) abruptly announced yesterday that he will resign at the end of this month.

According to Schock, the strain of weathering multiple scandals was preventing him from effectively traveling the world serving his constituents in Peoria, Illinois.

Seems legit.

While Schock’s downfall will be officially credited to the recent string of revelations relating to his personal use of campaign and taxpayer funds, along with politically-affiliated real estate deals, that isn’t what we’re going to remember him for. Plenty of politicians play on the margins when it comes to financial disclosures, and still more use their political influence for financial gain.

But not too many politicians flaunt their ill-gotten wealth, power and finely-tuned deltoids as brazenly as Aaron “Haters Gonna Hate” Schock, who never saw a vacation he didn’t want someone else to pay for — and have his “personal photographer” document for the world to see.

And boy, did we see it.

John Aravosis’s coverage of Aaron Schock here at AMERICAblog goes all the way back to 2009, before the then-freshman congressman was even a twinkle in the House Ethics Committee’s eye. Schock’s staunchly conservative record didn’t seem to square with the rest of his persona, which, as John noted, came off as pretty gay. Observations led to questions, which Schock refused to answer. That led to rumors, which eventually made their way across the ideological aisle and into the conservative blogosphere. By now, it’s fairly common knowledge that if Aaron Schock isn’t gay, he’s not very convincing.

If you go through AMERICAblog’s Aaron Schock archives in chronological order, you can relive the saga of the “homophobe boy-toy” for yourself.

And while some argued that it wasn’t fair to cast aspersions on Schock’s sexuality, no one could argue that he didn’t invite the attention. Never one to shy away from all the wrong kinds of coverage, Schock’s positively steamy Instagram account always attracted more buzz than his fiercely conservative politics. Be it via swanky hotels, private jets or, most recently, a replica Presidential podium (which accounted for roughly $5,000 of nearly $80,000 in taxpayer money that he spent on furniture in 2009), Schock spent his career reminding the world how awesome his life — and his abs, and his shoe collection — was.aaron-schock-men's-health

Schock didn’t just break the rules; he didn’t bother to pretend that he wasn’t breaking them — not only with respect to his finances, but also with respect to his public image. As John A. noted last month:

The semi-nudity was beneath the dignity of his office. And the pictures of the Peoria congressman galavanting around the world in Greece, Italy, Turkey, England, India, China and Brazil — and then skiing in Jackson Hole and surfing in Hawaii — had a braggadocio about them that was asking for trouble.

Schock made himself into a big story by insisting on living a Real Housewives of Beverly Hills lifestyle in a House of Cards town, and in doing so invited more scrutiny than his older, possibly more corrupt counterparts in Washington. As I wrote on Monday:

Sooner or later, Aaron Schock is going down. If the current round of spending revelations and ethics complaints don’t get him, something else will. This is a man who clearly believes that either the rules don’t apply to him, or that they won’t ever catch up to him. But after six years of flagrant opulence, he’s put himself on the radar screen of every political journalist who knows that where there’s smoke there’s a flamer fire.

So no, we aren’t going to remember Aaron Schock for being shady with his finances. We’re going to remember him for being a living, breathing Dolce & Gabbana caricature; a bougie, fatuous, flamboyant narcissist who made his career fighting against basic human rights for gay people while, at the same time, living out one of the gayest lifestyles any member of Congress ever has.

After all, how many people own a 0% rating from the Human Rights Campaign and these pants?

aaron-schock-plaid-pants-smalker

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Shake it off, sailor.


Jon Green graduated from Kenyon College with a B.A. in Political Science and high honors in Political Cognition. He worked as a field organizer for Congressman Tom Perriello in 2010 and a Regional Field Director for President Obama's re-election campaign in 2012. Jon writes on a number of topics, but pays especially close attention to elections, religion and political cognition. Follow him on Twitter at @_Jon_Green, and on Google+. .

Share This Post

78 Responses to “Aaron Schock goes down”

  1. Katan Scott says:

    A bit off topic, but if Schock does end up coming and apologizes for his role in marginalizing LGBTQ citizens, do you guys think he will be able to redeem himself?

  2. Katan Scott says:

    Why am I not “Schocked” (Crickets chirping)

  3. Strepsi says:

    Bullshit, garbage and nonsense.
    Read the stories of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell: people who were kicked out of the military with DISHONORABLE discharge for holding hands with their spouse… or talking to their spouse on the phone…. or having a photo of their spouse in their bunk… super-chaste things every heterosexual takes for granted day or night 24/7.

  4. Guest says:

    ## Kendall . if you, thought Denise `s article is great, last week
    I bought a top of the range Fiat Panda since I been bringin in $6979
    this last month and just a little over 10k this past month . it’s
    actualy my favourite job I’ve ever had . I began this nine months/ago
    and immediately began to make minimum $70… per-hour . have a peek
    here

    ►►►►► http://GetMoreInfo

  5. John Masters says:

    I agree with you Thom. They wouldn’t give a crap that he was corrupt, that’s just business as usual for Congressional Republicans…the problem was, he was attracting too much attention, so no one wanted to in a photo op with him, or otherwise associated. He was actually one of the largest contributors to other congressional campaigns, so he was spreading the money around. Given that, again, you can bet they didn’t care…except, again, he was just too flamboyant and extravagant. He was the moth flying too close to the flame.

    He kind of reminded me of the Eddie Murphy character, Jeff Johnson, in the movie “The Distinguished Gentleman.” The character seizes an opportunity to get easily elected to Congress for no reason other than knowing how much money he can grift. I think this was Schock. But, instead of just being on the dole, and keeping a low profile, he was way too out there, and making sure everyone saw him. There is a reason that most burglars bur-gal in the dark.

  6. John Masters says:

    The issue is that you assume any sort of action or statement by any gay person is sharing “every detail regarding your sexuality to strangers who might not be comfortable with it.” Going somewhere with you same-sex spouse or partner is not “sharing every detail of your sexuality,” it is doing the same thing straight people do. Having a photo of yourself and your significant other on your desk is not some kind of statement that gives any more detail than it would were the couple in the photo heterosexual….unless of course, you spend a lot of time thinking about and/or fantasizing about what the gay couple does in bed. But then it is you filling in the details, not the gay couple.

  7. hidflect says:

    I”ve always got a certain amount of sympathy for the fallen. Maybe it comes from reading too much Greek classics. Heaven knows, I’ve made a part-time career out of writing snarky comments about the Fabulous Mr. Schock but I respect that he stood down. He could’ve been less classy and hung on the bitter end, pulling paychecks until they dragged him kicking and screaming from his office. As a Transcendentalist I like to think he’s pulled back and is re-assessing his tack in life. But if he comes roaring back with some new scam I’ll flame him till the day he expires.

  8. Guest says:

    Gabriella . I agree that Johnny `s posting is cool, last week I got Chrysler when I got my cheque for $ 7542 this past month and-just over, 10/k this past-munth . this is really my favourite job I’ve ever had . I actually started 3 months ago and pretty much immediately brought home at least $72 p/h . see this page

    ►►►►► http://www.Fb.C0m/H0me/Advice

  9. mirth says:

    Ok, let’s say we just happen to pass on a street. I’ll recognize you in your dress jeans and I’ll be the one laughing about something going on only in my head.

  10. BeccaM says:

    Soon to be ex-Representative Aaron Schock, on the issues related to LGBT: Against marriage equality. Against laws preventing employment discrimination. In favor of broad religious exemptions to allow both businesses and private individuals to discriminate against LGBTs in housing, employment and commerce. Received a zero score from the Human Rights Campaign. And basically against gay rights of any kind.

    With respect to his personal life, he’s been giving every appearance of being distinctly not-hetero but refusing to admit it. Not just ‘flamboyance’ but an utter absence of girlfriends or other female romantic companions. Countered by a suspiciously large number of very buff, very close male companions and ‘friends’, including that personal photographer.

    Basically, whatever his orientation, he’s an avowed enemy of gay rights — which puts him well within the camp of far, far right conservative Republicans who actually DO want to recriminalize being gay.

    Based on all this, if indeed Schock is having his action on the down-low, he deserves to be exposed as a hypocrite. And he deserves whatever scorn and ridicule we care to heap upon him.

    p.s. I’m pretty sure you were a troll just pretending to be a gay man.

  11. BeccaM says:

    I smell the distinct whiff of trollage, to be honest… this one attempting to disguise himself as the concern-troll sub-species.

  12. Mike_in_the_Tundra says:

    Well, you’re hardly a stranger, but I will keep that in mind.

  13. mirth says:

    A new account, yes, but to not be recognized one has to be very good at disguising their usual manner way of writing and interacting and this person isn’t.

  14. Moderator3 says:

    i checked his comment history after his first comment. I guess it was my moddy sense.

  15. Thom Allen says:

    I checked his comment history when he first posted. He just joined tonight and these are the only comments he’s ever posted using this account, Ericthesnow”flake”. The “snowflake” smelled kinda trollish. You know how the RWNJ “straights” always obsess over butt secks and outlandish behavior and then, shortly thereafter get caught doing outlandish things while having butt secks.

  16. Mike_in_the_Tundra says:

    “The point of my original comment was to highlight the community’s compulsion with trying tear a person down because of their perceived gayness while at the same time demanding their opponents not do the same.”

    You really think your original post said that? You did not make your point. However, don’t let the door hit you on the ass on your way out.

  17. ericthesnowking says:

    Ok…

    “Good riddance to this crook. Still, I think I must have missed the memo
    that flamboyance automatically equals gay. Whatever happened to keeping
    our sex lives private.”

    Hmm…nothing about bullying, discrimination, or assault if I do say so myself. Anyway, I think I’ve made my point. So long dearies. :-)

  18. Mike_in_the_Tundra says:

    May I suggest that you go back and read your original post, because it sure doesn’t say what you think it says.

    I have never asked to be accepted with open arms. I’m quite happy just not being discriminated against.

    Personally, I hope Schock isn’t gay. I don’t want someone like that being associated with the gay community. However, I can see why he’s being attacked in this manner. It’s his voting record concerning gay rights. It’s atrocious. HRC gave him a rating of zero.

    As far as being flamboyant, my idea of dressing up is clean jeans. I pay little attention to how others dress.

  19. mirth says:

    Don’t hold back on my account.

  20. mirth says:

    Which has nothing, like totally, to do with your assertion that the “LGBT community” is not only thin-skinned but incredibly so for proclaiming their pride.

    Say, unless you about 10 years old, what’s up with your flamboyant avatar?

  21. ericthesnowking says:

    I’m sorry. Did I give the impression that any of your responses have offended me? Oh no! I assure you, no offense taken here, :-)

  22. ericthesnowking says:

    First, I never said that gays should be “discriminated against, bullied, or assaulted.” Those are your words. Someone disapproving of you because they have different beliefs, however, does not amount to discrimination, bullying or assault.

    I also never said that people should not be flamboyant. As I stated earlier, flamboyance does automatically mean that someone is gay. And in any case it is not flamboyance that is a problem, but the community’s hard lined insistence that it be welcomed with open arms everywhere. That is just not realistic.

    Anyway we’re getting off topic. The point of my original comment was to highlight the community’s compulsion with trying tear a person down because of their perceived gayness while at the same time demanding their opponents not do the same. As the article highlights, there are plenty of other areas that people could focus on regarding Mr. Schock’s record. Yet, we insist on making a private aspect of Mr. Schock’s life public.

    If you don’t people obsession about your sex life, don’t obsess over theirs. And please stop with the histrionics about supposed “hate crimes.” Again, disagreement does not equal discrimination.

  23. mirth says:

    I think you don’t know the meaning of “thin-skinned” – hypersensitive, easily offended, delicate – and cannot recognize it in yourself.

  24. Mike_in_the_Tundra says:

    “But why the insistence on making your sexuality the core tenant of your identity?”

    Why do you feel that our sexuality is the core tenant of our identity? It is an important part of our identity. Everyone’s sexuality is an important part of their identity. It often determines with whom we spend our lives. It affects our politics. In my case, it determined who my children are.

    “why insist on trying to share every detail regarding your sexuality to strangers who might not be comfortable with it?”

    I guess I really need to stop going up to total strangers and describing my last sexual encounter.

  25. Thom Allen says:

    There is nothing wrong with being discriminated against, bullied and assaulted? Really?

    “All gay and straight Americans should have the right to live their lives however they wish.” Then by what you just wrote, those who want to be flamboyant should be allowed to be. Yet you’re criticizing those who do. That’s logically inconsistent.

    I don’t know where you live, but most of the LGBTQs that I know don’t share the details of their sexuality. How often do you see same-sex couples even holding hands or kissing in public? I rarely if ever see that on the street, mush less discussions of sexual positions and techniques.

    And what does being “thin skinned” (if that is even true) have to do with proclaiming that he’s “out and proud”? Someone saying he’s gay and OK with it doesn’t make him any more, or less, thin skinned then he was previously.

  26. Thom Allen says:

    I think the other thing that rankled them was that he was such a publicity hound. Not that they’d see that as bad if he were generating appropriate publicity (signing legislation. kissing babies, giving speeches.) But that’s NOT what he did. His social media accounts were all about Aaron the playboy, bon vivant, sybarite. The other Repubs may do exactly the same thing, but they keep that on the downlow. Schock was so flashy they wanted to keep him at a distance.

  27. ericthesnowking says:

    There is nothing wrong with any of this. All gay and straight Americans should have the right to live their lives however they wish. But why the insistence on making your sexuality the core tenant of your identity? For instance, why insist on trying to share every detail regarding your sexuality to strangers who might not be comfortable with it? It would appear to me that the LGBT community is incredibly thin skinned if it’s members cannot go one minute without proclaiming how gay they are and how proud they are of it.

  28. Thom Allen says:

    You know, making a spectacle of ourselves like getting an education, working, having a relationship, getting married buying a house, having kids, taking care of our parents, voting, etc. All of that “outrageous” and “flamboyant” stuff. AND doing it while sometimes being discriminated against and getting bullied or assaulted.

  29. Mike_in_the_Tundra says:

    I hope you have fresh air pumped into your closet. Now please share how you think we make spectacles of ourselves as a community. If you dare type the word parade, I’ll crawl through the “intrertubes” and hit you so hard that your great-grandmother will say, “Ow.”

  30. ericthesnowking says:

    Of course we have the luxury. If we would stop making such a spectacle of ourselves as a community, you’ll find most people won’t give a flying flip who you’re fucking.

  31. Mike_in_the_Tundra says:

    Keeping our sex lives private? Is that in the legendary (and mythical) Gay Agenda? I’m male, and when I introduce someone to my husband, the cat is out of the bag. Coming out is a decision to not keep our sex lives private. As Harvey Milk said, “Come out, come out wherever you are.” Coming out is a strong weapon against homophobia.

    The voters in Minnesota voted down a gay marriage ban a couple of years ago. The strategy that was helpful in accomplishing that was the decision to have everyone (who could) come out to their friends and family. We don’t have the luxury of keeping out sex lives private, and why should we?

  32. ericthesnowking says:

    Good riddance to this crook. Still, I think I must have missed the memo that flamboyance automatically equals gay. Whatever happened to keeping our sex lives private.

  33. Jon Green says:

    D’oh — thanks for the catch.

  34. Melba toast says:

    Just one thing: you spelled it “Shock” a few times, rather than “Schock”.

  35. Max_1 says:

    LOL… the headline leaves me asking, “On who…?”

  36. Indigo says:

    They were wrong, you’re right. That’s surprising because they’re pretty good at reading their own. But there you have it, the small town prom king. What a Harlequin he turned out to be.

  37. BeccaM says:

    Narcissistic personality disorder, probably a combination of the unprincipled and elitist subtypes. Simple enough to figure out. He wasn’t content just to live the high life, he required companions and the attention of being photographed while doing it.

  38. devlzadvocate says:

    Another member of the Larry Craig Club. Boehner said his resignation was the “right thing to do.” Same thing he said when Craig flamed.

  39. BeccaM says:

    Maybe he just wants enough time to sort through his shady dealings and shred the incriminating stuff before he loses any remaining degree of Congressional deference and immunity…

    Either that, or he needs a week or two to line up his cushy Wingnut Welfare post-Congress lobbying job, seeing as he clearly did not foresee being forced to shut down his grift and corruption operation so soon.

  40. BeccaM says:

    I look at those pants and see a man who thinks to himself, ‘I can make anything look fahh-bu-lous!’

  41. BeccaM says:

    Given his voting record, public statements, and rather blatant hypocrisy, never from me.

  42. BeccaM says:

    It also would’ve been trivial for someone with Schock’s looks, influence and money to have acquired a ‘beard.’ He didn’t even try. In fact, if anything, he seems to have not cared at all to be seen traveling all over with a hunky male companion.

  43. BeccaM says:

    He was invited to the Big Kids’ Table with the belief he’d be ideologically pure (he mostly maintained that, ‘cept for being unambiguously gay), politically reliable (check), and a major fund-raiser. From his early days, he was seen as someone who could raise improbably large amounts of campaign money, which the GOP leadership thought they could harness.

    Turned out the only person Schock cared about raising money for was himself.

    I think they also thought he knew how to stick to the letter, if not the spirit of campaign finance laws and rules on Congressional spending — and here they were 100% wrong.

  44. BeccaM says:

    ‘All of the above,’ I think. Any halfway competent politician with good advisers can get past a scandal or two, provided they don’t involve being photographed snorting meth off the ass of a male prostitute.

    But Schock’s scandals and shenanigans just kept piling up. There was the photographer. The Downton Abbey office. A series of shady real estate and bank deals dating back to before his political career took off, and which over time appear to have become ever more blatantly illegal and corrupt. Improperly charging his campaign and the feds for travel expenses, and lying on mileage reimbursements. Charging his campaign and the feds for obviously social events, such as a plane trip to see a baseball game. Taking staff on junkets, both domestic and international. Accepting improper gifts from donors and failing to report gifts as required by law. And of course, being incredibly ostentatious.

    I mean, basically, a Congressweasel can get away with doing all kinds of stuff, including living very well. However, a smart one knows you don’t hire a professional photographer and post photos of yourself doing all this online. A narcissist doesn’t think this way: His entire attitude is, “LOOK AT MEEEEEE! Aren’t I fabulous?”

    Personally, I think Schock went into politics because he saw it as an opportunity for corruption and enrichment.

    Although his resignation came immediately after Politico was about to publish their discovery that Schock had falsified mileage rembursement claims (he claimed 170k miles worth of reimbursements from the feds and his campaign funds for a vehicle he sold in 2012 with just 80k miles on it), there were two other stories also breaking this past Monday. One was the Office of Congressional Ethics was beginning to question Schock’s associates, and the other involved Schock buying a warehouse from a donor and then getting a mortgage on the property from another donor. I’m no expert on campaign finance laws, but I suspect the investigation coupled with dealings that probably were totally illegal was what prompted the resignation.

    I’m just guessing, but it wouldn’t surprise me if the lawyers and consultants he hired a few weeks ago to get him through this mess sat him down Monday or yesterday and said, “You’re dirty and they’re going to catch you. If this goes to trial, you’re going to jail like McDonnell. Your only option to minimize the damage is to bail right now.”

    Schock’s attitude towards laws and regs affecting him were cavalier to the extreme. He remarked he “hoped” he wasn’t violating the law. When it was pointed out his aristocratic Downton Abbey-themed office was a violation of gift laws, as I remarked above, his attitude was like that of a kid caught stealing: He seemed to think all he had to do was feign ignorance and put back what he’d taken, and there’d be no lasting repercussions.

    Plus, despite a 100% anti-gay voting record, I doubt anybody actually was fooled into thinking he was straight.

  45. Indigo says:

    It’s as if the Republicans didn’t really like him. I wonder why that was?

  46. BeccaM says:

    Ideologically, he was the perfect GOPer: A 0% rating from the Human Right’s Campaign (HRC), which takes some doing to achieve. But in terms of serving in Congress, he seems to have been focused solely on leveraging his political career to live the high life and get filthy rich.

    From another angle though, despite his ideological purity on supporting anti-gay positions — from marriage equality to employment discrimination to hate crimes — I also suspect his rather conspicuous lack of any attempt whatsoever to acquire a ‘beard’ (to use the colloquialism) did not help him among the fundie Republicans.

    Ultimately though, Schock has no one to blame but himself. It was pride, hubris, and greed which brought him down.

  47. While he’s busy Schocking the monkey to life, don’t ever forget this about the ex-congressman: She is fierce!

  48. nicho says:

    A lobby job. Mmmmm. That sounds kinky. And with two Italians at that. Could be a successful porn video. “Aaron’s First Lobby Job” starring Dolce and Gabbana.

  49. Indigo says:

    Creative financing. He puts me in mind of a small town prom king. Entitled at every level the small town has because Dad’s the local muggity-wump. I think the most fascinating part of his little feifdom was that he couldn’t be bothered to cultivate supportive relationships with the other Republican nut-jobs and leadership in the House. That was weak. Ignorant, actually.

  50. 2karmanot says:

    At least he’s warmer than Lady Mary and certainly more clueless than Lord Grantham. And, pretty soon he’ll be as whiny as Lady Edith. I’m dying to see the baby by his personal trainer.

  51. BeccaM says:

    There’s a story dating back to the beginning of Schock’s rise in politics, 2008, how he’d been caught using his office in 2001 as a certified notary public to help his parents backdate some documents related to a tax shelter. (Later, it would turn out these shelters were scammy and fraudulent, which would later still uncover the abuse of the notary seal.) Most of us are familiar how being a notary isn’t that big a deal, but it a side-line only for those who are sticklers for following rules and who are detail-oriented.

    From the start, Aaron Schock demonstrated a lack in both those areas, countered by an abundance self-entitlement, narcissism, pride and ego. I’m sure we’ve all encountered these types during out lifetimes: People who lead seemingly charmed lives, behaving as if they’re entitled to everything and are immune to having to follow rules of any kind.

    A rule that can somehow be circumvented can be ignored. There is no moral or immoral, ethical or unethical, there is only the question, “How can I get what I want and get away with it?”

    There’s a hell of a lot of grifting and garden-variety corruption the average elected government official can get away with. But we’ve been learning Schock was running full-tilt, with the revelation about his Downton Abbey congressional office being the crack that finally brought down the whole edifice. At this point, when it became obvious he’d been skirting even the notoriously lax Congressional ethics rules, and behaved like a kid caught shoplifting who thinks he need only return the candy bar he just tried to steal and all would be forgiven, it was only natural people would start asking, “Well, where else has this guy been cheating?”

    It turns out the answer was, “Everywhere there was plunder to be had.”

    Contrary to Congressional rules, he was taking private jets and ‘copters everywhere — and whenever he could manage it, billing the cost to his campaign (illegal) or to the federal government (doubly illegal), to the tune of tens of thousands of dollars. By one report, the $40k he spent redecorating his office last year was on top of another $100k spent between 2009 and 2012. The AP was finally beginning to dig into how Schock had gone from “teen who once worked at a gravel company” to multimillionaire so quickly — and it turns out most of it was from shady real estate deals, more closely resembling kickbacks. Such as the sale of a home he owned for more than three times its assessed value.

    In fact, by a number of reports that were beginning to show up in the press, to become a campaign donor for Schock was an invitation to go into the real estate business with him. And in Congress, he could be counted upon to push for legislation and projects which would benefit both the donor and himself.

    http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/lawmaker-facing-spending-probe-benefited-from-donor-projects/

    and

    http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20150317/NEWS02/150319814/schock-donor-played-a-role-in-lawmakers-business-deal

    The last-ish story to hit via Politico, that he’d padded a mileage reimbursement by almost double for an SUV he owned for four years was probably (in my opinion) just a coincidence. I actually believe this here (via ChicagoBusiness.com’s timeline) is what prompted Schock’s resignation:

    March 16: The Office of Congressional Ethics reaches out to Schock’s associates as it begins an investigation into Schock’s dealings. Meanwhile, details emerge of another business deal between Schock and one of his political donors: A shell company linked to Schock paid a political donor $750,000 last year for a warehouse in Peoria, then took out a $600,000 mortgage for the property from a local bank run by other donors.

    Basically, he was improperly expensing everything and accepting all kinds of gifts he never should have. Plus, his pattern of behavior in amassing quite a lot of wealth in a very short period of time seems not to have even conceived that it was overtly corrupt and rather illegal as well.

    However, this is what the self-entitled narcissist will do. It also didn’t help that he did not have many allies in DC or in the GOP leadership…

  52. Ninong says:

    Was it because he failed to disclose that he used taxpayer funds to hire a personal photographer (and traveling companion) to go with him on that taxpayer-funded trip to India? Apparently Aaron and Jonathan Link have been personal friends for some time. Link is a professional photographer and Schock paid him to travel with him on the trip to India but he failed to disclose that as required.

    http://www.kennethinthe212.com/2015/03/the-missing-link.html

  53. Aaron Hdez says:

    Thank you for the strike-over phrases, they were fabuolous!

  54. Ninong says:

    He will have more time to work on his abs (and his glutes) with his personal trainer.

    http://aravosis.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/aaron-schock-trainer.jpg

  55. Ninong says:

    I think it was Politico that finally brought him down, especially once they added the blatant fraud of charging 170,000 miles of official congressional use on a vehicle that had only half that on its odometer when he sold it. Traveling with an undisclosed personal photographer and racking up tens of thousands of dollars in taxpayer-funded party expenses just doesn’t seem all that conservative to me. But then neither did this Easter outfit. He looked like a gift-wrapped wedding present.

  56. 2karmanot says:

    A Lobby job from Dolce and Gabbana?

  57. 2karmanot says:

    Just as we X-pect’d!

  58. nicho says:

    Well, you know better than I. I just find it curious that it was at exactly the end of the month, leading my suspicious mind to think there was some, as you say, threshold. Maybe he just wants time to spend more taxpayer money on something.

  59. emjayay says:

    Unless it gets him to a time served threshold it won’t matter much with any possible federal pension. And unlike what every wingnut and some others seem to believe, the subsidized federal employee health benefits end one month after the end of employment.

  60. Indigo says:

    Possibly. The Downton Abbey thing didn’t sit well with his public.

  61. dcinsider says:

    By the way, Jon, loved the headline. :)

  62. emjayay says:

    Nice link-filled post underlining the extensive coverage closet boy has gotten here. Great stuff, and no doubt a big part of what took him down.

    Certainly the really mindless endless flaunting of the worst of stereotypical superficial gay narcissism (while getting that zero gay issues score) makes him a more interesting case than the usual political grifter.
    Someone here pointed out that his tango photo was something staged on the street (or was it in front of a photo backdrop) with the tango lady with her foot on a stool off camera. His surfing photo and jete in front of the snowy background also appear to be similar deal.

  63. emjayay says:

    Being apparently a gerrymandered super Republican district, they will get another one of the same in terms of policies if not lifestyle.

  64. Jim Olson says:

    Wait, Aaron Schock is gay? (It worked with Ken Mehlman…)

  65. nicho says:

    I think they had him dead to rights on a significant amount of financial hanky-panky. It’s odd though that he delayed his departure until March 31, instead of immediately. There’s something curious about that. Something happens at the end of the month that feathers his nest somehow. Pension? Benefits? I don’t know.

  66. nicho says:

    Sort of misleading headline. At first I thought we’d discovered the reason for his quitting. I expected to find out there were pictures of him . . . . you know . . . giving someone head. But then, maybe that’s just my dirty mind.

  67. Indigo says:

    He gave up rather easily. I wonder what’s behind that?

  68. dcinsider says:

    The thing that strikes me most about Schock’s sexual orientation speculation is the LACK of anyone out there who came to his defense saying “Yeah, Aaron was a stud in college, no way he’s gay” or “I am currently dating the Congressman, and he’s not gay.” Those defenders are AUTOMATIC when a real straight public person is suggested to be gay, and even more so when it’s a male politician int he GOP. It’s like a knee jerk reaction.

    What happened when the gay rumors swirled around Little Lord Fauntleroy for the past year?

    Crickets. Total crickets.

    Given his homophobic voting record, John A’s brilliant exposure of his Instagram account here, and his ongoing relationship with the professional photographer, there is simply no doubt that this prick was (and is) gay. Absolutely pathetic.

  69. nicho says:

    And Schock will come out and apologize to the LGBT community in 5, 4, 3 …….. Then, we’re supposed to embrace him with loving hearts.

  70. The_Fixer says:

    Yeah, the way he’s dressed in that photo above fairly screams “retrograde fashion sense.”

    Why do I look at those pants and think “Garanimals”?

  71. UncleBucky says:

    One more photo. If not Downton Abbey, then Caravaggio’s Narcissus as Aaron Schock!

  72. The_Fixer says:

    I share your suspicions that there’s more funny business that he’s hiding. Usually, ethically challenged people like Schock stick around ’till the last dog is hung. He gave up awfully easily. Hell, guys like Tom Delay have to be thrown out of office. This guy either had more and bigger dirt to hide, or there’s something else at work.

    The big question, in light of the fact that disgraced Republicans always seem to fall up, what kind of sweetheart job is he going to be blessed with? He raised an awful lot of money for the party, someone likely thinks he should be rewarded. It’s “custom” in the GOP to reward the most effective money raisers, regardless of how ethically challenged they may be.

    It will be interesting to see how this all works out, because you know that he’s not out of the woods yet and there are going to be a lot more questions.

    It must suck to have such expensive tastes and have to worry about not being able to enjoy them because you’re worrying about paying very big fines, or prison. Prison decor is as far from Downton Abbey as anyone could imagine.

  73. dcinsider says:

    Well done Jon.

  74. UncleBucky says:

    Hahaha! Snarkity snark snark…. BUT TRUE!

    Something is rotten in the State of Forgottonia (Western Illinois, see my post above)… :D

  75. UncleBucky says:

    I am from Illinois. I am former resident of Quincy, IL, and well, I can’t say much about Peoria, but the Quincy I remember fits him like a “T”. Reason being, it was the former capital of “Forgottonia, the Western Part of Illinois in the 70s with NO superhighways. The result of having limited travel is that the place was culturally isolated, and people like Schock (boy oh boy does Quincy have some rustic German surnames!) can “pass” muster with the ridiculous outfits from the days of leisure suits and strangely matched colours. That photo of him is almost characteristic of how I think of that area. You can’t be out without the whole town of 40,000 knowing, and of course, you can develop fashion hiccups from trying to be “hip” but failing miserably.

    Too bad. Awwww….

  76. Jimmy says:

    I’m not a resident of Schock’s district or even the state of Illinois, but I say good riddance. He was a glaring example of what is so wrong with elected officials these days. I would say the people in his district are the winners here, but they kept electing him by resounding margins so they got what they deserved, which was a whole lot of nothing.

  77. HeartlandLiberal says:

    I still suspect there is something more to come underlying the suddenness and swiftness of his resignation. Hopefully there will be followup and more reporting in the future on this. Either that or even the GOP could no longer hold their nose, and if they told him to beat it because of money and ethics charges, it has got to be very bad coming from them, they being the very embodiment of ethical behavior themselves (insert end snark tag here).

© 2019 AMERICAblog Media, LLC. All rights reserved. · Entries RSS