Sen. Ernst pushes to stop Pentagon credit card fraud
Earlier this year, an audit conducted by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) exposed an eye-popping $40 billion in annual expenditures throughout the government on 4.6 million credit cards - a number that's nearly twice the number of active federal employees. Thousands of the transactions unearthed in a separate report by the Pentagon's inspector general occurred at 'high-risk locations' including casino ATMs, bars and nightclubs.
'After exposing sweeping abuse of government credit cards, I am chopping up the Pentagon 's plastic,' Ernst told the Daily Mail. 'From casinos to bars and much more, bureaucrats have been swiping away and sending the American people the check.'
Ernst's office was unable to confirm when her measure could receive a vote before the full Senate body and provisions like these often get stripped out or risk being voted down during last minute negotiations to get the must-pass legislation over the finish line. The Senate version of the NDAA has passed out of the Armed Services Committee, and the House is scheduled to vote on their version of the bill Thursday afternoon.
The Senate did not achieve final passage of last year's NDAA until mid-December. Slashing waste, fraud, and abuse has been top of mind for Republicans in Washington since President Trump reclaimed the White White House and greenlit an agency tasked with slashing the federal bureaucracy, and Erst has been eager to align herself with the president's objectives as she contemplates a re-election bid in 2026. But her provision only covers the Pentagon, not the broader $40 billion problem plaguing all agencies.
'Washington insiders wouldn't leave their own old credit cards floating around, and there is no reason why they should treat taxpayer-funded credit cards with less responsibility,' Ernst concluded. Some of the bad actors have been identified as part of ongoing investigations. In 2020, a Texas National Guardsman was sentenced to two years in federal prison and ordered to repay over $75,000 after it was uncovered that he used 'General Services Administration and Department of Defense 'fleet cards' to purchase fuel and maintenance for government vehicles.'
Other similar instances of fraud are decades old, showing that misuse of government-issued credit cards has been a pervasive problem. In 2005, an ex-US Army recruiter was arrested for using a 'stolen card to purchase gasoline, automotive parts and food for his personal use and consumption in excess of $13,000.'
A 2002 report by the Government Accountability Office noted that a 'Fort Benning military cardholder charged $30,000 for personal goods and cash advances before and after retirement.' The same report also said that the individual tasked with approving the charges only acted as a 'rubber stamp' and failed to notice the cardholder retired.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
3 hours ago
- The Guardian
‘We're anti-federal chaos': Democratic cities prepare for worst after Trump's tirades against DC and LA
As sand-colored Humvees rolled down Washington DC streets against the wishes of local leaders, mayors around the country planned for what they would do if the Trump administration comes for them next. Donald Trump's disdain for Democratic-run cities featured heavily in his 2024 campaign. The president vowed to take over DC – a promise he attempted to fulfill this week. Earlier this year, he sent national guard troops to Los Angeles amid protests despite California opposing the move, which led to a lawsuit from the state. City leaders say there are appropriate ways for the federal government to partner with them to address issues such as crime, but that Trump is using the pretext of crime and unrest to override their local authority, create chaos and distract from a bruising news cycle about his ties to Jeffrey Epstein. Many cities have worked to bring down violent crime rates – they are on the decline in most large cities, though mayors acknowledge they still have work to do to improve the lives of their residents. 'President Trump constantly creates a narrative that cities like Seattle are liberal hellholes and we are lawless, and that is just not the fact,' said Bruce Harrell, the mayor of Seattle. 'We are the home of great communities and great businesses. So his view of our city is not aligned with reality. It's to distract the American people from his failures as a president.' By sending in the military, some noted, Trump was probably escalating crime, contributing to distrust in the government and creating unsafe situations both for residents and service members. Even Republican mayors or mayors in red states have said they don't agree with Trump usurping local control for tenuous reasons. The US Conference of Mayors, currently led by the Republican mayor of Oklahoma City, David Holt, pushed back against Trump's takeover of DC, saying 'local control is always best'. 'These mayors around the country, by the way, from multiple ideological backgrounds, they love their city more than they love their ideology,' said Jacob Frey, the mayor of Minneapolis. Mayors told the Guardian they are ready to stand up for their cities, legally and otherwise, should Trump come knocking. They are working with their chiefs of police to ensure they agree on the chain of command and coordinating with governors in the event the national guard is deployed. Because Trump has so frequently brought up plans to crack down on cities, large Democratic cities have been strategizing with emergency planning departments and city attorneys. But Trump has shown he's willing to bend and break the law in his pursuits against cities. The Pentagon is reportedly planning to potentially put national guard troops at the ready, stationed in Alabama and Arizona, to deploy to cities experiencing unrest. He has indicated this is just the beginning of an assault on cities. His attorney general sent letters to a host of Democratic cities this week, threatening to arrest local leaders if they don't cooperate with federal authorities on immigration enforcement. The idea that troops could be on the ground for any number of reasons in cities around the US should alarm people, said Brett Smiley, the Democratic mayor of Providence, Rhode Island. 'This is not something that we should be used to, and we shouldn't let this administration break yet another norm or standard in our society, such that a couple years from now, we don't think twice about when we see troops in our cities,' Smiley said. The roots of Trump's battle with cities stretch back to his first administration, and they align with common narratives on the right about how cities today have fallen off because of liberal policies. Project 2025, the conservative blueprint, called for crackdowns on cities, including withholding federal funds to force compliance with deportation plans. His campaign promises included a commitment to 'deploying federal assets, including the National Guard, to restore law and order when local law enforcement refuses to act'. In a video from 2023, he explained: 'In cities where there has been a complete breakdown of law and order, where the fundamental rights of our citizens are being intolerably violated, I will not hesitate to send in federal assets including the national guard until safety is restored.' In 2020, he reportedly wished he cracked down much harder and faster on protesters and rioters during the demonstrations after George Floyd's murder. Now, he's using smaller problems – anti-immigration protests and crime against a government employee – to declare emergencies. Minneapolis, where the protests began after a police officer killed Floyd, has at times made Trump's list of rundown cities. Frey, a Democrat, said he didn't know whether 2020 protests played a role in Trump's current actions. 'I don't think anybody can pretend to know what's in Donald Trump's head,' Frey told the Guardian. 'It's an utter mess of idiocy. I don't know what he's thinking. I don't know what he's thinking or what the rhyme or reason is. I mean, clearly there's a focus on Democratically run cities.' When Trump called out other cities on his radar, he named blue cities run by Black mayors – Baltimore, Oakland, Los Angeles, Chicago. 'The fact that my city and all the others called out by the president on Sunday, led by Black mayors, are all making historic progress on crime, but they're the ones getting called up – it tells you everything that you need to know,' Baltimore's mayor, Brandon Scott, said in a press call this week. The federal government can often partner with cities to address crime – several Democratic mayors noted that they worked with the Biden administration on this front successfully. But those partnerships are mutually agreed upon collaborations, not overrides of local policing. 'We're not anti-federal help. We're anti-federal chaos,' Frey said. Detroit's mayor, Mike Duggan, said in a statement that his city is seeing its lowest homicides, shootings and carjackings in more than 50 years, crediting a partnership with federal agencies and the US attorney as a major part of that success. 'This partnership is simple and effective: DPD does the policing and the feds have strongly increased support for federal prosecution,' Duggan said. 'We appreciate the partnership we have today and are aware of no reason either side would want to change it.' Mayors are not saying they have solved the issue of violent crime, Scott said, though they are acknowledging they have reduced it and will continue to work toward further reductions. 'We need folks that want to actually help us do that, versus try to take and show force and make us into something other than a representative democracy that we all are proud to call home,' he said. Mayors throughout the US made a clear distinction between Trump's authority in Washington DC compared to other cities. Washington has a legal provision in the Home Rule Act of 1973 that allows for a president to take over its police department during an emergency on a temporary basis, though Trump is the first to use this power. Other cities have no similar concept in law. Even with the Home Rule Act, Washington officials sued Trump after his attempt to replace the city's police chief, saying the president was mounting a 'hostile takeover' of DC police. Trump and the city agreed to scale back the federal takeover on Friday, keeping DC's police chief in place. 'We know when people want to say they're going to be a dictator on day one, they never voluntarily give up that aspiration on day two,' Norm Eisen, an attorney who frequently sues the Trump administration, said in a press call this week. 'That is what you are seeing in the streets of the District of Columbia.' In Minneapolis, Frey said the city has prepared operational plans with police, fire and emergency management and readied itself legally. 'Our chief of police and I are lockstep, and he reports up to the commissioner of safety, who reports up to me,' Frey said. 'There's no lack of clarity as to how this reporting structure works, and it certainly does not go to Donald Trump. Doing something like that in Minneapolis, it would be just a blatantly illegal usurpation of local control were this to happen here. Of course, we would take immediate action to get injunctive relief.' Trump's decision to send in national guard troops to Los Angeles is also legally questionable. Governors typically direct guard troops. The California governor, Gavin Newsom, sued Trump for using the military for domestic law enforcement in defiance of the Posse Comitatus Act. The case was heard by a judge this week. Harrell, of Seattle, said he is confident he will be able to protect his police department and the city's residents if Trump sends troops. 'What I have to do is make sure that the people under my jurisdiction as mayor feel confident in an ability to fight his overreach, and that our law department is well geared to advance our legal arguments,' he said. Scott, of Baltimore, said he was prepared to take every action 'legally and otherwise'. Still, there is some uncertaintyand unsteadiness about how cities can respond if Trump calls up the national guard. 'It's very difficult to know what our options are, because we're in unchartered territory here,' Smiley, of Providence, said. 'It's unprecedented and I don't know what my options are with respect to preventing troops from coming in, which is one of the reasons that I'm trying to be so proactive about making it clear that it's not necessary, it's not wanted.' This article was amended on 17 August 2025. An earlier version stated that tanks were present in Washington DC, when they were actually Humvees.
The Independent
10 hours ago
- The Independent
Trump shares First Lady Melania's letter to Putin as he rages over coverage of Alaska summit
President Trump has posted the full text of a letter from First Lady Melania Trump that he delivered to Russia's Vladimir Putin as part of the pair's Friday summit in Alaska. In the letter, which Putin reportedly read 'immediately' in front of delegates at the summit, the First Lady urged the Russian leader to remember the innocence of the children caught in the middle of Russia's invasion of Ukraine. 'In protecting the innocence of these children, you will do more than serve Russia alone — you serve humanity itself,' the letter reads. 'Such a bold idea transcends all human division, and you, Mr. Putin, are fit to implement this vision with the stroke of the pen today. It is is time.' The president revealed the letter on Truth Social, after making multiple posts criticizing media coverage of the Alaska summit, which did not result in any lasting deal to end the Ukraine war. "It's incredible how the Fake News violently distorts the TRUTH when it comes to me," Trump wrote in an earlier post. "There is NOTHING I can say or do that would lead them to write or report honestly about me." "If I got Russia to give up Moscow as part of the Deal, the Fake News, and their PARTNER, the Radical Left Democrats, would say I made a terrible mistake and a very bad deal,' he said in another.
The Independent
10 hours ago
- The Independent
Confederate statue dedicated to ‘faithful slaves' targeted in class-action lawsuit
A federal lawsuit filed in Columbia, North Carolina is targeting a Confederate monument outside a courthouse that bears an inscription with the line "IN APPRECIATION OF OUR FAITHFUL SLAVES." The lawsuit is calling for that portion of the inscription to be removed or covered up. 'I just remember thinking that slaves had to be so-called faithful or they would be punished or even worse,' Sherryreed Robinson, one of the members of the lawsuit, told the New York Times. 'As an adult, the words sitting on the grounds of a courthouse made me question whether Blacks could really receive justice there.' Earlier this year, a federal judge ruled that a portion of the lawsuit could move forward. Tyrrell County officials have been resistant to taking action themselves, citing state monument protection laws that, they say, bars them from making any changes to the monument. The challenge to the statue — which sits on the lawn of the Tyrrell County Courthouse — comes at a time when President Donald Trump and his administration are restoring Confederate names and monuments after many were demolished and destroyed during or in response to racial justice protests in 2020. In June, Trump demanded that the military restore Confederate names that had been previously removed from military bases. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has ordered that a Confederate sculpture removed from Arlington National Cemetery be re-installed. The lawsuit in North Carolina was launched last year — before Trump returned to office — by the Concerned Citizens of Tyrrell County, which is made up primarily of older Black residents. The filing argues that the "faithful slave" portion of its inscription constitutes racial discrimination in government speech, which the litigants argue is a violation of the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause. It calls for the county to remove or cover the message. Tyrrell County officials moved to have the lawsuit dismissed in 2024, arguing that county officials cannot change the monument based on a state law limiting how an "object of remembrance" on state property can be changed or moved. 'The North Carolina Court of Appeals has ruled that county commissioners are bound by this statute, and that commissioners who are bound by this statute are not motivated by a discriminatory intent,' the motion reads. 'Tyrrell County should not be subject to liability based on its decision to follow state law.' The statue was one of many Confederate monuments erected during the Jim Crow era in the wake of the U.S. Civil War. The Tyrell Monument Association, founded by former Confederate Army lieutenant colonel William Fessenden Beasley, gifted the monument to the county. It has stood on the courthouse lawn since 1902. It depicts a Confederate soldier standing on a base that includes a bust of General Robert E Lee. There are inscriptions on each of the base's four sides, one of which includes the reference to "faithful slaves." Mark Snell Brickhouse, whose great-great-grandfather's name is one of many Confederates' etched on the monument, said he visits the monument and the family cemetery because it honors his family, but he told the Times he agrees that the "faithful slave" portion should be covered. 'I love the statue because it honors my family members,' Brickhouse, 72, told the paper. 'But I can see how the words are offensive to some people. I think the statue should stay because it reflects our history, but those words should be covered.' The Concerned Citizens of Tyrell County tried in the 1990's to have the statue removed completely, but have since changed their course, only asking for the reference to slaves to be removed or covered. Ian Mance, a lawyer with Emancipate North Carolina, a racial justice and advocacy group, told the Times that the statue outside the Tyrrell County Courthouse is the only known Confederate monument that directly endorses or shows an appreciation for, slavery. 'This is the only monument of its kind at a courthouse with that language of appreciation, or an endorsement, of slavery on it,' he said. 'You are talking about families who have been here since before the Civil War. For them, there is this feeling that this monument is offering commentary about their families.' According to Mance, the lawsuit is not seeking damages.
