Ocasio-Cortez Faces Backlash For Giving Her Boyfriend A Congressional Email Account

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez faced fierce backlash on Friday after it emerged that she has given her boyfriend Riley Roberts a congressional email account.

The 29-year old Congresswoman was forced to defend her actions on Twitter saying that it’s only so her boyfriend can look at her calendar.

Political consultant Luke Thompson tweeted a picture of his official House email address, which went viral immediately.

“While you were having a nice Valentine’s Day, @AOC decided to put her boyfriend on staff – drawing a salary on the taxpayer’s dime. Nice to see her adapting to the swamp so quickly,” he wrote.

Ocasio-Cortez fired back, tweeting: “Actually this cal designation is a permission so he can have access to my Google Cal. Congressional spouses get Gcal access all the time. Next time check your facts before you tweet nonsense.”

Her chief of staff Saikat Chakrabarti defended her action, saying it is a normal thing for a spouse or partner.

“He’s not paid,” he tweeted. “We have no volunteers in the office. He’s not doing any government work. He can see her calendar just like spouses/partners/family members in other congressional office.

Spouses and partners normally get http://mail.house.gov e-mail addresses for the purpose of getting calendar access.”

David O’Boyle, Spokesperson for the Office of the Chief Administrative Officer, told Fox News:

“From time to time, at the request of members, spouses and partners are provided House email accounts for the purposes of viewing the member’s calendar.”

After Thompson’s tweet went viral, Jason Chaffets, former chairman of the House Oversight Committee, told Fox News:

“It’s totally naive and inappropriate – you wouldn’t allow it in most companies, let alone the House of Representatives. There should be real consequences.

“When I was in the House, my scheduler would forward my wife my schedule once a week. But you’re not allowed unfettered access. And he isn’t even her spouse. It should be referred to the ethics committee for further investigation.”

What are your thoughts on this? Please share and comment.