Huge Conflict of Interest Potential with the January 6 House Committee
The Jan. 6 Committee could be in some hot water over a major potential conflict of interest. They hired Brian Young who is a senior financial investigator at the consultancy Polar Solutions Inc. He is also a contractor for the Jan. 6 Committee, according to his LinkedIn profile as well as an internal congressional document obtained by the DCNF.
Young is also married to House Deputy Sergeant-at-Arms (SAA) Kim E. Campbell, the second most senior official in the SAA. They, along with the U.S. Capitol Police are being probed by the committee for security failures in connection to the Capitol riot.
It looks like Young’s work could be reviewing the performance of the SAA or Capitol Police, according to Tom Jones, executive director of the watchdog American Accountability Foundation.
That is a major conflict of interest.
“Young needs to come clean about what he is doing for the J6 Committee,” Jones told the DCNF. “There is no way a husband can give an independent and objective assessment of his wife’s performance.”
The House and Senate SAA offices typically coordinate with U.S. Capitol Police to maintain Capitol security. The Jan. 6 Committee is investigating “the sharing of intelligence” between federal, state, and local agencies with the SAA offices and Capitol Police.
The committee is also supposed to be investigating the House SAA and other government offices’ “systems for monitoring” intelligence on or before Jan. 6. The plan is to issue both an interim and final report on its findings, conclusions, and recommendations “for corrective measures.”
“For this committee to utilize, in any capacity, a consultant who is literally married to a high ranking official within the SAA’s office is highly inappropriate,” Republican South Carolina Rep. Ralph Norman told the DCNF.
Michael Chamberlain is the director of the watchdog Protect the Public’s Trust. He told the DCNF. “The reason ethics laws were enacted in the first place was to prevent precisely this type of conflict of interest from impacting government activities.”
“It also raises the question of how he was even allowed to be in the position where this type of conflict could exist,” said Chamberlain. “Why would those in charge of such a high profile and controversial committee jeopardize the credibility of their investigation like this? It certainly does not add to the committee’s already questionable efforts.”