Congressman lied to FBI about campaign funds, jury finds

On Thursday, at the end of the first trial of a sitting congressman since 2002, a federal jury found U.S. Rep. Jeff Fortenberry of Nebraska guilty of lying to federal authorities about receiving $30,000 in illicit campaign contributions. His sentencing will occur in June.

Brian Melley/AP
U.S. Rep. Jeff Fortenberry (center), a Republican from Nebraska, speaks with the media outside the federal courthouse in Los Angeles, March 24, 2022. Mr. Fortenberry was convicted for lying to federal authorities about an illegal $30,000 campaign contribution.

Nebraska Congressman Jeff Fortenberry was convicted on charges that he lied to federal authorities about an illegal $30,000 contribution to his campaign from a foreign billionaire at a 2016 Los Angeles fundraiser.

A federal jury in LA deliberated about two hours Thursday before finding the nine-term Republican guilty of concealing information and two counts of making false statements to authorities. Mr. Fortenberry was charged after denying to the FBI that he was aware he had received illicit funds from Gilbert Chagoury, a Nigerian billionaire of Lebanese descent.

Mr. Fortenberry showed no emotion as the verdict was read, but his youngest daughter began sobbing uncontrollably in the front of the gallery as her mother tried to console her. After the jury left the courtroom, Mr. Fortenberry walked over to his wife and the two of his five daughters who were present and clasped them in a hug.

Outside the courthouse, Mr. Fortenberry said the process had been unfair and he would appeal immediately. He would not say if he would suspend his campaign for reelection, saying he was going to spend time with his family.

“I’m getting so many beautiful messages from people literally all around the world, who’ve been praying for us and pulling for us,” he said.

The judge set sentencing for June 28. Each count carries a potential five-year prison sentence and fines.

It was the first trial of a sitting congressman since Rep. Jim Traficant, a Democrat from Ohio, was convicted of bribery and other felony charges in 2002.

Mr. Fortenberry did not testify, but his lawyers argued at trial that he wasn’t aware of the contribution and that agents directed an informant to feed him the information in a 10-minute call to set him up.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Mack Jenkins said there was ample recorded evidence in the case and the jury’s swift verdict vindicated the prosecution’s efforts.

“Our view is that it was a simple story,” Mr. Jenkins said. “A politician caught up in the cycle of money and power. And like I said, he lost his way.”

The trial could all but end the political career of a congressman seen as a reliable conservative who coasted to easy wins but isn’t a familiar name outside of Nebraska. Felons are eligible to run for and serve in Congress, but the vast majority choose to resign under threat of expulsion.

Mr. Fortenberry took a big political hit when prosecutors announced the charges, and his indictment already divided Nebraska Republicans who backed him for years in the conservative district. Many prominent Republicans have endorsed state Sen. Mike Flood, a conservative state lawmaker and former speaker of the Nebraska Legislature, for the congressional seat.

Prosecutors argued Mr. Fortenberry lied about what he knew about the illicit donation during an interview at his Lincoln home in March 2019 and a follow-up meeting four months later in Washington about the contribution received at a Los Angeles fundraiser.

Defense lawyers said Mr. Fortenberry’s flaw was voluntarily meeting with agents and prosecutors to help their probe and having a faulty memory.

Celeste Fortenberry, the lawmaker’s wife, was the final witness in the case and testified that her husband didn’t even remember the day they met. She said he loathed making fundraising calls and was often on “autopilot” when he conducted them.

Lawyers on both sides of the trial focused their closing arguments on one such call with Dr. Elias Ayoub, who held the fundraiser for Mr. Fortenberry at his Los Angeles home in 2016.

Dr. Ayoub, who was cooperating with the FBI, told Mr. Fortenberry during the secretly recorded call in June 2018 that he distributed $30,000 to friends and relatives who attended the fundraiser so they could write checks to Mr. Fortenberry’s campaign.

The doctor said the money had been provided by an associate of theirs and probably came from Mr. Chagoury, who lives in Paris. Mr. Chagoury admitted in 2019 to funneling $180,000 in illegal campaign contributions to four campaigns and agreed to pay a $1.8 million fine.

The three men in the alleged scheme to funnel the money to Mr. Fortenberry were all of Lebanese descent and had ties to In Defense of Christians, a nonprofit Mr. Fortenberry supported that was devoted to fighting religious persecution in the Middle East.

Mr. Fortenberry asked Dr. Ayoub on the phone call to organize another fundraiser with supporters of their cause.

In 2019, Mr. Fortenberry denied to FBI agents that he received any funds from a foreign national or through so-called conduit contributions, where the money was distributed to straw donors.

Mr. Fortenberry, who was unaware agents had recorded his call with Dr. Ayoub, said it would be “horrifying” if the doctor had made such a claim about the source of the funds.

Defense attorney John Littrell said the recording of the call only depicted what was heard on Dr. Ayoub’s end and not what Mr. Fortenberry, who had poor cellphone reception, heard.

If Mr. Fortenberry had not heard as few as three crucial words, he may have missed what Dr. Ayoub was trying to tell him about where the money came from, Mr. Littrell said. The fact that Mr. Fortenberry didn’t remember the call more than a year later was understandable, he said.

“This is a memory test every one of us would fail,” Mr. Littrell said.

Mr. Littrell said the $36,000 his client raised in Los Angeles – most of it illegally – was a drop in the bucket for a congressman in an uncompetitive district with a healthy war chest. He said jurors should believe what most witnesses said about Mr. Fortenberry: He was an honest man of integrity.

“Do you think he would put his reputation on the line for $30,000 when he had $1.5 million?” Mr. Littrell said. “That’s not possible.”

Mr. Jenkins countered that Mr. Fortenberry’s squeaky clean reputation was at the root of his lies.

“You build up that much of a reputation, you have a lot to lose,” he said. “That’s not a justification for lying; that’s a motive for lying.”

Patty Pansing Brooks, a former legislator who is seeking the Democratic nomination for the congressional seat, thanked the jury and offered “thoughts and prayers” for Mr. Fortenberry and his family.

“It’s time for Nebraska to elect new leadership. I will serve with integrity and fight for all Nebraskans,” she said in a statement.

This story was reported by The Associated Press. Grant Schulte reported from Omaha, Nebraska.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to

QR Code to Congressman lied to FBI about campaign funds, jury finds
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today