California Republican Rep. Duncan Hunter has apparently been living high on the hog, using campaign donations to wine and dine several women he is not married to, while the woman he is married to, Margaret Hunter, may end up testifying against him in federal court. Rep. Hunter is currently facing more than 60 federal charges of fraud for misusing campaign donations. During his first court appearance in August 2018, he stunned observers when he threw his wife under the bus:
"When I went away to Iraq in 2003, the first time, I gave her power of attorney. She handled my finances throughout my entire military career and that continued on when I got into Congress," Hunter said on "The Story."
"She was also the campaign manager, so whatever she did, that’ll be looked at, too, I'm sure, but I didn't do it," he added.
What a guy! Earlier this month, Margaret Hunter cut a plea deal with prosecutors and agreed to cooperate and testify as prosecutors see fit. She may serve up to five years in prison. That’s bad news for Duncan Hunter because Margaret can waive spousal privilege and testify against him. And after the case prosecutors laid out today, who could blame her? In the case they made in Hunter’s trial today, Hunter has been a serial adulterer, carrying on affairs with at least three lobbyists, a staff member from his office, and an official from the Republican National Committee. Prosecutors laid out evidence Hunter used campaign funds to finance all the affairs—dinners, ski trips, alcohol, Uber service to and from his meet-ups with other women.
There was one other eyebrow-raising detail in the government filing. Prosecutors included a section entitled “additional potentially secretive conduct” that is so salacious that they would not name it in open court. You can read the details below, but prosecutors say whatever bombshell it is they are sitting on could potentially ruin a jury pool. What. The. Hell?!
Additional potentially secretive conduct
In addition to pursuing intimate personal relationships, Hunter improperly used campaign funds to pursue other clearly non-work related activity during get-togethers with his close personal friends. As with the evidence described above, the United States has offered to craft a factual stipulation that would eliminate the need to introduce this potentially sensitive evidence at trial. With respect to this evidence, Hunter has indicated he may seek such a stipulation; the parties are discussing specifics.
Public disclosure of this additional activity runs the risk of improperly tainting the jury pool before the trial begins. Accordingly, in the event the parties are unable to reach a stipulation on this matter, the United States respectfully requests that the Court grant leave to: (1) file a motion on this topic outside of the previously set deadlines; and (2) file the statement of facts related to this motion under seal.
For his defense, Hunter has been all over the place. USA Today reporter Brad Heath was live tweeting the details. He noted Hunter claims he’s broke, despite a $170,000 per year salary. Prosecutors noted he and Margaret overdrew their bank account 1,100 times in seven years, accumulating $37,000 in overdraft fees. He does live in California and Washington, D.C., both expensive zip codes, for certain. But, come on. Anyway you slice it, this man has no business managing taxpayer dollars, that’s for sure. And living in expensive zip codes doesn’t mean you start embezzling campaign funds to pay for your cigarettes, ski trips, and numerous adulterous affairs.
Hunter also made an effort to get the case thrown out because two of the government’s attorneys met Hillary Clinton once upon a time and got a photo with her. In his motion to dismiss the case, Hunter’s attorney argued he was being targeted because he endorsed Trump.
What a tool.
