Of the. Michael San Nicolas is to respond to the findings of a year-long ethics investigation into the allegations against him, which found ‘substantial evidence’ that he accepted an improper cash contribution of $10,000 and pledged in a plot to cover it up.
The findings of the 217-page Congressional Ethics Office report have been forwarded to the US Department of Justice for possible prosecution.
A live statement, according to a notice sent by San Nicolas, will be made at 11 a.m. Tuesday local time.
“Interested media partners will have time to ask questions and should live stream the press conference on their social media platforms,” San Nicolas said.
Guam’s only delegate to Congress has yet to speak publicly about the development, or respond directly to questions from the Guam Daily Post about his case being in the hands of federal law enforcement, and his various media accounts. social media has yet to address the issue as of press time Monday – except to share information about the planned live statement.
The report disputes that San Nicolas chose not to cooperate with the investigation, calling unsuccessful efforts to bring the delegate to appear voluntarily or under subpoena results of a scheme “delaying tactics” on his part. .
Investigations into other matters, such as whether he employed a woman he was having an affair with, were hampered by his lack of involvement and led the Congressional office to report his findings to federal law enforcement, rather than risk running out of time for possible lawsuits. The deadline to prosecute San Nicolas will be next year for some of the allegations, and 2024 for others, the report notes.
“The Committee joins the (sub-commission of inquiry) in noting that “it would not be in the interests of justice to allow (San Nicolas) to continue to avoid responsibility for his actions in delaying this review while the limitation period continues to run”.
According to Roll Call, the delegate’s attorney has “scoured” the congressional investigation and predicted that it will not result in criminal charges from the DOJ.
“After months of investigation, the production of thousands of pages of documents related to the matters under investigation, more than half a dozen recorded voluntary interviews with current and former staff of the Delegate, and countless hours facilitating the provision of all information requested by the subcommittee investigator,” Stanley Woodward reportedly said. “We are extremely pleased that the subcommittee has taken the extraordinary step of concluding this case without recommending the adoption of a declaration of alleged violation.”
Woodward reportedly said he was “confident that no further investigation will come into this matter.”
But the report itself provides a critical account of how San Nicolas and its legal representation responded to the investigation.
“Furthermore, despite his attorney’s assurance of “the delegate’s unwavering commitment to the Committee’s crucial constitutional function,” the delegate treated the ethics process with disdain. Counsel for the delegate, without citation, disputes the ISC’s assertion that its refusal to provide voluntary testimony is rare, stating that “there are many examples of members asserting their legal right not to provide voluntary testimony. voluntary testimony”. This statement demonstrates that the delegate does not appreciate the unique role of this committee,” the report states. “The committee is not aware of a single other member in recent history who has refused to testify voluntarily before the ethics committee. When a Member is the subject of an investigation by the Ethics Committee, he has a duty of candor and diligence; the delegate did not fulfill this obligation.
The subcommittee, according to the report, “considered” recommending House-level punishment for San Nicolas, for violating federal laws, regulations and his code of conduct as a member of Congress.
“The ISC determined, however, that this would not be the most effective action given the impending retirement of the House delegate, as well as the potential expiration of applicable statutes of limitations as early as next year for some of the behaviors involved,” the report states.