Next News Network

The U.S. Office of Special Counsel (OSC) found that U.S. Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm committed an ethics violation when she promoted the Democrat party during a recent interview.

According to a report from the OSC, Secretary Granholm violated the Hatch Act of 1939 during her interview with Marie Claire.

In the interview she praised the Democrat’s “bare majority” and even told the audience to go out and vote for Democrats in lieu of Biden delivering the policies he promised on the campaign trail.

“The good news is that that marching and that voting gave Democrats a bare majority, but a majority, in the House in the Senate,” said the Energy Secretary. “And again, I am using Democrats as a substitute for the policies that you believe in, the policies that you would like to see happen. And what I say to people all the time is the most important thing you can do is make your voice heard. Vote!”

The Hatch Act that Granholm has been accused of violating specifically requires that government employees cannot participate in political speech or campaign activities.

The Office of the Special Counsel wrote about the interview: “OSC has concluded that Secretary Granholm engaged in political activity when she gave this response promoting the electoral success of the Democratic Party. Specifically, when asked what viewers could do to ensure that certain legislation gets passed, Secretary Granholm began her answer by commenting that Democrats now have a majority in the House and the Senate, which is ‘good news”

Despite acknowledging that Jennifer Granholm did break the law, the OSC recommended that no disciplinary action be taken on the issue. They instead issued a letter informing the Department of Energy about the violation and warning her not to do it again.

Twitter, on the other hand, had different feelings on the matter.

It’s clear from the interview and the Special Counsel’s report that Secretary Granholm did use her position to push a single party. Do you think it’s fair to just issue a warning or should more severe action be taken against her for her crime?