CAPITOL OFFICE
Room State Capitol Building
Etil West Capitol Avenue
Jefferson City. MO 65101
Ph: $73.75!.24l2

COMMITTEES
Rules - Admin. Oversight. Chair
Spec. lnv. forum. on Oversight. (?Iiair

Elementary and Secondary Education.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

iav.bames??housesnogov Member
MISSOURI HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
JAY BARNES
State Representative District (ill

Rep. Don Phillips, Vice-chair Rep. Gina Mitten. Ranking Member
donphillipst?lhousemogov gina.mitten@house.mo.gov

Rep. Jeanie Lauer Rep. Kevin Austin
icanie.1auer@house.mo.gov kevin.austin@house.mo.gov

Rep. Tommie Pierson Rep. Jay Eggleston
tommiepierson@house.mo.gov 
Rep. Curtis Trent Rep. Greg Razor
gregmazer?ilhouscsnog?

 

 

Memo to the Missouri House Special Investigative Committee on Oversight
June 26, 2018
Dear Colleagues:

Thank you for your service on the House Special Investigative Committee on Oversight. It was an
honor to serve with you. I write regarding the future of our Committee.

This committee was formed her the express purpose ol? investigating allegations against Governor
lirie R. Greitens. At the time of his resignation. the Committee was very close to finishing its
investigation of credible allegations of sexual assault and domestic violence. Although we never
voted on it, i believe the evidence was such that a super-majority of our Committee was prepared
to vote that there was good cause to believe Greitens engaged in multiple acts constituting crimes.
misconduct. and acts of moral turpitude warranting the ?ling of articles of impeachment.

As chairman, I believe the acts of misconduct and moral turpitude against Witness 1 extended into
Greitens? time in office. It was misconduct and an act of moral turpitudc for Greitens to publicly
claim that Witness 1 testi?ed that she might have remembered the encounter in a dream and that a
video of a conversation she had with the St. Louis Circuit Attorney and an investigator was
?esonerating.? Both statements by Greitens were slanderous and, as the Committee unanimously
found in an addendum to Report l, wholly untrue.

Page 1 of'4

In addition to evidence of sexual assault and domestic violence, the Committee also possessed
suf?cient documentary evidence to establish good cause to believe Greitens and his campaign had
misappropriated property of The Mission Continues, and then lied about it on a report submitted
to the Missouri Ethics Commission.

Based on the documents in our possession, I believe Eric Greitens faced a near certain criminal
conviction in the now dismissed case on tampering with computer evidence. In addition to what
was already publicly known, the Committee possesses a document showing that Greitens
originally obtained the donor list from The Mission Continues under false pretenses. That
document presented the possibility that additional charges for fraud may have been available to
state or federal prosecutors.

But our investigation was not complete.

The Committee also obtained documentary evidence that suggests Greitens? may have engaged in
criminal fraud in a grant application and its award ?'om the John Templeton Foundation and
Washington University. The documents also show Greitens spent up to $66,600 of grant funds for
political purposes not authorized by the grant.

I had prepared a memo for the Committee summarizing the docmnents in our possession that may
have (and still could potentially be) the basis for federal or state fraud charges and was set to
present it to the Committee on Wednesday of the week that Greitens resigned. At the same time,
counsel for our committee was engaged in discussions with Washington University to secure
testimony relating to the grant. This was cut short due to Greitens? unexpected resignation.

Though not criminal, other documents in the Committee?s possession raise suspicions of literary
fraud regarding Resilience, Greitens? best-selling book. Greitens repeatedly asserted to national
media outlets that the book was the outgrowth of a series of letters between himself and a fellow
Navy SEAL suffering from PTSD who called him after having been arrested and charged with a
crime. This appears to be false. The original manuscript for the book was likely written by one of
Greitens? assistants, and it was only after that manuscript was complete that Greitens began editing
the book into a series of ?letters.? There is also no public record of Greitens? friend being arrested
or charged with a crime in the time period in which Greitens? claimed.

The Committee?s investigation into campaign ?nance improprieties was also curtailed by
Greitens? resignation. We had recently received more than 30,000 pages from the Greitens for
Missouri campaign and were soon expecting documents from A New Missouri, Inc.. The campaign
documents we possess contain signi?cant circumstantial and direct evidence of illegal activity.
The documents also tend to show that those in charge of the Greitens? campaign had a scheme to
hide donor identities and attempt to funnel donors to a if a potential donor?s identity would
either be politically troublesome or they were otherwise prohibited by federal or state law from
contributing to the campaign.

Finally, this list of criminal activity by Eric Greitens and those around him does not include several
other areas of inquiry that, as chairman or as a Committee, determined that we did not have the

Page 2 of4

time or resources to ?illy investigate or, despite having spoken to witnesses off-the-record, did not
have anyone willing to testify publicly. These included:

I. Use of the Con?de and other secret messaging applications for of?cial business;

2. Public corruption in which a senior member of the transition team attempted to (and may
have) pro?ted from her role on the transition. Greitens? was very likely informed of the
pro?teering, but she was not removed from any of?cial responsibilities and remained a key
player during the Greitens? administration until the very end; and

3. Other potential acts sexual misconduct and crimes by Eric Greitens; and

4. Misuse of of?cial resources for campaign related purposes, including communications and
social media content.

Now, the question is, what next? Should the Committee continue its work after its initial stated
purpose - investigating allegations against ?Governor? Eric Greitens is moot?

Like many of you, I have spent a considerable amount of time thinking about this question. The
question is not whether ?irther investigation is warranted. Instead, it is whether this Committee is
the appropriate governmental entity for such an investigation. And the answer has rami?cations
beyond this particular Committee.

Contrary to what some potential critics have said, the House does not have ?inherent authority? to
investigate ?an g? it wants. In a government with limited and separate powers, the legislature
cannot transform itself into a law enforcement agency. Instead, Article section I of the Missouri
Constitution vests ?[t]he legislative power? in the Senate and House of Representatives and only
?the legislative power.? Hence, in my view, any activity of a legislative committee must be tied to
a ?legislative power,? i.e. it must have a legislative purpose. The House has four primary legislative
purposes: legislation, budgeting, oversight of state governmental entities, and impeachment.

To what category could we assign further investigation by this Committee? Legislation does not
?t because I believe A New Missouri?s activities are already illegal under Missouri law. Budgeting
does not ?t this Committee because we have another Committee dedicated to that purpose.
Oversight of state governmental entities does not ?t because A New Missouri, Inc. was not a
governmental entity. And impeachment no longer ?ts because Greitens resigned. Accordingly, this
Committee is not the appropriate entity for further investigation.

I understand this may disappoint some of you and some in the public - who demand further
accountability for Eric Greitens. But we cannot investigate alleged illegal activity by someone else
with actions of our own that are either illegal or create problematic precedent for ?lture legislators.

Make no mistake. Missourians deserve a full accounting of A New Missouri, Inc., which I have
come to believe was a criminal enterprise ?'om its inception - designed to illegally skirt donation
limits and conceal the identities of major donors to Eric Greitens and ballot initiatives relating to
right-to-work that were supported by the former governor.

Page 3 of4

There are at least three state governmental entities with potential jurisdiction to investigate A New
Missouri: the Attorney General, the Cole County Prosecuting Attorney, and the Missouri Ethics
Commission. As chairman of this Committee. I am preparing a complaint to he filed with the
Missouri Ethics Commission against (ireitens for Missouri and A New Missouri. It should be ready
For tiling next week. Please let me know il?you would like to add your name as a complainant.

Respectfully yours,

sir

Rep. Jay Barnes

Page 4 of 4