Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders is facing scrutiny over the purchase of a $19,000 lectern and the handling or records surrounding it.

Sarah Huckabee Sanders rose to national prominence in part during her time at the lectern as White House press secretary, but the purchase of a $19,000 lectern for the Arkansas governor is undergoing scrutiny and prompting claims that records about it have been altered.

A legislative panel next week will take up a lawmaker’s request for an audit to review the purchase of the lectern, which was bought in June for $19,029.25 with a state credit card. The Arkansas Republican Party reimbursed the state last month for the wood-paneled and blue lectern, which the state received in August.

“From my experience, where we’re at with this particular thing is we need to allow legislative audit go in,” Republican Sen. Jimmy Hickey, who requested the audit, said. “Everyone knows them, they do their work, they’re very thorough and then they produce a detailed report that comes to the Legislature through an open committee.”

  • Peaty@sh.itjust.works
    134·
    9 months ago

    They didn’t pocket the difference. Gov Sanders used state money to go on vacation and this is the cover.

    • Stabbitha@lemmy.world
      281·
      9 months ago

      That’s what “pocketing the difference” is. She took the state money she said was used for the lectern and used it for personal purposes.

      • Peaty@sh.itjust.works
        46·
        9 months ago

        She went on the trip first and then bought the lectern when people started asking questions. Pocketing the difference doesn’t apply because the theft happened first.

        • enki@lemm.eeEnglish
          121·
          9 months ago

          You’re being very pedantic about something very unimportant. Sometimes it’s best to just let it go.

        • ChunkMcHorkle@lemmy.worldEnglish
          10·
          9 months ago

          The timing is not as relevant as you think it is here. Just because you arrange for restitution to be made by a third party before or around the time your theft is discovered does not automatically mean a crime has not been committed.

          • Peaty@sh.itjust.works
            33·
            9 months ago

            Im not saying a crime never happened. Im saying the crime preceded the purchase so they aren’t pocketing the difference. The expense is being justified by the purchase to cover for the crime