A month after she married one of her security guards last March, Missouri Rep. Cori Bush was immediately met with cries of foul play from her political opponents.

Two groups, the conservative political-action committee, Committee to Defeat the President, and the Foundation for Accountability and Civic Trust, which bills itself as a nonpartisan watchdog group but has ties to dark money groups with right-wing causes, each complained that Bush’s continued employment of her new husband, Cortney Merritts, violated two federal campaign laws.

“It is time for the FEC to defund Cori Bush by stopping her from using her campaign fund as a personal piggy bank and lying to the American people about it,” the first group said in their complaint.

Those complaints have since culminated in a criminal investigation from the Department of Justice as confirmed by the Democrat, who represents Missouri’s 1st Congressional District late January.

“Since before I was sworn into office, I have endured relentless threats to my physical safety and life. As a rank-and-file member of Congress, I am not entitled to personal protection by the House, and instead have used campaign funds as permissible to retain security services,” Bush said. “I have not used any federal tax dollars for personal security services. Any reporting that I have used federal funds for personal security is simply false.”

Congressional ethics rules allow family members of representatives to be compensated through campaign funds if they provide “bona fide services”and as long as the payments don’t exceed market pricing.

Bush, who said she is fully cooperating with the DOJ, added that she has complied with all laws and the House of Representatives rules with respect to her husband’s employment.

“These frivolous complaints have resulted in a number of investigations, some of which are ongoing,” she explained. “We are fully cooperating in all of these pending investigations. In September of last year, the Office of Congressional Ethics found no wrongdoing and voted unanimously to dismiss the case. I look forward to this same outcome from all pending investigations.”

I don't quite understand what is the crime of a routinely-threatened member of Congress using campaign funds to pay her husband, a U.S. Army veteran, market rate for private security services, which he has provided for years.

Especially when we know threats against members of Congress have risen dramatically in recent years.

Axios that Capitol Police opened 8,008 threat assessment cases in 2023 – an increase of more than 500 from 2022.

These numbers are down from 2020 and 2021, respectively, but they are nevertheless high and emblematic of an ongoing problem.

Last December, a new survey conducted by the U.S. Association of Former Members of Congress (FMC) and the University of Massachusetts Amherst found that nearly half (47 percent) of retired members of Congress claim they or their family members were threatened at least “sometimes.”

When polling among women and Black or Latino former members, that number was dramatically higher at 69 percent.

“There is nothing new about people criticizing or disliking certain Members of Congress, but the uptick in violent threats towards our politicians is incredibly disturbing,” FMC President L.F. Payne said.

“Partisan disagreements should not lead to violence or threats. The results of this survey showcase a need for drastic action.”

I could think of plenty of other people for the DOJ to target – namely many of the people and groups that have made Bush along with other fellow members of Congress targets of violent threats.

Unfortunately, that is not the conversation most are having with respect to how members of Congress like Cori Bush handle such heightened threats in the press.

Instead, we have to contend with comments made by the likes of Republican Congressman Troy Nehls, who in response to the reports of Bush’s investigation, claimed that she is “loud” and should “tone it down” if she doesn't want to face threats.

“She doesn't even support the police,” Nehls said. “But the idea to pay her thug money to try to help protect her this and that, for what? Maybe if she wouldn't be so loud all the time, maybe she wouldn't be getting threats.”

I’m familiar with Nehls as the congressman who made headlines for bluntly saying of the proposed bipartisan bill on border security, "Why would I help Joe Biden approve his dismal 33 percent [approval rating]?"

Nehls hails from Beaver Dam, Wisc.,, a town that has a Black population hovering near 3 percent, which helps explain the use of “thug” to describe Bush’s husband, a military veteran.

Still, when asked whether he was suggesting Bush deserves to be threatened, answered: “No, what I'm saying is, is that when you're out there talking the way she does. She's pretty radical. And maybe she should tone it down a little bit.”

In other words, yes, he is suggesting that Cori Bush is at fault for the threats being lodged against her.

In response to his claims, Bush voiced her frustration on X (formerly Twitter), demanding an apology:

Democratic House Minority Leader Congressman Hakeem Jeffries echoed Bush’s call for Nehls to apologize for his arguably very racist and sexist comments, but neither should hold their breath.

But, when it comes to the genuine issue of an increasing amount of members of Congress being threatened, Congress, and by extension, the DOJ, I hope they show greater consideration for the reality that in this new dangerous dynamic, it is unsurprising that a Black woman would bear the greater burden of rising political violence in America, and that maybe she shouldn’t be the only one scrutinized about
it.

Michael Arceneaux is the New York Times bestselling author of I Can't Date Jesus: Love, Sex, Family, Race, and Other Reasons I've Put My Faith in Beyoncé, I Don't Want To Die Poor, and his latest essay collection, I Finally Bought Some Jordans.