Alexandria woman embezzled more than $840,000 while working as campaign treasurer, authorities say
ALEXANDRIA, Va. () — An Alexandria woman pleaded guilty Monday to embezzling hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign funds while serving as a treasurer for candidates running for political office.
The U.S. Attorney's Office (USAO) said 59-year-old Katherine Margaret Buchanan was a political campaign compliance consultant for more than two decades, working for various campaigns and political action committees (PACs).
Montgomery County teacher sues after Palestine flag removed from classroom
She usually held the title of 'Treasurer' while in these roles.
From 2020 through 2024, Buchanan used the access she had as treasurer to take campaign funds from her clients for her own personal use.
The USAO detailed that she used these funds to pay off her personal credit cards or transfer funds to her bank accounts. At times, she also reportedly used official campaign or PAC credit cards to make personal purchases.
Embezzled funds paid for her dining, landscaping, aesthetic services, a Peloton exercise bike, clothes, flights to Italy, concert tickets, yacht tours, legal fees and more.
In all, she misappropriated over $840,006.
Buchanan also under-reported her income from 2017 through 2022 to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to avoid paying taxes, the USAO added. This resulted in $671,200 in unpaid federal taxes.
Woman accused of stealing over $26K from funeral GoFundMe arrested in Maryland
She pleaded guilty on June 23 to embezzling campaign contributions from three federal candidates for political offices and committing tax evasion. She faces up to five years in prison for each charge.
Buchanan's sentencing is scheduled for Oct. 8.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Human rights group loses legal challenge over exports of jet parts to Israel
A Palestinian human rights organisation has lost a High Court challenge over the Government's decision to continue exporting parts of fighter jets to Israel amid the conflict in Gaza. Al-Haq took legal action against the Department for Business and Trade (DBT) over its decision to continue licensing exports of components for F-35 fighter jets, telling a hearing in May that it was unlawful and 'gives rise to a significant risk of facilitating crime'. In September last year, the Government suspended export licences for weapons and military equipment following a review of Israel's compliance with international humanitarian law in the conflict. But an exemption was made for some licences related to parts for F-35s, which are part of an international defence programme. The DBT defended the challenge, with its barristers telling a four-day hearing in London that the carve-out is 'consistent with the rules of international law'. In a 72-page ruling on Monday, Lord Justice Males and Mrs Justice Steyn said the case was about a 'much more focused issue' than the carve-out itself. The judges continued: 'That issue is whether it is open to the court to rule that the UK must withdraw from a specific multilateral defence collaboration which is reasonably regarded by the responsible ministers as vital to the defence of the UK and to international peace and security, because of the prospect that some UK manufactured components will or may ultimately be supplied to Israel, and may be used in the commission of a serious violation of international humanitarian law in the conflict in Gaza. 'Under our constitution that acutely sensitive and political issue is a matter for the executive which is democratically accountable to Parliament and ultimately to the electorate, not for the courts.'
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Judges to decide if UK can supply parts for Israeli warplanes
British judges will rule on Monday on a legal challenge brought by a Palestinian human rights organisation seeking to block the UK from supplying components for Israeli F-35 fighter jets. Israel has used the jets to devastating effect in its bombardment of Gaza, with both sides being accused of atrocities during a conflict that has killed tens of thousands -- mostly Palestinian civilians, according to the Hamas-run territory's health ministry. The UK government suspended some export licences for military equipment after concluding there was a risk Israel could be breaching international humanitarian law, but made an exemption for some parts for Lockheed Martin F-35 stealth jets. In its claim to the High Court, rights group Al-Haq said the "carve out" was unlawful, alleging the government had misunderstood the applicable rules of international law -- a claim denied by ministers. The UK contributes components to an international defence programme that produces and maintains the F-35s. Defence Secretary John Healey said a suspension would impact the "whole F-35 programme" and have a "profound impact on international peace and security". The London court is due to give its ruling at 0930 GMT. Al-Haq, which is supported by Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Oxfam and others in its case, is seeking a court order to stop the supply of UK-made parts for the US warplanes. Lawyers for Al-Haq said the government had known there was a "clear risk" Israel would use the jet parts to commit violations of international law. But government lawyer James Eadie said the UK's trade department had acted lawfully. He added the court was not placed to rule on the legality of Israel's actions, and that attempting to do so could have a "potentially deleterious" effect on "foreign relations with a friendly state, namely Israel". In September 2024, the new Labour government announced it was suspending around 30 of 350 export licences following a review of Israel's compliance with international humanitarian law. But the partial ban did not cover British-made F-35 parts, which include refuelling probes, laser targeting systems, tyres and ejector seats, according to Oxfam. Healey has previously said suspending F-35 licences would "undermine US confidence in the UK and NATO" but lawyers for Al-Haq have described the exemption as a "loophole". UK-based NGO Campaign Against Arms Trade has said that licensing figures showed the government had made a "shocking increase in military exports to Israel" in the months after its September 2024 announcement of partial suspensions. It said the figures showed the UK approved £127.6 million ($170 million) in military equipment to Israel in single-issue licences from October to December 2024, saying this was more than for the period from 2020 to 2023 combined. Most of the licences were for military radars, components and software, as well as targeting equipment, according to the NGO, which was involved in the case against the government. jwp/jxb
Yahoo
11 hours ago
- Yahoo
Judges to rule on Palestinian group's legal action over Israel military exports
A Palestinian human rights group will discover on Monday whether it has won a legal challenge against the Government over decisions related to exports of military equipment to Israel amid the conflict in Gaza. Al-Haq is taking legal action against the Department for Business and Trade (DBT) over its decision to continue licensing exports of components for F-35 fighter jets. In September last year, the Government suspended export licences for weapons and military equipment following a review of Israel's compliance with international humanitarian law in the conflict. But an exemption was made for some licences related to parts for F-35s, with lawyers for Al-Haq telling the High Court in May that this 'carve-out' was unlawful and 'gives rise to a significant risk of facilitating crime'. The DBT is defending the challenge, with its barristers telling a four-day hearing in London that the carve-out is 'consistent with the rules of international law' and that suspending the licences would negatively impact a wider international programme. Lord Justice Males and Mrs Justice Steyn are due to hand down their ruling at 10.30am on Monday. At the hearing at the Royal Courts of Justice, Raza Husain KC, for Al-Haq, said the case came 'against the backdrop of human calamity' in Gaza, describing the conflict as a 'live-streamed genocide'. In written submissions, he said that the Government misunderstood relevant parts of the Geneva Conventions when there was a clear risk that the parts might be used to commit or facilitate violations of international humanitarian law by Israel. F-35s are part of an international defence programme which produces and maintains the fighter jets, with the UK contributing components for both assembly lines and an international pool. An earlier hearing in the case was told that the decision to 'carve out' licences related to F-35 components followed advice from Defence Secretary John Healey, who said a suspension would impact the 'whole F-35 programme' and have a 'profound impact on international peace and security'. In written submissions for the May hearing, Sir James Eadie KC, for the Government, said that this 'provided justification to take exceptional measures to avoid these impacts and was consistent with the UK's domestic and international legal obligations'. He continued that some of Al-Haq's criticisms 'are not based on a balanced appreciation of the facts' and did not consider 'the true depth and range of the information-gathering and analysis' by the Government when it made the decision. Charities Oxfam and Amnesty International, as well as Human Rights Watch, all intervened in the case.
