Fundraising emails from a dead congressman’s campaign? That’s the bizarre reality in Virginia’s 11th district, where Rep. Gerry Connolly’s team kept soliciting donations after his passing. It’s a move that’s raising eyebrows and ethical questions.
The Daily Caller reported that Connolly, a Democrat who served Fairfax County, died earlier in 2025 at 75, weeks after his esophageal cancer returned. His campaign’s continued emails, blasted to supporters, pushed James Walkinshaw, his former chief of staff, as his successor.
Former FBI informant Kamran Fareedi called it “beyond unethical” on June 6, 2025, and he’s got a point. Connolly’s cancer battle began in 2024, and by early 2025, he announced it had returned.
He passed away shortly after stepping down as the top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, a role he’d held since January 2025. Before his death, he penned a letter urging voters to back Walkinshaw in the upcoming primary.
Posthumous emails from Connolly’s campaign didn’t just ask for money—they promoted Walkinshaw for the congressional seat.
A party-run primary to replace Connolly was set for June 28, 2025, just 22 days from Fareedi’s post. Polling locations? Still unannounced as of June 6.
Fareedi, no stranger to calling out shady dealings, didn’t hold back. “Seems incredibly disrespectful to the deceased,” he said, slamming the campaign’s tactics. Using a dead man’s name to boost a successor feels like a low blow, even in politics.
Walkinshaw, Connolly’s right-hand man, was the campaign’s chosen one. Connolly’s letter before his death made that plain, practically begging constituents to elect his former aide. But leveraging a deceased congressman’s legacy to secure a nomination? That’s a tough sell.
Fareedi’s outrage wasn’t just hot air. He accused campaign operatives of trying to “coronate” Walkinshaw, warning he could “rule over Fairfax County constituents for decades.” The word “coronate” stings—it’s not democracy if the fix is in.
The emails, Fareedi claimed, were controlled by whoever still ran Connolly’s campaign machine.
It’s unclear who’s pulling the strings, but the optics are terrible. Exploiting a dead man’s name for political gain isn’t just tacky—it’s a betrayal of trust.
Connolly’s legacy deserves better. He fought cancer, led on Capitol Hill, and even beat out Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez for that Oversight Committee spot. His team’s decision to keep his campaign’s engine running posthumously cheapens all that.
The primary to replace Connolly was fast approaching, with just over three weeks to go as of June 6. Yet, the lack of announced polling places raised questions about transparency. Voters deserve clarity, not a rushed, opaque process.
Walkinshaw’s backers seem to think they can coast on Connolly’s name. Fareedi’s posts suggest otherwise, painting a picture of a campaign more interested in power than principle. Actions have consequences, and this stunt might backfire.
Connolly’s letter endorsing Walkinshaw was heartfelt, no doubt. But using his campaign’s email list after his death feels like a cynical ploy. It’s hard to imagine the congressman would’ve approved of this.
Fareedi’s posts struck a nerve because they tapped into a broader truth: politics shouldn’t trump decency. “Incredibly unethical” isn’t just a soundbite—it’s a warning about what happens when ambition overrides respect. Connolly’s memory shouldn’t be a campaign prop.
The 11th district’s voters will decide Walkinshaw’s fate on June 28. They’ll likely weigh whether his team’s tactics reflect the values Connolly championed. A primary should be a fresh start, not a coronation.
