Pappert: John Rose’s Financial Filings ‘Don’t Add Up’ as Campaign Declines to Respond

Kaitlin Housler
John Rose

Tom Pappert, lead reporter at The Tennessee Star, said Monday that unanswered questions surrounding U.S. Representative John Rose’s (R-TN-06) congressional financial disclosures could be easily resolved, but remain unanswered because the congressman’s office has not responded to requests for clarification.

Pappert discussed his reporting during Monday’s edition of The Michael Patrick Leahy Show, where he said Rose’s financial disclosure filings appear to contain inconsistencies involving reported holdings and sales of Alphabet Inc. stock and a mutual fund.

“His congressional disclosures, put simply, they don’t add up, and I mean that literally,” Pappert said.

Pappert explained that Rose’s 2024 annual financial disclosure reported he owned between $250,001 and $500,000 in Alphabet Class A stock, the parent company of Google, at the end of the year. However, a June 3, 2025 periodic transaction report later indicated Rose sold between $1 million and $5 million worth of the same stock from the same brokerage account.

“So the question is, of course, is this an error? Was this submitted in error, that he does not actually double his amount of holding of Alphabet stock? Or did John Rose somehow double his holding of Alphabet stock?” Pappert said.

According to Pappert, The Star contacted Rose’s congressional office Friday seeking clarification and set a response deadline before Monday’s broadcast.

“We asked the Rose congressional office. We asked on Friday. We gave them a deadline of 9:00 a.m. this morning. We’ve yet to receive a response,” Pappert said.

Pappert added that The Star identified a second apparent discrepancy involving Rose’s reported holdings in the American Funds SMALLCAP World Fund Class A mutual fund.

“There is actually another sort of oddity from the same June 2025 transaction report. John Rose reported that he owned between half a million dollars and $1 million worth of a mutual fund, but claimed that he sold between $1 million and $2 million of the same fund in June 2025,” Pappert said.

“So again, we asked Rose’s congressional office, was this an error? Or are you going to put a correction in? If it’s not an error, where did this extra stock and mutual fund shares come from? We did not receive a response,” he added.

Pappert said the questions could potentially be resolved through Rose’s 2025 annual financial disclosure, but noted the congressman requested and received a 90-day extension to file the report.

“This is something that could be completely cleared up if we had John Rose’s 2025 annual disclosure to Congress, but in April he filed a request for an extension. It was granted. They give 90-day extensions, and now John Rose will not have to submit his 2025 annual report until August 13 of this year,” Pappert said.

“And for those playing at home, that is seven days after voters will cast their ballots in the primary,” he added.

After Leahy asked whether Rose was effectively refusing to release his financial disclosure until after the August 6 Republican gubernatorial primary, Pappert replied, “That is exactly what I’m telling you. John Rose will not release his financial disclosures until after the primary.”

Pappert noted that The Star asked whether Rose planned to release the report before the filing deadline but received no response.

“We’ve asked him if that’s going to change, if maybe he’s going to shock us and put that out tomorrow so nobody will have any questions about how did he get potentially up to half a million dollars worth of Google stock according to the transaction report. But we did not receive a response from the campaign, so it looks like he’s going to wait until August 13,” Pappert said.

While acknowledging there could be an innocent explanation for the discrepancies, Pappert said Rose’s failure to respond has left the matter unresolved.

“As you said, this could be very simple. This could be something to the effect of an accountant entered his sum into the wrong column, and it wound up being inputted incorrectly into the federal database,” Pappert said.

“But the fact is, it seems to have an error in the accounting in the federal database, and we didn’t get a response. These federal disclosures are federally required. You’re supposed to put accurate information in them. There are laws on the books requiring this, and I think that John Rose not responding is very curious,” he added.

Watch:

– – –

Kaitlin Housler is a reporter at The Tennessee Star and The Star News Network.
Photo “John Rose” by John Rose. 

 

 

 

 

Related posts

Comments