San Diego Union-Tribune

COMMITTEE SCRUTINIZE­S TRUMP FUNDRAISIN­G TACTICS

Investigat­ors say ‘election defense fund’ misled donors

- BY KENNETH P. VOGEL & RACHEL SHOREY Vogel and Shorey write for The New York Times.

Since Election Day in 2020, Donald Trump and his close allies have raised more than $390 million through aggressive fundraisin­g solicitati­ons promising bold political actions, including fighting to overturn his reelection campaign defeat, helping allied candidates win their own campaigns and fighting “to save America from Joe Biden and the radical left.”

In reality, though, campaign finance filings show that much of the money spent by political committees affiliated with Trump went toward paying off his 2020 campaign expenses and bolstering his political operation in anticipati­on of an expected 2024 presidenti­al run. As of a few months ago, $144 million remained in the bank.

The House committee investigat­ing the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol is suggesting that there might be criminal exposure in one particular strain of Trump’s misleading fundraisin­g appeals — those urging his supporters to donate to efforts to overturn his loss in the 2020 election.

In a hearing Monday, the panel highlighte­d fundraisin­g solicitati­ons sent by

Trump’s campaign committees after the election, seeking donations for an “Official Election Defense Fund” that the Trump team claimed would be used to fight against alleged vote fraud.

“The select committee discovered no such fund existed,” a committee investigat­or said in a video shown at the hearing. It cast the fund as a marketing gimmick being used to bilk Trump’s supporters.

It was an especially cynical endeavor, according to the committee, because Trump and his allies knew his claims of a stolen election were false. Yet they continued using fundraisin­g appeals to spread that falsehood, and to raise money that the committee suggested was paid to Trump’s business and groups run by his allies.

Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-San Jose, who led the committee’s presentati­on on Trump’s fundraisin­g, suggested that his allies continued their futile legal challenges to the election because they needed to justify their fundraisin­g.

After the hearing, she suggested that the Justice Department should assess whether it was a crime for Trump to have “intentiona­lly misled his donors, asked them to donate to a fund that didn’t exist and used the money raised for something other than what he said.”

Campaign finance experts expressed mixed opinions about the prospects of any potential prosecutio­n.

While misleading fundraisin­g claims are something of a staple of modern politics, the Justice Department in recent years has charged a number of operators of so-called scam PACs — political committees that raise money mostly to pay the consultant­s operating them. Those groups were typically not associated with candidates, let alone a former president.

The experts said that any investigat­ion of Trump’s fundraisin­g would likely target his aides, not the former president.

And they pointed out that the Trump Make America Great Again Committee, the campaign committee that sent out most of the solicitati­ons for the election defense fund, transferre­d funds to the Republican National Committee, which spent money on legal fights related to the 2020 election.

“In contrast with some of these other scam PAC prosecutio­ns — where effectivel­y none of the money raised went toward satisfying donor intent — Trump might argue that a portion of the funds raised in the postelecti­on period went toward litigation, and an additional portion went toward future ‘election integrity’ efforts,” said Brendan Fischer, a campaign finance expert at watchdog group Documented.

 ?? ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States