Best printers for Home

Best Mixer Grinder

Best wired Earphones

Best 43 Inch TV in India

Best Wi Fi Routers

Best Home Theatre in India

Smart Watch under 5000

Best Laptops for Education

Best Laptop for Students

<ul class="summary-list"><li>A new lawsuit accuses federal regulators of dropping the ball investigating Trump's 2020 campaign.</li><li>Campaign Legal Center accused Trump's campaign of laundering campaign funds through outside firms.</li></ul>Federal regulators unlawfully dismissed allegations that <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/category/donald-trump">Donald Trump</a>'s 2020 campaign concealed spending by laundering hundreds of millions of dollars in payments through firms closely tied to the former president, a watchdog group argued Friday.In a 26-page <a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.245150/gov.uscourts.dcd.245150.1.0.pdf">lawsuit</a> filed in US District Court for the District of Columbia, the nonprofit, nonpartisan Campaign Legal Center said the <keyword id="11964531" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="federal-election-commission" source="Orion">Federal Election Commission</keyword> failed to enforce campaign finance disclosure requirements by declining to investigate the Trump campaign's use of two firms — <keyword id="13497068" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="american-made-media-consultants" source="Orion">American Made Media Consultants</keyword> and <keyword id="13497069" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="parscale-strategy" source="Orion">Parscale Strategy</keyword> — to hide the details of its spending.The lawsuit followed a separate <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/donald-trump-shell-company-jared-kushner-campaign-fec-2022-3">case</a>, filed in March, in which the Campaign Legal Center accused the FEC of failing to respond to the group's July 2020 complaint and a January 2021 supplement laying out allegations against the Trump campaign.An FEC spokesperson declined to comment on the lawsuit.The original complaint and supplement alleged that the Trump campaign "laundered upwards of three quarters of a billion dollars in 2020 campaign spending" through American Made Media Consultants and Parscale Strategy, a firm run by former Trump campaign manager <keyword id="12514735" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="brad-parscale" source="Orion">Brad Parscale</keyword>.The Campaign Legal Center drew in part from <keyword id="11893589" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="news" source="Orion">news</keyword> investigations, including Insider's reporting that American Made Media Consultants' <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/eric-trump-deputy-kushner-campaign-spending-shell-company-2020-12">board included family members</a> of Trump and former Vice President Mike Pence.In its lawsuit Friday, the Campaign Legal Center added that the FEC's failure to proceed with an investigation into the Trump campaign could embolden the former president and other candidates to repeat the same conduct and deprive voters of details about political spending.The FEC's dismissal of "well-supported allegations encourages future campaigns — including any 2024 Trump presidential campaign — to seek to evade [federal campaign law's] transparency requirements by similarly laundering payments through a small number of reported vendors," Campaign Legal Center's lawyers argued.In dismissing the group's complaint, the FEC went against the advice of the regulatory agency's own chief lawyer.The agency's general counsel recommended in April that the FEC find reason to believe that the Trump campaign violated federal election laws by using American Made Media Consultants and Parscale Strategy as pass-throughs to disguise the ultimate recipients of spending.Despite that recommendation, the bipartisan commission deadlocked 3-3, falling short of the four votes needed to proceed with an investigation into the alleged violations.Two of the three commissioners who voted to approve the general counsel's recommendation issued a statement at the time describing the complaint as "meticulously documented" and the Trump campaign's conduct as concealing "exactly the type of information" that federal election law is intended to "expose to the sunlight of disclosure."Democratic commissioners <keyword id="14406024" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="shana-broussard" source="Orion">Shana Broussard</keyword> and <keyword id="12650664" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="ellen-weintraub" source="Orion">Ellen Weintraub</keyword> also noted that the dismissal extended Trump's "remarkable win streak" before the FEC, in which the commission received more than 40 complaints against the former president or his campaign. Broussard and Weintraub went on to tally the number of investigations the FEC had undertaken into Trump: "a grand total of zero."

Federal officials failed to investigate Trump campaign's money 'laundering': lawsuit

<ul class="summary-list"><li>The <keyword id="12021087" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="fec" source="Orion">FEC</keyword> found reason to believe Sen. Tillis and <keyword id="11956152" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="john-bolton" source="Orion">John Bolton</keyword> violated laws banning foreigners from US elections.</li><li>British firm <keyword id="12352111" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="cambridge-analytica" source="Orion">Cambridge Analytica</keyword> was heavily involved in strategy for both Republicans' campaigns.</li></ul>The <keyword id="11964531" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="federal-election-commission" source="Orion">Federal Election Commission</keyword> found reason to believe in 2019 that both Sen. <keyword id="12476907" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="thom-tillis" source="Orion">Thom Tillis</keyword> and former National Security Advisor John Bolton violated federal laws against foreign interference in US elections by working with now-defunct British consulting firm Cambridge Analytica in 2014.But the commission, which found that the North Carolina Republican Party and a perennial Republican candidate in Oregon also ran afoul of the same laws, does not appear to be doing anything about it, since the five-year statute of limitations for both cases has now expired and no criminal referrals appear to have been made."Once again, the Commission has failed to take meaningful enforcement action on complaints alleging serious violations of the foreign national ban," <a href="https://www.fec.gov/files/legal/murs/7351/7351_99.pdf">wrote Commissioners Shana Broussard and Ellen Weintraub in a statement of reasons.</a> "Despite the Commission's previous commitment to prioritizing foreign national matters, that commitment appears in retrospect to have been lip service as we continue to skirt our obligations to the American people."The two commissioners also said that <keyword id="12095641" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="former-president-donald-trump" source="Orion">former President Donald Trump</keyword> and Sen. <keyword id="11971766" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="ted-cruz" source="Orion">Ted Cruz</keyword> of Texas, both of whom worked with the British firm during their 2016 presidential campaigns, may have violated the same laws as well, but that two previous Republican commissioners - Matthew Petersen and Caroline Hunter - did not wish to take action."They were willing to move forward only on the claims that were already imperiled under the statute of limitations, setting the Commission up for failure," the pair wrote, referring to the claims against Bolton and Tillis."Unfortunately, there is no public explanation of why they would not move forward on the later allegations [against Trump and Cruz]," they continue. "Instead, the American people are left in the dark as to why the Commission was unable to muster the necessary four votes to pursue these serious allegations of foreign intervention in the 2016 election."<h2>Cambridge Analytica's work with Tillis, Bolton, Cruz, and Trump</h2>The saga began in March 2018 as the <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/cambridge-analytica-a-guide-to-the-trump-linked-data-firm-that-harvested-50-million-facebook-profiles-2018-3">Facebook-Cambridge Analytica data scandal</a> - in which personal data from over 87 million Facebook users was improperly obtained by the firm - came to a head.Watchdog organization Common Cause <a href="https://www.fec.gov/files/legal/murs/7351/7351_01.pdf">filed a complaint</a> against Cambridge Analytica itself, while the Campaign Legal Center <a href="https://www.fec.gov/files/legal/murs/7357/7357_01.pdf">filed a complaint</a> against John Bolton's super PAC. Two months thereafter, the chair of the North Carolina Democratic Party <a href="https://www.fec.gov/files/legal/murs/7382/7382_01.pdf">filed a complaint</a> against Sen. Tillis and the Republican Party. Another <a href="https://www.fec.gov/files/legal/murs/7350/7350_01.pdf">complaint against the Trump campaign</a> by the Resistance Committee Action Fund is also included in the case.Each complaint alleging violations of the foreign nationals ban was broadly similar, alleging that foreign nationals - in this case, British employees of Cambridge Analytica - had taken on "significantly greater roles in the campaigns" and that foreign nationals "participated in, and in some instances directed, the Committees' election-related activities," according to the <a href="https://www.fec.gov/files/legal/murs/7351/7351_99.pdf">statement of reasons</a>.A <a href="https://publicintegrity.org/politics/inside-john-bolton-super-pacs-deal-with-cambridge-analytica/">2018 report by the Center for Public Integrity</a> detailed the extent of Bolton's coordination with the British firm. Additionally, the Campaign Legal Center's complaint alleged that Bolton's super PAC had engaged in illegal coordinated activity with the Tillis campaign and the North Carolina Republican Party during the former's 2014 campaign.The commission <a href="https://www.fec.gov/files/legal/murs/7382/7382_27.pdf">voted in July of 2019</a> and found reason to believe that Tillis, Bolton, the North Carolina GOP, and even Oregon congressional candidate Art Robinson had all violated the foreign nationals ban, initiating an investigation by the commission. But then, <a href="https://www.npr.org/2020/12/24/949672803/the-federal-election-commission-can-finally-meet-again-and-it-has-a-big-backlog">the FEC lost a quorum for the rest of that year and most of 2020</a>, imperiling the body's work and resulting in the eventual lapse of the statute of limitations on the 2014-era cases.The FEC is made up of six commissioners, and the commission loses quorum when there are fewer than four commissioners. In 2019, then-vice chairman Matthew Petersen resigned, <a href="https://www.npr.org/2019/08/30/755523088/as-fec-nears-shutdown-priorities-such-as-stopping-election-interference-on-hold">bringing the commission down to three</a>."Unfortunately, the Office of General Counsel's investigation of the 2014 activity never gained traction," Broussard and Weintraub wrote.The commission <a href="https://www.fec.gov/files/legal/murs/7382/7382_49.pdf">voted on September 30 of this year to close the file</a>, apparently ending the matter before the FEC. Ann Ravel, a former Democratic FEC commissioner, told Insider that it was unlikely that any criminal referral had been made to the Department of Justice, as that would have been noted in the documents made public this week."It's unlikely that they would if they failed to take any action on this case," she said. "Making a referral to the Department of Justice also takes four votes."Tillis, Cruz, the Trump campaign, and a representative for Bolton did not respond to Insider's requests for comment.

FEC finds 'reason to believe' Sen. Thom Tillis and John Bolton violated the 'foreign national ban' by working with British political consulting firm Cambridge Analytica

<ul class="summary-list"><li>Google asked federal regulators to OK a plan for easing spam filters on political emails.</li><li>The Federal Election Commission voted 4-1-1 to approve Google's plan.</li></ul>Get ready for an whole lot more political email hitting your main Gmail inbox.In a 4-1-1 vote Thursday, the Federal Election Commission ruled that Google could legally launch a pilot program for political candidates that allows them to skirt email spam filters when raising money from, or otherwise communicating with, prospective voters and donors.Despite a <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/google-spam-filter-gmail-political-committees-fec-ruling-2022-7">torrent of public outrage</a> preceding the vote, Google is now free to invite federal political candidates to sign up for the email pilot program, which would amount to a free pass out of Gmail spam-box purgatory.The core question before the FEC was decidedly narrow: Would a Google giving some political candidates a break from Gmail spam filters constitute an illegal in-kind political contribution — or, in other words, something of value to political candidates that violated existing campaign finance law?It would not, most commissioners agreed. Even a commissioner who wasn't thrilled with the notion of unleashing more political emails on an overloaded electorate concluded Google's program proposal is legal."I don't want to, and it's for the same reasons that all the commenters don't want to," newly appointed Democratic Commissioner Dara Lindenbaum said before voting in favor of Google's request. "But I think the law and the commission regulations and commission precedent permit this."Republican commissioners Allen Dickerson, Trey Trainor, and Sean Cooksey joined Lindenbaum in voting to approve Google's request.Democratic Commissioner Ellen Weintraub voted against it, while Democratic Commissioner Shana Broussard abstained.<div type="image" title="Federal Election Commission logo" height="3840" width="5119" msid="93506647" hostid="261"></div><h2>Angry consumers </h2>The path to this decision has been turbulent.Facing <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/google-spam-filter-gmail-political-committees-fec-ruling-2022-7">growing public outrage</a> over <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/campaign-matching-donations-democrats-republicans-bogus-gimmick-2021-5">misleading</a> and <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/donald-trump-gop-fundraising-emails-republicans-2022-7">hyperbolic</a> fundraising pitches, the FEC last month unanimously agreed to give Americans three more weeks to critique Google's <a href="https://www.fec.gov/data/legal/advisory-opinions/2022-14/">request</a> to quickly allow political committees' emails to skirt its Gmail spam filters.The FEC received 2,641 comments on Google's request and another 104 comments on a draft response the commission circulated."If people want political spam, let them sign up for it. Do not make me and those who do not want political spam spend hours marking messages as spam trying to stop the flood," <a href="https://www.fec.gov/files/legal/aos/2022-14/202214C_24.pdf">wrote</a> one commentor whose concerns echoed hundreds of others.Republicans and Democrats alike <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/26/us/politics/winred-investigation-republican-fundraising.html">have</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/campaign-matching-donations-democrats-republicans-bogus-gimmick-2021-5">engaged</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-pelosi-emails-spam-fundraising-match-donations-doj-2021-5">in</a> spammy, misleading, and even patently false email campaigns. That didn't stop the Democratic National Committee from <a href="https://www.fec.gov/files/legal/aos/2022-14/202214C_25.pdf">registered concerns</a> that Google's pilot program would foster "deceptive solicitations," be to the "detriment of voters and our democracy," and "place the burden on Google's users themselves to protect their inboxes from unwanted political spam emailsAlthough the FEC told Insider that it doesn't keep track of which advisory opinion requests have over the years attracted the most public comments, a review of past cases indicates Google's request ranks near or at the top.Before the final vote Thursday, Weintraub motioned to approve a <a href="https://www.fec.gov/resources/cms-content/documents/mtgdoc-22-37-B.pdf">alternate ruling</a> that would have effectively prevented Google from launching its pilot program.The motion failed in a 1-4-1 vote, with Weintraub alone voting for it."Google should be aware that if it decides to move forward with its ridiculous and wildly unpopular plan to allow political campaigns to send spam email without consequence, it will face unprecedented backlash from its users, who overwhelmingly do not want this change to happen," said Josh Nelson, a political fundraiser and CEO of Civic Shout, which works for left-learning causes and campaigns.<h2>Google's political email plan</h2>As described in its initial request to the FEC, Google wants to "launch a pilot program for authorized candidate committees, political party committees, and leadership political action committees" that would ensure the emails of accepted committees "will not be affected by forms of spam detection to which they would otherwise be subject."Google said that its spam-skirting political pilot program is "not intended to favor or disfavor any particular candidate, party or speaker, nor intended to influence the outcome of any election."Google attorney Claire Rajan of Allen &amp; Overy LLP told the FEC on Thursday that the many negative comments from people decrying the plan were "well received" and that "people really dislike spam, which Google knows well."How Gmail users will ultimately react to the program in practice can't be predicted, Rajan said."We can't know that until testing that, and that's the purpose of the pilot," she said.Many Republicans have argued that spam filters have disproportionately affected GOP emails, although Rajan said that isn't true and that Google is not biased for or against any political party or candidate.Any committee registered with the FEC, whose emails comply with Google's terms of service and don't contain prohibited content such as <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/what-is-malware">malware</a> or <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/what-is-phishing">phishing</a> schemes, could apply to participate. Gmail users will retain the right to opt-out of receiving political emails, but this will require more vigilance on their part.Google's concerns — articulated in a <a href="https://www.fec.gov/files/legal/aos/2022-14/202214R_1.pdf">15-page letter</a> to the FEC from Rajan on July 1 — centered on whether its efforts would constitute "prohibited in-kind contributions" to political committees.Put simply: Google wanted the government's reassurance that it isn't breaking any law by giving politicians and political operatives a potentially valuable service. Suspected violations of federal campaign finance laws can result in costly investigations and potential civil fines, say nothing of bad press.

Attention Gmail users: Your inboxes are about to get way more spammy with political email thanks to a new ruling by federal regulators

<ul class="summary-list"><li>A group of <keyword id="394019" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="60" keywordseo="Federal-Election-Commission">Federal Election Commission</keyword> employees is demanding that the White House and the <keyword id="6355284" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="senate">Senate</keyword> appoint people of color to the agency for the first time, according to a letter seen by Insider. </li><li>The bipartisan Federal Election Commission has only had white members in its 45-year history.</li><li>Senate Democrats have asked the White House to nominate <keyword id="903838" type="PERSON" weightage="60" keywordseo="FEC">FEC</keyword> attorney Shana Broussard, who is Black, to serve on the FEC. But Trump has not acted. </li><li>During 11 of the past 12 months, the agency hasn't had enough commissioners to enforce laws, pass rules, or otherwise execute its high-level responsibilities even as Election Day draws closer.</li></ul>A group of Federal Election Commission employees has a message for the White House and US Senate leaders: appoint commissioners of color for the first time in the agency's 45-year history.All the <a href="https://www.fec.gov/about/leadership-and-structure/commissioners/">31 people</a> who've served on the FEC as commissioners since its founding in 1975 have been white. Former Commissioner Ann Ravel, who served from 2013 to 2017, identifies as white and Latino."Just as no political party has a flawless record on race, we believe fervently that none has a monopoly on advancing <keyword id="61889" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="60" keywordseo="Diversity">diversity</keyword>," <a href="https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/20384449/dei-letter-to-wh-senate-8-17-20.pdf">reads a letter</a> signed by 66 FEC staffers, and seen by Insider. "We make this call not to tip the balance toward any party or potential nominee but instead to rectify a historical blindness to the benefits Commissioners of diverse backgrounds and experiences can bring to the agency staff, to its mission, and to the nation."The letter comes amid a nationwide debate about racial equality and power in government, and as the country grapples with several obstacles to voting — the COVID-19 pandemic, mail-in ballots, fear of vote suppression — that could disproportionately affect Black and Hispanic communities.It also comes as the FEC <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/federal-election-commission-fec-2020-money-campaigns-trump-biden-superpac-2020-7">has three vacancies</a> on its six-seat commission: For the past year, the FEC has lacked the minimum four commissioners needed to enforce civil campaign finance rules, complete investigations, fine scofflaws, and attend to other high-level functions.The FEC briefly regained a minimum quorum of four commissioners in June, following the <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/federal-election-commission-fec-2020-money-campaigns-trump-biden-superpac-2020-7">Senate appointment</a> of Republican Trey Trainor, who's now the FEC's chairman. But it lost that quorum in early July when Republican Commissioner Caroline Hunter resigned. The FEC, therefore, is effectively sidelined as the 2020 election races toward Election Day on November 3.<keyword id="3828720" type="PERSON" weightage="60" keywordseo="President-Donald-Trump">President Donald Trump</keyword> has not heeded the long-standing request of Senate Democrats to nominate <a href="https://publicintegrity.org/politics/fec-federal-election-commission-trump-mcconnell-schumer/">Shana Broussard</a>, a Black attorney who works for current FEC commissioner Steven Walther, to one of the other FEC vacancies.Trump has, however, nominated conservative election law attorney Allen Dickerson to fill one of three vacant seats. Dickerson hasn't yet been cleared by the Senate, where a confirmation hearing hasn't been scheduled. The White House and offices of Sens. Mitch McConnell, a Kentucky Republican, and Chuck Schumer, a New York Democrat, did not immediately respond to requests for comment.Among the letter's signatories are two agency spokespeople, Judith Ingram and Christian Hilland, and Debbie Chacona, assistant staff director for the agency's reports analysis division.They note that they're advocating for a more inclusive FEC leadership in their "personal capacities and using our own non-work time and resources."

Dozens of Federal Election Commission employees are asking Trump and the Senate to appoint people of color to the agency for the first time in its 45-year history

<ul class="summary-list"><li>Lawyers for a Jeb-linked PAC accused the Trump campaign of accepting illegal corporate contributions in 2015.</li><li>After almost 6 years, the FEC closed the file after the statute of limitations expired.</li><li>The matter began when a <keyword id="11964533" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="trump-organization" source="Orion">Trump Organization</keyword> lawyer sent cease and desist letters to Trump critics.</li></ul>Last month, the <keyword id="11964531" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="federal-election-commission" source="Orion">Federal Election Commission</keyword> closed the file on a complaint filed in 2015 by a Jeb Bush-linked PAC that accused the Trump campaign of accepting illegal in-kind corporate contributions.<a href="https://www.fec.gov/files/legal/murs/6992/6992_14.pdf">The commission deadlocked 3-3</a> on ideological lines over whether to dismiss the allegations outright, but ultimately voted unanimously to <a href="https://www.fec.gov/data/legal/matter-under-review/6992/">close the file</a>, putting the matter to rest nearly 6 years after Bush's PAC filed the initial complaint.<a href="https://www.fec.gov/files/legal/murs/6992/6992_18.pdf">In an August 25th statement</a>, the commission's two Democratic members, Shana Broussard and Ellen Weintraub, said that they believe the Trump campaign did in fact break the law, but explained that the commission was "ultimately left with no meaningful enforcement options" regarding the complaint after the 5-year statute of limitations expired.They also said the years-long delay was due to both the <a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2020/12/fec-restored-by-senate/">loss of a quorum on the commission</a> that lasted from August 2019 to December 2020 as well as the fact that the complaint "involved legal and factual issues that potentially overlapped with pending criminal and congressional investigations," alluding to the involvement of Trump lawyer <keyword id="11964532" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="michael-cohen" source="Orion">Michael Cohen</keyword>.The saga first began on December 4, 2015, when a lawyer for the Trump Organization sent a cease and desist letter to Right to Rise PAC -- a so-called "leadership PAC" affiliated with <keyword id="11964530" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="jeb-bush" source="Orion">Jeb Bush</keyword> designed to let the former Florida governor raise money on behalf of other candidates and campaigns. The Trump Organization, which sent similar letters to other groups, was threatening to take "immediate legal action" if the PAC ran ads containing "false, misleading, defamatory, inaccurate or otherwise tortious statements" about then-candidate <keyword id="11914386" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="donald-trump" source="Orion">Donald Trump</keyword> or his brand.But the Trump Organization screwed up, sending the letter to a different but related PAC, Right to Rise USA, a super-PAC backing Bush that had already begun airing negative ads against Trump.In response, lawyers from the PAC that had been wrongly targeted by the Trump campaign <a href="https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/2644444/Trump-Letter-and-Complaint.pdf">filed a complaint</a> 5 days later with the FEC alleging that Trump had broken <keyword id="11964534" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="campaign-finance-law" source="Orion">campaign finance law</keyword> by using his corporation's legal team for campaign purposes, which is essentially an illegal corporate contribution."Just as your client is attempting to quickly learn the basics of foreign policy, we wish you personally the best in your attempts to learn election law," read a <a href="https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/2644444/Trump-Letter-and-Complaint.pdf">particularly sassy letter by the lawyers</a> attached to the FEC complaint.A month later, the Bush-linked PAC's lawyers <a href="https://www.fec.gov/files/legal/murs/6992/6992_06.pdf">filed an addendum</a> to the complaint to include Trump lawyer Michael Cohen, accusing him of illegally acting as a campaign employee while employed as executive vice president and senior counsel at the Trump Organization. Because of Cohen's ensuing legal troubles, the commission was unable to act on the matter until after the statute of limitations had already expired.

The FEC closes the file on a Jeb Bush-linked PAC's 6-year-old complaint against the Trump campaign

<ul class="summary-list"><li>The <keyword id="12021087" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="fec" source="Orion">FEC</keyword> won't investigate <keyword id="6354862" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="trump" source="Orion">Trump</keyword> for possible campaign finance violations related to a veterans fundraiser.</li><li>Trump steered the money to his foundation and gave out $100,000 checks to bolster his image.</li></ul>The <keyword id="11964531" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="federal-election-commission" source="Orion">Federal Election Commission</keyword> let <keyword id="12095641" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="former-president-donald-trump" source="Orion">former President Donald Trump</keyword> off the hook even after the body's legal counsel said he violated federal campaign finance laws with a fundraiser for <keyword id="11896861" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="iowa" source="Orion">Iowa</keyword> veterans in 2016, according to <a href="https://www.fec.gov/data/legal/matter-under-review/7425/">documents made public this week</a>.At stake was whether Trump violated laws prohibiting "soft money" spending — using unregulated, non-campaign funds for political purposes — in connection with his 2016 presidential campaign. Specifically, Trump funneled roughly half of the $5.8 million he raised at the Des Moines veterans event on January 28, 2016 to his <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-dissolves-trump-foundation-charity-amid-new-york-lawsuit-2018-12">now-defunct Donald J. Trump Foundation</a>. The Trump campaign then steered how the foundation, a separate entity, spent $2.8 million in charitable funds just ahead of the Iowa Republican caucuses. Last month, the FEC voted along partisan lines to close the case. The <keyword id="12410921" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="campaign-legal-center" source="Orion">Campaign Legal Center</keyword>, an ethics and government watchdog, slammed the commission in a statement to Insider."The FEC failing to enforce campaign finance laws is nothing new, but the latest deadlock may be a new low," said Erin Chlopak, senior director for campaign finance at Campaign Legal Center. "The Commission's non-partisan, career attorneys found reason to believe the Foundation was illegally used to benefit Trump's presidential campaign. The Republican Commissioners voted not to pursue the matter. It is time for the FEC to do its job."Democratic Commissioners Shana Broussard and Ellen Weintraub <a href="https://www.fec.gov/files/legal/murs/7425/7425_41.pdf">accused their Republican colleagues</a> of "eroding the public's trust in the integrity of the federal campaign finance process" by blocking the enforcement of federal law."This is one in a long series of matters that we've had where our nonpartisan professional staff have recommended moving forward in some way against a complaint involving the former president," Weintraub told Insider in a interview on Thursday. "And every single time, the Republican commissioners come up with an excuse to not move forward."Weintraub suggested that Trump could've faced a "pretty hefty fine" had the commission moved forward, given that he was accused of a multi-million dollar violation of campaign finance laws."I think it would have been a strong message for us to send, to discourage that sort of activity by others," she said. "But sadly, we were not able to do that, we did not have the political will to move forward on this. I mean, some of us did."Republican Commissioners Sean Cooksey, Allen Dickerson, and Trey Trainor have not yet issued any statements on the matter, and none responded to Insider's requests for comment.<h2>'A respondent named Trump'</h2><div type="image" title="Trump presents an enlarged copy of a $100,000 check to the owners of Puppy Jake, a charity that trains dogs for veterans, at a Davenport, Iowa event on January 30, 2016." height="1382" width="2000" msid="89812110" hostid="261"></div>In June 2018, New York's then-Attorney General Barbara Underwood <a href="https://ag.ny.gov/sites/default/files/fec_final_letter.pdf">referred evidence of Trump's possible violations to the FEC</a>, writing in a letter that her office had "acquired substantial credible evidence" that Trump broke the law.In a complaint to the FEC the following month, the Campaign Legal Center <a href="https://www.fec.gov/files/legal/murs/7425/7425_01.pdf">accused the Trump campaign of violating campaign finance law</a> for soliciting and then using his foundation's share of the veteran donations for political purposes based on the evidence uncovered by the NY AG's investigation.Emails and other documents <a href="https://ag.ny.gov/press-release/2018/attorney-general-underwood-announces-lawsuit-against-donald-j-trump-foundation#">uncovered by the New York Attorney General's investigation</a> revealed that Trump's then-campaign manager, Corey Lewandowski, gave Allen Weisselberg, then the Trump foundation's treasurer, a list of Iowa veterans organizations that the Trump campaign intended to target in order to drum up political support in the state ahead of the February 1, 2016 caucuses.Weisselberg is also the chief financial officer of the Trump Organization and is currently ensnared in separate investigations <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/ny-attorney-general-trump-lawsuit-attempt-to-block-subpoena-deposition-2022-1">by the New York Attorney General</a> and <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-organization-allen-weisselberg-seek-dismissal-manhattan-da-charges-2022-2">the Manhattan District Attorney</a>.Trump went on to hand out 6-figure donations at several events in the days before the caucuses, giving enlarged $100,000 checks apiece to Partners for Patriots, Support Siouxland Soldiers, Mulberry Street Veterans Shelter, and Puppy Jake — all of which were charities based in Iowa. He <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/why-donald-trump-lost-iowa-caucus-results-ted-cruz-2016-2">ultimately lost the caucus</a> to Republican Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas.<div type="image" title="Emails show Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski directing Trump Foundation treasurer Allen Weisselberg to spend foundation funds at the campaign's behest." height="1000" width="1384" msid="89812112" hostid="261"></div>In response to Campaign Legal's complaint, the Trump campaign said that the veterans contributions were only temporarily in the foundation's coffers, though <a href="https://ag.ny.gov/sites/default/files/ex_22.pdf">documents uncovered by the New York Attorney General's investigation</a> show contributions stretching all the way to May 2016. The campaign also argued that it was simply carrying out its legal obligations to donors by directing the charity's spending and accused the watchdog group of trying to "vilify fundraising for charity.""Essentially everything a federal candidate does may have some effect on that candidate's public image, and philanthropic activity is certainly no different," wrote Trump campaign lawyer E. Stewart Crosland <a href="https://www.fec.gov/files/legal/murs/7425/7425_12.pdf">in a letter to the commission</a> in September 2019. "Whether those efforts result in some goodwill with the public is simply not a campaign-finance (or FEC) concern."Just three months later — under pressure from a <a href="https://ag.ny.gov/press-release/2018/attorney-general-underwood-announces-lawsuit-against-donald-j-trump-foundation#">lawsuit brought by the New York Attorney General's Office</a> taking aim at both the veterans-related political contributions as well as other instances of possible fraud — <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-dissolves-trump-foundation-charity-amid-new-york-lawsuit-2018-12">Trump dissolved the foundation</a>, later admitting to the facts of the case as part of the settlement.In May 2019, <a href="https://www.fec.gov/files/legal/murs/7425/7425_13.pdf">the FEC's legal counsel then recommended</a> that the commission vote to investigate Trump for violating federal campaign finance laws. They <a href="https://www.fec.gov/files/legal/murs/7425/7425_27.pdf">reaffirmed that position in March 2020</a> after the campaign agreed to the facts of the case as part of a separate <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-foundation-lawsuit-2-million-settlement-2019-11">settlement with the State of New York</a>.But there was one major problem: the <a href="https://publicintegrity.org/politics/federal-election-commission-fec-to-effectively-shut-down/">Federal Election Commission had lost its quorum at the end of August 2019</a> when the body's membership of six commissioners atrophied to just three, barring the commission from making any decisions on pending cases. The FEC remained mostly without a quorum <a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2020/12/fec-restored-by-senate/">until December 2020</a>, when the Senate confirmed three new appointees.When the commission finally voted on the matter in January 2021, <a href="https://www.fec.gov/files/legal/murs/7425/7425_28.pdf">it deadlocked</a> along partisan lines over whether to pursue the case. Every Republican commissioner voted to dismiss the allegations entirely, while the two Democrats and one left-leaning independent voted to open an investigation.It was at their first executive session following the restoration of the quorum that the Republican commissioners voted not to investigate the claims against Trump. <div type="image" title="Trump holds up a sheet of paper with a list of donations to veterans groups at a press conference at Trump Tower on May 31, 2016." height="1000" width="2000" msid="89812113" hostid="261"></div><a href="https://www.fec.gov/files/legal/murs/7425/7425_41.pdf">According to Broussard and Weintraub</a>, the Republican commissioners cited the fact that the statue of limitations was set to expire within six months in voting not to pursue the case. In the absence of a quorum, the FEC developed a backlog of cases, some of which were no longer enforceable. But Weintraub told Insider that she doesn't buy the Republicans' argument."We did have a lot of cases where we had to make a choice about whether to move forward or not, given the time that had run on statute of limitations," she said. "But we did move forward on a number of them, just not on any involving a respondent named Trump."Indeed, the <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/fec-cambridge-analytica-tillis-bolton-cruz-trump-violation-federal-law-2021-11">commission's legal counsel found reason to believe in 2019</a> that several GOP figures, including Trump, violated the "foreign national" ban by employing the now-defunct British firm Cambridge Analytica, but the statute of limitations expired and Republicans blocked further action. Both in her interview with Insider and <a href="https://www.fec.gov/files/legal/murs/7425/7425_41.pdf">in her statement of reasons</a>, Weintraub said the New York Attorney General's prior investigation had already done much of the fact-finding work for the commission, raising further questions about why six months was not enough time to enforce the law."We didn't have to do very much because the Attorney General handed it to us, all these incriminating facts," she said.

The Federal Election Commission let Trump off the hook for allegedly using $2.8 million in charitable donations to veterans for political purposes

<ul class="summary-list"><li>The <keyword id="12021087" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="fec" source="Orion">FEC</keyword> said it was legal for an Australian mining company to fund a <keyword id="12460417" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="ballot-measure" source="Orion">ballot measure</keyword> campaign in Montana.</li><li>It was previously ambiguous whether it was legal, but the 4-2 decision has cleared that up.</li></ul>In a 4-2 decision, the <keyword id="11964531" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="federal-election-commission" source="Orion">Federal Election Commission</keyword> has affirmed that foreign nationals - <a href="https://www.fec.gov/updates/foreign-nationals/">including</a> individuals, corporations, and even governments - can legally pour money into ballot measures in states that don't otherwise forbid it.That's because they don't technically count as elections under federal election laws, which foreign nationals are barred from participating in.<a href="https://www.axios.com/fec-foreign-money-referendum-dcc92322-05ad-4093-8bb8-35446ef6c964.html">Axios first reported on</a> the July decision, which has not yet been made public, in which Democratic FEC Chair Shana Broussard reportedly joined with the three Republicans to dismiss a complaint filed against an Australian mining company that contributed to a 2018 anti-highway ballot measure in Montana."Are we, as U.S. citizens, really OK with letting foreign money go directly to state lawmaking via citizen initiative campaigns?" said David Brooks, one of the people who brought the complaint against the mining company, <a href="https://www.axios.com/fec-foreign-money-referendum-dcc92322-05ad-4093-8bb8-35446ef6c964.html">in a statement to Axios</a>.Seven states <a href="https://campaignlegal.org/update/maine-misses-chance-fight-foreign-election-interference">currently ban some version of this foreign funding</a>, including California, Colorado, Maryland, Nevada, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Washington.The <a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/21096628-fec-ballot-measure-ruling">commission's legal analysis</a> of the case stated that the Federal Election Campaign Act "regulates only candidate elections, not referenda or other issue-based ballot measures" and that "spending relating only to ballot 3 initiatives is generally outside the purview of the Act.""The FEC has now officially said this is fine, this is okay," said Aaron McKean, legal counsel at the Campaign Legal Center, in a brief interview with Insider. "Really, it's pretty upsetting, and it goes against the mission of the FEC to protect our elections."Democratic Commissioner Ellen Weintraub <a href="https://twitter.com/EllenLWeintraub/status/1455575559547850755?s=20">spoke out about the decision on Twitter,</a> noting that a fuller statement would be released tomorrow. "I voted to protect our nation's ballot initiatives from foreign influence, but my view did not prevail," she wrote. "Ballot initiatives can reach deeply into the laws of a state or locality and directly rewrite both statutes and constitutions. They are vulnerable to manipulation and are deserving of no less protection from foreign influence than are our candidate elections."While arguably the most famous case of <keyword id="12460416" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="foreign-interference" source="Orion">foreign interference</keyword> in elections is Russia's involvement in the 2016 election - including disinformation on social media and hacking into the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton's campaign, an effort that led to <a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/grand-jury-indicts-12-russian-intelligence-officers-hacking-offenses-related-2016-election">charges</a> against Russian agents - this is far more straightforward. Foreign entities now have the green light to directly plunge millions of dollars into campaigns to change laws that effect everyday citizens' lives.The FEC decision clarifies what had previously been an ambiguous area of campaign finance law; in 2015, the <a href="https://www.fec.gov/data/legal/matter-under-review/6678/">commission deadlocked</a> over whether it was legal for a foreign corporation to contribute $150,000 to a California ballot committee.That led to both a lack of enforcement and a lack of guidance on whether the contributions were even legal in the first place."It's years later, and we're still having the same problems with foreign money in our elections," said McKean. "And it's something that the FEC could fix by themselves. It's their interpretation of the law that is allowing foreign money to get into our elections."This kind of foreign spending is banned by two major election bills supported by congressional Democrats but continually blocked by Republicans - the <a href="https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/people-act-separating-fact-fiction">For The People Act</a> and the <a href="https://www.klobuchar.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2021/9/klobuchar-colleagues-introduce-legislation-to-protect-freedom-to-vote-and-strengthen-our-democracy">Freedom to Vote Act</a>."The important thing here is that people at all levels of government recognize this is the problem," said McKean. "This is self-governance."Maine <a href="https://campaignlegal.org/update/maine-misses-chance-fight-foreign-election-interference">recently tried to ban foreign contributions to ballot committees</a> after a Canadian government-owned public utility spent nearly $10 million on a ballot measure there. Democratic Gov. Janet Mills vetoed it, saying that "entities with direct foreign investment employ thousands of Mainers" and that banning spending by the companies "is offensive to the democratic process.""There are state laws, there are local laws that are trying to patch up these loopholes," said McKean. "And it really hurts when the FEC essentially blesses this loophole."

The FEC affirmed that foreigners can fund US ballot measures because they're technically not elections

<ul class="summary-list"><li>The <keyword id="11964531" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="federal-election-commission" source="Orion">Federal Election Commission</keyword> has "evenly divided" on a case involving <keyword id="11914386" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="donald-trump" source="Orion">Donald Trump</keyword>'s 2020 re-election committee.</li><li>A complaint alleged that Trump's campaign hid the true sources of its payments.</li></ul>Federal regulators have deadlocked on a complaint that Donald Trump's 2020 White House campaign laundered hundreds of millions of dollars in spending through <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/jared-kushner-trump-campaign-shell-company-family-ammc-lara-2020-12">corporate entities</a> closely tied to the ex-president and his <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/eric-trump-deputy-kushner-campaign-spending-shell-company-2020-12">family</a>, according to a ruling document obtained by Insider.The ruling by the Federal Election Commission, which the agency has not yet made public, does not offer reasons for the bipartisan body's decision on an arrangement <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/jared-kushner-trump-campaign-shell-company-family-ammc-lara-2020-12">detailed</a> in late 2020 by Insider. The six-member commission was "equally divided" on several legal questions it considered, according to a letter it sent Monday to the nonpartisan <keyword id="12410921" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="campaign-legal-center" source="Orion">Campaign Legal Center</keyword>, which had filed a formal complaint.Had the FEC ruled against the Trump campaign, Trump's committee could have faced significant fines.The Campaign Legal Center alleged that the Trump campaign routed funds through two firms — <keyword id="13497068" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="american-made-media-consultants" source="Orion">American Made Media Consultants</keyword> and Parscale Strategy — to conceal its spending in the 2020 presidential election. The Trump campaign, it further contended, had failed to keep an "arm's length relationship" with American Made Media Consultants, citing Insider's <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/jared-kushner-trump-campaign-shell-company-family-ammc-lara-2020-12">reporting</a> in December 2020 that <keyword id="12110143" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="jared-kushner" source="Orion">Jared Kushner</keyword>, the then-president's son-in-law and advisor, helped create a shell company that secretly paid the president's family members and spent $617 million in reelection cash.In the complaint, the Campaign Legal Center said Trump's campaign funneled millions of dollars to American Made Media Consultants and Parscale Strategy, which then paid sub-vendors. In addition to Kushner's involvement, the lawsuit notes Insider's reporting that American Made Media Consultants' <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/eric-trump-deputy-kushner-campaign-spending-shell-company-2020-12">board included family members</a> of Trump and former Vice President Mike Pence. The other firm, Parscale Strategy, is run by former Trump campaign manager <keyword id="12514735" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="brad-parscale" source="Orion">Brad Parscale</keyword>.The Campaign Legal Center filed an <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-campaign-parscale-guilfoyle-spending-complaint-ads-fec-2020-7">initial complaint</a> in July 2020 and a supplement to its complaint in January 2021, following Insider's reporting on Trump's campaign operations.In March, the Campaign Legal Center <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/donald-trump-shell-company-jared-kushner-campaign-fec-2022-3">sued the FEC in federal court</a>, alleging that the commission was slow-walking its complaint against Trump's operation."The FEC is responsible for protecting voters' right to know how politicians are raising and spending money, but the FEC has abdicated its responsibilities for years — particularly when it comes to enforcing the law against the Trump campaign — so the FEC's deadlock over the campaign's massive concealment scheme is shameful but not surprising," Adav Noti, the Campaign Legal Center's vice president and legal director, told Insider.A Trump spokesperson could not be immediately reached for comment on the latest FEC ruling.FEC Commissioner Ellen Weintraub, a Democratic appointee and the agency's longest-tenured commissioner, confirmed Monday that she voted to find reason to believe the Trump campaign and related individuals had violated federal law."Disclosure is the core mission of the FEC, and it's important for an informed electorate to know where the money is coming from and where the money is going," Weintraub said.She added that she was "disappointed that we did not have the votes to go forward" and expressed concern that such a decision will "look to the public like the commission is making decisions on a partisan basis."The FEC's five other commissioners — Allen Dickerson, Shana Broussard, Trey Trainor, Steven Walther, and Sean Cooksey — did not immediately respond to inquiries.<h2>More legal trouble for Trump</h2>An adverse ruling from the FEC would have only added to Trump's legal woes.Democratic Reps. Ted Lieu of California and Kathleen Rice of New York in December 2020 had asked both the FBI and FEC to investigate the shell company created by Kushner, in response to Insider's investigation. They argued that Trump's campaign may have violated laws barring the spending of campaign cash for personal use and public disclosure requirements when it spent its money through American Made Media Consultants.Separately, Rep. Mark Pocan, a Democrat of Wisconsin, <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-campaign-shell-company-kushner-ammc-pocan-investigation-2020-12">wrote in a</a> December 2020 letter to then-Attorney General Bill Barr and then-FEC Chairman Trainor: "If Mr. Kushner's American Made Media Consultants did in fact spend $617 million as reported, he and his associates — which include additional Trump family members as well as the Vice President's nephew — could face penalties amounting to more than one billion dollars."Trainor, one of three Trump-nominated commissioners currently on the FEC, <a href="https://publicintegrity.org/politics/will-donald-trump-let-the-federal-election-commission-rot/">worked</a> as a lawyer in service of Trump's 2016 re-election effort.In New York, Trump is facing investigations into his namesake business, with the Manhattan district attorney and the state attorney general mounting parallel inquiries. While the district attorney's investigation appears to be winding down, the New York Attorney General Letitia James' office has repeatedly signaled in recent months that it has a bounty of evidence against the Trump Organization.During a court hearing Friday, an assistant New York attorney general said James' office had amassed a "substantial amount of evidence" that could support an enforcement action against against Trump's business. James had previously stated that her office has "uncovered significant evidence that suggests Donald J. Trump and the Trump Organization falsely and fraudulently valued multiple assets and misrepresented those values to financial institutions for economic benefit."Trump is also facing continued scrutiny over his conduct in the White House. The New York Times reported last week that federal prosecutors have opened a grand jury investigation examining whether classified White House documents taken to Trump's home in Florida were mishandled. That inquiry stems from the National Archive's discovery that, at the end of his four-year term, Trump took 15 boxes from the White House that contained government documents, mementos, gifts and letters.Meanwhile, the special House committee investigating the January 6 attack on the Capitol has been preparing for public hearings that are likely to address Trump's conduct leading up to the insurrection. The House panel recently subpoenaed five Republican lawmakers, including Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, all of whom are close allies of the former president.

You Searched For "shana broussard" and got 8 results

Federal officials failed to investigate Trump campaign's money 'laundering': lawsuit

C. Ryan Barber

FEC finds 'reason to believe' Sen. Thom Tillis and John Bolton violated the 'foreign national ban' by working with British political consulting firm Cambridge Analytica

Bryan Metzger

Attention Gmail users: Your inboxes are about to get way more spammy with political email thanks to a new ruling by federal regulators

Dave Levinthal

Dozens of Federal Election Commission employees are asking Trump and the Senate to appoint people of color to the agency for the first time in its 45-year history

Dave Levinthal

The FEC closes the file on a Jeb Bush-linked PAC's 6-year-old complaint against the Trump campaign

Bryan Metzger

The Federal Election Commission let Trump off the hook for allegedly using $2.8 million in charitable donations to veterans for political purposes

Bryan Metzger

The FEC affirmed that foreigners can fund US ballot measures because they're technically not elections

Bryan Metzger

Trump's campaign committee dodges penalty as federal watchdog deadlocks on complaint it laundered hundreds of millions of dollars

Dave Levinthal,C. Ryan Barber

Popular Keywords

Buying Guides