Everyone has a price.

Manage newsletters

View in browser

With Roger Sollenberger, Political Reporter

Pay Dirt is a weekly foray into the pigpen of political funding. Subscribehere to get it in your inbox every Thursday.

 

The Big Dig this week… How Trump and DeSantis are pushing campaign finance laws to the breaking point.

While the top two contenders in the nascent 2024 Republican presidential primary will at some point have to differentiate themselves for GOP voters, it doesn’t seem like campaign finance law is stacking up to be much of a battlesphere.

 

The campaigns of both former President Donald Trump and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis have pushed the bounds of federal fundraising laws in the early days of their bids. Legal experts say those moves—tens of millions of dollars worth of transactions in each case—may violate the law, give megadonors even more of an outsized influence, and undermine public faith in the democratic system.

“Rigged and Stollen”

 

Trump, of course, boasts a storied history of thumbing his nose at campaign finance regulations—and, according to legal analysts, repeatedly violating those laws. Of course, he didn’t let the fact that he’d left office deter him.

 

After departing the White House under the cloud of the Jan. 6 attack, Trump has continued to solicit money around false claims that the 2020 election was “rigged” and “stollen” [sic]—including several solicitations sent out in recent months. (A fundraising email from Dec. 28, 2022, said, “Donald J. Trump never thought, for even a moment, that the Presidential Election of 2020 was NOT Rigged or Stolen.”) Those moves—including how the Trump operation spent that money—are now reportedly a focus of special counsel Jack Smith’s sprawling investigation into the events surrounding the attack on the Capitol.

 

Polar plunge

 

More recently, however, both candidates have tested the limits of “testing the waters,” specifically the ban on so-called “soft money.” According to legal experts, Trump and DeSantis have flouted rules in order to bulwark their campaigns with astounding piles of cash—tens of millions of dollars in both cases.

 

Erin Chlopak, senior director of campaign finance at bipartisan watchdog Campaign Legal Center, explained the soft money ban.

 

“It’s fairly simple: Federal law prevents federal candidates and associated entities from soliciting, receiving, directing, transferring, or spending soft money—funds that are not subject to federal campaign finance rules,” Chlopak told The Daily Beast. These rules include disclosure requirements, restrictions on sources, and, importantly, individual contribution limits.

 

But there’s a specific rule where both Trump and DeSantis appear to have crossed a legal line—the “testing the waters” period.

 

Under the law, someone becomes a candidate for federal office when they raise or spend more than $5,000 in support of their candidacy. But the law also allows for a “testing the waters” grace period, where potential candidates can engage in financial transactions without triggering federal reporting requirements even if the amounts exceed the $5,000 threshold.

 

“It’s a timing issue,” Chlopak explained. “Campaign finance rules apply to someone who’s a candidate, and sometimes there are questions about what point that happens. But you can’t just say you haven’t quite made up your mind and use that as an excuse to raise or spend millions of dollars.”

 

Swimming in it

 

Trump and DeSantis, Chlopak said, abused the testing the waters period to stash massive amounts of money while engaging in what would otherwise be prohibited transactions. Specifically, they used the window before they officially declared their bids to raise giant sums of money directly into super PACs supporting them—something candidates aren’t allowed to do, since super PACs have much looser restrictions than campaigns and can raise unlimited amounts of money from individuals and corporations.

 

The Trump operation did this through his “Save America” leadership PAC, transferring $20 million to the “MAGA Inc.” super PAC in the weeks before he officially declared his 2024 candidacy. More recently DeSantis tried the same move with his state-level PAC, which this spring transferred more $80 million into the “Never Back Down” super PAC dedicated to supporting his run. That same super PAC is also reportedly routing $500,000 back to the DeSantis campaign.

 

Complaint rock

 

After The Daily Beast reported on Trump’s scheme last October, CLC filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission alleging that the transfers were illegal. But the Trump operation plowed ahead, and CLC amended that complaint in May to account for more transfers—a standing total of $60 million. On Tuesday, CLC filed a similar complaint targeting DeSantis, alleging that his PAC broke the same law.

 

“When somebody running for federal office—particularly the highest office—is raising and spending massive amounts of money without complying with the law, that can really undermine faith in our already fragile political system,” Chlopak said.

 

Brendan Fischer, a campaign finance law specialist and deputy executive director of Documented, told The Daily Beast that the candidates appear to be exploiting the law as well as the regulators charged with enforcing it, but whose lackluster efforts have “promoted a culture of near-impunity.”

 

“Both DeSantis and Trump know that they can aggressively push the legal envelope and expect to get away with it,” Fischer said.

 

Isn’t it ironic?

 

But Fischer also noted that since the Supreme Court’s landmark Citizens United decision that gave rise to super PACs, candidates in every presidential cycle have worked to create or expand loopholes.

 

“As a result, super PACs are now a central feature of the campaign landscape, and megadonors and special interests have an incredible amount of power and influence,” Fischer said.

 

But the watchdogs have a strange bedfellow on this issue: the Trump team.

 

Don’t you think?

 

In March, Trump’s operation—which has famously survived dozens of FEC complaints detailing what appear to be clear violations—filed a state-level ethics complaint against DeSantis in Florida. Among the allegations? Violating the state’s own version of the testing the waters period.

 

But the irony doesn’t end there. That complaint was filed by the MAGA Inc. super PAC, the same entity Trump gave millions of dollars just ahead of his own announcement. And, it turned out, the Trump team got a taste of its own medicine in May, when the Florida Ethics Commission scrapped the complaint.

 

In the decision, the commission—a majority of its members appointed by DeSantis—cited a “lack of legal sufficiency.”

 

Read the full story here.

 

Advertisement

 

From Roger’s Notebook...

Santos Saga Update. In May, following his 13-count indictment for fraud, money laundering, theft, and false statements, beleaguered Rep. George Santos (R-NY) lost his treasurer—the elusive “Andrew Olson.” The treasurer had been the subject of a recent FEC complaint from CREW—filed the day of the indictment—alleging there was good reason to believe that Olson did not in fact exist, and asking for an investigation into whether the campaign was illegally operating without a treasurer.

 

The “departure” was one of a number of recent shakeups in Santos Land. The law firm representing Santos before two other investigative bodies—the Securities and Exchange Commission and the House Committee on Ethics—also reportedly dropped him in May, and his communications director resigned after she was caught on tape saying he was “not a good person” and should be removed from Congress. This week, a former Santos junior congressional staffer who left earlier this year said that he told House investigators he landed the job after paying Santos senior aide Vish Burra at least seven installments of $150, the Associated Press reported.

 

But when “Olson” “resigned,” Santos initially took over the role himself (still listing the email for “Olson”). It was a bold move, one that would theoretically make Santos criminally liable for filing future false statements with the government. The next day, however, Santos hired Georgia-based professional treasurer Jason Boles, who also boasts Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) as a client.

 

Last week, Boles made his first notable, if seemingly small, changes as financial steward. He removed both Flushing Bank and Empire Bank—two local New York institutions the Santos campaign has long patronized—and replaced them with Atlanta-based ServisFirst Bank, the same bank Boles uses with numerous other political committees.

 

The move would guarantee Boles direct access and insight into campaign accounts and transactions. Earlier this year, a former Santos senior aide told The Daily Beast that he suspected Santos may have seen the regional New York banks as easy marks. “If you just need to find a million dollars on Long Island, it’s not that hard if you know the right people,” the former aide said. “It looks odd if you just walk into a bank with $100,000 cash, but if you do it enough times…”

 

Ozymandias. Dr. Mehmet Oz’s dead 2022 senate campaign reported somehow raising nearly $90,000 in the first three months of the year. This fact had gone lost among the quarterly reports back in April, but I caught it when going into Oz’s filings to provide a link in an aside for the main Pay Dirt article this week.

 

The filings show that the campaign redesignated donations for the 2022 general election back to the 2022 primary—a real head-scratcher in terms of the space-time continuum. The campaign treasurer, Sal Purpurra, also served as treasurer for 2022 GOP celebrity Senate candidate Herschel Walker, where he got caught up in a recount redesignation scandal that I reported on back in February.

 

Oz, however, is still about $25 million in the hole, after largely personally underwriting his own bid. But thanks to the Supreme Court and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), he could theoretically recoup all of that money with funds raised after the election—though it’s still unclear why the donations were redesignated backwards in time.

 

Contractors beware. Earlier this month, the FEC settled with Alabama-based medical equipment supplier Medical Place, Inc., for violating the ban on federal contractor contributions in connection to $100,000 in donations to the Alabama Conservatives Fund super PAC. (The ACF returned the money last year and has not been found legally liable.)

 

The conciliation agreement discloses a fine of $17,500—less than 20 percent of the donated amount, from a company that, according to the office of general counsel’s report, has scored about $250 million in federal government contracts. But that report is notable in another way—according to FEC data, only a handful of other OGC reports about impermissible contractor donations have cited the company’s presence in the Federal Supply Schedule, a sprawling database. All those complaints have been settled recently, signaling that, at least in this arena, the FEC is perhaps sharpening its teeth.

 

A Schlapp to the face. Last week, the longtime treasurer for the American Conservative Union—the Matt Schlapp-controlled group that hosts CPAC—submitted a scorching resignation letter to the ACU board, citing a lack of confidence in the group’s financial statements. In his letter, first reported by New York Magazine, treasurer Bob Beauprez wrote, “I cannot deliver a financial report at the upcoming board meeting with any confidence in the accuracy of the numbers.”

 

Beauprez—a close friend of Schlapp—also suggested a general mistrust of Schlapp’s leadership, and claimed he was taken by surprise when Schlapp informed him that he had raised $270,000 for his legal defense against the recent sexual assault lawsuit filed by former Herschel Walker staffer Carlton Huffman. Huffman’s allegation—which I broke in January—appears to have set in motion something of an internal reckoning at the organization, which insiders say has led to a number of resignations and triggered a long overdue re-evaluation of Schlapp’s leadership more broadly.

 

“A cancer has been metastasizing within the organization for years,” Beauprez wrote at the end of his letter. “It must be diagnosed, treated, and cured, or it will destroy ACU/F. You simply cannot survive like this.”


The RNC-Salesforce Ohana. In its May monthly filing, the Republican National Committee disclosed paying software giant Salesforce more than $2.5 million for web hosting. The RNC had long tapped the famously liberal-leaning company to manage its fundraising platform, including its joint fundraising with the Trump campaign in the weeks after the 2020 election. When the Jan. 6 committee subpoenaed Salesforce last year for information related to Trump’s 2020 post-election fundraising emails, the two entities joined forces to fight the demand. The committee dropped that line of inquiry in August, around the time reports revealed that the Justice Department had begun probing that fundraising—an inquiry that special counsel Jack Smith appears to be carrying forward, according to recent reports.

 

More From The Beast’s Politics Desk

Matt Gaetz

A Trump lawyer who abruptly quit last month has been speaking out—and now his former colleagues now have payback in mind. Read this Jose Pagliery exclusive, which takes you inside the knife fight.

 

Longshot Democratic presidential challenger Marrianne Williamson’s operation is not getting a great start to what will surely not be a great campaign, anyway—more than 10 of her staffers have already quit, Jake LaHut reported last week.

 

Democrats knew they were getting the better of Republicans on the debt limit, even if they weren’t ecstatic about making any concessions at all. Still, Ursula Perano and Sam Brodey got Democrats to admit that they were holding their congratulatory press releases until after the debt deal passes. 

 

Roger Stone got caught on a hot mic detailing how to manipulate Donald Trump into getting him to say whatever you want. Essentially, the trick is this: just lie. Zach Petrizzo has the full story—and the clip. 

 

We'll be back next week with more Pay Dirt.  Have a tip? Send us a note and subscribe here.

 
Daily Beast
FacebookTwitterInstagram

© 2023 The Daily Beast Company LLC I 555 W. 18th Street, New York NY, 10011

 

Privacy Policy

 

If you are on a mobile device or cannot view the images in this message, click here to view this email in your browser. To ensure delivery of these emails, please add [email protected] to your address book. If you no longer wish to receive these emails, or think you have received this message in error, you can safely unsubscribe.

https://elink.thedailybeast.com/oc/5581f8dc927219fa268b5594iunlj.4l2/d2c8a710