TRUMP’S APPARENT WITNESS TAMPERING AND ILLEGAL FUNDING OF HIS LEGAL EXPENSES

Witnesses in multiple civil and criminal cases involving former president Trump have gotten financial benefits or promises of pardons at key points in time during the cases’ proceedings. Witness tampering is a crime. Five campaign entities have shared the funding of Trump’s legal expenses, estimated to be over $100 million as-of early 2024. Some of their spending and transfers of funds appear to be illegal.

(Note: If you find my posts too long to read on occasion, please just skim the bolded portions. Thanks for reading my blog!)

Trump, his campaign committee, and three Political Action Committees (PACs) organized to support his campaign all appear to have violated the law in activities related to the criminal and civil cases where Trump is a defendant.

First, at least a dozen witnesses in Trump’s civil or criminal cases have received significant financial benefits either from the Trump campaign (such as large pay raises, increased consulting fees, severance pay, or new jobs for themselves or family members), from Trump’s social media company, or other Trump businesses (such as positions, shares, or severance pay). These benefits often were provided right around the time of their actual or potential testimony. Trump has also made, both explicitly and implicitly, promises of pardons for witnesses. If any of these actions were intended to influence a person’s testimony or their willingness to testify, that would be a crime. [1]

Cases of witness tampering are difficult to prove in court because prosecutors must show that benefits or punishments were intended to influence testimony. However, both a former Trump campaign manager and a former campaign adviser were convicted of witness tampering in 2018 and 2019. Trump pardoned both men in the final days of his presidency, but notably did not pardon a co-defendant who had cooperated with prosecutors.

Apparent attempts to influence witnesses have been a recurring theme in civil and criminal cases involving Trump. In 2023, Trump publicly encouraged a witness not to testify in the Georgia election interference case. During the congressional January 6 hearings, White House staffer Cassidy Hutchinson reported multiple efforts to influence her testimony. Trump aides Boris Epshteyn and Susie Wiles, both potential witnesses in Trump cases, saw their consulting companies receive large increases in payments from the Trump campaign while their testimony was being sought by prosecutors. In the same time period, Wiles’ daughter got a $222,000 a year job at the Trump campaign. Allen Weisselberg, former chief financial officer of the Trump Organization businesses, got a $2 million severance package in January 2023, four months after the New York State Attorney General sued Trump for financial fraud. The severance agreement prohibits him from voluntarily cooperating with investigators.

Dan Scavino, a longtime Trump communications staffer, had the power to post to Trump’s social media accounts and was with Trump on January 6. In August 2021, a month after the congressional January 6 hearings began, Scavino got a $240,000 a year consulting job from Trump’s social media company. He refused to testify or turn over documents to the committee and was held in contempt of Congress. In September 2022, he was subpoenaed by the federal grand jury investigating election interference. After this subpoena but before his testimony in May 2023, he was given a seat on the board of Trump’s social media company. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) reports from the company show that he was given a $600,000 bonus and $4 million in shares, although it isn’t specific about when these benefits were granted. And the list of apparent witness tampering goes on and on.

Second, five campaign entities have shared the funding of Trump’s legal expenses, estimated to be over $100 million as-of early 2024. The five entities are: [2]

·         Trump’s 2020 presidential campaign committee,

·         The Make America Great Again (MAGA) PAC,

·         The Save America PAC, ostensibly a “leadership PAC” meant for supporting other candidates,

·         The MAGA Inc. PAC, a Trump-supporting Super PAC that can take unlimited contributions because it operates independently of the candidate and his campaign committee (supposedly), and

·         The Republican National Committee (RNC).

An important legal question is which of Trump’s legal expenses are (or should be) personal expenses versus appropriate campaign expenses. Campaign finance laws prohibit campaign committee funds from being used for personal expenses, but allow personal use of PAC funds. Trump has used donations to his campaign, his affiliated PACs, and the RNC to pay essentially all his lawyers’ bills in all of the two dozen cases he has faced since 2020. A lot of the spending falls into legal gray areas due to loopholes in campaign finance laws and weak enforcement, especially by the Federal Elections Commission (FEC). Further complicating the situation, several of his lawyers work both on cases that are personal (e.g., the civil and fraud cases involving his businesses) and on ones that are related to his role as President (e.g., the classified documents case).

Between election day in 2020 and the January 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol, Trump raised $255.4 million for an “election defense fund,” supposedly to stop the election from being stolen. This money was split between his campaign committee (and was later moved to his MAGA PAC) and his Save America PAC. The Save America PAC has paid roughly $70 million for Trump’s legal expenses, the bulk of those expenses to-date. Trump campaign staff set up a joint fundraising agreement between the Save America PAC and the RNC, which had the RNC prioritize sending money to the Save America PAC rather than to its own coffers.

The Save America PAC made a $60 million donation to the MAGA Inc. PAC but then got that money back through a series of unusual monthly payments. MAGA Inc. is a Super PAC that can receive unlimited donations and is required to operate independently of the Trump campaign. However, this unusual arrangement makes it appear that it is paying for Trump’s legal expense, although FEC disclosure requirements don’t make this explicitly clear. Furthermore, it is illegal for MAGA Inc. to donate more than $5,000 to the Save America PAC, so their arrangement appears to be illegal but there has been no enforcement action.

Federal elected officials and candidates are allowed to establish a personal legal defense fund to pay for any legal matter related to the individual’s reputation and fitness for office. These legal defense funds are subject to strict contribution and disclosure requirements. There is no evidence that Trump has set up a legal defense fund.

The three PACs are prohibited, at least in theory, from coordinating their spending with the Trump campaign committee and Trump, as well as with each other. However, the FEC, which has three Republican and three Democratic members, has repeatedly been deadlocked on key decisions and enforcement actions. As the Brennan Center for Justice reports, “In the 14 years since Citizens United, during which super PAC coordination with candidates … has been rampant, the FEC has almost never even investigated coordination restrictions, let alone sought to enforce them, despite the commission’s own nonpartisan staff recommending investigations dozens of times.” [3]

All of this highlights the need to reform campaign finance laws and strengthen FEC enforcement. Passing the Freedom to Vote Act in Congress would do a lot to address these issues.

I urge you to contact your U.S. Representative and Senators to ask them to push for passage of the Freedom to Vote Act. You can find contact information for your US Representative at  http://www.house.gov/representatives/find/ and for your US Senators at http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm.

[1]      Faturechi, R., Elliott, J., & Mierjeski, A., 6/3/24, “Multiple Trump witnesses have received significant financial benefits from his businesses, campaign,” ProPublica (https://www.propublica.org/article/donald-trump-criminal-cases-witnesses-financial-benefits)

[2]      Weiner, D. I., & Bacskai, O., 5/10/24, “Trump’s use of campaign funds to pay legal bills,” Brennan Center for Justice (https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/trumps-use-campaign-funds-pay-legal-bills)

[3]      Weiner, D. I., & Bacskai, O., 5/10/24, see above