ReportWire

Tag: federal election commission

  • Beacon Hill targets AI in political advertising

    [ad_1]

    BOSTON — Doctored photos and video footage coupled with ads twisting candidates’ words have been used for decades in political campaigns, but the rise of artificial intelligence has elevated such deceptive tactics to a new level.

    That has prompted a bipartisan push on Beacon Hill for restrictions on the misuse of the technology to sway voters and bash political opponents.

    This page requires Javascript.

    Javascript is required for you to be able to read premium content. Please enable it in your browser settings.

    kAmp A2:C @7 3:==D E92E 4=62C65 E96 s6>@4C2E:44@?EC@==65 w@FD6 (2JD 2?5 |62?D r@>>:EE66 @? %F6D52J H:E9 2 72G@C23=6 G@E6 H@F=5 C6BF:C6 42>A2:8?D E@ 5:D4=@D6 E96 FD6 @7 px 😕 A@=:E:42= 25G6CE:D6>6?ED 2?5 32? “5646AE:G6” 4@>>F?:42E:@?D 😕 42>A2:8? 25D h_ 52JD 367@C6 2? 6=64E:@?]k^Am

    kAmx? 2 ;@:?E DE2E6>6?E[ w@FD6 $A62<6C #@? |2C:2?@[ s”F:?4J[ 2?5 w@FD6 (2JD 2?5 |62?D r92:C>2? p2C@? |:49=6H:EK[ sq@DE@?[ D2:5 w@FD6 s6>@4C2ED A=2? E@ AFE 3@E9 3:==D FA 7@C 5632E6 2?5 2 G@E6 2E 2 7@C>2= D6DD:@? (65?6D52J]k^Am

    kAm“pD 2CE:7:4:2= :?E6==:86?46 4@?E:?F6D E@ C6D92A6 @FC 64@?@>J 2?5 >2?J 2DA64ED @7 @FC 52:=J =:G6D[ =2H>2<6CD 92G6 2 C6DA@?D:3:=:EJ E@ 6?DFC6 E92E px 5@6D ?@E 7FCE96C E96 DAC625 @7 >:D:?7@C>2E:@? 😕 @FC A@=:E:4D[” E96J D2:5]k^Am

    kAm“w@FD6 =6256CD9:A 4@?E:?F6D E@ 92G6 AC@5F4E:G6 4@?G6CD2E:@?D H:E9 E96 >6>36CD9:A @? E9:D :DDF6[ 2?5 H6 =@@< 7@CH2C5 E@ A2DD:?8 E9:D :>A@CE2?E =68:D=2E:@? @? (65?6D52J]”k^Am

    kAm~?6 3:==[ 7:=65 3J #6A] %C:4:2 u2C=6Jq@FG:6C[ s!:EED7:6=5[ H@F=5 AC@9:3:E 2?J@?6 CF??:?8 7@C 6=64E65 @77:46 7C@> 5:DEC:3FE:?8 5646AE:G6 @C 7C2F5F=6?E “DJ?E96E:4” 25D H:E9:? h_ 52JD @7 2? 6=64E:@? 😕 H9:49 E96 42?5:52E6 @C E96:C A@=:E:42= A2CEJ H:== 2AA62C @? DE2E6 @C =@42= 32==@ED] ‘:@=2E@CD H@F=5 7246 7:?6D @7 FA E@ S`[___ F?56C E96 AC@A@D2=]k^Am

    kAmp?@E96C 3:==[ 7:=65 3J w@FD6 |:?@C:EJ {6256C qC25 y@?6D[ #}@CE9 #625:?8[ H@F=5 C6BF:C6 A@=:E:42= 42>A2:8?D E@ 5:D4=@D6 E96 FD6 @7 2?J px E649?@=@8J E@ 86?6C2E6 %'[ 5:8:E2= @C AC:?E 25D E2C86E:?8 E96:C @AA@?6?ED]k^Am

    kAm!@=:E:42= @3D6CG6CD 2?E:4:A2E6 2? @?D=2F89E @7 D@A9:DE:42E65 px86?6C2E65 G:56@ @C 2F5:@ 4=:AD 😕 AC6D:56?E:2= 25D 7@C E6=6G:D:@? 2?5 D@4:2= >65:2 D:E6D 29625 @7 E96 A:G@E2= }@G6>36C >:5E6C> 6=64E:@? H96? 4@?EC@= @7 r@?8C6DD H:== 36 FA 7@C 8C23D]k^Am

    kAmp a_ac C6A@CE :DDF65 3J E96 r@?8C6DD:@?2= #6D62C49 $6CG:46[ 2 AF3=:4 A@=:4J C6D62C49 2C> @7 r@?8C6DD[ H2C?65 E92E 566A72<6D 4@F=5 2=D@ 36 86?6C2E65 3J C@8F6 4@F?EC:6D @C 7@C6:8? 25G6CD2C:6D E@ >655=6 😕 E96 FA4@>:?8 AC6D:56?E:2= 6=64E:@?D]k^Am

    kAm“$E2E6 25G6CD2C:6D @C A@=:E:42==J >@E:G2E65 :?5:G:5F2=D 4@F=5 C6=62D6 72=D:7:65 G:56@D @7 6=64E65 @77:4:2=D @C @E96C AF3=:4 7:8FC6D >2<:?8 :?46?5:2CJ 4@>>6?ED @C 3692G:?8 :?2AAC@AC:2E6=J[” E96 C6A@CE’D 2FE9@CD HC@E6] “s@:?8 D@ 4@F=5[ 😕 EFC?[ 6C@56 AF3=:4 ECFDE[ ?682E:G6=J 27764E AF3=:4 5:D4@FCD6[ @C 6G6? DH2J 2? 6=64E:@?]”k^Am

    kAmx? a_ac[ E96 u656C2= t=64E:@? r@>>:DD:@? G@E65 E@ 368:? E96 AC@46DD @7 C68F=2E:?8 px86?6C2E65 566A72<6D 😕 A@=:E:42= 25D 29625 @7 E96 a_ac 6=64E:@?] %96 A2?6= 96=5 2 e_52J AF3=:4 962C:?8 AC@46DD[ 3FE 92D J6E E@ E2<6 24E:@? @? 2?J ?6H C68F=2E:@?D] p =24< @7 utr 4@>>:DD:@?6CD >62?D E96 A2?6= 5@6D ?@E 92G6 2 BF@CF> E@ >66E @C G@E6 @? D2?4E:@?D]k^Am

    kAmp 8C@FA @7 4@?8C6DD:@?2= =2H>2<6CD[ :?4=F5:?8 |2DD249FD6EED #6AD] $6E9 |@F=E@? 2?5 y:> |4v@G6C?[ HC@E6 E@ E96 utr 😕 yF=J a_ac[ FC8:?8 E96 286?4J E@ 24E @? 2 A6E:E:@? 7C@> 8@@5 8@G6C?>6?E 8C@FAD E@ D6E C6DEC:4E:@?D @? 566A 72<6 A@=:E:42= 25G6CE:D:?8]k^Am

    kAm“”F:4<=J 6G@=G:?8 px E649?@=@8J >2<6D :E :?4C62D:?8=J 5:77:4F=E 7@C G@E6CD E@ 244FC2E6=J :56?E:7J 7C2F5F=6?E G:56@ 2?5 2F5:@ >2E6C:2=[ H9:49 😀 :?4C62D:?8=J EC@F3=:?8 😕 E96 4@?E6IE @7 42>A2:8? 25G6CE:D6>6?ED[” E96J HC@E6]k^Am

    kAmk6>mr9C:DE:2? |] (256 4@G6CD E96 |2DD249FD6EED $E2E69@FD6 7@C }@CE9 @7 q@DE@? |65:2 vC@FAUCDBF@jD ?6HDA2A6CD 2?5 H63D:E6D] t>2:= 9:> 2E k2 9C67lQ>2:=E@i4H256o4?9:?6HD]4@>Qm4H256o4?9:?6HD]4@>k^2m]k^6>mk^Am

    [ad_2]

    By Christian M. Wade | Statehouse Reporter

    Source link

  • Trump campaign files complaint with FEC seeking to keep Biden from transferring campaign funds to Harris

    Trump campaign files complaint with FEC seeking to keep Biden from transferring campaign funds to Harris

    [ad_1]

    Donald Trump’s campaign has filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission claiming the transfer of funds from the Biden reelection campaign to the Harris presidential campaign is a violation of campaign finance rules. The complaint is filed against President Biden, Vice President Harris, the Biden campaign and campaign treasurer Keana Spencer.

    “Kamala Harris is seeking to perpetrate a $91.5 million dollar heist of Joe Biden’s leftover campaign cash — a brazen money grab that would constitute the single largest excessive contribution and biggest violation in the history of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, as amended (the “Act”).”

    The Trump campaign’s general counsel, David Warrington accuses them of “filing fraudulent forms with the Commission purporting to repurpose one candidate’s principal campaign committee for the use of another candidate,” claiming that Harris simply replaced Biden’s name with her own rather than filing her own Statement of Candidacy.

    “There is no provision in federal campaign finance law for Kamala Harris to take over Joe Biden’s candidacy now by quite literally attempting to become him via an amendment of his Form 2, assuming control of his campaign by amending Form 1, and making off with all of his cash,” wrote Warrington.

    He also accused Mr. Biden’s campaign of making an excessive contribution to Harris, saying, “This is little more than a thinly veiled $91.5 million excessive contribution from one presidential candidate to another, that is, from Joe Biden’s old campaign to Kamala Harris’s new campaign. This effort makes a mockery of our campaign finance laws.

    “Contributions by federal candidate committees to other federal candidates are limited to $2,000. Yet, Biden for President is seeking to make an excessive contribution over approximately $91 million dollars — more than 45,000 times the legal limit.”

    In addition, the Trump campaign claims that since Mr. Biden dropped out of the race before transferring the funds to Harris, he’s prohibited from keeping the contributions, leading to yet another violation.

    As a remedy, the campaign asks the FEC to “immediately open an enforcement matter, seek to enjoin this unprecedented illegal transfer, assess a civil penalty commensurate with the size and scale of this brazen violation, and refer this matter to the Department of Justice for prosecution as a knowing and willful violation of federal law.”

    Ultimately, the campaign contends that, “Kamala Harris is in the process of committing the largest campaign finance violation in American history and she is using the Commission’s own forms to do it. The Commission must not and cannot sit idly by while one candidate takes nearly one hundred million dollars from the authorized committee of another, in violation of the Act and the will of the donors who gave the money in the first place. The Commission must immediately find reason to believe and quickly end this ongoing violation.”

    The move by Trump’s campaign comes as his allies have floated the possibility of court challenges to try to keep Mr. Biden at the top of the Democratic ticket, even though he’s ended his campaign. But election law experts believe it’s unlikely such court fights aimed at blocking Vice President Kamala Harris’ presidential candidacy would gain traction in the federal courts.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • How to watch Thursday’s CNN Presidential Debate

    How to watch Thursday’s CNN Presidential Debate

    [ad_1]

    (CNN) — A historic showdown between President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump is set for Thursday on CNN when the presumptive major party nominees meet for their first debate this election cycle.

    The debate will be the earliest such event in US history. Televised presidential debates between general election candidates have always started in September or early October, going back to the first one between John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon in 1960.

    Here’s how to watch the debate:

    [ad_2]

    CNN

    Source link

  • Biden builds early advertising edge as Trump spends millions on legal fees

    Biden builds early advertising edge as Trump spends millions on legal fees

    [ad_1]

    (CNN) — Joe Biden holds a big edge on the airwaves over Donald Trump in the opening weeks of their general election matchup. The president and his allies nearly tripled his rival’s network in ad spending over the past month and a half while Trump has had to devote millions of campaign funds to legal expenses.

    From March 6 – the day after Super Tuesday when Trump effectively secured the 2024 GOP presidential nomination – through Sunday, Biden’s campaign and other Democratic advertisers spent $27.2 million on advertising for the presidential race, while the Trump campaign and GOP advertisers spent about $9.3 million, according to AdImpact data.

    The Biden campaign’s ad spending has included millions in key battleground states such as Michigan ($4.1 million), Pennsylvania ($3.9 million), Arizona ($2.5 million), Wisconsin ($2.2 million) and Georgia ($2.2 million). The Biden network has used its plentiful airtime to promote the administration’s first-term record and to slam Trump, focusing on key issues such as the cost of living and abortion rights.

    [ad_2]

    David Wright and CNN

    Source link

  • Biden Soothes, Sinema Flops And 5 More Fundraising Takeaways

    Biden Soothes, Sinema Flops And 5 More Fundraising Takeaways

    [ad_1]

    For the last time before the 2024 election year, federal political candidates had to reveal their fundraising to the Federal Election Commission by Sunday night, giving us a peek at who is successfully filling their coffers and getting a leg up in next year’s House, Senate and presidential contests.

    Here are seven takeaways from third-quarter political fundraising.

    Biden Hopes Fundraising Will Smooth Democratic Nerves, With A Catch

    President Joe Biden announced raising $71 million in the third quarter, a total far greater than former President Donald Trump’s haul. The Biden campaign’s press release boasted he had more cash on hand than every Republican competing for the GOP nomination combined.

    None of this is wrong, but there’s an obvious reason for it. Biden is the de facto nominee of the Democratic Party, and thus has full control of the Democratic National Committee, giving him access to much, much larger donations than the standard maximum donation of $6,600. The maximum donation to Biden’s campaign, after the cash is routed through the DNC and various state parties, is $929,000.

    The Biden campaign, which has faced months of rocky polling and questions about donor and voter enthusiasm, also made sure to highlight the growing number of small-dollar donors to his campaign. The campaign has brought in more than 200,000 donors who didn’t give in 2020 and doubled the number of donors who’ve pledged to give every month to 112,000.

    Kyrsten Sinema’s Fundraising Hits The Skids

    Arizona independent Sen. Kyrsten Sinema reported over $10 million in the bank ― an impressive haul that would go a long way if she decides to run for reelection next year in a potentially messy three-way showdown with Rep. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) and top GOP election denier Kari Lake, who announced her campaign for Senate earlier this month.

    But Sinema’s pace of fundraising dropped off markedly over the summer, a development that is sure to add to speculation about her political future. Sinema raised only $826,000 in the third quarter, lagging behind every in-cycle Democratic incumbent. After accounting for expenditures on advertising, Sinema ended the quarter with just $41,000 more in her war chest since last quarter.

    Gallego, on the other hand, raised over $3 million, ending the quarter with $5 million cash on hand.

    It Turns Out Being Indicted Has Consequences (If You’re A Democrat)

    Rep. Andy Kim (D-N.J.) raked in $1.17 million in the third quarter, with nearly $1 million in contributions coming in just seven days after he announced a primary bid against indicted Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.). The longtime New Jersey lawmaker is charged with taking bribes and acting as an agent on behalf of a foreign government; many of Menendez’s colleagues have urged him to step down and one even wants him expelled. Compare that to the treatment of Trump, who was rewarded by donations and endorsements by Republicans after his multiple indictments, including over his attempt to overthrow the 2020 election and his alleged mishandling of classified documents.

    Kim actually outraised Menendez, who took in $919,000 in the same period. Still, Menendez ― who has denied the federal charges and vowed to contest them in court ― has nearly $8.6 million cash on hand compared to Kim’s $1.9 million.

    The campaign of Republican presidential candidate and former Vice President Mike Pence has just $1.2 million in the bank.

    Anna Moneymaker/Getty Image

    The Entire GOP Field — Especially Pence — Trails Trump By… A Lot

    Former Vice President Mike Pence has had trouble getting traction in a party dominated by his coup-attempting former boss, and his third-quarter fundraising numbers tell the story.

    Pence, who stood up to Trump’s attempt to remain in power as an unelected autocrat, enters the key final three months before voting starts with just $1.2 million in the bank and $621,000 in debt, all of it to direct mail firms, after raising a relatively paltry $3.4 million.

    Pence’s meager haul stands in major contrast to that of his former boss, who reported raising $24 million. Trump’s campaign initially said it brought in $45 million across three accounts he controls, but his filings revealed a significantly lower number, suggesting expenses related to fundraising that cut into his net haul. Trump still reported $37.5 million cash on hand to spend in the primary — the number his campaign said to expect in the filings.

    Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, who reported raising $15 million with $5 million available to spend against Trump in the primary, took second place in the fundraising race among Republican contenders. Former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley raised over $11 million, with $9 million available as of the beginning of the month to spend in the primary.

    Republicans Made Generous Loans To Their Campaigns

    Entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy has now spent $22.3 million on his campaign. More than $17 million of that is from himself ($15.25 million technically in the form of loans). He started October with $4.2 million in cash, although that number is kind of meaningless as long as he’s willing to pour his own money into the campaign.

    North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum, another long shot candidate, loaned his campaign $2 million last quarter.

    Burgum’s money didn’t all come from his own coffers: He reported raising $3.4 million in individual contributions, which was enough to get him onstage in the first two Republican debates. But that was likely due to a fundraising gimmick the former software executive used to raise small-donor donations: giving $20 gift cards to people who contributed as little as $1 to his campaign. Burgum is currently offering donors the same amount in gas cards.

    Rep. George Santos (R-N.Y.) says he is running for reelection in spite of a criminal indictment, but has little cash on hand.
    Rep. George Santos (R-N.Y.) says he is running for reelection in spite of a criminal indictment, but has little cash on hand.

    George Santos Refunded More Than He Took In

    Embattled Rep. George Santos (R-N.Y.), who faces new federal charges in a superseding indictment that came down last week, ended the quarter having refunded more money than he raised.

    His campaign reported barely $23,000 cash on hand at the beginning of October for what’s guaranteed to be a challenging reelection in a swing district. Primary challengers have already lined up to take him on. Santos maintains that despite the numerous charges against him — which include fraud, conspiracy and identity theft — he is nonetheless running for reelection in New York’s 3rd Congressional District.

    Santos, whose former treasurer pleaded guilty this month in a scheme to defraud donors, ended the quarter with an almost $17,000 net loss in contributions and $750,000 in debt, which includes a $500,000 loan he previously claimed to have given the campaign.

    Potential Senate GOP Headaches Fall Flat

    Senate Republicans have zeroed in on three Democrat-held seats in red states ― West Virginia, Montana and Ohio ― as key to their hopes of winning the Senate in 2024. A potential threat to their plans in West Virginia and Montana, at least, has been weaker (or at least less establishment-friendly) candidates winning GOP primaries.

    The fundraising numbers out of Montana and West Virginia might help D.C. Republicans sleep easier at night. Their preferred candidates, businessman Tim Sheehey in Montana and Gov. Jim Justice in West Virginia, performed better than some of their potential rivals: Justice raised $935,000 and Sheehey raised $2.8 million.

    Meanwhile, Reps. Matt Rosendale (R-Mont.) and Alex Mooney (R-W.Va.) each raised less than $500,000 in the first quarter, with Mooney bringing in just $410,000 and Rosendale raising a mere $334,000. Both candidates may get a boost from the Club for Growth, a moneyed conservative group, though the group is unsure if it will ultimately back Rosendale, who has yet to officially announce a campaign.

    The Democrats in those states had distinctly different quarters: Sen. Jon Tester of Montana raised $5 million, while Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia, who has yet to officially decide on a run, raised just $714,000. Both men have impressive cash-on-hand totals: $13 million for Tester and $11.3 million for Manchin.

    The third race Republicans are counting on in their efforts to flip control of the 51-49 Senate is Ohio, where incumbent Democratic Sen. Sherrod Brown raised $5.8 million. Republicans don’t have a preferred candidate in the race, though Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose raised $1 million; businessman Bernie Moreno’s campaign raised $4 million, including $3 million of his own money; and State Sen. Matt Dolan matched Moreno, donating $3 million of his own money and raising $4 million overall.

    S.V. Dáte contributed reporting.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Nevada GOP Senate candidate raised money to help other candidates — the funds mostly paid down his old campaign’s debt instead | CNN Politics

    Nevada GOP Senate candidate raised money to help other candidates — the funds mostly paid down his old campaign’s debt instead | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Nevada Republican Senate candidate Sam Brown created a political action committee to “help elect Republicans” but most of its funds were spent paying down debt from his failed previous campaign. The group donated less than 7% of its funds to the candidates it was set up to support, according to campaign finance records – a move one campaign finance expert likened to using the PAC as a “slush fund.”

    Brown formed the Duty First PAC in July 2022, saying the organization would help Republicans take back Congress. A month earlier, Brown lost the Republican Senate primary to Adam Laxalt after raising an impressive $4.4 million for his upstart campaign, but his campaign was left with more than $300,000 in debt.

    Now Brown is running again in Nevada as a top recruit of Senate Republicans.

    A former Army captain, Brown made lofty promises when launching his PAC, Duty First.

    “With your support, we will: Defeat the socialist Democrats. Help elect Republicans who believe in accountability to the Constitution and service to the people. Stand with the #DutyFirst movement, chip in with a grassroots contribution today,” he said in a tweet announcing the PAC.

    “We’ll ensure that the socialist agenda of the Democrats does not win in November, and the Republicans continue to be held accountable to defending our Constitution and defending our conservative principles. The country’s counting on us,” Brown said in an accompanying video for the PAC’s launch in July 2022.

    Since then, the PAC raised a small amount – just $91,500 – and used the majority of their money – $55,000 – to repay debt from Brown’s failed campaign for Senate, which Brown had transferred over. Campaign finance experts told CNN this falls into a legal gray area.

    Of the $90,000 spent so far, just $6,000 made its way to five Nevadan Republican candidates’ committees. An additional payment for $1,000 was listed as going directly to congressional candidate Mark Robertson as a contribution but lists the amount as being directly paid to the candidate at his home – not to his committee.

    Instead, the Duty First PAC made over a dozen debt payments. A combined $23,000 was spent on website and software services used by Brown’s Senate campaign. Another $11,275 went towards paying down the failed campaign’s credit card, with an additional $3,000 spent on credit card interest fees.

    Duty First paid off over $1,200 in credit card debt accrued at a country club near where Brown previously lived in Dallas, Texas, and ran for the state house in 2014. A spokesman for the Brown campaign said in an email to CNN the “facility fee” charges were for a fundraiser “hosted by supporters of Sam’s campaign.”

    The most recent FEC filing shows Brown is now trying to dispute over $80,000 in remaining debt from the previous campaign, which the spokesman said “will be resolved in due course.” A majority of the disputed debt owed is for direct mail services used by Brown’s previous campaign.

    Duty First PAC is also responsible for eventually repaying Brown $70,000 that he personally loaned his committees.

    The spokesperson for Brown’s campaign defended the PAC’s spending.

    “The PAC promised to support conservative candidates in Nevada, and it did exactly that by donating to every Republican candidate in Nevada’s federal races during the 2022 general election,” they said.

    According to a CNN analysis of Duty First PAC’s FEC filings, of all the money raised, less than 7% went to candidates. When considering Brown’s personal loans, debt the PAC took on from Brown’s campaign, and expenditures, fewer than 2% of the PAC’s funds went towards candidates in 2022

    The money not spent on debt went to a variety of consulting and digital marketing expenses. The PAC spent $1,090 on a storage unit, more than it donated to the winning campaign of Republican Rep. Mark Amodei.

    Despite this, Brown played up his PAC’s donations to candidates in interviews and in posts on social media.

    “I have pledged to help defeat the Democrats in Nevada,” he added in an email, announcing the launch of the PAC.

    The PAC’s donations were from grassroots donors, who typically donated $50 or less.

    Just a day before the 2022 midterm election, Brown announced donations to several candidates running for office in Nevada.

    Records with the FEC show the 2022 donations to House candidates were made on October 31, while the donation to Laxalt’s Senate campaign was made in early September.

    “The Duty First PAC proudly supports conservatives fighting for Nevada,” he said in a tweet after making the donations on November 7, 2022. “This past week, we donated funds to the four Republicans working to take back the House. Join us in supporting them right now!”

    Later, following the 2022 midterms in a late November interview on a local Nevada radio station, Brown played up the PAC’s work and said it would continue to work between election cycles.

    “Duty First is here to kind of work between the cycles, so to speak and help candidates who are running,” Brown said. “In fact this cycle, you know, we had raised money and supported all of our Republican federal candidates, Adam Laxalt, as well as the four Congressionals.”

    “And so, it’s our way of pushing back against the Democrat agenda and their representation,” Brown said. “But, also, it gives Duty First supporters and people that believe in our mission, a sort of platform to remind Republicans what we’re about.”

    Campaign finance experts CNN spoke to said Brown marketing the Duty First PAC as a way for people to financially support conservative candidates was a “creative way” for Brown to pay off old campaign debts behind the scenes.

    “It creates a situation where contributors to a PAC may think that PAC is doing one thing, which is supporting political candidates, when in fact what it’s doing is being used to pay off long standing debts from a previous campaign,” said Stephen Spaulding, vice president of policy at Common Cause and former advisor to an FEC commissioner.

    Since the FEC has not issued an advisory opinion that would “apply to that candidate and any other candidate that has a very similar situation,” Spaulding said transferring debts between campaign committees and PACs is a gray area in campaign finance law. In Brown’s case, his candidate committee was rolled into a PAC, Sam Brown PAC, that was associated with his candidacy, which the campaign finance experts agree is a common maneuver for candidates. But what struck the experts as odd was that Brown terminated the Sam Brown PAC, and transferred his outstanding loans and debts to the Duty First PAC.

    Brown’s 2024 candidate committee, Sam Brown for Nevada, is an entirely new committee with its own FEC filings, despite having the same name as his previous committee. This committee, formed in July 2023, is not affiliated with the Duty First PAC, nor is it obligated to pay off the remaining $271,000 in previous campaign debt and loans.

    “Unfortunately, Sam Brown, like too many other politicians, has given almost no money to other candidates and, instead, has used his PAC as a slush fund,” said Paul S. Ryan, executive director at Funders’ Committee for Civic Participation. “Many donors would understandably be upset if they learned their money wasn’t used to help elect other candidates like Brown – the reason they made their contributions,” he added.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • DeSantis fundraising slowed after initial campaign launch, filing shows | CNN Politics

    DeSantis fundraising slowed after initial campaign launch, filing shows | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Republican presidential candidate Ron DeSantis is relying on larger donors to fuel his campaign and saw the pace of contributions slow after his initial announcement, a new report detailing his fundraising for the quarter ended June 30 shows.

    His campaign also confirmed to CNN on Saturday that it had recently let some staffers go.

    “Defeating Joe Biden and the $72 million behind him will require a nimble and candidate driven campaign, and we are building a movement to go the distance,” DeSantis’ campaign spokesperson Andrew Romeo said in a statement.

    Politico reported Saturday that “fewer than 10 staffers” in event planning were cut on Thursday. DeSantis’ latest FEC fiiling shows that about 90 people were on his campaign payroll during the second quarter. Two veterans of his political operation are also departing the campaign to work with an outside group that will focus on boosting his presidential bid.

    DeSantis’s camp has been working to reassure his benefactors that he has a path to the GOP nomination, even as he continues to trail former President Donald Trump in the polls.

    DeSantis, whose campaign posted a strong second-quarter haul of $20 million, saw his fundraising surge after launching his White House bid on May 24, but it quickly fell off in the weeks that followed, a CNN review shows. Among individuals giving more than $200, DeSantis raised more than $5 million in the opening days of his campaign – roughly 30% of the total he raised from those donors in the quarter.

    Candidates are only required to disclose details on contributions that exceed $200, including the date they were received.

    And DeSantis’ filing with federal regulators shows that a relatively small share – roughly 15% – of his individual contributions came in amounts of $200 or less. Donors who contribute in small amounts are valuable to campaigns because they can be tapped repeatedly for contributions before they hit donation limits. Robust small-dollar donations can also be a sign of grassroots momentum behind a campaign.

    About $3 million of the $20 million DeSantis reported raising in the second quarter cannot be touched in the battle for the 2024 GOP nomination because it is designated for the general election and cannot be used unless he becomes his party’s standard-bearer.

    Trump has traditionally relied on legions of grassroots donors to sustain his campaigns. Candidates still were filing their reports with the FEC on Saturday night as the midnight deadline to disclose their fundraising and spending details for the April to June period approached.

    The filings offer a snapshot of which Republican candidates are struggling to gain early traction with donors and those who have jumped to early leads.

    DeSantis has significant resources behind his campaign. A super PAC supporting his candidacy, Never Back Down, has previously announced taking in $130 million since it launched in March. But nearly two-thirds of that sum came from a state political committee tied to DeSantis’ 2022 reelection campaign in Florida, as CNN has previously reported.

    This story has been updated with additional information.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • George Santos names himself treasurer of his campaign committee | CNN Politics

    George Santos names himself treasurer of his campaign committee | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Rep. George Santos has named himself the treasurer of his campaign committee, marking the latest twist in a monthslong saga over puzzling filings his campaign has made with federal regulators.

    The new filing, made late Friday afternoon with the Federal Election Commission, comes a little more than a week after federal prosecutors unveiled a 13-count criminal indictment, charging the New York Republican with wire fraud, fraudulently obtaining Covid-19 unemployment benefits and lying about his personal finances on forms he submitted to the US House of Representatives as a candidate. He has denied wrongdoing and pleaded not guilty to the charges.

    Santos defended the move Saturday, saying it was to “ensure compliance.”

    “My intent is to operate above reproach,” the freshman lawmakers said on Twitter. “We will continue to build our campaign around professionals with subject matter expertise.”

    He added that FEC records will be updated to reflect the change.

    Questions long have swirled about the identity of Santos’ campaign treasurer. This year, Santos’ campaign named a new treasurer identified as Andrew Olson, but federal and state records did not show anyone with that name serving as the treasurer of any other federal committees or any political committees operating in New York state.

    At the time that Olson was added as treasurer, the address associated with him and Santos’ campaign was that of a mixed-use apartment and commercial building in Elmhurst, New York, where the congressman’s sister had resided until earlier this year.

    Earlier this month, the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington watchdog group, lodged a complaint with the Federal Election Commission questioning Olson’s existence and asking the agency to investigate whether the campaign had potentially violated campaign finance laws with filings that listed that person as treasurer.

    Political committees are not allowed to raise or spend money without a treasurer. Candidates legally can serve as the treasurers of their own campaigns, but it is rare for them to do so.

    In his short time in Washington, Santos’ campaign filings have faced intense scrutiny. They range from questions about dozens of campaign expenses listed at $199.99 – a penny below the threshold for which campaigns are required to retain receipts – to confusion about who was filing the treasurer’s role.

    On January 25, for instance, Santos’ campaign listed a Wisconsin political consultant as replacing the congressman’s longtime treasurer Nancy Marks. But the consultant’s lawyer said the campaign had done so without his authorization, and that his client had turned down the job.

    Then, on January 31, Marks informed the FEC that she had resigned. Later that day, Olson’s electronic signature first appeared on a Santos report.

    Santos has argued in the past that the filings were not his responsibility.

    “I don’t touch any of my FEC stuff, right?” he told CNN back in January. “So don’t be disingenuous and report that I did because you know that every campaign hires fiduciaries.”

    This story has been updated with additional information.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Six takeaways from campaign fundraising filings by Trump, Haley, Santos and more | CNN Politics

    Six takeaways from campaign fundraising filings by Trump, Haley, Santos and more | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Former President Donald Trump’s criminal indictment helped jolt his fundraising. GOP presidential candidate Nikki Haley faces questions about her campaign math. Embattled New York Rep. George Santos refunded more contributions than he took in. And some – but not all – of the Democratic Party’s most vulnerable Senate incumbents have stepped up their fundraising ahead of tough 2024 election fights.

    Here’s a look at a few takeaways from new first-quarter campaign filings covering the first three months of 2023:

    Trump raised about $14.4 million for his main campaign committee in the first quarter of this year – with donations spiking at the end of March as news broke of his indictment by a Manhattan grand jury.

    The new filings suggest that the former president’s legal troubles have helped him politically and financially as he makes a third bid for the White House. But the amount only captures the start of what the campaign said was a fundraising surge that continued into the beginning of the second quarter.

    Even so, Trump’s first-quarter haul lagged behind the pace he had set in earlier campaigns.

    Earlier this month, Haley;s campaign publicized what it boasted as a strong haul for her 2024 presidential bid: The former South Carolina governor had raised “more than $11 million in just six weeks,” according to a campaign release.

    But official filings with the Federal Election Commission on Saturday night show that the campaign appears to have double-counted money routed among Haley’s fundraising committees, overstating the topline figure.

    The three committees connected to Haley raised a total of $8.3 million – still a sizable showing for a first-time presidential candidate but not the figure publicly touted by the former UN ambassador’s campaign.

    Fundraising serves as one benchmark of support for a campaign, and candidates are often eager to tout big numbers in advance of their official filings with federal regulators.

    In an email to CNN on Sunday, Haley campaign spokesman Ken Farnaso defended the $11 million figure, saying the accounting mirrored how other candidates have previously described their fundraising.

    Other candidates have sought to present their campaign filings in the most favorable light. Trump’s campaign, for instance, touted a $9.5 million haul during the first six weeks of his campaign. But, in that window, only about $5 million flowed into the joint fundraising committee that powers his political operation.

    Embattled Rep. George Santos’ campaign refunded more contributions than it took in during the first three months of the year, according to a campaign report the New York Republican filed Saturday.

    The freshman congressman from Long Island received $5,333 in contributions during the first quarter and refunded more than $8,000 in donations. It’s highly unusual for a sitting member of Congress to report a net loss on a fundraising report.

    By contrast, another first-term congressman, Republican Anthony D’Esposito, who represents a neighboring district, reported more than $670,000 in receipts during the first quarter, including more than $300,000 from political action committees and other lawmakers’ campaign committees.

    Santos, who has lied about his education, work history and family background, faces a House ethics inquiry, along with local and federal investigations into his finances.

    His campaign reported $25,000 in remaining cash as of March 31 and $715,000 in debt – which Santos has described as personal funds he loaned to his successful 2020 effort for New York’s 3rd Congressional District.

    (How Santos, who in 2020 reported a $55,000 salary and no assets when he ran unsuccessfully for Congress, amassed the money to fund his campaign two years later remains one of the biggest questions surrounding his political rise.)

    Last month, Santos formally filed paperwork for a 2024 reelection bid, but it followed a demand from the FEC that he declare his intentions after he crossed a fundraising threshold that required him to file a statement of candidacy.

    Some of his fellow Republicans have urged the scandal-plagued congressman to resign or not seek reelection. Last month, when asked by CNN whether he intended to run again, Santos responded, “Maybe.”

    In the closely watched race to succeed California Sen. Dianne Feinstein, Rep. Adam Schiff outraised the rest of the Democratic field, bringing in $6.7 million during the first quarter – topping the nearly $4.5 million raised by Rep. Katie Porter and roughly $1.3 million collected by Rep. Barbara Lee.

    Schiff also led the field in available cash, ending March with more than $24.6 million stockpiled in his campaign account.

    Porter, who transferred nearly $11 million from her House campaign into her Senate account this year, had more than $9.4 million in cash still available on March 31. Lee trailed with a little more than $1.1 million in available cash.

    Feinstein, who at 89 is the oldest sitting senator, has announced she will not seek reelection next year – although she is facing calls from some Democrats to retire now after being sidelined with shingles since early March.

    Last week, she asked to be temporarily replaced on the Senate Judiciary Committee while she continues her recuperation.

    In Arizona, the leading Democratic candidate for Senate, Rep. Ruben Gallego, outraised independent incumbent Sen. Kyrsten Sinema, bringing in nearly $3.8 million to his opponent’s $2.1 million.

    Sinema, who changed her affiliation from Democrat late last year, continues to caucus with her former party. She has not formally declared an intention to seek a second term. But she has the resources to compete in what could be a costly, three-way general election battle for the seat. She ended March with nearly $10 million in available cash to Gallego’s $2.7 million.

    Mark Lamb, an Arizona sheriff aligned with Trump, this month became the first major Republican candidate to enter the race, but he won’t file his first fundraising report until July.

    Democratic Sen. Sherrod Brown of Ohio – who is seeking a fourth term in what will be one of the most closely watched contests of the 2024 cycle – raised more than $3.5 million in the first quarter, up from the roughly $333,000 he collected during the last three months of 2022.

    Several Republicans have lined up to challenge Brown, including Cleveland businessman Bernie Moreno and former state Sen. Matt Dolan, whose family owns the Cleveland Guardians Major League Baseball team.

    Saturday’s filings show Dolan collecting $3.3 million – most of which he loaned his campaign. Moreno joined the race in April, after the first-quarter fundraising period had ended.

    Brown is one of three Democratic senators who are up for reelection next year in states won by Trump in 2020.

    Montana Sen. Jon Tester, another Democratic incumbent facing a tough reelection battle in a Republican state, raised $5 million in the first quarter and had $7 million stockpiled as of March 31.

    In deep-red West Virginia – a state Trump won by nearly 40 points in 2020 – Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin has not yet declared whether he will seek a third full term in 2024. He pulled in just $370,000 in the first quarter but was sitting atop a $9.7 million war chest of available cash as of March 31.

    West Virginia Rep. Alex Mooney, the first major Republican to enter the Senate race, collected roughly $500,000 in the first quarter.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Ramen noodles and drained savings: FEC weighs allowing candidates to use political cash to pay themselves bigger salaries | CNN Politics

    Ramen noodles and drained savings: FEC weighs allowing candidates to use political cash to pay themselves bigger salaries | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    When Nabilah Islam began running for Congress in the 2020 cycle, she said she quickly discovered the high price of her decision.

    “It was impossible for me to have a full-time job and wage a competitive campaign,” the Georgia Democrat recalled. So, she gave up her work as a campaign consultant, paused paying her student loans and went without health insurance – in the middle of a pandemic – because she could no longer afford to pay the premiums. She drained her savings to pay living expenses.

    “I was eating ramen and turkey sandwiches every day,” said Islam, who lost her bid for a House seat and now serves in the Georgia state Senate. “It was one of the hardest things I had ever done in my life.”

    Now, the Federal Election Commission is taking up a request that Islam lodged in 2021 to change some of the federal rules governing the use of political cash. At a hearing Wednesday, the regulators weighed boosting the amount of campaign money candidates can use to pay themselves while running for office. They also are considering whether to allow federal candidates to use donors’ money to underwrite health insurance premiums and other benefits.

    Although the FEC now allows candidates to use campaign funds to pay themselves a salary, the agency set strict limits. That salary is capped at the annual salary for the office they are seeking or their earnings in the year before they became a candidate, whichever is the lower amount.

    The limits are aimed at preventing candidates from enriching themselves at donors’ expense, but they also bar candidates who were unemployed or at home caring for children in the prior year from using contributors’ money to draw a candidate salary.

    Supporters of the change say it would make it easier for a broader spectrum of Americans to run for federal office, including full-time caregivers, students and people from working-class backgrounds. But critics question whether it would encourage grift.

    “The reality is that giving up your salary for a year or two to run for Congress is unsustainable for most working people,” said Liuba Grechen Shirley, a former House candidate and founder and CEO of the Vote Mama Foundation, which aims to overcome the obstacles mothers face in running for office. She supports the rule change.

    “We have to make it the norm that candidates pay themselves a livable wage, so that they can run for office because that’s how we start to change the system,” she told CNN in an interview this week.

    Running for Congress is a time-consuming and expensive enterprise. The average successful House winner in the 2022 midterms spent nearly $2.8 million in campaign funds, according to OpenSecrets, a nonpartisan organization that tracks political money.

    And members of Congress, as a group, are far wealthier than the general US population. An OpenSecrets analysis of congressional financial disclosures reports in 2020 found that more than half the people in Congress that year were millionaires.

    Although a record number of women serve in Congress, they still make up just over a quarter of total representation, according to the Center for American Woman and Politics (CAWP) at Rutgers University.

    Only about 28% of all candidates for the House in 2022 were women, said Kelly Dittmar, CAWP’s director of research, underscoring that the gender disparities start long before Election Day.

    “If you could tell a potential candidate that they would have greater financial security if they decided to wage a campaign for office, then it might increase the pool of candidates, including women,” Dittmar said.

    The limits don’t just affect women.

    Maxwell Frost rides an elevator on his way to be interviewed on a podcast in Orlando, Florida, on August 30, 2022.

    Florida Rep. Maxwell Frost, who last year became the first Gen Z candidate to win a congressional seat, told the commissioners he “put himself in a bad financial place” by seeking a House seat.

    The 26-year-old Democrat said he left his job at a gun-violence prevention organization to run for office but quickly realized that he couldn’t sustain campaigning and driving part-time for Uber as he had planned.

    Frost drew headlines late last year after a landlord denied his application to rent an apartment in Washington, DC, because of his low credit score.

    “I did overcome the odds,” he testified Wednesday. “But there are often consequences when you participate in a system that’s not set up for you.”

    The FEC, which is not likely to make a decision in the coming weeks, is considering a range of options.

    Among them: Allowing candidates to earn, on a pro-rated basis, up to 50% – or as much as 100% – of the federal office they are seeking, regardless of what they earned in the year before they launched their campaigns. Rank-and-file members of Congress earn $174,000 a year, with those in top leadership positions collecting more.

    Other options include allowing candidates to receive a salary that’s tied to a $15-an-hour rate or to the minimum wage set by federal or state law.

    So far, a range of individuals and organizations – including the campaign arms for House Democrats and Republicans – have expressed general support for a change, although they diverge on the specific remedies.

    Some Republicans on the panel, including Commissioner James “Trey” Trainor, questioned whether the agency is overstepping its bounds by weighing a rule change and should instead ask Congress to change the federal law that bars candidates from converting campaign contributions to personal use.

    Bradley Smith, a former Republican FEC commissioner, testified that the agency should be wary of going too far with “feel-good rule-making.”

    “Why not allow candidates to pay for haircuts, better clothes, better food to keep a candidate’s energy up and fundraising or recharging time at the country club, all of which could be helpful to a campaign?” he asked.

    The commission also is considering whether to allow candidates to begin drawing a donor-funded salary as soon as they file a statement of candidacy rather than waiting, as is currently required, for primary ballot deadlines, which vary widely by state.

    Frost, the freshman congressman from Florida, also urged the commission to allow candidates to continue drawing a campaign salary after the election as they wait for their salaries as officeholders to kick in.

    Although the FEC often deadlocks along partisan lines, the commission has signaled an openness to easing some rules for candidates in the past.

    In 2018, the agency opened the door to candidates using campaign contributions to pay for child care benefits, following a request from Grechen Shirley. She said she did so after trying for months to juggle care for her small children while running for a House seat in Long Island. “I would literally be nursing my son, while my daughter put hairclips in my hair, and I’d have my headphones on and would be dialing for dollars,” she said.

    To date, 59 federal candidates have used campaign dollars for child care, according to Vote Mama. The group now is pressing states around the country to extend the policy to state and local candidates.

    This year, 19 bills to do so have been introduced in 13 states, Grechen Shirley said.

    Last year, Islam, 33, made history by becoming the youngest woman and the first Muslim woman elected to the Georgia state Senate. Although she is not currently planning another run for Congress, she said she is determined to see federal policy change.

    “I’m very persistent,” she said. “No one should have to go through all that in order to run for office.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • ‘Have not heard of him’: George Santos has a new campaign treasurer but questions persist | CNN Politics

    ‘Have not heard of him’: George Santos has a new campaign treasurer but questions persist | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    More than a week after embattled Rep. George Santos named his new campaign treasurer, questions persist over the identity of the person who has filled that role and the campaign’s filings with federal regulators.

    Andrew Olson, listed as treasurer of Santos’ federal political committees on February 21, does not serve as treasurer for any federal committees beyond those associated with the Republican congressman who represents parts of Nassau County, New York. And election officials in New York say no one with that name is registered as treasurer of any political committee in the state. The address associated with Olson and Santos’ campaign is that of a mixed-use apartment and commercial building in Elmhurst, New York, where the congressman’s sister resided until earlier this year.

    “Do not know him. Have not heard of him,” Nassau County Republican Party spokesman Mike Deery told CNN. County GOP chair Joseph Cairo “is not acquainted (with) him,” Deery added.

    On Capitol Hill on Wednesday, Santos did not answer any questions about his treasurer posed by CNN’s Manu Raju. Questions to Olson through an email address provided on the Federal Election Commission filing have gone unanswered. And Santos’ personal lawyer has not responded to inquiries.

    Santos – who has lied about his biography, family background and school and work history – is the subject of federal and local investigations into his finances.

    This year, questions emerged about who serves as treasurer. On January 25, Santos’ campaign listed a Wisconsin political consultant as replacing the congressman’s longtime treasurer Nancy Marks. But the consultant’s lawyer says the campaign had done so without his authorization, and his client had turned down the job.

    On January 31, Marks informed the FEC that she had resigned. Later that day, Olson’s electronic signature appeared on a Santos filing that detailed the campaign’s activity in the final weeks of 2022 along with a note that said it been “filed based on the limited information provided to the campaign from the previous treasurer Nancy Marks.”

    Marks did not respond to CNN’s request for comment this week. Her assistant said they don’t know who Olson is.

    Confusion long has swirled around Santos’ filings with the FEC, which has sent more than two dozen letters requesting additional information from his campaign since he first ran for Congress in the 2020 election cycle.

    This week, the FEC sent yet another such letter, ordering the campaign to fix the statement of organization that listed Olson as the new treasurer, because the paperwork incorrectly described Santos’ campaign committee as a national Republican Party committee. The campaign has corrected the error.

    But Saurav Ghosh, a former FEC enforcement lawyer who now works with the Campaign Legal Center watchdog group, said the initial report “reflects a complete lack of sophistication and lack of diligence with the details about what they are filing.”

    “It seems like his campaign has never done any of kind of reasonable job of filing accurate and complete statements, which is why the FEC has asked them so many questions and why the public, justifiably, is asking them so many questions,” Ghosh added.

    Election watchdogs say they have been stumped when they have sought to learn more about Olson. “I’ve never seen this before: Having a complete mystery as a treasurer for a sitting member of Congress,” said Jordan Libowitz of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington.

    The address listed for Santos’ committee and his treasurer on Queens Boulevard in Elmhurst, New York, is that of an apartment building that has been associated with Santos and his sister Tiffany Devolder Santos.

    The congressman’s sister vacated her apartment in that building in January, court records show, and recently reached an agreement with her former landlord to repay more than $19,000 in back rent.

    Her former residence is located in a six-story residential and commercial mixed-use building on Queens Boulevard in Elmhurst – the same building that Santos has listed as his address on campaign documents. In the most recent FEC filing designating Olson as treasurer, no details are given about an office or apartment number.

    Employees at the three businesses on the second floor – a Department of Labor office, beauty salon and finance firm – said the name Andrew Olson was unfamiliar. CNN was not able to access the floor, but the owner of the beauty salon said there were no other businesses or operating offices on the floor.

    The congressman’s sister and her attorney did not respond to CNN inquiries this week.

    State election records show Tiffany Santos controls a New York-based political action committee, Rise NY PAC, that has described itself on social media as working to boost voter registration and enthusiasm. She was paid nearly $26,000 by the PAC during the 2022 election cycle, according to filings with the New York State Board of Elections.

    State elections records also show that Marks has retained her position as treasurer of Tiffany Santos’ PAC.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Bankman-Fried Hit With Four New Criminal Charges Alleging Illegal Political Donations And Bank Fraud

    Bankman-Fried Hit With Four New Criminal Charges Alleging Illegal Political Donations And Bank Fraud

    [ad_1]

    Former billionaire Sam Bankman-Fried, the founder of befallen crypto exchange FTX, has been charged with four new criminal counts including allegations of illegal political donations and bank fraud.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • What to know about George Santos and his campaign finance issues as questions grow | CNN Politics

    What to know about George Santos and his campaign finance issues as questions grow | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Rep. George Santos began his third week as a congressman with an array of questions still swirling around the New York Republican’s personal and campaign finances.

    He ended the week with even more unanswered questions – after his campaign submitted a raft of changes to federal election regulators, including appearing to install a new campaign treasurer without that person’s permission.

    “I can’t think of another example (of a campaign) that has presented such a wide variety of legal concerns,” said Erin Chlopak, senior director of campaign finance at the watchdog group Campaign Legal Center and a former lawyer with the Federal Election Commission. “I feel like the George Santos saga is like a campaign finance law school course, all in one.”

    Santos, who faces multiple investigations about his finances and lies about his biography and resume, repeatedly refused to respond to reporters’ inquiries about his filings and finances this week – saying at one point that he does not “touch” FEC reports.

    Leaving his office Friday morning on Capitol Hill, Santos told a reporter that he would put together a news conference “soon” to “address everything.”

    “We’ll give you all the answers to everything you’re asking for,” he said.

    Santos’ personal lawyer Joe Murray declined to comment when reached by CNN this week. “In light of all the complaints that have been filed, it would just be inappropriate to discuss anything about it,” he said.

    Santos’ longtime campaign treasurer Nancy Marks has not responded to multiple inquiries from CNN.

    Here’s what you should know about the latest developments:

    As of Friday afternoon, it was not clear who serves as treasurer of the Santos campaign – the person responsible for filing disclosure reports with the FEC, authorizing spending and ensuring that the campaign complies with federal campaign finance laws.

    Earlier this week, Santos’ campaign filed paperwork installing Thomas Datwyler, a Wisconsin-based political consultant, as the new treasurer of his campaign and several Santos-aligned political committees.

    But in a statement Wednesday, Datwyler’s lawyer said that his client had turned down the treasurer’s position and that the campaign had filed the paperwork without Datwyler’s authorization.

    Campaign finance experts say only someone with access to the campaign committee’s login credentials can file electronic amendments with the FEC.

    Derek Ross, Datwyler’s attorney, told CNN that agency officials said they were aware of the situation and sent letters to Datwyler on Friday to “confirm the authenticity and accuracy of the various filings.”

    Datwyler’s team has responded, “notifying the FEC that the filings are unauthorized and Mr. Datwyler should be removed as treasurer,” Ross said.

    Santos, like all congressional candidates, faces a looming Tuesday deadline to file new reports with the FEC that detail his fundraising and spending during the closing weeks of 2022.

    Santos this week also filed a slew of amended reports with the FEC that only added to the confusion about the source of the loans he has said he made to his campaign.

    In some filings, the campaign did not check boxes denoting that two six-figure loans came from the candidate’s personal funds.

    Campaign finance experts say it’s hard to tell whether the unmarked boxes amounted to little more than sloppy bookkeeping or point to something more serious. Over the course of his campaign, Santos’ reports have offered inconsistent information about the loans.

    But how Santos achieved the financial windfall to provide more than $700,000 in loans to his successful 2022 campaign has been a central question ever since the 34-year-old flipped a Long Island-based House seat in November, helping Republicans secure their narrow majority in the chamber.

    During his unsuccessful 2020 campaign for the House, he reported a salary of $55,000 and no assets in his candidate filings to Congress.

    Two years later, Santos reported a $750,000 salary from the Devolder Organization, which he said had earned between $1,000,001 and $5 million in income the previous year. He also reported owning an apartment in Rio De Janeiro, a checking account valued at between $100,001 and $250,000, and a savings account worth between $1,000,001 and $5 million.

    For weeks, Santos has faced questions about the dozens of expenses his campaign has reported at exactly $199.99, one cent below the threshold above which the campaign is required to retain receipts.

    The Campaign Legal Center has filed a complaint with the FEC that describes the disbursements as “odd and seemingly impossible.” It notes that one of the $199.99 expenses was purported to be for a “hotel stay” at the luxury W Hotel South Beach in Florida in October 2021, where the lowest-price room typically would have cost more than $700.

    But The Washington Post first reported this week that Santos’ campaign briefly reported in an earlier submission to the FEC a raft of additional just-under-$200 expenses – but described both the recipients and purpose of the disbursements as “anonymous.”

    Those anonymous entries later were removed in revised filings.

    Clopak of the Campaign Legal Center said those entries just add to the cloud surrounding Santos’ campaign.

    “We have campaign finance disclosure laws to serve to ensure a number of interests,” she said. “One of the things is to make sure that voters are informed about the sources of … the money that they spend and what they spend it on.”

    “When people file reports indicating that the recipients of their campaign spending is ‘anonymous,’ that defeats the very purpose of those transparency laws,” Clopak said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • FEC dismisses RNC complaint that Google’s spam filters were biased against conservatives | CNN Business

    FEC dismisses RNC complaint that Google’s spam filters were biased against conservatives | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    Washington
    CNN
     — 

    The Federal Election Commission has tossed out claims by the Republican National Committee that Google’s spam filters in Gmail are illegally biased against conservatives, according to an agency letter obtained by CNN.

    The decision resolves a joint FEC complaint filed last year spearheaded by the RNC that alleged Gmail’s automated filters had sent Republican fundraising emails to spam at a higher rate than for Democratic candidates during the 2020 election cycle. The RNC didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

    The FEC decision to dismiss the complaint and close the case is the latest defeat for Republicans who have sought on multiple occasions to bring the agency’s powers to bear against tech platforms over allegations of anti-conservative bias. In 2021, the FEC dismissed a similar RNC claim against Twitter over the company’s decision to temporarily suppress the New York Post’s reporting about Hunter Biden’s laptop, saying the content moderation decision appeared to have been made “for a valid commercial reason.”

    The FEC took the same stance on the Gmail filtering issue in a letter to Google last week, and which the company provided to CNN on Wednesday.

    In the Jan. 11 letter, the FEC said its review “found no reason to believe that [Google] made prohibited in-kind corporate contributions” to Democrats in the form of more favorable email filtering treatment.

    In order to be considered a violation, the FEC wrote, “a contribution must be made for the purpose of influencing an election for federal office,” adding that Google’s public statements have made clear its spam filtering exists “for commercial, rather than electoral, purposes.”

    Even if it were true that Gmail spam filtering happened to favor Democratic campaigns over Republican ones, the FEC wrote — an allegation the commission neither explicitly endorsed nor rejected — that outcome would not necessarily make Gmail’s underlying conduct an illegal campaign contribution.

    In its letter, the FEC cited Google’s public statements claiming that its reasons for spam filtering include blocking malware, phishing attacks and scams.

    “In sum, Google has credibly supported its claim that its spam filter is in place for commercial reasons and thus did not constitute a contribution within the meaning of the [Federal Election Campaign Act],” it wrote.

    Documents related to the case will be made available to the public by Feb. 10, according to the letter.

    “The Commission’s bipartisan decision to dismiss this complaint reaffirms that Gmail does not filter emails for political purposes,” said José Castañeda, a Google spokesperson. “We’ll continue to invest in our Gmail industry-leading spam filters because, as the FEC notes, they’re important to protecting people’s inboxes from receiving unwanted, unsolicited, or dangerous messages.”

    While the FEC did not weigh in directly on Gmail’s practices, the letter highlighted the limitations and context surrounding a 2022 academic study that the RNC had leaned heavily upon in its initial complaint.

    The study by North Carolina State University researchers had involved an experiment testing the spam filters of Gmail, Microsoft Outlook and Yahoo! Mail. Its findings suggested that of the three email providers, Gmail was the likeliest to mark emails from Republican campaigns as spam.

    The RNC had cited the study’s findings as evidence of “illegal, corporate in-kind contributions” to Democratic candidates, including Joe Biden, and called for an FEC investigation.

    But the FEC’s letter cited several factors that cast doubt on the RNC’s interpretation of the research, including the study’s own statements of limitations and a Washington Post interview with one of the study’s lead authors, who had said Republicans were “mischaracterizing” the paper.

    The study itself acknowledged that it covered a short period of time, and that its findings could have been affected by campaigns’ own tactical decision-making as well as other variables the study did not account for, the FEC wrote, adding that in its response to the RNC allegations Google had said the researchers used a sample of 34 email addresses “when Gmail has 1.5 billion users.”

    “Though the NCSU Study appears to demonstrate a disparate impact from Google’s spam filter, it explicitly states that its authors have ‘no reason to believe that there were deliberate attempts from these email services to create these biases to influence the voters,’” the FEC added.

    Meanwhile, a separate RNC lawsuit against Google over the same Gmail filtering issue is still ongoing. And Google has continued with an FEC-approved pilot project that allows political campaigns to bypass Gmail’s spam filters. More than 100 political entities are participating in that program, a Google spokesperson told CNN on Wednesday.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • George Santos accused of breaking campaign finance laws

    George Santos accused of breaking campaign finance laws

    [ad_1]

    George Santos accused of breaking campaign finance laws – CBS News


    Watch CBS News



    New York Rep. George Santos is facing a formal ethics complaint filed with the Federal Election Commission. The complaint accuses the Republican of illegally using campaign funds for personal expenses and submitting false information about the source of his campaign donations. Scott MacFarlane reports.

    Be the first to know

    Get browser notifications for breaking news, live events, and exclusive reporting.


    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Incoming Kansas attorney general fined for 2020 Senate campaign finance violations | CNN Politics

    Incoming Kansas attorney general fined for 2020 Senate campaign finance violations | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The Federal Election Commission has levied a $30,000 fine on incoming Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach and a private border wall organization he was once affiliated with due to campaign finance violations committed during his unsuccessful 2020 Senate bid.

    In an agreement approved by the FEC last month, about a week after Kobach was elected, he admitted to illegally accepting an in-kind contribution from We Build the Wall, a Steve Bannon-linked group which ran a fundraising campaign to build a private border wall but became ensnarled in allegations of fraud.

    CNN has reached out to attorneys for Kobach and We Build the Wall for comment.

    In 2019, Kobach’s campaign rented We Build the Wall’s 295,000-person email list for just $2,000, a price significantly below the normal rate.

    The campaign was also accused of additional campaign finance violations in connection with We Build the Wall, but the FEC, which is made up of three Democrats and three Republicans, either dismissed those allegations or was equally divided.

    Kobach is an immigration hardliner and a longtime spreader of false election claims who served as Kansas’ secretary of state from 2011 to 2019 and has close ties to former President Donald Trump.

    Kobach was narrowly elected Kansas attorney general in November, defeating Democrat Chris Mann 51% to 49% in the reliably red state. His victory came after two consecutive defeats in recent election cycles – losing bids for the governorship in 2018 and for the GOP nomination for US Senate in 2020.

    He previously served on We Build the Wall’s board and as the organization’s general counsel.

    Two men have pleaded guilty in federal court, and another was convicted of defrauding donors in connection with We Build The Wall. Bannon and the organization itself are now facing charges in New York state. Bannon, who has pleaded not guilty to state charges, had previously been indicted in federal court but was pardoned by then-President Trump at the end of his term.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump campaign says it saw surge in donations after indictment | CNN Politics

    Trump campaign says it saw surge in donations after indictment | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Former President Donald Trump raised a combined $18.8 million in the first quarter of 2023 through his joint fundraising committee and his campaign – and saw a spike in donations after being indicted by a Manhattan grand jury on March 30 – according to new figures provided by his campaign.

    The campaign told CNN it also raised $15.4 million in the two weeks after charges were filed against the former president, showing how much his supporters have rallied around Trump after learning of the indictment.

    The Trump campaign said the fundraising figures suggest his legal woes have benefited him both politically and financially – at least in the short term – and energized his base as he continues to campaign for his third shot at the presidency.

    Politico first reported Trump’s first quarter fundraising numbers.

    Trump’s campaign previously said on March 31 that it had raised $4 million in the 24 hours since his indictment was first announced. The former president has pleaded not guilty to 34 felony criminal charges of falsifying business records.

    During the first quarter, from January 1 to March 31, Trump received a total of 541,971 donations, according to the figures provided by his campaign. The average donation was roughly $34.

    Comparatively, Trump received 312,564 donations in the two weeks after charges were filed against the former president, beginning on March 30, with the average donation totaling roughly $49.

    Prior to the indictment, the former president was bringing in roughly $168,000 per day between January 1 to March 30. It’s unclear whether the boost the Trump campaign says it received since his indictment will continue into the second quarter.

    The former president has been raising money for his 2024 presidential bid through both his campaign and his political action committee, Save America PAC. Filings Saturday night with the Federal Election Commission show that $14.4 million of the first-quarter haul went to Trump’s main campaign account.

    The figure lags behind the $30 million he raised during the first quarter of the 2020 election cycle, when he still occupied the Oval Office.

    In all, the Trump campaign spent $3.5 million in the first quarter and had $13.9 million in cash on hand as of March 31.

    More than $727,000 of his campaign dollars during the three-month period funded payroll, filings show. A little more than $488,000 went to TAG Air Inc. – the Trump-owned company that operates his airplanes.

    Other Republicans who have announced their 2024 candidacies include Nikki Haley, a former United Nations ambassador and ex-South Carolina governor, whose campaign has said she collected $11 million in the six weeks since she launched her bid on February 15. But the filings show she raised less than that, and her campaign appears to have double-counted money routed among various committees. In all, Haley raised $8.3 million across three committees connected to her campaign.

    Another South Carolinian, Republican Sen. Tim Scott – who announced a presidential exploratory committee on Wednesday, after the end of the first quarter – reported Saturday that he had nearly $22 million remaining in his Senate campaign account as of March 31. That’s money Scott could transfer directly into a presidential campaign account.

    Biotech entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy, who declared his bid for the GOP nomination in February, loaned his campaign $10.25 million and raised about $1.2 million from contributors through March 31. He had nearly $9.4 million in cash on hand at the end of the quarter, his FEC filing shows.

    Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, who is expected to launch a 2024 GOP presidential bid, has built a sizable war chest through his state-level fundraising committee. Friends of Ron DeSantis has more than $85 million remaining in its coffers, recent state records show.

    He faces restrictions on the use of that money for a presidential bid, but it could potentially be transferred to another committee backing his candidacy.

    Already, a pro-DeSantis super PAC, Never Back Down, which launched in March, has announced that it had raised $30 million as of early April. The group debuted its first national TV ad Sunday, taking direct aim at the former president.

    “Donald Trump is being attacked by a Democrat prosecutor in New York, so why is he spending millions attacking the Republican governor of Florida?” the ad said. “What happened to Donald Trump?” The one-time buy on Fox will be followed by a seven-figure national ad buy beginning Monday, according to a source familiar with the super PAC’s plans.

    Details on Trump’s fundraising after the first quarter ended on March 31 won’t be disclosed to regulators for several months.

    On Friday, the former president filed his personal financial disclosure report with the FEC – offering the public a first look at his post-presidential finances. The 101-page report provided some new insights into Trump’s finances since he left office, including his social media business venture, and last year’s sale of digital trading cards known as NFTs, or non-fungible tokens.

    This story has been updated with additional information.

    [ad_2]

    Source link