Connect with us

News

Trump’s Shady Legal Defense Fund Lets Wealthy Donors Pay Off Potential Witnesses in Secret

Published

on

Donald Trump’s legal costs have ballooned so much that his allies have set up a new defense fund that allows wealthy donors to anonymously contribute massive amounts, and there are few restrictions on how much it can spend.

The “Patriot Legal Defense Fund” was created July 19 and registered with the IRS as a political nonprofit under section 527 of the tax code, and while it won’t pay the former president’s own legal fees, it will pay lawyers for potential witnesses in various Trump cases — and it will face few fundraising constraints, reported The Daily Beast.

“Federal law does not establish any limits on the amount of money that individuals or corporations can contribute” to these organizations, said Brett Kappel, a campaign finance attorney at Harmon Curran.

For example, Trump’s political committees cannot accept donations over certain dollar amounts or take corporate money, this legal defense fund can raise any amount from almost any source to “pay for or help defray legal expenses related to defending against legal actions arising from an individual or group’s participation in the political process,” according to its IRS filing.

READ MORE: Trump’s ‘fake electors’ are likely to avoid prosecution in Pennsylvania — here’s why

“Moreover, a donor can request that their name not be disclosed if they pay an excise tax equal to 35 percent of the amount of money they donate to the political organization,” Kappel said.

That last rule could allow for straw donations — or contributions made in the name of someone else — through the establishment of untraceable companies to shield donors from public disclosure, and campaign finance watchdogs say the PLDF could be particularly appealing to megadonors who want to keep their involvement a secret.

“527s are nominally regulated by the IRS, so if a donor were to try to use an LLC to facilitate a straw donation then the FEC isn’t monitoring it—the IRS is,” said Brendan Fischer, deputy director of Documented. “Only recently has the FEC really begun to enforce the law about LLC straw donations to super PACs, and it remains to be seen whether the IRS will regulate this at all.”

Those groups operate in a lightly regulated area of political spending, but 527 groups are supposed to operate primarily to influence campaigns for public office, and campaign finance experts questioned whether this pro-Trump organization deserved its tax-exempt status.

“I’m scratching my head wondering whether this group is even eligible,” said Paul S. Ryan, a campaign finance law expert and deputy executive director for the Funders’ Committee for Civic Participation.

Saurav Ghosh, director of federal reform at watchdog Campaign Legal Center, said the former president had often “ridden right over the guardrails of campaign finance law,” and he said PLDF set off a number of alarms.

“This is a situation where a 527 is being created to ‘defray legal expenses,’ but that raises more questions than it answers,” Ghosh said. “The decision to create it this way links the group to elections… doubles down on the red flags.”

There's a reason 10,000 people subscribe to NCRM. You can get the news before it breaks just by subscribing, plus you can learn something new every day.
Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

Congresswoman Appeals Ruling That Would See Her Tried for Felony Assault at ICE Facility

Published

on

Rep. LaMonica McIver (D-NJ) has filed an appeal Monday against a ruling that she should stand trial for hitting a federal agent with her arm outside an ICE facility.

Earlier this May, McIver went with other congresspeople to the Delaney Hall immigrant detention center in Newark, New Jersey. She is accused of hitting an ICE officer with her arm while protecting Newark Mayor Ras Baraka from arrest. The Department of Justice filed three felony charges against her for assaulting, interfering with and resisting a federal officer, according to The Hill.

McIver asked the court to dismiss the charges, saying she had legal immunity as she was a member of Congress making a legal oversight visit to the ICE facility. She also alleged she was being targeted by the Trump administration, according to Politico. District Judge Jamel Semper, a Biden appointee, ruled in November that the charges would stand.

READ MORE: ICE Agents Appear To Detain Man on Christmas Eve, Steal His Groceries: Video

“Defendant’s active participation in the alleged conduct removes her acts from the safe harbor of mere oversight,” Semper wrote. “Lawfully or unlawfully, Defendant actively engaged in conduct unrelated to her oversight responsibilities and congressional duties.”

McIver filed her appeal on Monday to the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals, repeating that she is being unfairly targeted by the Trump administration.

“This appeal is for everyone who is standing up to this administration as they try to operate without oversight, silence the people who oppose them, and shut down those who protect the vulnerable,” McIver said in a statement. “They want to make an example out of me, but I will not let them. I will not be bullied out of doing my job and protecting our communities. Not now, not ever.”

Last week, McIver returned to Delaney Hall as part of another oversight visit. Her visit was nearly two weeks after the death of Haitian immigrant and detainee Jean Wilson Brutus, who died the same day he was entered into the facility, according to NJ.com.

“It is very traumatic to be back here, personally,” McIver said. “But I had to put aside my traumatic experience here, and come back here and represent for them what is happening inside of this awful detention center.”

Image via Shutterstock

Continue Reading

News

Trump Refuses to Say If Military or CIA Struck Venezuelan Facility

Published

on

President Donald Trump refused to say whether the military or CIA had struck a Venezuelan drug-smuggling facility when it’s unclear the strike actually happened

Trump made the claim during a press conference following his meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Monday afternoon. A reporter had asked for further details on Trump’s Friday claim that he had “knocked out” last week a Venezuelan facility where drug-smuggling ships “come from.” Venezuela has yet to comment on the alleged attack or even confirm that it happened, according to The Hill.

“Was the facility taken out by the U.S. military, or was it another entity like the CIA?” the reporter asked in a clip surfaced by reporter Aaron Rupar.

READ MORE: GOP Lawmaker Suggests US ‘About to Go In’ to Venezuela for Oil

“Well, I don’t want to say that. I know exactly who it was, but I don’t want to say who it was. But you know it was along the shore,” Trump said.

He was then asked if he’d talked to Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro. Trump said he had “pretty recently” but that “nothing much comes from it,” before changing the topic to immigration.

“They’ve sent billions of dollars of drugs in, but maybe just as bad, they’ve sent hundreds of thousands of people in from jails, from prisons, from mental institutions and insane asylums. The drug lords, the drug dealers, were all sent into our country,” Trump said. “Tren de Aragua, probably the worst gang. They cut off people’s fingers. One man made a phone call to complain about them. He cut off their hand. They cut off his hand. ‘Don’t ever make a phone call again. We’ll cut off your hand, and after that, we’ll kill you,’ they said. That was in Colorado.”

Trump appears to be referring to a story from 2024, where Brawnis Dominique Suarez Villegas, accused by the Department of Justice as a member of the Tren de Aragua gang, allegedly “directed and approved the torture and disfigurement” of a Denver man, according to KUNC-FM.

KUNC-FM reports that Suarez Villegas allegedly told fellow gang members to ransom a Denver man to his family for $30,000. The money did not come through and Suarez Villegas is said to have ordered the removal of the man’s finger, not his entire hand.

Suarez Villegas was indicted by a grand jury on Thursday for the robbery of a jewelry store in June 2024, according to CBS News. He is currently in a Bogota, Colombia prison and will be extradited to the United States.

Image via Reuters

Continue Reading

CORRUPTION

‘My Friends Will Get Hurt’: MTG Says Trump Told Her Why He Doesn’t Want to Reveal Epstein Conspirators’ Names

Published

on

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) said that President Donald Trump was reticent to reveal the identities of any of the men accused of abusing children in the Epstein files was because “My friends will get hurt.”

Greene made the allegation in a new interview with The New York Times published Monday morning. She said that Trump told her the reason while on a call after a press conference where Greene said she may expose the names of some of those listed in the files related to disgraced financier and convicted sex criminal Jeffrey Epstein.

Trump had called Greene in her office, and a staff member told the Times that the entire office could hear the president shouting at Greene over a speakerphone. The article alleges that she was confused why Trump was so upset, and her question led to the remark.

READ MORE: DOJ Issues ‘Bizarre’ Disclaimer Defending Trump in Latest Epstein Files Dump

Greene also alleges that she asked Trump to invite some of Epstein’s victims to the White House, but he balked at the suggestion. Trump reportedly told her that the women abused by Epstein hadn’t done anything to warrant a White House invitation. Greene says this is the last time she talked with the president.

She says the outburst blindsided her as previously she had believed Trump’s assertions that he was not in the Epstein files.

“The story to me was that I’d seen pictures of Epstein with all these people. And Trump is just one of several. And then, for me, I’d seen that Bill Clinton is on the flight logs for his plane like 20-something times. So, for people like me, it wasn’t suspicious. And then we’d heard the general stories of how Epstein used to be a member of Mar-a-Lago, but Trump kicked him out. Why would I think he’s done anything wrong, right?” Greene told the Times about her beliefs prior to the phone call.

Though Greene was formerly a staunch ally of Trump, her interest in the Epstein files caused Trump to turn on her. She joined with Reps. Thomas Massie (R-KY) and Ro Khanna (D-CA) to force a House vote compelling the Department of Justice to release all of its files on the Epstein case, with the only redactions to protect victims’ names.

The bill ultimately passed both House and Senate and was signed by Trump, giving the DOJ a December 19 deadline to release the information, But when the date rolled around, only a portion of the files were released. What was available was heavily redacted, with names of co-conspirators and others blacked out.

Shortly after Trump called her a “traitor” on his Truth Social platform over her calls to release the Epstein files, Greene announced that she would be resigning from the House January 5, midway through her term.

Image via Reuters

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.