“Is it fraud? Yes, it’s fraud. But is it always illegal? It’s not necessary,” said Paul Pelletier, a former federal prosecutor who previously headed the Department of Justice’s fraud department.
A New York Attorney General, Leticia James, has already said she will investigate the commission’s allegations of fraud and potential misconduct. “The new details revealed tonight, related to January 6, are worrying,” James tweeted hours after the commission’s findings were made public this week. “It is my duty to investigate allegations of fraud or potential misconduct in New York. This incident is no exception. ”
Donors were encouraged to contribute to the so-called “Official Election Protection Fund”, which did not exist and was simply a term used for marketing, the commission said. Most of the money eventually went to a PAC called Save America, created less than a week after the election, which distributed it to other political endeavors. Some of the funds went to the company that organized the January 6 rally, and even to Trump’s family business, the commission said.
“The big lie was also a big scam,” said Zoe Lofgren of California, one of the Democrats in the panel.
Mississippi Democrat MP Benny Thompson, who chairs the committee, told CNN on Tuesday that there was still a question about whether Trump and his family were trying to take advantage of the fundraiser.
“Obviously, a lot of the money went to the Trump Hotel. They went to non-profit organizations associated with people who work for the president. And obviously that wasn’t the goal of sending a lot of fundraising emails. So obviously they were misled at best. And in some cases, they were just clearly wrong, “Thompson said.
Attorney General Merrick Garland has already promised in a speech on the one-year anniversary of the attack on the Capitol that the Department of Justice will investigate funding behind the uprising.
High cleaning tape
However, if federal prosecutors are to prosecute, they will have to respond to many unknowns left unanswered by the House in a brief presentation Monday – and consider the implications of charging a fundraising operation for an incumbent president who is running for re-election.
“In a normal situation, could you get people charged with a crime?” Of course, “said Adav Noti, legal director of the campaign’s Legal Center, a non-profit government oversight organization. “This is not a normal situation. At that time, we are talking about the current president of the United States. This is not a problem that the Department of Justice must make.”
“Do the people who gave this money think they are investing it in a permanent account that can be withdrawn by the campaign organizers for whatever they want? Maybe the donor will not be interested, but the law is interested,” he said. Notes.
As with all investigations, any potential criminal case would turn into evidence, former prosecutors say.
“There are two major complications” in filing a criminal case based on fundraising emails, said Eli Honig, a former federal and state prosecutor who is a senior legal analyst at CNN. “What the fine print says, and you have to link the scam to whoever you want to accuse.” In the case of Trump, he could be removed by the man who wrote and sent the fundraising email, Honig said.
Prosecutors will also face questions about whether there are victims who want to be witnesses in the case, and who, if any, intended to use the fundraising effort as bait.
Disclosure in small print about Trump’s fundraising bombings, which say money can go to a “recount” only if a donation reaches nearly $ 10,000, could further complicate the case.
Other former public safety prosecutors and white-collar lawyers have agreed that the possibility of a criminal investigation into wire fraud seems clear – but filing a lawsuit may not be as simple as it seems.
“I think the legal danger to Trump’s world is pretty clear,” said Daniel Goldman, a lawyer who worked on the case against Trump during his January 6 impeachment proceedings on CNN on Tuesday. “It is alleged that Donald Trump did not know he was receiving $ 250 million from a false request. But it’s harder to prove with real evidence than just to say. ”
Goldman outlined how prosecutors would have to find donors and establish that they intended to donate to a legal protection fund and that they were victims by sending their money for an unadvertised purpose.
“You would show that the legal protection fund does not exist. And essentially you have a criminal case. It’s quite a textbook on wire fraud, “Goldman said. “It’s harder to attach that to Donald Trump.”
Prosecutors may be the way to go
If the Ministry of Justice ultimately does not prosecute the allegations, state-level law enforcement agencies may be interested in them. James from New York, who built his political personality around conducting a long-term investigation of the Trump organization, is already signaling this path.
Attorneys general have a consumer protection law they could use to investigate whether some donors have been misled by the campaign’s demands, and they have recently focused on fundraising tactics involving the Trump campaign.
In an important test case for the scope of the Attorney General’s powers to investigate federal fundraising practices, four states, including New York, won a key decision earlier this year involving WinRed, a company that processes online donations.
Four attorneys general – from New York, Connecticut, Maryland and Minnesota – have launched investigations against WinRed after The New York Times published an article describing how the Trump campaign and WinRed used pre-marked boxes to sign donors to make multiple contributions.
The United States has sent summonses for documents seeking information about customers who have used pre-checked boxes, complaints from donors and refunds. WinRed has filed a lawsuit to block subpoenas, arguing that state consumer protection laws were preceded by the Federal Election Campaign Act. Trump’s campaign has restored some of the donors.
Earlier this year, a federal judge sided with the attorney general and dismissed the lawsuit, saying he had the power to investigate federal campaigns.
The investigation of the Ministry of Justice so far
So far, there are no public indications that federal prosecutors are investigating the wider post-election fundraiser, which largely goes to the Trump-controlled political action committee.
But the investigation is wide, according to the grand jury’s request shared with CNN. An investigation by the Justice Ministry’s grand jury on Jan. 6 sought information on the organization of a Trump rally and the use of Trump’s campaign in the United States on the battlefield, where he lost the popular vote.
A few months ago, the Department of Justice was also investigating fundraising for another fund, Defending the Republic, which was encouraged by conservative lawyer Sidney Powell, who was involved in Trump’s post-election legal challenges. While Powell’s lawyer told CNN in January that she was cooperating with the investigation, it was unclear where the investigation was at the moment.
Historically, the Justice Department has used its corruption prosecutors to file lawsuits against political fraud for fundraising, including in the Border Wall charity investigation where Steve Bannon was indicted. Trump pardoned Bannon at the end of his presidency.
In the We Build the Wall case, the alleged fraud is apparent and the men have taken steps to try to cover up their wrongdoing, according to the indictment.
Prosecutors say the men misrepresented to the public in attracting donors, public statements and on social media that “100% of the funds raised” will be used to build the wall, not “pennies” will not be used to compensate for Brian Colfage, American veteran working with Bannon on the wall. Instead, prosecutors say, Colfage and Bannon used bogus companies to direct hundreds of thousands of dollars to cover their personal expenses. Kolfage pleaded guilty in April and awaits sentencing.
The Manhattan District Attorney’s Office is investigating Bannon and whether he violated state laws with his role in fundraising efforts, CNN reported. Recently, several people from Bannon’s “immediate circle” were called to appear before a grand jury of the state, sources told CNN.
Asked earlier about the grand jury’s summons, Bannon’s lawyer Robert Costello told CNN: “I’m not aware of these issues.”
In other schemes, sometimes known as “PACs scams,” prosecutors say misdirection is often rude. In one Maryland political consultant, he accepted donations for specific purposes in support of candidates. However, he never intended to spend the money on what was advertised, but instead made donations to demand more donations. He was sentenced to three years in prison.
In another case, announced last year, three men linked to PACs were accused of asking for donations for presidential candidates in 2016, but the money went to their personal benefit. One of the three men pleaded guilty.
Ryan Nobles and Evan Perez of CNN contributed to this report.
Add Comment