Jan. 6th: Trump’s Official Election Defense Fund (Zero-In on The Committee)

3
Jan. 6 committee zeros in on Trump's

Monday 6 January, the House Committee attempted to prove possible criminal liability of Trump’s former inner circle members.

News is moving: Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D.Calif.Amanda Wick, the chief investigator counsel to the committee, and Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D.Calif.) focused their attentions on the “Official Election Defense Fund”, which Trump described in its fundraising emails.

  • This email was central to Trump’s fundraising campaign that raised $250 million after 2020. Trump pledged to use these funds to help pay for legal fees and to challenge the election.
  • In reality, the committee alleged, millions of dollars were funneled to vehicles like Save America — a leadership PAC set up by Trump after the election — and other political and advocacy groups with ties to top Trump aides.

These are their words: “The select committee discovered no such fund existed,” Wick revealed in a pre-recorded video, citing taped depositions with two Trump campaign staffers.

  • Lofgren said that not only was there the Big Lie, but also the Big Ripoff.
  • It is obvious. [Trump]His donors were tricked and asked to make donations to a fund that was not there. He used the money to purchase something else than he said,” she stated. Comment after the hearing.

Is that the point? Legal experts believe that this probe is designed to prove Trump’s campaign, and his allies, could have used fraud to raise funds in the years after 2020. Numerous high-ranking officials knew about the false allegations of voter fraud.

  • “This allegation constitutes textbook wire fraud.” Randall EliasonLofgren’s statements were condemned by George Washington University’s professor of white-collar crime and an ex-federal prosecutor.

These are the lines that connect them. Lofgren said Monday that he didn’t believe Lofgren was guilty of any criminal activity. According to Lofgren, it is up for someone else to decide if this is criminal.

  • Merrick Garland is the Attorney General for the United States. He made it very clear that the Justice Department would closely monitor the disclosures regarding the hearings.
  • “I will look and watch every hearing.” Garland shares his thoughts and feelings with journalists“And, you can be certain that Jan.6 prosecutors are monitoring every hearing.”
  • In recent years, the Justice Department has seen its effectiveness increase in recent years The criminal justice system has been reorganizedFalse promises made by political operatives about the spending of funds are used to raise money.

Zoom in Salesforce has an email marketing company that Trump uses. The Jan. 6 has subpoenaed records. RNC has filed suit to stop the release of these records. The case remains pending.

  • This information is expected to reveal the value of these appeals for “election defense” and their internal process.
  • The spokesperson for RNC said that post-election fundraising and spending were fine. He also pointed out the RNC’s participation in lawsuits challenging the election results in Georgia, as well as in the Senate runoff elections in Georgia in January.
  • “In addition to the several million dollars spent on our legal efforts, the RNC spent tens of millions in the Georgia Senate races for over 500 paid staffers in the state along with thousands of volunteers, all who made over 15 million voter contacts during the runoff,” the spokesperson said.

There is much debate about whether the DOJ would be interested in this report’s findings.

  • Brett Kappel, an attorney for campaign finance, said that there could be enough evidence to open or start a probe into wire fraud, but it would need a large amount of accounting before any person can be charged.
  • Kappel cited fine print in fundraising solicitations to explain that much of the money would be given to Trump’s leadership PAC. This language might help the campaign avoid misrepresentations made in its solicitations.

Make smart decisions Even if the committee clearly establishes that Trump campaign fundraising emails were knowingly false — and even if DOJ sees enough to warrant prosecution — it’s highly unlikely Trump himself would be implicated.

  • Trump likely had little influence on the fundraising appeals of his campaign.
  • This investigation could however trap former campaign personnel or vendors.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here