WASHINGTON (AP) — Last month, President Donald Trump instructed the Attorney General to look into online fundraising over concerns that foreign entities and fraudsters were utilizing complex “schemes” and “dummy accounts” to amass unlawful contributions to politicians and causes.
However, instead of initiating a broad investigation, the president has pinpointed specific targets. Democrats’ online fundraising powerhouse has acknowledged that it received over 200 potentially illegal contributions from foreign internet sources last year.
Trump’s announcement notably left out one significant detail: His own political committee has also been flagged for potentially problematic contributions.
An Associated Press analysis of donations to Trump over the past five years discovered 1,600 contributions from donors residing abroad, with ties to foreign interests, or lacking basic identification details. Among these was a significant donation of $1 million from the spouse of an African oil and mining mogul.
It is illegal for U.S. candidates and political committees to accept contributions from foreign nationals. The law imposes stringent limits on donation amounts and forbids laundering contributions to circumvent legal limits. Typically, such donations are monitored by the campaign and the Federal Election Commission, with only the most egregious cases pursued by federal law enforcement agencies.
However, after reclaiming the presidency, Trump initiated a retaliatory campaign against his perceived adversaries, including his university, law firms, and former officials. If the Justice Department investigates ActBlue, it could jeopardize key funding mechanisms for Trump’s political opponents ahead of the 2026 midterm elections, thereby impacting the fragile Republican majority in the House and the president’s ability to advance his agenda in Congress.
“This is a direct assault on democratic, progressive fundraising aimed at undermining his political opponents,” stated Ezra Reese, an attorney at the Elias Law Group, a leading Democratic firm that does not represent ActBlue. “There’s no doubt about them targeting specific adversaries. He’s not hiding it.”
Trump’s committee has accumulated contributions from overseas residents
The White House did not provide answers regarding Trump’s fundraising efforts. Instead, senior officials pointed to findings from a recent House inquiry into ActBlue, which claimed the White House “uncovered evidence of potentially illegal activities.”
“The memorandum instructs the Attorney General to conduct a comprehensive investigation, following the evidence and taking appropriate actions,” said an official who requested anonymity to discuss the matter.
Neither Chris Lacivita, co-manager of Trump’s 2024 campaign, responded to requests for commentary.
American citizens living abroad are permitted to contribute to politicians in the U.S. However, identifying who is donating to a campaign and whether someone is acting as a “straw” donor for another trying to influence U.S. elections can be challenging.
The AP has identified merely two Trump donors, out of over 200 overseas, whose U.S. citizenship is marked as “verified” in the president’s Campaign Finance Report. More than 1,000 contributions came from 150 donors who omitted essential identification information such as city, state, address, and country. At least 90 donations were made by individuals who did not provide their full names, listed as “anonymous” or using “names that haven’t been disclosed.”
Many of these Trump donations were made through Winred, the Republican fundraising platform, the GOP’s equivalent of ActBlue. Only about three dozen contributions were returned, primarily from unknown sources and involving cryptocurrency, as campaign finance disclosures indicate.
The winners did not reply to requests for comments.
“Foreign funding for our elections is a genuine concern,” said Dan Weiner, a former Federal Election Commission lawyer now serving as director of election and government programs at the Brennan Center. “What is unjustifiable is singling out one political opponent while pretending the issue is limited to them.”
Donation from A La Quinta Inn
For instance, Jiajun “Jack” Zhang is a Chinese businessman whose scaffolding company claims to be among the “largest manufacturers and suppliers in China.” In October, he contributed $5,000 to Trump via Winred, as shown in the Campaign Finance Disclosure.
Chang is said to reside in Shandong Province, China, according to his LinkedIn profile, and is identified as a Chinese citizen in a French business application. Yet, his donation to Trump was recorded with a La Quinta Inn located in Hawaiian Gardens, California, suggesting possible discrepancies. This donation coincided with Chang sharing a photo on social media during a family visit to Disneyland, not far from the hotel.
Chang did not respond to an email for further comments.
Other questionable donations include four from unidentified donors who provided “999 Anonymous Dr.” as their addresses.
A series of contributions lists donor addresses as vacant buildings in Washington, previously housing a funeral home. One donor is noted merely as “Alex, A,” contributing nearly $5,000 across more than 40 transactions last year. Such donations tend to invite closer scrutiny from campaigns and regulators.
Regulators and watchdogs have long raised alarms about contributions from individuals linked to foreign interests. Notably, Trump received a contribution from Nnenna Peters, wife of Nigerian billionaire Benedict Peters, founder and CEO of an oil and mining conglomerate.
Nnenna Peters, located by Ella, donated $1 million to Trump’s political committee. As a naturalized citizen residing in Potomac, Maryland, Nnenna Peters is authorized to contribute to the campaign.
However, federal regulations prevent contributions on behalf of non-citizen spouses unless the funds are community property. Experts point out that husbands may be barred from donating using funds solely from their wife’s name.
In practice, such restrictions are challenging to enforce since determining if a spouse is acting independently or on behalf of a partner is difficult. Government watchdogs state that these donations heighten the risk of foreign interests attempting to influence U.S. policy.
This is precisely the concern Trump raised in his executive order while targeting ActBlue.
After all, Benedict Peters has significant interests that may align with Trump’s focus on resource extraction during his second term. The Trump administration has sought to secure access to crucial minerals that are essential for modern technology. Peters’ Aiteo Group promotes itself as one of Nigeria’s largest energy conglomerates, while his company, Brabla Holdings, works to secure rights to vast mineral deposits across Africa.
Her donations draw attention given her prior giving patterns. She had previously donated exclusively to Democrats, including a $66,800 contribution to Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign.
“This is likely coming from her husband,” stated Craig Holman, a lobbyist for Public Citizen, a Washington-based government oversight group. “This is the kind of situation the FEC scrutinizes closely.”
Benedict and Ella Peters did not respond to requests for comments.
Disregard for campaign finance regulations
The suspicious donations fit a pattern for Trump, who has previously demonstrated a lack of concern for campaign finance rules and has leveraged presidential authority to assist those entangled in related legal challenges.
In January, Trump’s Justice Department filed a lawsuit against Rep. Jeff Fortenberry, a Nebraska Republican, for accepting a $30,000 contribution from a Nigerian billionaire. During his first term, Trump pardoned conservative commentator Dinesh D’Souza and Republican donor Michael Liberty. He also pardoned former California Rep. Duncan Hunter, who was convicted in 2020 for misappropriating $250,000 from his campaign fund.
Trump’s political efforts have also attracted contributions from straw donors and foreign individuals who were under legal scrutiny.
Barry Zekelman, a Canadian steel magnate, was fined $975,000 in 2018 by the Federal Election Commission for contributing $1.75 million to America First Action.
Two U.S. citizens of Soviet origin, Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, were convicted for the Strodner scheme, contributing $325,000 to the same super PAC during the period leading up to Trump’s 2020 re-election campaign.
Republican political operative Jesse Benton was found guilty in 2022 for serving as a straw donor for a Russian businessman who contributed $25,000 to Trump’s 2016 campaign.
Democrats argue that Trump’s focus on ActBlue is misdirected. They point out that he welcomes suspicious donations while clamoring for investigations into perceived political adversaries, noting that Trump even dismissed the commissioner at the Federal Election Commission in February. This decision, occurring after the resignation of the Republican commissioner, effectively left the agency without a quorum to enforce campaign finance laws and regulations.
“While Trump and his associates attack grassroots-funded platforms like us, their own campaigns are reportedly welcoming funds from dubious sources,” remarked Megan Hughes, a spokesperson for ActBlue.
Republicans contend there are legitimate grounds for investigating the Democratic platform that has relaxed fraud detection protocols before the 2024 presidential election.
Democrats worry about the future of ActBlue
Nevertheless, political advantages arise from probing ActBlue. The platform has been notably more effective than Winred, the Republican alternative, collecting less than half of the $3.8 billion raised by ActBlue during the 2024 election cycle.
ActBlue’s representatives declined to elaborate on whether they had been contacted by the Department of Justice.
ActBlue is anticipated to contest any investigations vigorously. When the Republican-led Congressional Committee initiated its inquiry in 2023, its findings became the groundwork for several accusations Trump referenced in his executive order.
Meanwhile, Democrats are preparing for worst-case scenarios.
“Being a veteran Democratic operative who served as engineering director during Joe Biden’s 2020 campaign, I can say this is a major concern,” said Matt Hodges. “It’s the worst fear we all have – escalated legal scrutiny that impedes our operational abilities.”
He predicted that if ActBlue were forced to shut down, Democrats could potentially lose over $10 million in the short term. This is why some within the party have begun contemplating alternatives, although they concede it may be too late to find a comparable replacement for ActBlue.
___
Reporting by People from New York.
__
For inquiries, contact the AP’s Global Research Team [email protected] or https://www.ap.org/tips/
Source: apnews.com