Key takeaways:
- Raskin and Whitesides asked the GAO and the U.S. Office of Special Counsel to investigate the ads’ funding and potential legal violations.
- The ads say they were paid for by the U.S. government and began airing Sept. 23, according to The Guardian.
- Talking Points Memo reported that other Democrats are questioning reports of a roughly $20 million transfer from Homeland Security to fund the ads.
Two House Democrats are asking federal watchdogs to investigate television ads promoting President Donald Trump ahead of the midterm elections, questioning whether the government illegally used taxpayer money to make and broadcast them.
Reps. Jamie Raskin of Maryland, the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, and George Whitesides of California asked the Government Accountability Office and the U.S. Office of Special Counsel to examine the campaign. The ads end with fine print saying they were paid for by the U.S. government, The Guardian reported.
The lawmakers want the GAO to identify the source and total amount of taxpayer money used to produce and distribute the ads and to determine whether the spending violated federal law. They asked the special counsel’s office to investigate who may be accountable. According to Talking Points Memo, their letter also seeks an accounting of the ads’ cost and how they were paid for.
“Accordingly, we are writing to formally request that the GAO investigate the source, accounts, and total amount of taxpayer funds used by the Executive Office of the President to produce and distribute this advertisement across major television markets and official White House social media channels,” Raskin and Whitesides wrote.
The first ad began airing Sept. 23 and shows dozens of images of Trump while a singer repeats “love me” and UFC President Dana White praises him, according to The Guardian. A second ad aired days later, pairing footage of Trump with audio from a rally in which he criticizes the “deep state.” Talking Points Memo reported that the ads have appeared on Fox, Newsmax, MS NOW and CBS, as well as during NFL games.
Raskin and Whitesides cited a provision in this year’s spending law barring funds for “publicity or propaganda,” the Anti-Deficiency Act, federal criminal statutes concerning misuse of public money and the Hatch Act, The Guardian reported. The Hatch Act exempts the president but applies to executive branch employees, whom the lawmakers say must have helped make the ads.
The lawmakers rejected the White House’s characterization of the ads as public service announcements. They said nearly every claim in them is false and argued that the commercials closely resemble Trump’s 2024 campaign advertising. They also disputed the White House’s position that the ads are not political because Trump is not on the ballot, pointing to his call at an August rally for supporters to “pretend, please, that I’m on the ballot.”
A White House spokesperson called the ads “educational and unapologetically patriotic,” The Guardian reported. Trump said Wednesday he would “gladly pay the money” if the ads were found to be improper.
Talking Points Memo reported that other congressional Democrats have sought investigations into reports that the White House shifted about $20 million from the Department of Homeland Security to pay for the ads. The lawmakers have raised questions about whether money allocated for Customs and Border Protection was used for a purpose Congress did not authorize.
Several Republican senators have also questioned the use of public money, while Federal Communications Commission Chair Brendan Carr, a Trump appointee, said the ads were appropriate, according to The Guardian.
Be First to Comment