WASHINGTON — “Do we love law enforcement or what?” President Donald Trump asked a cheering crowd during his “Make America Great Again” political rally Oct. 12 in Lebanon, Ohio.
“Thank you, law enforcement!” the president later told officers, who he called “heroes.”
But when Lebanon City Hall sent Trump’s campaign a $16,191 invoice for police and other public safety costs associated with his event, Trump didn’t respond. Trump’s campaign likewise ignored Lebanon officials’ follow-up reminders to cover the sum — one rich enough to fund the entire police force for nearly two days in this modest city of 21,000, between Dayton and Cincinnati.
The bill remains unpaid.
“There’s a lot of benefit when a president comes here: economic benefits, more visibility for our community,” Lebanon Mayor Amy Brewer said. “But I would hope and believe the Trump campaign would pay its bills. It’s our taxpayer dollars.”
The red ink Trump poured on Lebanon’s thin blue line is no anomaly.
At least nine other city governments — from Mesa, Arizona, to Erie, Pennsylvania — are still waiting for Trump to pay public safety-related invoices they’ve sent his presidential campaign committee in connection with his political rallies, according to interviews with local officials and municipal records obtained by the Center for Public Integrity.
Some invoices are three years old. In all, city governments say Trump’s campaign owes them at least $841,219.
Must Trump pay?
That depends on who you ask. The cities are adamant Trump should pay up. But in many of these cases, there are no signed contracts between the municipal governments and the Trump campaign. The cities dispatched police officers to secure Trump’s events because they believe public safety required it — and the U.S. Secret Service asked for it.
Reached for comment, Trump campaign Director of Operations Sean Dollman referred questions to the campaign’s communications staff, which did not respond to numerous requests.
The Fraternal Order of Police, which endorsed Trump in 2016, has no formal position on whether presidential campaigns should pay municipalities’ bills for police protection, said Chuck Canterbury, the organization’s president. “That is the government’s responsibility in each local area,” he said.
But presidential candidates should consider paying cities’ police bills even if they don’t believe they are legally required to do so, other police advocates said.
“The fiscal impact on local governments, especially during campaign seasons in critical vote states or communities, can be significant,” said Richard Myers, executive director of the Major Cities Chiefs Association and former police chief for several cities, including Colorado Springs, Colorado, and Newport News, Virginia. “When one considers how much money campaigns raise and spend, it does not seem unreasonable to expect some degree of reimbursement for such demands for service.”
‘A character integrity issue’
“It is our hope that [Trump’s campaign] will do right by the taxpayers of Mesa and provide payment,” Mesa Deputy City Manager Scott Butler said.
Other aren’t so bullish.
The largest single invoice, $470,417, is also the most recent: it’s from El Paso, Texas, where officials have publicly pilloried the Trump campaign for not covering costs associated with Trump’s Feb. 11 campaign rally near the Mexican border. (Democratic presidential candidate Beto O’Rourke conducted a much smaller campaign rally in El Paso the same day and paid his $21,021 police bill on time, KTSM-TV reported in May.)
“I’m hopeful they’ll pay. I’m hopeful they’ll do what’s right. People that don’t pay their bills — that’s a character integrity issue,” El Paso Mayor Dee Margo told the Center for Public Integrity.
But municipal policies vary.
Many of the more than 60 cities Trump visited since his inauguration for Make America Great Again rallies have policies against billing any politician for police costs. Several more cities calculated the cost of providing public safety services for Trump rallies but said they chose not to bill Trump’s campaign.
Trump’s July 2017 rally in Youngstown, Ohio, for example, involved paying 48 police officers more than $11,147 in overtime, although Youngstown officials didn’t invoice Trump.
Local governments do have some financial leverage when presidential candidates want to stage a rally not at a private venue, but a government-owned facility — such as a municipal convention center or city park.
Several have required the Trump campaign to sign a contract or similar agreement to pay various expenses and fees at their municipal facilities, including police protection.
In Nashville, for example, the Trump campaign agreed to pay $49 per hour for each uniformed police officer patrolling Nashville’s Municipal Auditorium during a rally in March 2017 and $50 per hour for a rally in May 2018.
The Trump campaign has honored these city facility contracts, although in at least once case, not in a timely fashion, and in another case, not in full.
The Gallatin Airport Authority in Montana, which administers the Bozeman Yellowstone International Airport where Trump’s campaign rallied on Nov. 3, 2018, sent the Trump campaign a $17,355 invoice for labor, construction and rental costs. Trump paid three months after its due date, on April 1, 2019, according to a canceled Trump campaign check.
In 2016, then-Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski signed a contract for a rally with the city-owned Tucson Convention Center, but Trump’s campaign has yet to pay for the public safety costs still in dispute.
Don McGahn, Trump’s campaign general counsel, and later, his White House counsel, lambasted Tucson police’s performance outside the 2016 event.
Trump’s campaign “was, in fact, frustrated by the refusal of Tucson Police to do anything to control the violent and angry protestors outside the Convention Center,” McGahn wrote in a letter to Tucson’s city attorney — an accusation Tucson officials denied.
Through the course of his many Make America Great Again rallies, Trump has been adamant about his support and respect for police.
“We love you and will always support you,” Trump tweeted in January on National Law Enforcement Appreciation Day.
“For you guys, anything I can do I’ll do,” he told the International Association of Chiefs of Police last year at their annual convention.
“America’s police officers have earned the everlasting gratitude of our nation,” Trump said in October.
Trump’s campaign certainly has the money to pay cities’ police bills: it reported nearly $40.8 million cash on hand, as of March 31, according to federal records.
Police payment Catch-22?
Cities hosting presidential candidates say securing many presidential candidate rallies, such as those conducted by most 2020 Democratic candidates, is a matter of overall community safety. Many are relatively modest affairs that don’t carry excessive cost.
Trump rallies are an entirely different matter.
When Trump visits a city to stage a Make America Great Again rally, often cash-strapped city governments have little choice but to provide whatever public safety resources the U.S. Secret Service requests of them.
The requirements are often significant — street closures, security perimeters, the paid time of dozens of law enforcement officers — because unlike most official presidential visits, political rallies attract thousands, if not tens of thousands of people.
The president’s campaign political events have also earned a reputation for rowdiness, even violence. Protestors have thrown and received punches, journalists have been threatened — even Trump himself has been targeted.
Researchers at the University of Pennsylvania concluded that cities hosting Trump rallies during the 2016 presidential campaign on average experienced 2.3 more assaults than they would expect on a typical day — an increase not associated with his opponent Hillary Clinton’s campaign rallies during the same time period.
But the Secret Service doesn’t reimburse municipal governments for their assistance during presidential campaign events.
Why? Blame Congress.
The Secret Service, spokesman Jeffrey Adams said, is not funded to reimburse local police, “and we don’t have a mechanism to do so.”
Local officials are therefore left to bill presidential campaigns in the hope they’ll pay because it’s their ethical or moral duty. While a few cities have flirted with suing presidential candidates for nonpayment, they’ve concluded legal action would be more aggravation than it’s worth.
For example, Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, meticulously paid police bills during his run for president in 2016, with then-spokeswoman Catherine Frazier explaining that Cruz put a “a high value on running an organized campaign.” Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign appears to have paid most bills, although federal records provide no evidence that the Clinton campaign ever paid one known bill from Philadelphia.
President Barack Obama’s campaign committee did not always pay municipal police bills when local governments wanted, and in at least one reported case, ignored a large bill, arguing that it wasn’t responsible for the costs. Obama’s campaign committee officially shut down in July 2018 without reporting any remaining debt. Federal records do indicate that Obama’s campaign paid some local government entities — from the City of Hollywood, Florida, to the Pittsburgh Bureau of Police — for “security” costs over the years.
Others never pay. Numerous city officials told the Center for Public Integrity that, over the years, they’ve billed both Democratic and Republican candidates for police costs only to be ignored.
So why don’t cash-strapped city governments protest by denying candidates such as Trump police protection?
Trump rallies draw big crowds, for one: Revelers fill hotels, pack restaurants, purchase sundries and drink watering holes dry. Then there’s the luster that comes with the commander-in-chief visiting town.
There are also a darker reasons not to keep cops away from campaign events, particularly ones involving the commander in chief.
“Most [police] chiefs will remind their officials how long it took Dallas to not be known as the place where the president was assassinated,” said Myers of the Major Cities Chiefs Association.
What about the Democrats?
Among 2020 Democratic presidential candidates, Sen. Bernie Sanders has the most checkered history when it comes to paying cities’ police bills.
During his 2016 presidential run, Sanders’ campaign at one point refused to pay campaign event-related public safety bills from 23 different local governments and law enforcement agencies.
Total tab: more than $449,000.
Sanders’ then-campaign attorney Brad Deutsch explained the campaign’s refusal to pay in a September 2016 letter to the city attorney of Tucson, Arizona, where Sanders had conducted a campaign event in March 2016.
“The Campaign did not contract for, not did it request or arrange for the Tucson Police Department to provide public safety at the Campaign event,” Deutsch wrote. “The level of security or public safety requirements anticipated for any particular event were not dictated by the campaign.”
But as Sanders mulled another run for president, his 2016 campaign committee began quietly paying its public safety bills, according to Federal Election Commission records.
Sanders spokeswoman Arianna Jones told the Center for Public Integrity in October 2017 that the campaign would work with municipal government to “amicably resolve these matters” even if the campaign wasn’t “legally responsible” for event security costs.
It made its final payment — more than $22,000 to the Solano County Sheriff’s Office in California — on Sept. 15, 2018.
Now, as Sanders is running second or third behind former Vice President Joe Biden in most major Democratic presidential primary polls, Sanders’ current presidential campaign won’t say whether it would pay all public safety bills it received from local governments.
“We pay all costs for police support we ask for or agree to as a condition of the permit at a particular venue,” Sanders spokeswoman Sarah Ford said.
That’s more than Biden would say about paying police bills.
Reached by phone, Daniel McCarthy, Biden’s chief operations officer and chief financial officer, declined to comment, and Biden press officials didn’t respond to several requests for comment. (Prior to announcing his presidential run, Biden personally campaigned in November for Sen. Heidi Heitkamp, D-N.D., and Heitkamp’s campaign paid a City of Fargo police bill associated with the event, city spokesman Gregg Schildberger confirmed.)
Several other Democratic presidential campaigns also didn’t respond to multiple inquiries, including that of Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, whose 2018 U.S. Senate campaign described her as “always supporting law enforcement.”
But like O’Rourke’s campaign paying its police bill in El Paso, a few Democratic candidates have already spent precious campaign dollars on police bills, municipal records indicate. Others — including Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., who’s rising in recent polls — tell the Center for Public Integrity that they’ll definitely pay if municipal governments send them public safety bills.
Take Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey. His presidential committee racked up $50,400 in fees — mostly police overtime — associated with his campaign kickoff rally April 13 in Newark, New Jersey, where Booker used to serve as mayor.
Booker’s campaign paid the bill on May 2, according to a deposit document from Newark’s Revenue Collection Division.
“Cory 2020 believes we should always pay the bills for police or public safety expenses,” Booker spokeswoman Sabrina Singh said, adding that it’s “wrong that the Trump campaign has not paid bills for his MAGA rallies. The campaign should pay these bills immediately.”
Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., received a public safety expense invoice for $187,327.87 following her massive campaign kickoff rally — an estimated 20,000 people attended — on Jan. 27 in Oakland, California.
The invoice due date: April 13. As of this week, the Harris campaign had paid Oakland $65,000, with a remaining balance of $122,327.87 due by next week, Oakland city government spokeswoman Karen Boyd confirmed.
Harris spokeswoman Kate Walters said the campaign is working with Oakland to “square away any outstanding costs.”
Two city leaders running for president — Mayor Pete Buttigieg of South Bend, Indiana, and Mayor Wayne Messam of Miramar, Florida — also vowed that their campaigns would pay whatever police bills their campaigns receive.
Said Buttigieg spokesman Chris Meagher: “As a mayor, Pete knows that local government makes things work, and it’s important that they get reimbursed for the work done to keep the public safe.”
Potential legal trouble
Regardless of whether presidential campaigns believe they should pay public safety bills that city governments send them, federal election law states this much: “A political committee shall report a disputed debt … if the creditor has provided something of value to the political committee.”
In its mandatory campaign finance reports filed with the Federal Election Commission, Trump’s campaign committee has not reported debts to municipal governments or police departments. Nor has it disclosed the debts in federal filings as “disputed debts” — something the Sanders 2016 presidential campaign did while initially refusing to pay its police bills.
Several election law lawyers asserted that Trump’s campaign is therefore likely violating federal campaign finance laws.
“It’s hard to argue that public safety services to the campaign is not something of value to the political committee,” said Erin Chlopak, director of campaign finance strategy for the nonpartisan Campaign Legal Center and former FEC assistant general counsel.
The bipartisan FEC, whose four remaining commissioners often deadlock on high-profile political issues, could conceivably itself investigate Trump’s campaign if it believed the campaign wasn’t properly disclosing disputed debts. A third party could file a complaint against the Trump campaign with the FEC, forcing the issue.
Furthermore, a campaign committee may consider requesting an advisory opinion from the commission “for activities or scenarios for which there is not clear legal guidance,” FEC spokeswoman Judith Ingram said.
Congress could also involve itself. House Democrats in particular have deluged Trump and his administration with various oversight requests.
“It’s outrageous that the president is leaving local municipal governments to foot the bill for his excessive political campaign events,” said Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., chairwoman of the Committee on House Administration. “The American taxpayers deserve to know to what extent they are subsidizing the president’s political activities.”
In the meantime, presidential campaign rallies — and the police presence surrounding them — are all but destined to be larger and more frequent ahead of the nation’s first presidential caucus in Iowa and primary in New Hampshire.
Trump, who officially filed for re-election on the day of his inauguration, is scheduled to next week conduct what could be one of his biggest political rallies yet. It’s slated to serve as a ceremonial campaign kick-off extravaganza at the Amway Center — stated capacity of 18,500 — in Orlando, Florida.
And, according to the Orlando Sentinel, the city is requiring Trump’s campaign to pay up front.
The moral of the story for cities who want presidential candidates to help pay for their visits?
“Treat the political committee just like you would any private sector event promoter,” said Brett Kappel, a government affairs and public policy partner at the Akerman LLP law firm. “Get it in writing.”
About this investigation
The Center for Public Integrity attempted to contact local government officials in the 63 cities or counties that have hosted President Donald Trump’s political campaign rallies since Trump became president. Of these, 60 responded to the Center for Public Integrity’s questions about whether they billed the Trump campaign for public safety-related costs, and, if so, whether the Trump campaign had paid. The Center for Public Integrity also requested invoices, bills, receipts, correspondence, contracts and other related documentation of the bills. The Center for Public Integrity also contacted five municipal governments that, in 2016, had unsuccessfully invoiced the Trump campaign for public safety-related costs. Government officials for these cities confirmed that the Trump campaign had not paid. In addition to the Trump campaign, the Center for Public Integrity also contacted the campaigns of 23 Democratic presidential candidates and Republican candidate Bill Weld to inquire whether they will pay police bills they receive during the 2020 presidential campaign. Relatedly, the Center for Public Integrity contacted several municipal governments whose cities have already hosted large-scale campaign events for Democratic candidates to ask whether they had invoiced the candidates for public safety costs.
The Center for Public Integrity is a nonprofit, nonpartisan investigative news organization in Washington, D.C.
Ballroom dancers say Trump immigration clampdown hurts business
ORANGE, Conn. — When no Americans replied to her multiple help-wanted ads for a dance instructor, Connecticut studio owner Chris Sabourin looked overseas for a qualified candidate. But she was stymied again by a federal tightening of visa application rules that she and others contend is hampering the ballroom dance industry.
Sabourin had to eventually give up on one prospective employee after spending the past year and thousands of dollars attempting to hire a top ballroom dancer from Greece to teach at her Fred Astaire studio in Orange, only to have the woman detained at JFK International Airport and sent back home.
“It would just be nice to know why we’re having such a hard time,” Sabourin said. “It’s affecting our business, definitely.”
With a steady interest in learning iconic dances like the foxtrot and tango, fueled in part by popular TV shows like “Dancing with the Stars,” studio owners like Sabourin say their efforts to hire enough professional instructors are hampered without overseas help.
The owners, national representatives of the Arthur Murray and Fred Astaire dance studio chains, and attorneys describe greater backlogs for visa applications and an overall increase in evidence requests, including for redundant information and unnecessary documents.
Immigration lawyers contend President Donald Trump’s administration has erected an “invisible wall” of numerous hurdles that has made it difficult for all kinds of U.S. industries, from ballroom dance to STEM fields, to hire foreign workers for jobs they’ve had a difficult time filling with qualified American applicants.
A review of United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) data released in January by the American Immigration Lawyers Association found that average case processing time surged by 46 percent between fiscal year 2016, the last full year of the prior administration, and fiscal year 2018 — from 6.5 months to 9.48 months.
In congressional testimony provided in July, the association’s president, Marketa Lindt, said USCIS’s overall backlog of delayed cases exceeded 5.69 million this past fiscal year, a 69% increase over fiscal year 2014. Meanwhile, federal records reviewed by The Associated Press show there’s been a slight uptick since 2017 in initial application denials for 01 visa applications from individuals with “extraordinary ability or achievement” — the visa that many of the foreign dancers seek — as well as for 01 visa applicants who were given a second chance to meet eligibility requirements.
Representatives of the dance industry say they’ve seen the processing times for these non-immigrant visas, which allow the dancers to work in the U.S. for up to three years, increase from multiple weeks to multiple months, with uncertainty the application will ultimately be approved. In one case, a professional dancer approved for his visa to work at a dance studio in Southbury, Connecticut, was later denied at the American consulate in his home country of Ecuador, one of the last steps in the process.
Let our news meet your inbox. The news and stories that matters, delivered weekday mornings.
“I think these particular professionals, these artists, are falling into this area where USCIS and immigration services are just making it increasingly difficult to come here legally,” said Hartford, Connecticut, immigration attorney Erin O’Neil-Baker, who is currently representing about 10 New England dance studios sponsoring foreign, professional ballroom dancers. “Even if you’re an expert in your field, even if you have extraordinary ability, to stay here, they make it difficult.”
Immigration attorneys point to the “Buy American and Hire American” executive order Trump signed in April 2017 as one reason for processing delays. The order was intended to create higher wages and employment rates for U.S. workers by “rigorously enforcing and administering” the nation’s existing immigration laws.
“Across the board, across all types of applications at USCIS, we have observed a significant uptick in the increase in case processing time,” said Diane Rish, associate director of government relations for the American Immigration Lawyers Association, which warned in its report that processing delays have reached “crisis levels under the Trump administration” for families, individuals and businesses.
The Government Accountability Office told members of Congress in late May it plans to investigate the report’s findings.
Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies in Washington, D.C., a think tank that supports tighter controls on immigration, said he empathizes with the small business owners and their challenges, but argues they shouldn’t be blaming federal immigration policy for their labor recruitment problems.
“It’s one thing if you’re talking about world-renowned nuclear physicists, where there’s a handful of people on the planet who have an ability and we want them here. Everybody gets that,” he said. “Dance instructors? I’m sorry. That’s something for the market to deal with. If they can’t find people at dance programs in college to entice to be teachers, well, maybe we need fewer dance schools. This is a supply and demand issue.”
Krikorian noted the Trump administration is not making up new rules, but applying existing law as it was intended, “instead of winking and nodding and looking the other way, which is what multiple administrations have been doing for decades.”
A spokeswoman for the U.S. Department of State said there has “been no policy change” regarding the 01 visas specifically.
But there are concerns the tightening of rules could have long-term ramifications. Michael Wildes, an immigration attorney for First Lady Melania Trump and her family, noted in an op-ed published several months ago in The Hill that immigration lawyers for fashion designers, models and photographers have also “experienced an unprecedented level of push-back from immigration authorities.” He warned there could be “widespread disenfranchisement” among talented and creative people, who decide to forgo the U.S. and opt for Paris or Beijing.
Dance studio owners said the lengthy delays and red tape can be discouraging for their prospective instructors, leading them to give up on plans to work in the U.S.
“They can’t wait that long,” said John Gates, vice president of the Fred Astaire Dance Studios.
Many of the dancers come from Europe, where it’s more common to learn ballroom dance at a very young age — with hundreds of kids in group classes — and to compete at much higher levels than in the U.S. There’s also a desire among foreign dancers who’ve aged out of European competitions in their early 20s to come to the U.S. for the opportunity to keep competing, as well as to teach, and have a very successful career in a country where there are fewer professional ballroom dancers.
Jose Zuquilanda, a 23-year-old ballroom dancer from Ecuador who has competed throughout the world, including in the U.S., had hoped to spend the next few years competing, training, teaching dance and learning how to run a business at a Fred Astaire studio in Southbury, Connecticut. Zuquilanda, who has visited the U.S. dozens of times on tourist visas, successfully obtained an 01 visa for professionals so he could work here legally. But he was recently denied both the 01 and his tourist visa at the American consulate in Ecuador. His mother, Liliana Serrano, who lives in Connecticut, doesn’t understand why her son’s application was ultimately denied.
“They are not only harming his career, they’re harming the Fred Astaire studio,” she said.
Sabourin estimates her studio could generate another $100,000 a year if she could find two more instructors, especially a female dancer to work with the male clients she’s had to turn away, some of whom want to train for amateur competitions.
“The government figures there’s enough Americans to hire,” she said. “Of course, the people that are making those decisions don’t know the different between tap, jazz, ballet and ballroom, but whatever.”
Wayne Smith, executive vice president of Arthur Murray Dance Centers, has been in the ballroom dance business for nearly 50 years. He said the immigration challenges have worsened in the last couple years for his company’s dance studio owners as well.
“This is all the time, currently now. It’s just become a very difficult problem,” said Smith, who said it can be financially challenging for these business owners to afford to hire attorneys who understand the immigration law. “For them to invest that kind of money into it, it’s not really worth it to them in the long run.”
Trump administration quietly releases Lebanon military aid after mysterious delay
WASHINGTON — The Trump administration has quietly released more than $100 million in military assistance to Lebanon after months of unexplained delay that led some lawmakers to compare it to the aid for Ukraine at the center of the impeachment inquiry.
The $105 million in Foreign Military Financing funds for the Lebanese Armed Forces was released just before the Thanksgiving holiday and lawmakers were notified of the step on Monday, according to two congressional staffers and an administration official.
All three spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly to the matter.
The money had languished in limbo at the Office of Management and Budget since September although it had already won congressional approval and had overwhelming support from the Pentagon, State Department and National Security Council. The White House has yet to offer any explanation for the delay despite repeated queries from Congress.
Lawmakers such as Rep. Eliot Engel, the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee and Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., had pressed the administration since October to either release the funds or explain why it was being withheld. The State Department had notified Congress on Sept. 5 that the money would be spent.
Let our news meet your inbox. The news and stories that matters, delivered weekday mornings.
Earlier this month, the delay came up in impeachment testimony by David Hale, the No. 3 official in the State Department, according to the transcript of the closed-door hearing. Hale described growing consternation among diplomats about the delay.
The White House and the Office of Management and Budget have declined to comment on the matter. The State Department had offered only a cryptic response to queries, defending the assistance but also calling for Lebanese authorities to implement economic reforms and rein in corruption.
As with the Ukraine assistance, OMB did not explain the delay. However, unlike Ukraine, there has been no suggestion that President Donald Trump is seeking “a favor” from Lebanon in exchange for the aid, according to officials familiar with the matter.
The delay had frustrated the national security community, which believes the assistance that pays for U.S.-made military equipment for the Lebanese army is essential, particularly as Lebanon reels from financial chaos and mass protests.
The aid is intended to help counter Iran’s influence in Lebanon, which is highlighted by the presence of the Iranian-supported Shiite Hezbollah movement in the government and the group’s militias, officials have said.
Murphy, asked about the hold up Monday afternoon in an interview on MSNBC’s “Andrea Mitchell Reports,” said it became apparent to him upon a recent visit to Lebanon that the Lebanese military “badly needs” the aid appropriated by Congress.
“I went to Lebanon to see how badly needed that aid is on the ground. I’ve returned back to Congress to work with my Democratic and Republican colleagues to press the administration to at least explain to us why they have withheld that aid. They have offered no reason,” Murphy said.
At the time of that interview, he had not been told the money had been released.
Murphy described the Trump administration’s withholding of aid as “eerily similar” to the situation in Ukraine.
Some pro-Israel members of Congress have long sought to de-fund the Lebanese military, arguing that it has been compromised by Hezbollah, which the U.S. designates as a “foreign terrorist organization.” Republican Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas has long advocated cutting the assistance and is expected to introduce legislation that would bar such aid as long as Hezbollah is part of Lebanon’s government.
The Pentagon and State Department reject that view, saying the army is the only independent Lebanese institution capable of resisting Hezbollah.
Elizabeth Janowski contributed.
GOP Rep. Duncan Hunter, after claiming ‘witch hunt,’ to plead guilty to misusing campaign funds
U.S. Rep. Duncan Hunter says he will plead guilty to misusing campaign funds — a criminal case he’d once decried as a politically motivated “witch hunt.”
The Republican lawmaker will formally enter his guilty plea in a hearing in federal court in San Diego on Tuesday morning, his court docket shows.
In an interview with KUSI News, Hunter said he would plead guilty to one count of misusing campaign funds in the case.
“I did make mistakes. I did not properly monitor or account for my campaign money,” he said. “I am responsible for my campaign and what happens to my campaign money.”
The change of plea was first reported by the San Diego Union-Tribune.
Let our news meet your inbox. The news and stories that matters, delivered weekday mornings.
Prosecutors had charged Hunter and his wife “converted and stole” more than a quarter million dollars in campaign funds for their own use, including trips to Hawaii and Italy, bar tabs, theater tickets and school tuition for their kids. Prosecutors have also charged that Hunter used campaign money to finance romantic flings with lobbyists and congressional aides.
Download the NBC News app for breaking news and politics
Both Hunters pleaded not guilty last year, but the Republican congressman and Iraq war vet appeared to blame his spouse for their problems in an interview on Fox News soon after.
“When I went away to Iraq in 2003, the first time, I gave her power of attorney. She handled my finances throughout my entire military career and that continued on when I got into Congress,” Hunter said on “The Story.”
“She was also the campaign manager, so whatever she did, that’ll be looked at, too, I’m sure, but I didn’t do it.”
Hunter’s wife, Margaret, pleaded guilty to conspiring to misuse campaign funds in June, and was expected to testify against her husband at his trial, which had been scheduled for Jan. 22.
“I think it’s important not to have a public trial for three reasons, and those three reasons are my kids,” Duncan Hunter said in the KUSI interview.
He said he did not know how much time he’ll get from the judge, but added, “Whatever my time in custody is, I will take that hit. My only hope is the judge does not sentence my wife to jail. I think my kids need a mom at home.”
Hunter is a staunch ally of President Donald Trump, and was the second sitting member of Congress to endorse his 2016 presidential campaign.
The first, Rep. Chris Collins of New York, pleaded guilty last month to federal charges related to insider trading and resigned his seat. Like Hunter, he had taken a page from the Trump playbook and said the investigation into his actions was “a political witch hunt.”
Hunter, who’d been running for re-election next year, was vague when asked what would happen with his seat.
“We’re going to pass it off to whoever takes the seat next. I think it’s important to keep the seat a Republican seat,” he said. “President Trump right now needs support more than ever.”
Latest News1 week ago
British man and his wife rescued in Philippines after gunbattle | World News
Latest News1 week ago
WWW inventor Sir Tim Berners-Lee warns of ‘digital dystopia’ as he launches ‘web contract’ | Science & Tech News
Latest News1 week ago
Elon Musk boasts of nearly 150,000 Tesla Cybertruck orders despite launch gaffe | Business News
Politics1 week ago
Schiff says House will move forward with impeachment inquiry after ‘overwhelming’ evidence from hearings
Politics6 days ago
Jo Swinson HUMILIATED: Lib Dem leader’s popularity crashes after Question Time disaster
Politics5 days ago
Britons furious at Jeremy Corbyn’s NHS claims ‘Steptoe peddling rubbish again!’
World1 week ago
Europe could rev up the world economy — Commentary
Politics1 week ago
‘Conan is a tough cookie’