Tag Archives: campaigns

US

Court voids Trump campaign’s non-disclosure agreement

Leave a comment

Gardephe’s 36-page decision said a non-disparagement clause in the agreement was similarly flawed.

“The Campaign’s past efforts to enforce the non-disclosure and non-disparagement provisions demonstrate that it is not operating in good faith to protect what it has identified as legitimate interests,” the judge added. “The evidence before the Court instead demonstrates that the Campaign has repeatedly sought to enforce the non-disclosure and non-disparagement provisions to suppress speech that it finds detrimental to its interests.”

Gardephe issued the ruling in a case brought by Jessica Denson, a Hispanic outreach director for Trump in 2016 who accused the campaign of sex discrimination in separate litigation.

At one point, the campaign persuaded an arbitrator to issue a $50,000 award against Denson for violating the agreement, but that award was later overturned.

Denson celebrated the latest ruling, saying it dealt a death blow to a tactic Trump has long wielded to control his image.

“I’m overjoyed,” Denson told POLITICO. “This president … former president spent all four years aspiring to autocracy while claiming that he was champion of freedom and free speech. … There’s many people out there who have seen cases like mine and were terrified to speak out.”

For decades, Trump required such secrecy agreements of his personal employees and staff in his companies. When he jumped into the presidential race in 2016, his lawyers continued to demand NDAs that seemed modeled on those he used previously in his personal and business affairs.

The practice continued into Trump’s presidency, despite warnings from First Amendment advocates that it was unconstitutional to demand that public employees swear an oath of secrecy. Precisely who at the White House was required to sign such agreements and what they covered remains something of a mystery.

The Justice Department joined in the secrecy drive last year by filing a lawsuit against Stephanie Winston Wolkoff, a former volunteer adviser to first lady Melania Trump, over a tell-all book Winston Wolkoff wrote. Some legal experts questioned the basis for the suit, which was based on an NDA she had signed. Days after President Joe Biden’s inauguration, the Justice Department dropped the case.

Denson said she is certain that such agreements helped mute criticism of Trump during his 2016 presidential race and through his four years in office.

“Just the terms of the NDA were wildly restricting and it completely stifled public debate, truthful public debate about the Trump campaign and presidency, so this is a massive victory,” the former aide said. “NDAs like this are part of the reason why we ended up with a Donald Trump candidacy and presidency in the first place.”

An adviser to the former president expressed disagreement with the ruling and said Trump’s attorneys are considering their options.

“We believe the court reached the wrong decision and President Trump’s lawyers are examining all potential appeals,” said the aide, who asked not to be identified.

Technically, Gardephe’s decision applies only to Denson, barring the campaign from enforcing the NDA against her. But her attorneys said Tuesday they think the decision effectively nullifies all the NDAs the Trump campaign has issued.

“The court rules point by point, almost entirely in our favor,” said New York lawyer David Bowles, who handled the case for Protect Democracy, an advocacy organization which formed in opposition to Trump but bills itself as non-partisan and anti-authoritarian.

An attorney with the group, John Langford, said the court ruling transcends Trump and serves as a warning to any campaign considering any similar effort to gag its staffers.

“From our perspective, it’s really not about politics,” Langford said. “No one should have to give up their free speech rights or swear allegiance to a candidate forever just to get a job with or volunteer on a campaign.”

The court decision does not foreclose the use of narrower non-disclosure agreements to protect sensitive campaign information, which the judge said might include polling data and fundraising strategies.

The Trump campaign asked Gardephe to edit the provisions if he found them unenforceable as written, but he declined.

Read original article here

Business

Former Trump adviser takes prominent role in voting battle

Leave a comment

A GOP lawyer who advised former President Donald Trump on his campaign to overturn the 2020 election results is now playing a central role coordinating the Republican effort to tighten voting laws around the country.

Cleta Mitchell, a longtime Republican lawyer and advocate for conservative causes, was among the Trump advisers on a January phone call in which Trump asked Georgia election officials to “find” enough votes to declare him, and not Democrat Joe Biden, the winner of the battleground state.

Now Mitchell has taken the helm of two separate efforts to push for tighter state voting laws and to fight Democratic efforts to expand access to the ballot at the federal level. She is also advising state lawmakers crafting the voting restriction proposals. And, she said Friday, she is in regular contact with Trump.

“People are actually interested in getting involved and we have to harness all this energy,” Mitchell said in an interview. “There are a lot of groups that have projects on election integrity that never did before.”

Mitchell’s new prominence tightens the ties between the former president, who has falsely insisted he lost the election due to fraud, and the GOP-led state voting overhaul that has helped turn a foundational principle of democracy into a partisan battleground.

Trump’s false claims of fraud have fueled a wave of new voting restrictions. More than 250 proposed voting restrictions have been proposed this year by mostly Republican lawmakers, according to the Brennan Center for Justice. On Thursday, Georgia’s GOP governor signed into law a measure requiring voters to present ID to vote by mail, gives the GOP-controlled state legislature new powers over local elections boards and outlaws providing food or water to people waiting in line to vote. Biden on Friday condemned it as “Jim Crow in the 21st Century.”

In response, Democrats have stepped up the push for a massive federal election overhaul bill. That proposal, known as H.R. 1, would effectively neuter state-level voter ID laws, allow anyone to vote by mail if they wanted to and automatically register citizens to vote. Republicans view that as an encroachment on state control over elections and say it is designed to give Democrats an advantage.

“The left is trying to dismantle 100 years of advancement in election administration,” Mitchell said, expressing bafflement at Democrats’ charges that Republicans are trying to suppress votes. “We’re watching two different movies right now.”

Mitchell’s most public involvement in the voting wars came in participation on Trump’s call to Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger Jan. 2. During that call, Mitchell insisted she had evidence of voting fraud, but officials with the Secretary of State’s office told her that her data was incorrect.

The call is part of an investigation by the Fulton County District Attorney’s office into whether Trump or others improperly tried to influence election officials. Mitchell would not discuss the call or the investigation.

Mitchell’s involvement caused an outcry in the legal community and led to her departure from her longtime job at the law firm Foley & Lardner. But Mitchell says that has been a blessing.

“One of the great advantages of resigning from my law firm is that I can devote all my time to something I love,” she said.

Mitchell has two new roles in an emerging conservative voting operation. She’s running a $10 million initiative at the limited government group FreedomWorks to both push for new restrictions in voting and help train conservatives to get involved in the nuts and bolts of local elections. She’s also a senior legal fellow at the Conservative Partnership Institute, an organization run by former Republican Sen. Jim DeMint. She says she’ll use that role to “coordinate” conservative voting positions, particularly in opposition to H.R. 1.

A onetime Oklahoma state legislator, Mitchell, 70, has links to other influential players in the conservative movement. She also serves as outside counsel to the American Legislative Exchange Committee, a conservative group that provides model legislation to state lawmakers and organized a call with state lawmakers and Texas Sen. Ted Cruz on opposing H.R. 1.

And Mitchell said she’s been talking regularly with Republican state lawmakers about the need for new election laws. She would not identify whom she speaks with but said it’s been a longtime passion.

“I’ve been working with state legislatures for several years to get them to pay attention to what I call the political process,” Mitchell said. “I love legislatures and working with legislators.”

She similarly would not detail her conversations with Trump or say whether they involved the new voting fights. “I’m in touch with the president fairly frequently,” she said of Trump.

Repeated audits have shown no significant problems with the 2020 election. Trump and his supporters lost more than 50 court cases challenging its results.

Mitchell says she believes the courts used legal trickery to avoid ever truly addressing Trump’s allegations of voter fraud.

That evidence had made some conservative groups careful not to echo Trump’s baseless claims of election fraud, even as they argue for tighter restrictions on who Americans vote.

Mitchell’s role could complicate that effort to keep a distance.

“I have concerns with the election but I do not think the election was stolen,” said Noah Wall, executive vice president of FreedomWorks. However, Wall said he saw no conflict in working with Mitchell. “When we talk about what we’re going to be focused on, I don’t see any daylight between her issues and ours,” Wall said.

Mitchell has a long history in the conservative movement, with positions on the boards of the National Rifle Association and the Bradley Foundation. She represented Trump’s Environmental Protection Agency chief, Scott Pruitt, and has been the campaign attorney for several Republican senators. She also is chair of the Public Interest Legal Foundation, a conservative election law project that she said may get involved in litigation against H.R. 1, should it pass, or in support of new laws like the one in Georgia.

Read original article here

US

Wave of GOP retirements signals battles ahead

Leave a comment

This is not the way Republicans wanted to begin the year.

Missouri’s Roy Blunt on Monday became the fifth Republican senator to announce he will not seek reelection, a retirement wave that portends an ugly campaign season next year and gives Democrats fresh hope in preserving their razor-thin Senate majority.

History suggests Republicans are still well-positioned to reclaim at least one chamber of Congress next year. But officials in both parties agree that the surge of GOP departures will make the Republicans’ challenge more difficult in the Senate.

“Any time you lose an incumbent, it’s bad news,” said Republican strategist Rick Tyler, who briefly worked for failed Missouri Senate candidate Todd Akin nearly a decade ago. “Missouri’s not necessarily a safe state for Republicans. Democrats have won there.”

The 71-year-old Blunt’s exit is a reminder of how the nation’s politics have shifted since the rise of Donald Trump. Blunt and his retiring GOP colleagues from Ohio, Pennsylvania, North Carolina and Alabama represent an old guard who fought for conservative policies but sometimes resisted the deeply personal attacks and uneven governance that dominated the Trump era.

Their departures will leave a void likely to be filled by a new generation of Republicans more willing to embrace Trumpism — or by Democrats.

Several Missouri Republicans are expected to seek the nomination to replace Blunt, but none will be more divisive than former Gov. Eric Greitens, who resigned in 2018 amid the fallout of a sex scandal and ethics investigation. Missouri’s Republican base has since rallied behind him, believing he was unfairly prosecuted.

Greitens was considering running for the GOP nomination even before Blunt’s announcement. He is expected to announce his candidacy as soon as Tuesday morning.

Two leading Missouri Democrats, former Sen. Claire McCaskill and 2016 Senate candidate Jason Kander, both said they would not run for the open seat.

Ahead of Greitens’ announcement, some Republicans worried that he could jeopardize the Senate seat if he emerges as the party’s nominee.

Steven Law, a key ally of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and CEO of the Senate Leadership Fund, warned that Republicans may be beginning to repeat the mistakes of 2010, when the GOP lost the Senate majority by embracing flawed far-right candidates.

Law cited Greitens’ looming announcement specifically.

“We have an opportunity to win back a majority,” Law said. “But in 2010, that opportunity was lost on the Senate side because of unelectable candidates who got nominated.”

Back in 2010, tea party favorite Christine O’Donnell beat a longtime GOP congressman in the Delaware Senate primary before losing by a landslide in the general election following reports of personal financial difficulties, questionable use of campaign funds and allegations that she had “dabbled into witchcraft.”

Two years later in Indiana, Richard Mourdock defeated six-term Sen. Richard Lugar in the 2012 GOP primary, but he imploded after a debate in which he said pregnancy resulting from rape “is something that God intended.” In Missouri, Republican nominee Akin lost after he insisted on a local talk show that women’s bodies have ways to avoid pregnancy in cases of “legitimate rape.”

In the decade since Akin’s debacle, Missouri’s politics, like the nation’s, have evolved in a way that gives both parties opportunities.

States like Missouri, Ohio and Iowa, recently considered swing states, are trending away from Democrats. At the same time, previous red states like North Carolina and Georgia are trending away from Republicans.

Missouri hasn’t elected a Democratic senator since McCaskill beat Akin in 2012. Trump carried the state last November by 15 percentage points. Trump carried Ohio, where Republican Sen. Rob Portman will not seek reelection next year, by 8 percentage points. The former president won by the same margin in Iowa, where 87-year-old Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley is considering retirement.

Democrats are expected to be more competitive in North Carolina, where Trump eked out a victory by just 1 percentage point, and in Wisconsin, should Republican Sen. Ron Johnson follow through with a campaign promise not to seek more than two terms.

Democrats have not lost any incumbents to retirement, but they are defending vulnerable incumbents in Georgia and Arizona, among others.

They have no margin for error. Republicans will claim the Senate majority for the last two years of President Joe Biden’s term if they pick up even one additional seat next November.

The party that occupies the White House traditionally suffers significant losses in the first midterm election of a new president. President Barack Obama’s Democratic Party, for example, lost 63 seats in the House and six in the Senate in 2010.

Democrats are hopeful that Trump will become an unwitting ally in 2022. The former Republican president has vowed to play an active role in the midterms, particularly by supporting pro-Trump candidates in primary elections. That leaves little room for well-established Republicans like Blunt who are popular statewide.

“The challenge for Republicans will be the race to the bottom in the Republican primaries,” said Morgan Jackson, a leading Democratic strategist based in North Carolina. “It’s not about what you say, it’s about how loud and angry you say it. That’s a very different view of the world.”

Jackson said “it’s a safe bet” Republicans will win the House majority, but he’s optimistic that Trump’s meddling in Senate primaries will help limit Democrats’ losses.

“Maybe it won’t be a good cycle, but maybe it won’t be a bad cycle,” he said.

J.B. Poersch, who leads the Democratic-allied Senate Majority PAC, noted that Republicans are focused on the nation’s culture wars, while Democrats are in the process of sending billions of dollars to working-class Americans affected by the pandemic. That contrast will help Democrats, he said.

“There is a working-family economic argument that Democrats can still make in the middle of the country, in places like Missouri and Ohio, and keep them competitive,” he said.

Meanwhile, Blunt predicted political success for Republicans in Missouri and beyond during a Monday news conference. He also reflected upon the 2010 election, when Democrats were punished nationwide after embracing Obama’s fiscal stimulus and health care overhaul.

“I think 2022 will be a great year in the country and I think it will be a fine year in this Senate race,” Blunt told reporters. “The Republican Party will be just fine.”

Read original article here

US

Trump’s cash plea could complicate GOP fundraising efforts

Leave a comment

ORLANDO, Fla. (AP) — “Trump needs you,” one fundraising email implored.

“President Trump’s Legacy is in your hands,” another pleaded.

Others advertised “Miss Me Yet?” T-shirts featuring Donald Trump’s smiling face.

While some Republicans grapple with how fiercely to embrace the former president, the organizations charged with raising money for the party are going all in. The Republican National Committee and the party’s congressional campaign arms are eager to cash in on Trump’s lure with small donors ahead of next year’s midterm elections, when the GOP hopes to regain control of at least one chamber of Congress.

But there’s a problem: Trump himself. In his first speech since leaving office, the former president encouraged loyalists to give directly to him, essentially bypassing the traditional groups that raise money for GOP candidates.

“There’s only one way to contribute to our efforts to elect ‘America First’ Republican conservatives and, in turn, to make America great again,” Trump said Sunday at the annual Conservative Political Action Conference in Orlando, Florida. “And that’s through Save America PAC and donaldjtrump.com.”

The comment was particularly notable because Trump is generally loath to ask for money in person. It amounts to the latest salvo in the battle to shape the future of the GOP, with Trump making clear that he holds no allegiance to the party’s traditional fundraising operation as he tries to consolidate power.

That could help him add to an already commanding war chest, aiding his effort to influence the party. Save America has more than $80 million cash on hand, including $3 million raised after the CPAC speech, according to a person familiar with the total.

Some of that money could help Trump settle scores with incumbent members of Congress who have crossed him. In his Sunday speech, Trump read aloud the names of every Republican who voted against him and called for them to be defeated. He’s already endorsed a Republican challenger to GOP Rep. Anthony Gonzalez of Ohio, who voted to impeach him over the U.S. Capitol riot.

“Trump’s call to give directly to him shows that the normal organs of the party … are going to have to fight for relevance in the 2022 cycle,” said Dan Eberhart, a longtime Republican donor who has given large sums to all three as well as to Trump’s campaign.

Bill Palatucci, a RNC member from New Jersey, called Trump’s comments “unwelcome” and “counterproductive” and voiced concern that the GOP would suffer further losses, like Georgia’ Senate runoff elections in January, if they don’t work together.

“Listen it’s a free country. Anybody can form a federal PAC or a super PAC and there’s always lots of competition for dollars. But the crossing the line there is then to also tell people to not give to the important committees of the national party,” said Palatucci. “There’s got to be a willingness on the former president to look beyond his own self-interest.”

The RNC and spokespeople for the House and Senate campaign committees declined to comment. But others sought to downplay the apparent tensions. They noted, for instance, that Trump is scheduled to speak at the RNC’s spring donor retreat — a major fundraising source — in April in Palm Beach.

And Trump told the party’s chair, Ronna McDaniel, in recent days that he wants to continue fundraising for the RNC, according to a person briefed on the conversation who, like others, spoke on condition of anonymity to disclose private conversations.

Before making his money pitch on Sunday, Trump’s team quietly updated its fundraising filings. They converted his Save America leadership PAC to an entity that can also support other candidates, and turned his main Donald J. Trump for President campaign committee into the Make America Great Again, or MAGAPac. Money raised through Trump’s website now goes to Save America JFC, a joint fundraising agreement between the two.

While Trump left office as a deeply unpopular figure, he remains a powerful draw for small-dollar, grassroots donors, a reality that has been abundantly clear in fundraising appeals over the last week.

Over the course of a single hour last Thursday, the RNC, both GOP congressional campaign committees and the Republican State Leadership Committee, which tries to elect Republicans to state office, blasted supporters with urgent fundraising appeals that included urgent references to Trump.

And the National Republican Senatorial Committee warned this week that its “limited edition” T-shirts featuring Trump were almost sold out.

Regardless of Trump’s next move, the GOP is unlikely to remove him from its sales pitch anytime soon.

“Our digital fundraising strategy is simple: raise as much money as possible,” said Andrew Romeo, a spokesman for the RSLC.

Read original article here

US

Trump’s cash plea could complicate GOP fundraising efforts

Leave a comment

ORLANDO, Fla. (AP) — “Trump needs you,” one fundraising email implored.

“President Trump’s Legacy is in your hands,” another pleaded.

Others advertised “Miss Me Yet?” T-shirts featuring Donald Trump’s smiling face.

While some Republicans grapple with how fiercely to embrace the former president, the organizations charged with raising money for the party are going all in. The Republican National Committee and the party’s congressional campaign arms are eager to cash in on Trump’s lure with small donors ahead of next year’s midterm elections, when the GOP hopes to regain control of at least one chamber of Congress.

But there’s a problem: Trump himself. In his first speech since leaving office, the former president encouraged loyalists to give directly to him, essentially bypassing the traditional groups that raise money for GOP candidates.

“There’s only one way to contribute to our efforts to elect ‘America First’ Republican conservatives and, in turn, to make America great again,” Trump said Sunday at the annual Conservative Political Action Conference in Orlando, Florida. “And that’s through Save America PAC and donaldjtrump.com.”

The comment was particularly notable because Trump is generally loath to ask for money in person. It amounts to the latest salvo in the battle to shape the future of the GOP, with Trump making clear that he holds no allegiance to the party’s traditional fundraising operation as he tries to consolidate power.

That could help him add to an already commanding war chest, aiding his effort to influence the party. Save America has more than $80 million cash on hand, including $3 million raised after the CPAC speech, according to a person familiar with the total.

Some of that money could help Trump settle scores with incumbent members of Congress who have crossed him. In his Sunday speech, Trump read aloud the names of every Republican who voted against him and called for them to be defeated. He’s already endorsed a Republican challenger to GOP Rep. Anthony Gonzalez of Ohio, who voted to impeach Trump over the U.S. Capitol riot.

“Trump’s call to give directly to him shows that the normal organs of the party … are going to have to fight for relevance in the 2022 cycle,” said Dan Eberhart, a longtime Republican donor who has given large sums to all three as well as to Trump’s campaign.

Bill Palatucci, a RNC member from New Jersey, called Trump’s comments “unwelcome” and “counterproductive” and voiced concern that the GOP would suffer further losses, like Georgia’ Senate runoff elections in January, if they don’t work together.

“Listen it’s a free country. Anybody can form a federal PAC or a super PAC and there’s always lots of competition for dollars. But the crossing the line there is then to also tell people to not give to the important committees of the national party,” said Palatucci. “There’s got to be a willingness on the former president to look beyond his own self-interest.”

The RNC and spokespeople for the House and Senate campaign committees declined to comment. But others sought to downplay the apparent tensions. They noted, for instance, that Trump is scheduled to speak at the RNC’s spring donor retreat — a major fundraising source — in April in Palm Beach.

And Trump told the party’s chair, Ronna McDaniel, in recent days that he wants to continue fundraising for the RNC, according to a person briefed on the conversation who, like others, spoke on condition of anonymity to disclose private conversations.

Before making his money pitch on Sunday, Trump’s team quietly updated its fundraising filings. They converted his Save America leadership PAC to an entity that can also support other candidates, and turned his main Donald J. Trump for President campaign committee into the Make America Great Again, or MAGAPac. Money raised through Trump’s website now goes to Save America JFC, a joint fundraising agreement between the two.

While Trump left office as a deeply unpopular figure, he remains a powerful draw for small-dollar, grassroots donors, a reality that has been abundantly clear in fundraising appeals over the last week.

Over the course of a single hour last Thursday, the RNC, both GOP congressional campaign committees and the Republican State Leadership Committee, which tries to elect Republicans to state office, blasted supporters with urgent fundraising appeals that included urgent references to Trump.

And the National Republican Senatorial Committee warned this week that its “limited edition” T-shirts featuring Trump were almost sold out.

Regardless of Trump’s next move, the GOP is unlikely to remove him from its sales pitch anytime soon.

“Our digital fundraising strategy is simple: raise as much money as possible,” said Andrew Romeo, a spokesman for the RSLC.

Read original article here

World

Anti-vaxxers campaign against the COVID-19 vaccines

Leave a comment

As the vaccine rollout continues, anti-vaccine campaigns are on the rise. To end the pandemic, health experts say a large part of the population must be vaccinated. As anti-vaxxer campaigns continue to gain traction, we asked Penn State College College of Medicine Professor Dr. Bernice Hausman if the anti-vaxxer campaigns gain traction, could they impact pandemic response?Dr. Hausman says “A lot of people are concerned. I feel like the concerned is a little bit misplaced.”Hausman has done extensive research on the controversy surrounding vaccination. She tells us it is important to understand the hesitancy. Myth #1: COVID-19 vaccines were developed too quicklyShe tells us, “The most common (myth) is that the vaccine was developed too quickly and there have not been enough studies to demonstrate safety.” Hausman stresses that the efficacy has been proven. Currently, there are two COVID-19 vaccines available and many more are in clinical trials. Each of the vaccines use different types of technology, some method are newer and less common than others. Hausman says, “People may have different comfort levels with different kinds of vaccines depending on how comfortable they are with technology.”Myth #2: COVID-19 data are not real or calculated incorrectlyAnother hesitancy stems from concerns over how COVID-19 data has been calculated. She says that health experts use data from national, county or city numbers and can understand why those numbers do not always connect with people who are skeptical.Hausman tells us, “People don’t experience vaccines at the population level. They experience them at the level of their own body or the body of their children or family member.” Hausman says as the rollout of vaccinations continues, more confidence can be built. Until then, she says the focus should be on the plan for distribution.

LANCASTER, Pa. —

As the vaccine rollout continues, anti-vaccine campaigns are on the rise.

To end the pandemic, health experts say a large part of the population must be vaccinated.

As anti-vaxxer campaigns continue to gain traction, we asked Penn State College College of Medicine Professor Dr. Bernice Hausman if the anti-vaxxer campaigns gain traction, could they impact pandemic response?

Dr. Hausman says “A lot of people are concerned. I feel like the concerned is a little bit misplaced.”

Hausman has done extensive research on the controversy surrounding vaccination. She tells us it is important to understand the hesitancy.

Myth #1: COVID-19 vaccines were developed too quickly

She tells us, “The most common (myth) is that the vaccine was developed too quickly and there have not been enough studies to demonstrate safety.” Hausman stresses that the efficacy has been proven.

Currently, there are two COVID-19 vaccines available and many more are in clinical trials. Each of the vaccines use different types of technology, some method are newer and less common than others.

Hausman says, “People may have different comfort levels with different kinds of vaccines depending on how comfortable they are with technology.”

Myth #2: COVID-19 data are not real or calculated incorrectly

Another hesitancy stems from concerns over how COVID-19 data has been calculated. She says that health experts use data from national, county or city numbers and can understand why those numbers do not always connect with people who are skeptical.

Hausman tells us, “People don’t experience vaccines at the population level. They experience them at the level of their own body or the body of their children or family member.”

Hausman says as the rollout of vaccinations continues, more confidence can be built. Until then, she says the focus should be on the plan for distribution.

Read original article here