FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20463
BEFORE THE FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION
In the Matter of )
) MURs 7165 & 7196
Jesse Benton )
STATEMENT OF REASONS OF CHAIR SHANA M. BROUSSARD AND
COMMISSIONERS STEVEN T. WALTHER AND ELLEN L. WEINTRAUB
Earlier this year, the Federal Election Commission found that there was reason to believe
that Jesse Benton knowingly and willfully violated federal law by soliciting a contribution from a
foreign national. This is an egregious violation of the Federal Election Campaign Act (“the
Act”). It is unfortunate, to put it mildly, that the Commission failed to follow through and hold
Benton accountable for his actions.
Benton had served as a consultant for the intended recipient, Great America PAC
(“GAP”), a pro-Trump super PAC. The evidence, including a video taken shortly before the
2016 general election that is still publicly available online, shows that Benton believed he was
speaking with the representatives of a foreign national interested in making a $2 million
contribution to GAP.
1
Benton recommended to them that the funds be made through his
company and two 501(c)(4) organizations, thereby evading public scrutiny and the laws
prohibiting such contributions.
After making knowing and willful findings against both Benton and GAP, the
Commission successfully conciliated with GAP.
2
The conciliation agreement – which included a
$25,000 civil penalty – confirmed Benton’s illegal conduct, as GAP acknowledged that Benton
solicited a foreign national contribution with GAP’s knowledge and for its benefit.
3
Benton,
however, declined to cooperate in the Commission’s investigation and chose not to enter into
conciliation, asserting various due process concerns. Our Office of General Counsel (OGC) then
proceeded to the next stage of the enforcement process, recommending that the Commission find
1
Pro-Trump Fundraisers Agree to Accept Illicit Foreign Donation, YOUTUBE,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xQnOxM9iqOw (posted Oct. 24, 2016) (“Telegraph video”).
2
Certification, MURs 7165 and 7196 (Great America PAC, et al.) (Feb. 25, 2021); Conciliation Agreement,
MURs 7165 and 7196 (Great America PAC, et al.) (June 28, 2021) (“GAP Agreement”). According to the signed
conciliation agreement, “GAP is a hybrid political committee, or ‘Carey committee.’” The General Counsel’s Brief
(“GC Brief”) refers to GAP as an “independent expenditure-only political committee,” better known as a “super
PAC.”
3
GAP Agreement at ¶ IV.11-12.
MUR716500378
MURs 7165 & 7196 (Jesse Benton)
Statement of Chair Shana M. Broussard, Commissioner Steven T. Walther and Commissioner Ellen L. Weintraub
Page 2 of 6
probable cause to believe that Benton knowingly and willfully violated the foreign national
prohibition.
4
We supported OGC’s recommendations but we did not have the necessary four votes to
pursue Benton further, and the matter was closed.
5
While we take due process concerns very
seriously (which included delays in locating and contacting Benton and in providing
Commission documents), we believe these concerns were sufficiently addressed and did not
justify dropping him as a respondent. Benton was clearly the bad actor here.
As with many other cases that were delayed while the Commission lacked a quorum,
OGC’s initial recommendations languished for over a year because we were unable to take
substantive action. Once the quorum was restored in December 2020, however, we proceeded
briskly on this and many other important matters, and when the probable cause vote failed, there
were still several weeks remaining within the statute of limitations. The Commission is placed in
a bad light when it settles with one respondent in an enforcement matter but lets the key
individual – whose conduct was at the heart of the allegations – off the hook. In weighing
Benton’s egregious violation against concerns related to the statute of limitations and delays in
the enforcement process, this was an easy call.
Jesse Benton was not just a minor political player caught up in a political scheme
orchestrated by others; he was a sophisticated consultant who was well acquainted with
campaign finance laws. Between 2008 and 2014, he managed or worked on two of Ron Paul’s
presidential campaigns, and also on the Senate campaigns of Rand Paul and Mitch McConnell.
6
He was indicted in August 2015 for his involvement in a scheme to buy a key endorsement for
Ron Paul on the eve of the 2012 Iowa caucuses, re-indicted in November 2015 after certain
charges were dismissed, and then convicted in May of 2016.
7
He received a pardon for these
crimes from former President Trump in December 2020.
8
Just last month he was indicted for
illegally funneling $25,000 from an unnamed Russian national to Trump’s 2016 campaign in
4
OGC’s Notice to the Commission Following the Submission of Probable Cause Briefs, Memorandum to the
Commission dated Aug. 26, 2021.
5
Certification, MURs 7165 and 7196 (Great America PAC, et al.) (Aug. 31, 2021). We voted to find probable cause
to believe that Benton knowingly and willfully violated 52 U.S.C. § 30121(a)(2) and 11 C.F.R. §110.20(g) by
knowingly soliciting a contribution from a foreign national. Commissioners Cooksey and Dickerson dissented and
Commissioner Trainor was recused.
6
Aaron Blake, The brazen timeline of the GOP consultant accused of funneling Russian money to Trump’s 2016
effort, W
ASH. POST, Sept. 21, 2021, available at https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/09/21/brazen-
timeline-gop-consultant-accused-funneling-russian-money-trumps-2016-effort; Tal Kopan, Former Ron Paul aide,
Trump super PAC chief convicted in campaign finance trial, CNN (May 5, 2016, 4:01 P.M.), available at
https://www.cnn.com/2016/05/05/politics/jesse-benton-rand-ron-paul-aide-convicted-trump-super-pac/index.html.
7
Id.
8
Statement from the Press Secretary Regarding Executive Grants of Clemency, WHITE HOUSE (Dec. 23, 2020),
available at https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/statement-press-secretary-regarding-
executive-grants-clemency-122320/ (pardoning Benton).
MUR716500379
MURs 7165 & 7196 (Jesse Benton)
Statement of Chair Shana M. Broussard, Commissioner Steven T. Walther and Commissioner Ellen L. Weintraub
Page 3 of 6
September 2016.
9
All of these activities occurred before Benton solicited the $2 million
contribution at issue here.
To recap, the complaints in this matter based their allegations on an October 24, 2016,
article appearing on The Telegraph UK’s website, which describes how two reporters posed as
consultants for a fictitious foreign national donor.
10
The article included a video showing Benton
meeting with the reporters and agreeing to assist them in routing the contribution from their
purported foreign national client to GAP through two layers of conduits.
11
The reporters first contacted GAP co-chair Eric Beach earlier in October 2016,
purporting to represent a Chinese national.
12
Beach expressed interest but stated that he needed
more information about the donor and had “concerns about his nationality,” and that he would
“need to know the origins” of contributions to GAP.
13
Beach also suggested during this initial
phone call that the donation could be directed to a 501(c)(4) organization through which the
reporters’ foreign national client could make a contribution for a specific purpose. Beach then
referred the reporters to Benton.
14
Benton sent an email introduction to the reporters and later
met with them in person. At their meeting, which the reporters recorded, Benton offered to
transmit the $2 million contribution to GAP through his company, Titan, and two 501(c)(4)
organizations, to conceal its origin.
15
The reporters recorded their discussions with Benton, and
clips of those recordings are shown in the Telegraph video, which includes the following
exchanges between Benton and the reporters:
16
Benton: “I’ll actually probably send, I’ll send money from my company to both.”
***
Undercover reporter: “So I’m just thinking also about logistics, how this would actually
work. That is the 501(c)(4) that the money is going into — yeah?”
Benton: “Correct.”
9
Press Release, U.S. DEP’T OF JUSTICE , “Political Operatives Indicted for Alleged Scheme Involving Illegal
Campaign Contribution to 2016 Presidential Campaign,” Sept. 20, 2021, available at
https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/political-operatives-indicted.
10
Compl. ¶¶ 23-28, MUR 7165 (Oct. 27, 2016); Compl. at 5, MUR 7196 (Nov. 10, 2016). Investigative Team,
Exclusive Investigation: Donald Trump Faces Foreign Donor Fundraising Scandal, T
HE TELEGRAPH (Oct. 24,
2016, 8:10 PM), http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/10/24/exclusive-investigation-donald-trump-faces-foreign-
donor-fundrai/ (“Investigative Team Article”). The video is no longer available on the Telegraph website, but a copy
is available on YouTube. See supra fn. 1.
11
Id.
12
Compl. at 2-3, MUR 7165 (Oct. 27, 2016); Compl. at 2, MUR 7196 (Nov. 10, 2016).
13
Investigative Team Article; see Nicholas Confessore, Consultant with Tíes to Donald Trump Linked to Offer to
Hide Source of Donations, N.Y.
TIMES (Oct. 24, 2016), available at
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/25/us/politics/
consultant-with-ties-to-donald-trump-linked-to-offer-to-hide-source-of-donations.html (“NY Times Article”).
14
NY Times Article.
15
MUR 7165 Compl. at 3-4; MUR 7196 Compl. at 3; GC Brief at 3-4.
16
Telegraph video.
MUR716500380
MURs 7165 & 7196 (Jesse Benton)
Statement of Chair Shana M. Broussard, Commissioner Steven T. Walther and Commissioner Ellen L. Weintraub
Page 4 of 6
Undercover reporter: “Yeah. And that’s through your company, yeah?”
Jesse Benton: “That’s correct.”
***
Undercover reporter: “How much do you think you can pass on to the super PAC
because I think that’s what I am going to get asked.”
Jesse Benton: “All of it.”
Undercover reporter: “All of it?” [Benton nods his head]
***
Undercover reporter: “Can I report back that it’s getting used for on-the-ground
grassroots stuff or it’s getting used for TV, or could be a mixture?”
Jesse Benton: “It’s a mixture.”
***
Jesse Benton: “It will definitely allow us to spend two million more dollars on digital and
television advertising for Mr. Trump.”
Undercover reporter: “Right, and that’ll be spent by the super PAC?”
Jesse Benton: “Yes it will be.”
***
Jesse Benton: “You shouldn’t put any of this on paper.”
***
Undercover reporter: “It’s not like he’s asking for anything directly but he just wants to
know that he won’t just be treated as ‘A N Other’ — what do you think?”
Jesse Benton: “It’ll do that, yeah.”
***
Jesse Benton: “And we can have that whispered into Mr. Trump’s ear whenever your
client feels it’s appropriate.”
Benton’s statements and proposal to funnel the contribution to GAP through two layers
of conduits demonstrate that he knew or was aware of sufficient facts to reasonably conclude that
the person being solicited to provide funds was a foreign national who could not legally make a
contribution to GAP or appear on GAP’s disclosure reports. By proceeding to formulate and
recommend a plan for the undercover reporters’ client to make a contribution to GAP, with a
clear understanding that the client was represented to be a foreign national, Benton solicited a $2
million contribution for GAP from someone he knew or reasonably believed to be a foreign
national – a clear violation of section 30121(a)(2) of the Act.
17
17
The Act and Commission regulations prohibit any “foreign national” from directly or indirectly making a
contribution or donation of money or other thing of value, or an expenditure, independent expenditure, or
disbursement, in connection with a federal, state, or local election. 52 U.S.C. § 30121(a)(1); 11 C.F.R. § 110.20(b),
(c), (e), (f). Section 30121(a)(2) prohibits any person from soliciting, accepting, or receiving any such contribution
or donation from a foreign national. The Commission’s implementing regulation at 11 C.F.R. § 110.20(g) provides a
narrowing construction – i.e., “no person shall knowingly solicit . . . ” – and, as relevant here, “knowingly” is
defined to include “actual knowledge” that the target of the solicitation is a foreign national, see id. § 110.20(a)(4).
Commission regulations also provide that to “solicit” means to “ask, request, or recommend, explicitly or implicitly,
that another person make a contribution, donation, transfer of funds, or otherwise provide anything of value.” Id. §
110.20(a)(6) (cross-referencing 11 C.F.R. § 300.2(m)). The Act’s definition of “foreign national” includes an
individual who is not a citizen or national of the United States and who is not lawfully admitted for permanent
residence. 52 U.S.C. § 30121(b)(2).
MUR716500381
MURs 7165 & 7196 (Jesse Benton)
Statement of Chair Shana M. Broussard, Commissioner Steven T. Walther and Commissioner Ellen L. Weintraub
Page 5 of 6
In conciliating with the Commission, GAP agreed that “[b]y proceeding to recommend a
plan for the undercover reporters’ client to make a contribution . . . [after] having been informed
that the source of the contribution would be a foreign national, Benton solicited a $2 million
contribution from someone he knew or reasonably believed to be a foreign national.”
18
GAP
acknowledged that Benton took measures to conceal the scheme – particularly his advice to the
reporters that “[y]ou shouldn’t put any of this on paper.” In settling these matters, GAP agreed
not to further contest the Commission’s finding that it violated the Act “through Benton’s actions
on its behalf . . . by knowingly soliciting a contribution from a foreign national.”
19
Prior to this case, the Commission had never applied the Act’s foreign national
prohibitions to the solicitation of a fictitious foreign contributor. In support of its reason-to-
believe findings, the Commission determined – based on the plain meaning of section
30121(a)(2), the legislative history animating the longstanding prohibition on foreign national
interference in U.S. elections, the Act’s parallel restriction on soliciting soft money, and the
interpretation of federal bribery and anti-corruption statutes – that section 30121 prohibits all
“knowing” solicitations of foreign nationals.
20
That remains true whether the person making the
solicitation has “actual knowledge” that the person being solicited is a foreign national, or is
aware of facts that would lead a reasonable person to conclude that there is a reasonable
probability that the person being solicited is a foreign national (including, e.g., because the
person making the solicitation is told the person being solicited is a foreign national), even if that
conclusion is ultimately incorrect.
21
The Commission missed a valuable opportunity to hold a knowing and willful violator
accountable for his actions, to deter efforts to evade the Act’s foreign national prohibition, and to
advance the Act’s clear goal of eliminating foreign influence in U.S. elections, including foreign
national contributions solicited by domestic actors. In fact, the Commission has observed and
relied on the substantial and growing concern regarding foreign influence in the processes of
American democratic self-governance in shaping its enforcement priorities,
22
and the
Commission has informed Congress that it continues to enforce the foreign national provision
and prioritize cases involving allegations of foreign influence.
23
We are disappointed that the
18
GAP Agreement at ¶ IV.12
19
Id. ¶ V.1 (emphasis added); GC Brief at 5.
20
See Commission Factual and Legal Analysis at 4-10, MURs 7165 and 7196 (Jesse Benton).
21
Id; GC Brief at 8.
22
See, e.g., Minutes of Open Meeting of Federal Election Commission at 13 (Sept. 16, 2016) (directing this Office
to prioritize cases “involving allegations of foreign influence”); Responses to Questions from the Committee on
House Administration, Fed. Election Comm’n at 41-42 (May 1, 2019); see also Explanatory Statement to
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018, 164 Cong. Rec. H2045, H2520 (Mar. 22, 2018) (“Preserving the integrity of
elections, and protecting them from undue foreign influence, is an important function of government at all levels.”);
GC Brief at 19.
23
See Letter to House Committee on Appropriations and Senate Committee on Appropriations, Fed. Election
Comm’n at 1, 17-18 (Sept. 18, 2018) (reporting on Commission’s role “in enforcing the foreign national prohibition,
including how it identifies foreign contributions to elections, and what it plans to do in the future” as required by
MUR716500382
MURs 7165 & 7196 (Jesse Benton)
Statement of Chair Shana M. Broussard, Commissioner Steven T. Walther and Commissioner Ellen L. Weintraub
Page 6 of 6
Commission invested sufficient resources to procure a preliminary knowing and willful finding
against Benton and to achieve a successful conciliation with GAP – on whose behalf Benton
solicited the contribution – only to fail to pursue any further enforcement action against him. As
frustrating as this is, it in no way vitiates the Commission’s earlier conclusion in approving the
GAP conciliation agreement, that both GAP and Benton violated the law.
Benton promised to provide a purported Chinese national access to a future president in
return for a $2 million contribution. Benton’s conduct was dishonorable, unpatriotic, and clearly
illegal.
October 7, 2021 ____________________________
Date Shana M. Broussard
Chair
October 7, 2021 ____________________________
Date Steven T. Walther
Commissioner
October 7, 2021 ____________________________
Date Ellen L. Weintraub
Commissioner
Explanatory Statement for 2018 Appropriations Act); Explanatory Statement to Consolidated Appropriations Act,
2018, 164 Cong. Rec. at H2520; GC Brief at 19.
MUR716500383
