Trump biographer raises questions about his wealth as campaign donors foot the bill for his many lawyers

Former President Donald Trump’s PACs have spent about $50 million in donor money on his legal bills last year, sources told The New York Times.

The “staggering sum” spent by Trump on his legal fees and investigation-related expenses is about the same amount his lone remaining GOP primary opponent Nikki Haley raised across all her committees last year, the Times’ Maggie Haberman and Shane Goldmacher write. Federal Election Commission filings this week are expected to detail the full extent of Trump’s “enormous financial strain,” they added.

Trump, who has a penchant for relying on campaign donations to pay his lawyers if he actually pays them at all, has used his Save America PAC to cover his legal costs. When the PAC ran low on cash last year, Trump asked for an unusual refund of $60 million that had been transferred to the pro-Trump MAGA Inc. PAC. Trump has also been directing 10% of donations raised through Save America to a PAC that primarily pays his lawyers, according to the Times.

  • DandomRude@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    10 months ago

    How can Trump still be a presidential candidate? I’ve been asking myself that for years now. I just don’t get it.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      He’s got an enormous base of support in the party with a majority in the parts of the country that get to decide who the President is.

      • DandomRude@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        How can anyone think Trump should get a second term? I realize, of course, that neither the interests of the people nor common sense are a factor in the States, but even the most unscrupulous businessmen should realize by now that Trump is not an option. I mean, someone who manages to squander even such an exorbitant inheritance without any significant returns can’t be considered a smart businessman or any good for business. The only way I can explain the support for Trump is that many influential people backed the wrong horse and are now committed - just the way these people handle their share transactions. But hey, I am not a US-American and so I can’t help but get the impression that you all have lost your minds (even for thinking that this is in any way acceptable). How such a ridiculous circus can be possible in a so-called constitutional state is simply beyond me.

        • jkrtn@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          10 months ago

          Donald lowered their corporate taxes to nothing. They had three years of stock buybacks on the back of the strong economy Obama set up. Then in the pandemic, instead of being held accountable for raiding the coffers and needing to put money back in, they were given trillions more in handouts. And now they are recording record profits and blaming inflation on Biden.

          The influential people make serious bank at the expense of the public every time a Repub gets power. Somehow the economy crashes, people lose their jobs and homes, but it is the wealthy receiving billions or trillions in handouts. So these influential people run propaganda networks to make sure low information voters can be tricked into voting for Repubs.

          As for how it can happen, my opinion is because we have FPTP voting. If we had score voting, Donald never would have been selected. Dem voters and Independents all would have ranked every functioning adult higher than Donald.

          Also the Electoral College means everyone’s vote is valued less than a Wyoming vote. That violates the spirit of the 14th Amendment IMO. But Donald being able to run violates the letter of the 14th Amendment so what do I know.

          • DandomRude@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            I realize most that, but why risk the comfortable status quo? Perhaps it really is megalomania in the form of wanting to return to monarchy-like conditions in which the law not only pretends to apply to everyone, but is actually a law “by the grace of God”. I can well imagine this, given everything that is apparently negotiable in America.

            • jkrtn@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              10 months ago

              That’s the question we’re all asking ourselves. Aren’t the hoards big enough?

        • samus12345@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          This is a case of the inmates running the asylum. The Republicans in power who know he’s an idiot are stuck with him because he has such a large base of hateful assholes (whose votes they have been courting for decades) who think he’s the second coming. Their votes are the only chance they have at winning, and they have only themselves to blame.

          • DandomRude@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            That’s clear, but I don’t understand why there is a need to deviate from business as usual all of a sudden. It can’t be in the interests of the rich and powerful to draw attention to how very wrong things have been going in the so called US democracy for decades. I think that’s extremely dangerous - and if there’s one thing big business wants to avoid at all costs, that’s probably this.

            • samus12345@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              10 months ago

              It’s the natural progression of big business cozying up to conservatism since it’s profitable to do so. As soon as Republicans starting allying with far-right groups, they were all in bed with fascists. Instead of risk losing profits short-term, they’ll pretend that everything is fine until it’s not possible to any more.

              • DandomRude@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                10 months ago

                Yes, that’s probably how it went. Fascism is, of course, a perspective that promises profit and power for such people - it worked excellently for the profiteers in Nazi Germany, nowadays also in Russia (in a slightly different disguise) and elsewhere. The only question that remains is whether the Americans will resist. Unfortunately, it doesn’t really look that way to me at the moment. So perhaps the very unscrupulous have bet on the right horse after all. We’ll have to wait and see.