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, WASH. POST, Sept. 21, 2021, available at https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/09/21/brazentimeline-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-regardingexecutive-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, THE TELEGRAPH (Oct. 24, 

2016, 8:10 PM), http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/10/24/exclusive-investigation-donald-trump-faces-foreigndonor-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-tobelieve 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