FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20463

STATEMENT OF REASONS OF 

CHAIR SHANA M. BROUSSARD AND COMMISSIONER ELLEN L. WEINTRAUB

Another day, another failed effort to hold Donald Trump and his campaign accountable for 

violating federal election law. In the last several years, the Commission’s Office of General Counsel 

has recommended we investigate Trump or his committee for violations ranging from accepting 

prohibited contributions through Trump’s role in the Stormy Daniels payoff,1 to soliciting excessive 

contributions to a super PAC supportive of Trump,2 to illegally soliciting a contribution from 

Russian nationals.3

 The Commission has repeatedly deadlocked on our lawyers’ recommendations, 

effectively turning a blind eye to the apparent misconduct. 

This time, the Complaint alleged that Donald J. Trump for President, Inc. (the “Trump 

Committee”) and American Media, Inc. (“AMI”), now known as A360 Media, Inc. – parent 

company of the National Enquirer – violated the law in connection with AMI’s payments to two 

individuals in advance of the 2016 presidential election. The payments were purportedly intended to 

suppress negative stories about then-presidential candidate Trump’s relationship with several 

women through “catch and kill” arrangements. The Commission agreed that the available 

information indicated AMI and its executives, David J. Pecker and Dylan Howard, paid $150,000 to 

Karen McDougal to purchase the rights to her claim that she engaged in a relationship with Trump.4

And we agreed the available information indicated that AMI’s payment was coordinated with the 

Trump campaign.5

 AMI admitted in its non-prosecution agreement with the Department of Justice 

that it made the payment to McDougal “in cooperation, consultation, and concert with, and at the 

request and suggestion of one or more members or agents of a candidate’s 2016 presidential 

campaign, to ensure that a woman did not publicize damaging allegations about that candidate 

1 See MURs 7313, 7319, 7379 (Michael D. Cohen, et al.). 2 See MUR 7135 (Donald J. Trump for President, Inc. et al.). 3 See MURs 7265 and 7266 (Donald J. Trump for President, Inc., et al.). 4 See MURs 7324, 7332, and 7366 (Donald J. Trump for President, et al.), Factual and Legal Analysis for A360 Media, 

Inc. (“F&LA”) at 3. 

5 Id. at 11, 13. 

BEFORE THE FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

In the Matters of

Donald J. Trump for President, Inc. and 

Bradley T. Crate in his official capacity as 

treasurer; Donald J. Trump; A360 Media, 

LLC f/k/a American Media, Inc.; David J. 

Pecker; Dylan Howard; Michael D. 

Cohen; Timothy Jost

)

 ) 

 ) 

 ) 

 ) 

 ) 

 ) 

 ) 

 

 MURs 7324, 7332, 7364, and 7366 

 

 

MUR732400498
MURs 7324, 7332, 7364, and 7366 (Donald J. Trump for President, Inc., et al.)

Statement of Chair Shana M. Broussard and Commissioner Ellen L. Weintraub

Page 2 of 3 

before the 2016 presidential election and thereby influence that election.”6 The Commission 

unanimously found reason to believe that AMI and Pecker knowingly and willfully made prohibited 

corporate in-kind contributions to the Trump Committee.

7

 

 It is illegal to knowingly accept prohibited contributions.8

 The Commission unanimously 

found that “the available information supports the conclusion that AMI’s payment to McDougal 

was coordinated with the Trump Committee and was made for the purpose of influencing Trump’s 

election, resulting in AMI making ‘coordinated expenditures’ under the [Federal Election Campaign 

Act of 1971, as amended].”9

 But our Republican colleagues inexplicably voted against our 

attorneys’ recommendations to find reason to believe that Trump and the Trump campaign 

knowingly accepted and failed to report prohibited contributions.10 You read that right. We all 

agreed that the payment was coordinated – coordination inherently involves at least two parties – 

but only three of us voted to hold the persons on both sides of the transaction accountable. Without 

a fourth vote, we could not investigate Trump’s role in the “catch and kill” scheme, despite AMI 

admitting that the payment was made in cooperation with one or more members or agents of the 

campaign and despite Michael Cohen’s sworn testimony to Congress that the arrangement was 

“done at the direction of Mr. Trump and in accordance with his instructions.”11

Though these matters represent yet another example of the Commission failing to pursue 

credible allegations against Donald Trump, we want to applaud our attorneys for what they were 

able to accomplish with the deck very much stacked against them. With not much time left before 

the expiration of the statute of limitations, our attorneys successfully negotiated a conciliation 

agreement with AMI requiring them to pay a $187,500 penalty. This is among the Commission’s 

largest penalties and is appropriate for the seriousness of the allegations. It is a job well done and a 

testament to the excellent work our attorneys do every day. It also shows that, even when up against 

the clock and negotiating with sophisticated legal counsel, the Commission has the resources to 

hold Respondents accountable for breaking the law – at least, when we have the votes necessary to 

do so.12

6 Id. at 11 (citing non-prosecution agreement). 7 See Certification in MURs 7324, 7332, 7364, and 7366 (Donald J. Trump for President, Inc., et al.) (“Cert.”). 8 See 52 U.S.C. § 30118(a). 9 F&LA at 13.

10 See Cert. 11 U.S. House of Representatives Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, Executive Session, Michael Cohen Dep. 

at 117, 119 (Feb. 28, 2019), https://docs.house.gov/meetings/IG/IG00/20190520/109549/HMTG-116-IG00-20190520-

SD002.pdf; see also Tr. of Proceedings before Hon. William H. Pauley III at 23, United States v. Cohen, No. 1:18- cr00602-WHP (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 21, 2018), https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/4780185/Cohen-Court-ProceedingTranscript.pdf (“[O]n or about the summer of 2016, in coordination with, and at the direction of, a candidate for federal 

office, I and the CEO of a media company at the request of the candidate worked together to keep an individual with 

information that would be harmful to the candidate and to the campaign from publicly disclosing this information. After 

a number of discussions, we eventually accomplished the goal by the media company entering into a contract with the 

individual under which she received compensation of $150,000.”). 12 Several of our colleagues have cited an approaching statute of limitations deadline as a reason to dismiss matters. See, 

e.g., Statement of Reasons of Vice Chair Allen Dickerson and Commissioners Sean J. Cooksey and James E. “Trey” 

Trainor, III in Matters Under Review 7324, 7332, 7364, and 7366 (Donald J. Trump for President, et al.); Statement of 

Reasons of Commissioners Sean J. Cooksey and James E. “Trey” Trainor III in Matters Under Review 7313, 7319, and 

7379 (Michael D. Cohen, et al.) at 3; Statement of Reasons of Vice Chair Allen Dickerson and Commissioners Sean J. 

Cooksey and James E. “Trey” Trainor, III in Matters Under Review 7265 and 7266 (Donald J. Trump for President, 

Inc., et al.) at 2. As demonstrated by the conciliation agreement with AMI, a running clock does not preclude the agency 

from successfully enforcing the law. 

MUR732400499
MURs 7324, 7332, 7364, and 7366 (Donald J. Trump for President, Inc., et al.)

Statement of Chair Shana M. Broussard and Commissioner Ellen L. Weintraub

Page 3 of 3 

 July 1, 2021 __________________________ 

Date Shana M. Broussard

Chair

 July 1, 2021 __________________________ 

Date Ellen L. Weintraub 

Commissioner 

MUR732400500