All posts tagged "adam schiff"

Trump DOJ ally demoted in move to strip his powers: report

The Department of Justice has demoted Ed Martin, a close ally to President Donald Trump, in a move that has stripped him of most of his authority.

Two people who spoke under the condition of anonymity who were familiar with the DOJ move told The Washington Post on Monday that Martin was sidelined and will no longer chair the DOJ's Weaponization Working Group, "which was tasked with reviewing special counsel Jack Smith’s prosecutions of Trump and other perceived examples of 'prosecutorial abuse.'" The decision has not yet been announced publicly.

Martin, who has not been at the DOJ for a year, was expected to leave the department entirely, CNN reported. He was initially picked to help implement Trump's key priorities. The Weaponization Group has not released any information, but will apparently meet daily. Trump has been critical that the DOJ has not been active enough to pursue legal action against his political enemies.

Several sources have told CNN that Martin "wasn't doing much," CNN reported

"Martin will continue to serve as the Justice Department’s pardon attorney but will no longer work at Justice Department headquarters. Instead, his office will be located in another DOJ building in Northeast Washington, pulling him away from the attorney general and the most powerful figures in the department, according to a person familiar with the move," The Post reported. "The pardon office is in that Northeast Washington building."

He was expected to leave his role in the coming weeks.

“President Trump appointed Ed Martin as pardon attorney, and Ed continues to do a great job in that role,” a Justice Department spokesperson said.

Martin had no previous trial experience before Trump appointed him to serve as the U.S. attorney for Washington, D.C. He was a longtime antiabortion activist and helped organize and finance the rally following the Jan. 6, 2021, U.S. Capitol riot.

When Martin did not have enough Senate support to confirm him, Trump pivoted and gave him a senior Justice Department role that did not require Senate approval, The Post reported.

Martin has been behind the unsuccessful legal attacks on Trump's adversaries, including New York Attorney General Letitia James, former FBI director James B. Comey and Sen. Adam Schiff (D-CA).

Federal prosecutors have questioned Martin, along with Trump’s Federal Housing Administration Director Bill Pulte, known as an attack dog for the president, were at the center of a Maryland grand jury investigation for hires that were made to pursue investigations aimed at Trump’s critics.

Bill and Hillary Clinton should testify over Epstein, top Dem says

WASHINGTON — Former President Bill Clinton and former First Lady and presidential candidate Hillary Clinton should testify before a congressional committee about their links with Jeffrey Epstein, a senior Democratic senator told Raw Story.

“People get subpoenaed, they should show up,” Sen. Ben Ray Luján (D-NM) told Raw Story at the Capitol Wednesday.

The Clintons have rejected Republican attempts to force them to testify about links to Epstein, the late financier and sex offender, setting up a clash with Rep. James Comer (R-KY), chair of the powerful House Oversight Committee.

Earlier this week, lawyers for the Clintons released a lengthy letter rejecting the legal premise of Comer’s subpoena.

In their own blistering letter to Comer, the Clintons pointed out that the Department of Justice had not fully complied with a law mandating that it release all files related to investigations of Epstein.

“Comer should subpoena [the] DOJ,” Luján said, laughing.

Under Attorney General Pam Bondi, a close ally of President Donald Trump, the DOJ is widely seen to be dragging its feet on the Epstein matter.

Trump’s once-close friendship with Epstein, a convicted sex trafficker who killed himself in prison in New York in 2019, is an enduring subject of fascination, reporting, gossip, and festering scandal.

“Look,” Luján said. “What Comer does, if he's gonna subpoena people, he should subpoena everyone that needs to be subpoenaed, and pull them in.

“And if he wants to make this look political, Comer is doing a pretty good job of that.

“But anyone involved in all of this Epstein bulls—, they should come in and they should fess up and the truth should be shared with the American people, right? No matter who they are, because everybody, because this was so bipartisan, everybody should do it. I mean, that's how I would describe it.”

The Epstein affair has indeed ensnared a number of prominent public figures. Bill Clinton has prominently featured in DOJ releases since Congress passed a law mandating such transparency. Trump’s name has also been shown to be in such Epstein files.

Trump has named the Clintons among liberal figures he says should be investigated in relation to Epstein.

Speaking to reporters on Tuesday, after theatrically displaying an empty chair during a supposed deposition of Bill Clinton, Comer said: “Jeffrey Epstein visited the White House 17 times while Bill Clinton was president.

“No one’s accusing Bill Clinton of anything, any wrongdoing. We just have questions.”

Comer also said he would charge the Clintons with contempt of Congress.

Speaking to the right-wing Real America’s Voice TV network, Comer said: "We expect the Clintons to come in, or I expect the Clintons to be met with the same fate that [Steve] Bannon and [Peter] Navarro were met with when the Democrats were in control.”

Bannon and Navarro, close Trump aides and advisers, both served prison time after refusing to answer subpoenas for testimony as part of investigations of the deadly January 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol by Trump’s supporters.

Democrats rejected Comer’s threats as political posturing.

On Wednesday, Sen. Adam Schiff (D-CA), a target of Trump’s demands that his political enemies be prosecuted, told Raw Story Comer was not the only Republican in Congress working to Trump’s benefit in matters relating to Epstein.

“I think this is a political exercise by Jim Jordan,” Schiff said, referring to the Ohio Republican who chairs the House Judiciary Committee.

“I think they will lose in court if it's litigated. But I think this is designed to deflect attention from the president's withholding of all the Epstein files.”

Trump social post sparks probe as it reveals legal blunder of 'inexperienced' aide: report

Prosecutors blindsided "inexperienced Trump loyalists" in a shocking mortgage fraud investigation into whether Trump administration officials shared information to unauthorized people about a criminal probe into a Democratic lawmaker, according to a report.

Christine Bish, a GOP Congressional candidate and California real estate agent, gathered and sent documents to the administration in April, just a few months before President Donald Trump announced a mortgage fraud investigation of Sen. Adam Schiff (D-CA) in July, according to The Washington Post Monday.

When Trump posted on Truth Social sharing documents — highlighted in yellow — they were the ones provided by Bish who was surprised to see that they were posted, "but she knew Trump’s post drew from her files because of the highlights marking up the page," the report claimed.

A prosecutor, an FBI agent and the Federal Housing Finance Agency inspector general questioned her for more than an hour Thursday over her communications with Ed Martin, a Justice Department official, Federal Housing Finance Administration Director Bill Pulte, and others involved in the administration. They issued a subpoena to her and reportedly focused on anyone who was affiliated with Martin or Pulte.

"Now Bish’s experience is providing an unexpected window into how inexperienced Trump loyalists in top administration positions are wielding their power," The Post reported.

Pulte has accused several Trump enemies, including Schiff, Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook and New York Attorney General Letitia James, of mortgage fraud.

Pulte and Martin are reportedly not under investigation by a grand jury.

"Grand jury probes are just one way that officials can investigate conduct, though they are a necessary step in securing indictments," The Post reported.

"Yet the interactions highlight the unconventional and sometimes erratic nature of the administration’s attempt to prosecute Democrats on charges of mortgage fraud. Bish’s brief visit to Washington — and accompanying media blitz — showed how Pulte, Martin and their confidants are operating, with direct messages to strangers on social media and out-of-the-blue phone calls. And it revealed potential weaknesses in the mortgage fraud case against Schiff, one of the president’s Democratic foes," according to The Post.

Dems demand probe as Trump's favorite Biden attack gets turned on him

WASHINGTON — If Republicans want to debate allegedly illegal pardons, Democrats are all in.

After House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer (R-KY) dropped a new report that claims President Joe Biden’s end-of-term pardons should be deemed “void” because they were signed by an autopen, Democrats questioned the get out of jail free cards President Donald Trump doled out to some 1,500 Jan. 6, 2021 rioters after his inauguration this year.

“I hope [the report] will be an analysis by Republicans of Trump's pardon of 1,550 people,” Sen. Adam Schiff (D-CA) — who received a Biden pardon arising from his work on the House Select Committee on January 6th — told Raw Story.

“He must have a very fast hand to have signed all those, so I look forward to Comer announcing that investigation.”

While Comer and company are looking back to Biden, Schiff and other Democrats say America’s overdue for a discussion about Trump’s own pardon practices.

“Are they gonna go examine all the pardons that Trump did of the January 6 rioters?” Sen. Chris Coons (D-DE) told Raw Story.

“I mean, do you think he actually sat down and he signed every single one of those? I'd be happy to have them review those.”

Republicans aren’t investigating Trump — they’re hungry for retribution instead.

‘Signed and settled’

Throughout U.S. history, presidents of both parties have leaned on autopens to help them sign the stacks of official and unofficial documents that demand their attention daily.

While the Supreme Court has never weighed in on autopens, a 2005 Department of Justice memo went so far as to okay presidential underlings signing official documents on a president’s behalf.

“The President need not personally perform the physical act of affixing his signature to a bill he approves and decides to sign in order for the bill to become law,” the memo reads.

“Rather, the President may sign a bill within the meaning of Article I, Section 7 [of the Constitution] by directing a subordinate to affix the President’s signature to such a bill, for example by autopen.”

That’s partly why Democratic senators Raw Story spoke to Wednesday dismissed the Comer report as partisan and legally flawed.

“Look, executives use autopens, with appropriate processes and authorization, all the time,” said Sen. Coons — who fills the seat Biden vacated when he became vice president to Barack Obama in 2009.

“The question isn't, ‘Did Joe Biden actually effectively illegally pardon?’ The question is, ‘Did he follow appropriate procedures for making the decisions, individually documenting them and then authorizing the appropriate person to audit.’”

“How dangerous is it having the party in power trying to negate [past pardons]?” Raw Story asked.

“They're doing a lot to negate things that were signed and settled into law,” Coons said, before using this week’s deadly Caribbean storm as an example.

“A hurricane just roared over Jamaica, and we had appropriated money for disaster assistance and for humanitarian relief, and they shut down USAID, laid off some of the world's most experienced and capable disaster response people, and today our neighbors in Jamaica are waking up without a well-coordinated and robust American response because of it.”

‘A legitimate issue’

Ignoring growing questions about Trump’s fitness for office, Republicans are welcoming Comer’s report.

“I think [Biden’s autopen use is] a legitimate issue the American public cares about,” Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL) told Raw Story.

“I would ask about whether, you know, all the autopen is legal or not. So I think there ought to be an investigation, and we can make a good decision.”

Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) is conducting an investigation of his own.

“It all speaks to the question, ‘Who was in charge?’” he said.

“That's a serious question, and what we're doing in my committee is we're interviewing the constitutional officers — ‘What did you know? What did you see?’ — for the historical record.

“Because if this happens in the future, they've got to realize they have a responsibility to the Constitution. You can't allow somebody who's not capable of fulfilling the awesome duties of President to do this and let somebody else completely unelected, unknown to the American public, run the show.”

Should the American people expect prosecutions?

“Depends on what crimes may have been committed,” Johnson said. “That's all hypothetical about something in the future, but now we should get to the bottom of this. People need to come forward … I always have way more questions than we ever get answers for.”

Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-AL), one of President Trump’s most ardent supporters, was happy to call for investigations and perhaps prosecutions.

Last-minute Biden pardons “should be voided,” Tuberville said. “If they were done by an autopen, I mean, this doesn't seem very constitutional to do it that way.”

Sen. Adam Schiff (D-CA) speaks with reporters. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst

“I'm sure they probably are, yeah,” Tuberville said when asked if pardon recipients, such as his colleague Sen. Schiff, should be investigated by the DOJ.

“That's a huge part of breaking the law, to me, if you're going to do something that notorious, on such an important topic.”

‘Really disturbing’

Crocodile tears are all the GOP’s offering, Senate Democrats said.

“Considering that this President uses pardons to extort from people, I would hope that the Republicans would be more concerned about the use of pardon powers in that way,” Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-HI) told Raw Story, nodding to controversial Trump pardons of powerful financial figures like Changpeng Zhao, the founder of crypto company Binance.

Comer released his report while the federal government is shut down and the U.S. House of Representatives is closed for business.

“[Conspiracies have] already been debunked,” Sen. Alex Padilla (D-CA) told Raw Story. “And they should wish they were equally passionate about trying to re-open [the] government and avoid impact to people who rely on nutrition assistance programs.”

Other Democrats are even more blunt when asked about congressional Republicans feeding a sympathetic DOJ fodder to go after the President’s personal, if perceived, enemies.

“I find that really disturbing,” Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) told Raw Story.

'Never seen anything like it': Expert stunned by Pam Bondi's bizarre responses

A legal expert called Attorney General Pam Bondi's reaction to questions from members of Congress on Tuesday during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing "remarkably, completely antagonistic."

Former Deputy Assistant Attorney General Harry Litman told CNN that Bondi "refused to give answers at every turn."

"She gave no answers, really," Litman said. "Anything she could deflect, she did, but was really remarkable. You've seen fiery moments with AGs at other hearings. She came in guns a blazing with pre-drafted soundbites, and just whenever there was something she needed to answer, she substituted instead the sort of 'when did you stop beating your wife' kind of slurs."

He pointed to Sen. Adam Schiff (D-CA) and his fiery interaction with Bondi after he asked her about a reported 2024 bribery scheme involving White House Border Czar Tom Homan receiving a bag of cash with $50,000. It led to an FBI probe, though Homan has not been charged, and senators pressed Bondi about what happened to the money.

She deflected "from some really basic questions" during the hearing, Litman said. "Ask the FBI, she said."

Litman called Bondi's reactions "a concerted strategy, both not to give any responses, but also to have a sort of, you know, outrage, bombastic kind of presentation that she was even there and that I, I assume she hopes, observers who aren't paying a lot of attention just take away from it."

He said it was unusual.

"But it was remarkably unresponsive," Litman added. "And remarkably like I've never seen anything like it. Completely antagonistic and contemptuous to the senators"

At some points, Bondi said she would not say anything, then "proceeded to give details, self-serving details, and then and only then shut things down."

"In any event, the notion I think it's just puzzling," he said. "But what really was salient to me is she'll talk a little bit — she'll talk a little bit about Epstein and then shut things down again with personal insults. You know, Schiff was making a real point. It's an oversight hearing. This is where you give us answers. And with this sort of calculated bombast, she refused to give answers at every turn."

Stetson grad Pam Bondi scoffs at legal knowledge of senator — who went to Harvard Law

Attorney General Pam Bondi tried to put down a U.S. senator Tuesday as she refused to answer multiple questions — begging to know of Adam Schiff (D-CA), "Do you have a law degree?"

Unfortunately for Bondi, her intended sleight failed as he does — from Harvard Law School.

The law school is ranked sixth in the country, according to U.S. News and World Report.

Stetson University, from which Bondi graduated, is ranked 99th.

Bondi testified in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing Tuesday and was asked by Schiff and several other senators about a reported 2024 bribery scheme involving White House Border Czar Tom Homan receiving a bag of cash with $50,000. It launched an FBI probe — though Homan has not been charged — and senators were asking Bondi about what happened to the money.

"So I'm asking you the question, did he take the money?" Schiff asked.

Bondi said she had already answered the question. Schiff pushed back and said he didn't think she had responded to it. Then, she said the investigation was prior to her confirmation as attorney general.

"All I know is that Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche and FBI Director [Kash] Patel said there was no case. And Caroline Leavitt is one of the most trustworthy human beings I know," Bondi said.

Then she attacked Schiff, saying she would have fired him if he worked for her.

Schiff didn't hold back, saying "You can stipulate to all your personal attacks on the Democratic members of the committee."

Bondi was visibly upset and responded, "Personal attacks? You've been attacking my FBI director. You've been attacking my office."

Schiff continued talking about the Homan investigation, asking Bondi to respond.

"You're the attorney general. This will be your decision. Will you support..." he asked, then Bondi cut him off.

"Don't tell me what is my decision," she snapped.

"Let me let me do this because I think it's it's valuable that the American people get a sense of what you have refused to answer today," Schiff responded. "So these are just some of the questions you refuse to answer, or have answered with personal attacks on members of this committee. You are asked whether you consulted with career ethics lawyers, as you promised you would do during your nomination hearing, when you approved the president receiving a $400 million gift from the Qataris. You refuse to answer that question. You are asked who or what role you may have played, or who played the role, in asking the Trump's name be flagged in any of the Epstein documents gathered by the FBI? You refuse to answer that question. You were asked whether Homan kept the $50,000 bribe money? You refuse to answer that question. You were asked whether Homan paid taxes on the $50,000 bribe money? You refuse to answer that question. You were asked, did career prosecutors find insufficient evidence to charge James Comey? You refused to answer that question. You were asked, how are military strikes on these boats in the Caribbean legal? And you refuse to even answer that question?"

That's when Bondi asked him if he had a law degree. Schiff ignored her question.

"You were asked by my colleague whether you believe government officials, like immigration officials, have to abide by court orders? You wouldn't even answer that question. This is supposed to be an oversight hearing," Schiff said.

Bondi attempted to interject again.

"Attack me later," Schiff said. "And I know you've got plenty of canned attacks. We've heard them all day today."

'Crook!' Trump launches random attack on Adam Schiff over 2-year-old probe

President Donald Trump launched an apparently random attack Tuesday that he has "learned" some nefarious information about Sen. Adam Schiff (D-CA) that should lead to his prosecution.

Seemingly out of the blue, Trump posted on Truth Social, "I have always suspected Shifty Adam Schiff was a scam artist. And now I learn that Fannie Mae’s Financial Crimes Division have concluded that Adam Schiff has engaged in a sustained pattern of possible Mortgage Fraud."

In announcing the "possible mortgage fraud," Trump offered no proof to back up his claims.

Trump's post continued, "Adam Schiff said that his primary residence was in MARYLAND to get a cheaper mortgage and rip off America, when he must LIVE in CALIFORNIA because he was a Congressman from CALIFORNIA. I always knew Adam Schiff was a Crook. The FRAUD began with the refinance of his Maryland property on February 6, 2009, and continued through multiple transactions until the Maryland property was correctly designated as a second home on October 13, 2020. Mortgage Fraud is very serious, and CROOKED Adam Schiff (now a Senator) needs to be brought to justice."

It's an old argument brought to light in 2023 by CNN's KFile. A Schiff spokesperson said at that time that his primary residence is in Burbank, CA, while he keeps a second home in the Washington, D.C., area "to spend more time with his children while doing his job.”

The U.S. Constitution says that "members of Congress must have an 'inhabitancy in the state at the time elected' – a fairly vague requirement," according to KFile. A professor of political science at the University of Maryland told KFile that “On the merits, technically there’s absolutely nothing wrong with it."

At the time, when Schiff was running for Senate, the report warned, "the dual residency could still complicate his run for the Senate in the state’s competitive primary and present a political problem." That didn't seem to happen, and Schiff was sworn in to the Senate in Dec. 2024.

Trump offered no new details from the 2023 report.

Trump has repeatedly attacked Schiff, with particular vitriol over his role in the first Trump impeachment proceedings. Trump has called for Schiff's prosecution, censure, and removal from Congress, portraying him as a primary political enemy who led what Trump characterized as a "witch hunt" against his administration.

Read The KFile report here.

'Someone knew': Insider trading speculation abounds after Trump abruptly reverses course

The wild market fluctuations caused by President Donald Trump's tariff announcements raised questions Wednesday afternoon about the potential for insider trading.

Financial markets continued to free-fall Wednesday morning over Trump's tariffs for U.S. trading partners at an average rate of 29 percent. Trump posted on Truth Social, "THIS IS A GREAT TIME TO BUY!!! DJT"

After Trump announced that afternoon that he was issuing a 90-day reprieve on all tariffs except for those leveled against China, the Dow Jones Industrial Average jumped 2,500 points, while the Nasdaq surged 10%.

This series of events led some, including Sen. Adam Schiff (D-CA), to wonder aloud who made money on the week-long financial roller-coaster ride.

ALSO READ: The new guy in charge of USAID doesn't believe in foreign aid

"Trump is creating giant market fluctuations with his on-again, off-again tariffs," Schiff posted to X. "These constant gyrations in policy provide dangerous opportunities for insider trading."

Schiff asked, "Who in the administration knew about Trump's latest tariff flip flop ahead of time? Did anyone buy or sell stocks, and profit at the public’s expense? I'm writing to the White House — the public has a right to know."

One woman whose bio dubbed her a conservative, agreed with Schiff, posting, "There needs to be an investigation. The market was up $35, when the news broke and within minutes it went to $1K than to over $2.5K. It was plain for all to see."

Market watcher, @unusual_whales, with 2.2 million followers on X, posted, "Alright, I think people knew of the tariff pause and traded it beforehand. You can see before Trump posted "buy" on Truth Social, traders opened $QQQ $TQQQ and $SPY calls RIGHT BEFORE THE NEWS, someone opened $SPY 509 calls, expiring TODAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Those calls are up 2100% in one hour. You can see all volume was literally opened TODAY!!!!!!!!!! (That little green arrow). You can see all volume is new opening volume (not only on the Zero days, but also on the weekly $QQQ and $TQQQ calls).

They continued, "This is especially odd given IVR on these was around 82 this morning, with IV through the roof. The traders really wanted to trade directionally... In fact, using Unusual Whales' net premium, you can see people have been loading calls trading for a reversal, following these opening calls. Very clear example here. Insane, someone knew."

'Reject the political hacks': Columnist urges Senate to 'demand better choices' from Trump

Kash Patel and Tulsi Gabbard wouldn't stand a chance in Senate confirmation hearings if David Firestone had his way.

The deputy editor of The New York Times Editorial Board used Thursday's column to implore senators to "reject the political hacks" nominated by President-elect Donald Trump lest more attacks like the New Year's Eve mayhem in New Orleans and Las Vegas are allowed to multiply.

The FBI determined that 42-year-old Shamsud-Din Jabbar, who rammed his pickup truck into a crowd on Bourbon Street, killing 14, and 37-year-old Matthew Alan Livelsberger, who shot himself before setting off an explosion in his rented Cybertruck outside a Trump International Hotel in Las Vegas, were both U.S. citizens and military veterans who acted alone.

"...[T]he news on New Year’s Day serves as a reminder that lone-wolf terrorism, whether inspired by ISIS or some other extreme ideology, hasn’t gone away," Firestone wrote.

"Individuals acting alone are always the hardest perpetrators to detect, and if these attacks lead to a resurgence of domestic terrorism by copycats inspired by bloodshed, the country is going to want the best possible people working to track them down. That description does not include Kash Patel, Trump’s choice for F.B.I. director, and Tulsi Gabbard, his pick for director of national intelligence. Both appear to have been chosen not because of any background in fighting crime or terrorism, but because of the grudges they share with Trump and their fealty to him."

ALSO READ: America's dark past and the key to stopping Trump's authoritarian rule

Two other Trump nominees caused a stir for ethics concerns having to do with prostitution, drugs, and alcohol when Trump nominated them; former Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) dropped out of contention for attorney general altogether after admitting he became a "distraction," but Pete Hegseth continues to soldier on for the defense secretary post.

On Thursday, Democrats announced that incoming senator Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) and Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) will be part of the Senate Judiciary Committee members probing Trump's nominees.

"Many of the nation’s best case officers and special agents would probably walk out the door rather than work for these kinds of leaders, making the nation even more vulnerable to attack," Firestone wrote of Trump's nominees. "To make the country safer, Senate Republicans should demand better choices."

Read The New York Times Opinion column here.

Outside spending in 2024 federal election tops $1 billion

This article originally appeared in OpenSecrets. Sign up for their weekly newsletter to receive stories like this one in your inbox.

Outside spending in the 2024 election cycle has surpassed $1 billion, outpacing prior election cycles, according to a new OpenSecrets analysis of federal campaign finance reports.

Super PACs and other outside groups that can raise and spend unlimited sums of money have poured about $1.1 billion into 2024 federal elections as of Aug. 15 — nearly twice what similar groups spent over the same period in the 2020 presidential election cycle when independent expenditures hit an all-time record.

More than half of all outside spending during the 2024 cycle — about $585.8 million — has gone into the presidential election, which saw an especially expensive Republican presidential nominating contest.

SFA Fund and Never Back Down, the main super PACs aligned with former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, respectively, sank a combined $119.6 million on independent expenditures during the Republican presidential primary.

ALSO READ: Donald Trump deep in debt while foreign money keeps coming: disclosure

However, the largest spender, by far, is former President Donald Trump’s flagship super PAC, Make America Great Again Inc. To date, MAGA Inc. has spent about $125.1 million boosting Trump in the presidential election, including nearly $33.2 million attacking his GOP rivals and more than $65.6 million opposing President Joe Biden.

Future Forward and American Bridge 21st Century, the first and second-largest Democratic hybrid PACs, have spent a combined $74.7 million on the presidential race as of Aug. 15. Both super PACs pivoted to supporting Vice President Kamala Harris after Biden suspended his campaign last month.

Outside spending slowed after Haley, Trump’s last-remaining Republican challenger, bowed out of the presidential race in March. But independent expenditures continue to outpace previous election cycles.

Congressional races have also attracted millions in outside spending.

Americans for Prosperity Action, a super PAC at the center of a network of conservative donors and activists led by billionaire Charles Koch, spent more than $31.2 million supporting Haley. After she suspended her campaign, AFP Action, which hasn’t endorsed Trump, pivoted to congressional races, spending nearly $27.7 million to help Republicans hold onto the U.S. House and win back the Senate.

Another top spender is Fairshake, a super PAC established last year to prop up candidates it sees as friendly to the crypto industry. Fairshake and its affiliated super PACs, Protect Progress and Defend American Jobs, have spent a combined $45.7 million on elections in 2024 — more than any other industry-focused group.

Of that, nearly $10.1 million went toward defeating Democratic Rep. Katie Porter in California’s open primary election for the U.S. Senate. Porter, who questioned the crypto industry’s impact on the environment, finished a distant third behind Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) and Republican Steve Garvey, a former professional baseball player.

Fairshake and its affiliated super PACs are slated to spend millions more on the general election in coming months. Earlier this month, Fairshake announced that it had reserved $25 million in TV advertising to support 18 House candidates — nine Democrats and nine Republicans. Politico also reported that Defend American Jobs intends to spend at least $12 million supporting Republican Bernie Moreno in his race against Senate Banking Chair Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), a longtime skeptic of the crypto industry. Democrats need to hold onto Brown’s seat to maintain their majority in the Senate.

ALSO READ: Sen. John Fetterman violates financial law with botched corporate bond disclosures

Meanwhile, Protect Progress is preparing to launch a pair of approximately $3 million ad campaigns supporting Reps. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) and Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) in their Senate races. Both lawmakers have voted for crypto industry-backed legislation in the House.

The crypto-focused super PACs’ largest donors include the digital asset firms Coinbase and Ripple, as well as the venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz.

United Democracy Project, a super PAC affiliated with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, or AIPAC, has also poured millions into influencing 2024 elections. United Democracy Project has spent more than $35.6 million on congressional races this cycle, mostly on efforts to oust Democratic incumbents over their criticism of Israel’s military response to the Oct. 7 Hamas attack.

Last week, AIPAC-backed Wesley Bell, a county prosecutor, won the Democratic primary election in Missouri’s 1st Congressional District, defeating incumbent Rep. Cori Bush in the state’s most expensive nominating contest on record. United Democracy Project spent more than $8.6 million on the race, far more than any other outside group.

The AIPAC-affiliated super PAC also pushed out Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-N.Y.), who lost the Democratic primary election in New York's 16th Congressional District to George Latimer in June. United Democracy Project poured more than $14.6 million into the race.