Follow us on social

2018-01-03t230218z_714644112_rc1e748ebd20_rtrmadp_3_usa-trump-russia-bannon-scaled

Will the RNC return funds from alleged foreign agent?

Thomas Barrack’s links to the GOP go well beyond Donald Trump.

Reporting | Washington Politics

The recent indictment of Trump confidante Thomas J. Barrack Sr. for acting as an unregistered agent of a foreign country raised eyebrows as the Justice Department has rarely prosecuted such cases. Perhaps even more surprising, Barrack and his two accomplices were indicted for acting as unregistered foreign agents for the United Arab Emirates, a country with extremely close ties to policymakers, a lengthy track record of funding Washington-based think tanks, and an aggressive regional foreign policy ranging from the Horn of Africa, Libya, and Yemen to isolating its Persian Gulf neighbors, Qatar and Iran.

While the indictment focused on Barrack and his co-conspirators’ role in influencing Donald Trump's 2016 campaign messaging and early presidency, the extent of Barrack’s influence in American politics goes well beyond Donald Trump. He has spent over $1.6 million on Republican campaigns since 2015.

CNN reported that political considerations influenced the Justice Department’s decision to hold off on the indictment until after the presidential election, noting that prosecutors “are discouraged from advancing politically sensitive matters ahead of an election.”

Barrack generously supported the election campaigns of Trump and GOP House and Senate members who were up for election over the past several political cycles, contributing $1,665,600 to Republican campaigns over the 2016, 2018, and 2020 campaign cycles, according to Federal Election Committee records reviewed by Responsible Statecraft.

The top recipient was the Trump Victory Committee ($875,600), funds that were used for Trump’s presidential campaigns and that, presumably, helped ensure the access to Trump that made Barrack such a valuable asset for the Emiratis, according to the indictment.

But Barrack’s second biggest campaign contributions went to the Republican National Committee and totaled $389,500 in the 2020 election cycle alone, funds that the GOP used to support campaigns for various candidates.

When asked if the RNC has any plans at this time, or in the event that Barrack is convicted of acting as a foreign agent, to return the $389,500, the party did not respond.

Holding on to six-figure contributions from someone who is currently under indictment for acting as a foreign agent of the UAE seems like something that a major political party might want to distance itself from, but Washington think tanks, politicians, and consultants are surprisingly comfortable with money linked to the UAE and other Gulf states.

For instance, former Senator Norm Coleman is a central Republican Party fundraiser who oversees the disbursement of tens of millions of dollars in contributions supporting Republican campaigns in each political cycle, via the American Action Network and its sister super PAC, the Congressional Leadership Fund.

Coleman is also a registered agent for Saudi Arabia, a job for which he has been remunerated  since 2014 and which he publicly defended in the wake of Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi’s murder, reportedly on orders from the country’s de facto leader, Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman, in October 2017. 

On the Democratic side, WestExec Advisors, a consultancy founded by Secretary of State Antony Blinken and former Under Secretary of Defense for Policy in the Obama administration, Michèle Flournoy, sold a minority stake of its business to Teneo, an advisory firm with multimillion-dollar contracts to represent clients in Saudi Arabia and the UAE.  

And in the think tank arena, UAE funding is pervasive, accounting for over $15 million in contributions to think tanks between 2014 and 2018, according to research conducted by the Foreign Influence Transparency Initiative at the Center for International Policy, making the UAE the third largest foreign government funder of U.S. think tanks after Norway and the United Kingdom.

Washington’s institutions are awash in UAE and Saudi funding, with recipients facing little public relations or legal consequences. Barrack’s prosecution appears anomalous, but the Justice Department’s decision to pursue the case against him, albeit belatedly, is a warning that money from the UAE and other foreign sources may come with legal, as well as reputational, risks.

FILE PHOTO: Colony Capital CEO Thomas Barrack speaks at the Republican National Convention in Cleveland, Ohio, U.S. July 21, 2016. REUTERS/Mike Segar/File photo
Reporting | Washington Politics
Why American war and election news coverage is so rotten
Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. | Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. speaking wit… | Flickr

Why American war and election news coverage is so rotten

Media


Journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed: everything else is public relations.”

keep readingShow less
Peter Thiel: 'I defer to Israel'

Peter Thiel attends the annual Allen and Co. Sun Valley Media Conference in Sun Valley, Idaho, U.S., July 6, 2022. REUTERS/Brendan McDermid

Peter Thiel: 'I defer to Israel'

QiOSK

The trouble with doing business with Israel — or any foreign government — is you can't really say anything when they do terrible things with technology that you may or may not have sold to them, or hope to sell to them, or hope to sell in your own country.

Such was the case with Peter Thiel, co-founder of Palantir Technologies, in this recently surfaced video, talking to the Cambridge Union back in May. See him stumble and stutter and buy time when asked what he thought about the use of Artificial Intelligence by the Israeli military in a targeting program called "Lavender" — which we now know has been responsible for the deaths of an untold number of innocent Palestinians since Oct 7. (See investigation here).

keep readingShow less
Are budget boosters actually breaking the military?

Committee chairman Jack Reed (D-RI), left, looks on as co-chair Roger Wicker (R-MS) shakes hands with U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin before a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on President Biden's proposed budget request for the Department of Defense on Capitol Hill in Washington, U.S., April 9, 2024. REUTERS/Amanda Andrade-Rhoades

Are budget boosters actually breaking the military?

Military Industrial Complex

Now that both political parties have seemingly settled upon their respective candidates for the 2024 presidential election, we have an opportune moment to ask a rather fundamental question about our nation’s defense spending: how much is enough?

Back in May, Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, penned an op-ed in the New York Times insisting the answer was not enough at all. Wicker claimed that the nation wasn’t prepared for war — or peace, for that matter — that our ships and fighter-jet fleets were “dangerously small” and our military infrastructure “outdated.” So weak our defense establishment and so dangerous the world right now, Wicker pressed, the nation ought to “spend an additional $55 billion on the military in the 2025 fiscal year.”

keep readingShow less

Israel-Gaza Crisis

Latest

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.