(Photo by Daniel X. O’Neil from USA, CC BY 2.0)
The Federal Election Commission has dismissed a complaint by Donald Trump’s presidential campaign that alleges The Washington Post made “illegal corporate in-kind contributions” to Kamala Harris’ presidential campaign.
In a bipartisan, 4-0 decision, the commissioners rejected the Trump campaign’s claim that the Post purchased advertising on social media to boost news articles critical of Trump.
Trump’s campaign had alleged that The Washington Post was conducting a “dark money corporate campaign in opposition to President Donald J. Trump” and “pretextually using its own online advertising efforts to promote Kamala Harris’s presidential candidacy.”
The Trump campaign cited reporting in the news outlet Semafor that the Post had “aggressively ramped up its paid advertising campaign, boosting dozens of articles related to the election,” including ones Trump considered negative in tone.
Trump’s campaign also argued that the Post was not entitled to what’s known as a “press exemption” for political content because it was “not functioning within the scope of a legitimate press entity. By boosting content to influence the election, the Washington Post is acting as like any other partisan player in the election process, not in its capacity as a press entity.”
The FEC disagreed.
After reviewing the Trump campaign’s complaint, the FEC General Counsel’s Office advised the bipartisan agency’s commissioners to dismiss the matter. The agency’s in-house lawyers cited an internal “scoring criteria” for agency resources and that the Post “appears to have been acting within its legitimate press function and thus its activities are protected” by federal election laws’ exemption for overtly journalistic activities.
“Given that low rating and the apparent applicability of the press exemption, we recommend that the Commission dismiss the complaint, consistent with the commission’s prosecutorial discretion to determine the proper ordering of its priorities and use of agency resources,” the general counsel’s office wrote.
The Post had maintained its innocence throughout the investigation.
After the Trump campaign filed the complaint in late October, a Post spokesperson called the complaint “improper” and “without merit,” arguing that such advertising is “routine” practice across the media industry.
“As part of The Washington Post’s regular social media marketing strategy, promoted posts across social media platforms reflect high-performing content across all verticals and subjects,” the Post spokesperson told the company’s reporter Manuel Roig-Franzia.
Then, in a lengthy Nov. 25, 2024, letter to the FEC, the Post argued that the Trump campaign’s allegations “are wholly without factual support or legal merit” and its “promotion of its political coverage is protected by the First Amendment.”
The White House and The Washington Post did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
The FEC voted on Feb. 25, with the case file becoming public today.
Notably, Trump 2016 campaign attorney Trey Trainor, whom Trump nominated to the FEC, joined Republican Allen Dickerson and Democrats Shana Broussard and Dara Lindenbaum in voting to dismiss the complaint.
The FEC’s decision in the Trump/Washington Post case came relatively quickly, as the agency often spends more than a year — sometimes several years — considering a complaint before reaching a ruling.
Trump last month dismissed longtime FEC Commissioner Ellen Weintraub, a Democrat who was serving as chairwoman, in a move Weintraub says is illegal — and will fight.
With only four commissioners remaining, the six-seat FEC is operating with a bare-bones quorum and would have to cease many of its high-level duties, such as campaign finance violation investigations and civil law enforcement efforts if not fully staffed.
Dave Levinthal is a Washington, D.C.-based investigative journalist. He served as OpenSecrets’ editorial and communications director from 2009 to 2011.
This post was originally published on Original Journalism from OpenSecrets News.