Taxpayers have funded nearly $1.5M in pro-Trump ads. Criticism is mounting

Taxpayers have funded nearly $1.5 million in advertisements that praise President Donald Trump, prompting growing criticism from both parties and legal experts. The White House has spent several days defending three taxpayer‑funded spots that it describes as public‑service announcements similar to those used by prior administrations. White House communications director Steven Cheung posted on X on Sunday, “Don’t fto the Fake News get distant with their lies astir our epic Public Service Announcements that person been moving connected tv.” Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R‑S.D.) told reporters the spots “shouldn’t beryllium paid for with payer dollars.” Sen. Mike Rounds (R‑S.D.) echoed the sentiment, saying, “It would not person been thing that I would person done. And I cognize that the White House is not covered by the aforesaid guidance that we are, but it’s not thing that I would person done.” Legal scholars consulted by The Associated Press warned the ads may violate federal statutes that prohibit using congressionally appropriated funds for publicity or propaganda and that restrict partisan political activity by government employees. They noted the current spots, which run on broadcast, cable and streaming platforms, differ from earlier administrations’ PSAs because they are not designed to help Americans access any specific government program. Richard Painter, former White House ethics counsel under President George W. Bush, called the three ads “sheer propaganda” and said they “are progressively looking similar what authoritarian governments bash to beforehand their leaders.” Kathleen Clark, a law‑ethics professor at Washington University in St. Louis, argued the ads “are thing much than authorities propaganda, aimed astatine helping Trump.” Painter added, “There’s thing successful present astir a peculiar argumentation that’s astatine each focused,” noting one spot focuses on “the evils of the heavy state” and another on “communists and Marxists.” The White House defended the campaign by citing past PSA examples from the Bush, Obama and Biden administrations, including promotions of Medicare law changes, Affordable Care Act subsidies and COVID‑19 vaccination efforts. It also referenced historical propaganda efforts by Presidents Woodrow Wilson and Franklin D. Roosevelt during the World Wars. James Kimble, a communications professor at Seton Hall University who studies domestic propaganda, acknowledged Wilson’s use of propaganda but said, “By astir immoderate nonsubjective measure, looking back, we find what they did beauteous repulsive.” The three advertisements have aired in fewer than seven days, with a combined cost well over $1 million. The first spot, launched the previous Wednesday, intercuts Trump remarks about defeating communism with on‑screen text promoting the “largest taxation cuts successful history,” “reigniting American manufacturing” and a call to “defend instrumentality and bid and police.” A second ad, released later in the week, shows nighttime footage of Mount Rushmore accompanied by quotes and clips from Trump’s Fourth of July address marking the nation’s 250th anniversary. The third spot, first shown over the weekend, closely resembles a 2024 Trump re‑election advertisement. It depicts Trump walking down a hallway while a voice‑over warns of a “final battle” against “globalists” and “warmongers.” All three conclude with the tagline, “Paid for by the U.S. Government.” The White House has not identified which federal agency is financing the effort. AdImpact, which monitors media spending, reported the spots have so far exceeded $1.4 million in outlay and have aired across a broad range of television networks nationwide. The total expenditure could be substantially higher if networks classify the spots as political advertisements. Opposition on Capitol Hill has intensified. Top Democrats on the Senate and House Appropriations Committees wrote to the White House demanding the ads be withdrawn and requesting detailed spending information. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer denounced the latest spot as “an implicit usurpation of what a ideology is expected to look like,” adding, “Americans sat down to ticker football, not to beryllium force‑fed Trump’s propaganda connected their ain dime.” Sen. John Kennedy (R‑La.) told CBS’s “Face the Nation” that no federal official should spend taxpayer money on partisan ads for themselves. Rep. Thomas Massie (R‑Ky.), who lost his seat to a Trump‑backed challenger, wrote on X, “Don’t worry, utilizing payer dollars to tally ominous run ads of the President has been done earlier and is wholly legal… successful banana republics.” The Republican chairs of the Senate and House Appropriations Committees have not responded to requests for comment. Associated Press writers Mary Clare Jalonick and Steven Sloan contributed to this report.