Politics
Celebrities and Notable Faces in the Crowd at the Democratic Convention
Thousands of Democrats — delegates, party members, politicians and celebrities — filled Chicago’s United Center this week to nominate Vice President Kamala Harris and Governor Tim Walz of Minnesota for president and vice president. Here are some of the notable people spotted in the arena.
Thursday
Ms. Harris accepted her party’s nomination, speaking about her middle-class roots and calling for unity with a “new way forward.” Before she spoke, members of her family took turns at the lectern, including her sister Maya, niece Meena and step-daughter Ella. Several celebrities were spotted in the crowd.
Doug Emhoff, the second gentleman
Maya Harris, Tony West and Meena Harris
Vice President Harris’s grand-niece Gov. Tim Walz and his children, Gus and Hope
Padma Lakshmi, television personality
Sheryl Lee Ralph, actor and singer
Wednesday
The convention’s third night featured speeches by several up-and-coming party stars, former President Bill Clinton and a surprise appearance by Oprah Winfrey. After several guests highlighted Mr. Walz’s average-Joe persona and background as a football coach, he officially accepted the Democrats’ vice-presidential nomination.
Senator Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota helped to introduce Mr. Walz before he took the stage, emphasizing his Midwestern roots.
Mr. Walz’s wife and children: Gwen, Gus and Hope Senators Tina Smith and Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota
Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts
Senator Mark Kelly of Arizona and former Rep. Gabby Giffords of Arizona
Julian Castro, former HUD secretary, and Rep. Joaquin Castro of Texas
Rep. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota
Tuesday
Several Democratic governors, including J.B. Pritzker from the convention’s host state of Illinois, were seated with their delegations during a ceremonial roll call. A playlist of songs and a performance by the rapper Lil Jon soundtracked the night.
Before speeches by the former first lady Michelle Obama and former President Barack Obama capped the evening, Doug Emhoff, the second gentleman, spoke about how Ms. Harris took on the role of “Momala” to his children, Cole and Ella.
Gov. J.B. Pritzker of Illinois
Mr. Emhoff’s daughter, Ella, and parents, Barbara and Michael
Cole, Mr. Emhoff’s son, and his wife
Gov. Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan
Gov. Wes Moore of Maryland
Gov. Tony Evers of Wisconsin
Gov. Andy Beshear of Kentucky
Rep. Maxine Waters of California
Monday
The convention’s first night featured remarks by Hillary Clinton and a torch-passing speech by President Biden. “America, I gave my best to you,” he said, reciting a phrase from the song “American Anthem” by Gene Scheer. Several members of Mr. Biden’s family were among the crowd, and audience members held up signs reading, “Thank you Joe.”
Nancy Pelosi, a key figure in pushing for Mr. Biden to exit the race, held up a “We [Heart] Joe” sign.
Jill Biden, the first lady
President Biden’s grandchildren
Rep. Nancy Pelosi of California
Gov. Josh Shapiro of Pennsylvania
Gov. Gavin Newsom of California Senator Chuck Schumer of New York
Rep. Lucy McBath of Georgia
Politics
Hundreds of Big Post-Election Donors Have Benefited From Trump’s Return to Office
Since President Trump was elected a second time, he and his allies have raised nearly $2 billion for his favored political causes and passion projects. That total, which was confirmed by four people involved in the fund-raising, likely eclipses the amount raised to support his 2024 campaign.
The astounding haul hints at a level of transactionalism for which it is difficult to find obvious comparisons in modern American history. The identities of the donors behind much of the cash are not legally required to be, and have not been, publicly disclosed. In some cases, Mr. Trump’s team has offered donors anonymity.
To shed light on what has been a largely opaque fund-raising apparatus, The New York Times conducted a comprehensive investigation. It relied on previously unreported documents and public campaign finance filings, as well as interviews with dozens of people who are familiar with the solicitations or are involved in the fund-raising. It traced a large portion of the funds raised — more than half a billion dollars’ worth — back to 346 donors who each gave at least $250,000. It also found that more than half of them have benefited, or are involved in an industry that has benefited, from the actions or statements of Mr. Trump, the White House or federal agencies.
It is not possible to prove that any of the donations directly led to favorable treatment from the Trump administration. And the contributions do not personally enrich Mr. Trump, unlike some of his family’s cryptocurrency ventures.
But many of the deep-pocketed individuals and corporations who have given large sums have a lot riding on the administration’s actions, raising questions about conflicts of interest.
Each of these dots represents a person or company that has given at least $250,000 to a group or project supported by Mr. Trump since he was elected to a second term.
The president’s inaugural committee raised nearly $240 million, more than double the record, which Mr. Trump himself set in 2017. The 284 donors shown here each gave at least $250,000.
284 red dots are arranged into a circle on the screen.
After Mr. Trump won, the fund-raising didn’t stop for a super PAC devoted to him and run by his advisers. At least 81 donors gave $250,000 or more to MAGA Inc. It raised $200 million from Nov. 7, 2024, to June 30, 2025.
81 of the dots separate from the main group and are highlighted.
According to Mr. Trump, $350 million has been raised for his White House ballroom project, which is largely being processed by the Trust for the National Mall. The Times has identified pledged or completed donations from 14 ballroom donors, which amount to about $100 million.
The original group of dots re-forms and a new group of 14 dots separates and is highlighted.
The biggest donors to the White House Historical Association to support this year’s Easter Egg Roll, including the four shown here, were offered new types of branding opportunities and access to an event beforehand with Melania Trump, the first lady.
The original group of dots re-forms and a new group of four dots separates and is highlighted.
The president’s team has also raised money for America250, a nonprofit group that was formed to produce celebrations for the country’s semiquincentennial birthday. Eight of the donors identified by The Times sponsored this group after the 2024 election.
altText:The original group of dots re-forms and a new group of 8 dots separates and is highlighted.
Of the 346 donors identified by The Times, at least 197 have benefited, or are in industries that have benefited, from policies or actions of Mr. Trump or his administration. Those include pardons, favorable regulatory moves, the dropping of legal cases, access to the president and more.
altText:The original group of dots re-forms and a new group of 197 dots separates and is highlighted.
Hover or tap on each of the circles here to learn more about the individual and corporate donors who have given at least $250,000 to Trump-approved causes. (Dollar figures may be undercounts, since some kinds of donations do not need to be disclosed.)
The dots return to their original arrangement in a circle.
Presidents of both parties have raised funds for their inaugurations, and many major companies have long histories of donating to them. But second-term presidents usually begin winding down their own fund-raising after their inaugurations, focusing instead on boosting their parties’ committees and candidates.
Mr. Trump, on the other hand, was emboldened by the record-breaking sum of nearly $240 million raised by his inaugural committee. He immediately tasked his fund-raising team, led by his campaign’s finance director, Meredith O’Rourke, to raise money for an array of groups and causes supported by the president, according to three people involved in the fund-raising. They requested anonymity to discuss nonpublic information, as did five others who discussed other elements of the fund-raising.
It is a buffet of options that allows donors to pay tribute to Mr. Trump and sometimes receive access to him to pitch their own interests. While the groups raising funds are independent from one another, and some are nonpartisan, they are presented to donors as part of a fund-raising apparatus to which Mr. Trump or his allies would like them to give, according to four people familiar with the fund-raising. They said Mr. Trump closely tracks which companies have given, and how much, debriefing regularly with Ms. O’Rourke.
Lobbyists with connections in Mr. Trump’s orbit recommend that their clients donate to these groups to try to win him over, said five people familiar with the fund-raising.
“In this town, money talks, and that is going to give you an opportunity to at least have a seat at the table,” said Harrison Fields, a former Trump White House official who left in August and became a lobbyist. His firm, CGCN Group, has represented companies that have donated to projects Mr. Trump supports, including the new White House ballroom, America250 and MAGA Inc.
“These people are not getting coerced. They are making business decisions,” said Mr. Fields.
At least 51 of the donors have given to more than one of the groups in this analysis since the election.
While MAGA Inc., the inaugural committee and the Republican National Committee (another entity for which Trump-allied fund-raisers are soliciting money) are required to disclose their donors to the Federal Election Commission, there is no such requirement for contributions to other groups for which the president’s allies are raising funds.
Those groups include the Trust for the National Mall, America250, the White House Historical Association, a political nonprofit group called Securing American Greatness and the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, which Mr. Trump’s allies have remade in his own image, including adding his own name to the title and the building’s facade.
The Times’s investigation identified a number of donations, or potential benefits to donors, that had not been publicly known.
One $2.5 million contribution to MAGA Inc. was given by a South Florida woman whose father months later received an unusually lenient deal from top Justice Department officials to settle charges that he bribed Puerto Rico’s then-governor in 2020.
Another $2.5 million pledged donation — this one to Mr. Trump’s White House ballroom project — came from Parsons Corporation, an engineering firm that has won government contracts for years, including under Mr. Trump, and is jockeying for some of the more than $1 trillion in contracts that could be awarded to build a missile defense system proposed by the president called the “Golden Dome.” Also giving $2.5 million to the ballroom project was the chief executive of Roblox, a popular online video game company that has applauded a Trump executive order and other initiatives involving children’s use of artificial intelligence.
A couple who donated $1 million to Mr. Trump’s inaugural committee and $500,000 to MAGA Inc., as well as an undisclosed amount to the ballroom fund, saw Mr. Trump nominate their son to be U.S. ambassador to Finland.
And a company that was accused last year by the Justice Department of colluding over ticket prices donated $250,000 to Mr. Trump’s inauguration. The president pardoned the company’s co-founder in a separate case this month.
In other cases, The Times was able to quantify large donations for which the amounts were previously unknown. Those included gifts from the technology firm Palantir, which donated $10 million to the ballroom project and $5 million to America250. Additionally, the Palantir co-founder Alex Karp donated $1 million each to the inauguration and to MAGA Inc. In Mr. Trump’s second term, Palantir has secured federal contracts worth hundreds of millions of dollars, including to develop software to help Immigration and Customs Enforcement deport people. But a Palantir official said in a previously unpublished response to an inquiry from Senator Richard Blumenthal, Democrat of Connecticut, that the company did not seek and was not offered any special consideration for its donation to the ballroom project.
While a foundation funded by Miriam Adelson, a casino magnate, mostly supports Jewish and Israeli causes, it pledged to donate $25 million to the ballroom project, according to two people familiar with the donation. In a speech at a White House Hanukkah party last week, Mr. Trump praised Dr. Adelson, a physician by training, for donating tens of millions of dollars to help his campaigns and using her access to lobby for greater U.S. backing for Israel. Calling her to the lectern, Mr. Trump said, “When somebody can give you $250 million, I think that we should give her the opportunity to say hello.” The two embraced and bantered about how Dr. Adelson would be willing to donate $250 million more to help Mr. Trump seek an unconstitutional third term.
Mr. Trump’s continued fund-raising is all the more striking given his boasts during his first presidential campaign a decade ago that he was an outsider whose personal wealth made him impervious to Washington’s pay-to-play politics and the manipulation of major donors, including Dr. Adelson’s late husband.
Liz Huston, a White House spokeswoman, rejected the suggestion that donors were getting special treatment. She said in a statement that Mr. Trump’s “only motivation as the president of the United States is improving the lives of the American people and making our country greater than ever before.” Donors who support him “should be celebrated, not attacked,” she said.
Donors who received administration jobs, government contracts, partnerships and approvals
Hover to see donor details
While the donations far exceed most Americans’ means, the sums pale in comparison to the contracts being sought from the Trump administration.
Take Mr. Trump’s “Golden Dome” missile defense project, which could yield lucrative work for a number of contractors. Palantir has already held discussions about being involved. Firms including Lockheed Martin and Boeing also are expected to compete for pieces of the work; each company donated $1 million to Mr. Trump’s inaugural committee. That is the same amount they gave to President Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s inaugural committee.
But Lockheed Martin also donated $10 million to the Trust for the National Mall for Mr. Trump’s ballroom project and $5 million to America250, according to two people familiar with the sums. Lockheed is the primary maker of F-35 fighter jets, which cost about $80 million to $110 million each. While some national security officials have expressed concern about selling the jets to Saudi Arabia, Mr. Trump announced last month that he planned to approve such sales. The next day, Lockheed’s chief executive attended a black-tie dinner at the White House honoring Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman of Saudi Arabia, which was also attended by executives for other defense contractors.
As for Boeing, two months after the inauguration, Mr. Trump announced that the company would be paid to build more than 180 new advanced fighter jets for the Air Force.
Major defense contracts can take years to develop, bid and execute, and there is no evidence that any such contracts were awarded as a direct result of donations.
Boeing’s ability to pursue federal contracts could have been hindered by criminal charges stemming from two fatal crashes of its planes during Mr. Trump’s first term. But this year, the Trump Justice Department dropped the case, entering into a settlement that required the company to improve its safety and compliance programs and pay hundreds of millions of dollars into a fund for victims.
Presidents have long awarded their campaigns’ top donors with ambassadorships, jobs and appointments to boards and commissions. Mr. Trump appears to have taken that tradition to a new level, tapping at least 32 people for an array of positions — including in his cabinet — who have donated at least $250,000 each to his causes after the election, or whose companies or families have made such donations.
Among them is Howard Brodie, now the U.S. ambassador to Finland. His parents, Elizabeth and Stefan Brodie, donated to the Trump inauguration, MAGA Inc. and the ballroom project after Mr. Trump’s victory in the 2024 election. The elder Brodies were invited to the White House dinner last month honoring the Saudi crown prince, and Stefan Brodie attended a dinner the month before for major donors who gave at least $2.5 million for the ballroom.
Another Trump ambassador nominee, the Miami mortgage lender Bernie Navarro, gave a little-noticed $1 million donation to the inaugural committee through an obscure company registered in Puerto Rico. Mr. Navarro, a close ally of Secretary of State Marco Rubio, said in a statement that the donation was unrelated to his interest in becoming an ambassador. “In retrospect, he is doing such an amazing job that I wish I would have done more,” Mr. Navarro said of Mr. Trump.
In all, more than a dozen donors have been nominated or confirmed for ambassadorships.
Where donors received ambassadorships
Warren Stephens
Gave $6 million
Melissa Argyros Gave $2 million
Dan Newlin
Gave at least $1.5 million
Howard Brodie
Parents gave at least $1.5 million Benjamin León Jr.
Gave at least $1 million
Melinda Hildebrand
Gave combined $1 million together with her husband
Ken Howery Gave $1 million
Tilman Fertitta
Gave $1 million
Bernie Navarro
Gave $1 million Anjani Sinha
Gave $1 million
Peter Lamelas
Gave $250,000
Nicole McGraw Gave $250,000
John Breslow
Gave $250,000
Benjamin Landa
Gave $250,000 Joseph Victor Popolo Jr.
Gave $250,000
Donor
Nominated or
confirmed ambassador to…
United Kingdom
Latvia
Colombia
Finland
Spain
Costa Rica
Denmark
Italy
Peru
Singapore
Argentina
Croatia
Cyprus
Hungary
Netherlands
It is not possible to definitively link donations to nominations.
Tommy Pigott, a spokesman for the State Department, in a statement called Mr. Trump’s ambassadors “an America first diplomatic A-team,” adding that they “were chosen to help drive forward historic wins for the American people, and they have done exactly that.”
Four of Mr. Trump’s cabinet officials made personal or corporate donations of more than $250,000.
They include Kelly Loeffler, the administrator of the Small Business Administration. She and her husband, Jeffrey C. Sprecher, the chief executive of the parent company of the New York Stock Exchange, donated a combined total of $11 million to groups Mr. Trump favors, including $1 million to the inaugural committee and $5 million to MAGA Inc., as well as previously unreported donations totaling $5 million for the ballroom, according to records and a person familiar with the fund-raising.
Donors who received pardons, relaxed enforcement and other relief
Hover to see donor details
Getting a reprieve from adverse state action can be just as valuable as winning a government contract or appointment.
Extremity Care, a company that makes a pricey form of bandages known as skin substitutes, donated $5 million to MAGA Inc. An executive from the company then attended a donor dinner in March at Mar-a-Lago where he lobbied Mr. Trump, whose administration announced the next month that it would delay a Biden-era plan to limit Medicare’s coverage of the bandages. Extremity Care or one of its affiliates subsequently donated $2.5 million to the ballroom.
And Mr. Trump has entered into deals with a number of drug makers, including several that donated to groups he supports, to lower prices in exchange for avoiding punitive measures including threatened tariffs.
In two instances, Mr. Trump pardoned people whose companies or families made donations.
In January, amid scrutiny from the Justice Department’s antitrust division, which had identified — but not charged — the venue management company Oak View Group in a lawsuit against Ticketmaster’s parent company, Oak View donated $250,000 to Mr. Trump’s inauguration.
The donation did not eliminate legal exposure for Oak View’s co-founder and then-chief executive, Timothy J. Leiweke. Months later, the antitrust division charged him in an unrelated case. He stepped down as head of Oak View, and the company agreed to pay $15 million in penalties. Mr. Leiweke pleaded not guilty. But this month, before the case went to trial, Mr. Trump pardoned him.
David B. Gerger, a lawyer for Mr. Leiweke, rejected a question about whether the donation was intended to avoid legal trouble.
“Any such innuendo — whether coming from ill will or just ignorance — is false,” he said in a statement.
In another case, the former health care entrepreneur Elizabeth Fago, after donating $1 million to MAGA Inc., attended a donor dinner with the president. Mr. Trump pardoned her son, Paul Walczak, less than three weeks later, sparing him from having to pay nearly $4.4 million in restitution and from reporting to prison for an 18-month sentence for employment tax crimes.
Another donor with an interest in the outcome of a criminal case was Isabela Herrera, who donated $2.5 million to MAGA Inc. late last year. At the time, her father, Julio Herrera Velutini, a Venezuelan-Italian banker, was being prosecuted by the Justice Department for trying to bribe the governor of Puerto Rico.
Mr. Herrera hired a former personal lawyer for Mr. Trump, who alleged that the case was an example of the political weaponization of the criminal justice system. Top Justice Department officials appeared to agree, authorizing a misdemeanor plea deal to settle the case and overruling career prosecutors who had pushed for a harsher sentence.
Mr. Herrera could still face a year in prison at sentencing, which is scheduled for next month.
Ms. Herrera and a lawyer for Mr. Herrera declined to comment.
A Justice Department spokeswoman said “the decision to settle this case was made through the proper channels and was not influenced by any donation to MAGA Inc.”
But John D. Keller, who oversaw the Justice Department division that handled the case, said in an interview that the difference between the deal and the more than 20 years Mr. Herrera could have faced if convicted of the original charges was “striking.” Mr. Keller, who resigned in protest when he was directed by Mr. Trump’s appointees to drop another politically fraught prosecution, said the Herrera case “appears to be another example of political considerations dictating the outcome in an individual criminal case.”
A broader relaxation of federal scrutiny has benefited cryptocurrency companies and other corporate interests that have showered donations on Mr. Trump’s groups.
The Securities and Exchange Commission largely abandoned its hard-line approach to crypto trading platforms, ending lawsuits against Coinbase, Kraken and Ripple after the companies each donated $1 million or more to Mr. Trump’s inaugural committee, and ending an investigation into Robinhood after it donated $2 million to the committee. Coinbase and Ripple also donated to the ballroom, while Coinbase gave to America250.
A spokesman for the S.E.C. said that “politics have had nothing to do with S.E.C. actions” on the cases. “Decisions on these cases turn on long held publicly expressed legal and policy views,” he added.
Donors in industries that benefited from administration policies
Hover to see donor details
In addition to specific benefits enjoyed by individual companies and people, Mr. Trump has also enacted sweeping tax cuts and taken other actions that more broadly advantage a wide range of industries, major corporations and wealthy individuals.
Last week, Mr. Trump signed an executive order to downgrade cannabis from the most restrictive category of drugs, easing some limitations and allowing for more research. It was a major victory for a burgeoning industry that has spent heavily since the election on lobbying and donations, including a $1 million donation to MAGA Inc. from American Rights and Reform PAC, a pro-cannabis political committee; and a $750,000 donation to the inaugural committee from Trulieve, a leading marijuana retailer. Kim Rivers, Trulieve’s co-founder and chief executive, urged Mr. Trump to make the move during multiple meetings with him, including a donor dinner at his New Jersey golf club in August, according to a person familiar with the event, which was first reported by the Wall Street Journal.
“We are really thankful for the president,” Ms. Rivers said in an interview on Thursday. “He has been consistently supportive,” she added. She declined to comment when asked if she would have been granted the presidential audiences without donating.
The crypto industry writ large has benefited from Mr. Trump’s cheerleading, as well as his championing and signing into law a bill creating the first federal rules for stablecoins, a popular form of digital currency. At least 27 companies or executives with interests in crypto gave a total of at least $58 million to groups Mr. Trump favors after the election, The Times found.
Mr. Trump has also favored the fossil fuel industry, directing tens of billions of dollars in incentives to companies, allowing drilling in the Alaska wilderness, and repealing environmental regulations. About two dozen companies with interests in oil, gas and coal donated at least $41 million.
Likewise, the administration has pushed regulatory changes and other executive actions that benefit Big Tech, tobacco interests, private equity firms and the defense and aerospace industry. (In all of the industries discussed here, individuals and firms may have benefited to different degrees from these actions.)
Danielle Alvarez, a spokeswoman for the R.N.C., said Mr. Trump “has governed and delivered results for every American,” citing his efforts to secure the Southern border and crack down on fentanyl trafficking, among other initiatives. She said Mr. Trump “is grateful to his donors, but unlike the politicians of the past, he isn’t bought by anyone.”
Donors who received invitations, access and praise
Hover to see donor details
Since retaking office, the president has lavished his post-election donors with praise and access to himself and his inner circle. In some cases, the attention can provide a competitive business advantage. In others, it may only mean bragging rights.
At least 100 donors have attended exclusive dinners and events with Mr. Trump at the White House, accompanied him on overseas trips that include meetings with foreign dignitaries and prospective business partners — or both. About half have popped up at multiple events. Regular visitors to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue include Jensen Huang, chief executive of Nvidia; Lisa Su, chief executive of AMD; Tim Cook, chief executive of Apple; and others.
Mr. Trump is fond of using these presidential forums to call out friends and donors in the room.
“So many of you have been really, really generous,” Mr. Trump told donors to the ballroom project he convened at the White House for a thank-you dinner in October. He singled out defense contractor donors (representatives for Booz Allen Hamilton, Lockheed Martin and Palantir were in the room), saying the United States was “the greatest manufacturer of weapons.”
And it’s not just Mr. Trump.
The White House has used government platforms to praise major donors to a wider audience. At least 67 post-election donors have been positively featured, often multiple times, in official press releases, social media posts and other communications.
There is a flip side to Mr. Trump’s willingness to reward loyalty. His efforts to punish perpetrators of perceived slights have been an animating theme of his second term — and a motivating factor for at least some of the donors to his favored causes, according to three people familiar with the fund-raising.
They said that major donors and corporations fear incurring Mr. Trump’s wrath by not giving, or not giving as much as their rivals, and that they donate out of concern that he might publicly attack them or even use the levers of government against them. Donations, they said, serve as a form of protection — or, if things have already soured, as an olive branch.
But it’s no guarantee. For some companies that have given large sums since the election, Mr. Trump and his administration’s actions have not been exclusively helpful.
Pilgrim’s Pride, a massive poultry producer, donated $5 million to Mr. Trump’s inaugural committee, making it the biggest donor. Good news for the poultry industry followed: In April, the Trump administration withdrew a Biden-era proposal that would have required poultry companies to keep levels of salmonella bacteria under a certain threshold and to test for six dangerous salmonella strains.
And in June, after years of attempts, federal regulators approved a public listing on the New York Stock Exchange for JBS, the Brazilian firm that owns Pilgrim’s Pride. But then last month, Mr. Trump directed the Justice Department to investigate JBS and three other meat packing giants, accusing them of “driving up the price of beef through illicit collusion, price fixing and price manipulation.”
In another example, Mr. Trump’s relationship with Mark Zuckerberg has been a mixed bag over the years. But when Mr. Trump won last fall, Mr. Zuckerberg and Meta, the parent company of Facebook, Instagram and other platforms, took steps that seemed designed to appease the incoming president. Meta donated $1 million to his inauguration, as did other tech companies and executives that had occasionally been crosswise with Mr. Trump, including Amazon, Google and Apple’s chief executive, Mr. Cook. The companies’ executives were given prominent places behind Mr. Trump inside the Capitol rotunda as he was sworn in.
Days after the inauguration, Meta announced that it had agreed to pay $22 million to Mr. Trump’s library foundation to settle a lawsuit. Google agreed to donate a similar sum for the ballroom project to settle a similar suit. (Those settlement amounts are not included in the analysis presented in this article, nor are payments to the Trump library foundation by Paramount Global and ABC News to settle separate lawsuits brought by Mr. Trump.) Meta also donated at least $2.5 million for the ballroom project, according to a person familiar with the fund-raising.
And Amazon, Meta and Google each donated at least $200,000 to the White House Historical Association to sponsor the annual Easter Egg Roll. While Meta and Google had sponsored the event during the Biden administration, top sponsors have not traditionally been expressly offered access to a pre-event brunch with the first lady as a donor perk, according to a person familiar with the event.
The offer came from a private event production firm on contract with the association, and not the association itself, which does not offer access to the White House or first family as an inducement for donations, according to a person familiar with previous fund-raising efforts.
Mr. Zuckerberg unsuccessfully lobbied Mr. Trump and his aides to derail a federal antitrust lawsuit against Meta. (A judge dismissed the case on its merits last month.) But the company has won other victories from the administration. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ended an investigation into Meta’s advertising for financial products in September, amidst a Trump-led push to kill the agency. And Mr. Trump this month signed an executive order to neuter state laws that limit the artificial intelligence industry — a major growth area for Meta, Google and other tech companies.
(The New York Times has sued three tech companies that are among, or whose executives are among, the donors in this analysis — Microsoft, OpenAI and Perplexity — claiming copyright infringement of news content related to A.I. systems. The companies have denied the suits’ claims.)
As Mr. Trump’s term moves into its second year, there are signs that the president and his allies intend to continue the fund-raising push.
MAGA Inc. has already announced dinners for donors who give $1 million or more, with Mr. Trump at his golf club in the Virginia suburbs of Washington in January and at his Mar-a-Lago club in Palm Beach, Fla., in February, according to invitations reviewed by The Times.
And the Donald J. Trump Presidential Library Foundation has indicated in filings that it intends to raise $950 million before the beginning of Mr. Trump’s final year in office.
If anything, the buffet of options to which donors can give appears to be expanding.
Last week, Mr. Trump announced the creation of a new initiative called Freedom 250, which will raise money from corporations and donors to fund events and projects dear to him as part of the celebration of the 250th anniversary of the country’s independence. Those include an arch overlooking Washington in the style of the Arc de Triomphe in Paris, a National Garden of American Heroes, a prayer event on the National Mall and a four-day competition for high school athletes.
Freedom 250 will be housed inside the National Park Foundation, a nonpartisan nonprofit group. Last month, at the behest of the Trump administration, the foundation quietly added to its board Ms. O’Rourke, who will raise money for Freedom 250, and Chris LaCivita, who helped run Mr. Trump’s 2024 presidential campaign.
Ms. O’Rourke did not respond to a request for comment. Mr. LaCivita declined to comment.
Methodology
The Times created a database of every person, company and organization that Federal Election Commission filings indicated had donated at least $250,000 to the inaugural committee or MAGA Inc. after the 2024 election. After establishing this initial universe, The Times, through interviews and other reporting, expanded the database to include donors to Trump-supported groups and projects that — unlike the inaugural committee and MAGA Inc. — are not required to disclose their donors, including the White House ballroom project, the White House Easter Egg Roll and America250.
Reporters combed through documents and interviewed dozens of people to determine the donors behind each contribution (some of their identities were obscured in public filings by corporate structures), as well whether and how each donor may have benefited from actions by Mr. Trump or his administration. This involved reviewing lobbying disclosures; campaign finance and corporate filings; Securities and Exchange Commission reports; agency memos; government contracting databases; corporate and government press releases; White House pool reports; social media posts; transcripts, photographs and video from White House events; and other documents. The Times reached out to everyone identified as having benefited from actions by Mr. Trump or his administration. Some people and companies did not respond or declined to comment. Others said they did not benefit from the administration’s actions. And others did not dispute the characterization.
In some cases, companies had existing contractor relationships with the federal government; this analysis included new contracts and renewals only, not those awarded in previous administrations.
Politics
Comer summons Minnesota officials as House probes massive social services fraud
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
FIRST ON FOX: The House Oversight Committee is widening its probe into allegations of widespread fraud within Minnesota’s social services programs, which prosecutors suggested could be worth billions of dollars.
Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., sent letters to seven current and former Minnesota state officials on Monday morning, inviting them for transcribed interviews with his panel.
Comer sent two additional letters to Attorney General Pam Bondi and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, seeking the federal government’s cooperation in the probe and requesting briefings for committee staff by Jan. 9.
LABOR SECRETARY ANNOUNCES ‘STRIKE TEAM’ GOING TO MINNESOTA TO INVESTIGATE RAMPANT FRAUD
House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., speaks at a press conference at the U.S. Capitol on Oct. 21, 2025, in Washington, D.C. (Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images)
“The Committee on Oversight and Government Reform is investigating reports of widespread fraud in Minnesota’s social services programs. As the Director of Nutrition Program Services and in your previous roles as the Assistant Director of Nutrition Program Services and Supervisor of Business Operations and Support Services for the Minnesota Department of Education, you have information that will assist the Committee’s investigation,” read one such letter, sent to Emily Honer, the director of Nutrition Program Services at the Minnesota Department of Education.
“Accordingly, we request your testimony at an in-person transcribed interview on January 26, 2026. If you do not voluntarily appear for the interview, we will be forced to evaluate the use of the compulsory process.”
Another current official, Minnesota Department of Education Assistant Commissioner Daron Korte, was asked to appear on Jan. 28.
Similar letters were sent to the following former officials with requests to appear on dates ranging from late January through early February: former Minnesota Department of Human Services Commissioner Jodi Harpstead, former Minnesota Department of Education Commissioner Mary Cathryn Ricker, former Minnesota Department of Human Services Chief Financial Officer David Greeman, former Minnesota Department of Human Services Commissioner Tony Lourey, and Eric Grumdahl, the department’s former Assistant Commissioner of Homelessness & Housing Supports.
ILHAN OMAR DEFENDS MEALS ACT DESPITE TIES TO MASSIVE MINNESOTA FRAUD SCHEME
“Whistleblowers have made it clear that American taxpayers were defrauded in Minnesota, raising serious questions about whether Governor Walz and Attorney General Ellison failed to act or were complicit in the theft,” Comer told Fox News Digital. “Today, the Committee is requesting information from the Treasury Department and the Department of Justice, as well as transcribed interviews with Minnesota state officials.”
Federal prosecutors in Minnesota have charged multiple people with stealing more than $240 million from the Federal Child Nutrition Program through the Minnesota-based nonprofit Feeding Our Future.
The probe has since widened to multiple state-run programs being investigated for potential fraud.
Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz speaks at a town hall meeting at the DeYor Performing Arts Center on April 7, 2025, in Youngstown, Ohio. (Jeff Swensen/Getty Images)
Officials investigating are now questioning whether people at the very top of Minnesota’s government were aware of signs of fraud but did not act in any way to stop it.
Gov. Tim Walz, who is running for a third term, took accountability in remarks to reporters on Friday: “This is on my watch. I am accountable for this. And more importantly, I am the one that will fix it.”
He heaped doubt on federal prosecutors’ accusations that the fraud could have totaled in the billions, however.
AGRICULTURE SECRETARY DEMANDS MINNESOTA FIX SNAP BENEFITS FOR 4 COUNTIES IMMEDIATELY UNDER PILOT PROGRAM
“You should be equally outraged about $1 or whatever that number is, but they’re using that number, without the proof behind it,” Walz said. “But to extrapolate what that number is for sensationalism, or to make statements about it, it doesn’t really help us.”
Walz also said he was “partners” with the federal government in stopping the fraud, and said he stopped payments to programs suspected of fraud in July after being granted the ability to do so.
U.S. prosecutors held a press conference on Thursday announcing the fraud probe was widening to focus on 14 programs aimed at disbursing Medicaid funds.
Attorney Joseph H. Thompson said those programs have cost roughly $18 billion since 2018, of which he said a “significant amount” likely fell prey to fraud.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
“It is staggering, industrial-scale fraud,” he said during the press conference.
Thompson said some of those dollars have been traced to real estate investments in Nairobi, Kenya.
He also said “some money went to Somalia indirectly” and “might have gotten into the hands” of militant group Al-Shabaab, but stated there was “no indication that the defendants that we’ve charged were radicalized or seeking to fund Al-Shabaab or other terrorist groups.”
Fox News Digital reached out to Walz’s office, as well as the offices of Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison, the Department of Human Services, and the Department of Education for comment.
Politics
CBS News correspondent accuses Bari Weiss of ‘political’ move in pulling ‘60 Minutes’ piece
A “60 Minutes” story on the Trump administration’s imprisonment of hundreds of deported Venezuelan migrants to El Salvador was pulled by CBS News Editor-In-Chief Bari Weiss shortly before it was scheduled to air Sunday night.
The unusual decision drew a sharp rebuke from Sharyn Alfonsi, the correspondent for the piece.
Alfonsi said the decision was motivated by politics, according to an email she circulated to colleagues and viewed by the Times. Alfonsi noted that the story was ready for air after being vetted by the network’s attorneys and the standards and practices department.
“It is factually correct,” Alfonsi wrote. “In my view, pulling it now — after every rigorous internal check has been met is not an editorial decision, it is a political one.”
According to the CBS News press department’s description of the segment, Alfonsi spoke to released deportees who described “the brutal and torturous conditions they endured inside CECOT,” one of El Salvador’s harshest prisons.
In a statement, a representative for CBS News said the report called “Inside CECOT” will air in a future “60 Minutes” broadcast. “We determined it needed additional reporting,” the representative said.
Weiss viewed the segment late Thursday, according to people familiar with the matter who were not authorized to comment publicly. She had a number of issues with story and asked for additional reporting, which could not be completed in time for airing on Sunday. A press release promoting the story went out Friday.
Weiss reportedly wanted the story to have an interview with an official in President Trump’s administration.
But Alonsi said in her email the program “requested responses to questions and/or interviews” with the the Department of Homeland Security, the White House and the State Department.
“Government silence is a statement, not a VETO,” Alfonsi wrote. “Their refusal to be interviewed is a tactical maneuver designed to kill the story.”
Alfonsi’s email said she learned the story was pulled on Saturday and that she had not discussed the matter with Weiss.
Even if Weiss’ concerns might be valid, the sudden postponement of a “60 Minutes” piece after it has been promoted on air, on social media and through listings on TV grids is a major snafu for the network.
For Weiss, it’s perilous situation as her every move as a digital media entrepreneur with no experience in television is being closely scrutinized.
As the founder of the conservative-friendly digital news site who was personally recruited by Paramount Chief Executive David Ellison, journalists at CBS News and media industry observers are watching to see if Weiss’ actions are tilting its editorial content to the right.
Before it was acquired by Skydance Media, Paramount agreed to pay $16 million to settle a Trump lawsuit making the dubious claim that a “60 Minutes” interview with Kamala Harris was deceptively edited to aid her 2024 presidential election campaign against him.
Trump recently said “60 Minutes” is “worse” under Paramount’s new ownership following an interview with Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, in which she was highly critical of the president and his administration.
Paramount acquired the Free Press for $150 million as part of the deal to bring Weiss over. Her first major move was to air a highly sympathetic town hall with Erika Kirk, the widow of slain right-wing activist Charlie Kirk. Erika Kirk has taken over as head of Turning Point USA, the political organization her husband founded.
-
Iowa1 week agoAddy Brown motivated to step up in Audi Crooks’ absence vs. UNI
-
Iowa1 week agoHow much snow did Iowa get? See Iowa’s latest snowfall totals
-
Maine6 days agoElementary-aged student killed in school bus crash in southern Maine
-
Maryland1 week agoFrigid temperatures to start the week in Maryland
-
South Dakota1 week agoNature: Snow in South Dakota
-
New Mexico6 days agoFamily clarifies why they believe missing New Mexico man is dead
-
Detroit, MI7 days ago‘Love being a pedo’: Metro Detroit doctor, attorney, therapist accused in web of child porn chats
-
Maine6 days agoFamily in Maine host food pantry for deer | Hand Off