Maps should now show that a large swamp is centered on the White House under President Donald Trump. It is not lawful to tie support for legislation or other governmental favors to a demand to give in support of a campaign. That is extortion in any political swamp. If President Obama had done it, the Republicans would have been justifiably up in arms.
Extortion is part of the patchwork of campaign laws that even King Trump is bound by.
In addition to the direct federal regulation of campaign contributions, a number of federal political corruption provisions prohibit federal officials from receiving personal benefits that are related, in certain ways, to their official acts. Among some of the most common concerns raised in political corruption cases are bribery, illegal gratuities, and extortion. Laws criminalizing these activities bear upon the relationship of official acts to otherwise lawful contributions: The prohibition on bribery precludes officials from accepting contributions in exchange for performance of an official act. The prohibition on illegal gratuities does not require that the contribution be made in exchange for the official act, but instead precludes officials from accepting contributions made because of the official act. The prohibition on extortion precludes officials from using their position to demand contributions in exchange for official action. Additionally, a number of political corruption cases involve charges of so-called “honest services” fraud, alleged when public officials engage in schemes that deprive the public of honest services of government officials.
(www.everycrsreport.com/...)
Specifically,
[d]emands by elected public officials on private citizens for payments, such as for campaign contributions, even when the payments are to be made to third parties such as campaign committees, may fall within the extortion provisions when there is some wrongful use of one’s official position to induce or coerce the contribution. As stated by one court, the Hobbs Act would “penalize those who, under the guise of requesting ‘donations,’ demand money in return for some act of official grace.”
(www.everycrsreport.com/...)
But that is exactly what Trump did just the other day with megadonor Sheldon Adelson.
When President Donald Trump connected by phone last week with Republican megadonor Sheldon Adelson — perhaps the only person in the party who can cut a nine-figure check to aid his reelection — the phone call unexpectedly turned contentious.
The 87-year-old casino mogul had reached out to Trump to talk about the coronavirus relief bill and the economy. But then Trump brought the conversation around to the campaign and confronted Adelson about why he wasn’t doing more to bolster his reelection, according to three people with direct knowledge of the call. One of the people said it was apparent the president had no idea how much Adelson, who’s donated tens of millions of dollars to pro-Trump efforts over the years, had helped him. Adelson chose not to come back at Trump.
…
Adelson's allies say it’s unclear whether the episode will dissuade the Las Vegas mogul — long regarded as a financial linchpin for Trump’s reelection — from helping the president down the home stretch.
(www.politico.com/...)
Whether or not Adelson got infuriated at the shakedown does not render it any less illegal. Nor does the possibility that Adelson will now cut a huge check. Trump hit him up just as Adelson was seeking political help.