Chapter 6

Foreign Funding and Influence

Abstract

The Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) is a disclosure statute. The Justice Department inspector general counted seven criminal FARA cases from 1966 to 2015 and no civil injunction after 1991, and the Justice Department's own fact sheet counts more than twenty people and entities charged in 2018 alone. The cases since 2017 involve Ukraine, Turkey, Egypt and the United Arab Emirates. They end in a plea document, a dismissal, a settlement, a reversed acquittal, three acquittals and one conviction of a sitting senator. The December 2025 report lists 565 active registrants for 858 foreign principals, and 19 registrants with a Qatar-related principal report amounts received. Outside FARA, the National Endowment for Democracy receives about $315 million a year from Congress and grants about 38 to 39 percent of its expenses to four core institutes, two of them the Republican and Democratic party institutes. A 2025 court order found the stated reason for withholding $95 million of its funds not plausible, at the preliminary stage. Under Section 117 of the Higher Education Act, universities reported about $8.8 billion attributed to Qatar, and Education Department investigations were opened under the first Trump Administration (19), none under the Biden Administration and four so far under the second. No cited filing links a registrant's fee or a grant to an official act, and no cited document supports a claim that a foreign government controls a party, an official or an institution.

6.1 What FARA requires

Finding POL-6.1Primary record

FARA requires a person who acts at the direction or control of a foreign principal and engages in political activities in the United States to register and file disclosures. A willful violation or false statement in a filing carries up to five years in prison and a $250,000 fine, and the Attorney General may seek a civil injunction. Since 1995 an agent of a non-government foreign principal who registers under the Lobbying Disclosure Act is exempt from FARA registration.

Section 611(c)(1) of Title 22 defines an agent of a foreign principal as a person who acts at the order, request or under the direction or control of the principal and who engages in political activities, acts as public relations counsel or political consultant, solicits or disburses money, or represents the principal before a U.S. agency or official. Section 611(o) defines political activities by an intent to influence officials or the public on domestic or foreign policy.

Evidence: Exhibit 816, Exhibit 818, Exhibit 817

Mechanism: Lobbying and purchased policy

§6.1.1

The statute requires registration and disclosure and contains no ban on the activity. The inspector general and the Justice Department both state that lobbying for a foreign government is lawful when disclosed. The inspector general's wording is that such lobbying is "not itself inappropriate or unlawful."

§6.1.2

The Justice Department's enforcement page gives the penalties in 22 U.S.C. 618. A willful violation or a false statement in a registration carries a fine of up to $250,000 or up to five years in prison. Section 618(f) lets the Attorney General seek a civil injunction. A separate statute, 18 U.S.C. 219, bars a public official from acting as an agent of a foreign principal required to register.

§6.1.3

The Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 added section 613(h). It exempts from FARA an agent of a foreign person or entity that is not a government or political party, if the agent engaged in lobbying and registered under the Lobbying Disclosure Act. The exemption took effect on 1 January 1996. Agents of foreign governments and foreign political parties stay inside FARA. Section 6.3 gives the inspector general's recommendation about the exemption.

Exhibit 816 · Statute

Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938, 22 U.S.C. 611 (definitions)

any activity that the person engaging in believes will, or that the person intends to, in any way influence any agency or official of the Government of the United States or any section of the public within the United States with reference to formulating, adopting, or changing the domestic or foreign policies of the United States

Sec. 611(c)(1) defines an agent of a foreign principal as a person who acts at the order, request or under the direction or control of a foreign principal and who engages in political activities, acts as public relations counsel or political consultant, solicits or disburses money, or represents the principal's interests before a U.S. agency or official. Sec. 611(o) defines political activities by intent to influence U.S. officials or the public. FARA is a registration and disclosure statute, not a ban on the activity.

Source: U.S. Congress
Date: 8 June 1938 (as amended)
Quoted from: 22 U.S.C. § 611(o)
Grade: Primary record
Document: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/22/611
Accessed: 2026-11-09
Cited by: Findings citing this exhibit

Exhibit 818 · Agency web page

FARA Enforcement (NSD FARA Unit web page)

be punished by a fine of not more than $250,000 or by imprisonment for not more than five (5) years.

States the criminal penalty for willful violation or false statement in a registration (22 U.S.C. 618(a)), the continuing-offense rule for failure to register (618(e)), the Attorney General's civil injunction authority (618(f)), and the bar on public officials acting as agents of a registrable foreign principal (18 U.S.C. 219).

Source: U.S. Department of Justice, National Security Division
Date: Read 10 November 2026
Quoted from: I. Criminal Penalties (22 U.S.C. § 618(a))
Grade: Primary record
Document: https://www.justice.gov/nsd-fara/fara-enforcement
Accessed: 2026-11-09
Cited by: Findings citing this exhibit

Exhibit 817 · Statute

Foreign Agents Registration Act, 22 U.S.C. 613(h) (Lobbying Disclosure Act exemption)

Any agent of a person described in section 611(b)(2) of this title or an entity described in section 611(b)(3) of this title if the agent has engaged in lobbying activities and has registered under the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995

Sec. 613(h) exempts from FARA registration an agent of a person or entity described in sec. 611(b)(2) or (3) (foreign persons and entities that are not a government or political party) who has engaged in lobbying activities and registered under the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 for that representation. Added by the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995, effective 1 January 1996.

Source: U.S. Congress
Date: 19 December 1995 (Pub. L. 104-65, sec. 9(3); amended Pub. L. 105-166, 1998)
Quoted from: 22 U.S.C. § 613(h)
Grade: Primary record
Document: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/22/613
Accessed: 2026-11-09
Cited by: Findings citing this exhibit

6.2 Registrations over time

Finding POL-6.2Primary record

DOJ's registrant files show 66 new FARA registrations in 2014, 150 in 2019 and 138 in 2025. DOJ's report for July to December 2025 lists 565 active registrants representing 858 foreign principals, and the inspector general counted 916 active registrations in 1987 and 360 at the end of 2014.

The table gives counts derived from the Justice Department's public registrant files, which record each registration with start and end dates. The Justice Department publishes no annual table. New registrations in 1986 (157) and 2014 (66) match the inspector general's counts exactly, and new registrations in 2010 (45) and 2016 (69) match the 2019 fact sheet.

Evidence: Exhibit 823, Exhibit 822, Exhibit 819

FARA registrations by year, from the DOJ registrant files
Year	New registrations	Registrants active at any time
1987	156	917
2000	50	457
2010	45	356
2014	66	337
2016	69	356
2017	101	397
2018	113	432
2019	150	478
2020	105	468
2021	133	517
2022	119	538
2023	105	520
2024	126	540
2025	138	581

§6.2.1

The active counts differ from the inspector general's. The audit gives 916 active registrations in 1987 and 360 at the end of 2014, and the registrant files give 917 and 337 for registrants active at any time in those years, a difference of up to 7 percent. The inspector general reports that it "could not definitively correlate specific causation" for the decline in registrations after 1987, and states that the 1995 exemption may have contributed to it. Registration fees began in 1993.

§6.2.2

The semiannual report for July to December 2025 gives 54 new registration statements, 13 terminations, 349 new short-form registrations, 127 new agreements and seven books-and-records inspections. It states that "there were no criminal FARA cases charged" and that no civil causes of action were filed in the period. Its foreword gives 565 active registrants representing 858 foreign principals.

Exhibit 823 · Dataset

FARA eFile bulk data: all registrants and all foreign principals (CSV)

Registrant and foreign-principal files with registration and termination dates. Counts derived by the researcher: new registrations 66 in 2014, 69 in 2016, 101 in 2017, 113 in 2018, 150 in 2019, 105 in 2020, 133 in 2021, 119 in 2022, 105 in 2023, 126 in 2024, 138 in 2025; registrants active at any time in the year 917 in 1987, 337 in 2014, 581 in 2025. The 1986 count of 157 new registrations and the 2014 count of 66 match the OIG audit exactly. Active counts differ from the OIG by up to 7 percent. Registrant-name searches return no entries for Brookings, the Atlantic Council or the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Source: U.S. Department of Justice, FARA Unit
Date: Downloaded 10 November 2026
Grade: Primary record
Document: https://efile.fara.gov/bulk/zip/FARA_All_Registrants.csv.zip
Accessed: 2026-11-09
Cited by: Findings citing this exhibit

Exhibit 822 · Agency report to Congress

Report of the Attorney General to the Congress on the Administration of the Foreign Agents Registration Act, six months ending December 31, 2025

A total of 565 active registrants, representing 858 foreign principals, were on file during the period of July 1, 2025, through December 31, 2025.

Statistical summary: 54 new registration statements and 13 terminations; 565 active registrants representing 858 foreign principals; 349 new short-form registrations; 127 new agreements; seven books-and-records inspections; no civil causes of action and no criminal FARA cases charged in the period. Per-country listing names each registrant, principal, activities and amounts received. Pages 233 to 236 list the Qatar-related registrants; the report states that the listing includes principals with no association with a foreign government.

Source: U.S. Department of Justice
Date: 2026
Quoted from: Foreword, Statistical Summary, p. 3
Grade: Primary record
Document: https://www.justice.gov/media/1467011/dl?inline
Accessed: 2026-11-09
Cited by: Findings citing this exhibit

6.3 The inspector general and GAO

Finding POL-6.3Primary record

The DOJ inspector general found in 2016 that DOJ brought seven criminal FARA cases from 1966 to 2015 and had not sought civil injunctive relief since 1991. The audit found that 62 percent of initial registrations were untimely and that the National Security Division does not track FARA cases it declines to prosecute.

The Justice Department inspector general's audit 16-24, requested by the House Appropriations Committee, reports that between 1966 and 2015 the Department "only brought seven criminal FARA cases." One ended in a conviction at trial, two in guilty pleas to FARA violations, two in guilty pleas to non-FARA charges and two in dismissals.

Evidence: Exhibit 819

Mechanism: The study not run

§6.3.1

The audit found that 62 percent of initial registrations were untimely and that 50 percent of registrants filed at least one supplemental statement late. The National Security Division told the inspector general that FARA's primary goal is registration and public disclosure, that it approves charges when the evidence shows a provable willful violation and that it disputes any reluctance to bring cases. The inspector general made 14 recommendations, among them a formal assessment of the 1995 exemption. The Division agreed with all 14. The audit also states that the Division does not track FARA cases it declines to prosecute.

Exhibit 819 · Inspector general report

Audit of the National Security Division's Enforcement and Administration of the Foreign Agents Registration Act, Audit Division 16-24

Between 1966 and 2015 the Department only brought seven criminal FARA cases

The audit was required by the House Appropriations Committee. It finds that active registrations peaked at 916 in 1987 and stood at 360 at the end of 2014; that DOJ brought seven criminal FARA cases from 1966 to 2015; that DOJ had not sought civil injunctive relief since 1991; that 62 percent of initial registrations were untimely and 50 percent of registrants filed at least one supplement late; that NSD does not track FARA cases declined for prosecution; and that the 1995 Lobbying Disclosure Act exemption may have contributed to the decline. The OIG made 14 recommendations, including a formal assessment of the LDA exemption. NSD agreed with all 14. The OIG could not establish a cause for the decline in registrations.

Source: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of the Inspector General
Date: September 2016
Quoted from: Executive Summary, p. i
Grade: Primary record
Document: https://www.oversight.gov/sites/default/files/oig-reports/a1624.pdf
Accessed: 2026-11-09
Cited by: Findings citing this exhibit

Finding POL-6.4Primary record

GAO reported in 2008 that DOJ lacks clear legal authority to inspect the records of persons it believes should register, that DOJ sought that authority in 1991 without success, and that its FARA Registration Unit fell from 13 staff in 1990 to 8 in 2008.

GAO's 2008 report states that "the number of staff resources in Justice's FARA Registration Unit has significantly declined over the last 17 years from 13 (9 professional and 4 administrative) in 1990 to 8 (6 professional and 2 administrative) in 2008."

Evidence: Exhibit 820

§6.3.2

GAO reported that the Department says it lacks clear legal authority to inspect the records of persons it believes should register and that it sought the authority in 1991 without success. GAO suggested that Congress consider giving the Department civil investigative demand authority and requiring persons who claim certain exemptions to give advance written notice. GAO's recommendation tracker lists the matter as closed and not implemented,. The 2016 audit records that any records-inspection authority would need controls and oversight.

Exhibit 820 · GAO report

Post-Government Employment Restrictions and Foreign Agent Registration: Additional Action Needed to Enhance Implementation of Requirements, GAO-08-855

the number of staff resources in Justice’s FARA Registration Unit has significantly declined over the last 17 years from 13 (9 professional and 4 administrative) in 1990 to 8 (6 professional and 2 administrative) in 2008.

GAO reports that DOJ says it lacks clear legal authority to inspect the records of persons it believes should register and to require advance notice of exemption claims, that DOJ sought such authority in 1991 without success, and that FARA Registration Unit staff fell from 13 in 1990 to 8 in 2008. GAO suggested that Congress consider civil investigative demand authority and advance exemption notification. GAO's recommendation tracker marks the matter closed, not implemented.

Source: U.S. Government Accountability Office
Date: 30 July 2008
Quoted from: p. 14
Grade: Primary record
Document: https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-08-855.pdf
Accessed: 2026-11-09
Cited by: Findings citing this exhibit

6.4 The 2018 and 2019 enforcement

Finding POL-6.5Primary record

DOJ's 2019 fact sheet states that more than twenty individuals and entities were criminally charged in 2018 with violations involving FARA, more than in the prior 50 years, and that its May 2019 civil action was the first since 1991. The fact sheet lists the 17 January 2019 settlement in which Skadden agreed to register after admitting that it acted as an agent of the Government of Ukraine in a 2012 media campaign.

The Justice Department's fact sheet of 25 September 2019 states: "In 2018 alone, more than twenty individuals and entities were criminally charged with violations involving FARA. That is more than the number of individuals and entities charged in all of the prior 50 years."

Evidence: Exhibit 821

§6.4.1

The fact sheet counts charges "involving FARA," which include non-FARA statutes. It states that in May 2019 the National Security Division used its civil authority for the first time since 1991, to obtain a court order requiring RM Broadcasting to register. It describes the post-2016 changes as added resources, a new deputy section chief, the FBI Foreign Influence Task Force, searchable filings and published advisory opinions.

§6.4.2

The fact sheet lists the 17 January 2019 Skadden settlement. In the Department's words, Skadden "agreed to register" under FARA after admitting that it acted as an agent of the Government of Ukraine by contributing to a 2012 public relations campaign directed at select members of the U.S. news media. The fact sheet also lists the 23 July 2019 jury conviction of Bijan Rafiekian and its overturning on 24 September 2019 (section 6.6).

Exhibit 821 · Agency fact sheet

Foreign Agents Registration Act Fact Sheet

In 2018 alone, more than twenty individuals and entities were criminally charged with violations involving FARA. That is more than the number of individuals and entities charged in all of the prior 50 years.

DOJ's own account of FARA enforcement after 2016. It reports more than twenty criminal charges in 2018, a May 2019 civil action (RM Broadcasting) that was the first since 1991, new-registrant counts of 45 (2010), 69 (2016) and 93 to date in 2019, and lists the Skadden settlement (17 January 2019) and the Rafiekian conviction (23 July 2019, overturned 24 September 2019).

Source: U.S. Department of Justice, National Security Division
Date: 25 September 2019
Quoted from: By the Numbers, Criminal Cases
Grade: Primary record
Document: https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/press-release/file/1205161/dl
Accessed: 2026-11-09
Cited by: Findings citing this exhibit

6.5 Ukraine

Finding POL-6.6Primary record

The September 2018 Manafort superseding information charges that from at least 2006 to 2015 Manafort conspired with Richard Gates, Konstantin Kilimnik and others to act as unregistered agents of Ukraine, including by arranging payment of over $2 million from offshore accounts to two unnamed Washington lobbying firms, which the information does not identify. On 31 March 2017 DOJ's FARA unit told the Podesta Group and Mercury Public Affairs in separate letters that each had an obligation to register for political activities for the European Centre for a Modern Ukraine.

The Manafort superseding information (Doc. 419, 14 September 2018) states that "MANAFORT arranged to pay Companies A and B over $2 million from his offshore accounts for their United States lobbying work for Ukraine." The Justice Department's FARA unit wrote to the Podesta Group on 31 March 2017 that "we have determined that Podesta has an obligation to register under FARA."

Evidence: Exhibit 824, Exhibit 825, Exhibit 826

Mechanism: Lobbying and purchased policy

§6.5.1

The information charges that from at least 2006 to 2015 Paul Manafort conspired with Richard Gates, Konstantin Kilimnik and others to act as unregistered agents of Ukraine. It describes the Hapsburg Group, four former European officials who appeared to give independent assessments while Ukraine paid them through Manafort's offshore accounts. It describes two Washington lobbying firms, called Company A and Company B, that lobbied Members of Congress, staff and executive officials for President Yanukovych, the Party of Regions and the Government of Ukraine. At pages 25 and 26 it describes letters sent to the Justice Department in November 2016 and February 2017 that the information characterizes as false.

§6.5.2

The information does not name Company A or Company B. It is a charging and plea document. Press reports have identified Company A and Company B with the Podesta Group and Mercury Public Affairs. The information and the two letters are reported side by side, and no cited government document links them.

§6.5.3

The two letters are dated 31 March 2017. Each concludes that the firm has an obligation to register for political activities in the United States for the European Centre for a Modern Ukraine, a foreign principal under the Act. The Podesta letter bases the obligation on an engagement of 18 April 2012 and finds that the firm sent strategic communications to, and arranged meetings with, U.S. officials, media and business leaders. It says the Department's information came from the firm's counsel in letters of August to December 2016. The Mercury letter, a scan whose recovered text is partly garbled, refers to Mercury's earlier registration under the Lobbying Disclosure Act from April 2012 to May 2014. Neither letter states who funded the Centre.

§6.5.4

The registrant file shows the Centre added to the Podesta Group's FARA registration on 12 April 2017 and the registration ending on 31 December 2017. Press accounts report that each firm told the Department the Centre had certified that it was a private entity. The cited documents record no charge against either firm. Skadden (section 6.4) settled over a 2012 campaign for the Government of Ukraine, and the 2019 acquittal of Gregory Craig, a former White House counsel and Skadden partner, concerned false statements about the firm's Ukraine work (section 6.7).

Exhibit 824 · Charging document

Superseding Criminal Information, United States v. Manafort, No. 17-cr-201 (ABJ), Doc. 419

MANAFORT arranged to pay Companies A and B over $2 million from his offshore accounts for their United States lobbying work for Ukraine.

Charges that from at least 2006 to 2015 Paul Manafort conspired with Richard Gates, Konstantin Kilimnik and others to act as unregistered agents of Ukraine. Describes the Hapsburg Group, four former European officials paid by Ukraine through Manafort's offshore accounts while appearing independent, and two unnamed Washington lobbying firms (Company A and Company B) that lobbied dozens of Members of Congress, staff and executive officials for President Yanukovych. Pages 25 and 26 describe false letters to the Justice Department in November 2016 and February 2017. The information does not name Company A or Company B.

Source: U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (Special Counsel's Office)
Date: 14 September 2018
Quoted from: para. 39, p. 23
Grade: Primary record
Document: https://www.justice.gov/archives/sco/file/1094141/dl
Accessed: 2026-11-09
Cited by: Findings citing this exhibit

Exhibit 825 · Agency letter

Letter, DOJ NSD Counterintelligence and Export Control Section to Caplin & Drysdale re Podesta Group, Inc. and the European Centre for a Modern Ukraine

we have determined that Podesta has an obligation to register under FARA.

Determines that the Podesta Group has an obligation to register under FARA for political activities in the United States for the European Centre for a Modern Ukraine, based on its engagement of 18 April 2012. Finds the Podesta Group sent strategic communications to, and arranged meetings with, U.S. officials, media and business leaders. The letter does not state who funded the Centre.

Source: U.S. Department of Justice, National Security Division
Date: 31 March 2017
Quoted from: p. 1
Grade: Primary record
Document: https://www.justice.gov/nsd-fara/page/file/1282081/dl
Accessed: 2026-11-09
Cited by: Findings citing this exhibit

Exhibit 826 · Agency letter

Letter, DOJ NSD Counterintelligence and Export Control Section to Skadden Arps re Mercury Public Affairs and the European Centre for a Modern Ukraine

we have determined that Mercury has an obligation to register under FARA, which arises from political activities it undertook within the United States pursuant to its relationship with the ECFMU, a foreign principal under the Act.

Determines that Mercury Public Affairs has an obligation to register under FARA for political activities in the United States under its relationship with the European Centre for a Modern Ukraine, and refers to its earlier registration under the Lobbying Disclosure Act from April 2012 to May 2014.

Source: U.S. Department of Justice, National Security Division
Date: 31 March 2017
Quoted from: DOJ National Security Division, Counterintelligence and Export Control Section, letter of 31 March 2017 to Kenneth A. Gross (Skadden), p. 1, first paragraph
Grade: Primary record
Document: https://www.justice.gov/nsd-fara/page/file/1282121/download
Accessed: 2026-11-09
Cited by: Findings citing this exhibit

6.6 Turkey

Finding POL-6.7Primary record

Michael Flynn stipulated in December 2017 that his 7 March 2017 FARA filings about a project for the benefit of Turkey contained materially false statements and omissions. He was charged only with a false-statement count about Russia contacts, and the court dismissed the case as moot on 8 December 2020. A jury convicted Flynn Intel Group executive Bijan Rafiekian in 2019 of acting as an unregistered agent of Turkey and of conspiracy, the district court set the verdict aside, and the Fourth Circuit affirmed an order for a new trial in 2023.

The statement of the offense in United States v. Flynn (Doc. 4, 1 December 2017) records at paragraph 5 that on 7 March 2017 Flynn "filed multiple documents with the Department of Justice pursuant to the Foreign Agents Registration Act" about a project he and Flynn Intel Group performed "for the principal benefit of the Republic of Turkey." The Fourth Circuit's opinion of 18 May 2023 recounts that "In 2019, a jury convicted Bijan Rafiekian of one count of acting as an unregistered agent of a foreign government and one count of criminal conspiracy."

Evidence: Exhibit 827, Exhibit 828, Exhibit 829

§6.6.1

Flynn pleaded to one count of false statements under 18 U.S.C. 1001 about contacts with Russia's ambassador. The stipulation adds that the FARA filings contained materially false statements and omissions about Turkey's supervision and direction of the project. The FARA conduct appears only as a stipulated fact and was not a separate count. On 8 December 2020 the district court denied as moot the government's Rule 48(a) motion (ECF 198) and granted as moot the consent motion to dismiss the case (ECF 308).

§6.6.2

Rafiekian was a Flynn Intel Group executive. The Fourth Circuit's opinion recounts that the district court granted a judgment of acquittal and conditionally granted a new trial. A 2021 Fourth Circuit opinion (991 F.3d 529) reversed the acquittal, the district court again ordered a new trial, and the 2023 opinion affirmed that order over a dissent by Judge Niemeyer. The Washington Times reported on 11 September 2023 that prosecutors dropped the case.

Exhibit 827 · Court filing

Statement of the Offense, United States v. Flynn, No. 17-cr-232 (RC), Doc. 4

On March 7, 2017, FLYNN filed multiple documents with the Department of Justice pursuant to the Foreign Agents Registration Act (“FARA”) pertaining to a project performed by him and his company, the Flynn Intel Group, Inc. (“FIG”), for the principal benefit of the Republic of Turkey (“Turkey project”).

Stipulated facts for the plea to one count of false statements (18 U.S.C. 1001) about contacts with Russia's ambassador. Para. 5 adds that Flynn's FARA filings of 7 March 2017 about a project for the benefit of Turkey contained materially false statements and omissions about Turkey's supervision and direction of the project. The FARA conduct was not a separate charged count.

Source: U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (Special Counsel's Office)
Date: 1 December 2017
Quoted from: para. 5, p. 5
Grade: Primary record
Document: https://www.justice.gov/archives/sco/file/1015126/dl
Accessed: 2026-11-09
Cited by: Findings citing this exhibit

Exhibit 828 · Court order

Order, United States v. Flynn, No. 17-cr-232 (EGS), Doc. 310

ORDERED that the government’s consent motion to dismiss this case as moot, ECF No. 308, is GRANTED

Denies the government's Rule 48(a) motion (ECF 198) as moot and grants the government's consent motion to dismiss as moot (ECF 308).

Source: U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia
Date: 8 December 2020
Quoted from: p. 1
Grade: Primary record
Document: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592.310.0_11.pdf
Accessed: 2026-11-09
Cited by: Findings citing this exhibit

Exhibit 829 · Court opinion

United States v. Rafiekian, No. 22-4252, 68 F.4th 177

In 2019, a jury convicted Bijan Rafiekian of one count of acting as an unregistered agent of a foreign government and one count of criminal conspiracy.

Affirms the district court's order for a new trial for Bijan Rafiekian, a Flynn Intel Group executive convicted in 2019 of acting as an unregistered agent of Turkey and of conspiracy. Recounts Rafiekian I (991 F.3d 529, 4th Cir. 2021), which reversed the judgment of acquittal. Judge Niemeyer dissented.

Source: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Date: 18 May 2023
Quoted from: slip op. p. 3
Grade: Primary record
Document: https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinions/224252.p.pdf
Accessed: 2026-11-09
Cited by: Findings citing this exhibit

6.7 Egypt, the UAE and the outcomes

Finding POL-6.8Primary record

The 5 March 2024 superseding indictment charged Senator Robert Menendez, Nadine Menendez and two New Jersey businessmen, among other offenses, with a conspiracy to have Menendez act as an agent of the Government of Egypt, a foreign principal required to register under FARA, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 219.

Paragraph 12 of the S4 indictment of 5 March 2024 states: "Public officials, including Members of Congress, are prohibited by law from agreeing to be or acting as an agent of a foreign principal required to register under FARA." The conspiracy count charges that Menendez was to act as an agent of "the Government of Egypt and Egyptian officials."

Evidence: Exhibit 830

§6.7.1

The indictment charges Senator Robert Menendez, his wife Nadine Menendez and two New Jersey businessmen, and its counts include bribery-related offenses beyond the agency conspiracy. It states that Nadine Menendez and one of the businessmen did not register under FARA. The indictment is an allegation.

Exhibit 830 · Charging document

Superseding Indictment S4, United States v. Menendez, No. 23-cr-490 (SHS), Doc. 239-1

Public officials, including Members of Congress, are prohibited by law from agreeing to be or acting as an agent of a foreign principal required to register under FARA.

Charges Senator Robert Menendez, his wife Nadine Menendez and two New Jersey businessmen with bribery-related offenses, and charges a conspiracy to have Menendez act as an agent of the Government of Egypt and Egyptian officials, a foreign principal required to register under FARA, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 219. States that neither Nadine Menendez nor Hana registered. Allegations only; the verdict is a separate exhibit.

Source: U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York
Date: 5 March 2024
Quoted from: para. 12, p. 7
Grade: Primary record
Document: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.606899/gov.uscourts.nysd.606899.239.1.pdf
Accessed: 2026-11-09
Cited by: Findings citing this exhibit

Finding POL-6.9Reported

A jury convicted Menendez on all counts on 16 July 2024, including acting as an agent of Egypt, and he was sentenced to 11 years on 29 January 2025. A jury acquitted Gregory Craig of a false-statement count about Ukraine work on 4 September 2019, and a Brooklyn jury acquitted Thomas Barrack and Matthew Grimes of all counts, including acting as agents of the United Arab Emirates, on 4 November 2022.

The Southern District of New York announced the convictions of Menendez and two businessmen on 16 July 2024 and an 11-year sentence for Menendez on 29 January 2025. NPR reported the 4 September 2019 acquittal of Gregory Craig, and the Eastern District of New York release and press coverage record the 4 November 2022 acquittal of Barrack and Grimes.

Evidence: Exhibit 831, Exhibit 833, Exhibit 832

§6.7.2

Release titles and press coverage report these outcomes. The Menendez verdict is reported as convictions on all counts, including acting as an agent of Egypt. Menendez denied acting as an agent and said he would appeal, as press reported. The Craig verdict concerned one false-statement count in United States v. Craig (D.D.C. 19-cr-125).

§6.7.3

Barrack was charged in a July 2021 indictment with acting as an agent of the United Arab Emirates between April 2016 and April 2018, and Grimes and a UAE national were charged with him. A Brooklyn jury acquitted Barrack and Grimes. An acquittal is a finding under a criminal standard of proof about the charged conduct.

§6.7.4

The matters involve a sitting senator, a former White House counsel, an outside adviser to a 2016 presidential campaign, a retired Army general who founded a consulting firm, political consultants, and law and lobbying firms. The documents cited here do not state party membership, and party roles reported in the press are not tied to a primary document, so no party is assigned to these matters and the record cannot be tallied by party. The matters ended in a plea document, a dismissal, a settlement, a reversed acquittal, three acquittals and one conviction.

Matters in this chapter: foreign principal, charging or determining document, and outcome in the cited sources
Matter	Foreign principal	Document	Outcome in the cited sources
Manafort and Gates	Ukraine	Superseding information, 14 Sep 2018	Pleaded
Podesta Group, Mercury	European Centre for a Modern Ukraine	DOJ letters, 31 Mar 2017	Obligation to register determined; no charge in cited documents
Skadden	Government of Ukraine	DOJ fact sheet, 17 Jan 2019	Agreed to register after admission
Craig	Ukraine work	United States v. Craig, 19-cr-125	Acquitted, 4 Sep 2019 (reported)
Flynn	Turkey	Statement of the offense, 1 Dec 2017	Dismissed as moot, 8 Dec 2020
Rafiekian	Turkey	Fourth Circuit opinion, 18 May 2023	Convicted 2019; verdict set aside; new trial affirmed
Barrack, Grimes	United Arab Emirates	EDNY indictment, 20 Jul 2021	Acquitted, 4 Nov 2022 (reported)
Menendez	Egypt	S4 indictment, 5 Mar 2024	Convicted, 16 Jul 2024 (reported)

Exhibit 831 · Agency press release

Statement of U.S. Attorney Damian Williams on the convictions of U.S. Senator Robert Menendez and two businessmen; sentencing release

ROBERT MENENDEZ, 70, of Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey; WAEL HANA, 40, of Edgewater, New Jersey, and originally of Egypt; and FRED DAIBES, 66, of Edgewater, New Jersey, were convicted of the charges listed in the chart below.

A jury convicted Menendez on all counts, including acting as an agent of Egypt, on 16 July 2024; the office later announced a sentence of 11 years (29 January 2025).

Source: U.S. Attorney's Office, Southern District of New York
Date: 16 July 2024; sentencing 29 January 2025
Quoted from: SDNY statement dated Tuesday, 16 July 2024, paragraph above the charges chart; chart counts 15 and 16 are 'Conspiracy for a public official to act as a foreign agent' and 'Public official acting as a foreign agent' (Menendez)
Grade: Reported
Document: https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/statement-us-attorney-damian-williams-convictions-us-senator-robert-menendez-and-two
Accessed: 2026-11-09
Cited by: Findings citing this exhibit

Exhibit 833 · News report

Jury Finds Ex-White House Counsel Craig Not Guilty Of Lying To Government

A D.C. jury acquitted Gregory Craig, a former Obama White House counsel and Skadden partner, of one count of making false statements to the Justice Department about Ukraine work (United States v. Craig, 19-cr-125, D.D.C.).

Source: NPR
Date: 4 September 2019
Grade: Reported
Document: https://www.npr.org/2019/09/04/757603189/jury-finds-ex-white-house-counsel-craig-not-guilty-of-lying-to-government
Accessed: 2026-11-09
Cited by: Findings citing this exhibit

Exhibit 832 · Agency press release

Former advisor to presidential candidate among three defendants charged with acting as agents of a foreign government (EDNY release); verdict reporting, 4 November 2022

A seven-count indictment was unsealed today in federal court in Brooklyn

The release announced a seven-count indictment of Thomas Barrack, Matthew Grimes and a UAE national for acting as agents of the UAE between April 2016 and April 2018. A Brooklyn jury acquitted Barrack and Grimes on all counts on 4 November 2022. DOJ's FARA recent-cases page also notes the acquittal.

Source: U.S. Attorney's Office, Eastern District of New York
Date: 20 July 2021; acquittal 4 November 2022
Quoted from: EDNY press release dated Tuesday, 20 July 2021, opening sentence
Grade: Reported
Document: https://www.justice.gov/usao-edny/pr/former-advisor-presidential-candidate-among-three-defendants-charged-acting-agents
Accessed: 2026-11-09
Cited by: Findings citing this exhibit

6.8 What registrants report from Qatar

Finding POL-6.10Primary record

DOJ's report for July to December 2025 lists 29 registrants with a Qatar-related foreign principal, and 19 of them report amounts received. The largest listed amounts are $1,820,400 for Finn Partners from Qatar Museums and $420,000 each for BGR Government Affairs and Bachner Group.

Pages 233 to 236 of the Attorney General's report for six months ending 31 December 2025 list the Qatar-related registrants. The report states that its dollar figure is the "total amount of money received in the United States by agents working on behalf of the foreign principal."

Evidence: Exhibit 822

Mechanism: Lobbying and purchased policy

§6.8.1

The listed Qatar-related principals include the embassy, the State of Qatar, Qatar Museums, the Qatar Investment Authority, QatarEnergy, Qatar Foundation, Barzan Holdings and the International Media Office. Of 29 registrant entries, 19 report amounts and 10 report none. The registrants' six-month periods end between 31 July and 31 December 2025, so the amounts are not a calendar-year total. Adding the 19 reported amounts gives $6,023,176.79, a sum of figures for differing periods that is not a total for any defined period.

§6.8.2

The report states that the Qatar list "necessarily includes foreign principals which have no association with a foreign government." Qatar Museums is the principal behind the largest listed amount, and Finn Partners reports public relations work on cultural projects for it. BGR Government Affairs reports $420,000 from the Embassy of the State of Qatar, Bachner Group reports $420,000 from Qatar, and GRV reports $400,000.

§6.8.3

A FARA amount records money received by an agent for services in a period. No cited document links any of these amounts to an act of an official.

6.9 Think tanks

Finding POL-6.11Reported

The New York Times reported on 6 September 2014 that at least 64 foreign governments, state-controlled entities or officials had contributed to 28 major U.S. research organizations since 2011, at least $92 million according to institutional disclosures, government documents and foreign lobbying reports. The Times reported that the organizations did not disclose the terms of their agreements and had not registered under FARA. Brookings and the Atlantic Council told the Times that their scholars are independent.

The Times investigation, by Lipton, Williams and Confessore, states: "The think tanks do not disclose the terms of the agreements they have reached with foreign governments. And they have not registered with the United States government as representatives of the donor countries, an omission that appears, in some cases, to be a violation of federal law, according to several legal specialists who examined the agreements at the request of The Times."

Evidence: Exhibit 846

§6.9.1

The article reports a $5 million agreement under which Norway funded the Center for Global Development, a four-year $14.8 million donation from Qatar to Brookings and a donation of more than $1 million from the United Arab Emirates to the Center for Strategic and International Studies. It reports at least 64 donors and at least $92 million in contributions since 2011, figures it derives from the institutions' disclosures, government documents and foreign lobbying reports. The think tanks do not disclose the terms of the agreements.

§6.9.2

Brookings and the Atlantic Council told the Times that their scholars are independent. The Center for Global Development's chief operating officer, Todd Moss, said of the registration question, "We will absolutely seek counsel on this." The inspector general's 2016 audit records that think tanks and nongovernmental organizations generally claim they act independently of foreign control.

Exhibit 846 · News investigation

Foreign Powers Buy Influence at Think Tanks

Reports that since 2011 at least 64 foreign governments, state-controlled entities or officials contributed to 28 major U.S. research organizations, at least $92 million, a figure the article derives from the institutions' disclosures, government documents and foreign lobbying reports. Reports that the think tanks do not disclose agreement terms and have not registered under FARA, and that legal specialists said some arrangements appear to merit registration. Brookings and the Atlantic Council said their scholars are independent; the Center for Global Development's chief operating officer said of the registration question, 'We will absolutely seek counsel on this.' Cites Norway's $5 million agreement with the Center for Global Development and Qatar's $14.8 million four-year donation to Brookings. Archived copy of the web page.

Source: Eric Lipton, Brooke Williams and Nicholas Confessore, The New York Times
Date: 6 September 2014 (web date 7 September)
Grade: Reported
Document: https://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/07/us/politics/foreign-powers-buy-influence-at-think-tanks.html
Accessed: 2026-11-09
Cited by: Findings citing this exhibit
Note: Wording as reported in the secondary copy: "The think tanks do not disclose the terms of the agreements they have reached with foreign governments." (para. 5).

Finding POL-6.12Primary record

As of 10 November 2026, DOJ's FARA registrant file contains no registrant named Brookings, the Atlantic Council or the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

A name search of the Justice Department's FARA registrant file on 10 November 2026 returned no registrant named Brookings, the Atlantic Council or the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Evidence: Exhibit 823

§6.9.3

The search is limited to the registrant name. An organization could register through counsel or under another name. The search shows only that those three names are absent from the file. The cited record includes no post-2014 primary record of the volume of foreign-government funding of U.S. research organizations, so current amounts are an open question (section 6.15).

6.10 The Endowment: statute and money

Finding POL-6.13Primary record

The National Endowment for Democracy Act of 1983 defines NED as a private nonprofit corporation that is not an agency of the U.S. Government, lists exchanges with "the two major American political parties, labor, and business" among its purposes, and subjects NED and its grantees to congressional oversight. The State Department paid NED congressional appropriations of $315,079,941 for fiscal 2022, $315,000,000 for 2023, $315,249,800 for 2024 and $315,860,780 for 2025.

The Act is Public Law 98-164, title V, of 22 November 1983. Its text defines the Endowment as a private corporation outside the Government and gives Congress oversight of the Endowment and its grantees. The amounts below come from Note 5 of NED's audited statements.

Evidence: Exhibit 834, Exhibit 835, Exhibit 840, Exhibit 837, Exhibit 838, Exhibit 839

§6.10.1

The Act was Public Law 98-164, title V, of 22 November 1983. Section 4412(e) set minimum amounts for fiscal 1984 and 1985 of $13,800,000 for the Free Trade Union Institute and $2,500,000 for the National Chamber Foundation. The annual grant originally came through the U.S. Information Agency and now comes through the State Department. The table gives the congressional appropriations stated in Note 5 of NED's audited statements, with the statements' total expenses.

NED appropriations received from the State Department and total expenses, by fiscal year
Fiscal year	Appropriation received	U.S. government grant revenue	Total expenses
2022	$315,079,941	$321,202,997	$322,805,657
2023	$315,000,000	$362,047,237	$363,214,993
2024	$315,249,800	$354,129,218	$355,484,413
2025	$315,860,780	$296,324,822	$298,423,023

§6.10.2

The 2023 statements state that "substantially all of the Endowment's revenue was related to appropriations and grants from the U.S. government." The 2025 statements report no subsequent events and do not mention the withholding dispute in section 6.12.

Exhibit 834 · Statute

National Endowment for Democracy Act, 22 U.S.C. 4411 (findings and purposes), Pub. L. 98-164, title V

to facilitate exchanges between United States private sector groups (especially the two major American political parties, labor, and business) and democratic groups abroad

Finds that the Endowment is a private nonprofit corporation that is not an agency or establishment of the U.S. Government, and sets its purposes, including exchanges between U.S. groups and democratic groups abroad and participation by the two major parties, labor and business.

Source: U.S. Congress
Date: 22 November 1983
Quoted from: 22 U.S.C. § 4411(b)(2)
Grade: Primary record
Document: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/22/4411
Accessed: 2026-11-09
Cited by: Findings citing this exhibit

Exhibit 835 · Statute

National Endowment for Democracy Act, 22 U.S.C. 4412 (grants to the Endowment)

The Endowment and its grantees shall be subject to the appropriate oversight procedures of the Congress.

Requires an annual grant to the Endowment, originally from the U.S. Information Agency and now through the State Department. Subsec. (e) set minimum amounts for fiscal years 1984 and 1985: $13,800,000 for the Free Trade Union Institute and $2,500,000 for the National Chamber Foundation. Subsec. (d) subjects the Endowment and its grantees to congressional oversight.

Source: U.S. Congress
Date: 22 November 1983 (amended 1987)
Quoted from: 22 U.S.C. § 4412(d)
Grade: Primary record
Document: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/22/4412
Accessed: 2026-11-09
Cited by: Findings citing this exhibit

Exhibit 840 · Audited financial statements

National Endowment for Democracy audited financial statements, fiscal year ended 30 September 2022

Fiscal Year 2022 Congressional Annual Appropriation received from DOS $ 315,079,941

Note 5: FY2022 congressional appropriation received from the State Department $315,079,941; U.S. government grant revenue $321,202,997; total expenses $322,805,657.

Source: National Endowment for Democracy
Date: Fiscal year ended 30 September 2022
Quoted from: Note 5, Grant Revenue - U.S. Government (PDF p. 14)
Grade: Primary record
Document: https://www.ned.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/NED_22-FS_Final.pdf
Accessed: 2026-11-09
Cited by: Findings citing this exhibit

Exhibit 837 · Audited financial statements and tax return

National Endowment for Democracy audited financial statements and Form 990, fiscal year ended 30 September 2023

substantially all of the Endowment’s revenue was related to appropriations and grants from the U.S. government.

Note 5: FY2023 congressional appropriation received from the State Department $315,000,000; total awards $333,680,861. Statement of activities: U.S. government grant revenue $362,047,237; total expenses $363,214,993. Schedule I lists grants to the four core institutes: International Republican Institute $39,199,882; National Democratic Institute $33,422,549; Solidarity Center $28,701,508 and American Center for International Labor Solidarity $7,286,496 (same EIN); Center for International Private Enterprise $24,024,205 and $9,727,120 (same EIN). Researcher's sum for the four institutes: $142,361,760, or 39.2 percent of total expenses. Whether the paired lines are separate grants is not stated.

Source: National Endowment for Democracy
Date: Fiscal year ended 30 September 2023
Quoted from: Note 6, Concentrations of Revenue
Grade: Primary record
Document: https://www.ned.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/National-Endowment-for-Democracy-FY-2023.pdf
Accessed: 2026-11-09
Cited by: Findings citing this exhibit

Exhibit 838 · Audited financial statements and tax return

National Endowment for Democracy Form 990 and audited financial statements, fiscal year ended 30 September 2024

FY2024 congressional appropriation received from the State Department $315,249,800; total expenses $355,484,413; U.S. government grant revenue $354,129,218 (per the FY2025 comparative column). Schedule I: International Republican Institute $35,410,575; National Democratic Institute $32,831,250; Center for International Private Enterprise $33,392,527; American Center for International Labor Solidarity (Solidarity Center) $34,259,215. Researcher's sum: $135,893,567, or 38.2 percent of total expenses.

Source: National Endowment for Democracy
Date: Fiscal year ended 30 September 2024
Grade: Primary record
Document: https://www.ned.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/National-Endowment-for-Democracy-FY-2024.pdf
Accessed: 2026-11-09
Cited by: Findings citing this exhibit

Exhibit 839 · Audited financial statements

National Endowment for Democracy audited financial statements, fiscal year ended 30 September 2025

Fiscal Year 2025 Congressional Annual Appropriation received from DOS $ 315,860,780

Note 5: FY2025 congressional appropriation received from the State Department $315,860,780. U.S. government grant revenue $296,324,822 (FY2024: $354,129,218); total expenses $298,423,023 (FY2024: $355,484,413). The statements report no subsequent events and do not mention the withholding litigation.

Source: National Endowment for Democracy
Date: Fiscal year ended 30 September 2025
Quoted from: Note 5, Grant Revenue - U.S. Government (PDF p. 16)
Grade: Primary record
Document: https://www.ned.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/2025-National-Endowment-for-Democracy-FS.pdf
Accessed: 2026-11-09
Cited by: Findings citing this exhibit

Finding POL-6.14Primary record

NED's Form 990 lists grants to its four core institutes, the International Republican Institute, the National Democratic Institute, the Center for International Private Enterprise and the Solidarity Center, of $142.4 million in fiscal 2023 and $135.9 million in fiscal 2024, 39 and 38 percent of total expenses. The Republican and Democratic institutes received $39.2 million and $33.4 million in 2023 and $35.4 million and $32.8 million in 2024.

The statute names the two major parties, labor and business as the groups for exchanges, and the four core institutes correspond to those groups.

Evidence: Exhibit 837, Exhibit 838

NED grants to the four core institutes (Form 990, Schedule I)
Institute	Fiscal 2023	Fiscal 2024
International Republican Institute	$39,199,882	$35,410,575
National Democratic Institute	$33,422,549	$32,831,250
Center for International Private Enterprise	$33,751,325	$33,392,527
Solidarity Center	$35,988,004	$34,259,215
Total	$142,361,760	$135,893,567
Share of total expenses	39.2%	38.2%

§6.10.3

For fiscal 2023 the printed schedule gives two lines each for the Center for International Private Enterprise ($24,024,205 and $9,727,120) and the Solidarity Center ($28,701,508 and $7,286,496), each pair under one employer identification number. The table adds each pair, and the schedule does not say whether the paired lines are separate grants. Fiscal 2024 gives one line for each institute.

§6.10.4

Money NED receives from Congress is fungible with its other funds, and the schedule does not trace a dollar from an appropriation to an institute. The Act names the parties, labor and business as purposes. The Republican and Democratic institutes each received tens of millions of dollars in both years.

6.11 The 1991 Weinstein remark

Finding POL-6.15Reported

In a Washington Post column of 22 September 1991, David Ignatius quoted Allen Weinstein, then head of the Center for Democracy, as saying, "A lot of what we do today was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA." The column describes overt funding as avoiding the backlash that exposed covert work produced.

The Washington Post column "Innocence Abroad: The New World of Spyless Coups," 22 September 1991, reads: "'A lot of what we do today was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA,' agrees Weinstein." The wording is quoted from a republished copy of the column.

Evidence: Exhibit 836

§6.11.1

Allen Weinstein was then head of the Center for Democracy, and the column describes the Endowment as funded by Congress. The column's argument is that overt political action draws less backlash than the covert action of earlier decades, and it quotes Weinstein as agreeing with that point. The sentence describes methods used by overt democracy programs in 1991. It is not a statement of a present CIA role in the Endowment's funding or decisions, and no cited document supports such a role.

§6.11.2

The covert relationships of the earlier period are documented in the Church Committee's Book I, which counts about 50 CIA relationships with U.S. journalists or media employees until February 1976. The cited record has one source for the remark, the Post column.

§6.11.3

War and Defense, Chapter 6 (Covert Action and Accountability) sets out the congressional and independent investigations of covert action, including the Church Committee's findings on the CIA and the press.

Exhibit 836 · News column

Innocence Abroad: The New World of Spyless Coups

Column on overt political action replacing CIA covert action. Allen Weinstein, then head of the Center for Democracy, agrees with the column's point that exposed covert work backfired. The column describes the National Endowment for Democracy as funded by Congress.

Source: David Ignatius, The Washington Post
Date: 22 September 1991
Grade: Reported
Document: https://canada-haiti.ca/content/innocence-abroad-new-world-spyless-coups
Accessed: 2026-11-09
Cited by: Findings citing this exhibit
Note: Wording as reported in the secondary copy: "“A lot of what we do today was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA,” agrees Weinstein." (Washington Post, 22 Sep 1991 (republished copy)).

Exhibit 305 · Congressional report

Foreign and Military Intelligence (Church Committee, Book I), S. Rep. 94-755: Covert Relationships with the United States Media

Until February 1976, when it announced a new policy toward U.S. media personnel, the CIA maintained covert relationships with about 50 American journalists or employees of U.S. media organizations.

Documents about 50 CIA relationships with U.S. journalists or media employees as of February 1976, the CIA's February 1976 policy, more than a thousand books produced or subsidized before 1967, and CIA acknowledgement that propaganda 'fallout' in the United States cannot be prevented.

Source: United States Senate, Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations
Date: 26 April 1976
Quoted from: Book I, Part B, Covert Relationships with the United States Media, p. 192 (PDF p. 195)
Grade: Primary record
Document: https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/sites-default-files-94755-i.pdf
Accessed: 2026-11-09
Cited by: Findings citing this exhibit

6.12 The 2025 and 2026 funding dispute

Finding POL-6.16Primary record

On 11 August 2025 a federal district court preliminarily enjoined the withholding of $95 million of NED's fiscal 2025 appropriation and found the stated reason for it not plausible. The State Department obligated NED's full $315 million fiscal 2026 appropriation in March 2026, and the government's motion to dismiss the suit as moot was pending on 9 October 2026. Executive Order 14169 paused new obligations of foreign development assistance for 90 days on 20 January 2025, and on 26 September 2025 the Supreme Court stayed an order to obligate about $10.5 billion of expiring aid without deciding the merits.

On 11 August 2025 Judge Friedrich granted NED a preliminary injunction against withholding $95 million of its fiscal 2025 appropriation. The memorandum opinion states that the State Department's spending plan put unobligated funds "subject to review for alignment with Administration priorities" and that, "Taken as a whole, that evidence leaves little doubt as to the defendants' motivations."

Evidence: Exhibit 841, Exhibit 842, Exhibit 843, Exhibit 844, Exhibit 845

§6.12.1

The opinion records that about $97 million in NED drawdown requests went unpaid from January 2025, that NED sued on 5 March 2025 and that the $97 million was paid on 10 March. By early June about $220 million of the $315 million had been obligated, and on 11 June the government's lawyer said $95 million was reserved for fiscal 2026 under the Antideficiency Act. The court found that explanation, first offered after suit began, not plausible. The opinion quotes a 2 May 2025 letter from the Office of Management and Budget director proposing to eliminate NED funding and asserting that grantees had called for prosecutions of allies of the President. The withholding left 226 approved grants, 124 recommended grants and 53 core-institute projects unfunded. The opinion describes NED as funding grantees directly and through the four core institutes, in about 2,000 projects in over 100 countries.

§6.12.2

The ruling is preliminary and concerns the likelihood of success. On 31 March 2026 a joint status report stated that "the State Department has obligated to the Endowment the $315 million that Congress appropriated for the Endowment in fiscal year 2026," and records the government's representation that it would not act on the allegations of a letter filed as ECF 68. On 17 July 2026 the government argued that "Plaintiff's claims are moot as NED has received the essential requested relief." A notice of 9 October 2026 shows the motion to dismiss was still pending. The government appealed the injunction on 9 October 2025. The cited record covers the second Trump Administration's handling of the appropriation in 2025 and 2026 only.

§6.12.3

Executive Order 14169 of 20 January 2025 directed agency heads to "immediately pause new obligations and disbursements of development assistance funds" pending reviews "for programmatic efficiency and consistency with United States foreign policy," within 90 days, with a waiver by the Secretary of State. On 26 September 2025 the Supreme Court stayed an injunction directing the Executive to obligate about $10.5 billion of expiring appropriated aid, of which $4 billion was proposed for rescission. The order states that the Government "has made a sufficient showing that the Impoundment Control Act precludes respondents' suit" at this early stage and that it "should not be read as a final determination on the merits." Justice Kagan dissented.

Exhibit 841 · Court opinion

Memorandum Opinion, National Endowment for Democracy v. United States, No. 25-cv-648 (DLF), Doc. 46, 795 F. Supp. 3d 63

Taken as a whole, that evidence leaves little doubt as to the defendants’ motivations

Grants NED a preliminary injunction against withholding $95 million of its fiscal 2025 appropriation. Finds that the State Department's spending plan placed unobligated funds under review for alignment with Administration priorities, that the OMB director urged Congress to defund NED because of grantees' criticism of the President's allies, and that the stated reason (reserving funds for FY2026) was not plausible. Records that the withholding left 226 approved grants, 124 recommended grants and 53 core-institute projects unfunded, and that Congress appropriated $315,000,000 for FY2024 and FY2025 at the same level. A preliminary ruling on likely success, not a final judgment.

Source: U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (Judge Dabney L. Friedrich)
Date: 11 August 2025
Quoted from: p. 7
Grade: Primary record
Document: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.278101/gov.uscourts.dcd.278101.46.0.pdf
Accessed: 2026-11-09
Cited by: Findings citing this exhibit

Exhibit 842 · Court filing

Joint Status Report and Plaintiff's Motion to Withdraw Preliminary Injunction Motion, National Endowment for Democracy v. United States, Doc. 70

the State Department has obligated to the Endowment the $315 million that Congress appropriated for the Endowment in fiscal year 2026.

Reports that the State Department obligated the full FY2026 appropriation to NED and that NED drew funds on 30 March 2026, and records the government's representations that it would not interfere with drawdowns or act on the allegations of the Rogers Letter (ECF 68).

Source: U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (parties' filing)
Date: 31 March 2026
Quoted from: p. 1
Grade: Primary record
Document: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.278101/gov.uscourts.dcd.278101.70.0.pdf
Accessed: 2026-11-09
Cited by: Findings citing this exhibit

Exhibit 843 · Court filing

Defendants' Reply in Support of Motion to Dismiss, National Endowment for Democracy v. United States, Doc. 77

But Plaintiff’s claims are moot as NED has received the essential requested relief.

The government's position that NED's claims are moot because FY2025 and FY2026 funds have been obligated and disbursed. NED's notice of supplemental authority (Doc. 78, 9 October 2026) shows the motion to dismiss was still pending and records the FY2027 continuing resolution (Pub. L. 119-103, 2 September 2026).

Source: U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (defendants' filing)
Date: 17 July 2026
Quoted from: p. 1
Grade: Primary record
Document: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.278101/gov.uscourts.dcd.278101.77.0.pdf
Accessed: 2026-11-09
Cited by: Findings citing this exhibit

Exhibit 844 · Executive order

Executive Order 14169, Reevaluating and Realigning United States Foreign Aid, 90 Fed. Reg. 8619

All department and agency heads with responsibility for United States foreign development assistance programs shall immediately pause new obligations and disbursements of development assistance funds to foreign countries and implementing non-governmental organizations, international organizations, and contractors pending reviews of such programs for programmatic efficiency and consistency with United States foreign policy, to be conducted within 90 days of this order.

Sec. 3(a) pauses new obligations and disbursements of foreign development assistance for 90 days for review; OMB enforces the pause through apportionment; sec. 3(e) lets the Secretary of State waive the pause for specific programs.

Source: The White House
Date: 20 January 2025 (published 30 January 2025)
Quoted from: sec. 3(a)
Grade: Primary record
Document: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2025-01-30/pdf/2025-02091.pdf
Accessed: 2026-11-09
Cited by: Findings citing this exhibit

Exhibit 845 · Court order

Department of State v. AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition, No. 25A269, order on application for stay, 606 U.S. 1055

This order should not be read as a final determination on the merits.

Stays a district court injunction that directed the Executive to obligate about $10.5 billion of expiring appropriated aid, of which $4 billion was proposed for rescission under the Impoundment Control Act. States a preliminary view that the Impoundment Control Act likely precludes the grantees' APA suit. Justice Kagan dissented. The order is expressly not a final merits determination.

Source: U.S. Supreme Court
Date: 26 September 2025
Quoted from: p. 1
Grade: Primary record
Document: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/25a269_bp7c.pdf
Accessed: 2026-11-09
Cited by: Findings citing this exhibit

6.13 Section 117 and universities

Finding POL-6.17Primary record

Under Section 117 of the Higher Education Act, Qatar was on 23 February 2026 the largest country of attribution for reported foreign gifts and contracts at U.S. colleges and universities, about $8.8 billion in about 1,300 transactions, and China was second at about $4.9 billion in about 8,000. The Education Department opened 19 Section 117 investigations from 2019 to 2021 under the first Trump Administration, none under the Biden Administration and four to date under the second Trump Administration.

CRS In Focus IF12927 (updated 25 March 2026) states: "As of February 23, 2026, Qatar was the country of attribution with the largest dollar amount of reported transactions (about $8.8 billion), representing about 1,300 transactions." It reports China second at about $4.9 billion over about 8,000 transactions, and Harvard University at about $4.5 billion and Cornell University at $4.2 billion in aggregate.

Evidence: Exhibit 847

§6.13.1

Institutions must report each foreign gift or contract that, alone or combined with others from a single foreign source, totals $250,000 or more in a calendar year. The Education Department has published the data since 1986. The statute defines foreign sources broadly, and the data include governmental and nongovernmental sources and cannot show intent. The Qatar total includes a contract of about $1.1 billion for Weill Cornell Medicine-Qatar.

§6.13.2

CRS states: "From 2019 to 2021 during the first Trump Administration, ED opened 19 investigations into Section 117 noncompliance. The Biden Administration did not open any investigations. The second Trump Administration has opened four investigations to date." The counts are of investigations opened, and CRS reports no measure of noncompliance in each period.

Exhibit 847 · CRS report

Section 117 of the Higher Education Act: Reporting of Foreign Gifts and Contracts, CRS In Focus IF12927 (updated 25 March 2026)

From 2019 to 2021 during the first Trump Administration, ED opened 19 investigations into Section 117 noncompliance. The Biden Administration did not open any investigations.

States the reporting rule ($250,000 per source per calendar year), ED's published spreadsheets since 1986, and totals as of 23 February 2026: Qatar about $8.8 billion across about 1,300 transactions, China about $4.9 billion across about 8,000. Harvard $4.5 billion and Cornell $4.2 billion in aggregate. Enforcement: 19 investigations opened 2019 to 2021 (first Trump Administration), none under the Biden Administration, four to date under the second Trump Administration.

Source: Congressional Research Service
Date: 25 March 2026
Quoted from: History of Enforcement Actions
Grade: Primary record
Document: https://www.everycrsreport.com/reports/IF12927.html
Accessed: 2026-11-09
Cited by: Findings citing this exhibit

Finding POL-6.18Primary record

A February 2019 staff report of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, chaired by Senator Portman (R) with Senator Carper (D) as ranking member, found that 33 of 48 schools required to report Hanban gifts above $250,000 did not, and that $36,089,456 of $51,526,181 that should have been reported for 2012 to 2018 was missing from Education Department data.

The February 2019 staff report of the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, "China's Impact on the U.S. Education System," states that "nearly 70 percent of U.S. schools that received more than $250,000 from Hanban failed to properly report that amount to the Department of Education." In the body it counts 33 of 48 schools.

Evidence: Exhibit 848

Mechanism: The study not run

§6.13.3

The report states that from 2012 to 2018 U.S. schools should have reported $51,526,181 and failed to report $36,089,456. It finds that since 2006 China directly provided over $158 million to U.S. schools for Confucius Institutes. It states that the Education Department last issued guidance on foreign gift reporting in 2004. The subcommittee's chairman, Senator Portman (R), and ranking member, Senator Carper (D), are named on the cover. The scope is Hanban only, and the figures are not a count of all foreign gifts.

§6.13.4

The report calls foreign government spending on U.S. schools "effectively a black hole, as there is a lack of reporting detailing the various sources of foreign government funding."

Exhibit 848 · Congressional staff report

China's Impact on the U.S. Education System, staff report of the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations

nearly 70 percent of U.S. schools that received more than $250,000 from Hanban failed to properly report that amount to the Department of Education.

Finds that from 2006 China directly provided over $158 million to U.S. schools for Confucius Institutes; that 33 of 48 schools (69 percent) required to report Hanban gifts above $250,000 did not; and that of $51,526,181 that should have been reported for 2012 to 2018, $36,089,456 was not. Scope is China's Hanban only.

Source: U.S. Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations (Chairman Portman, Ranking Member Carper)
Date: February 2019
Quoted from: Executive Summary, pp. 2-3
Grade: Primary record
Document: https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/imo/media/doc/PSI%20Report%20China's%20Impact%20on%20the%20US%20Education%20System.pdf
Accessed: 2026-11-09
Cited by: Findings citing this exhibit

6.14 Two registrations

Finding POL-6.19Primary record

The Podesta Group's FARA registration (no. 5926) was dated 1 April 2009 and terminated on 31 December 2017, with 33 foreign principals on the registration record. The firm reported $24.04 million in Lobbying Disclosure Act income for 2016 and $18.13 million for 2017.

Evidence: Exhibit 1292, Exhibit 1289, Exhibit 825

Mechanism: Lobbying and purchased policy

§6.14.1

On 31 March 2017 the Justice Department determined that the Podesta Group had an obligation to register under FARA for work for the European Centre for a Modern Ukraine, based on an engagement of 18 April 2012 (Section 6.5).

Finding POL-6.20Primary record

Ballard Partners holds two FARA registrations in the record: no. 6415, dated 5 April 2017 and terminated 6 February 2021, with 12 foreign principals, and no. 7070, dated 13 January 2022 and active, with 6 foreign principals listed on 10 November 2026.

Evidence: Exhibit 1292

Mechanism: Lobbying and purchased policy

§6.14.2

A firm's FARA registration lists the foreign principals it works for, and its Lobbying Disclosure Act reports state its domestic income. They are separate filings. Chapter 1 gives Ballard's domestic lobbying income for the same years.

Exhibit 1292 · Agency web page

FARA eFile records: Podesta Group, Inc. (no. 5926) and Ballard Partners (nos. 6415 and 7070)

Podesta Group, Inc.: registration 5926 dated 2009-04-01, terminated 2017-12-31, with 33 foreign principals on the foreign-principal list. Ballard Partners: registration 6415 dated 2017-04-05, terminated 2021-02-06, 12 foreign principals; registration 7070 dated 2022-01-13, active, 6 foreign principals listed active on 2026-11-10.

Source: U.S. Department of Justice, National Security Division, FARA Unit (efile.fara.gov)
Date: read 10 November 2026
Grade: Primary record
Document: https://efile.fara.gov/api/v1/Registrants/json/Terminated
Accessed: 2026-11-10
Cited by: Findings citing this exhibit
Note: API responses read; not stored. Terminated-list file sha256 1ba29d869f3039f5fc8e9f1aa1634a49e88cfc670846b695f4056b4731e1152d; Podesta principals file a1c8ce03fc3248cbc644aff4d26e11ad99750de678517651f16bc6858de65a20.

6.15 Questions the sources leave open

§6.15.1

Seven questions remain open in the cited record. The first is how much foreign governments give U.S. research organizations today and on what terms, which no post-2014 primary record answers. The second is the Qatar total for a defined period, which needs registrants' supplemental statements. The third is the primary text of the outcomes in section 6.7: the Menendez judgment, the Barrack verdict, the Craig verdict and docket, the Skadden settlement agreement, the Manafort and Gates pleas, the Flynn pardon and memorandum opinion, and the Rafiekian dismissal.

§6.15.2

The fourth is whether the Podesta Group and Mercury were Company A and Company B, which the information does not state. The fifth is the ruling on the mootness motion and the appeal in the NED case. The sixth is NED's grant-level record by country and program, which its grant database holds. The seventh is the award record for U.S. democracy programs outside NED, which needs USAspending data and not press accounts.

Key findings

FARA requires registration and disclosure, carries criminal and civil penalties, and exempts non-government principals that register under the Lobbying Disclosure Act (6.1).
New registrations were 66 in 2014, 150 in 2019 and 138 in 2025, with 565 active registrants in late 2025 (6.2).
The inspector general counted seven criminal FARA cases from 1966 to 2015 and no civil injunction after 1991 (6.3).
GAO found in 2008 that the FARA unit had fallen from 13 staff to 8 and that DOJ lacked records-inspection authority (6.4).
The Justice Department counts more than twenty people and entities charged in 2018 alone, and lists the Skadden settlement (6.5).
The Manafort information and the Podesta and Mercury letters concern Ukraine work in Washington (6.6).
Flynn's FARA filings about Turkey were stipulated as false, and Rafiekian's 2019 conviction ended in a new-trial order (6.7).
Senator Menendez was charged with acting as an agent of Egypt (6.8).
Reported outcomes: Menendez convicted, Craig and Barrack acquitted (6.9).
Nineteen registrants with a Qatar-related principal report amounts received in the second half of 2025 (6.10).
The Times reported in 2014 that 64 foreign donors gave at least $92 million to 28 think tanks without disclosed terms (6.11).
The FARA registrant file has no entries named Brookings, the Atlantic Council or CSIS (6.12).
NED is a private nonprofit that receives about $315 million a year from Congress (6.13).
NED granted $142.4 million in 2023 and $135.9 million in 2024 to four core institutes, including the Republican and Democratic institutes (6.14).
A 1991 Washington Post column quotes Weinstein on covert work 25 years earlier (6.15).
A 2025 court order found the reason for withholding $95 million of NED's funds not plausible, and the case is unresolved (6.16).
Qatar leads reported Section 117 gifts at about $8.8 billion, and investigations numbered 19, 0 and 4 across three administrations (6.17).
A 2019 Senate report found 33 of 48 schools did not report Hanban gifts above $250,000 (6.18).
The Podesta Group's FARA registration ran from 2009 to 2017 with 33 foreign principals (6.19).
Ballard Partners holds two FARA registrations, the second active since 2022 (6.20).

Version 0.2. Last updated 9 November 2026. Report an error.