LEXINGTON, Ky. — Over the last week, the campaigns of Democratic Gov. Andy Beshear and GOP gubernatorial nominee Attorney General Daniel Cameron been attacking each other over parallel campaign finance controversies.
Both campaigns are hyping the others’ issues to the public and to the FBI. Cameron’s official office first referred the matter of a donor linked to more than $200,000 in donations to Beshear and the Kentucky Democratic Party (KDP) well over the legal limit to the FBI on Thursday.
Then late Friday KDP’s legal team mirrored the actions of Cameron’s office. A KDP attorney alerted the FBI and the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Kentucky of details surrounding a cluster of donations given to, and later refunded by, Cameron from a recovery center that his office was investigating. On Monday, the Associated Press first reported that Cameron “directly solicited” contributions from the center, which is based in Morehead.
Keith Byers, a Kentucky native and retired FBI Special Agent who previously oversaw FBI anti-corruption programs, told the Herald-Leader that it appears as though the campaigns are currently most interested in swaying public opinion against their opponents.
“People who immediately go public with corruption allegations are usually just looking to score political points and generate media attention against their rivals. Current Attorney General Daniel Cameron and former Attorney General Andy Beshear both are well aware that publicity makes it exceptionally more difficult for the FBI to successfully gather evidence and conduct interviews of suspects already prepared for a knock on their door,” Byers said.
Here’s what we know about both cases.
What got reported to the FBI about Cameron?
Counsel to the KDP, Jonathan Berkon of Elias Law Group in Washington D.C., initially sent a letter to Deputy Attorney General Victor Maddox asking Cameron’s office to refer the contributions received from Edgewater Recovery Center to the FBI for investigation.
That same day, Berkon forwarded the letter to the FBI and the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Kentucky.
“I am providing you with my letter to Mr. Maddox so that your office can initiate an investigation on its own, if Mr. Maddox refuses to do so,” Berkon wrote.
In that letter to Maddox, Berkon said that Cameron “likely committed serious violations” of state law when he accepted $6,900 from Edgewater Recovery Center when it was under investigation by the Attorney General’s Office of Medicaid Fraud and Abuse.
“An investigation must ask and answer how the contributions came about, whether Attorney General Cameron was personally involved, and who from the Attorney General’s office or his campaign communicated with Edgewater. Kentucky law prohibits the Attorney General from using or attempting to use ‘his official position to secure or create privileges, exemptions, advantages, or treatment for himself or others in derogation of the public interest at large.,’” Berkon wrote.
No complaint has been filed to the Kentucky Registry of Election Finance (KREF) regarding the donations or Cameron’s behavior as of Tuesday, according to KREF Executive Director John Steffen.
Has anything changed recently with the Cameron case?
Two news stories this week provided new insight into the details of the Edgewater donations. First, the Associated Press initially reported that officials at Edgewater claim that Cameron engaged them earlier this year — as far back as January and into the Spring — soliciting donations while the investigation was ongoing. That investigation by the Office of Medicaid Fraud and Abuse began sometime in 2022.
The report stated that a Cameron campaign official was in contact with Edgewater about hosting a fundraiser, but that event never occurred according to Michael Denbow, an attorney from the firm Stites & Harbison representing the company in the matter.
Cameron’s office responded to scrutiny regarding the Edgewater donations by issuing a statement that acknowledged the discussions but emphasized its propriety in handling the situation.
“There were preliminary conversations about hosting an event. Once we were made aware of a conflict, the event was canceled. When they later made online contributions, I recused myself and the contributions were refunded. My approach has been to review, recuse, and refund,” Cameron said.
On Wednesday, the Cameron campaign stated directly that Cameron was not aware that his own office was investigating Edgewater when those discussions took place.
Later on Monday, reporting from The Daily Beast complicated the initial narrative. A source familiar with the matter told the outlet that Cameron’s campaign, as it had claimed, never technically “canceled” the fundraiser, it was just never finalized.
Aside from Denbow, Ashley Adkins – general counsel for the recovery center – has also commented on the matter to the Daily Beast. Adkins, who is the chair of the Rowan County Democratic Party, also served as counsel to former Democratic U.S. Senate nominee Amy McGrath. She offered up a timeline of events to the outlet.
“On January 20, 2023, a few people associated with Edgewater, including myself, had a call with Daniel Cameron’s campaign about holding a fundraiser for him, and continued communication with them through March to schedule this fundraiser,” Adkins said. “It was in March that Daniel Cameron called and personally asked for a donation.”
The AFL-CIO, a powerful labor union that tends to support Democrats, entered the picture on Tuesday when it submitted a complaint to the state Executive Branch Ethics Commission regarding the donations to Cameron. It suggests that Cameron likely broke state law in using his state position to benefit himself and asks the commission to investigate.
“It is a certainty that Attorney General Cameron’s campaign will claim this request for an investigation by the Executive Branch Ethics Commission is politically motivated. The reality is that it is only appropriate, timely and legally important for an investigation be undertaken by the appropriate authority and such a request needed to be made to protect the public trust in our campaign finance system, ensure accountability for elected officials, and protect the integrity of our elections,” Kentucky State AFL-CIO President Bill Londrigan said in a pres release.
What got reported to the FBI about Beshear?
Maddox’s letter to FBI Louisville Special Agent in Charge Jodi Cohen only made general reference to the Weddle donations being worthy of investigation.
When asked about the situation, Beshear emphasized that his campaign responded to the news of the donations being linked to one credit card swiftly and appropriately. He did not directly respond to a question about whether or not he believes Weddle should be prosecuted for the donations.
Any new developments?
A late clarification from the Beshear campaign on Tuesday made some tweaks to the narrative around Weddle’s contributions.
While the first memo released by the campaign said that “the donors” first brought the issue of Weddle’s credit card and excess donations being tied to his credit card, the campaign said that those “donors” were Weddle and his wife.
Who gave the donations?
London Mayor Randall Weddle is a wealthy businessman elected to office in 2022. A credit card traced to Weddle funded donations to the KDP and to Beshear’s re-election campaign that were marked as being from other people — many of them either members of Weddle’s family or people linked to his business, a freight hauling and ‘reverse logistics’ company.
Weddle is a registered Republican, and previously gave to the campaign of former GOP governor Matt Bevin. He is also under investigation by the Kentucky Registry of Election Finance (KREF) for giving away free gas to area residents months before his 2022 election, as well as providing limousine rides to the polls for primary voters and giving various gifts to public entities in the lead-up to election day.
Byers expressed doubt that much will come from the complaints against either campaign, but said that the FBI could be inclined to examine Weddle’s behavior beyond any connection to Beshear.
“It is unlikely any of this will amount to much pertaining to the two gubernatorial candidates, but London Mayor Randall Weddle better hope the FBI does not start turning over too many rocks pertaining to his alleged past activities,” Byers said.
Six different members of leadership at the Edgewater Recovery Center were the ones recently refunded donations by the Cameron campaign — that included Adkins as well as the owner of the center, John David Elam.
What happened to the money?
In both cases, the candidates refunded all of the money in question to the donors.
Beshear refunded the $202,000 to Weddle’s credit card. Cameron refunded the $6,900 to the donors from Edgewater.
What are the campaigns saying about each other?
There is no evidence of a quid pro quo related to any of the donations. However, Republicans and Democrats are working to paint their opponents in the worst light on both scores.
Republicans have gone so far as to accuse Weddle and Beshear of engaging in “pay-to-play” scheme, pointing to a grant that the City of London recently received and Weddle’s appointment to the Kentucky Transportation Center Advisory Board.
Beshear’s campaign has characterized that accusation as “a sloppy rush to score political points.”
The Beshear team is framing Cameron’s solicitation of donations from Edgewater officials as a “shakedown scandal,” and pointing to inconsistencies in Cameron’s story as reporting continues.
They ask how it can be true, as Maddox wrote in a statement, that Cameron recused “immediately after learning of the contributions, on May 19, 2023” when Cameron himself solicited contributions from Edgewater leaders.
The law
Both sides, to some degree, have alleged that the gubernatorial candidates have used their official positions to benefit their campaigns in potential violation of state law barring such conduct.
That could be difficult to prove, according to University of Kentucky law professor Josh Douglas. He said the current details of the cases make it “murky” as to whether or not any violation actually occurred on that score.
“The mere fact of two things happening at the same time is not enough to suggest a violation… You need to be able to demonstrate that you are using your office in a way that helps your candidacy,” Douglas said.
Existing law regarding campaign finance limits only applies currently to Weddle’s contributions to the KDP and Beshear.
In Weddle’s case, $190,000 to the KDP was traced to his credit card as well as $12,000 to Beshear’s campaign. The campaign individual limit of $2,100 per donor is set by state law. The current limit on individual contributions to state parties is $15,000, a mark set federally by the Federal Election Campaign Act.
