Vice President Harris has raised some eyebrows over potential conflicts of interest related to the substantial support her presidential run has received from individuals and entities engaged in active business dealings before the federal government.
The Harris campaign tapped law firm Covington & Burling to help vet Harris’ potential running mates and advise the campaign’s transition team. The law firm, which also provided the Harris campaign with financial support and experienced attorneys to defend it, is currently challenging the ban on TikTok in the U.S. passed by Congress and signed by President Biden.
One significant supporter of Harris’ campaign includes Chris Larsen, angel investor and co-founder of cryptocurrency firm Ripple Labs. Larsen, who has given Harris’ campaign committees nearly $12 million, is currently in a protracted legal battle with the Securities and Exchange Commission over whether its cryptocurrency, XRP, should be classified as “securities.” Meanwhile, $1 million of Larsen’s money to the Harris campaign was made in the form of his XRP cryptocurrency.
These are among the handful of examples that elucidate potential conflicts of interest that legal experts say don’t necessarily amount to anything illegal, but do raise questions about Harris’ judgment.
EPIC CLASH: PRESSED BY FOX NEWS, KAMALA HARRIS COMES OUT SWINGING
“To establish a violation of law — in the main, bribery — prosecutors would really have to prove a quid pro quo,” Andrew McCarthy, a senior fellow at the National Review Institute and a contributing editor for National Review’s online print publication, told Fox News Digital. “These situations are in the capacious category of arrangements that are ethically troubling, and that could be politically damaging depending on how they play out, but that are probably not legally actionable.”
Last week, attorneys from Covington & Burling and other major D.C. law firms, such as Paul, Weiss LLP, hosted a pricey Washington, D.C., fundraiser for Harris. Among the attorneys present were Weiss’ Karen Dunn, Bill Isaacson and Jeannie Rhee, who are currently defending Google in federal court against the Biden-Harris Justice Department. Additionally, the Harris camp tapped Dunn ahead of the September presidential debate to help Harris prep.
“It’s a conflict of interest if the government is indebted to opposing counsel,” Jeff Hauser, executive director of the Revolving Door Project, told the New York Post after it reported on the fundraiser. “That’s why attorneys should not be allowed to negotiate potential settlements with the Department of Justice if they served as active bundlers, including fundraiser hosts, for that administration.”
Hans von Spakovsky, manager of the Heritage Foundation’s Election Law Reform Initiative, said fundraisers like the one held for Harris last week do “raise concerns about the judgment of some of the people involved,” but Spakovsky also echoed McCarthy’s remarks that there was likely nothing legally actionable.
“If you are helping a political figure who is the boss of a federal prosecutor who is involved in a case with you, I mean that – to me – does clearly raise a conflict of interest,” Spakovsky argued. “Because if the prosecutors then go easy on your client, there’s always going to be a question of, well, ‘Did they do that because the prosecutors’ ultimate boss in the White House told them to go easy on the defense counsel’s client.”
“It may not look good and raises concerns about the judgment of some of the people involved,” Spakovsky concluded. “But I don’t see a legal problem.”
Uber general counsel and Harris’ brother-in-law, Tony West, was also present at last week’s fundraiser, alongside Democrat bigwigs like Eric Holder, a longtime Covington & Burling partner, and former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates. Holder and West are reportedly in the running to be in Harris’ Cabinet if she wins next month.
Fox News Digital reached out to the Harris campaign for comment but did not receive a response by press time.
