Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Campaign Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
ActBlue witness Wallace Jones invokes Fifth Amendment as Republicans press on foreign donations
Summary
At a House Judiciary Committee hearing, witness Wallace Jones repeatedly declined to answer questions about alleged foreign contributions to ActBlue, invoking her Fifth Amendment right after repeated questioning from Republican members who cited an "up to 38 million" contributions figure and counsel statements.
Wallace Jones, an ActBlue witness appearing before a House Judiciary Committee hearing, repeatedly invoked her Fifth Amendment right and declined to answer detailed questions about alleged foreign-origin donations and internal legal staffing.
Republican committee members pressed Jones on allegations they said were raised by legal counsel and by an ActBlue board chairman, including a claim that ActBlue accepted "up to 38 million contributions" in 2024 that showed signs of foreign origin. In a series of exchanges, Jones responded to multiple questions with the same statement: "On the advice of counsel, I respectfully decline to answer the question pursuant to my Fifth Amendment rights under the Constitution." The refusals covered queries about the number of foreign contributions, whether ActBlue accepted money from Russia, and why her in-house legal team left.
"We're here because Republicans are playing politics," one Republican member said during an opening rebuke, and later accused Jones and her legal team of misleading Congress. The questioners identified Covington Burling and Dana Remus as outside counsel they said raised allegations about Jones's testimony.
A lawmaker who identified himself as the "gentleman from North Carolina" said he regretted that the hearing had become partisan and pressed Jones on whether she regretted any past ActBlue practices. Jones again declined to answer on Fifth Amendment grounds.
Committee members said the repeated refusals mean those factual questions may be resolved in court. One Republican criticized the expense of the legal representation behind Jones and said the matter might ultimately be decided by a court.
The hearing record shows multiple rounds of questioning and repeated invocations of constitutional privilege; no witness testimony addressing the substance of the foreign-contribution allegations was provided during the exchange. The committee did not record a vote or formal action in the provided transcript excerpt.
