House Democrats are launching an investigation into Donald Trump’s meeting with oil executives last month at his Mar-a-Lago Club, where the former president asked the executives to steer $1 billion to his 2024 campaign and promised to reverse dozens of President Biden’s environmental policies.
In letters sent Monday evening, Democrats on the House Oversight Committee asked nine oil executives to provide detailed information on their companies’ participation in the meeting. The Democrats voiced concern that Trump’s request at the dinner may have been a quid pro quo and may have violated campaign finance laws, although experts say his conduct probably did not cross the threshold of being illegal.
Lawmakers sent the letters to the CEOs of Cheniere Energy, Chesapeake Energy, Chevron, Continental Resources, EQT Corporation, ExxonMobil, Occidental Petroleum and Venture Global. They also fired off a missive to the head of the American Petroleum Institute, the oil industry’s top lobbying arm in Washington.
Rep. Jamie Raskin (Md.), the top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, asked the executives to provide the names and titles of any company representatives who attended the Mar-a-Lago dinner, copies of any materials shared with the attendees, a description of any policy proposals discussed at the event, and a list of any contributions to the Trump campaign made during or after the event.
Raskin also asked the executives to provide a copy of any draft executive orders or policy paperwork that their companies have prepared for Trump or his campaign. Politico reported that oil industry lawyers and lobbyists have drawn up executive orders for Trump to sign in a possible second term, including directives aimed at boosting natural gas exports and offshore oil drilling.
Asked about the letter, Andrea Woods, a spokeswoman for the American Petroleum Institute, said in an email: “The premise of Mr. Raskin’s letter is patently false and an attempt to distract from a needed debate about America’s future — one that requires more energy, including more oil and natural gas. As the leading voice for America’s energy workforce, API regularly meets with policymakers and candidates and shares our priorities.”
A Venture Global spokeswoman said of the meeting with Trump: “Venture Global regularly engages with government officials — both past and present — on a bipartisan basis and this meeting was no different. We would welcome a similar conversation with President Biden at any time.”
A spokesman for Cheniere Energy declined to comment on the letter. Spokespeople for the other oil companies did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Democrats on the Oversight Committee lack certain investigative powers because Republicans control the House. If the oil companies decline to turn over the information, Democrats will not be able to subpoena the firms, stymying their investigation.
Yet Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), a vocal climate advocate who chairs the Senate Budget Committee, which wields subpoena power, has voiced interest in launching his own probe.
Trump’s comments at the dinner are “practically an invitation to ask questions about Big Oil’s political corruption and manipulation,” Whitehouse said in an emailed statement.
“Fossil fuel malfeasance will cost Americans trillions in climate damages, and the Budget Committee is looking at how to ensure the industry cannot simply buy off politicians in order to saddle taxpayers with the bill,” he added.
At the Mar-a-Lago meeting, Trump promised to immediately end the Biden administration’s freeze on permits for new liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports in a second term, according to people who attended. He also pledged to start auctioning off more leases for oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico and to reverse restrictions on drilling in the Alaskan Arctic.
Experts said Trump’s remarks at the dinner probably didn’t violate campaign finance laws as currently interpreted by the Federal Election Commission and the Supreme Court. They said a violation would need to involve a clear quid pro quo in which Trump promised to take a specific policy action in exchange for a specific campaign contribution.
“This alone is probably not enough to indicate the existence of a quid pro quo,” said Dan Weiner, director of elections and government at the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University’s law school.
Trump “was doing what candidates often do, which is saying, ‘Please give me money, and I will do the things that I know you want,’” Weiner added. “The brazenness is still quite astonishing, and it certainly flies in the face of the spirit of the law, if not the letter.”
Former Obama White House ethics adviser Norm Eisen, a Trump critic and prominent supporter of the four criminal cases against him, agreed.
“I’m not saying it’s a violation of the law,” said Eisen, who served as special counsel to the House’s first impeachment of Trump. “But it raises serious questions, and it’s a reminder of why we have those laws on the books.”
