Stormy Daniels’ crowdfunding raises transparency questions


Stormy Daniels has raised nearly a half-million dollars to fund her lawsuit against President Donald Trump, relying on contributions from a crowdfunding site. Her lawyer has repeatedly pointed to the public site as evidence that he and his client aren’t bankrolled by Trump’s political foes.

But the truth is, no one knows precisely who is funding the effort.

The more than 14,000 donations have been made mostly anonymously in amounts ranging from $10 to $5,000. Through Monday, Daniels, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford, and her attorney, Michael Avenatti, raised more than $490,000 on, a crowdfunding site dedicated to helping people raise money for legal fees. About $100,000 arrived in the last week after Avenatti released documents about payments Trump’s personal lawyer, Michael Cohen, received from private companies seeking information about the president’s beliefs on various issues.

The target for donations is $850,000, which Avenatti called a “realistic and reasonable target based on what we know right now.”

Jessica Levinson, a professor at Loyola Law School, said it’s unusual but “not totally unheard of” for a lawyer to seek online donations to cover legal costs.

“It does bring up some ethical concerns in terms of who is actually giving this money and whether they will try to exert influence,” said Levinson, who also is president of the Los Angeles City Ethics Commission. donors can choose whether to share their names with the person seeking funds. The site displays donations with either a first name or as anonymous donor.

Kathleen Clark, a professor of ethics law at Washington University, echoed Levinson’s concern.

The anonymous donations can be “fodder for public debate on who is actually backing this lawsuit,” Clark said.

“Of course when the third party is actually 14,000 different people it seems actually less of a danger than it would be in an ordinary case where a single third party would be paying,” she said.

Levinson said as long as Avenatti doesn’t change his legal strategy because of the payments, there isn’t an inherent ethical issue.

Read more at the AP