Photo via TIME

Trump's Taxpayer-Funded Ads Draw Bipartisan Criticism

Read the original at TIME ↗
Cite

Guzman, C. d. (2026, September 28). Trump's Taxpayer-Funded Ads Draw Bipartisan Criticism. TIME. https://time.com/article/2026/09/28/trump-ads-democrats-republicans-bipartisan-criticism-taxpayer-funds/

Dated when The Aporia collected the article, usually within hours of publication. Check the original for its exact date and byline.

TIME · collected 2026-09-28 · by Chad de Guzman

Quick Summary

Donald Trump's recent taxpayer-funded television advertisements have drawn criticism from lawmakers across party lines for potentially violating federal law. Two ads, one titled "Final Battle" and the other featuring music by JMSN with campaign talking points, have aired during major TV events like NFL games and Fox News Sunday. The “Final Battle” ad cost over $362,000 while the JMSN-ad has incurred nearly $920,000 in taxpayer funds as of reporting. Both ads are part of a mid-term election push, with some lawmakers questioning their legality and appropriateness, including Republican Senator John Kennedy who stated that public officials should not spend public money on private advertisements for themselves.
Written by AI on 2026-09-28, from this article's own text only (the story summary below draws on all the coverage).

AI analysis

Story summary

In mid-October 2018, the Trump administration began airing a series of ads on major networks like Fox News and CBS that praised President Trump's achievements. These ads were funded by taxpayer money and included phrases such as "Paid for by the U.S. Government." The first ad aired on Fox News, denouncing communism while highlighting domestic manufacturing, tax cuts, and law enforcement support.

The ad featured images of Trump at various events with patriotic music in the background and text stating, “America will never be a communist country.” It drew criticism from Democrats like Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD), who accused it of violating federal rules against using government funds for political campaigns. Raskin said such use could constitute "felony criminal theft" and violate the Hatch Act.

By October 19, AdImpact reported that spending on these ads had increased from $14,000 to $430,000 over three days, running in markets across the country. The White House defended the ad as a "public service announcement," arguing it was educational and patriotic rather than political.

Critics argue that with midterm elections approaching, these ads blur the line between government messaging and campaign propaganda, raising concerns about ethical violations and misuse of taxpayer dollars.

Written for “Taxpayer Funded Pro-Trump Ads” on 2026-11-03, grounded in this article and the 43 other(s) covering the same event.

Story

📰 Taxpayer Funded Pro-Trump Ads
Politics · 44 article(s) covering the same event. Compare every outlet's account →

Compared with similar articles

This article reads unscored and hedges 8% of its claims. Each row says how that neighbour differs.
The Straits Times
⚖️ Leans left Hedges 0 of 17 claims Outlet record 66/100
The Independent
⚖️ Leans left Hedges 2 of 19 claims Outlet record 59/100
“The articles describe different commercials aired at distinct times and with different content.”
The Guardian
Hedges 4 of 30 claims Outlet record 66/100
The Independent
⚖️ Leans left Hedges 1 of 21 claims Outlet record 59/100
NBC News
⚖️ Leans right Hedges 1 of 26 claims Outlet record 60/100
The Bulwark
⚖️ Leans strongly left Hedges 5 of 81 claims
CBS News
Hedges 0 of 2 claims Outlet record 66/100
The Bulwark
⚖️ Leans left Hedges 0 of 15 claims
CBS News
⚖️ Leans left Hedges 0 of 3 claims Outlet record 66/100
How this article was measured signals, leaning charts, publisher record, byline, topics and claims

Signals How these are calculated →

Claims extracted
36
sentences that state something as happening or true
Uncertain
8%
3 of 36 hedged ("reportedly", "may", "according to")
Leaning
withheld
no quote in the article backed the model's score
Publisher signals
59/100
TIME's corrections and hedging, across everything collected from it. Not a measure of accuracy.
Outlets on this story
44
Politics
Same framing elsewhere
1
articles that frame the event the way this one does
Analyzed 2026-09-28 · how these are computed

How this is being covered How these are calculated →

Article leaning vs. publisher reliability
Source leaning vs. consistency

Publisher

TIME · 793 article(s) · 2 correction(s) detected
Running correction rate · 2 correction(s)

Who wrote this

Chad de Guzman
30 article(s) here · 1 carrying a prediction
🔮 It’s the most expensive election cycle in U.S. history in terms of political ad spending, with more than $11 billion expected to be spent, according to analysis firm AdImpact.
🔮 “But Haley said what few people are willing to say.
🔮 The announcement, posted on social media overnight, followed President Donald Trump’s call for Peltola’s prosecution and escalated Republican efforts to challenge her candidacy just days before an election that could help determine control of the Senate.
🔮 Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez, who visited the crash site, announced that his government would declare three days of mourning in response and vowed an investigation.
🔮 “We know what is at stake, and since I am not allowed to say things explicitly, I will say: Vote correctly.
🔮 The other amendment is an apparent roundabout way to preserve patrilineal succession: members of the royal family may adopt a male from former imperial branch families, and those adoptees’ future male offspring can be considered legitimate successors to the throne.
🔮 Edmundo González Urrutia, another key opposition figure, also posted on social media Sunday that Machado is “on Venezuelan soil” and that he would soon be with her “so that our country truly advances toward freedom.”
🔮 “We will make every resource they need available,” he added.
🔮 On Monday, the Philippines House of Representatives passed a bill banning children under 13 from social media platforms, while those between 13 and 17 would have limited access, with 287 members voting in favor and only three against the measure.
🔮 A senior U.S. official told the AP on Sunday that Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio are “extremely pissed off” by Guilfoyle’s reported conduct and would likely assess future action after the Monday U.S. holiday.
Also by Chad de Guzman
Nothing else under this byline is closely related to this article, so these are simply their most recent.
All 30 articles by Chad de Guzman →

Topics

AdImpact CNBC CNN Truth Social the U.S. Government

Subjects

Trump PERSON · 7× the White House ORG · 3× AdImpact ORG · 2× CNBC ORG · 2× Democrats NORP · 2× JMSN PERSON · 2× John Kennedy PERSON · 2× White House ORG · 2× Donald Trump PERSON · 1× Truth Social ORG · 1×

Narrative

Trump posted the same video on his Truth Social platform in 2023, but with one difference: Then, the monochromatic ad ended with words on screen calling on the viewer to join Trump’s campaign and fine print saying it was “Paid for by Donald J. Trump for President 2024, Inc.”
framing: assertive · carried by 1 article(s) · first seen 2026-09-28
🔮 “This is the final battle,” Donald Trump could be heard saying in one of the taxpayer-funded television ads that aired ahead of the November elections and elicited scrutiny across political parties for potential violations of federal law.
2026-09-28 · TIME
Trump's Taxpayer-Funded Ads Draw Bipartisan Criticism · assertive framing

Claims (36 extracted, 3 hedged)

“This is the final battle,” Donald Trump could be heard saying in one of the taxpayer-funded television ads that aired ahead of the November elections and elicited scrutiny across political parties for potential violations of federal law. uncertain
that → hear → law
The 30-second ad is a black-and-white video of Trump walking down a hall over audio of his warnings against “the deep state,” “warmongers,” “globalists,” “Marxists,” “communists,” and “fascists.” asserted
Trump → walk → state
Trump posted the same video on his Truth Social platform in 2023, but with one difference: Then, the monochromatic ad ended with words on screen calling on the viewer to join Trump’s campaign and fine print saying it was “Paid for by Donald J. Trump for President 2024, Inc.” asserted
it → post → President
This time, the 2026 ad says at the bottom: “Paid for by the U.S. Government.” asserted
ad → say → Government
CNN reported that the ad aired during at least two NFL games on Sunday. asserted
ad → report → Sunday
CNBC also reported that the ad aired during Fox News Sunday, citing data from advertising intelligence company AdImpact, adding that the TV ad has cost more than $362,000 so far. asserted
ad → report → 362,000
Another ad with the same “paid for by the U.S. government” disclaimer began airing on Wednesday. asserted
ad → pay → Wednesday
The ad, which featured the song “Love Me” by singer-songwriter JMSN, showed a montage of photos and videos of Trump, intercut with campaign talking points like “largest tax cuts in history” and “reigniting American manufacturing.” asserted
which → feature → manufacturing
This ad, which CNBC reported also aired over the weekend, citing AdImpact data, has cost the federal government nearly $920,000 to date. asserted
CNBC → report → date
It also apparently did not get the approval of JMSN, who posted on social media that he “would never authorize my music to be used for ANY political agenda or campaign.” asserted
music → get → agenda
The ads appear to be part of a campaign blitz ahead of the November midterms, in which the GOP is hoping to defend its majorities in Congress. asserted
GOP → appear → Congress
Some lawmakers, including from his own Republican Party, are raising concerns with Trump and the White House over the advertisements. asserted
lawmakers → include → advertisements
Asked about the ads by CBS News on Sunday, Senator John Kennedy of Louisiana said: “I don’t think any public official, including President Trump or Kristi Noem or John Kennedy, should spend public money on private ads for themselves.” asserted
official → ask → themselves
(Kennedy was referring to former Homeland Security Secretary Noem, who came under fire for spending $220 million on an advertising campaign for border security.) asserted
who → refer → security
When asked about the “Love Me” ad, Senator Thom Tillis of North Carolina said that the use of taxpayer money was reminiscent of the far-right former Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán. asserted
use → ask → Orbán
“It’s inappropriate,” Tillis told reporters. asserted
Tillis → ’ → reporters
Rep. Thomas Massie, a Kentucky Republican and a vocal Trump critic, posted on social media about the “Final Battle” ad: “Don’t worry, using taxpayer dollars to run ominous campaign ads of the President has been done before and is completely legal… in banana republics.” asserted
using → post → republics
Democrats also raised questions. asserted
Democrats → raise → questions
In a Sept. 24 letter to White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, Sen. Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire demanded answers on the “Love Me” ad’s production cost, the agencies and external contractors involved, the source of funds, and the legal and ethical bases for the spot. asserted
Hassan → demand → spot
Hassan wrote in her letter that the ad “does not have a clear official government purpose and appears to run afoul of federal prohibitions.” asserted
ad → write → prohibitions
Sen. Andy Kim of New Jersey posted to social media about the black-and-white clip: “How much taxpayer money did the government spend on this ad?” asserted
government → post → ad
In another Sept. 24 letter, congressional Democrats on appropriations panels wrote to the White House that the “Love Me” ad should be taken off the air, as it was “the sort of government propaganda one might expect in North Korea, not the United States of America, and it is an egregious and illegal misuse of Americans’ hard-earned tax dollars.” uncertain
it → write → dollars
But the White House has defended the ads—which it called, in a Sept. 25 press release, “public service announcements.” asserted
it → defend → release
A White House official told TIME Friday that the ads weren’t political, didn’t have a call to action, and that the President wasn't on the ballot. asserted
President → tell → ballot
A spokesperson instead said that the ads were “about reminding Americans to love their country and understand what makes it worth defending, at home, at our borders, and abroad.” asserted
it → say → borders
What does the law say? asserted
law → say → What
Since the 1950s, yearly funding bills—including the appropriations measure the President recently signed—routinely ban the use of taxpayer funds for “publicity or propaganda.” asserted
President → include → publicity
The Government Accountability Office, which investigates how appropriated funds are spent, has interpreted this to refer to material that is “purely partisan,” “self-aggrandizing,” or “covert.” asserted
that → investigate → material
But it also noted that administrations may need to advocate or defend their policies. uncertain
administrations → note → policies
Some lawmakers have pointed to potential violations of the Hatch Act, the 1939 act that limits the political activities of federal civilian employees in the executive branch. asserted
that → point → branch
The President is exempt from the Hatch Act, though some argue that White House employees who facilitated the airing of the ads aren’t. asserted
who → argue → ads
Last week, the non-profit advocacy group Public Citizen filed a complaint before the GAO and the Office of Special Counsel, which is responsible for overseeing Hatch Act violations, seeking investigation and enforcement of relevant laws. asserted
which → file → laws
In defense of the “public service announcements,” the White House has pointed to previous ad campaigns during the administrations of George W. Bush, Barack Obama, and Joe Biden. asserted
House → point → Bush
(During the Bush Administration, one campaign did violate the anti-propaganda measure.) asserted
campaign → violate → measure
“When prior Administrations utilized the airwaves, it was called ‘public education,’” the Trump White House said. asserted
House → utilize → airwaves
“When this Administration promotes pride in our country, many of those same voices call it ‘propaganda.’” asserted
many → promote → it
💬Give feedback
🕘History 🎫Support