Financial consultant Isabela Herrera, daughter of convicted Venezuelan banker Julio Herrera Velutini, owner of Bancrédito International Bank & Trust Corporation, donated $2.5 million to the political action committee, called MAGA Inc, late last year.

Maga Inc. (Make America Great Again) was created in 2022 by allies of the president of United States, Donald Trump, to raise funds for his and the Republican Party’s activities leading up to the campaign that brought him back to the White House.

The donation was received on December 31, 2024, according to a document published on the digital platform of the Federal Election Commission (FEC), the entity with which political action committees must register and report their donations.

The information initially surfaced in an investigation published by The New York Times, which revealed that, since Trump was elected for the second time, he and his allies have raised nearly $2 billion for the political causes they champion.

The report - just published by the U.S. media outlet yesterday, Monday, December 22 - indicates that a large portion of the funds raised - specifically more than $500 million - was traced back to 346 donors who gave at least $250,000 each.

Also, the journalistic investigation found that more than half of the donors have benefited, or are involved in industries that have benefited, from the actions or statements of President Trump, the White House or federal agencies.

In the case of the $2.5 million donation, a spokesperson for the Federal Department of Justice (DOJ) told the media outlet that “the decision to settle this case was made through appropriate channels and was not influenced by any donation to MAGA Inc.”

However, John D. Keller, who oversaw the DOJ division that handled the case, said in an interview that the difference between the settlement and the more than 20 years in prison that Herrera Velutini could have faced had the original charges been proven against him was “shocking,” according to The New York Times.

Keller, who resigned in protest when Trump appointees allegedly ordered him to drop a politically sensitive prosecution, said Herrera Velutini’s case “appears to be another example of political considerations dictating the outcome of an individual criminal case.”

In August 2022, Herrera Velutini, as well as former Governor Wanda Vázquez Garced and former Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and financial adviser, Mark Rossini, were indicted by a grand jury for an alleged bribery scheme involving his 2020 election campaign.

In summary, all of the defendants faced charges of conspiracy, federal program bribery and honest services wire fraud. However, Herrera Velutini also faces charges relating to a separate bribery scheme.

To face this judicial process, Herrera Velutini hired a battery of lawyers, including Christopher Kise, one of Trump’s main legal representatives, who represented the U.S. president in the dismissed criminal case for illegal handling of classified documents, as well as in the civil case for fraud he faced in New York, related to his companies.

However, after a meeting with senior Department of Justice (DOJ) officials in Washington D.C. in May of this year, the co-defendants and the U.S. Attorney’s Office reached an agreement to avoid the trial, which was scheduled for August.

As a result, a new indictment was filed comprising a single misdemeanor charge under the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA), relating, allegedly, to the acceptance and/or pledging of contributions from a foreign national to a political campaign in the United States.

As a result of this new accusation, the co-defendants pleaded guilty in August before federal judge Silvia Carreño Coll. They are currently awaiting sentencing hearings, which are scheduled for 2026.

“Shockingly, the penalty for violating Section 30121 of the FECA Act is a mere slap on the wrist compared to the sentences they would have faced had they been found guilty through the original plea,” Carreño Coll said in a four-page order he issued last July.

“But, the Government’s decision to change course at the last minute is permissible because, ultimately, it is the Government that decides how it will exercise its prosecutorial discretion,” added the justice, who mentioned that “it is presumed” that the agreement was reached “following guidelines issued by the U.S. Department of Justice.”

However, Vázquez Garced’s defense filed a motion last August in which it stated that the agreement reached with the U.S. Attorney’s Office was due to the existence of “new, compelling and exculpatory evidence” and not to “political pressure”.

“Throughout the process, the government never suggested outside pressure or reluctant capitulation. Instead, her briefs consistently describe voluntary and professional negotiations - language fundamentally incompatible with any suggestion of orders from Washington,” the former governor’s defense added at the time.

The initial indictment alleged that Vázquez Garced; Herrera Velutini, owner of Bancrédito; Rossini; and others not formally charged allegedly participated in a bribery scheme through which the former governor allegedly replaced the head of the Office of the Commissioner of Financial Institutions (OCIF),George Joyner, with a person chosen by Herrera Velutini in exchange for political contributions and consulting services, according to the court document.

This personnel change allegedly occurred after OCIF investigations into possible regulatory violations by Bancrédito.

---

This content was translated from Spanish to English using artificial intelligence and was reviewed by an editor before being published.