Disgraced Ex-Iowa State Senator Testifies Against Ron Paul Aides

“I’m sorry for what I’m about to do.”

Former Iowa state Sen. Kent Sorenson speaks at a Ron Paul rally in December 2011.Charles Dharapak/AP

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


In late 2011, then-Iowa state Sen. Kent Sorenson had committed to backing Michele Bachmann’s presidential campaign in the run-up to the 2012 Iowa caucuses. But Sorenson was getting irritated with Bachmann and felt he owed the Ron Paul campaign something. After all, he testified in an Iowa courtroom Thursday, many of Paul’s campaign staffers had previously worked for the National Right to Work Committee, an anti-union group with close ties to the Paul family, and they had supported Sorenson’s political aspirations with money and manpower.

In the days after Christmas 2011, Sorenson said, the Paul campaign pressured him to switch sides, and after he asked for money to change his endorsement, a Paul operative stuffed a $25,000 check into the hands of Sorenson’s wife. 

Sorenson’s testimony came during the trial of two Paul family political operatives: Jesse Benton, who is married to Ron Paul’s granddaughter, was chairman of the 2012 presidential campaign, and operated a super-PAC backing Rand Paul in the 2016 race. Dimitri Kesari, who gave Sorenson’s wife the $25,000 check, is a longtime National Right to Work Committee and Paul family associate.

While paying for Sorenson’s endorsement violated Iowa Senate rules, it is not illegal under federal law for a presidential campaign to do so. Prosecutors say Kesari and Benton crossed the line when they allegedly tried to cover up the payments to Sorenson. Benton faces one count of making false statements to federal investigators. His attorneys argue that he didn’t know much about the deal with Sorenson and did not lie when he told investigators he knew nothing about the scheme. Kesari, on the other hand, faces a slew of charges, including conspiracy, campaign finance charges, and obstruction of justice.

In court, Sorenson testified about making the decision to switch his endorsement. “I’m sorry for what I’m about to do,” he recalled telling a friend on the Bachmann campaign, after revealing to the friend and others on Bachmann’s campaign that the Paul camp had offered him money to switch sides. Then, Sorenson said, he drove to a Paul event, where he was eagerly greeted by Kesari, who ushered him inside, where Benton and others on the campaign were waiting. Sorenson testified he was led over to meet Benton.

“I remember specifically asking Jesse if they would take care of me,” Sorenson testified, when asked whether he arrived at the Paul event with the expectation of being paid to change his endorsement. The response from Benton, according to Sorenson, was, “You’re bleeding for us—we’ll take care of you.”

Later that night, Sorenson said, Kesari took his cellphone away to prevent him from talking to the media or anyone else about his reasons for switching sides. “I was a wreck,” Sorenson recalled.

Bachmann publicly accused Sorenson of taking money to switch sides—it was later revealed that Sorenson was first paid by Bachmann’s campaign—and according to Sorenson, the morning after his decision, Kesari, Benton, and others counseled him on how to handle the situation and prepped him on how to address the media.

Sorenson pleaded guilty last fall in federal court to charges that he helped the campaign hide the payments. On Wednesday, Ron Paul testified, stating that he didn’t approve of endorsements and certainly wouldn’t have wanted his campaign to pay for one.

Besides Sorenson’s and Paul’s testimonies, prosecutors have introduced dozens of emails and financial records showing that the Paul campaign funneled money to Sorenson via a third party—a company in Maryland that did no work for the campaign but was paid for “audio-visual” work and then turned around and paid Sorenson. The payments are not in dispute, but defense attorneys for Kesari and Benton have argued that they were a normal part of politics and that there was no crime in the way they were reported.

Sorenson will return to the witness stand tomorrow.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate