The Manufactured Scandal: Why POTUS Trump Wants Beyoncé Prosecuted – And Why It’s All Smoke

Date: July 28, 2025

Introduction: A Midnight Rant Ignites a Firestorm

On a late July night in Scotland, amid a high-profile international visit, President Donald Trump unleashed a Truth Social tirade demanding the prosecution of music icon Beyoncé, media mogul Oprah Winfrey, civil rights activist Al Sharpton, and his former presidential rival Kamala Harris. The charge? Allegedly orchestrating “totally illegal” payments for celebrity endorsements during the 2024 election.

The claims were explosive:

• $11 million to Beyoncé for a silent endorsement
• $3 million to Oprah for unspecified “expenses”
• $600,000 to Al Sharpton for minimal effort.

But as fact-checkers scrambled and legal experts weighed in, a stark truth emerged: This scandal exists only in Trump’s rhetoric. Here’s why.

The Accusations: Breaking Down Trump’s Truth Social Bombshell

In his July 27 post, Trump framed the payments as a Democratic conspiracy:

“I’m looking at the large amount of money owed by the Democrats, after the Presidential Election... These ridiculous fees were incorrectly stated in the books and records. YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO PAY FOR AN ENDORSEMENT. IT IS TOTALLY ILLEGAL... They should all be prosecuted!”.

He doubled down on debunked claims:

• Beyoncé was paid $11 million to “walk onto a stage, quickly ENDORSE KAMALA, and walk off” without singing, provoking “booing” crowds.
• Oprah received $3 million for “expenses” while doing “absolutely NOTHING.”
• Sharpton was branded a “lightweight” paid $600K.

The Pattern: This wasn’t new. Trump had floated similar accusations in December 2024 and May 2025, adjusting figures each time (e.g., previously alleging $10M to Beyoncé).

The Reality: What Campaign Finance Records Actually Show

Federal Election Commission (FEC) filings and campaign statements obliterate Trump’s narrative:

1. Beyoncé’s Payment:$165,000 was paid to Beyoncé’s production company, Parkwood Entertainment, for “campaign event production” at an October 2024 Houston rally 2810.The campaign emphasized this covered production costs only, not personal fees. Beyoncé’s mother, Tina Knowles, publicly denounced the $11M claim as a “lie,” noting Instagram flagged it as “False Information”.
2. Oprah’s Role:$1 million went to Harpo Productions for a live-streamed event’s technical costs (set design, crew, equipment). Oprah stressed: “I was not paid a dime... The people who worked needed to be paid”.
3. Sharpton’s Involvement:$500,000 was sent to Sharpton’s National Action Network (NAN) – consistent with reimbursements to groups hosting campaign events.

The Legal Truth: No federal law prohibits campaigns from paying for endorsements if disclosed. Covering event production costs is routine and legal.

The $11 Million Mirage: Anatomy of a Disinformation Campaign

Trump’s fantastical $11M figure has no basis in reality:

• Origin: Traced to Trump-friendly social media circles in late 2024, where a “$10M payment” myth circulated. Fact-checkers (FactCheck.org, PolitiFact) found zero evidence.
• Trump’s “Source”: When pressed in February 2025, he vaguely attributed it to “Somebody just showed me something”.
• Campaign Context: Harris’ campaign spent $1.15 billion – but payments to Beyoncé/Oprah’s companies were drops in a vast ocean.

Why This Number? Experts note $11M is engineered for viral outrage – framing celebrities as greedy manipulators.

The Legal Theater: Prosecution Threats as Political Strategy

Trump’s demand for “prosecution” is part of a broader pattern:

• Weaponizing Justice: He’s repeatedly threatened legal action against opponents (Harris, media networks, publishers) .
• Distraction Tactic: The rant coincided with mounting pressure over his ties to Jeffrey Epstein, which the White House has refused to clarify 8.
• Undermining Trust: By falsely claiming payments are “illegal,” he paints Democrats as corrupt, energizing his base despite lacking evidence.

Legal analyst Rebecca Ballard notes:

“This is performative intimidation. Campaign finance law allows reimbursing production costs – which is all Harris did. Trump knows this but exploits public unfamiliarity with FEC rules.”

The Celebrities Fight Back: Denials and Defiance

• Beyoncé: At the Houston rally, she insisted, “I’m not here as a celebrity... I’m here as a mother” 3. Her team called the $11M claim “beyond ridiculous”.
• Oprah: Clarified on Instagram that she took no personal fee, calling production reimbursements standard.
• Sharpton: Though silent now, NAN historically receives event-related funding from both parties.

Why Beyoncé? The Symbolic Target

Trump’s focus on Beyoncé isn’t random:

1. Cultural Influence: As a Black female icon with immense reach, she embodies the “woke elite” Trump’s base resents.
2. Nostalgia for Grievance: He revived a 2016 feud where he called her “ungrateful” after meeting with BLM activists.
3. Racial Undertones: Critics note his attacks often hyperscrutinize women of color (Harris, Beyoncé) while ignoring similar payments in GOP campaigns