Profile of The American Accountability Foundation

Part 1/2 by Perplexity Deep Research. Warning, LLMs may hallucinate!

The American Accountability Foundation (AAF) is a conservative opposition research group playing a significant role in shaping political narratives and personnel decisions within the Trump administration. Here’s a detailed breakdown of its structure, operations, and connections:

Leadership & Key Figures

1. Tom Jones

   • Role: Executive Director and co-founder

   • Background: Former legislative staffer for Senators Ron Johnson (R-WI), Jim DeMint (R-SC), and John Ensign (R-NV). Directed opposition research for Ted Cruz’s 2016 presidential campaign3412.

   • Philosophy: Openly aims to "throw sand in the gears of the Biden administration" and obstruct progressive policies49.

2. Matthew Buckham

   • Co-founder: Worked in the Trump White House Presidential Personnel Office4.

3. Jerome Trankle

   • Research Director: Part of AAF’s team of former legislative/campaign staffers10.

Goals & Activities

• Primary Mission: Disrupt Biden administration nominees and policies through opposition research, public shaming, and media campaigns69.

• Key Initiatives:

  1. D.E.I. Watchlist: Published names/photos of 50+ federal workers involved in diversity programs, alleging "anti-American" agendas511.

  2. DHS Watchlist: Targets immigration officials perceived as hostile to Trump’s border policies611.

  3. Nominee Blockades: Campaigned against Biden appointees like Gigi Sohn (FCC) and Ketanji Brown Jackson (Supreme Court), using ads and opposition dossiers712.

  4. Recent Influence: Linked to Trump’s firings of Librarian of Congress Carla Hayden and Copyright Office head Shira Perlmutter after AAF criticized their DEI advocacy and copyright stances12.

Funding & Political Ties

• Major Funders:

  • Conservative Partnership Institute (CPI): $545,100 (2021–2022). CPI houses ex-Trump officials like Mark Meadows410.

  • Heritage Foundation: $100,000 grant for identifying "anti-American bad actors" in government11.

  • America First Legal Foundation (Stephen Miller’s group): $25,0001012.

  • Leonard Leo’s Network: $50,000 from the 85 Fund1012.

  • Dark Money Channels: Donor-advised funds (e.g., Fidelity Charitable, Goldman Sachs Charitable) obscure original donors410.

• Alliances:

  • Part of Project 2025, a Heritage Foundation-led initiative to staff a future Republican administration with loyalists411.

  • Collaborates with Trump-aligned groups like the Center for Renewing America and Club for Growth1012.

Controversies & Criticisms

• IRS Audit: Investigated for failing to disclose $230,000+ in political ad spending against Biden nominees, risking its tax-exempt status710.

• Ethical Concerns: Accused of McCarthyite tactics for doxxing federal workers and spreading QAnon-adjacent conspiracy theories5711.

• Partisan Focus: Exclusively targets Biden appointees and progressive policies, despite claiming nonpartisanship912.

Current Administration Links

AAF’s influence is evident in Trump’s recent purges of perceived “deep state” officials. For example:

• Carla Hayden (Librarian of Congress) and Shira Perlmutter (Copyright Office) were fired after AFF highlighted Hayden’s DEI advocacy and Perlmutter’s Democratic donations12.

• AAF’s research is cited by Trump allies to justify removals, aligning with Project 2025’s goal to eliminate bureaucratic resistance to a conservative agenda1112.

Summary

AAF operates as a key node in the conservative infrastructure, blending opposition research, media campaigns, and alliances with Trump-aligned groups to disrupt perceived adversaries. Its funding ties to dark money networks and involvement in personnel decisions underscore its role as a political enforcer within the current administration’s broader agenda.

The American Accountability Foundation: An Examination of its Operations, Personnel, and Political Influence

Part 2/2 by Gemini Advanced, Deep Research with 2.5 Pro. Warning, LLMs may hallucinate!

I. Executive Summary

The American Accountability Foundation (AAF), established in 2020, presents itself as a non-partisan government oversight and research organization. However, a comprehensive analysis of its leadership, funding, activities, and affiliations reveals it functions primarily as an aggressive conservative opposition research entity. Led by individuals with extensive backgrounds in Republican politics and opposition research, AAF has focused on derailing Biden administration nominees and, more recently, on identifying and targeting career federal employees perceived as obstacles to a conservative agenda.

Financially backed by prominent conservative organizations, including the Conservative Partnership Institute (CPI) and The Heritage Foundation, AAF operates within a network often described as "dark money" due to the opacity of some of its funding sources. Its key activities include publishing "watch lists" of federal civil servants, campaigning against Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) initiatives, and training conservative staffers in investigative techniques.

AAF's connections to the Trump administration are evident through key personnel, such as co-founder Matthew Buckham who served in Trump's White House, and its alignment with Trump-connected entities like CPI, which employed former Trump Chief of Staff Mark Meadows. Furthermore, AAF is an advisory board member of Project 2025, a Heritage Foundation-led initiative widely viewed as a blueprint for a potential second Trump term, indicating a role in shaping future conservative governance.

The organization has generated significant controversy due to its tactics, which critics have labeled as a "slime machine" employing misinformation and personal attacks. These activities have led to an IRS investigation into whether its political engagement violates its 501(c)(3) tax-exempt status. AAF's operations signify a strategic effort within the conservative movement to proactively influence the administrative state, often through methods that have drawn accusations of intimidation and McCarthyism. Its trajectory suggests a continued role in conservative efforts to exert control over government personnel and policy.

II. Introduction and Organizational Mandate

A. Formation and Stated Mission

The American Accountability Foundation (AAF) was established in 2020.¹ Officially, it positions itself as a "charitable and educational organization that conducts non-partisan governmental oversight research and fact-checking so Americans can hold their elected leaders accountable".¹ The organization's website reiterates this, describing AAF as a "non-profit government oversight and research organization that uses investigative tools to educate the public on issues related to personnel, policy, and spending".⁴ AAF further claims its purpose is to deploy "aggressive research and investigations to expose and neutralize" efforts it deems to be undermining American democracy and freedoms.⁴ It is recognized by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) as a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organization.²

B. Perceived Mission and Operational Focus

Despite its self-characterization as a non-partisan entity, AAF's operational activities and external assessments paint a different picture. It is widely identified as a conservative opposition research group.¹ A significant portion of its work appears dedicated to "discounting and discrediting President Biden and his executive nominees through opposition research and negative, often factually inaccurate narratives".⁶ This operational focus is underscored by the candid admission of its president, Tom Jones, who stated the group's goal is to "take a big handful of sand and throw it in the gears of the Biden administration".²

The foundation's activities are geared towards advancing "conservative messaging, rapid response, and Congressional investigations".² This pronounced partisan orientation, demonstrated through its targeting of specific political figures and its explicit aim to obstruct a Democratic administration, stands in stark contrast to the neutral, educational image projected by its official mission statements and its 501(c)(3) status. This divergence is not merely a matter of perception but is central to understanding AAF's strategic purpose and the controversies it has attracted, including scrutiny from the IRS regarding its political activities.⁶

The timing of AAF's establishment in 2020, coinciding with a presidential election year and the subsequent transition of power, is also noteworthy. Its launch by the Conservative Partnership Institute (CPI) ⁶—an organization that notably employed former Trump Chief of Staff Mark Meadows post-his White House tenure ¹—points towards a calculated, high-level conservative strategy. This strategy appears aimed not only at immediately countering the incoming Biden administration but also at laying the groundwork for future conservative political objectives, a notion reinforced by AAF's subsequent involvement in initiatives like Project 2025.¹

III. Leadership and Key Personnel

The leadership and operational staff of the American Accountability Foundation are composed of individuals with extensive backgrounds in Republican politics, congressional work, and specialized opposition research. This collective experience shapes the organization's capabilities and strategic direction.

A. Founders and Executive Leadership

• 1. Tom Jones (President, Co-founder, Executive Director):Tom Jones is the principal figure leading AAF.5 With a reported two decades of experience in politics, policy, research, and investigations 4, Jones directs AAF's strategy of employing "aggressive research and investigations" 4 and what he terms "unorthodox opposition research tactics".2 His political career is deeply rooted in the Republican party, having served in several key capacities for prominent conservative senators. These roles include Legislative Director for Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI) ², head of opposition research for Senator Ted Cruz's (R-TX) 2016 presidential campaign ⁶, and Senior Policy Advisor to former Senator Jim DeMint (R-SC).² During his tenure with Senator DeMint, Jones was part of an oversight team credited with efforts that led to the ban on Congressional earmarks.⁴ He also worked for Senator John Ensign (R-NV) as Legislative Director ⁸ and served as a subcommittee staff director, where he was involved in agency oversight and investigations into government waste, fraud, and abuse.²Commercially, Jones was the founder of the American Accountability Foundation (March 2021 onwards).⁹ Prior to AAF, he was President of Cannon Research Group LLC (July 2016-March 2021) ⁹, identified as a conservative opposition research firm.² He also served as Principal at 339 Group LLC (May 2013-July 2016).⁹ His earlier career included positions at the Consortium for Oceanographic Research and Education, the American Association of Engineering Societies Inc., and as a Legislative Assistant for Rep. Roscoe Bartlett (R-MD).⁹This background highlights a career path that has consistently blended political staff work with specialized research and investigative roles, often with a commercial dimension.

• 2. Matthew Buckham (Co-founder):Matthew Buckham is credited as a co-founder of AAF.1 His most direct and significant tie to the Trump administration comes from his service in the White House Presidential Personnel Office during Donald Trump's presidency.1 This role placed him directly within the apparatus responsible for staffing the executive branch under President Trump.Buckham's political affiliations also include work as a former staffer for the Conservative Partnership Institute (CPI) ², the organization that launched AAF. He previously served as a legislative aide to Senator Jim DeMint (R-SC) (as a Legislative Correspondent from 2012-2013) and as a Policy & Communications Advisor for then-Representative Ron DeSantis (2015-2016).¹⁰His organizational and commercial ties extend to The Heritage Foundation, where he was a Senior Projects Administrator (2016-2017) and Research Associate (2013-2015).¹⁰ He also held the position of Director of Recruitment and Outreach at the Conservative Partnership Institute (2017-2019).¹⁰ Buckham's career path demonstrates a strong connection to key conservative institutions and figures, including direct experience within a Republican presidential administration.

B. Other Identified Key Personnel

• 1. Jerome Trankle (Research Director):Jerome Trankle has served as AAF's Research Director 6, with his employment at AAF documented from May 2022 to March 2025.11 His professional background shows a close working relationship with Tom Jones, as Trankle previously worked for Cannon Research Group 2, the opposition research firm Jones led. This suggests a continuity of personnel and operational methods from Jones's prior commercial endeavors into AAF's non-profit structure.Before AAF, Trankle was Corporate Research Director (Feb 2021-May 2022) and Research Associate (Feb 2017-Feb 2021) at Axiom Strategies Inc..¹¹ His earlier experience includes roles as Client Account Manager at Campaign Financial Services and as a Staff Assistant and Intern for former Rep. Chris Collins (R-NY).¹¹ As of March 2025, LegiStorm listed Trankle as a Professional Staff Member for Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) on the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee ¹¹, indicating either a recent move or ongoing close connections with Senator Cruz's office, a prominent conservative voice.

• 2. Yitz Friedman (Spokesperson/Communications Manager):Yitz Friedman has been identified as a spokesperson for AAF 12 and held the role of Communications Manager from January 2023 to April 2025.13 He has been quoted in AAF communications concerning topics such as "woke ideologues in military" and the "Biden/Harris bureaucrat watchlist".4 His prior political and media experience includes serving as a Research Assistant for former Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX), an intern for Rep. Ken Buck (R-CO), and a Social Media Producer for Newsmax Media Inc. ¹³, a media outlet known for its conservative stance.

The collective résumés of AAF's leadership and key staff demonstrate a deep immersion in the conservative political ecosystem. Their careers have spanned Republican congressional offices, presidential campaigns, conservative think tanks, and specialized political research firms. This extensive network and shared ideological grounding are foundational to AAF's operational capabilities, providing it with access, influence, and a clear understanding of the political landscape it seeks to shape. The movement of individuals like Tom Jones and Jerome Trankle from a private opposition research firm (Cannon Research Group) to AAF suggests a professionalization of these tactics within the non-profit advocacy sector, blurring distinctions between commercial political consultancy and mission-driven organizational work.

Table 1: Key AAF Personnel and Affiliations

IV. Organizational Structure, Funding, and Affiliations

The American Accountability Foundation's structure, funding sources, and broader affiliations situate it firmly within the conservative political movement, operating in close concert with established institutions and financial networks.

A. Relationship with Conservative Partnership Institute (CPI)

AAF's origins are directly tied to the Conservative Partnership Institute (CPI). It is consistently described as a nonprofit "launched by the far-right Conservative Partnership Institute (CPI)".² This relationship was formalized when AAF filed documents in 2021 to secure its tax-exempt status, describing itself as existing "in care of" CPI.²

CPI's own 2021 annual report explicitly stated that it launched AAF to fill a perceived void, noting that "conservatives didn't have a group performing research on Biden's woke nominees—even though plenty of liberal groups were digging up (or manufacturing) dirt on our side".² This statement underscores the strategic intent behind AAF's creation as an offensive research arm for the conservative movement.

The significance of CPI's role is further amplified by its own connections. CPI notably employed Mark Meadows, former White House Chief of Staff under President Donald Trump, after he departed from the administration.¹ This connection provides an indirect but potent link between AAF and high-level figures from the Trump administration through its parent and launching organization, CPI.

B. Key Funding Sources

AAF's financial viability is sustained by contributions from several conservative foundations and funds:

• Conservative Partnership Institute (CPI): Provided $545,100 between 2021 and 2022 ⁶, representing a substantial initial investment and ongoing support from its founding entity.

• Center for Renewing America: Contributed $100,000 in 2022.⁶ This organization is also reportedly backed by CPI ², indicating a network of ideologically aligned groups supporting AAF.

• Dunn Foundation: Donated $50,000 between 2022 and 2023.⁶

• The 85 Fund: Provided $50,000 in 2023.⁶ The 85 Fund is known for its connections to Leonard Leo, a key figure in conservative legal and political funding.

• Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund: A sum of $39,800 was channeled through this donor-advised fund between 2021 and 2022.⁶ The nature of donor-advised funds means the original source of these funds is not publicly disclosed.

• Leonard Leo's Marble Freedom Trust: The Wall Street Journal has reported that AAF received funding from this trust, although this has not been independently documented by the Center for Media and Democracy.⁶ Marble Freedom Trust is another significant funding vehicle associated with Leonard Leo.

• The Heritage Foundation: This prominent conservative think tank has provided "generous support" for specific AAF projects, such as the publication of its list of "subversive, leftist bureaucrats".⁴ AAF was a recipient of the Heritage Innovation Prize, which enabled its Project Sovereignty 2025.⁷ Records indicate The Heritage Foundation provided $100,000 for AAF's project targeting federal employees.¹

This funding pattern demonstrates AAF's integration into a network of conservative "dark money" groups and established conservative institutions. The substantial contributions from CPI highlight a direct financial and operational linkage. Support from entities connected to Leonard Leo (The 85 Fund, potentially Marble Freedom Trust) and The Heritage Foundation places AAF within influential and often opaque funding streams that fuel the broader conservative movement. The use of donor-advised funds like Fidelity Charitable further obscures the identities of original donors, contributing to AAF's characterization as a "dark money" organization.

C. Financial Overview (as available)

Available financial data provides a snapshot of AAF's resources:

• For the year 2021, AAF reported revenue of $551,544, expenses of $530,360, and net assets of $46,684.²

• A separate, possibly cumulative or later-period financial summary, indicated total revenue of $1,020,672, total expenses of $940,414, and net assets of $160,735.⁶

• Reports suggest AAF's spending increased significantly from near-zero in 2020 to approximately $800,000 in 2022.¹⁴

D. "Dark Money" Classification

The New Yorker has characterized AAF as a "dark money group," defining it as "a politically active, tax-exempt nonprofit charity that doesn't disclose its backers".¹ This classification is significant as it points to a lack of transparency regarding the full spectrum of its financial support, a common critique leveled against organizations engaged in politically sensitive activities while benefiting from tax-exempt status.

The financial backing from organizations like CPI and The Heritage Foundation for specific AAF projects, such as the "bureaucrat watchlists" ⁴, signals a coordinated strategy within the conservative movement. These targeted investments are aimed at identifying and neutralizing perceived opposition within the federal government, aligning with broader objectives such as those articulated by Project 2025. This suggests AAF functions as an operational component for larger strategic initiatives designed to reshape the federal government according to conservative principles.

Table 2: Major Known Funders and Affiliated Organizations

V. Goals, Strategic Focus, and Key Activities

The American Accountability Foundation pursues its objectives through a range of activities centered on opposition research, scrutiny of government personnel, and engagement in policy debates, all aimed at advancing a conservative agenda.

A. Opposition Research and Targeting of Nominees

A core function of AAF has been its aggressive efforts to obstruct President Biden's nominees. The New Yorker reported in April 2022 that AAF "aims to thwart the entire Biden slate" and had already targeted 29 nominees by that time.¹ AAF President Tom Jones specified that the organization focuses particularly on executive branch appointees below Cabinet positions, considering them "the folks who are going to do the day-to-day work implementing the agenda".² To facilitate this, AAF established the website Bidennoms.com (reportedly not updated since August 2022 ¹⁴) to publicly scrutinize these nominees, stating its intent to ensure government leaders "reflect the values and concerns of the American people, not the liberal coastal elites and their woke allies in corporate America".²

AAF has claimed responsibility for derailing several high-profile nominations:

• Gigi Sohn (FCC Nominee): AAF led an extensive campaign against Sohn, reportedly spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on advertisements that labeled her as partisan, anti-police, and soft on sex trafficking.² AAF highlighted opposition from groups like the Fraternal Order of Police.² Sohn, who would have been the FCC's first openly LGBTQ+ commissioner, eventually withdrew her nomination. This campaign has been cited as an example of how "dark money" can influence confirmation processes.¹

• Sarah Bloom Raskin (Federal Reserve Board Vice-Chair for Supervision): AAF also took credit for the withdrawal of Raskin's nomination.¹ The campaign against her focused on her public statements regarding climate change as an economic risk that the Federal Reserve should consider.¹⁶ AAF also filed an ethics complaint against Raskin's husband, U.S. Representative Jamie Raskin.²

• David Chipman (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives Director): AAF acknowledged its role in derailing Chipman's nomination.¹ The organization compiled a dossier that included claims he was a radical "anti-racist" who opposed Mount Rushmore ² and filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit seeking his personnel files.¹⁴

• Other nominees AAF has acknowledged targeting or has been credited with helping to derail include Saule Omarova (Comptroller of the Currency) ², David Weil (Wage and Hour Division, Department of Labor) ¹, Kalpana Kotagal (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission) ¹⁷, and Carlton Waterhouse(Environmental Protection Agency).¹⁶

AAF's tactics in these campaigns have been varied and often aggressive. During the confirmation hearings for Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, AAF's research was used by her Republican opponents.¹ Journalist Maggie Severns reported that AAF "put forward [the narrative] that she had supported lighter sentences for people who had been involved with child pornography".⁶ Other tactics have included framing Federal Reserve nominee Lisa Cook's advocacy for police accountability as "racist" ¹⁶, infiltrating a Zoom meeting of House Democratic staffers discussing earmarks (and providing the recording to The Hill newspaper) ², reportedly using fake identities to access congressional staff trainings, and even soliciting opposition materials from nominees' friends and family.¹⁶ The organization also makes active use of FOIA requests and subsequent litigation to gather information.¹⁴

B. Scrutiny of Federal Bureaucracy

More recently, AAF's strategic focus has expanded from presidential nominees to include career civil servants. This is evident in several key initiatives:

• "Biden/Harris bureaucrat watchlist": Launched on October 23, 2024, this list aimed to identify "subversive, leftist bureaucrats serving in the Federal government who cannot be trusted".⁴ This project received funding from The Heritage Foundation.⁴

• Project Sovereignty 2025: This initiative, supported by The Heritage Foundation's Innovation Prize ⁴, is dedicated to "identifying and shining a spotlight on the high-ranking civil servants within the Departments of Homeland Security (DHS) and Justice (DOJ) who are likely to thwart an incoming conservative administration's immigration agenda".⁴

• "DHS Bureaucrat Watch List": Published on the website dhswatchlist.com, this list targets nonpartisan federal civil servants in DHS, DOJ, and the Office of Management and Budget, labeling them the "most subversive immigration bureaucrats".¹ The site publishes employees' personal information, including names, titles, photographs, small-dollar political donations, and screenshots of personal social media posts.¹ The Heritage Foundation reportedly provided $100,000 for this project.¹ A federal employee union likened this effort to McCarthyism, designed to intimidate federal workers.¹ AAF spokesperson Yitz Friedman indicated that "There are more names to come".¹²

• "DEI Watch List": In February 2025, AAF published this second list, expanding its targeting to federal civil servants in health agencies like the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The list predominantly featured Black individuals and targeted employees based on their campaign donations to Democrats and social media activity, reportedly without attempts to verify the information.¹ The director of the American Public Health Association stated the list appeared designed to threaten and scare employees.¹

• Letter to Pentagon Nominee Pete Hegseth: On December 9, 2024, AAF sent a letter to then-Pentagon nominee Pete Hegseth, providing a list of military personnel it deemed "woke ideologues" for a potential purge.⁴

This shift towards targeting career civil servants, often by publicizing their personal information and political affiliations, represents a significant development in AAF's strategy. It moves beyond influencing appointments to attempting to shape the permanent administrative state, aligning with narratives about a "deep state" hostile to conservative policies and with broader efforts like Project 2025, which aim to ensure ideological conformity within the government.

C. Engagement in Policy Debates

AAF actively participates in policy debates, particularly those concerning ESG investing and government spending:

• Anti-ESG Campaigns: AAF has been a vocal critic of "woke capitalism" and ESG investing, releasing multiple reports on the subject.⁶ Publications include "Naming and Shaming: The ESG Movement's Efforts to Defund Trade Associations..." (July 2023), which argues ESG resolutions aim to suppress conservative speech ²; "Proxy Wars: Glass Lewis" (July 2023), alleging liberal bias in the proxy advisory firm ⁶; and "None of It Is Our Money: An Introduction to the Leftist Activists and Liberal DC Insiders at BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street..." (April 2023).⁶ AAF has also signed group letters opposing what it terms "Biden's ideological embezzling of Americans' retirement accounts" and the "woke 401(k)" rule.⁶ In June 2024, it distributed a memo titled "BlackRock is Using OPERS' Investments to Push a Woke Agenda," aiming to have the asset manager blacklisted under Oklahoma law.⁶ AAF also reported on asset managers allegedly using Nevada pension funds to promote racial equity and climate proposals.⁷

• Training Conservative Staffers: AAF "leads effort to train conservative staffers on how to investigate Biden," based on the belief that "skillful investigation is a vital tool for fighting back against the Left".⁴

• Exposing "Government Waste": In collaboration with the Center for Restoring America (another CPI-backed entity), AAF created the "Congressional Pork Map" to highlight perceived government waste.²

• Other Reports: AAF has also published a report on billionaire John Arnold's role in criminal justice reform efforts ⁷ and an investigation into the American Library Association (ALA), accusing it of "sexualizing and indoctrinating" children.⁷

D. Public Communication and Dissemination

AAF disseminates its findings and messaging through various channels, including white papers, op-eds, press releases, and research documents.⁴ It utilizes social media, notably the X (formerly Twitter) handle @ExposingBiden ⁶, and engages with media outlets such as the Daily Wire, New York Post ⁴, and Fox News ² to amplify its message.

AAF's multifaceted strategy—combining aggressive opposition research, public campaigns often characterized as smears, media partnerships, and direct policy engagement—demonstrates a comprehensive approach to advancing its conservative objectives. This diverse toolkit allows it to exert pressure at multiple points in the political and policy-making process. The nature of its targets, which have often included women and racial minorities, or individuals advocating for diversity and equity initiatives, coupled with the ideologically charged language used in its campaigns (e.g., "woke," "subversive," "radical"), suggests its activities extend beyond mere policy disagreements into broader cultural and identity politics. This framing positions AAF as a combatant in what it perceives as an ideological battle for the direction of government and public policy.

VI. Connections to the Trump Administration and Broader Conservative Ecosystem

The American Accountability Foundation operates with notable connections to the Trump administration, both past and potentially future, and is deeply embedded within the broader conservative political ecosystem. These links are evident through personnel, institutional alignments, and shared strategic objectives.

A. Personnel Links to Trump Administration

The most direct personnel tie to the Trump administration is through AAF co-founder Matthew Buckham. Buckham served in the White House Presidential Personnel Office (PPO) during President Donald Trump's first term.¹ The PPO is a critical component of any administration, responsible for vetting and recommending candidates for thousands of appointed positions throughout the federal government. Buckham's experience in this office provides AAF with invaluable insight into presidential staffing processes and a network of contacts from that period.

B. Institutional Alignments with Trump-Connected Entities

• Conservative Partnership Institute (CPI): AAF's genesis is inextricably linked to CPI, which launched and heavily funded the foundation.² CPI's significance in the Trump-aligned conservative movement is underscored by its employment of Mark Meadows, who served as White House Chief of Staff to President Trump, after Meadows left the administration.¹ This relationship positions CPI as a key hub for Trump loyalists and conservative strategists, and by extension, AAF benefits from this association.

• The Heritage Foundation: A longstanding pillar of the conservative movement, The Heritage Foundation has maintained close ties with Republican administrations, including President Trump's. Heritage provides financial support to AAF for specific, strategically aligned projects, such as the development of "bureaucrat watchlists" and Project Sovereignty 2025.⁴ The Heritage Foundation is also the primary architect of Project 2025, a comprehensive plan for a potential future conservative administration.

C. Role in Project 2025

AAF is an official member of the advisory board for Project 2025.¹ This project, spearheaded by The Heritage Foundation, aims to develop policy proposals, personnel recommendations, and transition plans to equip a Republican presidential victor for immediate and sweeping changes to the federal government. It is widely interpreted as a preparatory effort for a potential second Trump term or a similarly aligned "America First" presidency.

AAF's activities, particularly its creation of "watch lists" targeting federal employees deemed "subversive" or likely to obstruct a conservative agenda ¹, directly complement the goals of Project 2025. Project 2025 includes plans for reclassifying tens of thousands of civil servants to make them easier to fire and replace with loyalists, thereby consolidating executive power. AAF's work in identifying such individuals can be seen as providing a pre-vetted list for such an endeavor.

D. Alignment with "America First" Agenda

The thematic focus of AAF's work often mirrors the policy priorities and rhetoric of the "America First" movement championed by Donald Trump. Its Project Sovereignty 2025, which aims to identify civil servants within DHS and DOJ perceived as likely to thwart an incoming conservative administration's immigration agenda ⁴, aligns directly with the Trump administration's emphasis on stringent border security and immigration control. The AAF's "About Us" page for its dhswatchlist.com initiative explicitly states its goal is to create a list of DHS bureaucrats who might obstruct a future "America First" president's border plans.⁴

Furthermore, AAF's rhetoric targeting "woke ideologues" ⁴ and "liberal coastal elites" ¹⁴ resonates with the populist and anti-establishment messaging frequently employed by President Trump and his supporters. The organization's reported cheering of the dismissal of Carla Hayden, the Librarian of Congress ¹⁸—an event noted in the initial context of this inquiry—further illustrates its alignment with actions perceived as favorable to a Trump-oriented agenda, often targeting established institutions or figures seen as part of the "establishment."

These connections—direct personnel links to the Trump White House, institutional parentage by a Meadows-affiliated organization, and active participation in forward-looking initiatives like Project 2025—indicate that AAF is more than merely "Trump-aligned." It appears to function as a component of the strategic infrastructure being developed and maintained by the broader conservative movement, designed to support and enact the agenda of a future Trump or "America First" administration. The collaboration between AAF, CPI, and The Heritage Foundation on projects like personnel watchlists and Project 2025 suggests a sophisticated and coordinated division of labor. In this framework, Heritage may provide the overarching strategic vision (Project 2025), CPI helps establish and support operational entities (like AAF), and AAF executes specific tasks such as personnel vetting and opposition research. This multi-layered approach is aimed at achieving long-term political and administrative objectives, particularly the assertion of greater executive control over the federal bureaucracy.

VII. Controversies and Criticisms

The American Accountability Foundation's aggressive tactics and operational focus have generated significant controversy and criticism from various quarters, including media organizations, watchdog groups, and federal employee unions. These controversies touch upon its methods, funding transparency, and the ethical implications of its activities.

A. Allegations of Misinformation and "Slime Machine" Tactics

AAF has faced strong accusations regarding the nature and veracity of its research and campaigns. The New Yorker notably published an article titled "The Slime Machine Targeting Dozens of Biden Nominees" ¹, a characterization that AAF, paradoxically, has sometimes highlighted to demonstrate its perceived effectiveness.²Critics assert that AAF employs "negative, often factually inaccurate narratives" to discredit its targets.⁶

One prominent example is the claim, reported by journalist Maggie Severns, that AAF propagated the narrative that Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson "had supported lighter sentences for people who had been involved with child pornography" during her confirmation process.⁶ The Revolving Door Project, another watchdog organization, has accused AAF of engaging in "slanderous, bad-faith attacks," "distorting facts," and employing "sexist and racist smears" against nominees.¹⁶ These allegations suggest a pattern of employing highly charged and potentially misleading information to damage the reputations of individuals AAF opposes.

B. "Dark Money" Accusations

AAF is frequently labeled a "dark money group".¹ This term is applied to politically active organizations, often with tax-exempt status, that are not required to disclose all their donors. This lack of transparency in funding is a central criticism, as it obscures who is financially backing AAF's aggressive political activities and what their specific interests might be. While some funders are known (see Section IV.B), the "dark money" designation implies that the full picture of its financial support remains hidden from public view.

C. IRS Investigation (March 2024)

In March 2024, it was reported that the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) is investigating AAF for potentially violating its 501(c)(3) tax-exempt status.⁶ Politico reported on this development on March 22, 2024.¹⁹ The core of the investigation appears to be whether AAF's extensive efforts to defeat Biden administration nominees constitute excessive lobbying or political campaign intervention, activities that are restricted for 501(c)(3) organizations.¹⁴ IRS regulations define lobbying to include activities related to the "legislative confirmation of appointive office".¹⁴

A key element of this scrutiny involves AAF's financial disclosures. The organization reportedly declared no spending on lobbying or advertising in its 2021 and 2022 tax filings.¹⁵ However, independent analyses of ad spending data, such as information from AdImpact and Meta (cited by TechDirt and Accountable.US), indicate that AAF spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on advertisements attacking nominees like Gigi Sohn.¹⁵ This discrepancy between reported expenditures and observed activity is likely a significant focus of the IRS inquiry. In response to the investigation, AAF President Tom Jones has accused the IRS of being "politicized".²

D. Methods of Targeting Federal Employees

AAF's more recent practice of creating and publicizing "watch lists" of career federal civil servants has drawn particularly sharp criticism. Initiatives like the "DHS Bureaucrat Watch List" and the "DEI Watch List" have been condemned for publishing personal information of these employees, including their names, photographs, political donations, and social media activity.¹

A federal employee union compared this tactic to McCarthyism, stating it was designed to intimidate and frighten federal workers.¹ Concerns have also been raised about the accuracy and verification of the information presented. For instance, AAF reportedly stated that it did not attempt to verify the information compiled for its "DEI Watch List".¹ The director of the American Public Health Association commented that the "DEI Watch List" seemed intended to threaten and scare employees in health agencies.¹

The controversies surrounding AAF underscore a fundamental tension: its aggressive, highly partisan political activities are conducted under the umbrella of a 501(c)(3) charitable organization, a status that confers tax benefits and implies a degree of non-partisanship. The "slime machine" allegations, the "dark money" funding structure, and especially the IRS investigation into its lobbying and political spending, all raise critical questions about the accountability and regulatory oversight of such groups. Furthermore, the tactic of creating and publicizing "watch lists" of civil servants marks a notable escalation in partisan conflict. This practice carries the potential for a chilling effect on public service, discouraging individuals from government work or promoting self-censorship among existing employees. These methods raise profound ethical concerns regarding the doxing and intimidation of non-political government staff, particularly when linked to broader political projects aimed at reshaping the federal workforce based on ideological loyalty.

VIII. Conclusion: Assessment of AAF's Influence and Trajectory

The American Accountability Foundation, since its inception in 2020, has rapidly established itself as a potent and highly controversial actor within the U.S. conservative political landscape. Its primary influence has been demonstrated in its aggressive campaigns to derail Biden administration nominees, with AAF claiming credit for several high-profile withdrawals. Beyond nominations, AAF has actively sought to shape policy discourse, notably through its staunch opposition to Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) criteria in finance and its efforts to identify and publicly scrutinize career federal employees it deems ideologically misaligned.

AAF's operational model, characterized by "aggressive research and investigations," often employing tactics criticized as misleading or intimidatory, positions it as a force multiplier for the conservative movement. It does not operate in isolation but is deeply integrated within a network of influential conservative organizations. Its launch by and continued financial support from the Conservative Partnership Institute (CPI), coupled with funding and project collaboration with The Heritage Foundation, underscores its role as an operational arm for broader strategic objectives.

Crucially, AAF's connections to the Trump political orbit and its formal advisory role in Project 2025 signal its importance in preparing for and potentially supporting a future conservative, and specifically "America First," administration. Its work in creating "watch lists" of federal personnel aligns directly with Project 2025's stated goals of reshaping the federal bureaucracy and ensuring ideological conformity. This proactive stance suggests AAF is not merely reacting to current events but is actively working to lay the groundwork for future governance.

However, AAF's confrontational methods and its "dark money" funding structure have invited significant scrutiny and controversy. Allegations of disseminating misinformation, the "slime machine" moniker, and ethical concerns over the targeting of civil servants have damaged its reputation outside of its supportive base. The ongoing IRS investigation into whether its activities violate its 501(c)(3) tax-exempt status represents a tangible threat to its operational model and financial standing.

In conclusion, the American Accountability Foundation has proven effective in executing its mission of disrupting opposing political agendas and advancing conservative interests, particularly in the realm of personnel and administrative governance. It serves as a specialized instrument within the conservative ecosystem, designed to exert influence through often abrasive means. Its future trajectory will likely be shaped by the broader political climate, the outcomes of regulatory scrutiny such as the IRS investigation, and its continued ability to secure funding from its network of conservative backers. Regardless of these factors, AAF has carved out a distinct and impactful niche in contemporary American politics, embodying a more combative and proactive approach to opposition research and ideological enforcement within the governmental sphere.

Works cited

1. American Accountability Foundation - Wikipedia, accessed May 11, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Accountability_Foundation

2. American Accountability Foundation (AAF) - InfluenceWatch, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.influencewatch.org/non-profit/american-accountability-foundation-aaf/

3. en.wikipedia.org, accessed May 11, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Accountability_Foundation#:~:text=The%20AAF%20describes%20itself%20as,hold%20their%20elected%20leaders%20accountable%22.

4. American Accountability Foundation, accessed May 11, 2025, https://americanaccountabilityfoundation.com/

5. Our Team - American Accountability Foundation, accessed May 11, 2025, https://americanaccountabilityfoundation.com/our-team/

6. American Accountability Foundation, accessed May 11, 2025, https://sfofexposed.org/american-accountability-foundation/

7. Yitz Friedman - American Accountability Foundation, accessed May 11, 2025, https://americanaccountabilityfoundation.com/blog/author/yitz/

8. en.wikipedia.org, accessed May 11, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Accountability_Foundation#:~:text=The%20AAF's%20executive%20director%20and,Jim%20DeMint%2C%20and%20John%20Ensign.

9. Tom Jones - American Accountability Foundation (March 2021-), Founder - LegiStorm, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.legistorm.com/person/bio/7823/Thomas_H_Jones.html

10. Matt Buckham - OpenSecrets, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.opensecrets.org/revolving-door/buckham-matt/summary?id=84060

11. Jerome Trankle - Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee (March 2025-), Professional Staff Member - Biography | LegiStorm, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.legistorm.com/person/bio/219941/Jerome_David_Trankle.html

12. How Donald Trump aims to dismantle the 'deep state' and assert control - India Today, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.indiatoday.in/world/us-news/story/how-donald-trump-aims-to-dismantle-the-deep-state-and-assert-control-glbs-2666799-2025-01-18

13. Yitz Friedman - Previously held position: American Accountability Foundation (Jan. 2023-April 2025), Communications Manager - Biography | LegiStorm, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.legistorm.com/person/bio/442076/Yitzchak_Friedman.html

14. An Anti-Biden Group Goes All In on FOIA Requests - Law Street Media, accessed May 11, 2025, https://lawstreetmedia.com/insights/an-anti-biden-group-goes-all-in-on-foia-requests/

15. Dodgy Group That Targeted Gigi Sohn FCC Nomination Now Under IRS Inquiry For Lying About Ad Spending - Techdirt., accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.techdirt.com/2024/03/27/dodgy-group-that-targeted-gigi-sohn-fcc-nomination-now-under-irs-inquiry-for-lying-about-ad-spending/

16. The American Accountability Foundation (AAF) Has Cost Americans The Realization Of Innumerable Biden Campaign Promises | Revolving Door Project, accessed May 11, 2025, https://therevolvingdoorproject.org/the-american-accountability-foundation-aaf-has-cost-americans-the-realization-of-innumerable-biden-campaign-promises/

17. Meet Eight MAGA Groups That Will Yield Massive Influence Over The 118th Congress And Their Extreme Agenda - Accountable US, accessed May 11, 2025, https://accountable.us/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/2023-01-06-Memo-on-MAGA-Groups-Influencing-House-FINAL.pdf

18. Inside Congress Newsletter - Politico, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.politico.com/newsletters/inside-congress

19. Headlines - POLITICO, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.politico.com/story/173

20. ICYMI: IRS Investigates Right-Wing Group After Failure to Disclose Political Spending, accessed May 11, 2025, https://accountable.us/icymi-irs-investigates-right-wing-group-after-failure-to-disclose-political-spending/