BREAKING NEWS: Donald Trump Demands ‘Major Investigations’ Into Bruce Springsteen, Beyoncé, Bono, Taylor Swift and Oprah Over Alleged Paid Endorsements for Kamala Harris’ 2024 Campaign

Trump Demands Investigations Into Springsteen, Beyoncé, Bono, and Oprah Over Alleged Paid Endorsements for Kamala Harris

May 19, 2025 | 5:08 PM WAT

In a fiery escalation of his ongoing feud with celebrity critics, U.S. President Donald Trump has called for “major investigations” into some of the entertainment industry’s biggest names—Bruce Springsteen, Beyoncé, Bono, and Oprah Winfrey—over their support for Kamala Harris during her 2024 presidential campaign. Trump, posting on his Truth Social platform late Sunday night and into Monday morning, accused these A-listers of accepting illegal payments for their endorsements, labeling the alleged transactions as “corrupt and unlawful” and demanding federal probes into what he calls an “election scam at the highest level.”

The controversy erupted after Bruce Springsteen, the legendary rocker and outspoken Trump critic, took the stage during his UK tour in Manchester, England, last week, where he branded the Trump administration as “corrupt, incompetent, and treasonous.” Springsteen doubled down on his remarks at a second UK concert over the weekend, prompting a swift and vitriolic response from the president. Trump, who has a history of clashing with celebrities who oppose him, fired back on Truth Social, calling Springsteen a “dried out ‘prune’ of a rocker” and suggesting he “keep his mouth shut” until he returns to the U.S. But the president didn’t stop there—he expanded his attack to include other high-profile Harris supporters, alleging they were paid to artificially inflate her campaign crowds in a “desperate” and “illegal” effort.

Trump’s Allegations: A Deep Dive

In a series of posts, Trump claimed that Kamala Harris’ 2024 campaign paid exorbitant sums to celebrities for their endorsements, framing these payments as illegal campaign contributions under federal election laws. “HOW MUCH DID KAMALA HARRIS PAY BRUCE SPRINGSTEEN FOR HIS POOR PERFORMANCE DURING HER CAMPAIGN FOR PRESIDENT?” Trump wrote, using his signature all-caps style. “WHY DID HE ACCEPT THAT MONEY IF HE IS SUCH A FAN OF HERS? ISN’T THAT A MAJOR AND ILLEGAL CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION? WHAT ABOUT BEYONCÉ? … AND HOW MUCH WENT TO OPRAH, AND BONO???”

Trump specifically zeroed in on Beyoncé, reviving a baseless rumor popularized by right-wing commentator Candace Owens that the superstar was paid $11 million to appear at a Harris rally in Houston in October 2024. According to Trump, Beyoncé “walked onto a stage, quickly ENDORSED KAMALA, and walked off to loud booing for never having performed, NOT EVEN ONE SONG!” He claimed this constituted an “illegal election scam,” though he provided no evidence to support the $11 million figure. Beyoncé’s mother, Tina Knowles, had previously debunked a similar rumor last year, stating on Instagram that her daughter “did not receive a penny” for the appearance and even covered her own travel and glam expenses.

Oprah Winfrey, another target of Trump’s ire, was also accused of accepting payments for her support. Federal Election Commission (FEC) filings show that Harris’ campaign paid $1 million to Oprah’s production company, Harpo Productions, for a “Unite for America” rally on September 19, 2024. However, Oprah clarified that she did not receive a personal fee, and the payment was for event production costs. No evidence has emerged to suggest Bono, the U2 frontman, received any payments, and Trump’s claims about Springsteen also appear unsubstantiated—FEC records indicate Harris’ campaign paid $75,000 to Springsteen’s production company for a rally appearance, but this was for logistical expenses, not a personal endorsement fee.

The Legal Gray Area

Trump’s central argument hinges on the idea that paying celebrities for appearances at campaign events constitutes an illegal campaign contribution. Under U.S. campaign finance laws, endorsements themselves are not regulated, but payments for services must be reported and comply with contribution limits. Legal experts note that celebrities often appear at campaign events without personal compensation, with campaigns covering production costs instead. Harris’ campaign, which raised over $1 billion but reportedly ended with a $20 million debt, spent heavily on star-studded rallies in the final days of the 2024 election, according to FEC filings. This included $20 million on concerts and celebrity appearances, a figure that has drawn scrutiny but does not necessarily violate election laws.

Trump himself has a history of leveraging celebrity endorsements, from Kanye West to Kid Rock, who performed at the Republican National Convention and Trump’s inauguration-eve victory rally in 2024. Critics have pointed out the apparent hypocrisy in Trump’s stance, noting that his campaigns have also spent millions on high-profile events to boost turnout. “This was a very expensive and desperate effort to artificially build up her sparse crowds. IT’S NOT LEGAL!” Trump wrote, ignoring the fact that his own campaign employed similar tactics.

Springsteen’s Defiance and the Celebrity Backlash

Springsteen, a longtime Democratic supporter who endorsed Harris in 2024, has not directly responded to Trump’s latest attacks but seems undeterred. His comments in Manchester were part of a broader critique of the Trump administration, which he has called out repeatedly over the years. During Harris’ campaign, Springsteen performed at rallies, often entering to his iconic song “Born in the USA,” and his support was seen as a boost for Harris in battleground states like Pennsylvania and New Jersey.

Beyoncé, who allowed Harris to use her song “Freedom” as a campaign anthem and appeared alongside her in Houston, has also remained silent on Trump’s allegations. Oprah, who hosted a major Harris rally, issued a statement last year denying any personal payment and emphasizing her genuine support for the Democratic candidate. Bono, who has a history of political activism but kept a lower profile during the 2024 election, has not been directly tied to any specific Harris campaign payments.

Political Motivations and Public Reaction

Trump’s call for investigations comes amid what some analysts describe as a “revenge campaign” against his 2024 election opponent, Kamala Harris, and her supporters. Harris, who lost to Trump in November 2024, had galvanized a wave of celebrity endorsements in the lead-up to the election, a strategy that mirrored Trump’s own use of high-profile figures to energize his base. However, Trump’s fixation on Harris’ celebrity backers—weeks after taking office—has raised questions about his priorities as president.

Public reaction has been mixed. On X, the Variety post about Trump’s demands garnered attention, with one user, @GeladeiraSatan, mocking Trump’s approach: “Kkkkkkkkkkkkkkk, vai arrumar briga com todas fanbases do mundo e precisar de outro bilionário pra comprar votos pra ele na próxima eleição” (roughly translating to “He’s going to pick a fight with every fanbase in the world and need another billionaire to buy votes for him in the next election”). Others have dismissed Trump’s claims as a distraction from more pressing issues, while his supporters have echoed his calls for accountability.

What’s Next?

As of May 19, 2025, no formal investigations have been launched into Trump’s allegations, and it remains unclear whether federal authorities will take up the matter. The FEC, which oversees campaign finance violations, typically moves slowly on such cases, and Trump’s lack of concrete evidence may hinder any serious inquiry. Meanwhile, Springsteen continues his UK tour, Beyoncé and Oprah remain focused on their respective projects, and Bono has yet to comment publicly.

Trump’s history of targeting celebrities who oppose him—most recently calling Taylor Swift “no longer hot” after her Harris endorsement—suggests this may not be the last we hear of his grievances. For now, the clash between the White House and Hollywood’s elite underscores the deep cultural and political divides that continue to define American discourse in 2025.