Love me, taxpayer
A 30-second hype reel for the president, set to a song called “Love Me,” has been running on Fox weeks before the midterms. The tell is in the fine print: “Paid for by the U.S. Government.”
Government advertising is normal — military recruitment, public-health campaigns, census reminders. What it is not allowed to be is partisan self-promotion paid for out of the public's pocket. This ad, which loops the chorus of JMSN's “Love Me” over patriotic imagery of Donald Trump and closes on a “Paid for by the U.S. Government” disclaimer, is the rare case where the funding source is admitted on the face of the spot. We document the ad, the airing, and the White House's defense, lay out the appropriations law that bars public money for propaganda aimed at helping a party or candidate, and pose — because it is a legal question for the Government Accountability Office, not one we can decide — whether this crosses the line.
What this page is about
Beginning the night of September 23, 2026, a 30-second advertisement praising President Trump aired on Fox News — during Jesse Watters Primetime — and on Newsmax, first flagged by CBS News Miami's Jim DeFede. Set to the chorus of JMSN's song “Love Me” and built like a social-media hype reel — flags, military aircraft, “America will never be a communist country” — it ends with a disclaimer that would be unremarkable on a campaign ad and is astonishing on this one: “Paid for by the U.S. Government.” That is public money, spent on partisan messaging, roughly six weeks before a midterm election.
The White House has defended the spot as a “public service announcement” and declined to say which agency paid for it; it has since expanded the taxpayer-funded pro-Trump ad campaign. Democratic appropriators and legal experts say it violates the long-standing bar, restated in the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2026, on using appropriated funds for “publicity or propaganda” designed to aid a party or candidate. We grade the ad and its funding disclaimer FACT; we treat the illegality as a serious, sourced allegation for the GAO to resolve, not a verdict we issue; and we note the irony that the administration's related pro-Trump ad spending was exempted from the DOGE cost-cutting review that scrutinized everyone else's.
Books that go deeper on this story. Links are Amazon affiliate searches — buying through them supports the work at no cost to you.
The same investigation, restaged one beat at a time. Step through it here, or present it fullscreen.
Love Me, Taxpayer
A 30-second hype reel for the president, set to a song called 'Love Me,' ran on Fox weeks before the midterms. The tell is in the fine print: 'Paid for by the U.S. Government.'
The claim this page defends
The federal government spent public money producing and airing a partisan advertisement promoting the president weeks before a midterm election — admitting the funding source on the ad itself — in apparent tension with the appropriations law barring public funds for propaganda that aids a party or candidate, while the administration's related pro-Trump ad spending was shielded from its own cost-cutting review.
Six weeks before the midterms: September 2026
- 2025. The Department of Homeland Security runs ads thanking Trump for his immigration crackdown; the payments to the contractors are reported as exempted from Elon Musk's DOGE review.
- September 23, 2026. The “Love Me” ad airs on Fox during Jesse Watters Primetime and on Newsmax, tagged “Paid for by the U.S. Government”; CBS Miami's Jim DeFede flags it.
- September 24–25, 2026. The White House defends the spot as a “public service announcement” and won't say which agency paid; Democratic appropriators demand it be pulled and cite the propaganda ban.
- September 27, 2026. The White House expands the taxpayer-funded pro-Trump ad campaign rather than pulling it.
The record, claim by claim
A pro-Trump ad tagged 'Paid for by the U.S. Government' aired on Fox weeks before the midterms.
FACTBeginning September 23, 2026, a 30-second spot promoting President Trump ran on Fox News during Jesse Watters Primetime and on Newsmax, first flagged by CBS News Miami investigative reporter Jim DeFede. It loops the chorus of JMSN's 'Love Me' over patriotic imagery of Trump and messaging like 'America will never be a communist country,' and closes on the disclaimer 'Paid for by the U.S. Government.' CBS News, CNN, NBC News, and others confirmed the ad and its funding tag. It is straightforwardly partisan content, aired about six weeks before a national election, paid for with public money — with the funding source printed on the ad itself.
The White House calls it a 'public service announcement' — and won't say which agency paid for it.
FACTAsked to justify a government-funded ad that mostly praises the president, the White House defended it as a 'public service announcement' — and declined to identify the agency that paid for the content and the airtime, which was placed through an ad agency. That refusal is itself notable: an ordinary public-service campaign has an obvious sponsoring agency and purpose. We report the 'PSA' defense in full, and the non-answer on funding, because both are part of the record. The administration then expanded the campaign rather than withdraw it.
Appropriators and legal experts say it violates the ban on using public funds for 'publicity or propaganda.'
SOME SMOKEFederal appropriations law has for decades barred using appropriated funds for 'publicity or propaganda purposes' not authorized by Congress, and specifically for a 'general propaganda effort designed to aid a political party or candidate.' Democratic appropriators say the ad violates that restriction as restated in the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2026, and legal experts quoted in the coverage agree the spot 'does not have a clear official government purpose' and appears to run afoul of it. We grade this SOME SMOKE and pose it: the law and the allegation are real and well-sourced, but whether this ad crosses the legal line is a determination for the Government Accountability Office — which enforces the publicity-or-propaganda rules — or a court, not one we issue. What is unusual, and what makes the question so pointed, is that the ad admits its government funding on its face.
The administration's related pro-Trump ads were exempted from the DOGE cost-cutting review.
FACTThis is the irony at the center of the story, and we state it precisely. The Department of Homeland Security ran taxpayer-funded ads thanking Trump for his immigration crackdown; Rolling Stone reported that the payments to the two contractors producing those ads were deemed exempt from the review conducted by Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency — the same outfit that spent 2025 slashing programs in the name of eliminating waste. So the government's self-styled waste-cutters waved through public spending on pro-Trump advertising while cutting services elsewhere. We attribute this to the DHS anti-immigrant ad campaign specifically; it is the same taxpayer-funded pro-Trump advertising pattern the 'Love Me' spot belongs to, not necessarily the identical contract.
Read together: public money bought partisan self-promotion, and the 'waste-cutters' looked away.
SOME SMOKESet the pieces side by side: a partisan ad for the president, paid for by the government, aired before an election, with the funding admitted on screen; a White House that calls it a 'PSA,' won't name the payer, and then expands the campaign; a decades-old law against exactly this use of public funds; and an administration that exempted its related pro-Trump ad spending from its own austerity review. We grade the overall characterization — that this is taxpayer-funded propaganda that the government's cost-cutters chose not to see — as SOME SMOKE and pose it, because the legal violation is unproven and the DOGE exemption attaches to the DHS ads. But every individual fact is documented, and the throughline is hard to miss: the public paid to be told to love the president.
What's documented, and what's for the GAO
- The ad and its funding tag are on the record. The spot, its airing on Fox and Newsmax, and the “Paid for by the U.S. Government” disclaimer are confirmed across mainstream outlets. This is not in dispute; it's printed on the ad.
- The illegality is alleged, not adjudicated. We cite the appropriations law and the appropriators and experts who say it's violated, and we leave the verdict to the GAO. That's why the legal claim is SOME SMOKE, not FACT.
- We state the White House's defense. It calls the spot a “public service announcement.” We report that in full, and note the refusal to name the funding agency and the campaign's expansion.
- The DOGE exemption is attributed precisely. It was reported for the DHS anti-immigrant “thank you” ads — the same pro-Trump, taxpayer-funded pattern — and we tie it there, not to this exact contract.
When the state pays to be loved
This page sits in Looting the American Public because the money is the public's and the beneficiary is a politician. The dollar figure is small next to an oil lease or a Medicaid cut, but the principle is the starkest version of the pattern: the machinery and budget of the state, turned to the promotion of the man who runs it, weeks before voters decide whether he keeps power. The line between a government and a regime is partly the line this ad crosses — whether public institutions serve the public or the leader. That it also belongs in Who Controls What You Get to Know is the other half: a government that will spend your taxes telling you to love it is a government shaping the information you live inside. The disclaimer says the quiet part in writing — and then asks you to pay for it.
Questions worth taking seriously
Doesn't the government run ads all the time? Why is this different?
Yes — for genuine public purposes: military recruitment, public-health warnings, census participation. What appropriations law bars is using public money for “publicity or propaganda” not authorized by Congress, and specifically for efforts designed to aid a party or candidate. A spot that mostly praises the sitting president and airs before an election is exactly the category the rule was written to prevent. The difference isn't that it's an ad; it's that it's a partisan ad on the public's dime.
Is it actually illegal, or are you just saying that?
We don't rule on that — it's the GAO's call, and possibly a court's. What we can say is documented: the law exists, Democratic appropriators and legal experts say this ad violates it, and the White House defends it as a “public service announcement.” We grade the legal-violation claim SOME SMOKE and present it as the live question it is. If the GAO finds a violation, we'll update the grade; until then we don't assert a verdict.
What does DOGE have to do with a Fox ad?
It's the irony, and we keep it precise. The same administration that ran DOGE to cut “waste” exempted the payments for its DHS anti-immigrant “thank you” ads from that review — public spending on pro-Trump messaging, waved through while services were slashed. The “Love Me” spot is part of the same taxpayer-funded pro-Trump advertising pattern. We attribute the specific exemption to the DHS ads, not to this exact contract, because that's what the reporting supports.
If you are named on this page
If you are named on this page, or are a party materially affected by the claims made here, and you wish to respond, correct the record, or add context, use the Contact page. Responses are published verbatim alongside the original claim, with the sender identified and the date of receipt. The channel stays open for the life of the page.
This site aggregates and grades a record that other outlets and primary sources have already put on the record. Every FACT-graded claim above is sourced to court filings, government reports, sworn whistleblower disclosures, published investigative journalism, or named-source statements. The citations are the accountability mechanism; this section is how you get on the record too.
The record
- CBS News — the taxpayer-funded “Love Me” ad campaign hits the airwaves
- CNN — White House airs a government-funded ad praising Trump
- NBC News — White House calls the government-funded pro-Trump ad a “public service announcement”
- The Detroit News — White House expands the taxpayer-paid ad campaign boosting Trump
- The Spokesman-Review — the ad airs with government funding despite the law against propaganda
- Common Dreams — appropriators call the US-funded pro-Trump ad illegal propaganda
- Rolling Stone — Trump's anti-immigrant propaganda ads exempted from DOGE review
- Black Book Audit — related coverage of government messaging and self-promotion