Vice President Kamala Harris and her running mate, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, find themselves at the center of a financial controversy involving their campaign's alleged mismanagement.

The financial stability of Harris's presidential campaign is in question after reports of a $20 million debt incurred through lavish expenditures, as The Hill reports, and longtime Democratic Party donor John Morgan is crying foul, suggesting that the VP has no future as a national candidate.

Harris and Walz recently faced Democratic National Committee finance directors to discuss the substantial debt their campaign has accumulated.

The $20 million in question stems from a series of expensive decisions, including extravagant event productions and costly travel arrangements.

Details on Campaign Expenditures

The campaign's expenditure report highlights $15 million spent on producing events, alongside $4 million for private jet travel. An additional $1 million was paid to a company owned by Oprah Winfrey for undisclosed services, raising eyebrows among Democratic strategists and donors alike.

Morgan, a leading political donor, voiced his concerns on NewsNation's CUOMO, criticizing the campaign’s financial decisions.

He suggested that the spending spree was more about ego and securing advertising commissions than about effective campaign strategy.

Morgan's Harsh Criticism

"All of a sudden, everybody’s got the keys to the candy store, ad buyers, talent consultants. There’s 100 days to do it, and the money started pouring in," Morgan commented, highlighting the rapid and unchecked nature of the campaign's expenditures.

Morgan went further, implying that the funds might have been mishandled. "Maybe legally," he said, hinting at potential legal ambiguities in how the funds were spent.

He strongly criticized Harris's leadership and financial acumen, stating, "I think this disqualifies her forever. If you can’t run a campaign, you can’t run America."

This sentiment was echoed in his later remarks about the lasting impact of these financial decisions on Harris's career.

The Campaign's Defense

In response to these allegations, Patrick Stauffer, the chief financial officer of the Harris campaign, assured that all debts were settled by Election Day.

"As of Election Day, there were no outstanding debts or bills overdue and there will be no debt on either the DNC or HFP report for post-general report," Stauffer claimed.

This statement was intended to clarify that the campaign's financial health was restored before the polls closed, a crucial factor in maintaining donor confidence and financial integrity within the Democratic Party.

Despite these assurances, internal reports and comments from DNC finance committee members like Lindy Li tell a different story. Li highlighted "the internal strife and monetary confusion at the center of the party," which she noted had led to several staff departures.

Political Repercussions and Future Implications

Morgan's disappointment has led him to step back from fundraising efforts for Harris, citing a shift in allegiance towards more traditional Democratic values embodied by Joe Biden. "I wouldn’t fundraise for Harris after her entrance to the presidential race," he stated, marking a significant withdrawal of support.

This financial controversy comes at a critical time for Harris, who is endeavoring to solidify her position within the party and across the nation. The scrutiny over her campaign's financial management not only casts doubt on her fiscal responsibility but also on her ability to govern effectively should she win the presidency.

As the story unfolds, the Democratic Party, its donors, and voters will be closely watching the outcomes of these financial revelations. The ability to manage a campaign's budget is often seen as a microcosm of a candidate's capability to manage the country's budget, making this issue particularly salient as the election approaches.