Government & Politics

Read 2nd report from Missouri House committee investigating Greitens


April 24, 2018

Signed by: Chairman Jay Barnes, Vice-chairman Don Phillips, Ranking Member Gina Mitten, Rep. Jeanie Lauer, Rep. KEvin Austin, Rep. Shawn Rhoads and Rep. Tommie Pierson Jr.

A. History of the Committee

The Committee was formed by Speaker Todd Richardson on February 27, 2018 and charged with investigating “allegations against Governor Eric R. Greitens” and reporting “back to the House of Representatives.” On April 5, 2018, the Committee voted to release reports relating to the Committee’s findings regarding allegations against Greitens. On April 11, 2018, the Committee issued its first report regarding the allegations surrounding the relationship between Greitens and Witness 1. Today, the Committee issues this report on Greitens’ use of a charitable donor list for fundraising during his campaign for governor, and events surrounding the use of that list. (Footnote 1) Additional reports may follow.

Every witness to the Committee testified under oath, and subpoenas were issued to compel the appearance of witnesses and the production of documents.

On March 14, 2018, pursuant to subpoena, the Committee took testimony from Michael Hafner, a former campaign worker for Greitens.

On March 16, 2018, a subcommittee including Chairman Barnes, Ranking Member Mitten, and Rep. Austin (as well as staff attorney Alex Curchin) spoke with Dave Whitman, a former employee of Greitens. Whitman is currently serving a sentence at the United States Medical Center for Federal Prisoners in Springfield, Missouri after having pleaded guilty to federal crimes relating to theft from Greitens. Whitman refused to speak on the record and indicated that he no longer had possession, access, or control of any documents relating to his employment with The Greitens Group and its relationship with The Mission Continues.

On March 19, 2018, Chairman Barnes and Attorney Curchin met informally with Matt Jacober, counsel for The Mission Continues, to discuss document requests and activities of The Mission Continues in relation to Greitens and The Greitens Group. The Committee eventually received more than 100,000 documents from The Mission Continues in response to its requests.

On March 27, 2018, pursuant to subpoena, the Committee took testimony from Krystal Proctor (formerly Taylor), former executive assistant to Greitens when he worked for The Greitens Group and The Mission Continues. Proctor also worked in an operations role for the Greitens campaign for governor.

On March 28, 2018, counsel for Danny Laub, a former campaign worker for Greitens, informed Chairman Barnes via email that Laub refused to appear before the Committee. However, Laub testified under oath via deposition taken by the Attorney General’s Office in Washington D.C. on April 18, 2018.

On March 29, 2018, the Committee took testimony from Spencer Kympton, President of The Mission Continues.

On April 2, 2018, pursuant to subpoena, the Committee took testimony from Lyndsey Reichardt (formerly Hodges), a former employee of The Mission Continues.

On April 3, 2018, the Committee met to discuss process for redactions of testimony and this report.

On April 4, 2018, the Committee took testimony from Jack Neyens, the former Chief Financial Officer of The Mission Continues.

On April 15, 2018, the Committee sought and received an Order from the Circuit Court of Cole County permitting the Attorney General’s Office (AGO) to share information about its investigation of The Mission Continues with the Committee.

On April 18, 2018, Chairman Barnes and Attorneys Curchin and Alixandra Hallen met with counsel from the Attorney General’s Office to exchange information. The Committee received the testimony and related exhibits from the AGO’s depositions of Michael Hafner, Krystal Proctor, and Danny Laub.

Read Next

B. Committee Findings for Report #2

Based on the testimony and evidence received by the Committee to date, the Committee finds reason to believe the following:

1. The Mission Continues (TMC) is a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organization started by Eric Greitens that helps veterans returning home from service “build new skills and networks that help them successfully reintegrate to life after the military while making long-term, sustainable transformations in communications and inspiring future generations to come.” (Footnote 2)

2. Greitens founded TMC in 2007 under the name The Center for Citizen Leadership. TMC grew slowly between 2007 to 2010, ending 2010 with $1.56 million in revenue. In 2011, TMC grew substantially, grossing total revenue of $7.01 million. (Footnote 3)

3. In 2009, Greitens formed The Greitens Group (TGG) for his personal for-profit business engagements, which included book writing, public speaking, and corporate training. (Footnote 4)

4. Krystal Proctor (formerly Taylor) began working for Greitens on January 1, 2011, with salary and expenses split between TGG and TMC. (Footnote 5) Throughout her time working for Greitens, Proctor worked at his direction. (Footnote 6)

5. Dave Whitman worked as the managing director for TGG until 2014, when he was charged with federal crimes relating to theft and fraud against TGG. In 2016, Whitman pleaded guilty and is currently serving his sentence in Springfield, Missouri.

6. Jack Neyens acted as the Chief Financial Officer of TMC for several years while Greitens was there. (Footnote 7)

7. Proctor explained how TGG and TMC worked together: TGG would book a for-profit event for Greitens, and TMC would then work around those events to “maximize” Greitens’ time. (Footnote 8) The Committee lacks non-profit expertise to determine whether the practice of booking TMC events around Greitens’ private business schedule is common or best practice. Neyens’ testimony suggests it is not common. (Footnote 9) However, Neyens’ also testified that it made “sense” as a way of “maximizing expenses” and “maximizing his time.” (Footnote 10)

8. The Committee found no evidence that TMC inappropriately paid Greitens’ travel expenses for events that were not exclusively TMC events. (Footnote 11) Likewise, the Committee found no evidence that TMC purchased Greitens’ books.(Footnote 12)

9. In 2011, as its operating budget grew significantly, TMC began hiring professional staff with experience in non-profit management, including Spencer Kympton, who was hired as the organization’s Chief Partnerships Officer.(Footnote 13)

10. As CEO of TMC, Greitens reported to the Board of Directors. (Footnote 14)

11. In late 2012, TMC’s Board initiated procedures to protect TMC’s 501(c)(3) status.

a. TMC entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with TGG to formalize cost-sharing between the organizations.(Footnote 15)

b. TMC required Greitens to sign a non-disclosure agreement (NDA) as a TMC employee. (Footnote 16)

12. In the TMC NDA dated November 27, 2012, Greitens agreed to hold in strict confidence “the identities of any donors or investors, and any personal information of donors or investors, and any contact information for donors or investors,” as well as any “lists, databases … trade or business secrets, … and similar or dissimilar information relating to the operations or activities of TMC.” (Footnote 17)

13. The NDA specifically stated that Greitens “shall not at any time during [his] employment with TMC or at any time after termination or expiration of [his] employment with TMC disclose any Confidential Information to any third party, in whole or in part.” (Footnote 18) Greitens further agreed that “all intellectual property that is developed by [himself] during the time [he] is employed by TMC, and that is within the scope of [his] employment with TMC, is the property of TMC, including but limited to … trade secrets.” (Footnote 19) He also agreed to not use TMC’s intellectual property, including trade secrets “in any context outside of [his] employment” unless he first “received the prior written consent (by email or letter) of TMC[.]” (Footnote 20)

14. Krystal Proctor signed the same TMC NDA on November 21, 2012. (Footnote 21)

15. Also in late 2012, Greitens received and signed TMC’s “Team Member

Handbook,” which set expectations for employees and volunteers. (Footnote 22) The Handbook begins with a signed letter from Greitens and speaks to the importance of confidentiality in at least three places:

a. “Under no circumstances should outside requests for donor material be fulfilled unless prior written permission is received from your Team Leader.”

b. “Team Members may not use our Systems “to solicit Team Members or others unless on behalf of The Mission Continues;” and

c. “Protecting our organization’s information is the responsibility of every Team Member[.] … Do not discuss the organization’s confidential business or proprietary business matters, or share confidential, personal Team Member information with anyone who does not work for us such as friends, family members, members of the media, or other business entities.”

16. In November 2012, Proctor recognized the importance of protecting TMC donor privacy.

At that time, she extracted TMC data for the limited purpose of compiling a holiday card list for Greitens, and sent TMC data to others within TGG with the following request: (Footnote 23)


Emphasis added.

17. Former TMC CFO Neyens testified that Greitens “grew the organization from zero[,]” (Footnote 24) and explained why and how he believed Greitens was able to grow TMC. “[P]eople, donors, corporations, individuals, foundations migrate. They were attracted to him. They migrated to him as he spoke around the country[.]” (Footnote 25) Further, Neyens agreed with the statement that Greitens “was a very strategic person” who “liked to have things planned out,” testifying, “He planned things out. … He didn’t go into – you know, I guess it’s kind of like going into battle. You just don’t randomly run in there. He had a plan of building his business – building his organization.” (Footnote 26)

18. Although Greitens was critical to TMC’s success, he did not work alone. Kympton testified that TMC fundraising responsibilities were shared between Greitens and the development team, including Lyndsey Reichardt. (Footnote 27)

19. Reichardt testified that as development director, her job included “anything related to fundraising” for TMC. (Footnote 28) This included an annual gala, corporate fundraising proposals, individual donors, appeal letters and “identifying donors that would be good for Eric or other leadership team members to meet with.”(Footnote 29) She explained that when someone made a small donation to TMC, she “would help set up meetings with people” who had “potential to give larger gifts or to contribute more to The Mission Continues.” The charity had a system to ensure every donor was thanked on a quarterly basis for his or her gifts. Reichardt was responsible for identifying small donors who might be good prospects to become larger donors.(Footnote 30) The thank you calls “involved all the staff.” (Footnote 31)

20. Reichardt explained that she also had frequent contact with individual TMC donors, testifying, “Sometimes I would go have coffee or lunch with them, tell them about the organization’s plans and how we were growing, and assess their interest in being more involved with the organization.” (Footnote 32) Through this process she was responsible for “gaining donors who donated in excess of a thousand dollars.” (Footnote 33) However, “[a]s the organization grew, the leadership members above [her] would take those meetings.” Those leadership members were not limited to Greitens, but also included Spencer Kympton, Lori Stevens, and Meredith Knopp. Reichardt testified that no one single leadership member took the bulk of those donor meetings. (Footnote 34)

21. Similarly, Reichardt testified that TMC’s annual banquet was a “team effort” where sponsors were identified by a leadership committee, and “those committee members would typically do the solicitations themselves.” (Footnote 35)

22. An email suggests Greitens began considering a run for statewide office at least as early as October 16, 2013, at which time a political consultant named Steve Michael emailed to tell him he was “finishing up on some of those to-do lists” and sent “Schweich’s donor list” as an attachment to give Greitens “a bit of an idea on his potential strengths.” (Footnote 36) At the time, Schweich was identified as planning a run for governor. (Footnote 37)

23. Greitens took a sabbatical from TMC from late 2013 to spring 2014. (Footnote 38)

24. Proctor testified that Greitens had decided he was running for office in early 2014. (Footnote 39)

25. Danny Laub began advising Greitens on political activity in early 2014. Laub testified he prepared a memo for Greitens in February 2014 regarding gubernatorial campaign strategy. (Footnote 40)

26. On February 27, 2014, Monu Joseph emailed Proctor and Greitens the schedule for Greitens’ trip to Orange County, California on March 12, 2014. (Footnote 41) Proctor testified the purpose of the trip and “the nature of those meetings was to start thinking about getting support and money from these people for when he would run for office.” (Footnote 42)

27. On March 5, 2014, Greitens emailed a spreadsheet to Proctor and Whitman with lists of “categories for consideration” for a run for public office. (Footnote 43) The document discussed fundraising, issue education, campaign organization, potential endorsements, and strategy.(Footnote 44)

28. Michael Hafner also began advising Greitens on political activity in early 2014. (Footnote 45) Emails reveal a meeting with potential supporters and donors as early as March 18, 2014. (Footnote 46)

29. On March 21, 2014, Proctor prepared a memo for Greitens, Whitman, and Mason Fink setting forth information about announced and likely candidates for governor in 2016. (Footnote 47) She testified that Greitens was “focused on the governor’s position” at this date and had, in fact, settled on Missouri governor’s race for his political future. (Footnote 48)

30. On March 24, at Greitens’ direction, Proctor set up a system to organize campaign contacts including donors, volunteers, staff, advisors, endorsements, interest groups, and other supporters. (Footnote 49)

31. On or about April 1, 2014, Proctor stopped using her TMC email linked to her TGG email on a regular basis. Instead, she created an auto-response to inform persons who emailed her that they could contact her at her TGG email address, an account for which the Committee does not have access to emails dated after April 1, 2014. (Footnote 50)

32. On April 24, 2014, Greitens informed TMC that he would transition from CEO to Board Member of TMC in the summer of 2014. (Footnote 51) In response, TMC asked Greitens to assure donors that the transition to new leadership would go smoothly and the organization was on strong footing with a good plan for the future. Reichardt explained:

Anytime there is a big leadership change within an organization it’s standard fundraising practice to take your top donors and let them know about that change…. [T]he development team’s plan for the transition was essentially to identify our top donors and let them know that Eric was going to be leaving the organization in a few months, and that the organization is in good hands with Spencer Kympton, the new president. (Footnote 52)

33. On May 8, 2014, TMC employee Lori Stevens emailed Greitens, Proctor, Kympton, and Reichardt with “transition call” instructions for Greitens and five attachments, including a list of TMC donors named “All donors 1K total and up – as of 5-7-14.xlsx.” (Footnote 53)


Emphasis added.

34. On May 12, 2014, Kympton followed-up on the transition calls: (Footnote 54)

IMAGE OF TEXT2 pg8.png

35. At least two other follow-up emails occurred to track and aid in the transition calls: (Footnote 55)


36. Proctor explained how she understood the circumstances of these transition emails.

Eric was stepping down as CEO of The Mission Continues…and I recall that he asked the development team at The Mission Continues, which would have been Lori Stevens and Lyndsey Reichardt at the time, who were both on this email. He asked the development team to send him a list of donors of The Mission Continues, and then also a list of calls that he would be making to The Mission Continues sort of top donors to let them know that he would be transitioning and stepping down as CEO. (Footnote 56)

My understanding was that he had – you know, Eric had built The Mission Continues, and these were his contacts, his friends, his family, his family members, colleagues, and you know, at some point in the future, he might need to reference this list and, you know, get in touch with these people. (Footnote 57)

37. Proctor was not aware of any communications specifying a purpose for TMC sending the donor list to Greitens other than the transition. (Footnote 58) However, she also testified:

The purpose, I believe, was that Eric would be making a number of phone calls to The Mission Continues donors to let them know he would be transitioning and stepping down as CEO, and then I also believe the purpose was to have a list of contacts, because, like I said, these were his contacts, his friends and family members and colleagues, people he had brought into The Mission Continues who were supporters of his, and I believe that he – you know, for convenience’s sake, he wanted their contact information in one place and one list. (Footnote 59)

38. Proctor recalled Reichardt “being sort of concerned and voicing those concerns around, you know, sending a list of The Mission Continues Donors to Eric[.]” (Footnote 60) She further testified Reichardt “sort of feeling like, you know, putting together this list and, you know, sending it to Eric felt, you know, inappropriate in some way.” (Footnote 61) Reichardt denied ever speaking of such concerns. (Footnote 62)

39. Proctor could not recall anyone from TMC stating that the list could be used for political purposes or for any purpose other than transition calls.(Footnote 63)

40. Kympton did not recall any alternative purpose for providing the TMC donor list:

[T]he original email that was sent sometime earlier – I mean, beginning on May 8th of 2014, was part of an overall plan that our development team constructed to guide the external communication of our CEO’s transition. So that sat a week or two after Eric had communicated internally that his plan was to transition from the CEO role over that summer – so several months later.

So this was our first step in our development team’s first step at guiding a proactive communications plan with our partners to not only communicate the transition itself but also talk about how The Mission Continues would be a going concern, how their partnership in support of The Mission Continues would continue to be valued by the organization and just – it was all part of a natural transition plan that we had created. (Footnote 64)

41. When asked whether there was any purpose other than the transition calls for “providing Mr. Greitens the full list of The Mission Continues donors who had given over a thousand dollars,” Reichardt answered, “Not to my knowledge.” (Footnote 65) Reichardt gave the same answer to questions of whether there was any express or implied consent for “Mr. Greitens to use this list of donors over $1,000 for political purposes.” (Footnote 66)

42. Kympton testified that the TMC NDA applied to the TMC donor list. When asked if there was an exception to the NDA for political activity, Kympton responded, “There are no exceptions.” He further explained that he could not “see a case where there would be an exception made” and “[i]t would not have been an authorized use of any information from The Mission Continues’ point of view.” He also characterized it as “a misuse, as far as The Mission Continues is concerned.” (Footnote 67)

43. Kympton testified that he was not aware of any implicit or explicit authorization to use the TMC list for political purposes. (Footnote 68) He further stated, “I have not seen any evidence that there was any authorization to Mr. Greitens, either in the context of his role as CEO or after, to suggest any authorization to use it for political purposes.” (Footnote 69)

44. Reichardt agreed that there were individuals and corporations who donated more than a thousand dollars to TMC for whom Greitens was not primarily responsible. (Footnote 70)

45. On May 24, 2014, Greitens met with Laub and others for ten hours to discuss a “future race for governor.” (Footnote 71) In preparation, Laub created a memo for Greitens that established the first objective of “establish a personal relationship with five candidates outside of Missouri who can be called-upon for personal favors during Eric’s campaign for Governor.” (Footnote 72)

46. In an email sent May 26, 2014, Fink suggested that Greitens open a campaign committee that spring. (Footnote 73) However, Laub responded that “this is silly.” In his deposition, he explained, “Eric’s key to victory was timing and this would have disrupted that.” (Footnote 74) Laub explained, “The later the better,” on when it was the right time for Greitens to enter the race. (Footnote 75)

47. On May 28, 2014, just 17 days after Greitens received the TMC donor list, he asked Danny Laub to sign an NDA that, like the TMC NDA, protected “donor lists” from disclosure to third-parties. (Footnote 76) The Greitens’ campaign NDA specified that “EG is exploring plans regarding a potential career endeavor involving public service[.]” (Footnote 77)

48. On August 14, 2014, Greitens scheduled a conference call with political consultants Steve Michael and Dave Hagemen. (Footnote 78)

49. On October 15, 2014, Proctor sent an email to Laub and Tyler Holman regarding a meeting on Monday, October 20, 2014. Proctor indicated she would bring “[a]ll of the donor lists that we’ve collected so far” to the meeting. (Footnote 79) The TMC donor list was one of those lists. Proctor testified that Greitens had talked to her multiple times about “the importance of the TMC donor list to support future political fundraising efforts.” (Footnote 80)

50. On December 1, 2014, Laub was hired by Greitens. Laub testified that, at this time, there was “definitely a future gubernatorial campaign” and Laub’s role included “political planning,” meaning “everything from…surveying the landscape, figuring out who Eric should meet with, figuring out how to achieve at this point … how to achieve success.” (Footnote 81) At the time, however, Laub was paid by Eric Greitens, LLC. (Footnote 82) Also on December 1, 2014, Proctor emailed Laub a document from Greitens titled “Candidate’s Intent.” (Footnote 83) It provided detailed campaign plans, including fundraising plans to achieve $8 million in commitments; messaging plans that sought answers to the questions “Why I’m Running” and “Why I’m a Republican.” (Footnote 84)

51. On December 5, 2014, Greitens convened a meeting to discuss the campaign. (Footnote 85) Laub testified that he first learned of the TMC list at this meeting. (Footnote 86) Several people attended this meeting, including Jennae Neustadt, Mark Bobak, Chris Bobak, and Fink. (Footnote 87) The attendees reviewed the TMC donor list at this meeting. (Footnote 88)

52. Hafner began working for pay in January 2015. Although Hafner’s work was strictly political, his initial pay was from either The Greitens Group or Eric Greitens personally. (Footnote 89)

53. Greitens for Missouri did not report Laub’s or Hafner’s pay as in-kind contributions from The Greitens Group to the campaign.

54. On January 6, 2015 at 1:57 p.m., the following invitation was sent to Hafner, Proctor, and Laub for a campaign “Finance Meeting” for 10 a.m. the next morning. (Footnote 90)

IMAGE OF TEXT pg13.png

55. Four minutes later, Proctor sent an email to Laub and Hafner: (Footnote 91)

IMAGE OF TEXT pg14.png

56. The attachment labeled “All donors 1K total and up – as of 5-7-14.xlsx” was TMC’s donor list – as sent to Proctor and Greitens by TMC for the purpose of “transition calls” when Greitens left TMC in May 2014. (Footnote 92)

57. Hafner and Proctor testified that Proctor sent the TMC list at Greitens’ direction. (Footnote 93)

58. Proctor testified “there was no confusion” when she shared the list with Hafner and Laub at Greitens’ direction that they were going to use it to support “the political campaign” and, in particular, “political fundraising.” (Footnote 94) Laub also testified that the TMC list was used to create a campaign fundraising list (Footnote 95) and that, at the direction of Greitens, Hafner used the TMC list to create a campaign fundraising list. (Footnote 96)

59. Proctor testified she never received authorization to share the list from anyone other than Greitens, and that Greitens directed her to share the list after he left TMC. (Footnote 97)

60. The TMC list contained the names, phone numbers, email addresses, donations,

and other details of every individual, company, or non-profit that had donated $1,000 or more to TMC. The list contained the information for more than 500 individuals and hundreds of businesses and foundations that had given to TMC. (Footnote 98)

61. Proctor testified that Greitens viewed the TMC list as his own list of friends, family, and supporters that he had built up with his own labor and endeavors from the beginning of the organization. (Footnote 99)

62. Greitens, did, in fact, put substantial labor into cultivation of donors for the list. However, Greitens earned a salary as CEO of TMC for most of that time, and other people also put labor into cultivation of the list. (Footnote 100)

63. TMC’s President Spencer Kympton explained that the list contained more than just Greitens’ friends, family, and supporters. When asked, “A previous witness testified that Mr. Greitens thought – essentially thought of this list as his own, that the list was comprised of his friends, his contacts that he had built up. … Do you believe that to be true?,” Kympton responded:

I would not characterize this list that way. This list is a list of 500 – more than 500 donors, supporters, partners of The Mission Continues who had given collectively or over time $1,000 or above to The Mission Continues. Within this list might be, you know, friends or family of Eric Greitens that have transitioned into being supporters of The Mission Continues, but as context, I have friends and family who are on this list; other staff members from The Mission Continues have family on this list. There are individuals on this list who came into The Mission Continues relationship via events that we ran, and they might have been invited by host committee members to those events. There are individuals on this list who came into a relationship with The Mission Continues by the company that was supporting The Mission Continues. So I think that there certainly are individuals on this list who might have been a friend or family member of The Mission Continues, but I would very much characterize this list as a list of supporters and partners of The Mission Continues that came from a variety of different pathways to that relationship. (Footnote 101)

64. Reichardt testified that she did not view the list as Greitens’ personal list, (Footnote 102) and that there were donors on the list for whom Greitens was not responsible. (Footnote 103)

65. Hafner testified that the Greitens campaign used the TMC list for fundraising purposes, stating there were two fundraising meetings in January, and “at least in one of those meetings we went through the list.” Greitens gave Hafner “notes on specific donors. And of course, donors were selected based on their ability to give which is denoted in the list of their lifetime giving history to The Mission Continues.” (Footnote 104)

66. Kympton and TMC expressly stated that it did not authorize this disclosure or use:

a. “The Mission Continues did not provide nor authorize any use of our donors’ information to the Greitens campaign or any persons or groups for political or campaign purposes;” (Footnote 105)

b. “Any use of The Mission Continues resources for any political or other unauthorized purpose would violate our policies and the trust we expect from each member of our staff.” (Footnote 106)

67. Hafner, an experienced campaign professional, testified that it was the first time he had ever used a charity’s donor list in the course of a political campaign. (Footnote 107)

68. Hafner testified that on January 19, 2015, Greitens instructed him to meet with Reichardt about the list because Greitens did not know a number of persons on it:

So after going through The Mission Continues donor list, at some point during the process, Mr. Greitens didn’t recall a number of names from the list and I was directed – he directed me to set up a meeting with Lindsey Reichardt who it was indicated that she was either a current employee or a former employee of The Mission Continues. And Eric indicated that she would have more extensive information on many of the donors from the list and that I needed to reach out to her to go over the list with her. I never met with Lindsey. I don’t recall ever reaching out to her, but it’s possible I could have. But to my knowledge, I don’t think she ever came into the office, and I certainly never met with her personally to go over the list. (Footnote 108)

69. Both Hafner and Reichardt testified that they never had a meeting. (Footnote 109)

70. On January 28, 2015 Hafner emailed Proctor, Laub, and Chris Bobak seeking help obtaining information for an initial fundraising list. Hafner noted that he “need[ed] the contact information that Eric already has for these people (and I assume that is all in SalesForce?).” Proctor responded that Hafner should check TGG’s account at, but pointed out, “Some of these will not be in salesforce. If not, I would suggest checking The Mission Continues list.” (Footnote 110) Proctor then attached the TMC list to her response. (Footnote 111)

71. Hafner and Laub testified that Hafner used the TMC list to create donor call lists in 2015. (Footnote 112) Hafner sent call lists to Greitens that were derived in part from the TMC list on at least February 5, 17, and March 20. (Footnote 113) At the time Hafner sent the donor call lists, there was no campaign in existence to which donations could be made. However, Laub testified Greitens “was indeed making calls” during this time period, agreeing that Greitens was “getting commitments but not actually getting checks.” (Footnote 114)

72. On February 25, 2015, the campaign filed a Statement of Committee Organization creating the entity Greitens for Missouri. (Footnote 115)

73. On April 22, 2015, after Hafner was no longer working for the Greitens campaign, Proctor emailed the TMC list to Meredith Gibbons, the new finance director for Greitens for Missouri. (Footnote 116) As set forth below, Proctor’s email notes the attachment “is The Mission Continues donor list through May 2014 when Eric stepped down as CEO. So anything in late 2014 won’t be included here or anything from 2015.”


74. Proctor testified that she shared the list with Meredith Gibbons at Greitens’ direction so that it “would be used for political fundraising.” (Footnote 117) She further testified that she was instructed by Greitens to use the lists for these purposes. (Footnote 118)

75. Reichardt testified that she met with Gibbons for lunch and Gibbons “provided [her] with a list of people that Eric was considering asking for money for the campaign.” (Footnote 119) Reichardt testified that she could not recall the size of the list Gibbons brought to the meeting, but that, for the persons listed “she asked if any of them would be good prospects.” (Footnote 120) While Reichardt could not recall the size of the list or whether it was the same as the list disclosed in the transition email, she did recall that Gibbons asked about a particular large donor to The Mission Continues. (Footnote 121)

76. Proctor testified that she was aware of the meeting between Reichardt and Gibbons regarding the TMC list. (Footnote 122) Proctor’s “understanding was that Eric asked Lindsey to meet with Meredith” and that the meeting “occurred in probably mid to late 2015.” (Footnote 123)

77. In August 2015, Greitens stepped down from the board of TMC. Kympton explained,

“[A]t that time, Eric notified both me and, as I recollect, our board chair that he was preparing to announce his candidacy for governor, and those conversations suggested that it was probably in the best interest of The Mission Continues, at that time to, and for Eric to step away from the board to avoid any types of conflict of interest that might arise as having a candidate for political office involved formally on our board.” Kympton identified “the use of Mission Continues resources for political purposes” as an example of such a conflict but stated that the board was not aware of the use of the TMC list at that time. (Footnote 124)

78. Kympton first became aware of Greitens’ political use of TMC resources in August 2016, but did not yet have knowledge of the Greitens’ campaign’s use of the TMC donor list. (Footnote 125) At that time, Kympton exchanged correspondence with Austin Chambers, campaign manager for the Greitens campaign for governor, regarding concerns about a “Greitens advertisement and fundraising campaign” that Kympton feared “jeopardize[d] [TMC’s] status as a 501c3.” In particular, among other things, Kympton was concerned with a link that “explicitly align[ed] [TMC’s] trademarked name with a political campaign effort: https://donate.ericgreitens/com/mission-continues” and with a website video titled “Eric Greitens: The Mission Continues” which was on a fundraising page. (Footnote 126) Chambers responded:


79. Greitens’ attorney Mike Adams responded, “Obviously, the Campaign wishes The Mission Continues nothing but the greatest success in its worthy cause and would do nothing to jeopardize its tax-exempt status.” Adams then quotes and discusses IRS guidance that an organization would jeopardize its 501(c)(3) status by “[a]llowing a candidate to use an organization’s assets … if other candidates are not given an equivalent opportunity.” Adams and the Greitens campaign agreed to cease using a photo it took at TMC offices but failed to notify TMC that the campaign was using the TMC donor list for political fundraising.

80. News reports from the fall of 2016 indicate that cross-referencing the names on the TMC list with Greitens campaign donors reveals that the campaign raised nearly $2 million from persons or organizations on the TMC list. (Footnote 127)

81. In approximately November 2016, an ethics complaint was filed against Greitens and Greitens for Missouri for failure to report the TMC list as an in-kind donation.

82. In a subsequent filing with the Missouri Ethics Commission, Greitens and his campaign admitted that the campaign used the TMC list for fundraising purposes. (Footnote 128)

83. Documents and testimony from Hafner and Proctor establish that Greitens himself utilized prospective donor call lists that included information taken from the TMC list. (Footnote 129)

84. In April 2017, Greitens signed a Joint Stipulation of Facts, Waiver of Hearing Before the Missouri Ethics Commission and Consent Order with Joint Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law in Missouri Ethics Commission v. Greitens for Missouri and Eric Greitens in MEC Case No. 16-0107-1. (Footnote 130)

85. Greitens admitted that the campaign used the list to contact donors. (Footnote 131)

86. Greitens asserted that the TMC list was an in-kind contribution received from Danny Laub on March 1, 2015 and had a value of $600. (Footnote 132)

87. On April 28, Greitens signed an amended campaign finance report for April 15, 2015, which also asserted that Laub donated the TMC list on March 1, 2015 with a value of $600. (Footnote 133)

88. Greitens electronically signed below the statement, “I certify that this report, comprised of this cover page and all attached forms, is complete, true, and accurate.” (Footnote 134)

89. In fact, however, the list was not an in-kind contribution from Danny Laub:

a. Laub was never an employee of TMC, and thus, was not able to authorize disclosure or use of the list; and

b. The list was sent to Laub and Hafner by Proctor at Greitens’ direction. (Footnote 135)

90. Laub testified that Austin Chambers called him on April 24, 2017. (Footnote 136) After exchanging pleasantries, Laub described their conversation:

And then Austin says to me, “I don’t know if you know this, but there’s a bullshit ethics complaint filed against us by the Democrat party about this Mission Continues donor list.” And he said, “I need someone who was on the campaign at the time, because I wasn’t, to put their name down so we can get this bullshit complaint dismissed. We will pay” – assuming him and the campaign – “will pay the fine, but we need to put someone’s name down who was on the campaign at the time, and I was not.” And he said, “Can we put your name down?” (Footnote 137)

91. Laub testified that he told Chambers the Greitens campaign could “put [his] name down,” which he “assumed … meant that [he] was the manager of the campaign at the time or in charge of the campaign at the time.” (Footnote 138) Laub learned a week later that “putting his name down” as the donor of the TMC list “was not what I thought I told Austin on the phone he could use my name for.” (Footnote 139) Instead, Laub testified that he had been “affirmatively misled” by Chambers. (Footnote 140)

92. Laub testified that if Chambers had not misled him that he “would never have agreed for it to be perceived or otherwise that I in-kinded a list that I did not in-kind.” (Footnote 141) Laub testified he would have never authorized Chambers to use his name as someone who donated the list “because that’s untrue.” (Footnote 142) Further, Laub testified that the TMC list was not donated to the campaign on March 1, 2015. (Footnote 143) Instead, he testified that nothing happened with the TMC list on that date.

93. Laub agreed that Greitens’ amended campaign finance report regarding the TMC list as an in-kind contribution was “false in every particular.” (Footnote 144) Laub further testified that everything of substance in the settlement agreement between Greitens and the MEC was untrue. (Footnote 145)

a. Laub did not contribute the list to the campaign. Instead, it was contributed by Greitens himself through his directions to Proctor. (Footnote 146)

b. The list was not donated to the campaign on March 1. Instead, its first use that Laub could remember was in December 2014, and the email records show its disclosure and use on January 6 and January 7. (Footnote 147)

94. Laub stated that the “whole document made [him] sick … because it was misrepresented [and] because [he] was in a round of news stories falsely portraying what happened.” (Footnote 148)

Footnote 1: The Committee notes that its work is not complete with this report, and that, in addition to other actions, subsequent reports may be issued.

Footnote 2:

Footnote 3: This data is available online with TMC’s Form 990 filings.

Footnote 4: This information is available at the website of the Missouri Secretary of State.

Footnote 5: Tr. Proctor at 10:8 to 13:2

Footnote 6: Tr. Hafner at 10:11-20; Tr. Proctor at 20:9-12.

Footnote 7: Tr. Neyens.

Footnote 8: Tr. Proctor at 15:1-16, “[T]ypically, I would … communicate … to [TMC], Eric is going to be in Florida for a speaking engagement; you guys probably want to use this opportunity to set up some donor meetings[.]” See also Tr. Neyens at 16:22 to 17:10. See Tr. Neyens at 17:15-18

Footnote 9: Tr. Neyens at 17:19 to 19:6, testifying he “did not” have a similar experience at other non-profits where he worked and had not worked at any non-profit where the director also had a private business at the same time.

Footnote 10: Tr. Neyens at 17:15-18.

Footnote 11: Tr. Proctor at 18:9-23; Tr. Kympton at 18:6-18; Tr. Neyens at 19:12-16.

Footnote 12: Tr. Kympton at 19:4-12; Tr. Neyens at 14:15 to 15:3.

Footnote 13: Tr. Kympton at 8-19,

Footnote 14: Tr. Kympton at 26:16-17.

Footnote 15: Ex. 15; Tr. Kympton at 13:20 to 14:7, describing MOU as “a board-directed initiative … intended to protect and preserve the nonprofit status of The Mission Continues. Recognizing that our CEO at the time was also the CEO of a for-profit entity...”

Footnote 16: Ex. 16, see Greitens signature on page 4. Tr. Kympton at 20:10-11, “[T]his is a document that all of our staff signs.”

Footnote 17: Ex. 16 at paragraph 1(C), (G), definition of confidential information; and paragraph 2, non-disclosure requirement.

Footnote 18: Ex. 16 at paragraph 3(A).

Footnote 19: Ex. 16 at paragraph 3(A).

Footnote 20: Ex. 16 at paragraph 3(C).

Footnote 21: Ex. 12; Tr. Proctor at 21:2-18.

Footnote 22: Ex. 14.

Footnote 23: AGO Proctor, Ex. 12.

Footnote 24: Tr. Neyens at 43:19.

Footnote 25: Tr. Neyens at 43:20-23.

Footnote 26: Tr. Neyens at 58:7-16.

Footnote 27: Tr. Kympton at 65:14 to 67:10.

Footnote 28: Tr. Reichardt at 11:6.

Footnote 29: Tr. Reichardt at 11:9-11.

Footnote 30: Tr. Reichardt at 11:25 to 13:20.

Footnote 31: Tr. Reichardt at 13:14-20.

Footnote 32: Tr. Reichardt at 14:17-20.

Footnote 33: Tr. Reichardt at 14:21-23, responding in the affirmative to question posed by Rep. Barnes.

Footnote 34: Tr. Reichardt at 15:2-14.

Footnote 35: Tr. Reichardt at 17:2 to 18:20

Footnote 36: AGO Proctor, Ex. 1.

Footnote 37: See Catherine Hanaway, former Missouri House Speaker, Pondering 2016 Run for Governor, St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Sept. 15, 2013, discussing Schweich “who has not said he will run for governor but is widely believed to be planning such a move.” Available at, April 23, 2018.

Footnote 38: Ex.19.

Footnote 39: Tr. AGO Proctor at 23:7-11, “I became more convinced because he started sort of planning for a transition or stepping down as CEO from The Mission Continues and focusing, you know, on a little bit more on the idea.”

Footnote 40: Tr. AGO Laub at 37:24 to 42:22; AGO Laub Ex. 2.

Footnote 41: AGO Proctor, Exs. 6, 7.

Footnote 42: Tr. AGO Proctor at 45:2-7; AGO Proctor, Ex. 7.

Footnote 43: AGO Proctor, Exs. 8, 9.

Footnote 44: AGO Proctor, Ex. 9.

Footnote 45: Tr. Hafner at 6:15 to 7:2.

Footnote 46: Ex. 30.

Footnote 47: Mason Fink is a national political fundraiser.

Footnote 48: Tr. AGO Proctor at 40:18-23; 41:24 to 42:2; 150:5-15; 151:1-5; AGO Proctor, Ex. 5. Footnote 49: Tr. AGO Proctor at 61:25 to 62:16; AGO Proctor, Ex. 10.

Footnote 50: Ex. 31

Footnote 51: Ex.19.

Footnote 52: Tr. Reichardt at 22:7-25.

Footnote 53: Ex. 32.

Footnote 54: Ex. 17.

Footnote 55: Ex. 17.

Footnote 56: Tr. Proctor at 23:6-17.

Footnote 57: Tr. Proctor at 24:1-7.

Footnote 58: Tr. Proctor at 25:7-9.

Footnote 59: Tr. Proctor at 24:20 to 25:6.

Footnote 60: Tr. Proctor at 25:13-17.

Footnote 61: Tr. Proctor at 76:23 to 77:1.

Footnote 62: Tr. Reichardt at 24:19-23.

Footnote 63: Tr. Proctor at 26:15 to 27:19, responding in the negative to questions posed by Rep. Barnes.

Footnote 64: Tr. Kympton at 33:7-23.

Footnote 65: Tr. Reichardt at 23:7-10; 23:11 to 24:6, rejecting contention that list was sent for “Mr. Greitens own use because these were his contacts, his friends, his family, his family members, and his colleagues, and it would be good to have a reference list for him to get in touch with them in the future.”

Footnote 66: Tr. Reichardt at 24:11-18.

Footnote 67: Tr. Kympton at 21:19 to 24:3.

Footnote 68: Tr. Kympton at 24:15 to 25:9.

Footnote 69: Tr. Kympton at 29:3-10.

Footnote 70: Tr. Reichardt at 18:21 to 19:1, responding in the affirmative to question posed by Rep. Barnes.

Footnote 71: Tr. AGO Laub at 111:1-4.

Footnote 72: Tr. AGO Laub at 90:23 to 95:24; AGO Laub, Ex. 12.

Footnote 73: AGO Laub, Ex. 13.

Footnote 74: Tr. AGO Laub at 118:22-24.

Footnote 75: Tr. AGO Laub at 119:3-5.

Footnote 76: AGO Laub, Ex. 14.

Footnote 77: AGO Laub, Ex. 14.

Footnote 78: Ex. 3.

Footnote 79: AGO Proctor, Ex. 16.

Footnote 80: Tr. AGO Proctor at 116:1-17.

Footnote 81: Tr. AGO Laub at 25:13 to 26:20.

Footnote 82: Tr. AGO Laub at 181:7-10. Eric Greitens LLC is d/b/a The Greitens Group.

Footnote 83: AGO Laub, Ex. 26.

Footnote 84: AGO Laub, Ex. 26.

Footnote 85: Tr. AGO Laub at 186:16-19.

Footnote 86: Tr. AGO Laub at 186:19.

Footnote 87: Tr. AGO Laub at 171:3-25; 186:20-23.

Footnote 88: Tr. AGO Laub at 172:7 to 174:18.

Footnote 89: Tr. Hafner at 7:3-15; 89:21 to 90:2.

Footnote 90: Ex 3 at 1; Tr. Hafner at 9:6-14.

Footnote 91: The list labeled “EG fnce prospects 061714.xlsx” was provided by Mason Fink, an unpaid informal advisor, but, to the best of the Committee’s knowledge, never reported as an in-kind contribution. The “Schweich list.xlsx” was provided by Steve Michael, an employee of Victory Enterprises, an eventual vendor for the campaign.

Footnote 92: Ex. 32

Footnote 93: Tr. Proctor at 28:10-16, “It would have been at Eric’s direction.”; Tr. Hafner at 11:13-16.

Footnote 94: Tr. AGO Proctor at 122:8-21.

Footnote 95: Tr. AGO Laub at 202:4-13.

Footnote 96: Tr. AGO Laub at 211:19 to 212:7.

Footnote 97: Tr. AGO Proctor at 133:3-16.

Footnote 98: Ex. 3 at 3-24.

Footnote 99: Tr. Proctor at 23:24 to 24:7

Footnote 100: See Reichardt testimony set forth above; Tr. Reichardt at 11:4 to 19:1

Footnote 101: Tr. Kympton at 34:10 to 35:24, further testifying that “Yes. Of course” he keeps a separate contact list for his friends and family than the TMC list.

Footnote 102: Tr. Reichardt at 23:11 to 24:6, rejecting Proctor’s contention that list was sent for “Mr. Greitens own use because these were his contacts, his friends, his family, his family members, and his colleagues, and it would be good to have a reference list for him to get in touch with them in the future.”

Footnote 103: Tr. Reichardt at 14:23, responding in the affirmative to question posed by Rep. Barnes.

Footnote 104: Tr. Hafner at 16:3 to 17:6.

Footnote 105: Tr. Kympton at 36:18 to 37:1.

Footnote 106: Tr. Kympton at 37:3-8.

Footnote 107: Tr. Hafner at 55:11-21.

Footnote 108: Tr. Hafner at 19:9 to 20:2.

Footnote 109: Tr. Hafner at 19:23; Tr. Reichardt at 28:25 to 29:1.

Footnote 110: Ex. 5.

Footnote 111: Tr. AGO Proctor at 107:3-13.

Footnote 112: Exs. 7, 8, 9.

Footnote 113: Exs. 7, 8, 9.

Footnote 114: Tr. AGO Laub at 250:12-25.

Footnote 115: This document is available on the website of the Missouri Ethics Commission. Footnote 116: AGO Proctor, Ex. 19.

Footnote 117: Tr. AGO Proctor at 123:12-24.

Footnote 118: Tr. AGO Proctor at 123:18-24.

Footnote 119: Tr. Reichardt at 30:18 to 31:1.

Footnote 120: Tr. Reichardt at 31:4-6.

Footnote 121: Tr. Reichardt at 49:23 to 51:3.

Footnote 122: Tr. AGO Proctor at 95:7-18.

Footnote 123: Tr. AGO Proctor at 96:1-19.

Footnote 124: Tr. Kympton at 38:16 to 39:3.

Footnote 125: Tr. Kympton at 39:19 to 40:5.

Footnote 126: Ex. 22

Footnote 127: See The committee notes that it may begin the process of cross-referencing donors to reach a precise amount, but, due to the time constraints, has not done so yet.

Footnote 128: Ex. 11 at paragraph 6.

Footnote 129: Tr. Hafner at 33:11 to 37:11; Exs. 7, 8, 9; Tr. Proctor at 35:3-5.

Footnote 130: Ex. 11.

Footnote 131: Ex. 11 at paragraph 6.

Footnote 132: Ex. 11 at paragraph 10. See Ex. 34 for email negotiations on the value of the list between Greitens’ counsel and the MEC.

Footnote 133: Ex. 10 at 2,9.

Footnote 134: Ex. 10 at 1.

Footnote 135: Tr. Hafner at 39:4-10.

Footnote 136: Tr. AGO Laub at 269:2-11.

Footnote 137: Tr. AGO Laub at 270:3-17.

Footnote 138: Tr. AGO Laub at 270:18 to 271:2.

Footnote 139: Tr. AGO Laub at 272:12-20.

Footnote 140: Tr. AGO Laub at 275:18-22.

Footnote 141: Tr. AGO Laub at 276:2-4.

Footnote 142: Tr. AGO Laub at 277:18-22.

Footnote 143: Tr. AGO Laub at 278:2-5.

Footnote 144: Tr. AGO Laub at 278:22 to 279:1.

Footnote 145: Tr. AGO Laub at 281:7-12.

Footnote 146: Ex. 3; Tr. Proctor at 28:10-16, “It would have been at Eric’s direction.”; Tr. Hafner at 11:13-16.

Footnote 147: Ex. 3.

Footnote 148: Tr. AGO Laub at 282:14-20.

Follow more of our reporting on Greitens scandal

See all 10 stories