Skip to main content
Sunday, March 15, 2026 AI-Powered Newsroom — All facts, no faction
PB

Political Bytes

Where the left meets the right in an unbiased dialogue
Congress

PR Executive Demands Senate Democrats Apologize for Falsehoods About His Company During Noem Hearing

Benjamin Yoho says Sen. Adam Schiff misrepresented his company's role in a $220 million DHS ad campaign, citing $226,137.17 in actual subcontract work.

Adam Schiff — Adam Schiff, Official Portrait, 115th Congress (cropped)
Photo: en:United States House of Representatives Office of Photography (Public domain) via Wikimedia Commons
⚡ The Bottom Line

The dispute centers on a significant discrepancy between the subcontract value cited by Senate Democrats during the Noem hearing and the actual amount paid to The Strategy Group for Media. Yoho's letter requests Democratic senators correct the official record and issue an apology, though no response has been provided as of publication. The controversy remains tied to Noem's removal from DHS, wh...

Read full analysis ↓

Benjamin Yoho, top executive of The Strategy Group for Media and husband to former DHS Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs Tricia McLaughlin, is demanding Senate Democrats correct the record and issue an apology after what he calls false allegations about his company's government contracts.

What the Right Is Saying

Yoho, in a letter addressed to Sens. Peter Welch, D-Vt., and Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., called Schiff's characterization factually incorrect. He stated his company provided limited production services as a subcontractor through Safe America Media LLC, receiving $226,137.17 for video and audio work — approximately one-tenth of one percent of the $143 million figure cited by Schiff.

"The facts are The Strategy Group for Media was hired by Safe America Media LLC to serve as a subcontractor to them for production work," Yoho wrote. "This statement is factually incorrect, and I respectfully request that you have your colleague correct the official record and issue an apology."

DHS has defended McLaughlin after allegations her husband's company profited from government contracts, calling such claims baseless.

What the Left Is Saying

Senate Democrats, led by Sen. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., questioned Noem during the hearing about the $220 million DHS ad campaign. Schiff referenced The Strategy Group for Media in connection with subcontracts, suggesting money had flowed to companies with ties to DHS officials. The line of questioning reflected broader Democratic concerns about potential favoritism in contract awards during Noem's tenure.

Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., also pressed Noem on the advertising contract during bicameral Judiciary Committee hearings. Democrats suggested the ad campaign, which featured Noem prominently, represented inappropriate spending that benefited those close to the secretary.

What the Numbers Show

Sen. Schiff referenced $143 million in subcontracts connected to The Strategy Group for Media during the hearing. Yoho's letter clarifies his company actually received $226,137.17 for production services — a figure representing approximately 0.16% of the $143 million cited by Schiff.

The broader context involves a $220 million DHS advertising campaign that featured Noem throughout. Trump removed Noem as DHS secretary after learning she had told senators he approved the $220 million ad campaign, reportedly expressing fury over her performance in congressional hearings.

Fox News Digital reached out to the offices of Sens. Adam Schiff, D-Calif.; Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn.; and Peter Welch, D-Vt., for comment on Yoho's letter.

The Bottom Line

The dispute centers on a significant discrepancy between the subcontract value cited by Senate Democrats during the Noem hearing and the actual amount paid to The Strategy Group for Media. Yoho's letter requests Democratic senators correct the official record and issue an apology, though no response has been provided as of publication.

The controversy remains tied to Noem's removal from DHS, which followed reports that Trump was furious about her testimony regarding the advertising contract. The episode highlights ongoing scrutiny of government contracting practices and the sensitivity around conflicts of interest involving agency officials and their family members.

Sources