Rep. Duncan Hunter’s legal defense is coming from the same campaign coffers he and his wife are accused of misusing, so far amounting to more than $600,000 for the lawyers.

Federal Election Commission filings show Hunter’s campaign made payments for “legal services” or “legal fees” to eight different law firms in excess of $600,000 during the 2018 election cycle. This includes disbursements of $182,000 to the San Diego-based law firm Seltzer Caplan McMahon Vitek, which is representing Hunter in the grand jury investigation. The five-term GOP incumbent and his wife were indicted for allegedly using $250,000 in campaign funds for personal use.

By comparison, another recently indicted congressman, Rep. Chris Collins, spent just over $250,000 in legal fees from the campaign coffers, all of it going to a single law firm.

While using campaign funds for personal use is prohibited, Hunter’s use of campaign funds for attorney fees is likely legal and permitted because it should pass the FEC’s so-called irrespective test. That test stipulates personal use is considered any use of funds from a candidate’s campaign account to fulfill a commitment, obligation or expense that would exist even if the candidate’s campaign or responsibilities as an official in federal office did not exist.

In this case, that means Hunter should be able to use campaign funds to defend himself against allegations of misusing campaign funds precisely because he has a campaign at all. Reread that again if you need to.