A San Francisco company whose leaders were convicted of forced labor conspiracy and sentenced to years in federal prison is now working Trump-connected attorneys, political operatives, and media figures in a bid for presidential clemency, and the effort has already reached the doors of the pardon office itself.
OneTaste, a self-described "orgasmic meditation" company that federal prosecutors likened to a sex cult, has submitted formal pardon applications to the Justice Department for founder and former CEO Nicole Daedone and former head of sales Rachel Cherwitz, CBS News reported, citing federal records, interviews, and visitor logs.
Daedone received a nine-year prison sentence in late March. Cherwitz got more than six years. Both were convicted in 2025 for forced labor conspiracy. Both have filed appeals. And both are now at the center of a pardon push that has drawn in Alan Dershowitz, Matt Gaetz, Roger Stone, and a network of conservative operatives with direct access to the clemency pipeline.
The campaign did not start with the pardon applications. It started with outreach, and it started early. Marcus Ratnathicam, a former OneTaste employee, reached out on social media to Mike Howell, who runs the Oversight Project nonprofit, before Trump even took office. Howell became a public advocate for Daedone and Cherwitz. His group published a report in January highlighting the case.
Ratnathicam also briefed members of Congress on the House Judiciary Committee, CBS News reported, citing sources familiar with the matter. He discussed the case with the Cato Institute and the American Civil Liberties Union. He declined to be interviewed.
A source close to the committee told CBS News that Ratnathicam had not briefed all members or staff, including Jim Jordan. That distinction matters. It suggests the outreach was targeted, not a broad congressional appeal.
OneTaste also courted Gaetz, the former Republican Florida congressman who now hosts a show on One America News. Gaetz aired a segment about the case in which he said that "nobody was forced or restrained or otherwise threatened to continue participating." He did not respond to CBS News requests for comment.
Stone, the political consultant, talked about the case on his podcast and told CBS News it "really raises serious constitutional issues." Steve Bannon was also approached, sources close to OneTaste said. He declined to comment. Laura Loomer, described as a MAGA influencer, was approached as well but said she does not work on pardons and does not recall the outreach. "I get so many calls," she said.
At the center of the legal effort sits Dershowitz, the high-profile defense lawyer. He told CBS News that OneTaste paid him to advise on its legal appeal and that he has since helped the company pro bono. He framed the case in constitutional terms, saying the "indictment is so broad that it really endangers religious practices and religious freedom."
That framing, religious freedom, government overreach, is not accidental. It mirrors language that has found a receptive audience among conservatives skeptical of federal prosecutorial power, particularly after the Biden-era Justice Department's record of politicized enforcement drew sustained criticism from the right.
Adam Katz, a MAGA-connected attorney who previously represented Rudy Giuliani in a defamation case, was enlisted by OneTaste before the conviction. He sent a letter to the Justice Department asking for review of the prosecution. Katz has worked on several pardon cases during Trump's second term.
The most striking detail in the CBS News report involves the pardon office itself, and the people walking through its doors. Cynthia Hughes, who runs the Patriot Freedom Project, has attended at least seven meetings at the pardon office with U.S. Pardon Attorney Ed Martin and other officials since last year, visitor logs reviewed by CBS News show.
Ayer and Ratnathicam were present at two of those meetings, in January and February 2026, the records show. That means representatives of the company seeking clemency sat in meetings at the very office that reviews clemency petitions.
Hughes and Martin are described as close friends. Martin served on the board of directors of Hughes's Patriot Freedom Project and collected a stipend from it, his government financial disclosure shows. Hughes's organization advocated for January 6 defendants and took credit last year for helping secure Trump's pardon of Michael McMahon, a former police officer convicted of acting as an illegal foreign agent and stalking.
Martha Byrne, an actress and McMahon's wife, told CBS News she was introduced to Martin at an event Hughes hosted at Trump National Golf Club in Bedminster, New Jersey. "Cynthia has been an amazing supporter and friend," Byrne said. "I champion her work."
Martin did not answer emailed questions from CBS News. Hughes did not respond to requests for comment. A Justice Department spokesperson declined to comment and referred CBS News to Martin directly.
OneTaste CEO Anjuli Ayer has been the public face of the clemency push. In a YouTube video posted in January by Patriot Freedom Project, Ayer discussed the prosecution. She told CBS News that Daedone and Cherwitz have drawn support because of the prosecution's "injustice."
"You ask why so many people could see this and advocate for it. Not for money, but for the simple, plain fact that there's a justice issue here."
Ayer also invoked the president's own rhetoric, telling CBS News: "We took the president's mantra, 'fight, fight, fight,' and we followed it. But it was not enough to deter these prosecutors."
Patriot Freedom Project's Weaponization Watch blog posted about the case, arguing it "is weaponization of government and conservatives recognize that this type of legal theory will come for them next." An OneTaste spokesperson told CBS News the company has not paid Hughes or donated to Patriot Freedom Project.
The broader question of how clemency decisions are influenced, and by whom, has become a recurring flashpoint in Washington. The OneTaste case adds a new dimension: a company convicted on serious federal charges deploying a sophisticated influence operation aimed at the very apparatus designed to evaluate mercy on the merits.
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt pushed back on the notion that lobbying can buy a pardon. She told CBS News that anyone "spending money to lobby for pardons is foolishly wasting their money." She described a "robust pardon review process, which includes White House counsel, the Department of Justice and ultimately the president himself as the final decider."
A Trump administration official, speaking anonymously, told CBS News that people approach the White House "with wants" and view Trump "as their best chance." Howell, for his part, said the administration should "take corrective steps" and that he "wouldn't turn over private information from people in the government's crosshairs."
Rachel Barkow, a law professor at New York University and an expert on executive clemency, offered a blunter assessment of the scale of outside influence on the pardon process. "It's of a magnitude that I've never seen before," she told CBS News. "We don't seem to have a functioning clemency process for everyone else who doesn't have these connections."
That observation cuts in multiple directions. The broader battles over executive power in Washington have raised the stakes for every institution that touches the presidency, including the pardon office. When a company convicted of forced labor conspiracy can land meetings inside that office, the process deserves scrutiny regardless of who occupies the Oval Office.
Strip away the lobbying apparatus and the constitutional framing, and the underlying facts remain stark. A federal jury convicted Daedone and Cherwitz of forced labor conspiracy. A federal judge imposed sentences of nine years and more than six years, respectively. Both exited federal court in Brooklyn on May 6, 2025. Both filed appeals.
Those are serious convictions carrying serious time. The appeals process exists for a reason. So does the pardon power. But when the path to clemency runs through personal friendships, nonprofit boards, golf club introductions, and high-profile Washington connections, ordinary Americans serving ordinary sentences have every right to wonder whether the system works the same for them.
Leavitt's assurance of a robust review process is welcome. The question is whether that process can hold when the people seeking pardons have already mapped every back channel into the building.
A pardon is an act of mercy. It should never become a product of access.
