Imaginary People Making Real Donations

On Thursday, The Daily Signal posted an article about the funding for ActBlue. ActBlue was founded in 2009 to help Democrats in fundraising. The organization serves as a conduit for left-wing donors, with two more arms—ActBlue Charities and ActBlue Civics—funneling money to 501(c)(3) and (c)(4) clients, respectively.

The article reports:

Paging Dr. Adrienne Young, M.D. 

The good doctor is listed online as an “internist” in McKees Rocks, a borough in western Pennsylvania’s Allegheny County, known locally as “the Rocks.”

Campaign finance filings report Young’s practice is located on Heckel Road in McKees and list a 412 area code phone number. But her office does not appear to exist at this address and the number is not in service. Moreover, none of the receptionists attached to doctors’ offices located in close proximity to Young’s office address in McKees have ever heard of her. That’s peculiar in and of itself. But a search of campaign finance records only adds to the intrigue. 

Someone identified as Adrienne Young has been making substantial contributions to a left-of-center political action committee known as ActBlue, according to Federal Election Commission records. 

…Restoration News is still attempting to contact the individual listed in campaign finance documents as Adrienne Young. Records list her residing on Leet Road in Sewickley, Pennsylvania. These records show that since 2017, Young has made 17,342 in contributions to ActBlue totaling $209,670.06—which averages seven contributions per day. 

Evidently the doctor is doing very well.

The article notes:

Smurfing” involves repackaging large sums of money into smaller, individual transactions to appear less suspicious and avoid scrutiny from law enforcement officials. Is “Adrienne Young” a cover for such an operation, benefiting Democrats?

While it is indisputably the case that ActBlue is ringing the bell with hundreds of thousands of dollars in contributions, it’s not evident the smaller contributions that translate over time into larger sums are coming from an individual donor.

One of the more recent contributions to ActBlue leading back to the donor identified as Young came on March 16, 2023, in the amount of $1196.50. That’s not an unusual amount for an individual, but what is unusual is folding that amount into more than 17,000 contributions made over the span of several years. The donor identified as Young was actively contributing to ActBlue at least through part of this year with a donation of $429.00 made on April 30, 2024. If a smurfing operation is underway, it may not be limited to what’s flowing into ActBlue. 

Please follow the link to read the entire article. This sort of cheating needs to have serious legal consequences.

On Friday, The Gateway Pundit posted an article with the response of the Former Chief Impact Officer at ActBlue.

This is the response:

In a recent interview with an OKeefeMedia Citizen Journalist, Geri Prado former Chief Impact Officer at ActBlue, downplayed concerns about the organization’s suspicious fundraising practices. Prado attempted to brush off allegations by describing ActBlue merely as “a payment processor for campaigns, but it’s not a campaign,” and likened it to PayPal, citing credit card fees as a standard issue.

When asked about potential money laundering, Prado dismissed the concern, “No… It’s a very hard thing to do,” downplaying the likelihood of any illegal activity. However, she admits, “There are other problems,” hinting at other issues within the organization.

This comes amidst reports that Federal Election Commission (FEC) records are inaccurately reflecting senior citizens as having made donations far beyond their actual contributions.

It will be interesting to see what the current Department of Justice does with these allegations.

Paperwork Matters

On Tuesday, Townhall reported that a complaint has been filed against the political campaign of President Biden and Kamala Harris.

The article reports:

A complaint filed with the Federal Election Commission last week by Citizens United and a number of state Republican Party chapters, President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris are accused of violating federal law in the hours after Biden dropped out of the 2024 race for the White House on July 21.

“This complaint is filed pursuant to 52 U.S.C. § 30109(a)(1) against Kamala Harris (FEC DI P80000722), Harris for President (f/k/a Biden for President) (FEC DI 00703975), and Keana Spencer, in her official capacity as Treasurer, for an unprecedented $96 million violation of 52 U.S.C. §30116(f),” the complaint, submitted July 24, 2024 states. “Importantly, Biden and Harris were not their party’s nominees for President and Vice President, respectively, for the 2024 general election at the time this all happened. Notably, there also is no record on the FEC’s website that Biden filed any paperwork with the Commission announcing that he was no longer a candidate for President, as other candidates do when they withdraw from a race.'” 

When Biden announced he would not seek re-election, weeks prior to being nominated at the Democratic National Convention in Chicago, his campaign war chest of $96 million was transferred to Kamala Harris after a name change on FEC paperwork. 

The rules are there for a reason. The transfer of the $96 million from President Biden to Vice-President Harris is not automatic–there is serious paperwork involved. Evidently, neither of the people involved sought to honor the paperwork requirements.

The article notes:

“In fact, while Harris filed paperwork with the Commission announcing that she was no longer seeking reelection as Vice President, 6 Biden did not file any corresponding paperwork.

It will be interesting to see if the rules are going to be followed or ignored.

Finding The Common Ground

On Wednesday, Townhall posted an article about a common factor among some  of the people attempting to remove President Trump’s name from the presidential primary ballot.

The article reports:

Maine’s Secretary of State Shenna Bellows claims to be unbiased when she ruled that Trump is disqualified from running in the state’s 2024 presidential race. But Bellows, the Democrat whose Dec. 28 ruling booted Trump off the Republican primary ballot in the northeasternmost U.S. state, previously cashed in on Soros family money.

According to Federal Election Commission (FEC) records, during her doomed U.S. Senate bid against Republican incumbent Sen. Susan Collins in 2014, Bellows received a $2,600 donation from Andrea Soros, the daughter of billionaire investor George Soros, who notoriously spends his wealth influencing local elections across America by bankrolling the campaigns of Democrat picks.

The article notes:

Maine was the second state to officially declare Trump ineligible. In Colorado, the state Supreme Court decided on Dec. 19 to enforce Trump’s disqualification. Leading the charge in the Colorado case to ensure Trump’s removal is the Orwellian-named Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW). Between FY 2017 and 2021, CREW was given more than $2.8 million in grants by the Foundation to Promote Open Society, which acts as one of Soros’s two chief grantmaking vehicles, for “general support” and “support[ing] political advocacy on ethics in government,” according to an Open Society Foundations database.

And another one…

Spurred by Colorado’s decision, California’s Lt. Gov. Eleni Kounalakis followed suit, requesting in a Dec. 20 letter that the state’s Secretary of State Shirley Weber “explore every legal option” to remove Trump from the presidential primary ballot there.

Kounalakis, too, is a Soros recipient. According to campaign finance records, Soros and his wife Tamiko Bolton Soros, another Open Society Foundations board member, handed over a total of $45,400 to bolster Kounalakis’ successful 2018 campaign and 2022 re-election. Now, Kounalakis is gunning for the California governorship in 2026. Last year, Soros gave Kounalakis an additional $36,400, the maximum amount allowed, just a few months after she launched her bid to succeed Gov. Gavin Newsom.

And in conclusion…

Free Speech for the People is the 501(c)(3)organization that filed a flurry of lawsuits across multiple states to bar Trump from the ballot by claiming that he violated the 14th Amendment’s little-used “insurrection” clause (Section 3). Dubbed the nationwide “14Point3 Campaign” in reference to the constitutional provision, the left-of-center nonprofit advanced 14th Amendment challenges in MinnesotaMichiganOregon, and Illinois as well as organized the most recent Massachusetts complaint.

…In the past, Free Speech for the People was partly funded through grants awarded by the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, which has received $1.5 million in funding from the Foundation to Promote Open Society, a primary Soros grantmaker. Between 2013 and 2017, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund gave Free Speech for the People $275,000 in grants, according to archived 990-PF forms.

See a pattern yet?

 

Voter Fraud In North Carolina

A website called American Lens posted an article today about voter fraud in North Carolina.

The article cites a few glaring examples:

According to North Carolina law, The Board of Election is required to verify the validity of the applicant’s residence (§163-82.7). In most cases, there is an assumption that the residence is valid, however, a cursory check of the data in Durham County should have raised a flag of concern.

As seen in the snapshot below of our data analysis, it is clear that hundreds of people are listed at the exact same address at Duke University’s campus in Durham.

Our examination of same-day student registrations revealed that 240 students  at Duke University were living at ‘1 Duke University Road, Durham.’

We then looked at online mapping sites, such as Google Maps and Bing Maps to understand why so many people were listed at the exact same address.

The address was a gravel parking lot with a shed.

Further research results were detailed in the article:

Believing the Duke results may just be an anomaly, we looked at the data for other college campuses in both Durham and Wake counties. We found more than 700 voters were registered at a centralized campus locations and not where they sleep.

At North Carolina Central University (NCCU), 340 students were registered to the college’s generic address of 1801 Fayetteville Road, Durham, NC.

Taking into consideration the definition of residence, it would appear that all of these voters mentioned in this article did not meet the voter residency requirements and subsequently voted without a valid registration.

I think we have a problem.

Something To Watch For As We Approach 2012

John Hinderaker at Power LIne posted a story today about recent activities by the Obama Justice Department that will make voter fraud more difficult to prevent. The Department of Justice has announced that it has rejected South Carolina’s voter identification law.

The article reports:

Department of Motor Vehicles executive director Kevin Shwedo said the state Election Commission knew it was using inaccurate data when it released reports showing nearly 240,000 active and inactive voters lacked driver’s licenses or ID cards.

Shwedo sent the state’s attorney general an analysis showing that 207,000 of those voters live in other states, allowed their ID cards to expire, probably have licenses with names that didn’t match voter records or were dead. He said the commission created “artificially high numbers to excite the masses.”

When the motor-voter law was passed, it required states to periodically examine their voting lists to eliminate people who had died or moved from the state. Unfortunately, in many states, that portion of the law has not been enforced. That is one of many reasons why voter identification is needed in all elections.

Voter identification requirements are not about denying people the right to vote–the are about ensuring that every man’s vote counts equally. When voter fraud is allowed to flourish, all Americans should be concerned.

Enhanced by Zemanta