There is at minimum 50% of American voters that don't care about this and see it as under the category of "by any means necessary" to keep Orange Man from being POTUS again. Will have zero effect on the election and nothing will be done about it in the courts either.

Any attempts to rein this in will be decried as "racism." The left is immoral.

Rockdoc said:

---

This is the way they do business and always have. Just have to accept it and move on.

---

That's the same thought process that keeps third world countries stuck in the third world... thank God our founding fathers had more of spine.

They strategically released those numbers yesterday to show momentum, that was basically big donations locked up because they didn't want Biden on the ticket

As far as the original topic, I believe they have been doing that forever, and I am sure it is not just Dems

Doesn't matter. Media won't report on it.

Water. Wet. Of course they are committing fraud. It's what they do.

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

Any attempts to rein this in will be decried as "racism." The left is immoral.

---

Didn't see any minorities in that video

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

Funky Winkerbean said:

---

Who exactly is going to do anything about it?

---

No one. They always take illegal donations. They've done it in every cycle at least since Clinton and the Buddhist monks. They find a loophole and exploit it to take foreign money or huge sums from wealthy individuals. They will never comply with the law.

---

Or the republicans are doing it as well.

This Is Democrat’s ActBlue Money Laundering Operation

Journalist (esala) “Found out that an Austin, Texas resident made 10,000+ different donations to the Democrats from 2020-2022 worth over $106,304. The resident said he has not used ActBlue but FEC website says otherwise. The… pic.twitter.com/WrIGRenCAq

— Wall Street Apes (@WallStreetApes) July 24, 2024

Caroline Wren On Democrat Fundraising: “In the last 36 hours, they say Kamala has raised 100 million dollars via ActBlue. ActBlue is the largest money laundering operation in the country.” @carolinewren pic.twitter.com/ocmyiOSzFC

— Grace Chong 🇺🇸 (@gc22gc) July 23, 2024

VIDEO: Donations to WinRed, the Republican counterpart to Act Blue, don't add up: The top donor in NJ says she did not give $154k to WinRed, despite what FEC data says. "I can't imagine that I did that. That's like impossible."

The FEC says she donated over 10,000 times, but she… pic.twitter.com/eExh43GOJG

— James O'Keefe (@JamesOKeefeIII) November 1, 2023

BREAKING: A massive scandal has emerged from the donations ActBlue received on the day Joe Biden dropped out; reports indicate that $20 million from Swiss billionaire Hansjörg Wyss was broken down into over 1.6 million donations across 400,000 donors

Hansjörg Wyss is looked at… pic.twitter.com/rOaBsM1l2s

— George (@BehizyTweets) July 23, 2024

I'm gonna guess it's to conceal the big money donors and other sources of the money. Could be foreign donors, could be washed money from govt funding

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

Any attempts to rein this in will be decried as "racism." The left is immoral.

---

So what if it is? Are we really going to be stupid enough to give the party of slavery and the KKK that power over us AGAIN?!

Election interference. Real foreign election interference. A real criminal conspiracy that really could result in hundreds of felony prosecutions.

LOYAL AG said:

---

TexAgs91 said:

---

Ok, so what is being done about it?

---

This is the ultimate question. Could we see a situation where a state attorney general was willing to pursue money laundering or identify theft charges on behalf of people living in their state? My guess is there are people on the list from all 57 states. This is a potentially big can of worms.

---

TAMU1990 said:

---

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

Any attempts to rein this in will be decried as "racism." The left is immoral.

---

Didn't see any minorities in that video

---

And?

It will be interesting to see if they actually do anything in a timely manner. Timely would be accountability to the degree it actually impacts THIS election. An untimely resolution would be something like:

Quote:

---

The Federal Election Commission fined the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton's 2016 campaign after a pair of now years-old complaints one from the Campaign Legal Center and another from the conservative Coolidge Reagan Foundation alleged that the party and campaign reported payments to the powerhouse Democratic law firm Perkins Coie as legal expenses, when in actuality some of the money was earmarked for "paying Fusion GPS through Perkins Cole to conduct opposition research on Donald Trump."

---

Wait that sounds weird...Hillary Clinton caused an expense to be classified as legal expense when it was actually a campaign related expense to influence sentiment against the candidate or another candidate?

That sounds a lot like 34 felony counts but, after all, it's (D)ifferent. Even more weird is it sounds like that may have been the genesis of a soft-coup against President Trump.

Democrats commit fraud every day in a multitude of various ways.

They are scum.

I would ask the Department of Justice to look into it, but they're in on it so …

HOLY SH*T!

.@CarlHigbie EXPOSES irregular FEC donations:

“This is verifiable data. Whoever is choreographing this volume is doing it in such small donations because they thought those wouldn't get flagged by watchdogs and FC officials. The way this is brought to our attention… pic.twitter.com/ymLz5jE975

— I Meme Therefore I Am 🇺🇸 (@ImMeme0) July 24, 2024

It's called a joke.

What Act Blue is actually doing is preying on the elderly. They are the least likely to follow up and complain about what is actually going on. They don't even know where to go to follow this. Most are barely about to use a computer. But this is the last generation that will be like that. Subsequent generations are more computer savvy and it will be harder for Dems to get away with laundering in this capacity.

LOYAL AG said:

---

It would be really interesting to get merchant data for those donations. All of this is happening by bank draft or credit card so there are records of the accounts used to make those donations. I'm guessing the lady that gives $5 every once in awhile will have like 12 donations of $5 from credit card ending x1234 then like 995 donor $1000 for a card ending x5678 that isn't in her name. It would seem that with subpoena power you could prove that.

---

Im not even sure you need all those transactions to pull this off. Just fudge the data already in the system.

I also wouldn't put it past the government to be putting out wrong data. Speaking professionally, a few characters out of several thousand lines of code can drastically change the results - especially when joining multiple datasets together.

At work, when we see data like that, our first question isn't to see why the results look the way they do. It's to question whether the data is even right or not.

And yet we know not one thing will happen and it will continue.

Jeeper79 said:

---

I also wouldn't put it past the government to be putting out wrong data. Speaking professionally, a few characters out of several thousand lines of code can drastically change the results - especially when joining multiple datasets together.

At work, when we see data like that, our first question isn't to see why the results look the way they do. It's to question whether the data is even right or not.

---

This kind of gets to the core of the problem. Government is so incompetent that we would assume the data isn't accurate and at least one party would gladly latch on to that assumption to mask their corruption. The federal government is way, way, way too big when we have to have these conversations. Way too much money and power and apparently no way to control it.

MouthBQ98 said:

---

This would also explain why they are incessantly asking for small donations online. It will allow them to launder larger donations from already legally maxed out or flat out unlawful sources.

---

Is there any legal limit to donations to PACs? I thought there wasn't anymore.

Not PAC's. This is the campaign. You can't have THE CANDIDATE run ads asking for PAC money, as that would be as illegally coordinated as it could possibly get. Go watch a YouTube video. I promise you you will see Harris in your face with her weird wrinkled neck within 5 minutes asking for a small donation…

Hansjörg Wyss has been openly donating to liberal causes for years now. It gets commented on in the news every once in a while. I don't claim to be an expert in campaign finance laws, but I strongly suspect he and his lawyers have found a way to do it and still be in compliance with those campaign finance laws.

And concerning ActBlue, the funny thing is that donating through them is actually more transparent than donating directly. That's because if you donate less than $200 that doesn't have to get reported to the FEC. But when ActBlue accepts a donation less than $200 and then sends it on to another PAC or candidate that information does get reported to the FEC.

Actual Talking Thermos said:

---

MouthBQ98 said:

---

This would also explain why they are incessantly asking for small donations online. It will allow them to launder larger donations from already legally maxed out or flat out unlawful sources.

---

Is there any legal limit to donations to PACs? I thought there wasn't anymore.

---

Here you go...

There are limits.

But, the point is, that the donations are being made in other peoples names to hide...SOMETHING. And that something is almost definitely that the limits are being broken to make the donations.

There's got to be some loophole that page isn't saying. Rich people regularly give more than those stated limits to PACs and to support specific candidates. So if Elon Musk really did want to give $45 million a month to support Trump, how would he actually do that?

Logos Stick said:

---

LOYAL AG said:

---

It would be really interesting to get merchant data for those donations. All of this is happening by bank draft or credit card so there are records of the accounts used to make those donations. I'm guessing the lady that gives $5 every once in awhile will have like 12 donations of $5 from credit card ending x1234 then like 995 donor $1000 for a card ending x5678 that isn't in her name. It would seem that with subpoena power you could prove that.

---

Yes.

---

And if they really wanted to find the truth, they could track the IP addresses from where the donations originated. Not hard to do but its (D)ifferent, so don't expect anything to come of this.

Funky Winkerbean said:

---

Who exactly is going to do anything about it?

---

It sure as hell won't be the Dept. of Justice.