With illegal contributions.

http://minx.cc/?post=276395
http://minx.cc/?post=276401
http://minx.cc/?post=276402

It's easy to see how he's raised over $600,000,000 when you can donate as much as you like.

Developing...

That seems like a reliable site.

How's this for reliability, cawksucker:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/10/us/politics/10donate.html?_r=2&pagewanted=1&hp&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

That link was found on the links I originally... linked.

So... nice rebuttal and stuff.

Jeez, you Aggies are bitter these days.

That is pretty interesting that the NYT would print an article that suggests suspicion od Obama.

i have an owned pic but i can not post it here. let me just say that you will be surprised

quote:

---

Jeez, you Aggies are bitter these days.

---

Sorry... we're a three point dog to Iowa State.

quote:

---

That is pretty interesting that the NYT would print an article that suggests suspicion od Obama.

---

that is really the news here.

quote:

---

The questionable donations to the Obama campaign, most of which appear to have been given in small increments online, are bolstering the contentions of some campaign finance groups that additional disclosure requirements are needed for contributions of $200 or less.

Federal candidates are not required to itemize such contributions to the F.E.C. unless the donor’s cumulative total adds up to more than $200. Roughly 70 percent of these contributions to Mr. Obama are not reported, compared with more than 75 percent of Mr. McCain’s.

---

Both candidates have a problem in this area, internet donations are not probably vetted because the system isn't built for it. Obama is certainly not "stealing the election" by making more money than McCain. It's just that more people want to vote for him. That's just democracy.

what if it is Pakistani and Saudi money?

Is that Democratic, too?

quote:

---

Both candidates have a problem in this area, internet donations are not probably vetted because the system isn't built for it. Obama is certainly not "stealing the election" by making more money than McCain. It's just that more people want to vote for him. That's just democracy.

---

Ummm, yeah!!! I have a bridge to sell you!

McCain's people aren't allowing fraudulent contributions, so lay off the "both candidates have a problem in this area" cop out BS.

...also I like the justification that since the polls show around a 5% (non-adjusted) lead for Obama, that explains him having 100 times more people giving the unregulated under $200 contributions. Great job there.

quote:

---

what if it is Pakistani and Saudi money?

Is that Democratic, too?

---

I would not be surprised if Obama had overseas donations that they weren't sure where it came from. I'm sure McCain has the same problem, probably to a much less degree, as he is much less popular abroad. However, Barack Obama can not become President of the United States unless the American people vote for him. But again, this is a problem in the system as we haven't really seen donations to this degree over the internet before. So the FEC will learn from this and I'm sure make the right adjustments.

what if it is Pakistani and Saudi money?



I dont know ask Bush.

I just can't believe that there are this many Americans that are actually going to vote for that dirty piece of ****.

Also keep in mind that these "fraudulent internet donations" make up a very very small percentage of Obama's overall fund raising, even if he was forced to return the money that he hasn't already return (read the full article for reference linked above) then it would make very little difference. The vast majority of his funds are from here in the US, and are valid.

quote:

---

The end result? "Donors" like "Doodad Pro" can submit tons of donations totaling well above the $2,300 limit using different bogus addresses (this does clarify how donations from "Palestine", or PA, got through). And the campaign has no way to reliably de-dupe these donations, besides looking at the last four digits of the credit card number, which with 3.1 million donors is an identifier that could be shared by literally hundreds of donors, and is not as easy to eyeball like a common name or address would be. The ability to contribute with a false address, when the technology to prevent it not only exists but comes standard, is a green light for fraud.

One could understand the oversight if prior to the bogus donor story breaking. But you'd think they would have taken measures to step up their donor security in the aftermath of the revelations. Having AVS turned on would have stopped or significantly deterred the fraudulent donations (or, at a very minimum, made them easily detectable). By turning this basic setting off, the Obama campaign invited this kind of fraud and has taken no steps to correct it.[/url]

---

Edited to add quotes...

[This message has been edited by Hoodlumman (edited 10/23/2008 3:05p).]

quote:

---

So the FEC will learn from this and I'm sure make the right adjustments.

---

Wha? Again the article isn't talking about something that should be a learning process here. How many years have we been buy/paying things online? You can't buy a $10 t-shirt online with a credit card number and a fake name & address. And this isn't a problem both candidates had. This is something easily and regularly eliminated in this type of transaction that is specific in politics to the Obama campaign. Period.

I would also add, staff, can we please move this to the politics board? It's obviously where this thread belongs.

quote:

---

Also keep in mind that these "fraudulent internet donations" make up a very very small percentage of Obama's overall fund raising

---

so its okay if its just a little bit of money

quote:

---

Both candidates have a problem in this area, internet donations are not probably vetted because the system isn't built for it. Obama is certainly not "stealing the election" by making more money than McCain. It's just that more people want to vote for him. That's just democracy.

---

Nonregdrummer, you continue to display your stupidity. Hvae you ever made a purchase online? Have you noticed that they require you to give a billing address and the name on the credit card? Do you realize those have to match up and there are systems in place to make sure they do? You know that Obama isn't using those right?

Stay in school.

quote:

---

The vast majority of his funds are from here in the US, and are valid.

---

You don't have any proof of this. Obama could have just shot your mama and you'd say it was an accident and a learning process and point out the other mama's he didn't shoot.

walkeanne, obviously it's the problem, and the NY Times article linked above, which I quoted, mentions that both candidates have a problem in this area. However, Obama gets twice the fund raising McCain does, so it is more difficult to him. Now no, it's not ok, however, the point I was trying to make is it would make no difference. McCain would still be down in the polls either way.

If that's so then why are they cheating if it wouldn't matter? Honest question.

Obama gave a big F*** YOU to his campaign promise to take public financing but decided against it so he could raise ungodly sums of cash - come to find out, a significant chunk of it is rife with fraud.

Nice call, Chosen One.

Ugh and sigh, it's not cheating.

quote:

---

Federal candidates are not required to itemize such contributions to the F.E.C. unless the donor’s cumulative total adds up to more than $200. Roughly 70 percent of these contributions to Mr. Obama are not reported, compared with more than 75 percent of Mr. McCain’s.

---

Sen. Obama is well within the rules, as is Sen. McCain on not regulating small donations. The reason why this is a problem is because this is an old rule before world wide internet could make it possible for people to make small donations from anywhere. Obviously F.E.C. will have to address it before the next election, but the Republicans can try to do whatever they want to discredit Obama, I don't really care anymore. We are less than two weeks away and I'm ready for this thing to be over with.

I guess Obama didn't know that he was illegally raising funds in Israel when his people were selling Obama t-shirts as a fundraiser.

I'm sure they gave all that money back, too.

That One is morally bankrupt. He will do and say anything to get elected.

But Hoodlumman, it wouldn't matter anyway. So its ok if they chose not to attempt to stop fraudulent donations with an easy process that has been used for a decade internet-wide and is readily available. You don't really have to follow rules and laws if you are The One. If you get caught it doesn't matter because your supporters have already talked so much smack to others that they have to defend you or else they'll look/feel like idiots. You could literally eat kidneys from newborns at a local county hospital and these people would still vote for and support you and deny you had ever remotely done anything wrong.

NRG, could you be a bigger doooshe? Really?

I could be a Taiwanese citizen, have a credit card with a $20,000 limit and give it all to Obama just by changing the name and address to whatever I want. And you think that's ok b/c the charges are less than $200 each?

How much of that hypothetical (which is happening on a huge scale) is fraud?

Answer: every ****ing part.

But that's ok with you, apparently.

Obama has the Address Verification Service (AVS) turned off so he can get away with this. MCCAIN DOES NOT. I repeat, you dense-headed turd, McCain does not have Address Verification Service turned off. So when you try this bullsh*t with him, it rejects the transaction.

*ding*

Your order of FAIL is up.

It is truly sad that liberals like drummer can look past anything and everything that Obama Christ does. You will make excuses and exceptions for ANYTHING.

quote:

---

The reason why this is a problem is because this is an old rule before world wide internet could make it possible for people to make small donations from anywhere.

---

No the reason this is a problem is because Obama's campaign will allow you to easily donate fraudulently - something that McCain's campaign and the 9 million internet businesses do not. That's the problem.

the class of 09 knows what is best for this country

quote:

---

That is pretty interesting that the NYT would print an article that suggests suspicion od Obama.

---

That's the first thing I thought as well. Shocking.



-------------------------------------------------------

Psssst, Hollywood, shut up.

quote:

---

Now no, it's not ok, however, the point I was trying to make is it would make no difference. McCain would still be down in the polls either way.

---

how can you possibly know this?

do you not see the proportional relationship in monies spent and campaign messages delivered?

what if it is foreign countries paying for the biggest mass marketing mechanism ever forced down the American public's throat....is that still cool cuz your guy won and this will all be over in a few weeks?

you're alright with that?