Sunday, October 21, 2012

Obama Campaign Busted For Accepting Foreign Donation$

The New York Post has the story:

The Obama re-election campaign has accepted at least one foreign donation in violation of the law — and does nothing to check on the provenance of millions of dollars in other contributions, a watchdog group alleges.

Chris Walker, a British citizen who lives outside London, told The Post he was able to make two $5 donations to President Obama’s campaign this month through its Web site while a similar attempt to give Mitt Romney cash was rejected. It is illegal to knowingly solicit or accept money from foreign citizens.

Walker said he used his actual street address in England but entered Arkansas as his state with the Schenectady, NY, ZIP code of 12345.

“When I did Romney’s, the payment got rejected on the grounds that the address on the card did not match the address that I entered,” he said. “Romney’s Web site wanted the code from the back of card. Barack Obama’s didn’t.”

By the way, taking contributions from non-U.S. citizens is against federal law.

The actual numbers are quite instructive. In September, the Obama campaign took in more than $2 million from donors who provided no ZIP code or incomplete ZIP codes, according to data posted on the Federal Election Commission Web site.

Romney's numbers? $2,450 from donors without ZIP codes and $2,500 from those with incomplete ZIP codes.

Walker also says he began receiving multiple e-mails asking him to donate an additional $188. That would have put him just under the $200 threshold above which FEC requires campaigns have to identify the donor.

Just for the record, I had exactly the same experience.

My $5 donation sent from 'Ismail Haniyeh, Gaza City, Gaza' went right through, was processed and was billed to my account.

I also receive e-mails asking me to donate another $190...again, just under the $200 reporting limit.These people know exactly what they're doing.

By the way Haniyeh is the leader of Hamas in Gaza, officially listed as a terrorist group by our State Department. No problem for President Obama!

The reason for the laxity regarding ZIP codes and 3 and 4 digit security codes (CVV) is a no brainer. A lot of foreign cards don't have them, so requiring them would limit foreign donations, if, let's say, you weren't too choosy about the law and wanted to accept them.

Not only that, but the address verification system used on VISA, MasterCard and American Express cards is the default position in the software involved. Someone would have to deliberately disable it in order for this type of fraud to go through.

The piece also reiterates the information about, owned by a prominent Obama bundler named Robert Roche who lives in China, has extremely close connections with the Chinese government, and received a prominent seat at a state dinner in honor of the Chinese President.

Is the FEC going to do anything about this 1 days before a national election? Probably not. But one would hope they'd investigate this thoroughly and prosecute. The Obama Campaign did exactly the same thing in 2008 and got away with it, so apparently they figured it was just fine to pull it again.


B.Poster said...

The FEC along with most government agencies are in the tank for the Democrats. As such, they are unlikely to ever investigate an Democrat on any thing but rest assured if a Republican tried to pull something simillar or was accused of something simillar they would investigate this with every thing they have.

Maybe the Republicans can somehow get the attention of the American people on this through any honest reporters the media may still have and by this pressure the FEC will be forced to take action. What does seem clear is given what a huge advantage this type of situation gives the Democrats it is hardly surprising that many Republicans opt for a "go along to get along" strategy when dealing with Democrats. Furthermore if such things are allowed to continue how can we expect to have a viable multi party system. Right now we have the Demcorats and the Democrat-lite party currently known as the Republican.

Anonymous said...


My god, we must impeach this president now! You could buy a whole election with $10!

Then again, as Erick Erickson of tried to (illegally) contribute money from a fake name in Russia and it was rejected. Meanwhile, Restore Our Future, a pro-Romney super PAC accepted $1 million from Fairfax Financial Holdings Limited, a Canadian company.

I await your outrage, Rob. That was a joke, of course.

Rob said...

I see, Anonymous.
So if I just steal $20 out of your wallet, that's fine. Let's just ignore the laws we don't feel like enforcing.

That pretty much gives us a good idea of your thought processes.

Actually, so does your assumption that it was only $10 and limited to that, and your conflating illegal foreign donations with with legal donations to a pro-Romney Super-Pac.

People with your mindset don't outrage me, Anonymous. I'm only sorry you're allowed to vote.


Anonymous said...

And it's okay for a foreigner to donate money to a campaign, as long as it's the affiliated Superpac? I'm struggling to see the difference. And I don't understand your analogy about stealing money from a wallet. Who exactly is being robbed here? This has been proven by even people on the right to be nothing more than a computer error, yet you're upset because someone is donating directly to a campaign instead of laundering it through a Superpac? Talk about a fake controversy. I'm genuinely curious to hear your reasoning on this.

By the way, I read this morning about Darrel Issa compromising national security through his own inept mishandling of the Libya case. I get the sneaking suspicion that you would call Obama treasonous for doing such a thing. Yet you're not going to comment? Where's all the high-minded crap about your love for service men and CIA field agents abroad? They've been outed by a republican, and you strangely (I jest, of course) say nothing. Had Obama done this, I can only imagine your feigned outrage...

louielouie said...

I'm only sorry you're allowed to vote.

boy oh boy i get anon doesn't understand that comment, at all!!
in which states, and how many times?
there is that dhimmocrat that's voted early in north carolina.
247 years old and still voting.
how are we gonna beat these people if they are still voting at that age?
who cares?

louielouie said...

ff, you also need to take into consideration your comment about, the convenience store, the shooting, and subsequent action by congress when posting this type of essay.

Rob said...

*chuckle* Well Anonymous, your comment is a perfectly good example of why talking to most people on the left is a serious waste of time.

If you don't understand the difference between a legal contribution and an illegal one..maybe some time with a dictionary would help your confusion, although I doubt it:

"1.permitted by law; lawful: Such acts are not legal.
2.of or pertaining to law; connected with the law or its administration: the legal profession.
3.appointed, established, or authorized by law; deriving authority from law.
4.recognized by law rather than by equity.
5.of, pertaining to, or characteristic of the profession of law or of lawyers: a legal mind. "

I disagree entirely with your characterization of Rep. Issa's remarks or his handling of the Libya coverup, as would most reasonable if President Obama has ever cared dick about our military except when it comes to political photo ops.

You simply don't know what you're talking about.

The bottom line here is that by taking out Khaddaffi, someone who we were giving foreign aid to and who was helping us take out AQ in the Maghreb, your boy opened a real can of worms.It was well known even before we spent a billion dollars taking Khaddaffi out that there was a heavy AQ and Salafist presence among the rebels. The heavy weapons used to attack the Benghazi compound were almost certainly obtained from Kaddaffi's armories thanks to President Obama's intervention.

Ditto with Egypt, which will end up being the Sunni equivalent of Iran.

Remember in three to five years time how the left referred to foreign policy as one of Obama's 'strong points'.

But again, there's no sense talking to people with your mindset. And you've already wasted enough of my precious time.

Hube said...

By the way, I read this morning about Darrel Issa compromising national security through his own inept mishandling of the Libya case.

Yeah, you mean the same person that was seen marching freely around the State Dept.? LOL! Yeah, try to make this another Valerie Plame case -- PLEASE. Anything to divert from Boss Obama's complete and utter ineptitude which led to the deaths of Amb. Stevens and 3 others.


chowtime said...

It's odd to me that people are up in arms about this $2 million, but the same people are generally in favor of Super Pacs which have supplied Romney with over $300 million in anonymous donations (and Obama with $120 mil), at least some of which has come from US subsidiaries of foreign owned companies. Saying "it's the law" isn't a good argument. If your position is that foreign money in our politics is bad, it would follow that you would challenge the law, not use it as a defense.

So for the record, I'm against all foreign money in politics. Not just the foreign money someone says is illegal.

Rob said...

Chow Time,
Legal is legal and illegal is illegal.The money going to the Super PACS is reported, Obama's illegal donations are not.In criminal law, this is commonly referred to as 'fraud'.

If you can't see the difference in these two situations, there's not much hope.

What you're doing here is a common debate technique known as a 'straw man'.

And remember, that's just $2 million this month.

Also, keep in mind that one reason Obama won so big in 2008 was that he lied. He said he would stick to the limits of public funding and then didn't. McCain did, and in the last month and a half of the campaign he was essentially broke and had no money to compete.

Obama also pulled the same crap with illegal donations in 2008.