The Next Special Prosecutor

Fox News – 49% of Act Blue donors may be straw donors

Foreign or untraceable funds are being poured into Act Blue’s coffers using straw donors, who may not even know they donated.

14 thoughts on “The Next Special Prosecutor

  1. I have refrained from participating here for some time because the effort pushing back against utter nonsense and truly laughable conspiracy theories promoted by a handful of willfully blind Trump supporters is not worth the effort and, of course, the idea that such people would be exercising editorial review of my comments is not acceptable.

    However, as someone who is not employed and who frequently supports causes I believe in through the amazingly useful Act Blue facility, I feel compelled to note that Fox’s hyper-partisan speculation without a shred of evidence is not evidence of anything. I would add that anyone taking the unsupported speculations from Fox News and re-stating them as actual facts is someone who has no respect for the truth, evidence or basic honesty. It is really quite a spectacle to see this kind of lame effort to cry “Corruption!” from the most venal and corrupt bunch of con artists – and their running dogs – to ever pass themselves off as a political party.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. The unemployment rate in 2019 was under 4%.

      Act Blue switched from a verified credit card processor to an unverified processor in 2015 for the stated purpose of making donations untraceable.

      Absent subpoena powers of a special prosecutor, we have no way of knowing how many of those contributions are from foreign donors, or from sources that cannot legally donate.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. “The unemployment rate in 2019 was under 4%.”
        Absolutely irrelevant. Obviously. A very significant portion of the adult population has nothing to do with that statistic. I am one. Retirees, homemakers, students, work force dropouts, etc. I would add that deliberately confusing donations with donors is sophistry by the Fox speculators. I am one unemployed person but I have made dozens of donations through Act Blue.

        “. . .the stated purpose of making donations untraceable.”
        Stated by whom? What evidence is there that someone in authority would make such a claim? It is outlandish on its face, but that does not seem to matter to some.

        As someone who claims allegiance to the Constitution maybe you have forgotten that we have a concept of law that requires EVIDENCE before we start dragging people into court or demanding access to their affairs. Neither you nor the speculations you linked to have cited ANY evidence of the widespread illegality alleged and – as with all these MANY Trump era conspiracy theories – the scale of the conspiracy postulated WOULD have to be massive and – if it were real – WOULD leave evidence.

        Liked by 3 people

        1. Read the article. They chose a time of low unemployment because in a time of higher unemployment a large number of unemployed donors is more defensible.

          The Constitution requires probable cause, and the statistical improbability of such a large number of retirees is adequate for that. Most tax evasion case investigations are based on far less.


          1. This is exactly what I was referring to – nonsensical conspiracy theories pulled out of someone’s derriere are a waste of effort arguing about. Especially with someone who does not respond to the valid arguments presented – in this case the official unemployment rate has NOTHING to do with this. You just ignore that very salient point because “truthy” is better than true, right? In addition to retirees, homemakers, students, etc., there are about 42,000,000 self-employed people in this country and each and every one of them can honestly say that they do not have an employer in the context of a donation.

            There is precisely ZERO evidence of any widespread use of Act Blue by foreign interests, but here is the right wing DESPERATELY trying to create smoke out of NOTHING for the truly corrupt – your man Trump and his cabal of criminals – to hide behind.

            Liked by 2 people

  2. $347 million divided by 4.7 million donors is a whopping $73.61 each. Now we need to convince millions of donors to volunteer their credit cards or other forms of payment.

    Plus, as Paul stated, retirees are in the millions. I don’t know the status of self-employed gig workers. Are they not counted because they have no employer?

    Students? Housewives or house husbands?

    4% unemployment is a number that really doesn’t reflect the workforce participation. We were reminded of that by Republicans and Trump whenever the unemployment dropped for each and every month when Obama was in office. “Participation is the important number”, even though that has not been used for decades.” But that still adds up to millions and millions.

    I think this is a tempest in the proverbial teapot.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Actually, due to the lack of verification deliberately employed by Act Blue, you can’t know if it is a tempest in a teapot or a huge evasion of election laws. Hence the need for an investigator with subpoena powers.

      And note the difference between the GOP sources and Act Blue. Less than 6% of those donating to GOP sites listed no employer as opposed to half of Act Blue.

      And last time I made a contribution, Retired was one of the allowed responses to the Employer question.


  3. I don’t think this is as big a deal as it’s being out to be.

    Twice last year, I donated to Tulsi Gabbard and the transaction lines on my statement read “ACTBLUE”.

    At no time was I asked for anything other than the amount of the donation, credit or debit card numbers, name as it appeared on that card and my billing address. That’s the same info every vendor I conduct online business with asks for.

    If there were sections asking for other information (age, race, sex, income…) it must’ve been optional.

    Liked by 1 person

      1. Reflexive questions:

        -What law;
        -Does the GOP have the same problem (failure to report);
        -Am I reading the news article wrong.

        I’ve donated money to politicians several times in my life. I don’t recall having been asked who I worked for.

        Liked by 1 person

          1. First, I apologize for the IRS link I included earlier, as it applies to campaign expenditures.

            It’s gotta be a pain running a campaign.

            Running a national campaign has gotta be more difficult considering the 50 states (plus territories) and their individual filing requirements.

            Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s