• ACORN Whistleblower

    Anita spoke at a May 19, 2012 seminar held by Citizen Watchdog & the Franklin Center. Anita is the insider who blew the whistle on ACORN and testified about their internal practices implementing voter fraud and illegal voter registration practices. Video is 34 minutes, but the sound is a little hard to hear.

  • Former Acorn Employee Anita Moncrief on Fox News

  • Anita Moncrief’s speech at C-PAC

    Anita Moncrief’s speech at Americans For Prosperity Foundation’s Suite Tea Breakfast with Andrew Breitbart in Orlando, Florida, September 23, 2011.

    Part 1:

    Part 2:

  • Anita Moncrief on Laura Ingraham Show

    Recorded on 09/17/2009

  • Dubious donations (2012 edition)

    Posted on April 2, 2012 by Scott Johnson in 2012 Presidential Election

    Barack Obama has proved the greatest campaign fund-raiser of all time by a long shot. In 2008 his campaign raised more than $750 million. The Obama campaign even went the extra mile to raise campaign funds by failing to adopt standard protections against fraudulent and illegal giving. Federal law prohibits foreign contributions and requires the disclosure of identifying information for contributions in excess of $200. Campaigns must accordingly keep running totals for each donor and report them once they exceed $200.

    As we and others noted, the 2008 Obama campaign’s records revealed big contributors with names like “Doodad Pro” (employer: “Loving,” profession: “You”) and “Good Will” (same employer and profession). Both donated via credit card. I believe it was Pamela Geller who reported that some donations came from overseas — raising the question of whether Obama was accepting donations from foreigners.

    All of which prompted an enterprising reader to test the controls put in place to enforce compliance with federal campaign law by the Obama and McCain campaigns. He decided to conduct an experiment. He went to the Obama campaign Web site and made a donation under the name “John Galt” (the hero of Ayn Rand’s novel Atlas Shrugged). He provided the equally fictitious address “1957 Ayn Rand Lane, Galts Gulch, CO 99999.” He checked the box next to $15 and entered his actual credit-card number and expiration date. He was then taken to the next page and notified that his donation had been processed. Others repeated “John Galt’s” experiment, giving to Obama under such fictitious names as Della Ware, Joe Plumber, Idiot Savant, Ima BadDonation (with a Canadian bank card) and Fake Donor.

    The Obama campaign was able to take these donations because it had turned off the standard Address Verification System that screens credit-card charges for matching names and addresses. (It can also screen cards issued by foreign banks.) The McCain campaign used AVS and provided a searchable database of all donors, including those who fell below the $200 threshold. The Obama campaign chose not to use the AVS system to screen donations. (The McCain campaign rejected such donations through the use of the AVS system.) You can find a good description of the AVS and CVV fraud prevention devices here.

    I wrote about this in the New York Post column “Dubious donations.” The Post subhead observed: “Bam’s Web site invites fraud.” The Washington Post reported on the matter two days later in the story “Obama accepting untraceable donations,” by Matthew Mosk. Mosk quotes Obama campaign officials on their practices. According to them, everything was copacetic.

    Urgent Agenda reader Adrian Murray wondered if the Obama campaign has become any more compliant this time around than it was last time. He conducted the necessary experiment and wrote Urgent Agenda proprietor Bill Katz:

    If you go here you will note that credit card donations to the Obama election campaign do not require the credit card security code [i.e., the CVV code]. What they have done is disable the Address Verification System (AVS) which prevents credit card fraud. Yesterday, just to see what would happen, I submitted a donation and filled out the form as follows:

    Name – Adolph Hitler
    Address – 123 Nuremburg Way, Berlin, Germany
    Occupation – Dictator
    Employer – Nazi Party

    After submitting, I received an email that began, “Dear Adolph, thank you for your generous donation….”

    I then went to the Romney and Santorum websites and tried the same thing. Both rejected the donations with a message that the address could not be verified as belonging to the card holder.

    Try it. Make up a name and an address and donate to Obama. Then try it with the other two. Only Obama will accept the donation.

    Why is this important? Federal law prohibits any foreign nationals from financially contributing to any election in the United States. It’s on the FEC website and is one of our most important safeguards against foreign influence in our elections. But anybody in the world can contribute to Obama. Not only that, but they can do so anonymously. Not only that, they can contribute an unlimited amount since there is no record of who made the donation. I could contribute $49 every day for the rest of my life by just changing names every time I reach $2,500 and no one would be the wiser.

    I haven’t repeated Mr. Murray’s experiment, but I believe the situation is as described in the words of the Talking Heads: “Same as it ever was.”

     

    [ Click here: Dubious donations (2012 edition) | Power Line]

  • Obama Accepting Untraceable Donations

    By Matthew Mosk

    Washington Post Staff Writer
    Wednesday, October 29, 2008

    Sen. Barack Obama‘s presidential campaign is allowing donors to use largely untraceable prepaid credit cards that could potentially be used to evade limits on how much an individual is legally allowed to give or to mask a contributor’s identity, campaign officials confirmed.

    This Story

    Faced with a huge influx of donations over the Internet, the campaign has also chosen not to use basic security measures to prevent potentially illegal or anonymous contributions from flowing into its accounts, aides acknowledged. Instead, the campaign is scrutinizing its books for improper donations after the money has been deposited.

    The Obama organization said its extensive review has ensured that the campaign has refunded any improper contributions, and noted that Federal Election Commission rules do not require front-end screening of donations.

    In recent weeks, questionable contributions have created headaches for Obama’s accounting team as it has tried to explain why campaign finance filings have included itemized donations from individuals using fake names, such as Es Esh or Doodad Pro. Those revelations prompted conservative bloggers to further test Obama’s finance vetting by giving money using the kind of prepaid cards that can be bought at a drugstore and cannot be traced to a donor.

    The problem with such cards, campaign finance lawyers said, is that they make it impossible to tell whether foreign nationals, donors who have exceeded the limits, government contractors or others who are barred from giving to a federal campaign are making contributions.

    “They have opened the floodgates to all this money coming in,” said Sean Cairncross, chief counsel to the Republican National Committee. “I think they’ve made the determination that whatever money they have to refund on the back end doesn’t outweigh the benefit of taking all this money upfront.”

    The Obama campaign has shattered presidential fundraising records, in part by capitalizing on the ease of online giving. Of the $150 million the senator from Illinois raised in September, nearly $100 million came in over the Internet.

    Lawyers for the Obama operation said yesterday that their “extensive back-end review” has carefully scrubbed contributions to prevent illegal money from entering the operation’s war chest. “I’m pretty sure if I took my error rate and matched it against any other campaign or comparable nonprofit, you’d find we’re doing very well,” said Robert Bauer, a lawyer for the campaign. “I have not seen the McCain compliance staff ascending to heaven on a cloud.”

    The Obama team’s disclosures came in response to questions from The Washington Post about the case of Mary T. Biskup, a retired insurance manager from Manchester, Mo., who turned up on Obama’s FEC reports as having donated $174,800 to the campaign. Contributors are limited to giving $2,300 for the general election.

    Biskup, who had scores of Obama contributions attributed to her, said in an interview that she never donated to the candidate. “That’s an error,” she said. Moreover, she added, her credit card was never billed for the donations, meaning someone appropriated her name and made the contributions with another card.

    When asked whether the campaign takes steps to verify whether a donor’s name matches the name on the credit card used to make a payment, Obama’s campaign replied in an e-mail: “Name-matching is not a standard check conducted or made available in the credit card processing industry. We believe Visa and MasterCard do not even have the ability to do this.

    This StoryInstead, the campaign does a rigorous comprehensive analysis of online contributions on the back end of the transaction to determine whether a contribution is legitimate.”

    Juan Proaño, whose technology firm handled online contributions for John Edwards’s presidential primary campaign, and for John F. Kerry‘s presidential campaign and the Democratic National Committee in 2004, said it is possible to require donors’ names and addresses to match those on their credit card accounts. But, he said, some campaigns are reluctant to impose that extra layer of security.

    “Honestly, you want to have the least amount of hurdles in processing contributions quickly,” Proaño said.

    Sen. John McCain‘s campaign has also had questionable donations slip through.

    Dan Pfeiffer, Obama’s communication’s director, said that “no organization can fully insulate itself from these problems. The McCain campaign has accepted contributions from fraudulent contributors like ‘A for You,’ ‘Adorable Manabat,’ ‘The Gun Shop,’ and ‘Jesus II’ and hundreds of anonymous donors.”

    But R. Rebecca Donatelli, who handles online contributions for the McCain operation and the RNC, said security measures have been standard in the GOP nominee’s fundraising efforts throughout the campaign. She said she was “flabbergasted” to learn that the Obama campaign accepts prepaid cards.

    “Yes, a gift card would go through the same process as a regular credit card and be subject to our same back-end review,” the Obama campaign said in its response to questions about the use of such cards.

    Campaign finance lawyers said there is a long history of debate within the FEC about how to ensure that donors use their own credit cards.

    Election lawyer Brett Kappel said the FEC has never grappled with the question of cash cards. “The whole system is set up for them to accept the payment, then determine whether it is legal or not. And if it’s not, send it back. That’s what the statute requires,” he said.

     

    [Source: Click here: Obama Accepting Untraceable Donations]

  • Obama’s Foreign Donors: The media averts its eyes; By Pamela Geller

    August 14, 2008

    By Pamela Geller

    I have been researching, documenting and studying thousands upon thousands of Obama’s campaign donations for the past month. Egregious abuse was immediately evident and I published the results of my ongoing investigation. Each subsequent post built a more damning case against Obama’s illegal contribution activity.

    The media took little notice of what I was substantiating. I went so far as to upload the documents so that anyone could do their own research. I asked readers to download the documents and a number of folks pitched in.

    Despite dropping the groundbreaking bombshell story of “Palestinian” brothers from the Rafah refugee camp in Gaza who donated $33,000 to Obama’s campaign, no big media picked up the story. Jihadis donating to Obama from Gaza? Could there be a bigger story? Foreign donations are illegal, but this story was all that and so much more. The “Palestinian” brothers were proud and vocal of their “love” for Obama. Their vocal support on behalf of “Palestinians” spoke volumes to Obama’s campaign.

    And yet still no media.

     

    But Obama pricked up his ears. He smelled trouble and while no media asked, he answered anyway. Sen. Obama’s campaign immediately scrambled and contended they had returned the $33,500 in illegal contributions from Palestinians in Hamas-controlled Gaza, despite the fact that records do not show that it was returned and the brothers said they have not received any money. Having gone through all of Obama’s refunds redesignations etc, no refund was made to Osama, Hossam, or Edwan Monir in the Rafah refugee camp. And still no media.

     

    One of the Gazan brothers, Monir Edwan (identified here), claimed he bought “Obama for President” T-shirts off Obama’s website and then sold the T-shirts in Gaza for a profit. All purchases on the Barack Obama website are considered contributions.

     

    The Palestinians allegedly claimed “they were American citizens”, so said Obama’s people. They listed their address — zip code 972 (ironically the area code for Israel) and they input “GA”the state abbreviation for Georgia (screen shot here) They actually lived in a Hamas controlled refugee camp. So if Obama’s people thought it was “Georgia” why did they ship the tee shirts to the correct address in Gaza? Shipping overseas to a Gaza refugee camp is vastly different than the state next door.

    Still no media.

     

    “Some young men even bought the T-shirts for 60 shekel ($17.29), which is a lot to spend in Gaza on a T-shirt, but that is how much Gazans like Obama,” Edwan claimed in a follow up article in the conservative websiet WorldNetDaily. And Hamas has publicly endorsed Obama.

    And still no media.

     

    Obama’s campaign said the Palestinian brothers in the Middle East made $33,000 in illegal donations to the campaign via the internet.

     

    The donations came in between Sept. 20 and Dec. 6 and virtually all of the money, about $33,500, was returned by December 6. But the refunds weren’t reported to the Federal Election Commission due to a technical error, campaign officials said.

     

    If McCain had been involved with something so dark and nefarious, taking money from Islamic jihad, his candidacy would never withstand the media blowback.

     

    But it was the son of hope, the agent of change, the one we have been waiting for , so the media yawned.

     

    The jihad donations were hardly the only bloody red flags. The first in my series of posts ran July 19th. The documents were so unwieldy, readers like John, Doc, and Cathy (who discovered Rafah) were working furiously to cross check our findings at the FEC site and then mine the data.

     

    Obama’s overseas (foreign) contributors are making multiple small donations, ostensibly in their own names, over a period of a few days, some under maximum donation allowances, but others are aggregating in excess of the maximums when all added up. The countries and major cities from which contributions have been received France, Virgin Islands, Planegg, Vienna, Hague, Madrid, London, AE, IR, Geneva,Tokyo, Bangkok, Turin, Paris, Munich, Madrid, Roma, Zurich, Netherlands, Moscow, Ireland, Milan, Singapore, Bejing, Switzerland, Toronto, Vancouver, La Creche, Pak Chong, Dublin, Panama, Krabi, Berlin, Geneva, Buenos Aires, Prague, Nagoya, Budapest, Barcelona, Sweden, Taipei, Hong Kong, Rio de Janeiro, Sydney, Zurich, Ragusa, Amsterdam, Hamburg, Uganda, Mumbia, Nagoya, Tunis, Zacatecas, St, Croix, Mississauga, Laval, Nadi, Behchoko, Ragusa, DUBIA, Lima, Copenhagen, Quaama, Jeddah, Kabul, Cairo, Nassau(not the county on Long Island,lol), Luxembourg (Auchi’s stomping grounds), etc,etc,etc,

     

    Half a million dollars had been donated from overseas by unidentified people “not employed”.

     

    Digging deeper, all sorts of very bizarre activity jumped at us. Dr and JJ continued to break it down and pull data from various sources. We found Rebecca Kurth contributed $3,137.38 to the Obama Campaign in 112 donations, including 34 separate donations recorded in one day,

     

    How about this gibberish donor on the 30th of April in 2008.

     

    A donor named Hbkjb, jkbkj

     

    City: Jkbjnj Works for: Kuman Bank (doesn’t exist)

     

    Occupation: Balanon Jalalan Amount: $1,077.23

     

    or the donor Doodad, The # of transactions = 1,044

     

    The $ contributed = $10,780.00

     

    This Doodad character works for FDGFDGF and occupation is DFGFDG

     

    The more questions we answered the more questions we discovered.

     

    Thousands of Obama’s foreign donations ended in cents. The “cents” did not make sense. And we compared McCain donation documentss to Obama’s. McCain’s records are nothing like Obama’s. McCain’s are so clean. No cents, all even dollar amounts. But Obama’s contained thousands of strange, odd amounts — evidence of foreign contributors, since Americans living overseas would almost uniformly be able to contribute dollars. Still no media.

     

    Julia Gorin told me a funny story two months ago. Her husband’s co-worker wanted to see what would happen if he tried giving a contribution to the Obama campaign via a credit card. He used his Macy’s card. The system accepted it. He tried the same with McCain’s campaign, and the transaction wouldn’t go through. Now, obviously, down the line, the Obama transaction would fail as well, but it goes to the point that there is no safety system in place — it’ll just accept any and all money, which helps explain how his campaign raised so much more money than everyone else’s.

     

    Despite the evidence of dirty campaign donations, crickets chirped in newsrooms across the country. The moment my Gaza story started to get some chatter on talk radio, the left and their supplicant handmaidens in the media sprang into action and created a McCain illegal campaign contribution “scandal”. The Washington Post published an inaccurate allegation and then retracted not a day later, at the risk of looking stupid. They are jeopardizing the little credibility that they have left.

     

    ….a Washington Post story detailing some suspicious looking contributions to the McCain campaign bundled by Harry Sargeant III. Shortly after posting, a correction appeared in the original report, as follows:

    An earlier version of this story about campaign donations that Florida businessman Harry Sargeant III raised for Sen. John McCain, former New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani and Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton incorrectly identified three individuals as being among the donors Sargeant solicited on behalf of McCain. Those donors — Rite Aid manager Ibrahim Marabeh, and lounge owners Nadia and Shawn Abdalla — wrote checks to Giuliani and Clinton, not McCain. Also, the first name of Faisal Abdullah, a McCain donor, was misspelled in some versions of the story (noted by Amanda Carpenter).

     

    So here an intrepid blogger finds a keg of dynamite of dirty dollar donations to Obama and what does the media do? They ignore it. And when forced to confront it by the sheer newsworthiness of the story, what happens? They go after McCain. They punish McCain.

    And that is meant to be a lesson to all of us, Whatever you find, whatever you discover about the Candidate of Mystery, they will blow it back in your face. And they did. Almost immediately.

     

    The irony and the upshot of all this. John McCain is reviewing contributions. Ain’t that a kick in the head. I can tell him he needn’t bother. Been there, done that. Nothing to see, keep moving.

     

    Obama’s out there raising millions, some in illegal donations and the Washington Post jumps on McCain for a $50k, which hasn’t been shown to be illegal, but merely “inappropriate.” The left and their handmaidens, the mani stream media, were so quick to deflect this hit, it seems we have hit a raw nerve. I intend to keep digging. Stay tuned.,

     

    Pamela Geller is Editor and Publisher of the blog Atlas Shrugs.

    on “Obama’s Foreign Donors: The media averts its eyes

     

    [ Source: Click here: Archived-Articles: Obama’s Foreign Donors: The media averts its eyes ]