Now ask yourself why (despite being developed by dems, for dems), one republican is allowed to use it.
Rat faced Ryan.
Look it up. It's on act blue and share blue filings - you can see where money goes to him as well.
He is also given access to NGP / VAN which is a fundraising and outreach tool for tracking democrat donors and voters - created by dems, for registered dems only.
TLDR; ActBlue is a "grassroots" online fundraising company (like a GoFundMe, for liberals) that can only be used by progressive politicians and causes SPEZ as well as Paul Ryan (h/t u/Gitmo_money). The money donated through their web-based payment system appears NOT to be tied to the donor name and address as the FEC requires, because on the FEC reporting of donor contributions ActBlue is submitting the info under their OWN company name, not the original donor's. By all appearances, they get away with it because it is BURIED way down in the over 3,000 pages they submit to the FEC every month as required. This allows for donors to contribute well beyond limits if they choose to or become "strawman" donors because of this concealment. This is a HUGE money laundering outfit for progressives with over 300 million dollars already disbursed for liberal candidates and causes thus far in 2018. It also turns out that a lot of people are unhappy because when they meant to do a "one-time" donation to a progressive cause, they've noticed that their accounts have been drafted monthly thereafter, making it a huge cash cow for the DNC and a scam against their donors. Spez 1:50 EST: I’ve now posted a second thread here and moved information specific to how they defraud their donors so that we don’t lose the focus of their FEC violations that this post should focus on.
Part 1
Here is the link to FEC Recordkeeping requirements:
Contributions exceeding $50
Records must identify each contribution of more than $50 by:
Amount;
Date of receipt; and
Contributor’s name and mailing address.
Furthermore, political committees must maintain either a full-size photocopy or digital image of each check or written instrument by which a contribution of more than $50 is made. Contributions aggregating over $200
For each contribution that exceeds $200, either by itself or when added to the contributor’s previous contributions made during the same calendar year, records must identify that contribution by:
Amount;
Date of receipt; and
Contributor’s full name and mailing address, occupation and employer.
If a person has already contributed an aggregate amount of over $200 during a calendar year, each subsequent contribution, regardless of amount, must be identified in the same way.
Please note that contributions to authorized committees are aggregated on a calendar-year basis for recordkeeping purposes, but are aggregated on a per-election basis for purposes of monitoring contribution limits, and on an election-cycle basis for reporting purposes.
Part 2
Here is a link to Act Blue's profile and expenditures YTD 2018.
Note: Over 45 MILLION to the DNC so far this year.
Part 3
The DNC's latest filing of donors and expenditures YTD.
If you do a search within that document for ActBlue in the itemized receipts, you'll note that the company name doesn't show up on donor forms until page 1,718 and then it is on almost every single page thereafter with NO identifying information of these original "grassroots" donors. In fact, you'll see that over $782,000 (see the aggregate YTD box) is recorded anonymously with ZERO identifying information for all of the Act Blue donations. I checked last years Year-end DNC filing and Act Blue was responsible for over $1 million in unrecorded contributions from donors.
Part 4
ActBlue may be considered a PAC or Super-pac, but there are still strict rules governing their actions that appear to have been violated
Part 5
Looks like South Dakota recognized this as an issue earlier this year and made the recipient of ActBlue’s concealed donors itemize each donor for the very reason I pointed out.
Bottom Line
If ActBlue is going to claim it is a PAC, then they CAN take unlimited donations, however, they are in clear violation of the law by donating to specific candidates and political parties rather than doing their own independent expenditures. If they are in actuality a business (which I believe they are) then they are also violating FEC law by not disclosing the donor names and addresses for contributions over $50. Either way, they are running the company in violation of campaign finance law.
Attached: yLdw2ml.jpg (2448x3264
3.81 MB, 648.07K)
