ActBlue Faces Investigation Over Alleged ‘Smfing’ in Campaign Donations
In the world of political fundraising, two platforms dominate the landscape. Republicans rely on WinRed, while Democrats use ActBlue, a fundraising giant that has helped process billions of dollars for left-wing candidates and political action committees (PACs). ActBlue, in particular, has long been heralded as a trailblazer for its digital fundraising tools that efficiently gather small-dollar donations from a wide base of supporters. However, recent allegations suggest that ActBlue’s practices may not be as above board as they seem.
A group of Republican lawmakers and 19 state attorneys general are now investigating ActBlue for allegedly skirting campaign finance laws through a money-laundering technique known as “smurfing.” The accusations, if proven, could have major implications for Democratic fundraising efforts and potentially lead to serious legal consequences.
The trouble for ActBlue began in August when whistleblowers came forward with allegations that the platform was using questionable methods to process donations. These accusations prompted Rep. Bryan Steil (R-WI), chairman of the Committee on House Administration, to call for an emergency investigation into ActBlue’s practices. Steil’s committee sent a letter to top officials at the Federal Election Commission (FEC), urging immediate action.
In the letter, Steil called on the FEC to “initiate an emergency rulemaking” that would require political campaigns to verify the card verification value (CVV) of online donors and prohibit the use of gift cards or prepaid debit cards for campaign donations. This move was aimed at tightening oversight of online contributions and ensuring compliance with existing campaign finance laws.
The urgency of Steil’s request underscores the seriousness of the allegations. The lack of stringent verification processes, such as not requiring a CVV for donations, opens the door for fraudulent donations or money laundering activities. The implications of such behavior are far-reaching, as they could distort the flow of campaign finances and provide an unfair advantage to one political party over the other.
At the heart of the investigation is the accusation that ActBlue is engaging in “smurfing.” Smurfing is a well-known money-laundering technique where large sums of money are broken into smaller transactions to avoid detection by regulatory agencies. These smaller transactions are often spread across various accounts to stay below financial reporting thresholds.
This technique is illegal and is typically used by criminals to launder money without drawing attention from law enforcement. If ActBlue is involved in such practices, it would mean that vast sums of money are being funneled into Democratic campaigns without proper oversight, violating both state and federal campaign finance laws.
The accusations from 19 state attorneys general suggest that ActBlue may be structuring political donations in ways that help donors avoid regulatory scrutiny. They have demanded answers from ActBlue’s legal counsel, asserting that the American public deserves to know if the platform is complying with the law.
The Patriot Act, passed after the 9/11 attacks, introduced strict regulations to combat money laundering, including requirements to report any financial transaction over $10,000. These rules were designed to prevent illegal activities such as terrorism financing and large-scale money laundering. However, if a fundraising platform like ActBlue were to structure transactions in smaller amounts through smurfing, it could potentially avoid detection while channeling significant funds into political campaigns.
If ActBlue is found guilty of these allegations, it would represent a major violation of campaign finance laws and could result in hefty fines, criminal charges, or both. Furthermore, it would severely damage the platform’s reputation, possibly forcing Democratic candidates to find alternative fundraising methods at a critical point in the election cycle.
The group of state attorneys general leading the investigation has set an October 23, 2024 deadline for ActBlue to respond to their inquiries. This deadline comes well before Election Day, indicating that the investigation could have a direct impact on the upcoming elections. Depending on the outcome, this probe could significantly alter the political fundraising landscape.
Political fundraising is a fierce battleground, with both parties vying for every dollar they can get. Any illegitimate advantage could sway electoral outcomes, making the allegations against ActBlue particularly concerning. If the platform is indeed engaging in smurfing, it would constitute blatant election interference, giving Democrats an unfair edge in the all-important race to raise funds.
The Republican-led investigation, along with the state-level probe, highlights the growing concern over how campaign donations are solicited, processed, and reported. For now, the focus remains on ensuring transparency and legality in political fundraising. Whether ActBlue’s practices will withstand scrutiny remains to be seen, but one thing is clear: this investigation is unlikely to conclude quietly.
As the October 23 deadline approaches, both political parties—and the voters—will be closely watching the outcome. Should ActBlue be found in violation of campaign finance laws, it could shake the very foundation of digital political fundraising, reshaping how future campaigns are financed.
Anyone want a job as a potential canvassers – Musk is asking.
The PAC is offering starting wages of $30 per hour to individuals willing to work on expanding voter registration and turnout ahead of the election. “Pay starts at $30 per hour, with bonuses for performance,” the PAC’s website states, underscoring the financial incentives to join the voter outreach effort.
The PAC’s aggressive voter canvassing initiative, which offers high pay of $30 per hour—more than 400% higher than the federal minimum wage—has garnered attention on social media. Users have pointed out that the attractive pay is a powerful motivator for potential canvassers, especially given the current economic climate. The strategy aligns with Musk’s belief in merit-based incentives, with the PAC even offering performance bonuses to workers who excel in their outreach efforts.
Follow America’s fastest-growing news aggregator, Spreely News, and stay informed. You can find all of our articles plus information from your favorite Conservative voices.
Elon Musk, the billionaire tech mogul and founder of Tesla and SpaceX, is taking a more active role in shaping the 2024 election through his political action committee (PAC), America PAC. Musk’s PAC is dedicated to increasing voter participation, particularly in key battleground states, and has announced an aggressive plan that offers high pay for canvassing efforts._
The PAC is offering starting wages of $30 per hour to individuals willing to work on expanding voter registration and turnout ahead of the election. “Pay starts at $30 per hour, with bonuses for performance,” the PAC’s website states, underscoring the financial incentives to join the voter outreach effort.
Musk’s PAC has targeted several swing states crucial to the outcome of the 2024 presidential election. These include Nevada, Arizona, Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Georgia, North Carolina, and other highly competitive districts across the U.S. The focus on these areas reflects the critical role they will play in determining the next president, as well as control of Congress.
Musk, who publicly endorsed former President Donald Trump earlier this year, has closely aligned America PAC’s efforts with Trump’s re-election campaign. At a recent rally in Butler, Pennsylvania, Musk joined Trump on stage and highlighted the importance of the upcoming election, calling it “the most important election of our lifetime.”
Musk’s endorsement of Trump comes after a long period of political ambiguity, during which the tech billionaire had described himself as a “moderate Democrat.” However, in recent years, Musk has been more outspoken in his criticisms of the Democratic Party, particularly on issues like free speech, regulation, and social policies. His political pivot has made headlines, and his financial support for Republican causes is now being closely watched.
At the rally in Butler, Musk echoed the urgency of voter participation, stating, “The other side wants to take away your freedom of speech. They want to take away your right to bear arms… They want to take away your right to vote effectively.” Musk’s comments were met with applause from the audience, many of whom were Trump supporters. He urged attendees to mobilize their communities, encouraging them to ensure everyone they know is registered and ready to vote.
“Honestly, you want to just be a pest,” Musk said, emphasizing the need for persistence in voter outreach. “Just be a pest to everyone—you know, people on the street, everyone.”
The rally also saw Musk echoing Trump’s defiant rhetoric from an earlier rally in July, where Trump was injured in an assassination attempt. Musk repeated Trump’s rallying cry of “Fight, fight, fight, vote, vote, vote,” a chant that has since become popular among Trump’s base.
Musk’s America PAC, officially launched earlier this year, has a mission focused on promoting free speech, free markets, and a merit-based society. The PAC’s website and financial reports show that it has dedicated significant resources to canvassing and get-out-the-vote operations in these swing states, which are expected to be pivotal in deciding the 2024 election.
According to filings from the Federal Election Commission (FEC) in late September, America PAC has already invested over $2.4 million in a dozen key congressional races. Additionally, Musk has signaled that he plans to commit up to $45 million per month to support the PAC’s efforts, a substantial financial commitment that could make a significant impact on voter outreach and turnout.
The PAC’s aggressive voter canvassing initiative, which offers high pay of $30 per hour—more than 400% higher than the federal minimum wage—has garnered attention on social media. Users have pointed out that the attractive pay is a powerful motivator for potential canvassers, especially given the current economic climate. The strategy aligns with Musk’s belief in merit-based incentives, with the PAC even offering performance bonuses to workers who excel in their outreach efforts.
America PAC has also partnered with conservative advocacy groups like Turning Point Action to strengthen the ground game in critical states. Last week, Politico reported that the two groups had teamed up in Wisconsin, a state that could prove decisive in the upcoming election. Andrew Kolvet, a spokesperson for Turning Point, noted the importance of having boots on the ground to drive voter turnout, saying, “We’ve always known bodies in the field equals ballots in the box.”
Musk’s growing involvement in Republican politics marks a significant shift for the tech entrepreneur, who has historically avoided such direct political activism. In August, he hosted Trump for a two-hour conversation streamed on X (formerly Twitter), during which they discussed a wide range of issues, including immigration, inflation, and the assassination attempt on Trump.
With America PAC’s extensive resources and Musk’s vocal support for Trump, the billionaire is playing a central role in shaping the political landscape ahead of the 2024 election. By mobilizing financial resources and building a strong network of canvassers, Musk’s efforts aim to ensure high voter turnout in swing states that will likely determine the next president and control of Congress.
As the 2024 election approaches, Musk’s influence in the political arena is only expected to grow, making him a key player in Republican efforts to reclaim the White House.
We have learned from Soros how that can sour politics. Money talks and in the past Soros has poured money into the political Democratic system/attorney generals in the U.S. We know from President Trump’s experience has been and this has to stop. Politicians should have to explain when they make a large money deposit in their bank account as to where the money came from if they are a politician or official. Rags to riches doesn’t happen over night unless you win the lottery.
This SOROS MONEY LOTTERY to policians has to be investigated because it is corrupting our politics.
Arnold, a philanthropist with an estimated net worth of $2.9 billion, has become a well-known donor in political circles over the last decade, particularly after becoming the youngest billionaire in the country at the time in 2007. Shortly after that, he and his wife pledged to donate the majority of their income to philanthropic causes, focusing much of his attention on efforts to reform criminal justice and education.
However, his efforts have prompted criticism from those in conservative circles, who accuse Arnold of using his money to “impose his far-left political preferences on Americans.”
“John Arnold is George Soros meets Tom Steyer,” an adviser to House GOP leadership told the Washington Examiner. “He is Far-Left, spending millions on socialist causes, including censorship, weakening our IP, and freeing dangerous criminals. Expect Congressional Republicans to increase their scrutiny of Arnold.”
Among Republicans’ top criticisms of Arnold is his support for bail reform in New York, as the billionaire has been publicly supportive of replacing the system with an algorithm that can offer recommendations to judges on whether to grant bail. The system predicts failure for one to appear in court for a pretrial and the likelihood of new criminal arrest while on pretrial release based on one’s age and criminal history. Related video: Ted Panics (MeidasTouch News)
MeidasTouch News
Ted Panics
That way, Arnold argued, it would maximize judges’ accuracy to permit bail while minimizing any racial disparities. Arnold has become a top donor to bail reform, even outspending Soros by millions of dollars over the last few years.
Those efforts have prompted concerns among GOP lawmakers, who argue Arnold’s proposed system would only “empower criminals” and lead to higher crime rates.
Both Arnold and his wife, Laura, have publicly spoken out about their stances on bail reform, arguing those efforts should be bipartisan.
“Judges are tasked with determining what happens to a defendant during this pretrial period,” John Arnold wrote in an op-ed for the Wall Street Journal. “In most places, judges set bail. If defendants can pay, they walk free until their court dates. If they can’t pay, they remain in jail until trial. The result? Dangerous people with access to money walk out of court. Meanwhile, hundreds of thousands of people charged with low-level offenses, disproportionately people of color, languish in city and county jails without having been convicted of a crime.”
Republicans have also raised criticisms with Arnold’s appointment to the board of Meta earlier this year, accusing the billionaire of attempting to censor conservative voices and undermine free speech ahead of the November election.
“John Arnold is a far-left radical who funded pro-criminal projects in Indiana and pro-censorship organizations nationwide,” Rep. Jim Banks (R-IN) told the Washington Examiner in a statement. “His board appointment should make every patriotic American nervous about Big Tech interfering in the 2024 presidential election, just like they did last cycle.”
Arnold Ventures pushed back against claims the Texas billionaire supports censorship efforts allegedly pushed by Big Tech, pointing to instances in which Arnold has supported free speech on college campuses and beyond.
“Mr. Arnold strongly believes that the bedrock principles of the First Amendment must be protected at all costs, which is one of the reasons why he supports the University of Austin (UATX), an institution dedicated to free speech on campus,” a spokesperson for Arnold Ventures told the Washington Examiner in a statement. “He has also long supported The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) since 2013 to help advance the organization’s mission to defend and sustain the individual rights of all Americans to free speech and free thought.”
Other conservatives have denounced Arnold’s support for election reform, particularly his support for ranked choice voting. Ranked choice voting, also known as instant runoff voting, allows voters to rank candidates by preference, with a winner not being declared until they receive a majority of the vote.
Arnold expresses support for ranked choice voting on his philanthropic organization’s website, and he has donated millions of dollars to state efforts to implement the election method.
Republicans have decried those efforts, claiming ranked choice voting is riddled with challenges and makes elections susceptible to fraud.
“Arnold and other liberal billionaires have tried to rig elections, including in Arkansas, with the ranked choice voting scam,” Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) said. “Americans should be skeptical and oppose these attempts from progressive billionaires to fundamentally change our representative democracy.”
Voting groups in Arkansas sought to put a ranked choice initiative on the 2020 ballot, but those efforts were shot down by the state Supreme Court. Arkansas Voters First collected $3.3 million, according to Little Rock Public Radio, with the outlet reporting most of the money came from Arnold.
Despite conservative criticism, Arnold Ventures is known for donating to both Republican and Democratic causes. According to campaign finance reports filed with the Federal Election Commission, Arnold and his wife have donated to both sides of the aisle, such as ActBlue and WinRed, as well as several individual candidates.
But conservatives claim Arnolds’s efforts go beyond just political donations, claiming Arnold Ventures hires individuals to develop “liberal ideas” before “orchestrating” them into government positions — and then later having them return to the organization.
Arnold Ventures has hired former government employees from both Republican and Democratic backgrounds ranging from the Obama administration to former House Speaker Paul Ryan.
Anyone want a job as a potential canvassers – Musk is asking.
The PAC is offering starting wages of $30 per hour to individuals willing to work on expanding voter registration and turnout ahead of the election. “Pay starts at $30 per hour, with bonuses for performance,” the PAC’s website states, underscoring the financial incentives to join the voter outreach effort.
The PAC’s aggressive voter canvassing initiative, which offers high pay of $30 per hour—more than 400% higher than the federal minimum wage—has garnered attention on social media. Users have pointed out that the attractive pay is a powerful motivator for potential canvassers, especially given the current economic climate. The strategy aligns with Musk’s belief in merit-based incentives, with the PAC even offering performance bonuses to workers who excel in their outreach efforts.
It is my hope as Pope Francis stated – it is our duty and obligation as Christians to VOTE.
Those who plan to sit out and not vote are actually giving up your freedom and your country and a vote for the opposition. It also means your hate/dislike for one person is greater than the love for your country and freedom.
As we all know our country has been hijacked by the Democrats who have become Marxists. In this 2024 election we are aware – it is the life or death of the Constitution.
We know the Democrat Marxists/Biden/Harris/Pelosi/Obama are now supporting Iran/Hezbolloh/Hamas and playing the ends against the middle as far as Israel is concerned. A vote for the Democrats/Harris will conclude any form of freedom if you follow the Harris platform. She has threatened anyone voting for Trump.
Sometimes prophecies, intended to be imminent in fulfillment, actually may be more foretelling of future events. Perhaps that was the case when just before the Iowa Caucuses in 2016 then presidential candidate Senator Ted Cruz declared in a speech before a group of Evangelical supporters that we must “awaken the body of Christ that we might pull back from this abyss.”
In a day when over 25 million Christians eschew their right to vote in any given presidential election, 65 million do not participate in local elections, and 15 million are not registered voters, the good Senator’s cries seemingly have not been heeded.
Now as we face the crucial presidential election cycle in 2024 the nation is in desperate turmoil and appears ready to make the leap into oblivion more so than at any time in recent history. Not only that but those people who self-identify as Christians are seeing their overall numbers dwindle in comparison to a more non-religious subset of voters. With all that, it certainly is easy to see how over these last eight years the abyss to which Senator Cruz referred has grown even bigger than any of us could have ever imagined.
Initially, by way of a disclaimer here, I should admit that for most of my life, I have been a political junkie. Over the span of more than six decades, I have been both an observer and an active participant in many of the political races that have shaped my generation and those that have followed in succession.
Certainly, there have been those times when the soul of the nation has been placed on trial by the intensity of the issues that unfolded before us. Who could forget the 1964 election to replace the assassinated President John F. Kennedy or the 1968 elections, which featured two major assassinations, Bobby Kennedy and Martin Luther King?
Then added to those were the widespread riots throughout our country, including the city of Chicago during the Democrat National Convention. Obviously, there have been many other difficult and extremely important contests for the heart of the nation over the years.
In fact, the argument could be made that the election of a President is always one which by its very nature is crucial to the well-being of America.
But, here in 2024, we just intuitively know that something is different, don’t we? Faced with what many have labeled as a make-or-break decision as to who will lead our nation for the next four years, we understand that the stakes have never been higher.
Perhaps in the minds of many voters though, the choices have never been lower. In reality, as late as it is, there is still a great deal of uncertainty as to who the candidate will be to carry the banner of the Democrat party. Their erstwhile leader and current president have painfully faltered greatly coming out of the gate.
On the other hand, Republicans are faced with the dilemma of a candidate who has rightfully or wrongfully been convicted of a number of felonies and who faces many more court dates perhaps even before the votes are all counted.
Is it any wonder that as the day of the election draws nearer and nearer, various elements of our electorate are being scrutinized to determine who they will cast their ballots for in the upcoming presidential race or even if they will vote at all?
Perhaps no other group is being watched more closely than those who at least self-identify as Christians. No doubt, religion has played an integral part in politics since the earliest days of our nation. As a people of The Book, we are commanded by Christ himself to “render to Caesar, the things that are Caesar’s and to God, the things that are God’s.”
That admonition alone should cause Christians in America to be actively involved in the voting process not only to be good citizens of our nation but also to influence the country based on the calling of God in our lives.
So, for Christians as participants in a republican form of government to not vote arguably could be contrary to the requirements placed on us by Christ Himself. Mike Sharrow, CEO of C12, who recently in collaboration with My Faith Votes to effectuate a workplace effort to encourage people of faith to vote in elections all the way from the presidency down to local interests, put it succinctly as he said,
“When we don’t vote, we are actually failing to engage the authority that has been entrusted to us.”
To be sure those who claim to be faith-based voters have not always aligned behind a single candidate or party. For instance, white Evangelicals tend to vote Republican while African American Evangelicals tend to vote Democrat.
At the same time, you see differences in levels of support amongst those who hold themselves out to be Catholic and those who are Jewish, with both of these groups at least tending in recent elections to support Democrat candidates.
Ironically, in the past few elections, those who adhere to the religion of Islam have tended to side with the Democrat party almost to the same extent as Jews. Then there is always the divide between those “Christians” who attend church regularly (Republicans) and those who seldom attend (Democrats). The divisions amongst faith groups’ voting patterns could go on probably ad nauseam.
Nevertheless, faith-based voters may be one of the most critical blocks in this year’s election and could very well become the single most important deciding factor. With that being said, recent polling indicates a clear favorite amongst the candidates in the eyes of voters who claim a Christian basis. Nathan Gonzales of Inside Elections was recently quoted in an article where he declared, “It’s becoming increasingly clear that President Trump’s appeal among religious voters is expanding.
As we approach Election Day, every vote, particularly from faith voters, will be crucial.
Comments:
Irena’s Vow interview: Daughter of Holocaust survivor on why Christians should support Israel
Dennis Quaid reveals why he believes Hollywood has “lost its way”
This actually may bode well for Mr. Trump in his quest to regain the presidency in spite of his legal troubles. Recent polling has indicated a significant trend in the coalescing of the faith-based vote in his favor, at least for the time being, even despite the softening of his stance on the most important issue of abortion. Not only is Mr. Trump polling well in the traditional Evangelical church-going group, but he is also making great inroads into religious groups that have tended to vote with the opposing side over the years. Perhaps one of the clearest examples of this can be found in the Jewish vote, which appears to be making a full-fledged exodus from the Democrat party because of the pro-Palestinian stance of many Democrat leaders and the perceived lack of support by the Biden administration for Israel in the aftermath of the Hamas terrorist attack of October 7, 2023.
There also seems to be a clear erosion of support amongst some traditionally Democrat-leaning Christian groups because of Mr. Biden’s and his party’s staunch pro-abortion stance. Jay Richards, a scholar at the Heritage Foundation, was recently quoted in the CBN article in which he highlights the deepening divide on religious issues by stating, “Despite his outward adherence to Catholicism, Joe Biden remains steadfastly pro-abortion, which continues to alienate many religiously inclined voters.” This “any time for any reason” position on the murder of the unborn is unsettling to a large portion of Hispanic Catholic and African American Christian voters as well, which is further eroding the support that traditionally belongs to the Democrat candidate.
That same CBN article goes further in stating that “this shift underscores a growing coalition of religiously motivated voters rallying behind Trump, in many cases driven by his conservative policies.” The writer also points out that “Trump has strategically emphasized religious liberty and pro-life policies, presenting himself as a champion of traditional American values.” Whether you like or dislike Mr. Trump, there is no doubt that he has positioned himself in such a way as to actively seek the votes of people of faith while it appears that Mr. Biden has deliberately distanced himself from the group by supporting late-term abortions and extreme alphabet sex issues while at the same time turning a blind eye to severe antisemitic demonstrations across the country particularly on college campuses. To put it bluntly and plainly, Mr. Biden has done nothing to assuage the concerns of the people of faith and has literally often “poked the eye” of this important electorate group by his administration’s attacks on religious liberty and by weaponizing the DOJ, IRS, DHS, and Department of Education against anyone who dares to speak out about the incongruency of his positions with the Constitution of these United States.
At Southern Evangelical Seminary, we understand, as Pastor Sam Rodriquez of New Season Church has said, “There is an undeniable schism amongst voters regarding the role of religion in our nation.” Regardless, this schism should never, under any circumstances, cause a Christ follower to not fulfill his or her civic duty by voting. Nevertheless, when deciding which candidate is to receive the support of your ballot, the first and foremost concern of every believer should be the freedom to proclaim the Gospel without restriction. Although all of the issues in this year’s election are important, they pale in comparison to religious freedom. This great freedom is embodied in the very first phrase in the very First Amendment to our Constitution in the Bill of Rights. When you vote this November, as we urge you to do, please, for the sake of our nation and for your children’s children, keep religious freedom at the forefront of your thoughts. It is the Gospel that in the end, is the only truth that matters.
After a distinguished career as both a lawyer and a judge, Judge Phil Ginn retired as the Senior Resident Superior Court Judge for the 24th Judicial District in North Carolina. Over the course of his 22-year judicial career, he was privileged to hold court in almost 50% of the county seats in North Carolina. Currently, Judge Ginn serves as the president of Southern Evangelical Seminary.
MeidasTouch News
kommonsentsjane 