Seven top officers of Democrat fund-raising giant ActBlue suddenly leave, cuz...

As every American surely knows by now, the New York Times is totally in the tank for the Democrat partei.  The leftist libs at the Times carefully ignore any illegal acts by any Democrat, or by the Partei itself.

Thus after seven senior officers with the massive Dem fundraising operation "ActBlue" recently departed, the Times spun the thing as "Republicans pounce" and that ActBlue "faces internal chaos."

For years ActBlue has raised billions for the Democrat partei.  The Times says this is because it created "a universal and trusted platform for donating."

Ohhh, yes!  Dat's it!  "Universal and trusted."  Yep yep yep.

ActBlue says that since its founding in 2004 it's raised over $16 billion for Democratic candidates.  That's a LOT of money--about $800 MILLION per year!-- and has likely given Dems thousands of election wins.

But there's a *tiny problem*:  By law, foreigners aren't allowed to contribute to candidates.  But ActBlue's "trusted, universal" fundraising seems to have been designed--intentionally--to allow foreign sources to donate billions--without revealing that the donations were from foreign sources.

Democrats and Media: "Dis no big deal, citizen!  Ebrywun know campaign finance laws are too complex to be understandable by ordinary peons, right?  So shut up!"

Ah, yes.  Of course.  Excuse us for being curious.

I first heard about ActBlue's cunning way of hiding illegal foreign donations a decade ago.  The source was whistleblower employees at the two credit-card giants, Visa and MasterCard.

When you get $50 bucks of gas, using a credit or debit card, you have to enter your zip code.  When you buy something on the Internet, you have to enter the 3-digit "CVV code" printed on the back of the card.  These two things provide at least a bare minumum of safety against fraud.

Both the big credit card companies have both these fraud-protection "fields" enabled by default.  Organizations that receive payments or donations can disable those, but that must be done deliberately.

Whistleblowers noted that ActBlue disabled both fields at least a decade ago--meaning there were no safeguards against donations from foreign cardholders.

Not surprisingly, the story got almost no mention in the Mainstream Media.  Republicans asked the Federal Election Commission to investigate, but for some mysterious reason that Dem-run commission took no action.

But now, with a new head of the FEC, congressional Republicans have demanded answers from ActBlue about why the standard, default security and fraud-prevention measures were disabled, and about how the group could recognize illegal foreign donations.

Of course the only thing the public will ever hear about this is that seven top officers of ActBlue have left "to pursue other opportunities," eh?  

The Times spins the story as "Dems fear Republicans will try to shut down..."
>>Some Democrats fear that Republicans will seek to shut down ActBlue.  Democrats worry that this is just an opening salvo in a campaign to dismantle and destabilize the broader Democratic infrastructure.>>

Now, if everything ActBlue has been doing is perfectly legal, the Dems wouldn't have anything to be worried about, eh?

But of course it's NOT legal.  But this will be totally buried by the Media.  "Too arcane to try to explain to the public," they'll say.

Yeah, just like the Vegetable giving hunty a "pre-emptive pardon" for any crimes he might have committed over a DECADE, even if not yet known.  Wow.

Source: New York Times

https://archive.is/4gXfh#selection-1135.3-1135.227