SNOPES.COM
Home --> Politics --> Barack Obama --> Campaign Contributions
Claim: The bulk of donations to the Obama campaign come from a handful of wealthy foreign financiers.
Status: False.
Example: [Collected via e-mail, July 2008]
Origins: The faux news article reproduced above is a masterful bit of political effluvium, one which proffers the "shocking revelation" that not only were the bulk of donations to Senator Barack Obama's presidential campaign made via the Internet coming from a handful of wealthy financiers in China, Saudi Arabia, Iran, and "other Middle Eastern countries" (rather than from American voters), but that Senator Obama was fine with accepting such tainted and compromised funding because of the technicality that "none of these donations violated campaign financing laws."
The article was not, as claimed in its header, written by veteran political columnist Maureen Dowd (her29 June 2008 column was about Senator Hillary Clinton's supporters, not the financing of Senator Obama's campaign), who said of it:
federal law,
identify "all PACs and party committees that give them contributions,
and they must identify individuals who give them more than $200 in an
election cycle."
Status: False.
Example: [Collected via e-mail, July 2008]
WHERE IS THE MONEY COMING FROM ?
By MAUREEN DOWD Published: June 29, 2008 OBAMA'S TROUBLING INTERNET FUND RAISING Certainly the most interesting and potentially devastating phone call I have received during this election cycle came this week from one of the Obama's campaign internet geeks. These are the staffers who devised Obama's internet fund raising campaign which raised in the neighborhood of What I learned from this insider was shocking but I guess we shouldn't be surprised that when it comes to fund raising there simply are no rules that can't be broken and no ethics that prevail. Obama's internet campaign started out innocently enough with basic
Then, about two months into the campaign the daily contribution intake multiplied. Where was it coming from? One of the web site security monitors began to notice the bulk of the contributions were clearly coming in from overseas internet service providers and at the rate and frequency of transmission it was clear these donations were "programmed" by a very sophisticated user. While the security people were not able to track most of the sources due to firewalls and other blocking devices put on these contributions they were able to collate the number of contributions that were coming in seemingly from individuals but the funds were from only a few credit card accounts and bank electronic funds transfers. The internet service providers (ISP) they were able to trace were from Saudi Arabia, Iran, and other Middle Eastern countries. One of the banks used for fund transfers was also located in Saudi Arabia. Another concentrated group of donations was traced to a Chinese ISP with a similar pattern of limited credit card charges. It became clear that these donations were very likely coming from sources other than American voters. This was discussed at length within the campaign and the decision was made that none of these donations violated campaign financing laws. It was also decided that it was not the responsibility of the campaign to audit these millions of contributions as to the actual source (specific credit card number or bank transfer account numbers) to insure that none of these internet contributors exceeded the legal maximum donation on a cumulative basis of many small donations. They also found the record keeping was not complete enough to do it anyway. This is a shocking revelation. We have been concerned about the legality of "bundling" contributions after the recent exposure of illegal bundlers but now it appears we may have an even greater problem. I guess we should have been somewhat suspicious when the numbers started to come out. We were told (no proof offered) that the Obama internet contributions were from $10.00 to $25.00 or so. If the $200,000,000 is right, and the average contribution was $15.00, that would mean over I believe the Obama campaign's internet fund raising needs a serious, in depth investigation and audit. It also appears the whole question of internet fund raising needs investigation by the legislature and perhaps new laws to insure it complies not only with the letter of these laws but the spirit as well. |
Origins: The faux news article reproduced above is a masterful bit of political effluvium, one which proffers the "shocking revelation" that not only were the bulk of donations to Senator Barack Obama's presidential campaign made via the Internet coming from a handful of wealthy financiers in China, Saudi Arabia, Iran, and "other Middle Eastern countries" (rather than from American voters), but that Senator Obama was fine with accepting such tainted and compromised funding because of the technicality that "none of these donations violated campaign financing laws."
The article was not, as claimed in its header, written by veteran political columnist Maureen Dowd (her
The line about it being the 'most shocking revelation,' I don't think
I've ever said those words, except in a satire. Also, it is about money,
which I never write about. Sometimes you try and protest things you
hear about, but sometimes it's just not worth it... It is
hard to track down and control these things, and anyone who reads my
column knows that this wasn't me. I got to the second line and I knew it
wasn't me.
And aside from the article's bogus attribution, the facts it posits
about contributions to the Obama campaign are wrong: The bulk of the
money raised by the Obama campaign via donations has come from contributions of $200 or larger, not contributions of "$10 to $25 or so," and campaigns must, by
I have a sick baby here, so I will do more research after she goes home. Let's start with this Snopes fact...
7 comments:
But this just proves Snopes is part of the Marxist Kenyan Hitlerite gay socialist pro-masturbation witch conspiracy!
I have a sick baby here,
With Linda and Lisa and the rest, I'd say you have a bunch of pretty sick babies here.....
that's true Infidel, how do I keep up?? :-)
Good find Sue. Sometimes I wonder if the liars on the right are even trying anymore. You'd think they'd realize that people are going to sniff out their B.S. with very little effort.
Infidel: That's just about what some of the righties will say about Snopes when confronted with this story. They may even throw in their new favorite adjective to describe Marxists (bearded). Or do they just use that term to smear Chris Coons?
Linda must have caught Lisa's "false fact" disease.
Sue ~ That would have been a great find for you IF I HAD ACCUSED HIM OF HAVING FOREIGN CONTRIBUTORS...here is what I said,
"Perhaps President Obama would, in the interest of the transparency
he promised on the campaign trail, divulge the identities of the thousands of online contributors donating millions of dollars to fund his campaign...don't hold your breath."
So, your Snopes piece does not relate to my statment. You wouldn't deliberately mislead, would you?
Hello, Linda. Where's your curiosity on where the US Chamber of Commerce is getting its money?
Get over it. Barack Hussein Obama is our American president.
We either need to have full disclosure FROM BOTH SIDES or public financing. There aren't very many good third options, as far as I can tell.
Post a Comment