From: Travis Subject: Massive Fund Raising Misdeeds Prove Obama is Bought, But Who owns Him? Date: Tuesday, October 21, 2008
[image: http://familysecuritymatters.org/]<http://familysecuritymatters.org/> October 21, 2008 Massive Fund Raising Misdeeds Prove Obama is Bought, But Who owns Him? Paul Hollrah<http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/authors/id.62/author_detail.asp> In a July 25 column titled "Who Owns Barack Obama?" we discussed Obama's phenomenal fundraising juggernaut. In July, Obama* *boasted that, as of May 31, his contributor base numbered some 1.5 million people, with one-fourth, or $66.25 million of his $265 million, coming from those contributing $2,000, or more... some 33,200 people. Thus, the remainder, or $198.75 million, came from some 1.47 million people, each contributing $5, $10, $20... or, as Obama assured us, "whatever they could afford." While it is true that Obama is the kind of guy who could read Bill Clinton's golf scorecard and make it sound convincing, simple arithmetic should have told him that $198.75 million dollars cannot be contributed by 1.47 million people in "$5, $10, or $20" amounts. Each of those 1.47 million people would have had to contribute, on average, $135 to create a pool of $198.75 million... and that simply does not happen. It has never happened before in American politics and it is *not* happening now. But now, just days before the election, the Obama campaign has compounded their sins. They are now reporting that their contributor base has increased from 1.5 million to 2.5 million and that the total amount raised now approaches $600 million. If we can assume that 25% of their contributions still come from individuals giving $2,000 to $2,300, that base has now grown from 33,200 individuals to 65,000 in a time span of just three months, and the number of individuals contributing modest amounts... "$5, $10, $20, or whatever they could afford"... is now up from 1.47 million to 2.43 million, each contributing, on average, $185. Anyone who believes that is actually happening will believe almost anything. So how are they doing it? In our July 25 column we pointed out that UBS Americas, headed by Robert Wolf... along with George Soros, one of Obama's top two money men... had been accused of highly unethical and illegal banking practices in six months of hearings by the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. According to an article in *The Nation*, UBS Americas, a subsidiary of UBS, of Zurich, Switzerland, has advised wealthy Americans, including many of our worst villains, how to shelter funds from the IRS, as well as from prosecutors, creditors, disgruntled business associates, family members, and each other. In a Statement of Facts in the recent criminal trial of former UBS executive Bradley Birkenfeld, it was alleged that UBS took extraordinary steps to help American clients manage their Swiss accounts without alerting federal authorities. For example, UBS advised American clients to avoid detection by using Swiss credit cards to withdraw funds, to destroy all existing off-shore banking records, and to misrepresent the receipt of funds from their Swiss accounts as *loans* from the Swiss bank. According to *The Nation, *UBS established an elaborate training program which taught bank employees how to avoid surveillance by U.S. Customs and law enforcement, falsify visas, encrypt communications, and secretly move money in and out of the country... " It is the perfect instrument for funneling illegal campaign contributions into the coffers of an unscrupulous American politician. Putting two and two together, I suggested that a very wealthy individual, or cartel, wishing to influence the election of the President of the United States, could transfer unlimited sums of money through this device. A U.S. recipient, such as the Obama campaign, could receive hundreds of thousands of individual contributions via Swiss credit card transfers, with fictitious payees being entered by teams of paid staffers working in a "boiler room" setting. The owners of the Swiss accounts would receive periodic statements indicating: a) debits of varying amounts, up to $2,300 each, and b) offsetting credits provided by the cartel, or by the wealthy, but unnamed, "international financier." For most of the super wealthy, especially those attempting to hide income and assets from U.S. authorities, an unexplained debit and credit of $2,300, or less, would not even raise an eyebrow. So who would ever know the source of such contributions? No one. Now, in an October 20 article in *Newsmax*, writer Kenneth Timmerman provides details from Federal Election Commission records that give substantial weight to my theory. In studying Obama's FEC filings, *Newsmax*found more than 2,000 donors who had given substantially more than their $4,600 limit ($2,300 in the primaries and $2,300 in the General Election). The law requires that such excess contributions must be returned to the donor within 60 days of the donor going over his/her limit. However, many of the donors contacted by *Newsmax* said that they had not been contacted by the Obama campaign and that they had not received refunds. But these are relatively minor infractions compared to 66,383 highly suspicious contributions, from 37,265 donors, whose contributions were not rounded to even dollar amounts. For example, Timmerman tells us that John Atkinson, an insurance agent in Burr Ridge, Illinois, gave a total of $8,724.26. He gave in odd amounts such as $188.67, $1,542.06, $876.09, $388.67, $282.20, $195.66, $118.15, and one of $2,300. Sandra Daneshinia, a self-employed caregiver of Los Angeles, made 36 separate contributions totaling $7,051.12. Thirteen of her contributions were later refunded. However, in an odd coincidence those 13 refunds, in amounts such as $233.88 and $201.44, came to an even $2,300, the maximum amount allowable in any one election. One contributor interviewed by *Newsmax*, Ronald J. Sharpe, Jr., a retired schoolteacher from Rockledge, Florida, is reported to have given $13,800... $9,200 over his limit. However, Mr. Sharpe does not remember giving that much money to Obama, nor has anyone from the campaign ever contacted him about a refund. Of the 66,383 contributions in odd amounts, 44,410 were in unrounded amounts of less than $100, 15,269 contributions were in unrounded amounts of between $101 and $999, and 704 contributions were in odd amounts greater than $1,000. Lest anyone suggest that these 37,265 donors either emptied their piggy banks or emptied their pockets and purses periodically and just sent it all to Obama, pennies and all, allow me to suggest something a tiny bit more Macheavellian. Those 66,383 contributions are the proceeds of conversions of foreign currency, smuggled into the country in foreign credit card receipts, and converted to U.S. dollars. According to a *Newsmax* analysis, the Obama campaign finance reports contain some 370,500 unique names... a far cry from the 2.5 million contributor base claimed by the campaign. Of course, when your money is coming in large chunks from offshore accounts, such as hundreds of thousands of dollars at a time from the Middle East and from Third World African countries, then laundered though UBS accounts in Zurich, it takes a bit of creativity to put authentic-sounding names on all of it for the FEC records. How massive is this crime? Since the Obama campaign has refused to disclose their complete contributor list (they continue to hide the identities of some 2 million donors), as the McCain campaign has done, *Newsmax* estimates that "Obama is financing his presidential campaign with anywhere from $13 million to a whopping $63 million from overseas credit cards or foreign currency purchases." Given the massive voter registration fraud committed by Obama's supporters, the fraudulent votes already cast in early voting by itinerant out-of-state voters, and the massive crime involved in accepting tens of thousands of illegal foreign contributions, John McCain and Sarah Palin simply must close the gap in the closing days of the campaign. If not, we will inaugurate a man on January 20 who will have to be impeached before his wife has a chance to measure the White House for new draperies. *FamilySecurityMatters.org <http://familysecuritymatters.org//> Contributing Editor Paul Hollrah is a Senior Fellow at the Lincoln Heritage Institute.* You can find this online at: http://familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.1527/pub_detail.asp COPYRIGHT 2008 FAMILY SECURITY MATTERS<http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/>INC. -- *~@):~{> --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
