Team Obama deliberately avoided credit-card security checks
posted at 11:07 am on October 29, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
On Monday, I chided the Washington Post’s Matthew Mosk for missing a key point in the story of credit-card fraud in Barack Obama’s campaign. Today he puts that point front and center in his follow-up report. Team Obama deliberately turned off the systems that would have guarded against the kind of fraudulent donations that have accrued millions to their coffers:
Sen. Barack Obama’s presidential campaign is allowing donors to use largely untraceable prepaid credit cards that could potentially be used to evade limits on how much an individual is legally allowed to give or to mask a contributor’s identity, campaign officials confirmed.
Faced with a huge influx of donations over the Internet, the campaign has also chosen not to use basic security measures to prevent potentially illegal or anonymous contributions from flowing into its accounts, aides acknowledged. Instead, the campaign is scrutinizing its books for improper donations after the money has been deposited.
The Obama organization said its extensive review has ensured that the campaign has refunded any improper contributions, and noted that Federal Election Commission rules do not require front-end screening of donations.
In recent weeks, questionable contributions have created headaches for Obama’s accounting team as it has tried to explain why campaign finance filings have included itemized donations from individuals using fake names, such as Es Esh or Doodad Pro. Those revelations prompted conservative bloggers to further test Obama’s finance vetting by giving money using the kind of prepaid cards that can be bought at a drugstore and cannot be traced to a donor.
Barack Obama claims to champion the consumers of America. This demonstrates worse than just callous disregard of financial security; it looks like a deliberate attempt to allow people to empty unsuspecting consumers of their savings and credit. The checks involving security codes and address verification were put in place years ago by the credit-card companies to protect their customers from having their accounts hijacked by thieves.
There is only one reason to deliberately choose to bypass those security processes, and that’s to facilitate fraud. Team Obama claims that they vet the donations after the fact, but that’s hogwash. It costs far more to do that than to screen for security codes and address verification up front, and everyone knows it. Obama counts on the fact that most of the fraud will fly under the radar of its victims, and the only cost they’ll incur is when they have to process refunds after getting a specific complaint.
This is a key, revelatory moment about Obama and his team. They have deliberately chosen to make it easier for people to defraud the public so that they can ring up millions more in a campaign that has already broken records for fundraising. It’s unethical, dishonest, and dangerous — especially since these will be the same people with their hands on tax records if Obama wins this election.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »
Gee, I thought fraud was illegal. With consequences.
Silly me.
tru2tx on October 29, 2008 at 11:46 AM
if McCain doesn’t tie this gross illegal activity to the credit crunch, he’s not worth the ballot his name appears on.
bloghooligan on October 29, 2008 at 11:47 AM
“I’m Nancy Pelosi and I disapprove of this message.”
Rovin on October 29, 2008 at 11:47 AM
That’s a good point. He’s made a big deal of running this big campaign, but the big campaign is looking like a good old fashioned Chicago-style racket. And he broke his promise to accept public financing specifically to keep this big fund raising fraud rolling.
Breaking promises, facilitating campaign finance fraud, and then wrapping it all up with lame excuses and lies. Awesome experience!
forest on October 29, 2008 at 11:48 AM
The vast majority of people making the “structured” credit charges are doing so on their own card. They want to give more money. They have no reason to dispute charges on their bill.
natesnake on October 29, 2008 at 11:48 AM
If The One wins, it is incumbent on all Republicans to demand that Patrick Fitzgerald remain on the job in Chicago. If the D’s move to remove Fitzgerald, then we’ll know for sure that the whip is coming down on all of us.
Mr. D on October 29, 2008 at 11:49 AM
…or oil soaked wahhabiists and blood soaked terrorists.
Count to 10 on October 29, 2008 at 11:51 AM
BTW, what is the limit for “structuring”? Is it $10,000? That’s how the Feds pinched the NY Governor.
As a follow up, people donating more than their allowed $2200 using credit card structuring (which should be easily traced per the card number) should also be prosecuted for breaking federal election laws.
The Feds should demand a list of all credit card numbers used for donations and make sure the amounts:
#1 Don’t exceed $200 while using fraudulent names
#2 Don’t exceed $2200
natesnake on October 29, 2008 at 11:53 AM
Perhaps we should start looking at that Berlin speech as a fund raising event.
Count to 10 on October 29, 2008 at 11:53 AM
Is this topic racist?
I just need to know before I start thinking about it.
Riposte on October 29, 2008 at 11:57 AM
Foreigners on our FORUMS?! Ma, get the shotgun! Heeey… waitjustacottonpickinminute… “JP”? Doesn’t that stand for JAPANESE PERSON?!
Beo on October 29, 2008 at 12:00 PM
I was willing to give Team O the benefit of the doubt as to whether or not they actually “processed” my 5.00 donation made in the name of Idiot Savant. It did show up immediately as “pending”, but disappeared later on.
However, today it actually went through. Team O has my 5.00 from as fraudulent a donation as you could ask for. “Vetting” my a**.
jwehman on October 29, 2008 at 12:01 PM
PS – THEY THROW AWAY THE CREDIT CARD NUMBERS.
THEY CAN’T VET THE DONATIONS OR RETURN ILLEGAL ONES.
HELLO.
Riposte on October 29, 2008 at 12:04 PM
Somebody ought to start making a bunch of $5.00 contributions in the name of Patrick Fitzgerald. That might get their attention. ;-)
rockmom on October 29, 2008 at 12:04 PM
Don’t get me wrong – I appreciate all you guys who are willing to throw a few bucks Obama’s way to make a point about his fraud. But just for the record, when you make anonymous contributions, even as a matter of research, you are ALSO committing campaign contribution fraud. I say this not to chide you or discourage you from digging deeper into this potentially watershed development – I say it only to encourage you to limit the details that you post about your transactions so that you won’t wind up in the pokey yourself.
Beo on October 29, 2008 at 12:06 PM
It seems highly unlikely that if the public is noticing, the large gargantuan pile of money, and no “reality based” explanation for it. That the people who would be in the know, would have an inkling of where it is coming from, and maybe doing something about it?
http://sarah-palin-2008.blogspot.com/2008/10/why-would-state-department-assist-obama.html
Dr Evil on October 29, 2008 at 12:08 PM
I’m not sure you guys are going to like how crowded it might become.
:-)
hawkdriver on October 29, 2008 at 12:14 PM
Truth be told, I worry about the Japanese the least in this respect.
Count to 10 on October 29, 2008 at 12:15 PM
I think it’s illegal.
Is anyone here an expert in Sarbanes-Oxley? The non-profits I’ve worked in all modified their procedures, including in regards to fundraising, in response to Sarbanes-Oxley… and I mean down to some very fine details to address the “internal controls” and audit requirements, such as ensuring that the person who opens up the donor letter is not the same as the person who processes and records their gift. It seems to me that O!’s campaign is violating the law, not just violating ethical practices, by deliberately obscuring their donor records.
Can anyone chime in on this?
Y-not on October 29, 2008 at 12:17 PM
That is what Obama is counting on…and of course this one fits him also.
And I can’t resist leaving this gem out.
right2bright on October 29, 2008 at 12:18 PM
They turned it off.
Then they lied about turning it off.
MarkTheGreat on October 29, 2008 at 12:23 PM
The accumulation of his wealth is something that is admired…sorry to say this but here it is: There is a certain segment of his supporters who feel that anything goes, if he is caught doing wrong it won’t matter. Here are some examples:
Jessie Jackson
Barney Frank (his gay brothel and fixing the tickets of his clients)
William Ayres
Al Sharpton
Willian Jefferson
Marrion Barry
Feinstein (shoveling contracts to her husbands businesses)
I could go on and on, every one of these have not been held accountable for their illegal activities…instead they were rewarded and honored.
You won’t find a similar list on the conservative side, maybe as many have done wrong (I doubt it), but when caught they were punished, not rewarded.
And this is just a partial list, all of you could expand this list by 5 times at least.
right2bright on October 29, 2008 at 12:25 PM
What is it about liberals? When it comes to their own behavior, they honestly believe that following the letter of the law exempts them from all criticism. While at the same time, demanding that everyone else avoid even “the appearance of impropriety”.
Every other campaign, even all the other Democratic campaigns put these security features into place. Obama says that since he didn’t have to, nobody should criticize him for not doing it.
MarkTheGreat on October 29, 2008 at 12:26 PM
BINGO.
Buy Danish on October 29, 2008 at 12:27 PM
Another clueless liberal who either hasn’t been paying attention or is hoping to divert the thread.
McCain’s web site has all the verification checks in place. That’s been tested by several people. He also refuses to allow the use of gift cards.
MarkTheGreat on October 29, 2008 at 12:29 PM
That is what I reported last week. A friend of mine who sets up (owns a company) credit card accounts advised me. You have to purposely override systems to have this loose of security.
The default is to be secure, and you have to override it with specific instructions to loosen security, and you have to take on the fiscal responsibility of those actions. Master Card, Visa, etc. all have their standards, and if you follow those, they will take the hit. But deviate and you are on your own.
In the many years, he has never set up an account like this…never even close.
He doesn’t do business with them, but he said not even the most vile part of the porn industry would have this loose of security.
Obama is looser then a porn site.
right2bright on October 29, 2008 at 12:31 PM
Looks like your boy Obama is hung out to dry.
Let’s see you tap dance around this one.
McCain’s site has been vetted, and it is clean as a whistle…sorry tomas, you are supporting a crook.
right2bright on October 29, 2008 at 12:33 PM
Having problems with reading comprehension today? How does someone who loses the election get to issue presidential pardons?
MarkTheGreat on October 29, 2008 at 12:36 PM
No, they are not committing campaign fraud…they are exposing fraud.
Good luck on trying to convict someone that is doing what Obama has encouraged people to do…and that there are probably about 10,000 people before them.
Carry-on and expose the fraud…btw, a news agency broke into an unsecured website to show how unsafe it was, reported it on TV, and they were never considered “committing fraud”…better re-hit the law books.
right2bright on October 29, 2008 at 12:40 PM
I’ve emailed Ann Althouse to see if she would be willing to set up a post considering the legal implications of Sarbanes-Oxley on Obama’s shenanigans. She’s a law professor — and many of her readers are lawyers — so perhaps she can shed light onto the legality of their shenanigans.
No reputable non-profit would process donations the way Obama’s campaign is doing it.
Y-not on October 29, 2008 at 12:42 PM
Sorry, if he loses, I don’t care what happens to him. I only care about Obama if he wins the election. I don’t hate the man, only what he can do in office to this country and my tax bill.
ThackerAgency on October 29, 2008 at 12:44 PM
The other is to set up phony card accounts. Let them take out $199 per month on each card. With the phony names they would never be caught, with his system.
You could have 100 (or if you are Soros, thousands) of $2,388 limit cards. Each month have $199 taken out so they don’t have to report it. A thousand times $199, is $199,000 per month ($2 mil year), and never be caught.
right2bright on October 29, 2008 at 12:46 PM
You will find out, no business processes money like this…none.
right2bright on October 29, 2008 at 12:47 PM
Adolf Hitler also made a donation to the Obama campaign. I know, Hitler died before Obama was born, but somebody DID make a donation to Obama in his name.
How many other foreigners, dead or alive, have donated to the Obama campaign? George Soros, do you know where your money is?
Steve Z on October 29, 2008 at 12:47 PM
After this election we are no longer required to take a damn thing Democrats say seriously. Especially when they talk about campaign spending and the donatioons themselves. I just finished reading…
“DEMS’ CAMPAIGN-FINANCE HYPOCRISY” by former Sen Bob Kerry
http://www.nypost.com/seven/10282008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/dems_campaign_finance_hypocrisy_135631.htm
There was the comment after the article that boiled my blood. (I’d cut and paste it but the comments aren’t showing now)
Essentially, the lib commenter thinks it’s funny now that the shoe is on the other foot and their guy is getting the big bucks and spending on ads like a drunk sailor. He said McCain was “outfoxed”. Hmm, one candidate being true to his word and promises and the other lying and using the system in anyway that benefits him is being “out-foxed”.
This example of liberal think has been brought to you by hawkdriver inc. Learn more about liberal think in your library.
Anyway, are we no longer bound by the rules either with an easy reference back to Obama and this 08 election?
Update, checked one more time and the comments came back. This is what the idiot said.
“Yikes! I stumbled onto a conservative rag!
John Kerry is still flip-flopping, and John McCain was outfoxed. Oh boo-hoo! When will conservatives realize that emotions and politics make incompatible bedfellows? When you do, you might be able to rejoin the human race. But one last thing, as long as you can’t get past the name calling and the mudslinging, then no one with a brain will listen to you.
My God, let me out of here…”
Like I said, no rules!
hawkdriver on October 29, 2008 at 12:48 PM
http://www.beatcanvas.com/guvsux/guvsux_20081023.jpg
beatcanvas on October 29, 2008 at 12:51 PM
Are the Democrat Party and Team Obama just completely unleashed now?
Anything goes, no reprecussions?
voter fraud
digging up dirt on average citizens to strike fear in those that dare oppose or question
Violating the Logan Act by interfering in negotiations with a foriegn country (Iraq)
Now illegal campaign contributions
Goodeye_Closed on October 29, 2008 at 12:56 PM
talented!
hawkdriver on October 29, 2008 at 12:57 PM
Speaking of processing..
Is there a way to find out who is doing the processing and/or acting as a facilitator?
Understand the chargebacks and associated fees could be enormous and no “real” business entity would absorb such fees nor allow for such potentially huge liabilities to occur..,,,
theblacksheepwasright on October 29, 2008 at 12:59 PM
there is no limit on these cards you can put
ConservativePartyNow on October 29, 2008 at 1:05 PM
Why would they be sorry? They don’t care who signs their paychecks, and they’ll be doing the same stories, in the same way.
MarkTheGreat on October 29, 2008 at 1:07 PM
Penalties under Sarbanes-Oxley.
They sound more serious than election code violations to me. Are there any lawyers out there who can comment?
Also, it’s pretty clear that you can’t be sloppy and just say “oops” afterwards. The point of Sarbanes-Oxley is that organizations put rigorous accounting systems in place and that the officers of that organization are held accountable for the financial statements they report.
Y-not on October 29, 2008 at 1:24 PM
I made a $5 donation as George W. Bush. I’m considering turning myself in to the FEC.
Any advise on what I could be facing?
Stephen Macklin on October 29, 2008 at 1:24 PM
posing as americans of course, but its happening. probably mostly on neutral and leftwing sites mostly
jp on October 29, 2008 at 1:27 PM
Wow… hadn’t even thought about Sarbains… in conjunction with Campaign committees… are the covered by it?
Romeo13 on October 29, 2008 at 1:33 PM
Yet another example of just how silly it is that he’s even in this race. Are you f**king kidding me? Can you imagine any Republican getting away with a fraction of what he has? Am I losing my mind? WTF is going on here?
RightWinged on October 29, 2008 at 1:42 PM
I *think* so… but I am not a lawyer. What I do know is that non-profits (at least the reputable ones) have modified all of their procedures in order to be in compliance with Sarbanes-Oxley. Non-profits… and campaigns… have fiscal officers, boards of directors, and “investors,” the latter being “donors” to a charity or a campaign.
I’m hoping Ann Althouse will find this topic interesting enough to cover (I sent her an email this morning), although I’ve noticed that she has really come out of the closet for Obama the past few weeks… she may be in too much denial to investigate.
I know we have some lawyers who read/post at Hot Air so with luck one of them will answer this.
Y-not on October 29, 2008 at 1:47 PM
Yeah, this is huge, because if you proove they cirvumvented the law, then Sarbains takes over as to who is responsible.
And Sarbains says you MUST keep all those records….
Romeo13 on October 29, 2008 at 1:50 PM
Does anyone know of any lawyers who run conservative blogs? I’m sure I’ve gone to some blogs run by lawyers, but I’m blanking on the names.
I’m trying Patriot Room now, but that’s not the one I’ve visited before.
I’d really like someone to pick up the Sarbanes-Oxley angle as I think that really nails the Obama campaign’s fundraising practices, if it applies.
Y-not on October 29, 2008 at 1:53 PM
Yeah — really you just have to nail them for being sloppy. Intent is not really relevant, as I understand Sarbanes-Oxley.
Y-not on October 29, 2008 at 1:57 PM
http://www.americasright.com/
Run by a legal Student… but pretty good…
Romeo13 on October 29, 2008 at 2:04 PM
The Obama organization … noted that Federal Election Commission rules do not require front-end screening of donations.
Why the frack not? Sorry, rhetorical question. And once He ascends to His power, it never will.
BTW, yes, this topic is racist. Shut ‘er down!
Paul_in_NJ on October 29, 2008 at 2:08 PM
From the WaPo article:
It would appear that the Obama campaign learned well from the mistakes of the Clinton campaign. Bill ‘n Hill were caught taking illegal campaign contributions from Chinese nationals like Yah Lin (Charlie) Trie, John Huang, and other donors from the People’s Republic of China.
In addition to the political damage it caused their party, it also cost the Democrats hundreds of thousands of dollars in donations they were forced to turn over to the Treasury Department, not to mention over $1 million in fines to the FEC. By facilitating credit-card fraud, Obama avoids inconvenient questions, investigations, and fines.
Then again, it took the FEC over two years to bring the Clintons to justice. Under Obama, it may take them longer… or it may never happen.
Paul_in_NJ on October 29, 2008 at 2:31 PM
“The people need to know whether or not their president is a crook. Well, I’m not a crook.”
Sefton on October 29, 2008 at 3:04 PM
The Obama campaign is socialism in a nutshell: sold with lies, implemented with careless disregard for the law, and impossible to reverse after it’s been put into place. All of these campaign-finance outrages will become less than meaningless once he’s elected. It wouldn’t really matter if some of those fuzzy donations came from Palestinian terrorists, or even al-Qaeda for that matter. Once Obama is the president, it all goes down the memory hole, and God help the Messiah’s opponent in 2012 if he commits even the tiniest technical violation of campaign law.
The primary effect of our elaborate campaign finance laws is to encourage the Democrat to break them like crazy, in the largest possible ways. Rake in the cash, steal the election, and once you’re in power, nothing you did to get there will matter any more. Meanwhile, a guy like McCain who takes them seriously comes off like a sap – he’s like an 1890s gentleman pugilist who showed up for a street fight.
The government Obama implements will be just like this disgusting campaign, except it will go on forever. Critics will be silenced, laws (and the Constitution) will be trampled without hesitation, enemies will be destroyed, and every hideous collectivist program will be hard-wired into the American political and economic systems, in such a way they are impossible to scale back or remove.
That’s why this must not be allowed to stand, and Obama must not win. Stand up and face your enemy, America. He’s right in front of you. You get one more election to bring this guy to justice, and if you screw it up, it will be the last real election you see in your lifetimes.
Doctor Zero on October 29, 2008 at 3:15 PM
Like I said on another thread, I’m sure that the Obama commerce site for buying paraphernalia like shirts, buttons and bumper stickers uses much more rigorous credit card verification than their donation site.
rokemronnie on October 29, 2008 at 3:22 PM
Obama is crooked and dirty. It really is that simple.
Oink on October 29, 2008 at 3:37 PM
And he obviously had this planned at the time he PROMISED to stick with public financing.
If Bush had done this, we would have millions in the streets calling for his head.
PattyJ on October 29, 2008 at 4:06 PM
Never thought of that.
I bet you are right.
Be easy enough to test.
LegendHasIt on October 29, 2008 at 4:12 PM
Hannity is reporting that a former ACORN employee is implicating BO’s campaign in lots of illegalities & no-nos.
jgapinoy on October 29, 2008 at 4:29 PM
If he wins and these allegations are proven to be true then there is only one course of action for Mr. Obama: Impeachment!
If he loses and these allegations are proven to be true then there is only one course of action for Mr. Obama: Removal from the U.S. Senate!
It is that simple. Period.
Claypigeon on October 29, 2008 at 4:32 PM
I just made a MyBarack page. How do you all like it? Wonder how long it will be there?
http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/markmache/gGgk8g
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
It’s pretty ugly because it’s my first time there and haven’t experimented with their formatting procedures.
In any case, this is what I posted to my “Mark Mache” blog:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Of these obvious blatant and false attacks by FauxNews with their ridiculous display of facts!!11!!!!
Obama must win in Virginia!! Come on fellow “Common Wealthers”! Stand Up! Well, if you can’t then, God Love Ya’! Don’t worry, you have plenty of people to pick you up and, ultimately hold you up because Obama has said so. Just remember, he once said “Our individual salvation depends on our collective salvation”. No worries there.
Biden was right, we WILL be tested soon!!1!!1!!! . We need it, we haven’t experienced enough aggression by the World’s sub-cultures. 9-11 wasn’t enough, we need something bigger and better from Barack’s friends, don’t we? I mean, we have it coming as we have ravaged the world for generations while giving more global aid than any nation in history. Makes sense right? Face it Repuglicans, Obama has sat down at dinner with these people, he knows them. He knows them very well. Not a casual knowledge, but something that provides a much more intimate knowledge of. He has an enlightened world view.
Another thing I am happy about for our new leader is that I will no longer have to lament at Church on Sunday as to whether I make the check for $50 or $75 or 100. Since I’ll have less disposable income my decision will be so much easier, it’ll be a question of $0 or $10. I’m sure Obama has much better use for my money and knows how to better redistribute my wealth in my community. Hey, reduced decision tree. Always good.
Another thing. Obama knows how to rehabilitate criminals and radicals. Unlike the evil BusHitlerHalliburBlackWat crowd who killed innocent terrorists and sent their beloved brothers to Gitmo for a little torture from the eveil west, he knows that we should give a pass to violent youths that have escaped the womb of their unfairly punished mothers and has decided to nip this problem in the bud. Just kill’em before they’re born (or a few hours after) and that saves a lot of time and money that could be better spent on lottery tickets and such in the inner cities on a path to a better life.
Sheww! I’m getting tired of talking about all the reasons to vote for Barack. I think I’ll turn the leads over to CNN, MSNBC, NBC, ABC, CBS and most of the rags. Afterall, I’m not getting paid for this, I’m only funding it.
Vote DooDad/Pro 2008!!!!11!!
Sincerely,
Mark Mache
Son of DooDad and Pro
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I hope you all like it, I do, a little. :)
MarkABinVA on October 29, 2008 at 4:52 PM
I tried to post this story to a related Jake Tapper post on abcnews.com complete with the Wapo link and the moderator very quickly deleted my comment. hmmm….
CliffHanger on October 29, 2008 at 5:18 PM
I got this reply from Mr. Mosk:
—
Thanks for your note, Mr. Hall. I would be interested in seeing evidence of the contribution you’re describing.
—–James Hall wrote: —–
To: moskm@washpost.com
From: James Hall
Date: 10/29/2008 11:41AM
Subject: Message via washingtonpost.com: Obama credit fraud
James Hall sent the following message:
Obama’s team is not scrutinizing contributions made after the fact either. My $5 donation to his campaign as Osama Bin Laden who resided in a cave in Waziristan, occupation Terrorist Leader was processed and applied to my account even though the address I supplied was completely wrong.
I have screen captures of this process and of my bank statement if you would like. Obama is accepting illicit funds for his campaign and if GOP candidate was involved in fraud like this, he would be arrested and thrown into jail. Please update your article, I can provide supporting evidence if you need.
James on October 29, 2008 at 5:28 PM
I replied with my screencaps from my WF acct and the initial caps from the donation.
James on October 29, 2008 at 5:29 PM
Money, money, money.
People are pissed about the bailouts. Pissed that our house costs more than it is worth and is taxed at what it costs not what it is worth.
Thus Barak Obama buying a half hour infomercial after:
- breaking his pledge to take public financing,
- disabling security software to accept donations under $200 that are virutally untraceable, and
- raising $150 million dollars in a single month AFTER breaking his pledge to take public financing,
is about the stupidest political statement since George Bush senior said “Read my lips.”
The inexplicably thuggish tactics of David Axelrod and the complicity of the MSM in refusing to highlight Obama’s broken pledge have combined to make this election less a referendum on Barak Obama and more a referendum on how we run elections in this country.
If McCain loses, as the author of CFR he will have died his boots on and been killed by his own sword.
However, if the impossible happens and Barak Obama loses, it will be because the American people honestly support the goals of campaign finance reform, if not the current law.
Angry Dumbo on October 29, 2008 at 6:12 PM
I was hearing on another site that Fox is reporting that of the $150Mill that obama raised in September that $100Mill cam from these types of cards
ConservativePartyNow on October 29, 2008 at 6:18 PM
What ever happen to the negative $5 donation?
AverageJoe on October 29, 2008 at 6:19 PM
So, SOLUTIONS. WHAT are we doing to stop it NOW? What I want is the media to give it the time they gave Britney Spears’ meltdown or even Palin’s wardrobe…something huge. What do we do?
I’m really getting scared at the sheer lawlessness of this guy. Seemingly more and more antiChrist by the minute. :o( Shake me out of it…
Mommypundit on October 29, 2008 at 7:01 PM
Joe Biden said it as well as anyone: ‘Gird yer loins.’
petefrt on October 29, 2008 at 7:18 PM
Where is ManlyRash and Grue in the Attic on this thread? Huh, where’s the love. How do I make my ObamaBlog more incindeary to the dolts?
MarkABinVA on October 29, 2008 at 7:30 PM
So we have this little tidbit of unethical and dishonest fund raising and a tape in the hands of the LA Times of Obama back slapping with a terrorist that they admit they have but wont release…. yeah, Obama is friggin’ wonderful.
*barfs in mouth a little bit*
Yakko77 on October 29, 2008 at 7:31 PM
The first who comes to mind is PowerLine’s Paul Mirengoff.
petefrt on October 29, 2008 at 7:38 PM
Has it crossed any ones mind that this money laundering scheme has nothing to do with foreign or other illegal donations? Obama is from Chicago and perhaps the simplest explanation is the best one. It’s a scheme to skim money off the top so Obama’s cronies get rich.
jerryofva on October 29, 2008 at 8:01 PM
Hope and Change and a New Kind of Politics
=
Just Another Sleazy, Lying Democrat Crook From Chicago, Crook County, Sillinois
Jaibones on October 29, 2008 at 8:14 PM
And John Hinderaker and Scott Johnson (all lawyers).
But also, the little known, but very bright, very literate, and highly witty and conservative Tom Tozer of The Order of Montjoie.
Jaibones on October 29, 2008 at 8:18 PM
I second that amendment! Thanks.
petefrt on October 29, 2008 at 8:20 PM
Doh — right, Powerline! Thanks, Jailbones and petefrt.
Y-not on October 29, 2008 at 8:22 PM
P.S. Kindly excuse my incomplete post, as I myself am a recovering lawyer. :)
petefrt on October 29, 2008 at 8:24 PM
Team Obama has already collected $ 100,000 from Hot Air readers. /sarc
slp on October 29, 2008 at 10:57 PM
What’s Obama’s street address in Chicago?
THAT is the address folks should be entering, so OBAMA gets all the spam US Mail that will be sent to these addresses daily.
desertdweller on October 29, 2008 at 11:26 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »