reSee.it - Related Video Feed

In politics, money raised is crucial. A group found suspicious donations to Democrats totaling over $200 million through ActBlue, mostly from older, liberal, lower-income individuals. Many donors seem unaware of these contributions made in their name, suggesting identity theft. Examples include a woman making 1400 donations in 7 years and another making 52,501 donations in 700 days. These irregularities raise concerns about potential election law violations and national security risks. Despite 52 complaints filed, Democrats are reluctant to investigate. The magnitude of these questionable donations far exceeds previous concerns over foreign influence, warranting a thorough investigation.

OMG has discovered a mole inside ActBlue, the democratic fundraising organization. They attended a secret meeting at a Boston hotel and spoke to ActBlue staffers who seemed unaware of questionable fundraising practices. ActBlue claimed that retirees had made large donations, but the retirees denied it. They also uncovered discussions about dummy accounts, FEC filing data, and other internal matters. Security was tight, and when confronted, ActBlue employees denied any wrongdoing. The situation escalated when security guards called the police on the reporters, who were eventually allowed to stay on public property. OMG urged viewers to check their own donations on the FEC website and encouraged insiders to come forward with information.

An undercover reporter attended a fundraiser for Anthony Brown, who ran for Congress in 2016, organized by pro-Israel advocate David Oaks. Attendees discussed how money pressures congressmen and senators, and that bundling contributions is the best way to buy influence. The current contribution limit is $2,700 per person, but bundling contributions from 50-100 people can total a quarter million dollars. Oaks described a similar event in New York with Wall Street donors focused on Iran. Donors may hand the congressman an envelope with credit cards to swipe. The group avoids disclosure requirements by collecting credit card information and turning it over directly to the candidate, instead of depositing the money into an account. This way, campaign finance reports only show individual contributions without revealing the bundling. A minimum commitment of $10,000 over two cycles is expected. Giving money to another person at the meeting so they can donate more than the $2,700 limit would be illegal campaign contribution laundering.

Sam Antar downloaded all the information from the New York City Board of Elections website, a 27,000 row spreadsheet taking up over 500 pages. "not a single donation came from, like, a regular person." He ran it through Excel's tools and three AIs and came to the same conclusion. "70 of them or so were not attributed to bundlers and the total from those lines was zero. Zero. Zero." The money goes right to New York City votes who keeps track. "Was it bundled money?" Based on the data, not a single dime ends up in his campaign coffers as a result of all of his appearances. "It's all bundled money." Four and a half million people on social media between YouTube, Instagram, Twitter X, X Twitter, and Facebook and whatever; they all tell you go to the mom Danny campaign website and you donate. "His bundler raised 94% of the $1,700,000 that he raised from his base" and another $1,900,000 from PACS. "This is not a grassroots candidate." "His bundle... raised 35% of overall bungler funds attributed to all candidates across the city, and he was 10 times more than the second place bundle."

FEC discovered suspicious donation patterns from unemployed individuals, with large sums donated through multiple transactions to ActBlue and Democrat campaigns. Investigator Tony Saruga found 400,000 new ActBlue accounts in 30 days. Harris campaign emails requested small donations using fear tactics, including fake names in their lists. The goal appears to be creating a facade of grassroots support while potentially funneling larger sums through these transactions.

FEC data reveals senior citizens making thousands of contributions to political causes. James O'Keefe investigates residents donating large sums through ActBlue, questioning if they are victims or participants in a potential money laundering scheme. Visiting homes, O'Keefe confronts donors like Cindy Ngo and Garland Riggs, who deny making numerous contributions listed under their names. O'Keefe urges citizen journalists to uncover similar cases nationwide. Lawsuits have been filed, and O'Keefe encourages others to investigate. Visit okeithmediagroup.com for more information.

Senior citizens in the US are donating thousands of times a year, raising questions about potential money laundering schemes. A group of citizen journalists investigated these donations, finding individuals who allegedly made numerous contributions. They visited some donors, like Cindy Ngo, who denied making such large donations. Another donor, Garland Riggs, also denied making thousands of contributions. The investigation aims to uncover whether these donors are victims or participants in a possible scheme. The journalist encourages others to investigate by knocking on doors and asking questions. The data was provided by citizen journalists from Election Watch in Maryland.

FEC data shows some senior citizens across the US have been donating thousands of times per year, with names and addresses attached to over $200,000 in contributions. The report says it knocked on the doors of some of these donors to corroborate the received data and is “wondering if these donors are victims of what appears to be a money laundering scheme.” Cindy Noe of Annapolis, Maryland, is described as having allegedly contributed over 1,000 times in 2022 to ACT Blue, totaling $18,849.77—presented as requiring three donations per day every day for the year. When approached, the transcript shows an exchange in which the interviewer asks if Cindy Noe donated to ActBlue, saying, “You did donate to ActBlue, right?” The response given is: “Once in a while.” The interviewer references the amount: “About eighteen thousand eight hundred and fifty dollars.” The response given is: “No, I don’t think so.” The interviewer then asks whether people are using Cindy’s address: “No people are using your address?” The response is: “I don’t think so.”

An individual describes a "magic mortgage" scheme involving ActBlue officers. When someone buys a house, a $200,000 mortgage is followed by a $200,000,000 mortgage through a title company, obscuring the lender's identity. These officers are allegedly spread across the nation. The speaker suggests this scheme may funnel money into campaigns via small-dollar donations or other means. They claim this architecture was set up by Barack Obama to spread cash around the country and fund candidates. The Arizona Democrat Party's fundraising decline is cited as a potential example. The speaker emphasizes this is alleged wholesale fraud, and the findings have been turned over to US Attorneys, the IRS criminal division, and the FBI for further investigation.

Investigative reporters uncover discrepancies in campaign donations through political action committees (PACs) WinRed and ActBlue. They visit the top political donor in New Jersey, Alexandra Gina, who denies making thousands of small donations totaling $154,000. The reporters find that both PACs may be funneling dark money into campaigns, with Democrats benefiting more. They also mention Swiss billionaire Hans Urs Weis contributing millions to progressive causes. The reporters call for accountability and urge viewers to review their own contributions for irregularities. They plan to continue investigating and invite viewers to join their training webinar to become citizen journalists. The concise transcript highlights campaign donation discrepancies, potential dark money involvement, and the call for viewer participation in uncovering the truth.

Discoveries on fec.gov revealed suspicious donation patterns from supposedly unemployed individuals. Four unemployed donors made nearly $198,000 in donations through thousands of transactions. They donated to various Democrat campaigns and PACs, raising questions about the source of their funds. Investigator Tony Saruga found over 400,000 new ActBlue accounts created in 30 days, with Harris campaign emails urging small donations. Fake names were inserted into ActBlue lists, showing up in official emails, suggesting a potential scam to create a facade of grassroots support while funneling larger sums.

An investigation reveals potential discrepancies in campaign donations attributed to unwitting donors through platforms like WinRed and ActBlue. FEC data suggests individuals are donating large sums via numerous small transactions, raising questions about hidden agendas. One New Jersey resident, Alexandra Gina, is listed as donating over $154,000 in three years through thousands of transactions, which she denies. The investigation found that WinRed and ActBlue did not respond to requests for clarification. The report also highlights the influence of foreign money in US elections, mentioning Swiss billionaire Hans Georg Wiese's significant contributions to progressive causes. The team encourages viewers to check their own FEC records for irregularities and report findings. They are also hosting a webinar to train citizen journalists.

FEC data reveals that some senior citizens in the U.S. have made thousands of donations, with one individual reportedly contributing over $200,000 through 12,000 transactions in three years. Investigators visited these donors to verify the data, questioning whether they were victims of a money laundering scheme or complicit in it. Many denied making the reported contributions, with one woman claiming she only donates small amounts occasionally. Another individual, Garland Riggs, was surprised to learn that over 31,000 contributions totaling $230,000 were attributed to his name. The investigation encourages citizen journalism, urging others to ask questions and gather information about these suspicious donations. James O'Keefe reports from Annapolis, Maryland, highlighting the need for transparency in political contributions.

OMG discovered potential money laundering at ActBlue's secret meeting in a Boston hotel. Donors found their names associated with large donations they didn't make. Security was tight, and police were called when journalists asked questions. ActBlue staff avoided answering about questionable donations. OMG urges people to check FEC donations for accuracy and invites insiders to share information. Join their citizen journalism efforts to uncover the truth about ActBlue.

The discussion centers on political criticism and backlash tied to Israel. One participant says Americans can be criticized heavily about their own government—citing being “brutal” on presidents from Barack Obama to Joe Biden and also being critical of Donald Trump “where he deserves it too”—but claims a different standard applies when criticism involves Israel. They describe a “hard no” response from a faction of the conservative movement, where critics are labeled “grifter[s]” and attacked by “bots nonstop online,” alongside an “apparatus” that “immediately turns on you.” They ask who is effectively trying to “veto” or block efforts by figures such as Tom Massie, podcasters, and people raising issues on social media. The other participant argues that the groups involved “entirely support Israel,” and points to Israel-related funding and campaigns, saying they have to set aside “seven hundred and fifty million dollars in a propaganda campaign” and references hiring Brad Parscale. They say Brad Parscale runs Salem Media and “had to register as a foreign agent for a foreign government.” They also claim that during the Trump reelection effort, “millions of dollars had disappeared from the campaign,” and that Parscale was “in charge of it,” implying it is “kind of shocking” and “odd” that he would be responsible for missing money and later overseeing other efforts. They add that it was “so significant” that he “had no choice,” and note that Parscale is “upfront about being a paid—at least… about being” something related to the arrangement being discussed. The conversation then returns to criticizing Israel’s government and foreign policy. One participant says it is “fine to be critical of Israel,” arguing that having “an issue with Israel’s foreign policy” or claiming Israel “getting us into a war” should not automatically make someone an “anti-Semite” or “a bad person.” The transcript ends mid-sentence with “I question the.”

FEC data reveals that some senior citizens across the US are listed as donating thousands of times per year, with some allegedly linked to over $200,000 in contributions. I'm James O'Keefe with OMG in Annapolis, Maryland, investigating these claims. I went to people's houses to ask them about these donations. I spoke with one man who told me to ask Donald Trump. I spoke to Cindy Noe, whose records indicate she donated over a thousand times to ActBlue in one year, totaling almost $19,000. She said she only donates $5 occasionally. Another individual was listed as making 18,000 contributions totaling $170,000, which they denied. I called Garland Riggs, who was listed as making over 31,000 contributions. He denied this. I encourage you to knock on doors and ask your neighbors if they've donated to ActBlue or Biden for President and if they know how many donations were made in their name.

Both the DNC and RNC target corporations and elites while a "money reality" exists in politics. Suites costing $500+ are occupied by those they claim to regulate, looking down on the "soldiers" who volunteer time for their parties. These attendees pay significant sums for access, while parties receive gifted hotel suites. Presidential campaign spending has risen from $300 million in 2000 to a projected $10 billion. Harris has raised hundreds of millions recently, some from small donors. Legal money, post-Citizens United, is now the most dangerous in politics. Promises to fight against this system are questionable, as evidenced by Trump's million-dollar-a-plate fundraisers.

Cohen made a $130,000 illegal contribution to the Trump campaign, exceeding the limit. This was done on behalf of his client, the candidate, as a coordinated effort to influence the election by keeping it secret.

Investigative reporters have discovered that both political action committees, ActBlue and WinRed, may be involved in a scheme where unwitting donors are making numerous small donations throughout the year. The top donor in New Jersey, Alexandra Gina, denies donating as much as the Federal Election Commission (FEC) claims. The FEC data shows Gina allegedly donated $154,000 in the past three years, but she disputes this. The FEC also found that Gina made three separate 5¢ donations to Republican causes. When contacted, neither WinRed nor the FEC provided explanations for these discrepancies. The reporters suspect that dark money is being funneled into campaigns, potentially even from foreign sources. They encourage viewers to investigate their own contributions and report any irregularities. The reporters are hosting a training webinar for aspiring journalists to join their efforts.

James O’Keefe and OMG report on FEC data indicating some senior citizens in the U.S. have donated large volumes of money, with examples of individuals attached to as much as $217,000 in contributions across 12,000 payments over three years, sometimes under variations of names and addresses. The team says the data, drawn from FEC and state records and organized by a group called election watch in Maryland, shows many contributions processed through ActBlue and groups related to political causes. In Annapolis, Maryland, O’Keefe notes the data and asks whether these donors are victims of or participants in a money-laundering scheme, or if they actually engaged in the activity—suggesting actions such as making phone calls or door-knocking to investigate. He describes the process as easy for citizen reporters: bring a microphone and camera (even an iPhone), knock on doors, and call donors to verify. He demonstrates by showing a chart of committees earmarked to receive donations via ActBlue and questions whether the donors are being duped or complicit. During on-camera interactions, he and his team cite a donor with 3,000 contributions totaling $32,000 at a given address, asking the person if she’s aware of such activity. The individual responds that they donated occasionally and not at the stated levels. They also reference the FEC record indicating donations to ActBlue and Biden for President, and question the accuracy of the donor’s claimed totals, while the donor denies making such large-scale contributions and expresses confusion over the situation. One profile highlighted is Cindy Ngo of Annapolis, Maryland, claimed to have contributed over 1,000 times in 2022 for $18,849.77 to ActBlue, which would require daily donations, a claim the interviewee disputes. The donor states they donate occasionally, around $5 at a time, and says they do not believe such frequent contributions were made from her address. The team remarks that the pattern is inconsistent with the donor’s response, noting that the frequency implied by the data does not match the donor’s account. Another profile discussed is Garland Riggs, described as an elderly donor with 31,073 individual contributions under his address, totaling about $230,000. When contacted, Riggs denies donating to ActBlue; he suggests his wife may have donated, but says the amounts are nowhere near the figures alleged. O’Keefe explains he will email the donor the information, including the FEC records, and asks whether Riggs believes someone else might be using his name. The report outlines a method for field inquiries: identify a target by name, confirm whether donations were made in their name and how many times, then ask follow-up questions such as whether they donated 3,000 times. The team emphasizes obtaining comment before publication and notes they have dozens of other homes in Maryland and hundreds nationwide matching the profile. They announce plans to continue calling and visiting more individuals. O’Keefe closes by noting the data came from election watch in Maryland, Gibson Group, and Maryland Twenty Twenty Watch, which have submitted a lawsuit to the U.S. District Court of Maryland regarding the grievance, and invites others to participate as citizen journalists. He directs viewers to okeefmediagroup.com for information on how to pursue similar stories.

Our undercover reporter explored how funding for congressmen is secured. David Oaks, a prominent pro-Israel advocate, invited Tony to a fundraising event, then called him to discuss details. The group is described as a leading and wealthy donor network in DC; Oaks emails a list of the people the group supports and notes that “this is the biggest ad on the global group and the that’s the wealthiest in DC.” The fundraiser took place in a wealthy Washington suburb. “The feedback group, it makes a difference. It really, really does. It’s the best bang for your buck, and the networking is phenomenal. Congressmen and senators don't do anything unless you pressure them,” a participant says. Speaker 2 explains the current contribution limit: “From any person to a candidate is $2,700.” They outline how to increase influence by coordinating many donors: “if you really want to add punch to that type of buying of favors, you get 50 or 100 people together at an event like this, all chipping in $2,700 and then you bundle it all together and hand over the total amount to the lawmaker.” This can total “anywhere up to a quarter million dollars,” enabling a group with aligned demands to effectively buy access. The fundraiser was for Anthony Brown, who ran for Congress in November 2016. One speaker claims, “This is direct spending. Brown's gonna use that.” Another adds, “He's actually saying, we're buying this, these office holders. And that's the point. We're chipping in all this money so we can hand over 100,000 or 200,000 to the office holders so we can buy them.” Oaks recalls a similar New York event with Wall Street donors. A participant comments, “In New York, we're just Taliban. We don't ask a goddamn thing about the Palestinians. You know why? Because it's a tiny issue. That's why.” The process involves backroom meetings with congressmen, where donors’ goals are stated, and donors like Jeff and Calvin—worth about $250,000,000—are highlighted. One attendee describes handing the lawmaker an envelope with 20 credit cards, each usable for a thousand dollars. There is a disclosure law intended to reveal potential money laundering in events like this: funds earmarked must disclose who showed up and how much each contributed to the lawmaker. The group putting on the event has no name and is described as an ad hoc political group; it pools money for legal reasons. The group avoids earmarking law by not taking money into its own account and then handing it to the candidate; instead, it collects credit card information and turns it over directly to the candidate. Campaign finance reports would only show individual donors, with no record that they acted together as a bundling group or that they attended the event. What would be visible is that person A gave $2,700, person B gave $2,700, and so on. In New York, the arrangement is described as a $10 over two cycles minimum commitment; some donors give more. If one donor gives $5,000 and another contributes $100, totaling $5,100, they acknowledge that would be illegal due to laundering of campaign contributions; the limit applies to the individual, and laundering through others is not permitted.

Peter reveals findings related to U.S. Senator Tammy Baldwin's campaign, indicating potential criminal money laundering. Data from the FEC shows numerous identical contributions made by individuals across the country at the exact same time, suggesting the use of computer bots to funnel money into her campaign. This method, referred to as "smurfing," appears to be a new technique alongside existing methods that involve both federal and state-level contributions. Peter explains that while some contributions are visible in the FEC database, others are hidden at the state level, requiring extensive data collection for comparison. He emphasizes that these tactics have not changed and are still being used to support Baldwin's campaign, similar to methods seen in other political campaigns.

The video reveals suspicious donation patterns on fec.gov, with unemployed individuals making numerous small donations totaling tens of thousands of dollars to ActBlue and various Democrat campaigns. Investigator Tony Saruga found over 400,000 new ActBlue accounts created in 30 days, with the Harris campaign sending emails asking for $1 donations using fear tactics. Fake donors were inserted into ActBlue lists, showing the campaign's desperation for small donations to potentially facilitate a larger scam.

FEC data indicates that numerous senior citizens in the US are donating thousands of times annually, with some names and addresses linked to over $200,000 in contributions. We visited some of these individuals to verify the data, suspecting a potential money laundering operation. For example, Cindy Noe of Annapolis, Maryland, purportedly donated to ActBlue over 1,000 times in 02/2022, totaling $18,849.77, which equates to approximately three donations daily. When approached, Cindy acknowledged donating to ActBlue occasionally, but denied donating $18,850 or the possibility of her address being used for such purposes.