Please help spread this as fast as we can and as far and wide as we must. It feels good to have the upper hand finally........lets do all we can to keep it :)
By JB Williams
The Obama campaign is reporting that it raised a record $181 million in the month of September alone. According to campaign FEC filings for September, the money came from 1.8 million individual donors, many overseas, and over 500,000 of whom had never donated before.
Did YOU donate to Obama? You might have, just follow the trail… The same thing happened in September of 2008. We later learned that most of that huge cash infusion came from foreign countries, in small denominations, just like September 2012, averaging $53 each from millions of undisclosed donors, most of them abroad.
There are Federal Laws making it “illegal” to accept “foreign campaign contributions,” yet Obama just took in almost $200 million, most of it from overseas donors. The FEC must immediately investigate the source of these overseas funds.
The neat part is who those “first time donors” are… it is YOU. And it is YOU who must demand that the FEC and Secret Service immediately investigate the massive overseas funds pouring into the Obama campaign.
From the report –
“Campaigns are not required to disclose donations from individuals who gave less than $200 in a campaign cycle unless the campaign is audited. Furthermore, campaigns do not even need to keep records of those who gave less than $50. Presidential candidates are raising large amounts of money that fall under the $200 threshold and audits are rare unless a campaign accepts federal matching funds. To this date (September 26, 2012), the Romney campaign has raised $58,456,968 and the Obama campaign has raised $271,327,755 in contributions under $200 for the 2012 campaign cycle. In the 2008 presidential elections, the Obama campaign raised $335,139,233 in donations under $200.”
A glimpse at campaign finance security –
Given the state-of-the art digital sophistication of the President’s re-election campaign—including social media, micro-targeting and data-mining—its online donation system contains at least three major security vulnerabilities:
1. The absence of the industry-standard CVV and unknown use of AVS anti-fraud security for online credit card donations
2. The presence of a branded, major third party-owned website (Obama.com) redirects its 68% foreign traffic to a campaign donation page
3. Active foreign solicitation using indiscriminate email solicitations and exposure to social media
Specifically: Obama Campaign Lacks the Industry-Standard Level Of Credit Card Security For Donations, But Uses It For Merchandise Purchases: To purchase Obama campaign merchandise, the campaign requires buyers to enter their credit card CVV security code, but does not require the credit card security code to be entered when making an online campaign donation (see page 61). By GAI’s estimates, the Obama campaign’s failure to utilize industry-standard protections potentially costs the campaign millions in extra processing fees. (with purpose)
The BIG Picture is Massive Fraud
There are reasons why the Obama campaign would use CVV code security technology for merchandising. In short, the CVV code on the back of your credit or debit card is there to ensure that the individual using the card is you, or someone authorized by you to use the card.
Most Credit Card fraud does not happen with a stolen card, but rather a stolen card number. Because the fraudster does not actually possess the card, but only the card number and expiration date for the card, they will not have the CVV code on the back of the card in most cases.
When the campaign is selling and shipping merchandise, they use CVV code technology to secure each transaction before shipping merchandise.
But when nothing is being shipped, as in the case of campaign donations, they have CVV code technology turned off. Why? Because, the transactions coming from overseas on stolen card numbers, will not have the CVV code. They also won’t have AVS information, which the Obama campaign also turned off on its donations account. They are stolen card numbers, most of them from Americans.
Address Verification, (AVS) like CVV code verification, are industry standards for blocking fraudulent online transactions. Why has the Obama campaign turned off both of those security functions for donations, but not for merchandise orders?
With these security functions turned on, the system would DECLINE transactions as “fraudulent” if they were missing a matching CVV code. So, to allow “fraudulent” donations on stolen card numbers, they would have to turn off the CVV security function, thereby allowing the “fraudulent” transactions to APPROVE without any CVV code match.
This raises three obvious questions?
1. Who are these individual donors? (Including via bundlers?)
2. Why are we allowing foreign donations from overseas?
3. How many of those donations are made on stolen U.S. card numbers?
Only a full scale investigation into the massive donations from September 2012 (and 2008) can answer these and other questions. However, what we already know is this…
· Obama is not supposed to accept any foreign campaign donations, but he is.
· The Obama campaign is familiar with and using CVV code technology on merchandise, but not on campaign donations.
· Without the CVV code, fraudulent donations can be made with stolen card numbers and they are.
· The CVV code technology was intentionally turned off for Obama donations only.
· The Secret Service is responsible for investigating and prosecuting Credit Card Fraud.
The Secret Service must immediately investigate the huge sums pouring into the Obama campaign from overseas donors, looking closely at the campaigns misuse of CVV code technology to open the flood gates for fraudulent transactions.
The Obama Campaign used these same tactics in 2008, for more than $200 million in foreign unsecure donations from undisclosed donors.
Because they are committing fraud in small denominations, $25-$50 each, most American cardholders won’t even notice the charge on their statement. Even if they do notice on their next billing statement and issue a chargeback, it won’t be until after the election is over.
Meanwhile, Obama can take in hundreds of millions in foreign fraudulent transactions billed to stolen U.S. card numbers and use those funds to win re-election. By the time people figure out they donated to Obama when their statement arrives, the election will be over.
To raise this issue with Secret Service, contact your closest Field Office.
Contact the FEC here and demand an immediate investigation into Obama’s foreign campaign contributions.
Whether or not the average reader can grasps the gravity of this fraud or not, I can assure you that the Secret Service and F.B.I. fully understand. They know exactly why someone would turn off these standard security features. They know that it represents an intentional opening of the flood gates for fraudulent online donations.
What the people need to know is what these Law Enforcement groups are going to do about it and if they are going to do it, before another election is stolen by fraud?
Are they loyal to America? – Or, to the Commander-in-thief?
I've written the Inspector General, next the Secret Service. I added in the communication that we the American people will be watching to see if IG and Secret Service will be protecting us or the President. We aren't backing down and this election something WILL be done.
PUTTING IT THREW JB!!!
Secret service in Jacksonville says they have no ability to investigate any credit card farud. It is not in their ability to do so.
READ HERE - http://www.secretservice.gov/criminal.shtml
You should so advise your local Secret Service office. Have them read their own mandates.
Surely using the internet to circumvent US Laws woudl be a crime that this secret Service task force would act upon. TEh SS does operate in foreign countries to stop other types of fraud like counterfitting US currency. Subverting the government of our country is at least as critical as defending the dollar from foreign attack.
On October 26, 2001, President Bush signed into law H.R. 3162, the USA PATRIOT Act. The U.S. Secret Service was mandated by this Act to establish a nationwide network of Electronic Crimes Task Forces (ECTFs). The concept of the ECTF network is to bring together not only federal, state and local law enforcement, but also prosecutors, private industry and academia. The common purpose is the prevention, detection, mitigation and aggressive investigation of attacks on the nation's financial and critical infrastructures.
The Secret Service's ECTF and Electronic Crimes Working Group initiatives prioritize investigative cases that involve electronic crimes. These initiatives provide necessary support and resources to field investigations that meet any one of the following criteria:
Please see the following links for information on the ECTF program and on the individual task forces and working groups.
U.S. Secret Service Electronic Crimes Task Forces
Well done, thanks for posting!
The Secret Service has always handled electronic fraud, including both cardholder and merchant credit card fraud. The Patriot Act only tightened that authority and responsibility and in fact, added new crimes to situations like this. Obama's campaign has broken dozens of laws here, including money laundering, credit card fraud, campaign fraud and even homeland security laws under the Patriot Act.
This is a no-brainer for the Secret Service. If a retail merchant did this at even a $50,000 level, the Secret Service would be on their door step with a no-knock arrest warrant. If they refuse to pursue this case, we know where the Secret Service now stands.
Since the release of this column, additional damning information has come available. I have posted ALL of it online here - http://www.scribd.com/doc/109477144/Secret-Service-Must-Investigate...
The President has come under fire for the shoddy verification proce... his campaign does for donations.
In light of this Newsweek story about the Illegal-Donor loophole with ... A while back, among conservatives, it was even a story that he was doing this shoddy credit card verification for overseas donors.
So, after talking with some lawyers about the process, etc. I donated to Barack Obama. Sort of.
It is rare that I do something where I feel the need to talk to lawyers first. But giving money to Barack Obama was one of those times.
I didn’t actually do it. I made up a name, made up a passport number, made up an address in Russia — hell I made everything up except my credit card number and expiration date.
Everything was bull**** except the actual credit card number and expiration date. Everything.
Go try that with Target or Amazon or Apple or Mitt Romney’s campaign and see what happens. Here’s a hint: it’d get rejected.
When the zip code does not match, it would get rejected.
When the name on the card does not match, it will probably get rejected.
When nothing matches, it will get rejected.
Barack Obama’s campaign processed my very generous $5.00 donation.
For several days my bank listed it as processing.
Then this is where the anti-climactic end to my story comes. The donation ultimately did not go through after three days of being listed as “processing.” There was no explanation.
Had the Obama campaign turned on basic verification, my transaction would have been rejected immediately. Instead, it lingered for a few days before being rejected.
I do not know what processes the Obama campaign employs to weed these out. It actually appeared, based on the way it processed for several days, that the bank stopped it, not that Barack Obama stopped it. For the liberals saying my donation did not go through so there should be no problem — here’s the problem. The Obama campaign processed the donation. It was Bank of America that stopped it, not Team Obama. Team Obama let it be processed, something that would not have happened in Romney’s campaign or most any retailer in the nation.
I do not know why they chose not to use the credit verification value system (CVV). I am glad, ultimately, that my donation was rejected. But I wonder if I had put in other data that seemed more credible — not a ridiculous fake name, a passport number of just multiple zeros, etc. would it have been rejected?
It sure seems the easiest, front line defense to avoid these sorts of transactions — a basic CVV check for credit cards — should be the default setting for campaigns. In Barack Obama’s case, it wasn’t. For pre-paid cards, several people tell me the situation is even worse and the transitions most likely will go through given the security set up of the Obama campaign.
This, like his failure to make eye contact with challenges, is just another tell tale sign that something is amiss with Team Obama.
I recall a recent $7 Billion+ settlement between the nations merchants, Visa, Master Card and the member banks that issue those cards. www.waytoohigh.com
I would bet that the Credit Card issuing banks can and would do the due diligence that the Obama fraudsters will not, that is if they and their senior executives knew that they could be brought up on charges for their complicity in the commission of Patriot Act crimes and facilitating known campaign donation fraud.
Specifically, given that the banks have come under fire as of late, perhaps they should refuse CC processing from Obama's and other Democrat's WEB sites that fail to collect the CVV verification information. This would be a proactive example demonstrating that the banks care about Main Street and doing what's right to assure the integrity of our political process.
Furthermore the Credit Card processors should go back through the last several month's transactions reversing any donations that failed to include this information or that could be identified as coming from ISP's outside the USA.
Obama Campaign Scrambles to Kill Illegal Online Fundraising Story
by Wynton Hall
Earlier today, Breitbart News and myriad news agencies reported on a new 108-page investigation conducted by the Government Accountability Institute (GAI) which examines the online donation systems of the entire U.S. Congress and the two presidential candidates. The report found that 47.3% of all House and Senate donation websites do not require online donors to enter their credit card security code (officially known as a CVV, or Card Verification Value), which leaves them vulnerable to foreign and fraudulent contributions.
Governor Mitt Romney’s website requires donors to enter a credit card security code, while President Barack Obama’s does not. The GAI report also revealed that Obama.com is not owned by the president’s campaign but rather by Robert Roche, an American businessman and top Obama fundraiser living in Shanghai, China, whose company has ties to the Chinese government.
Within hours of a Newsweek article on the report’s release, the Obama campaign issued a dismissive response. The Obama campaign’s rapid-fire attack against the report did not mention Robert Roche, Obama.com, the Obama campaign’s failure to require donors to enter their CVV code, or the report’s finding that 68% of the traffic going to Obama.com originates from foreign locations.
Instead, the Obama campaign sought to dismiss report’s findings by calling the group’s president, Peter Schweizer, a “right-wing activist” who previously worked for Governor Sarah Palin.
The Obama campaign’s attempt to deflect attention away from GAI’s findings, however, is undercut by the fact that Mr. Schweizer has been a consistent critic of Gov. Romney’s refusal to release the names of his fundraising bundlers. What’s more, President Obama championed and signed into law the STOCK Act banning insider trading—an effort sparked by Peter Schweizer’s insider trading expose featured on CBS’s 60 Minutes that placed GOP Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee Rep. Spencer Bachus (R-AL) under intense scrutiny for possible insider trading.
“Protecting U.S. elections from illegal foreign donations is an effort behind which all Americans can unite,” said Mr. Schweizer in an interview with Breitbart News. “As the GAI report demonstrates, lax and antiquated Federal Election Commission (FEC) laws are woefully out of step with the technological realities of today’s digital campaigns.”
I sent to my state GOP info site...They let me know they'd have Romney campaign look into it too...
Keep pressing this...it is important!
Check these out!....