chess online
| From | Message | ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
 No security pleaseby Mike Flynn 8 Oct 2012 Las week, I noted that the Obama campaign was bragging that it was closing in on the 10 millionth donation to its reelection efforts. It was a clear sign that, this year, they were surpassing their record-breaking haul of on-line donations in 2008. But a blockbuster new report from the Government Accountability Institute (GAI) raises serious questions about the legality of many of the on-line donations to Obama. It appars as though the Obama Campaign has the perfect portal for illegal foreign donations (visit campaignfundingrisks.com to download the full report). The most revealing finding in the report is that the Obama campaign has chosen not to use industry-standard verification methods for its on-line contributions. In fact, the campaign has to pay higher fees to credit card companies because they don't use these methods. So, the campaign is paying millions of dollars for the privilege of not utilizing basic security procedures. Why would they do this? The clear implication is that they will reap more money without these security procedures than they would with them. Democrats are only wasteful with other people's money. To some extent, then, they are knowingly collecting on-line donations that would otherwise be rejected by basic security protocols. Hmm. |
||
|
Bombshell: Obama.com Owned by Bundler in Shanghai with Business Ties to Chinese Government by Wynton Hall 8 Oct 2012 In an explosive report set to send shockwaves through official Washington, the Government Accountability Institute (GAI) released a 108-page GAI investigation into the threat of foreign and fraudulent Internet campaign donations in U.S. federal elections (visit campaignfundingrisks.com to download the full report). Breitbart News obtained an advance copy of the bombshell report which reveals that the Obama.com website is not owned by the president’s campaign but rather by Obama bundler Robert Roche, a U.S. citizen living in Shanghai, China. Roche is the chairman of a Chinese infomercial company, Acorn International, with ties to state-controlled banks that allow it to “gain revenue through credit card transactions with Chinese banks.” There’s more. The unusual Obama.com website redirects traffic directly to a donation page on the Obama campaign’s official website, my.barackobama.com, which does not require donors to enter their credit card security code (known as the CVV code), thereby increasing the likelihood of foreign or fraudulent donations. The website is managed by a small web development firm, Wicked Global, in Maine. One of Wicked Global’s employees, Greg Dorr, lists on his LinkedIn page his additional employment with Peace Action Maine and Maine Voices for Palestinian Rights. According to the GAI report, 68 percent of all Internet traffic to Obama.com comes from foreign visitors. And still more. In 2011, Mr. Roche obtained one of the most sought-after pieces of real estate in Washington, DC: a seat at the head table for President Obama’s State Dinner for Chinese President Hu Jintao. How Roche—a man whose infomercial company hawks fitness equipment, cell phones, and breast enhancement products—landed a seat alongside Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, former President Bill Clinton, Sen. John Kerry, former President Jimmy Carter, and Chinese President Hu Jintao remains unclear. Since 2009, White House Visitor Logs list the name Robert Roche at least 19 times, despite the fact Mr. Roche’s primary residence is in China. Mr. Roche, who is originally from Chicago, is a co-chair of the Technology Initiative for the Obama campaign. According to Acorn International’s prospectus, the success of Mr. Roche’s company hinges on maintaining access to state-run media and “preferential tax treatments and subsidies” doled out by the People’s Republic of China (PRC): Our business depends on our access to TV media time to market our products and services in China….PRC law is vague and is subject to discretionary interpretation and enforcement by PRC authorities…Loss of these preferential tax treatments and subsidies could have material and adverse effects on our results of operations and financial conditions. In addition to the Obama.com redirect revelation, the Government Accountability Institute report—America the Vulnerable: Are Foreign And Fraudulent Online Contributions Influencing U.S. Elections?—exposes myriad gaping online security holes that stand to threaten the integrity of House, Senate, and presidential elections. Stay tuned to Breitbart News for continuing coverage… www.breitbart.com |
||
|
Obama |
||
|
robo-donations by Tony Lee 8 Oct 2012 The Internet and social media sites like Facebook and Twitter have democratized elections, made the world more interconnected, and allowed the velocity of information to be faster than ever before. But an extensive eight-month investigation by the Government Accountability Institute (GAI) released on Monday found these same forces can also be the greatest threat to America’s sovereignty (visit campaignfundingrisks.com to download the full report). These technologies allow foreign donors to anonymously circumvent U.S. campaign finance laws and directly influence elections by donating repeatedly to candidates. The 108-page GAI report found nearly half of Congress, both political parties and presidential candidates, and third-party fundraising groups that funnel money to political parties and candidates were vulnerable to fraudulent and foreign donations. This is a bipartisan problem potentially impacting all levels of government, as those whose organizations were found to have been vulnerable include President Barack Obama, Mitt Romney, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL), the Democratic National Committee (DNC), the Republican National Committee (RNC), and third-party groups like ActBlue, which funnels money to progressive politicians. And the report found that the website Obama.com, which is not owned by President Barack Obama's campaign but redirects to the campaign's official donation page, may make the Obama campaign the most susceptible to illicit foreign donations. Obama.com is connected to an Obama campaign bundler, Robert Roche, who is from Chicago but now lives and co-founded a corporation in China. Roche has direct ties to China's state-owned banking industry. Peter Schweizer, president of GAI, told Breitbart News the ease with which foreigners could donate to American candidates puts America’s sovereignty in peril. “Foreign donations mean that we no longer make our election decisions anymore,” Schweizer told Breitbart News. Schweizer said he had initially thought “we would find some bloggers overseas with motivation to support a presidential candidate encouraging people to make donations,” but he was “very surprised” by the study’s findings, including how easy it was for foreigners to use "robo-donation" programs that allow foreigners to potentially make thousands of small-dollar, fraudulent and automated donations to candidates. Schweizer said he “never thought” the GAI would find mysterious redirect sites like Obama.com and was “surprised how little security is required to receive online donations.” “We are basically trusting political consultants and fundraisers to do the right thing when no one is looking,” Schweizer said. The report found nearly half of Congress was vulnerable to fraudulent and foreign directions. Of the 446 House and Senate members who have an online donation page, 47.3% do not require the Card Verification Value (CVV), which is the three or four-digit security code on the back of credit cards, for internet donations. Those in Congress who are vulnerable to foreign donations can be seen at www.CampaignFundingRisks.com. “Candidates appear content with lax security, negligently inviting foreign or fraudulent cash into their campaign,” the report notes. And the Obama campaign seems to be the most content with the "lax security." The FEC requires campaigns to make their “best efforts” to collect identifying information on all contributors who donate more than $50.30 and even more specific information, such as the donor’s occupation and employer, for donations over $200. As the report notes, donations less than $50, though, fall under the “Pass-the-Hat” rule, which means campaigns can report all such donations under a lump sum and do not have to make their “best efforts” to collecting information on these small-dollar donors. Because foreigners can exploit the “Pass-the-Hat” rule, the report found that “any campaign not using these industry-standard security tools is increasing its costs and unnecessarily increasing the risk of at least two types of potential fraud": The Fraudulent High Dollar Donor(s): –the fraudulent high dollar donor is politically motivated and is seeking to avoid detection by making numerous donations below the $200 dollar threshold, over which their donation must be identified; they may seek to exceed campaign donation limits. The Unintentional Fraudster –a foreign national who is unaware of U.S. election laws but sympathetic to the campaign. Such an individual can easily end up on a campaign donation page. Given that a number of campaigns list the U.S. donation laws in an inconspicuous place on the “donate” page, it is easy to see how illegal donations can be made with no malicious intent. And the Obama campaign is most vulnerable to both types of fraudsters. For example, the study found “the Obama campaign regularly and aggressively posts solicitations for donations and campaign memorabilia on Facebook,” and “the campaign does not make clear in these postings that only U.S. citizens or permanent residents are allowed to contribute.” Fundraising solicitations from the Obama campaign have gone out to foreigners, asking them to contribute in amounts of less than $200. Similar solicitations have been posted in Arabic, Taiwanese, and Chinese on Facebook and on Middle Eastern and Asian websites. Even though the Obama campaign is touted for its technological sophistication and sites run by top Obama technology advisers use the “CVV” feature, the Obama campaign itself does not use the “CVV” feature on its donation pages -- even though it does use the feature on the merchandise pages where it sells campaign merchandise. This means someone who donates $2,500 to the campaign online has to go through less security than someone who goes online to buy an Obama campaign mug. “This creates a security risk that is compounded by the considerable foreign interest in President Obama’s political history, personal story, and views,” the report notes. And according to the study, BarackObama.com, the campaign’s main website, receives approximately 43% of its traffic from foreign IP addresses. In addition, popular websites touting Obama’s campaign and linking to its donation page have been found in places like China, Azerbaijan, Vietnam, the Netherlands, Italy, Japan, Norway, Egypt, Hong Kong, and South Korea. The report notes that not using the CVV feature “is quite possibly costing the campaign millions of dollars in additional fees,” but the campaign is still not using it. Perhaps this is so because the Obama campaign has benefited from donations slipping through the cracks in the past. In 2008, the report discovered that an individual using the name “Doodad Pro” made at least 791 contributions totaling $19,065 to the Obama campaign while others named “Good Will,” “Test Person” from “Some Place, UT,” “gjtjtjtjtjtjr, AP,” and “QWERTTYYU” also contributed to the campaign. The most interesting -- or suspicious -- site is Obama.com, which the campaign strangely does not own. According to the report, nearly 68% of internet traffic to Obama.com comes from foreign locations. And the website is connected to Robert Roche, who lives in China and co-founded a Chinese company called Acorn International. Roche, the report found, made 19 visits to the White House since 2009, including being seated at the head table during a State dinner with Chinese president Hu Jintao in 2011. Unlike the Obama campaign, the Romney campaign website uses the "CVV" feature but it is not without vulnerabilities. For instance, Romney's campaign also has Facebook and Twitter accounts in Arabic that give off the impression they are associated with the Romney campaign. These accounts link to the Romney campaign’s page and are presumably for a foreign audience. In addition, the report found some of Romney’s top bundlers, like Akin Gump's Tom Loeffler, have lobbied for foreign governments like Saudi Arabia. Since 1980, Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos, the Chinese government, powerful Indonesian families, foreign criminal gangs, and the Turkish government have tried to influence American officials through campaign donations. Turkish government officials, the report notes, once bragged about sending hundreds of thousands of dollars in “un-itemized contributions” to then Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert’s campaign between 1996 and 2000 and the government of Pakistan has shuttled campaign donations through intermediaries to presidential candidates and members of Congress who sat on the Foreign Affairs Committee, such as Congressman Dan Burton. With the internet, foreigners can now attempt to influence American officials anonymously and conveniently -- with the click of a mouse. According to the study, influential members of Congress had websites that made them vulnerable to illicit foreign donations. For instance, Rep. Ilena Ros-Lehtinen, Chairman of the House International Affairs Committee, had a campaign website that prior to May 1, 2012 did not require the CVV to contribute to her campaign. Though there was no evidence of illicit campaign contributions, her website was vulnerable to them. The study also found that during Sen. Marco Rubio's 2010 senate run, Rubio's campaign did not require the CVV from his online contributors and foreign websites, including many in South America, often featured videos that urged viewers to "donate" to Rubio's campaign. One potential reason for Rubio's popularity abroad on websites was the idea of "ethnic solidarity" among Hispanics willing to support a rising star of the same heritage. The report also noted foreigners can also donate to third-party organizations on both sides of the aisle that funnel money to political candidates. The GAI study acknowledged “by design, social media’s expansive and viral nature disseminates information, ideas, and causes,” and as a result, “social media is difficult to control, and indeed should not be controlled.” “Campaigns need to be aware that the age of social media is an age where donation requests go viral, reaching the furthest corners of the world,” the report notes. “Failure to employ industry standard security and transparent accountability is almost an invitation to foreign money to inject itself into federal campaigns.” The United States has laws against foreign campaign donations to protect its sovereignty and, in January 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously upheld these laws banning foreign contributions were constitutional. The GAI report recommends election officials: •Integrate safeguards to limit the solicitation of money from foreigners by requiring donors with foreign IP addresses to provide proof of U.S. citizenship before they can proceed to the donate page •Immediately require campaigns to use industry-standard anti-fraud security technologies including, but not limited to, the Card Verification Value (CVV) and a rigorous Address Verification System (AVS) •Immediately require all campaigns to retain and disclose identifying information on all online campaign contributions, including those falling under the $200 nondisclosure threshold currently allowed under federal law •Address the threat of "Robo-Donations": The absence of industry-standard anti-fraud credit card security features render campaigns more vulnerable to so-called “robo-donations.” Robo-donations are large numbers of small, automated donations made through the Internet to evade FEC reporting requirements. Schweizer, president of GAI, put a particular emphasis on the "robo-donations" that "can literally make a thousand small contributions under different names to fall below the disclosure thresholds." These "robo-donations" essentially allow foreigners to threaten America's sovereignty and potentially undermine its elections, which is why Schweizer said it is "absolutely essential" to mandate more disclosure and credit card security for campaign donations. “Amazon.com uses more credit card security for online book purchases than many federal candidates accepting $2,000 campaign donations via credit card," Schweizer said. "To protect the integrity of U.S. elections, that must change." www.breitbart.com |
||
|
Oops they got screen captured before scrubbing by Wynton Hall 9 Oct 2012 With a new Government Accountability Institute (GAI) report highlighting the threat of foreign online campaign donations making a buzz throughout the Beltway, Breitbart News has discovered blog entries on President Obama’s official website that highlight the pervasiveness of the problem. Just last week, a Canadian woman writing on President Obama’s official campaign website claims she made a campaign donation to the Obama campaign during the last election and that she intends to do so this time as well—a clear violation of U.S. election laws: “I had donated to the original campaign and will again,” she writes. “I would also give my vote but alas I am a Canadian… but am a staunch supporter of the Obama-Biden Team.” The Obama blog has since deleted all comments on the thread, but not before Breitbart News screen captured them. In another entry, a supporter comforts a noncitizen lamenting the fact they cannot vote or donate directly to Obama. In lieu of contributing to Obama, the consoler tells the foreigner, they should instead make a donation to the Democratic National Committee—an act that is illegal for noncitizens. “You may not be able to donate directly to the president’s re-election campaign,” writes the sympathetic woman, “but you CAN donate to the Democratic National Committee—which in turn uses a lot of that money to support the president’s re-election. Please consider donating to the DNC.” The Obama blog has since deleted all comments in this thread as well. Are these postings the duplicitous work of Romney supporters pretending to be Obama backers? Or just the postings of misinformed Obama supporters unfamiliar with U.S. election laws? The anonymous nature of the Internet makes it hard to say for sure. “That’s the point of our 108-page report,” said GAI President Peter Schweizer in an interview with Breitbart News. “The world of online campaign contributions is still the Wild West. Federal Election Commission laws have not kept up with technology. All that’s needed is a simple pop-up for foreign website visitors that asks individuals abroad to enter their military ID or Passport number. It’s not a perfect solution, but it’s a start.” The GAI report, titled America the Vulnerable: Are Foreign and Fraudulent Online Campaign Contributions Influencing U.S. Elections?, also includes screenshots of the Obama and Romney campaigns posting in Arabic to foreign Facebook accounts that demonstrate how easily donation solicitations to non-citizens—again, a violation of U.S. election laws—can occur with just the click of a mouse. “Bottom line: we are live in an iPod world with jukebox campaign laws,” said Mr. Schweizer. “It’s up to our leaders in Washington to update campaign laws to the dangers that come with our pixelated political reality.” www.breitbart.com |
Log in 
