Tue. Sep 26th, 2023

This article originally appeared on Bill Bruch Substack and was republished with permission.

This is a continuation of my April 27 Substack article “More Ways They are Stealing Our Elections,” which gives specific examples showing the Federal Election Commission website (fec.gov) past years’ archived, downloaded, campaign finance donor data, changing and/or being purged on a regular basis.

This is problematic and the issues remain. If you are entering data into the fec.gov website using the exact same parameter fields to check on past years’ (2017-2022) campaign donor information, you should not see archived data constantly changing.

A system like this is ripe for manipulation and fraud. It lends itself to foster and allow for potential election interference, election tampering, electioneering, and the concealment of money laundering so that oligarchs can stay in power.

MORE EVIDENCE: Over the last several weeks, archived past years’ campaign donor contributions (using all identical filters) continues to change. E.g., between May 7 and May 8 total individual contributions dropped by 833,000, May 9 they increased by 1,279,000, May 10 they decreased by 1,936,000 (screenshots below):

Who or what is changing/purging the FEC database campaign contributions in years 2017-2022? There is no sound reason why campaign donor data for past years should be changing at all, much less changing so frequently, and by such large amounts.

Who is interfering with campaign finance data and our elections? Are the actual campaign donors giving permission for this to occur to their donations? How many of these transactions are donor identity theft and fraudulent donations?


MORE PROOF: On April 18 and May 5, 2023, a citizen researcher, using all identical filters, downloaded (exported) numerous campaign contributions that show unexplained changes in data.

We are on to them, and now this is being documented and tracked!

USING THE EXACT SAME FILTERS between 01/08/17 – 12-31-22 a female Evansville, Indiana donor’s contributions dropped from 8,438 to 1,122. From 01/08/17 – 11/13/22 (NOTE: 6 WEEKS OF DATA MISSING) her ActBlue contributions dropped from 5,437 to 0. Hmm…

See the spreadsheet below (ActBlue Count / % of ActBlue Contributions).

WE HAVE CAMPAIGN FINANCE DATA RECEIPTS: Why would 5,437 ActBlue donations completely vaporize overnight from past years’ archived data?

Are these donations fraudulent?

Are criminals covering their tracks by manipulating data in the FEC database?

James O’ Keefe (OMG) and others are finding (by going to the addresses of the donors and asking) that these donors and/or donations may not even be the real donors, but victim “Smurf Money-Mules” whose identities are being stolen, i.e., donor’s name being used fraudulently.

The FEC donor data changes show clear data manipulation, their financial contribution amounts and their frequency of donations are changing multiple times for individual donors on a regular basis for past years…

It appears that this is intentional.

These changes should not be happening.

Why is the physical FEC data changing?

Is this data manipulation being allowed by the FEC to facilitate money laundering?

What is going on with a live database system like this? Shouldn’t archived data numbers be locked in? Who are making these changes? Why are these huge discrepancies happening so frequently? Why are they allowed to exist?

Where is the accountability, quality control standards and oversight?

We are being told by FEC workers that the fec.gov website database allows for political action committees (PACs), political campaigns, political organizations and candidates to directly upload their donor information automatically to the site and the FEC DOES NOT CHECK OR VERIFY THE ACCURACY OF THE INFORMATION ONCE UPLOADED TO THE SITE.

This is a huge problem, especially given that a PAC like ActBlue DOES NOT verify up to 55% of their donors’ online credit card transactions, and DOES NOT require credit card CVC numbers to donate.

When asking FEC officials how examples like the aforementioned are possible, they have no answers or explanations and just say it is the campaign’s data, not our data, and if a problem exists then we need to file a formal complaint with the FEC.

It very much appears that the FEC policies, database and software program is set up perfectly to facilitate money laundering.

It would be hard to imagine that criminals have not been taking advantage of these vulnerabilities for decades.

Are paid bad actors covering their tracks by manipulating data in the FEC database?

Is this similar in nature as to how the election fraud cartel powers that be are manipulating the voter database elections rolls? Or how the voter rolls are being manipulated to take advantage of mail-in voting?

The evidence says that these are campaign finance law violations that facilitate money laundering. The crime is that someone or something is changing and manipulating official FEC historical campaign finance data.

The way campaign donation money is raised and spent plays a large part in who wins and who loses elections.

So if the FEC policies allow fraudulent donations, then what about the origin of the donation???

George Soros and other liberal billionaires have given millions to Left-wing groups whose alumni now fill crucial roles at the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).

Just how corrupt is the Administrative State?

Are bad actors and foreign agents taking advantage of the FEC vulnerabilities to control and swing elections?

If indeed criminals are exploiting and using the vulnerabilities of the FEC database to facilitate fraud and money laundering, we need full forensic audits of the entire fec.gov website and database.


  • Continue to identify and document archived data changes and potential donor “Smurf” Money-Mule victims via the fec.gov website (make sure all filters and search parameters are consistent).
  • Pursue and track ALL avenues for potential resolution in these matters.
  • File Formal FEC Complaints – Email: Glen@wethegoverned.com.
  • More citizen grassroots activists to take up this cause.
  • Congressional Investigations and Subpoenas.
  • The proper and necessary investigatory agency / agencies to do thorough and comprehensive forensic audits of the FEC data and filings. This may reveal or prevent RICO crimes.
  • New FEC procedures, polices and protocols to STOP fraud and abuse, campaign finance law violations, donor identity theft, money laundering, and election interference.
  • Criminals to be severely prosecuted!

The FEC is a taxpayer funded government agency. Until Congress is ready with subpoenas, perhaps Congress should contact the U.S. Government Accountable Office (GAO), for an investigation? The GAO has jurisdiction and oversight over the FEC. Their job is to examine how taxpayer dollars are spent and provide the public, Congress and federal agencies with objective, fact-based information to work more efficiently.

Also, the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) has authority to investigate matters that concern FEC personnel, programs, operations, and funds, so as to prevent and detect fraud, waste, abuse, mismanagement, and related misconduct. OIG Fraud Complaints and Hotline

If you have any idea as to how this is happening, or any plausible explanations, your feedback and comments are much appreciated.

(Bill Bruch is the WA State GOP Election Integrity Chairman, WSRP Executive Board Member, 4-Term Skagit County GOP Chairman, Citizen Journalist, Blogger, Business Owner, 2020 WA State House Representative Candidate, Former Council Member, and WA State 2016 RNC National Convention Delegate.)

The post Do Federal Election Commission Policies & Website Facilitate Money Laundering? appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Author: Jim Hoft
Source: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/05/do-federal-election-commission-policies-website-facilitate-money-laundering/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=do-federal-election-commission-policies-website-facilitate-money-laundering

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *