EX CIA EXPERT: OBAMA TOOK MILLIONS IN ILLEGAL FOREIGN DONATIONS

This should come as no surprise. Surprising is the American public's ignorance of this matter.

A Newsmax investigation of Obama/Biden campaign contributors, undertaken in conjunction with a private investigative firm headed by a former CIA operations officer, has identified 118 donors who appear to lack U.S. citizenship.

Some of these “red flag” donors work for foreign governments; others have made public statements declaring that they are citizens of Cameroun, Nigeria, Pakistan, Canada, and other countries.

A Newsmax sampling of about 3,400 donors also found hundreds more who showed “yellow flags” such as not having used a Social Security number or a known U.S. address. Most U.S.-born citizens are issued Social Security numbers at birth or by the time they enter kindergarten.

Under federal law, only U.S. citizens or permanent residents may donate to federal political campaigns. It is illegal for the campaigns to accept money knowingly from foreign donors.

In addition to the donations the campaign has disclosed, however, it has taken an unprecedented $218 million from donors whose names it is keeping secret, according to FEC spokesman Robert Biersack.

That money came from individuals who in theory never passed the threshold of $200, the limit the FEC set for public disclosure of a donor’s name and place of residence, so there is no way of knowing how much foreign money could be included in that amount.

Newsmax retained the services of former CIA operations officer Frederick W. Rustmann Jr. and a team of international forensic accounting experts to comb through Obama’s donor list to identify those who apparently aren’t U.S. citizens or residents. Rustmann, a 24 year veteran field officer, operates CTC International Group Ltd., a West Palm Beach, Fla., firm that provides business intelligence services and analysis.

Using sophisticated Internet search tools, fee-based data bases, and other public records, CTC attempted to identify Social Security numbers and U.S. addresses connected to the Obama donors. Most of these donors gave obvious overseas addresses when they made their donations, but the Obama campaign had no security screen to detect them.

“Hillary and McCain demanded proof of citizenship of all their donors,” Rustmann said. “Obama did not, so he benefitted by receiving an enormous amount of money from foreign donors who wanted to influence the U.S. election process.”

Rustmann and his investigative team expressed “high suspicions” that 118 donors flagged as “red” were not U.S. citizens.

“That’s all we can say for certain, because it’s difficult to prove citizenship with no database that lists citizens,” Rustmann said.

Typical is Victor A. of Lagos, Nigeria, who gave $500 to the campaign in May. In the FEC database, his address is listed as Ikoyi, NA. But a closer look at the actual itemized receipts filed by the campaign shows that he declared his address as 9e Awori Street Dolphin Estate, Lagos, Nigeria.

A survey of the Obama donor base returns 8,794 donations from individuals who gave their state as “NA.” They included donors from Bangalore, India; London; Dubai, United Arab Emirates; Lagos, Nigeria; and Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

Thousands more gave state abbreviations that, combined with the city addresses they listed, clearly referred to foreign countries. Examples include IT (Italy), FR (France), GR (Greece), NZ (New Zealand), JP (Japan), GA (Gaza).

Another 2,372 donors gave their state of residence as “ZZ,” with cities including Moscow, Barcelona, Beirut, London, Lausanne, Singapore, Hagatna, Gunma-Ken, Buelach, Shanghai, Geneva, Prague, Aichi-Gun, Kiev, Hong Kong, and others.

The pace of foreign donations and other questionable fundraising practices has increased during the past few weeks, even as Obama campaign spokesmen say they have closed loopholes on their Web site and changed the credit-card authorization procedures that have allowed such donations. The Federal Election Commission had flagged 16,639 potential foreign donations as of Oct. 21 that brought in $5,249,263.96 to the campaign.

CREDIT CARD EXPERT EXAMINES THE DEPTHS OF OBAMA CAMPAIGN'S FRAUD

This is from a reader at Ace's that has extensive experience in the credit card industry:

Because many of our colleagues in the media have failed to investigate the shenanigans of the Obama Campaign, I have taken upon myself to uncover some improprieties. One that has troubled me greatly is Obama's very relaxed donation policies.

I have over 8 years experience working in the payment services industry. By
taking a closer look at Obama's online donation site, I have noticed that
his team has left the door wide open for credit card fraud by not putting in
the security measures to ensure full visa/mastercard authorization
compliance. This is outright irresponsible behavior on the part of Obama's
team and in direct violation of their agreement with Visa/Mastercard.

I did a test on his site. Acting as Joe Stalin, I went onto the Obama site
and donated $5.00. I used false information, address: 100 Red Square,
telephone number 323-666-1953, zip code 10001, Employer: Kremlin
Occupation: Dictator. I did use my valid credit card numbers and expiration
date. The typical security measures, Address Verification System and the
Card Validation Code are not present on the Obama site. So there is nothing
in place to verify who I am. (Please see attachment. [I have his attachment. I see no point in putting it up; we all know Obama's site allows this -- ace.]) I clicked submit. The transaction went through.

Then I went to McCain's site, and entered in the same information. Joe
Stalin. $5.00. As you can see, my donation was rejected for errors.

* What's the big deal? Obama has left the door open for anyone to run prepaid cards and foreign credit cards without proper screening. In addition, it is easy to run multi-transactions on the same card but under different aliases. In other words, an organization like Move On.org could run tens of thousands of transactions for millions of dollars using essentially cards belonging to only handful of very large liberal donors like George Soros, Peter Lewis and Eric Schmidt.

In addition, Obama's site violates his agreement with Visa/Mastercard. Visa Mastercard regulations require each credit card acceptor to "obtain the 3 digit Card Validation Code [CVV2 found on the back of your credit card. 4 digits for American Express Cards] and submit this code with all authorization requests with respect to transactions where the card is not present..." [cite:] Visa/Master Program Guide.

(Please see attachment or go to Obama's site. You will notice that Obama's donation site does not have this code requirement, which is in direct violation of Visa/Mastercard regulations.)

Speculations as to why?

Many foreign credit cards do not have CVV2 codes. Requiring such codes would limit foreign donations.

Secondly, disabling the security allows would be credit card thieves to
"ping" numbers till they get a hit. In other words, a crook could simply
type in random numbers until he found one sequence that worked in some
fashion. That could give a thief a starting point for committing credit-card fraud. If all they had to do was type nonsense values for names and addresses, such as Doodad Pro, they could quickly determine which numbers were valid - and they could probably program bots to do that kind of work.

[I consider this latter point a minor concern, given the fact that most fraudulent donors are willing coconspirators, not credit card thieves. However, it is interesting that Obama invites this sort of fraud, and doesn't take the most elemental step to eliminate it -- indeed, he is in direct violation of Visa/Master Card rules in failing to ask for this code. Why? Because he wants foreign donations, and he's willing to facilitate the occasional credit-card thief to get them. -- ace.]

No Address Verification System (AVS)

The Value of AVS from a credit card exper: I have over 30 years of
experience in investigating Credit Card Fraud and I can tell you, which you
may or may not know, that the merchant acquirer that is conducting the
collection of credit / debit card for the Obama campaign are responsible for
the actions to be taken regarding the Address Verification System responses.
The value of the AVS system is that the issuer of the card being used
provides back to the merchant acquirer a response based upon the information
provided during the authorization process. This response indicates to the
merchant acquirer if the card information was validated as to ownership of the account. It is the merchant acquirer that determines what to do when
the authorization response is received. In most cases the transaction that
comes back with any negative meaning is denied. However, if the merchant acquirer has adjusted their system to accept any response as acceptable the transaction would be completed.

The value of the AVS system is to deny Card Not Present transactions (CNP)
which are suspicious. This protects the merchant against charge backs for
bad transactions. What is interesting to me is that the merchant acquirer
has knowingly violated a basic CNP fraud prevention technique to accommodate a merchant (Obama Campaign). I think that both the Associations (VISA & MasterCard) would be highly interested in looking at the merchant acquirer that was processing these transactions. The value of ignoring the AVS
responses is that multiple invalid transactions may be made without fear of being rejected by the authorization systems. This means that the real owner
of the credit card account is willing to allow multiple transactions to be made on the account using different names and addresses that under normal conditions would be denied. The merchant acquirer has a complete listing of all transactions done and it would be very interesting to see how many transactions were conducted on the same account number using different names. I would think that this would be a Federal violation under the current campaign funding laws.

I hope you will take this inquiry seriously. I want a fair election. I do
not want either side to STEAL the election literally. Obama's tactics have
gone too far in my opinion. McCain is doing the honorable thing on his site
and playing by the rules. Obama is in clear violation of the rules. Is
this change we can believe in?

THIS WILL PROBABLY BRING MEN WITH LARGE YELLOW LETTERS ON THEIR JACKETS TO MY DOOR: IS THE GOVERNMENT ASSISTING OBAMA IN OBTAINING FOREIGN DONATIONS?

I share this article from CFP:

Why does this collaboration by State and other Intel/Military Agencies want a pacifist like Barack Obama for President?

They knew they could not appeal to or trust John McCain and Sarah Palin to go along with the plan to stop a preventative invasion against Iran’s nuclear facilities. Compromising America’s security or that of our ally, Israel, is a betrayal of a greater magnitude.

Barack Obama, given his history of “hanging around the neighborhood” with self-declared anarchists and generally considered far Left-of-Center, could be easily guided by the likes of Colin Powell and Zbigniew Brzezinski to not either pre-emptively attack Iran as necessary or mount a second strike even after Iran attacked any American city or interest. Obama has said he would rather talk than act.

But first, Obama needed to be made President and that would cost huge sums. That meant he could not opt to take limited official Government funding as did John McCain. Obama needed far larger funds and that could not come from primarily normal contributions. It needed to come from deep, deep pockets - like those in Saudi Arabia, Dubai, the Gulf Oil States.

But, those campaign contributions could not come to Obama in huge traceable gifts, thereby calling attention from government agencies for illegal funding. The money had to be split into very small sums - like $200 per gift through millions of new donors. Of course, Obama’s fund raisers refused to release those names to check their origins as McCain chose to do. Other U.S. gifts to Obama in excess of legal limitations which were caught by outside observers, were generally returned - in part - but, even then - not all and not always. Who knew about this massive cash flow officially, unofficially or merely by well-founded rumors in the Intel community?

The State Department, the FBI, CIA, NSA and any number of our 16 Intelligence Agencies knew. But, just as no one stopped the false NIE Reports which caused the loss of American resolve to prevent Iranian nuclear weapons’ capability, no one stopped the buying of America by the huge, global campaign contributions. The Scam was that high up.

Buying a Presidential Election would be a well kept secret not unlike “the magic bullet” and “the shooter on the grassy knoll in Dallas”. Was the fix in?

It was puzzling when $150 Million Dollars came into Obama’s campaign in one month - not to mention the already accumulated “windfall” of close to $450 Million Dollars raised before. The $150 Million Dollars influx in September led to a grand total of $600 Million Dollars for Obama to spend, snowing the American public to cover his record and propagate his rhetoric.

Generally, that kind of money floats around drug cartels or oil deals between the Arab Muslim countries and the multinational oil companies. Clearly, if Iran (and Iran’s oil) were to be protected - along with its future potential for oil contracts, Obama would be a better, even vital, choice as a malleable President than a stubborn, experienced military man like McCain.

If the Presidency was to be owned and controlled by the multi-nationals and oil countries, they needed a President like Obama - a stooge. The “controllers” also needed a replacement VP who was known to be more than accommodating to Iran and, thus: Joe Biden.

The Media never really questioned this extraordinary cash flow but, instead expressed happy astonishment that a Left Liberal was receiving such approval by way of donations. Of course, no one in government stepped in and said: “Wait a minute”. No State Department, no FBI, no CIA, no Justice Department, no Intel Agencies, no watchdog Media....No Nothing!

IF Obama’s money is coming primarily from the Middle East, then this is a matter of National Security at its highest level - because America is in hock, in thrall, in debt to the tune of Billions of Dollars of deficit - and rising.

Clearly, the elections should be put on an extraordinary hold until these unusual questions hanging over Obama’s head are answered. A breach of security of this magnitude cannot be covered over or considered trivial just because the plotters need deniability.