CONTRIBUTION FRAUD: John Galt, Saddam Hussein, Osama Bin Laden, Bill Ayers – Obama has Charged Your Credit card

When asked about the possibility that a single person could use fake
names to mask many donations sent via a few credit cards, [General Counsel, Robert] Bauer
responded that "both campaigns seem to be in a similar position." National Journal here

McCain does not accept these donations. We have attempted time and time again.

The McCain campaign does accept normal credit card donations because staffers
can easily check whether the owner of the credit card shares the same billing
address as the listed donor, she said. That address-check process costs the
campaign about 12 cents, she said.

Story continues below advertisement

"We could lower our standards and accept more money… but this is John
McCain’s campaign, and he wants to root out fraud in fundraising and have
everything open and as honest as possible," said Donatelli. National Journal here

Craig confirms that the credit card charges for John Galt, Saddam Hussein, Osama Bin Laden, and Bill Ayers have gone through. So much for Obama’s rigorous credit card screening.

This from Craig

It took a few days to confirm, but as of this morning all four charges have posted to my CC account (see attached). Remember, these were all separate donations made by:

John Galt

Saddam Hussein

Osama Bin Laden

Bill Ayers

And I have the screenshots to prove it. Also, I made another attempt this morning to make a $10 donation under the name Tony Rezko (See attached.) And it went thru again. So reports that this has been fixed are erroneous.

Further, last night on Sheppard Smith’s 3pm-ET show this issue was brought up briefly and they cited the Obama campaign falsely claiming that this sort of thing happens at the McCain site and that they catch these errors later in the processing. Well, it took three days to process my donations and they all skated through their rigorous screening.

TONY REZKO!

UPDATED: JOHN GALT AKA CRAIG ADDS THIS (Craig is the reader who conducted this "experiment":

A few more points on this:

I’m in the web development business and it’s clear to me that Obama has a sophisticated system that could easily flag and reject these donations if they wished to do so. The fact that only one of my donations showed up on my CC statement within the first 24-hrs initially gave me pause that they were screening for fraud (even though I gave a completely fake address that didn’t match my card). However, when the other three donations showed up three days later, it only confirmed my worst suspicions.

Believe me, a major part of what I do for a living is Web-Analytics where I analyze and digest website traffic statistics on individual websites and sort thru in the most miniscule of detail; new visitors, browser type, sales transactions, email addresses etc. This is WebStuff 101. And even the most basic Web-Analytics and database tools would allow Obama to reject these phony donations before they occur, as the McCain site does. Further, it’s laughable that the Obama camp claim it’s too complicated to make their under-$200 donor information available. Again, even the most basic Web-Analytics and database tools would allow the Obama camp to make this info available the way McCain does. This openness, on McCain’s part, enabled the AP to finally find something worthy of reporting on the issue:

“The McCain Campaign website also lists 23 anonymous contributions in excess of fifty dollars, despite the legal requirement to maintain the name and address of each contributor any amount in excess of $50, and dozens of additional donors who provided incomplete information.” (link here)

The info is easily available if you try. But Obama isn’t trying, and in fact has enabled the fraud to occur. This is a clear case of facilitation of fraud. As others have reported:

“I]n order to accept donations from "Della Ware" and "Saddam Hussein" et al, the Obama website had, intentionally, to disable all the default security settings on their credit-card processing. I took a look at the inner sanctum of my (alas, far more modest) online retail operation this afternoon and, in order to permit fraud as easy as that which the Obama campaign is facilitating, you have to uncheck every single box on the AVS system, each one of which makes it very explicit just what you’re doing – ie, accepting transactions with no "billing address", no "street address" match, no "zip code" match, with a bank "of non-US origin" (I’ve got nothing against those, but a US campaign fundraiser surely should be wary), etc. When you’ve disabled the whole lot one step at a time, then you’ve got a system tailor-made for fake names and bogus addresses.”

UPDATE: OBAMA’S FUNDING FRAUD Poltical Inquirer (hat tip Cathy)

Let me make one thing clear: I do not think that Obama’s internet team is
more incompetant than an high school Intro to Web Commerce class. Therefore,
since their site would not survive 20 second of even the most cursorary
ethical hack test on their credit card use, it can only be because it has
been a deliberate effort to permit massive credit card fraud and violate
election laws wholesale. The site accepts a valid credit card number,
then does not validate it against anything else entered! And
has been in this state for months.  This is the only credit
card accepting site I have seen in the last 12 years that has this complete lack
of control.  Just read the updates here to see how ludicrous this is.

As such, it should be incumbent on the Federal Election Commission to demand
a full data dump of all contribution (including sub-$200
amounts) made to the Obama campaign and to put it through the following basic
analysis (this wouldn’t take a week; this is the type of stuff I do):

• The total amount by credit card number
• The total amount per address, as based on the valid addresses of credit
  cards (from the credit card services)
• The amount where there are multiple mismatches of address per card (name,
  street and city mismatching would be a start).
• The number of donations whose client was a foreign IP address
• Track down the purchase locations of gift cards used and how many are
  foreign.

This would be only a start, but it would prove quite illuminating; trust me. 
If they find what I suspect, they should immediately notify the Obama campaign-
and the general public- that there are serious problems- the general size of the
problem (most likely deep in the 8 digit range) and that matching fines will be
forthcoming.

The comment section was rich with intel:

UPDATE: I just realized something (it¢s been awhile since
I wrote credit card code); I don¢t believe any standard automated service would
accept simply the unverified credit card number.  They either are doing it in
collusion with a credit card processor willing to accept a high rate of fraud,
or they are manually re-entering the card number and amount as you would do in
your neighborhood sandwich shop.  Either way, there is extra work that
actually has gone on to perpetrate the fraud.

The other issue to understand in this is the vendor¢s
involvement, because that is a very suspicious
arrangement.  They very likely are taking in excessive number of bogus
charges.  They have to make good on the ones on which a customer complains, but
the question is; is the company getting reimbursed from the Obama campaign or
essentially making a multi-million dollar illegal contribution by eating it and
serving as a money launderer for one of Obama¢s billionare friends?  And bogus
ones not caught by the credit card holders, or reported (or addressed after the
election) don¢t enter into the picture.  One wonders how clear is the charge
showing up on the bills; Many internet purchases end up as pretty arcane entries
on statements.  Lots of questions, very few answers, and very little time to
find them.

The Truth Must be Told

Your contribution supports independent journalism

Please take a moment to consider this. Now, more than ever, people are reading Geller Report for news they won't get anywhere else. But advertising revenues have all but disappeared. Google Adsense is the online advertising monopoly and they have banned us. Social media giants like Facebook and Twitter have blocked and shadow-banned our accounts. But we won't put up a paywall. Because never has the free world needed independent journalism more.

Everyone who reads our reporting knows the Geller Report covers the news the media won't. We cannot do our ground-breaking report without your support. We must continue to report on the global jihad and the left's war on freedom. Our readers’ contributions make that possible.

Geller Report's independent, investigative journalism takes a lot of time, money and hard work to produce. But we do it because we believe our work is critical in the fight for freedom and because it is your fight, too.

Please contribute here.

or

Make a monthly commitment to support The Geller Report – choose the option that suits you best.

• $25.00 here
• $50.00 here
• $75.00 here
• $100.00 here
• $250.00 here