November 15, 2010
Bombshell: Illegal immigrant campaign group "OneAmerica Votes" illegally concealed finances from public disclosure
Recall last months' AP article: "Illegal immigrants canvassing across the state for Democrats".
"OneAmerica Votes", the campaign offshoot of Seattle-based "immigrant rights" group "OneAmerica" (formerly "Hate Free Zone") was sending illegal immigrant volunteers out canvassing for Patty Murray. Not mentioned in the article, but OneAmerica Votes was also actively campaigning for Democratic state legislative candidates and for or against various statewide ballot measures.
Although the group was clearly raising and spending massive sums to intervene in state election campaigns, it didn't register with the PDC or report its receipts and expenditures. Major illegal. Details in the complaint I sent to the PDC on Friday.
Nor is it registered with the FEC. Some might wonder whether the group is protected under Citizens United. Not from Washington's state disclosure laws. From federal disclosure only if it's genuinely qualified to operate as a 501(c)(4), which looks doubtful.
More to come.
Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at November 15, 2010
11:25 AM | Email This
Of course, all this info comes out AFTER the election! Wouldn't it be nice to live in a state where those in charge actually paid attention to flagrant voter violations?!
It is very discouraging to realize that my vote just goes down some rabbit hole while "those who must be protected" (ie Cantwell in 2000, Gregoire in 2004 and Murray in 2010) somehow always seem to find the votes they need in King County!
I'm praying that Kirby Wilbur can take over as the state chair and maybe the GOP will start actually dealing with all the vote fraud BEFORE the 2012 election!
2. This victim mentality you people perpetrate about yourselves and your causes is pathetic. Grow up and take responsibility for your ideological shortcomings and quit blaming everyone for your losses.
3. I have a hard time getting upset with an organization for not following bad laws like the campaign finance laws. If they want to raise and spend money on campaigns, that is their business and should not have to disclose.
4. On his well-researched TV show, Glen Beck said last week that this illegal alien group going door-to-door here for Patty Murray had funding from George Soros. Not a good sign.
I strongly commend last week's series of GB TV shows (M-Th) to anyone of any political party, if you want to know more about why this Soros connection was a bad sign.
Watch the Seattle Times attempt to outdo its 2004 performance in refusing to cover, and burying this clearly evidenced complaint against a blatant end run around Washington election law.
Bravo citizen Sharkansky, for shining light where the Times has not yet done so.
6. But in the Peoples Republic of Washington, this is a non-story because it happened on the left. If this had been Republicans, well it would have beaten the fold.
7. You know darn well if this were a "Republican" group, the lefties would be up in arms calling for another election. Why shouldn't we? And those of you defending this are plain stupid. Laws are in place for a reason, we are a nation of laws didn't you know? Oh, that's right, the laws regarding elections don't apply to those that steal them anyways.
Thanks, Michele, for highlighting the connection between the criminal Soros and election corruption in Washington.
Must we bear arms to take back our country from the scum that has stolen it?
Apparently Skunk @2 doesn't think so. He seems to believe election corruption and thievery are OK. Must be a Dimocrat.
9. The bottom line as always is Democrats do not care to follow the rules/laws of the land. Anything goes. Criminal activitity is OK as long as it keeps them in power. The gov will pardon them. But if a Republican group did this the press would be on it in a microsecond. It would be in the press weeks before an election instead of hiding it until after the election. That is the difference. Our Press is in bed with criminal activity. If they knew this was going on and called it non news they are as guilty as the group that does it. Look at the number of people reading the newspapers today. We are voting with our money not to buy thier Democrat rags. I want open and truthful news. Not one sided attacks. No party is without problems. But in this state Democrats can do anything they want and never pay a price.
Lets avoid name calling and try to discuss this civilly. Yes, we have laws and they exist for a reason. It does not follow that we should defend all laws.
In this case the reason we have laws is not a good reason. The disclosure laws result not in better elections but instead in intimidating business, groups, and individuals into supporting a limited few politicians for fear of retribution. The law is anti-freedom and should be elliminated. Until it is I will defend the actions of those that do not follow the laws.
You may disagree, but I do not think it warrants calling me stupid. Even if it did, you certainly did not make the case showing why I am stupid.
11. So, we can each decide which laws we like and just ignore the ones we don't and you will defend me for it. Didn't know that. Coolio... Of course the likelihood of getting prosecuted here in the state of Washington does tend to vary based on which side of the ideological table you sit.
Amen on that comment. I couldn't help but laugh when I saw the article in the Seattle Times about how there was "no vote tampering or ballot stuffing this election" before the vote counts was even completed.
The tax credits that the dems gave the Seattle Times are the best investment the dems ever made. Never have I seen so many journalists sell their integrity so fast for so little.
My oft repeated bleat.
If Stefan's suit wins, then there will be fine.
The fine will be considered a campaign expense and the electrion result will hold.
The SP comment "e-mail forward" function hasn't worked for weeks.
It is me? Or is there a problem at SP?
15. More to come.
And if a court ultimately decides this is all a bunch of trumped-up nonsense, I'm sure we'll read all about that here. Because explaining why pervious posts here were all wrong, wrong, wrong is such a big part of being personally responsible and all. And also, too.
16. @11 woody:
I will defend you if you violate a law I feel is unjust. Would you not do the same thing?
17. Thanks for doing this, Stefan. The suit notes that One America Votes is supporting mostly by foundations. The Tides Foundation will almost certainly be found to be one of those.
18. Shawna Forde applauds your action from jail in Pima County, AZ.
Travis Pahl -- You know what you need to do: run against Rob McKenna in the gubernatorial primary in 2012 on a platform of ending the ban on "Four Loko". Obviously, so many people will agree that you'll get a flood of money, and not all of which will be from the Four Loko company. Refuse to disclose your campaign finances. You'll be a hero!
Are you going to put up and stand up and act on your principles, or are you going to continue to be a tiresome troll?
20. Stefan - This is an excellent thread!!! Thank you for doing the research!!
The suit notes that One America Votes is supporting mostly by foundations. The Tides Foundation will almost certainly be found to be one of those.
More directly, how much of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funds were deployed in this murky enterprise? $1.4 billion of it is budgeted for a 'massive force of community organizers', which looks like a direct hit here. Laundering it through some foundation would be a normal tactic. Remember how Obama diverted $160 million of the Annenberg Foundation's educational bankroll to his political activist allies in Chicago, during his only executive job on record prior to becoming president?
How am I being a troll for commenting on exactly the topic you posted about? And why is it your response to anything I write is that I am troll unless I run for office?
Or alternatively, why don't you tell me what responses are acceptable to you in advance. Or is it as simple as I am only allowed to agree with you?
24. And lastly since you brought it up even though it is off topic, why are you mocking my stance on the Four Loko? Do you honestly side with McKenna on that?
25. #21: I didn't realize over a billion dollars was used in the phoney "stimulus" bill for radical leftist groups. I did some further googling and found that the Stimulus bill was written by--tada---the Apollo Alliance. And WHO is the "Apollo Alliance"? One blog ('romanticpoet's weblog) describes it as "consists of a coalition of unions like SEIU, social justice groups the likes of ACORN"; oh, and board members include famous communist Van Jones. You can just imagine the rest.
The Apollo Alliance is under the umbrella of ...tada!!....The Tides Foundation in San Franciso. George Soros has given $millions to Tides. Apollo Alliance is the radical leftist group that wrote the stimulus, which explains the billion+ dollars for radical leftist political activity. Are you angry yet? Oh, and they wrote the Cap & Trade bill, too. Are you angry yet??
Yes, I know all about Soros. Some other sources about him include the new book by Michael Savage - "Trickle up poverty". Soros had some involvement in the stock market crash in Sept. 2008 - he and 5 other hedge fund managers - it is documented. As you know, that economic downturn helped seal the election for Obama.
As for the Apollo Alliance, the Tides foundation, the Quantum fund and how he has essentially been the puppetmaster of this shadow government here, see articles in The Blaze. I sincerely hope that the House of Representatives does an investigation on the dealings of George Soros and how he is in the process of orchestrating the financial collapse of the US. In his words; "the United States is the main obstacle to creating a new world order". Are any more of you angry now ?
I generally feel that there are two basic groups of people:
Those who try to do the right thing and when they mess up (human afterall) get pummeled for their mistakes.
Then there are those who can 'work the system', 'bend the rules' and generally do as they please no matter who they hurt of what they destroy.
I find that Dems and to a lesser extent the entire political class operate largely under the latter. This also extends to the operations like the one in the OP. No matter how illegal or unethical, this will be ignored because at the end of the day, the ends justify the means for these people.
One day, those in the former group will grow weary and join the latter en mass. I pray that day does not come in my lifetime.
28. oh, and the groups like Tides Foundation exist to help hide donor moneys for all these radical lefist activities. Nice to know who's trying to radicalize my country. The more I'm learning the more I find it imperative to try and do something to help keep my country the place I knew growing up, so my kids don't live in a hellhole for the majority of their life, which is what Soros and his minions in all these secret groups are trying to do.
Beck reported that the Communist party USA is apparently openly teaming up with Trumka and his labor groups. Simply amazing. The hard left democrats that run this county and state won't likely care, but I submit that moderate/conservative democrats should want to know more about the groups that fund the Leftwing activities and ask themselves if they really knew what these groups were trying to do to our country and whether they still want to associate with all of that. Beck said that even his democrat m-i-l who was super-involved in labor was horrified to find out the backstory and what these people are really trying to do and is repulsed. That's why I say that anyone of any party ought to learn who these people really are, because many of those dems won't like what they see and will run screaming from it.
What is unethical about what the group did?
Failure to follow the law that is on the books is a good start. Whatever the law is, it should be followed to the extent that it can be (good faith effort). From the OP it appears that no effort was made, that appears to be a significant lack of ethical standards to simply ignore the law.
I also have a huge problem with foreign nationals getting involved with our elections. No matter if that involvment is financial, on the ground, making calls or filling out ballots (moter/voter pretty much opened that door).
This is one of those things like HCR that needs to happen, but the progressive elements continue to hi-jack the process in order to establish and consolodate government power. McCain/Fiengold was a joke. What is needed is more transparency and less 'special org strucure' and other lawyer-ish schemes designed to ice the small guy who doesn't have a lobby and/or law firm at their disposal.
I also have a huge problem with foreign nationals getting involved with our elections. No matter if that involvment is financial, on the ground, making calls or filling out ballots (moter/voter pretty much opened that door).
PRECISELY. That is the problem! Foreign nationals have no right or - as Lysander likes to state, ethical - right to affect the elections of a sovereign nation and its people. If you're not a citizen, you don't have a right to interfere. Period.
I'm a Republican.
Former PCO. I've spent way too much time at county, district, state, and national conventions.
I'm tired of playing by "nice guy" rules.
It's time for the gloves to come off and the party to focus on winning. I don't give a flying f*ck about playing nice as long as it gets us the majority.
Lose on principle? Been there, done that. It sucks.
I'm ready to give "just win" a try.
Sadly, I think my party is quite comfortable keeping things the way they are.
I believe the Soros-funded Tides Foundation wrote the Obongocare Bill.
Yet most Americans still seem to know little of the Fascist Soros and his extremist groups that control the dinosaur media and the White House. Grow a brain, people, Soros dictated much of what was passed into law by the 111th Congress.
It is unethical to violate the law no matter what the law? You do not see a possibility where following the law is unethical?
AS for foriegn people being involved in our election, Why should they not be able to exercise their right to free speech? I find it unethical to prevent others from exercising free speech. Or do you think that people from other countries do not have the same rights as us?
Stefan and Michelle Malkin
Report: Open-borders One America Votes operated illegal political committee
By Michelle Malkin • November 15, 2010 03:51 PM
You remember One America Votes.
Before the midterm election, the open-borders group (funded by Soros, SEIU, and the usual prog suspects) sent out illegal alien canvassers to drum up Democrat votes in Washington state.
The story isn't over. My friend and Washington state blogger/watchdog Stefan Sharkansky -- who has successfully exposed election fraud before -- scoured campaign finance records and found that OAV apparently failed to file as a registered political committee.
He has sent a formal complaint to the state Public Disclosure Commission.
Read the scoop at Sound Politics and be sure to click the link for the PDF of his filing:
36. The verry same to help Patty Cakes win gee. How surprising!Could that be how California and Nevada won with their incumbents too!! One bright spot a tea party friend from Olympia hepled chase Patty Cakes out of Olympia!!LOL!
37. Read the scoop at Sound Politics...
Because it surely is not at the Seattle Times.
Searches for 'oneamerica', PDC and Sharkansky all come up zip this morning at the Times, for anything more recent than 11/6.
Why don't you sneak into Mexico and try voting, let me know how that goes for you.
When you've succeeded, get back to us on how that went.
I have not advocated non citizens voting. I am merely suggesting they have the same right to free speech that you and I enjoy. Do you disagree? If so, why?
Also if you do not mind, lets avoid name calling. Thanks.
Dan@31 invents, "If you're not a citizen, you don't have a right to interfere. Period."
If by "interfere" you mean "speak freely", you're wrong, according to the US Constitution.
41. If by "interfere" you mean "speak freely", you're wrong, according to the US Constitution.
Not true. There are limits that have been placed on the BOR and the rest of the Constitution (right or wrong). A person here from another country, especially one who is here on questionable terms, should not have any say in how this country operates. Become a citizen and then fine.
I just love it when the left loves to expand rights in one column and take them away in another. If you said that all immigrants should be able to legally bear arms, you would have a total spazz attack on your hands.
But when they inject things like 'separation of church and state' a phrase that shows up exactly ZERO times in our founding documents or take the interstate commerce clause to be an open invite for the government to lord over any and all transactions that MAY occur between parties in different states.
You are again pointing out the law, but you have not stated yet if you think the law is just. Do you think non citizens have the same right to free speech that you and I enjoy?
As for your other comment... yes I think all immigrants should be able to legally bear arms.
@28 - Spot on - a textbook example of evil prevailing when good men (people) do nothing. If people are going to sharpen pitchforks, this is the best cause that I can think of - to save the Republic - this is no laughing matter !
Traditional Democrats should be repulsed at the actions of these leftists who are polluting the Democratic Party, who are propped up largely by Soros and his minions. These are the lunatic fringe, who are heavily financed by Soros and his cadre and have successfully infiltrated the media and the Obama Administration. They do what they do because they can get away with it and they are motivated by the wealthy marxists and liberal progressives. Wake up America - this is the enemy within !!
I think in this case the law is just. Why should foreign nationals have a voice in our internal affairs? I don't have a voice in Brazil's politics, nor should I. If I moved there for a job, I still would not have a voice, just be an ex-pat there for work.
Further, my guess is more than a few in this case are in country without following proper law to be here in the first place.
So flaunting laws releatedly is hardly the way to demonstrate a desire to be part of the process when you have no demonstrated respect for the current process.
No I do not believe that foreign nationals have the same rights across the board as a citizen. While it may be proper to have due process and other laws on the books, it is not a specific requirement of the founding documents. 'We the People' wasn't a 'we are the world' sort of statement. If found committing a crime they have a right to be sent back to their homeland.
You are one of the few on the left that thinks the 2A should apply to foreign nationals. Good for you, I would simply qualify my support with requiring that they be 'legit', not illegals.
So where is it that you think a non citizen crosses the line?
1. when they say, "i support candidate A."
2. When they say, "I think you should support candidate A."
3. When two of them together say "I think you should support candidate A"
4. When they are on US soil saying "i think you should support candidate A"
5. When they say it to someone they do not know?
6. When they print a flyer saying it?
7. When they pay to have someone else hand out the flyer?
8. When they hand out a flyer that someone else paid for?
9. When they do all of the above but do not fill out the right form?
I am curious if you think they do not have the right to do any of those things or if it is just a certain part of that they do not have the right to do.
I of course think that ALL people are created equal and have the same rights and therefore all should be able to do all of the above without filling out any forms. But I am just a silly person who thinks government should protect rights, not restrict them. Can you help me understand why I should want the government restricting rights rather than protecting them?
Also, why do you think that the second amendment should only apply to people that are here legally? Shouldn't ALL people have the right to protect themselves from criminals and the government?
And lastly... I am not a lefty! Why do you insist on calling me names!!! :)
Lysander @ 34:
This is an ethical law. In fact, it's a manifestation of the fundamental reason these United States were formed - representation of citizens. If you're a citizen, you're welcome to participate in our political system. If you're not a citizen, you're not welcome.
It's actually unethical to expect non-citizens to participate in our politics.
If you're so sure it's not an ethics problem, why not renounce your citizenship? What's the point of being a citizen of the US? Why don't you renounce?
I do not expect non citizens to participate. I also do not think non citizens are not welcome to participate in some ways. Speech is participation, and a right. Voting is participation and a privledge.
Citizens get the privledge and protection of their rights.
Non citizens do not get the privledge to vote but should certainly still have the right to free speech (or bear arms).
Why do you think they do not have a right to participate by speaking about politics?
And where do you get the idea that our country was founded on the idea of silencing non citizens from SPEAKING about politics?
49. It's actually unethical to expect non-citizens to participate in our politics.
Well, it's far more unethical to hose vast quantities of anonymous, unreported-to-PDC funds to coordinate and amplify the partisan campaigning of illegally-present activists who hope to benefit personally from the outcome of the election. Particularly when there's any chance at all of taxpayer funds forming a part of those electioneering slush funds - as they do when laundered through 'non-profit' foundations.
50. Insufficiently sensitive:
Why is it unethical to spend money without reporting it? please do not say because it is illegal. For something to be unethical it needs to be harming people or something along those lines. As far as I am aware, spending money on campaigns does not harm people even if some people involved are not citizens and the government does not collect forms saying who the money was from. Am I wrong?
51. Yes. You're wrong.
How about an answer to my other question... Why?
Or you could a shot at the list of questions in post 45 that might help you explain where it becomes wrong.
53. hello there thanks for your grat post, as usual ((o:
Speaking about politics and actively campaigning are two different things. I don't think foreign nationals should actively campaign in our elections. It's wrong, it's unethical, and it's illegal.
So why do you think foreign nationals should be allowed to actively campaign in our elections?
Dan@54 opines, "I don't think foreign nationals should actively campaign in our elections. It's wrong, it's unethical, and it's illegal."
You have a right to think it's wrong and unethical, although if someone lives here, works here, pays taxes here, etc., I don't have any problem with them expressing their opinion or trying to convince other people of it.
But you're flat-out wrong that it's illegal. What law are you imagining here? (Or maybe you're referring to the law in idyllic Shanghai, where anything is illegal if the police don't like it.)
57. Dan@56, thanks for the link. Did you, um, read it? It specifically says that foreign nationals may volunteer personal services for candidates. It also says they may contribute financially to ballot measures unrelated to candidates. So while you are welcome to express a moral opinion on these things, they're clearly legal.
You saying that all those people donating time (and maybe money - let's see what the PDC says when they investigate) to OAV weren't materially contributing to the election of a candidate? Did OAV campaign or support Rossi AT ALL?
And if this group is found guilty of violating campaign disclosure laws, it'll be okay for them not to pay part of their fine if they promise not to do it again
Attorney General Rob McKenna on Friday afternoon announced a settlement with the state Republican Party for violating campaign disclosure laws during Dino Rossi's 2008 gubernatorial run. [...] The remaining $10,000 of the fine is suspended. The WSRP will immediately owe the suspended amount if it is found to have committed any new campaign law violations between now and Dec. 31, 2014," the attorney general's statement said.