Corruption: Exposing Barack Obama's Illegal Foreign Campaign Money Loophole

From Katie Pavlich, at Townhall:

A new report obtained by Townhall from the non-partisan Government Accountability Institute [GAI] shows the Obama campaign has potentially violated federal election law by failing to prevent the use of fraudulent or foreign credit card transactions on the official Obama for America [OFA] donation webpage.

For the past eight months, GAI has been investigating the potential influence of foreign online campaign donations in House, Senate and presidential elections. The report was conducted using spidering software and found thousands of foreign sites linking to campaign donation pages. The investigation was conducted with the guidance of a former U.S. attorney. GAI is led by Peter Schweizer, who recently exposed congressional insider trading in his book Throw Them All Out.

“As FBI surveillance tapes have previously shown, foreign governments understand and are eager to exploit the weaknesses of American campaigns,” the report says. “This, combined with the Internet’s ability to disintermediate campaign contributions on a mass scale, as well as outmoded and lax Federal Election Commission rules, make U.S. elections vulnerable to foreign influence.”

OFA seems to be taking advantage of a “foreign donor loophole” by not using CVV on their campaign donation page. When you donate online to the Obama campaign using a credit card, the contribution webpage does not require donors to enter a secure CVV number (also known as CSC, CVV2 or CVN), the three-digit securing code on the back of credit cards. This code, although not 100 percent effective, is used to ensure a person making a purchase physically possesses the card. According to the report, 90 percent of e-commerce and 19 of the 20 largest charities in the United States use a CVV code, making its use standard industry practice in order to prevent fraud. Another anti-fraud security measure includes software, better known as an Address Verification System, to verify a donor’s address matches the address on file with the credit card company. The investigation could not determine whether OFA is using this type of software to prevent fraudulent or illegal donations.

Hmm...

Sounds familiar. I wonder where I've heard this story before?

Oh yeah: "Obama’s Fundraising Fraud."

Maybe the dead-tree press will do something about it this year? You know, like reporting it.

There's more from Pavlich at the link.

I'm not holding my breath. The FEC never goes after campaign finance fraud. The system's a joke.

Have Americans Finally Tired of the Obama Narrative?

Well, we'll find out on November 6th.

But see Jean Kaufman, a.k.a. Neo-Neocon, at PJ Media:

In the very best postmodern fashion, Obama and his supporters have relied on a narrative about Obama that has been carefully constructed. He’s brilliant, a great writer, a rare thinker, a moderate, a first-class temperament with neatly pressed pants, a uniter, a cool guy who’s unflappable.

The first debate last Wednesday threatened to make that narrative seem absurd. You might say that the narrative got mugged by reality, and an awful lot of people were watching while it happened.

But the next day there was a new narrative in place — or rather, several narratives: Romney cheated, the altitude was too high for Obama, he didn’t have time to practice because he was too busy with weighty matters, Romney lied, and look at those great unemployment numbers!

Those numbers themselves are another narrative, one that no one can quite figure out because there’s a disparity between one part of the stats and other parts. In a very real sense, the numbers don’t seem to add up. But they’re good for the Obama narrative, unless you think too deeply about them.

But one of the points of a narrative is not to think too deeply about it.

Now in a sense every candidate spins a narrative about him/herself, and the media spins a narrative of its own which is either in agreement or disagreement with that candidate’s preferred narrative. But Barack Obama is the first presidential candidate I can think of — be they liberal or conservative, Democrat or Republican, someone I have liked and supported or someone I have detested and opposed — who is nearly all about the narrative, and who seems so aware of it (“I serve as a blank screen on which people of vastly different political stripes project their own views”)...

Continue reading.

Many Californians Angry at Surging Price of Gasoline

I got $24 yesterday, so I could make it to work this morning. It was $4.60 a gallon at ARCO. I'll be glad when prices drop.

Maybe soon, according to the Los Angeles Times, "California gas prices should fall soon, analysts say." Video at the link, and at the Associated Press as well.

Remember, a Month Ago Nate Silver Gave 4-to-1 Odds Against Romney

Read Robert Stacy McCain's post, "Liberals Beginning to Realize They’ve Overestimated Obama’s Popularity?"

It's now a 3-1 margin against Romney, but it's still early.

Despite Threats, U.S. Cut Security in Libya Before Attacks

From Eli Lake, at The Daily Beast:

In the six months leading up to the assault on the United States consulate in Benghazi, the State Department reduced the number of trained Americans guarding U.S. facilities in Libya, according to a leading House Republican investigating the Sept. 11 anniversary attacks. The reduction in U.S. security personnel increased America’s reliance on local Libyan guards for the protection of its diplomats.

This is the latest charge from Rep. Jason Chaffetz, the Utah Republican leading a House investigation on the Benghazi attacks, regarding alleged security defects in Benghazi. Chaffetz said the information comes from whistleblowers who have approached the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.

The State Department on Wednesday didn’t respond to requests for comment. However, a senior State Department official said an independent review panel was examining the charge. This official said it was routine to reduce the number of U.S. personnel serving in new diplomatic posts such as Benghazi over time. When the U.S. established its official presence in Benghazi in 2011, it was the middle of a war, and even routine jobs such as drivers were handled by U.S. personnel, this official said.

The allegation from Chaffetz, who is the chairman of the oversight committee’s subcommittee that handles national security, is important in light of recent reports that some Libyans who provided security for U.S. missions were working with insurgents and, in one case, allegedly attacked the consulate in Benghazi in April with a homemade explosive.

On Tuesday, Chaffetz and the oversight committee’s chairman, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), disclosed in a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton details of an alleged April 6 bombing at the consulate. The letter detailed how in the run-up to the 9-11 assault there was an escalation of military-style attacks on Western targets in Libya’s second-largest city. The letter also said U.S. security personnel had requested, and were denied, additional security for the U.S. embassy in Tripoli and the consulate in Benghazi.

Chaffetz went further Wednesday, saying in an interview that the number of American diplomatic security officers serving in Libya had been reduced in the six months prior to the attacks. "The fully trained Americans who can deal with a volatile situation were reduced in the six months leading up to the attacks," he said. "When you combine that with the lack of commitment to fortifying the physical facilities, you see a pattern.”

And at the Salt Lake Tribune, "Chaffetz visits Libya to investigage ambassador killing."

Also, more from The Daily Beast, "Exclusive: Libya Cable Detailed Threats." And at London's Daily Mail, "Revealed: Ambassador to Libya told officials of security worries on day he died in consulate raid as special forces chief says he asked for 'more not less' back-up month before attack."

The Idea of 'Collective' Success Is Deeply Offensive

An excellent essay from TigerHawk, "Building it: In which I explain why "you didn't build that" so offended business people."

The White House Disinformation Campaign on Libya

A devastating clip, via Carl in Jerusalem:

"Forty five years ago this week, Ernesto 'Che' Guevara got a major dose of his own medicine..."

From Humberto Fontova, at Towhnall, "'Don’t Shoot!—I’m Che!' (A Glorious Anniversary)" (via Fausta).

Andrew Sullivan, the Left's Leading Forensic Gynecologist, on Suicide Watch!

Boom!

That Pew Research poll put RAWMUSCLEGLUTES into meltdown mode.

Here's the headline at Jammie Wearing Fool, "Andrew Sullivan on Suicide Watch." Folks can click through at the link, but here's the opening graf at RMG's:

The Pew poll is devastating, just devastating. Before the debate, Obama had a 51 - 43 lead; now, Romney has a 49 - 45 lead. That's a simply unprecedented reversal for a candidate in October. Before Obama had leads on every policy issue and personal characteristic; now Romney leads in almost all of them. Obama's performance gave Romney a 12 point swing! I repeat: a 12 point swing.

It's an AIDS-related freak-out, no doubt. RMG can't believe Romney's got the advantage among women, and here's the chart on Romney's gains on helping  even greater likelihood to help the middle class:

It's terrible, just terrible.

Jammie snarks: "Just roll one up and get stoned, Andy."

October is Here!

From A.F. Branco at Legal Insurrection:

Romney Closes 8-Point Gap in Latest Pew Research Poll

I saw the new Pew survey earlier today, and when I got home, as I walked in to turn on the television, I found Ashleigh Banfield on CNN discussing it, with the banner across the bottom of the screen, "Obama's Slide: Romney Leads 49-45 Among Likely Voters."

Here's the Pew report, "Romney's Strong Debate Performance Erases Obama's Lead: GOP Challenger Viewed as Candidate with New Ideas."

Obama held an 8-point lead in Pew's last survey in September, and I blogged it: "Pew Research Center Poll: Obama Up by Eight in New Nationwide Survey." As I noted at the post, "Pew's one of the better polling organizations. Very reputable."

Interestingly, that's not what the lefties are saying now that the numbers have their guy under water. Banfield reported that Team Obama was whining about the partisan breakdown at the poll, and Cornell Belcher, interviewed at the CNN segment, gave the most mealy-mouth excuses for O's collapse, going so far to claim that likely-voter sampling is "more of an art than science." It was completely ridiculous. I'll post that clip when it comes available later.

But to give an idea of how really bad the numbers are for the Democrats, compare Ed Kilgore's responses to both of the Pew surveys, at the Washington Monthly. Here's Kilgore on the September survey: "Really Bad News For Mitt From Pew." And here's his response today: "Pew’s Perfect Post-Debate Window." To be consistent, and credible, Kilgore should have written a post today entitled, "Really Bad News For Obama From Pew." Because the news is bad, really bad, and there's no way to spin it for the president. Especially not with some f-king retarded excuse about how Pew perfectly polled respondents in the four-day window since last Wednesday's debate. Hello. It wouldn't be an accurate post-debate poll without surveying respondents after the debate. Someone should crush this guy's skull with one of Obama's teleprompters. I can hardly believe the mendacity.

In any case, two weeks ago I was captioning my posts at the bottom with the disclaimer, "no sugarcoating." You'll get spin around here alright, but at least the spin here's reasonably rooted in reality. The latest surveys --- and remember Gallup today also shows Romney pulling even in the horse race --- don't mean that Obama's now about to lose. The polls are showing a genuinely tight race, with the built-in Obama-Media bias favoring the Democrats now excluded. Americans saw the real thing last week, and it wasn't pretty. Democrats literally wished that O had been able to used his teleprompter, and that's after years of mocking conservatives who had been mocking the president as TOTUS.

The shit has hit the fan. I can't recall as significant an effect from any one presidential debate in the last 25 years of watching these things. Perhaps there's been as big an impact from one or another, but this time the dramatic shift has been to see what was largely looking like a flailing, possibly hopeless, GOP campaign being transformed into a surging juggernaut of Republican confidence and grassroots enthusiasm. It's been an amazing week.

There are, of course, still three debates to go, the veeps debate Thursday night and two more presidential debates. The RNC has been lowering expectations for the Biden-Ryan debate, which I think is smart. There's some chatter on the right that Ryan's going to clean the gaffe-master's clock. And I hope he does. But the real game is with the remaining top-of-the-ticket debates on October 16 and October 22. The former will be a town hall style debate on both domestic and foreign issues; the latter will be in the traditional format and will focus exclusively on foreign policy. The administration's extremely vulnerable on foreign policy, which explains why the knives are out on the left today following Mitt's formidable foreign policy address today at the Virginia Military Institute in Lexington. Seriously. It's so bad that this morning's New York Times went with a preemptive strike on the front-page, looking to deflate Romney in world affairs: "Romney Remains Vague on Foreign Policy Details." That's all bullshit, naturally. Romney's been strong on foreign policy for years. He never stopped campaigning after 2008, released a campaign book in 2009, visited Europe and Israel recently, and has a detailed foreign policy page at his website. He's got some problems with his approach, as Barry Rubin points out quite well today regarding the speech, but the main thing is Romney's distinctive vision and refusal to apologize for American power. That's a core component of any realistic approach to foreign affairs, despite the harsh denial afflicting Romney's detractors on the left. There's going to be some fireworks in that debate on the 22nd. I'm especially eager to see how the president handles Romney's attacks on his administration's completely FUBAR response to the death of Ambassador Stevens in Libya.

I'll have more on this later...

Obama's Post-Debate Negativity Shows He's Got Nothing

As I was saying in my previous entry, the dude's got nothing.

And here's a clip with Amelia Chasse from this morning, slamming the administration's negativity, at the New Hampshire Journal, "Chasse on Fox & Friends: Obama’s post-debate negativity shows he has nothing to say" (via Instapundit).

More later...

Obama Ties-Up Traffic With Multiple Morning Fundraisers in Los Angeles

And these are $25,000 per plate fundraisers. Screw the little people who need to get to work.

The Los Angeles Times reports, "Traffic delays seen as Obama leaves L.A. after celebrity fundraisers":

Traffic delays are expected Monday morning as President Obama leaves Los Angeles after a series of fundraisers.

Street closures are planned in Beverly Hills and other Westside areas, including Avenue of the Stars between Santa Monica and Pico boulevards.

In a two-day swing, Obama raised millions of dollars during several fundraisers in the state, including two downtown L.A. events packed with celebrities.

As he took the stage Sunday night at the Nokia Theatre after a star-studded "30 Days to Victory" concert, the president praised the performers who entertained a crowd of 6,000, with a nod to "old school" Earth, Wind and Fire and "new school" Katy Perry.

"My understanding is it was an incredible show," said Obama, who whisked downtown only moments before he took the stage.

"They just perform flawlessly night after night. I can't always say the same," he joked, a reference to his performance in the recent presidential debate, which was criticized as lackluster.

I'm seeing updated news reports on the local networks. O snarled traffic, the prick.

And his campaign pitch is now, "You don't want Romney in there bringing back those policies that got us in this mess in the first place. So reelect me, a laggard, a lightweight, and a loser. I got nothing, but it least it ain't what the other guy's gonna do."

Meanwhile, here's the big news nationally, at Gallup, "Romney Narrows Vote Gap After Historic Debate Win." (Via Memeorandum.) Gallup's post-debate polling shows the race tied at 47 percent. And remember, people have been telling us all week that Romney lied, and that debates don't matter historically. This is just a blip in the road for the Obama steamroller.

Right.

More at Politico, "Battleground Tracking Poll: Dems less enthusiastic." (Via Memeorandum.)

Team Obama Plotting Comeback After Debate Debacle

ICYMI, William Jacobson had an essential post yesterday, "Preview of VP Debate."

And here's the spin at the New York Times, "With Biden Up Next to Debate, Obama’s Aides Plot Comeback":

WASHINGTON — President Obama’s campaign is working feverishly to restore its momentum after a lackluster debate performance last week, an effort that began with a conference call 10 minutes before the debate even ended and led to new advertisements, a rewritten stump speech, a carefully timed leak and a reversal of months-old strategy.

Perhaps most important as the president’s team struggles to put his campaign back on track is a renewed effort to win the three remaining debates, starting with Thursday’s face-off between Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. and Representative Paul D. Ryan. Mr. Biden moved into a Delaware hotel on Sunday for three days of debate camp.

Under the tutelage of David Axelrod, the president’s chief strategist who is personally overseeing the preparations, Mr. Biden will be counseled on how to avoid Mr. Obama’s mistakes and even correct them with a more aggressive prosecution of the Republican ticket. Mr. Axelrod’s involvement highlights the stakes the Obama campaign places on the debate, and Mr. Biden has been reading “Young Guns,” the book co-written by Mr. Ryan, and practicing attack lines that Mr. Obama avoided.

The focus on Mr. Biden comes as the campaign tries to diagnose what went wrong in Denver and what to do about it. Advisers had seen two presidents during practice debates, one who had been listless and passive two nights before and another energetic and aggressive the next night. It turned out the former was the one who showed up in Denver. He kept looking down and was not using the lines they had practiced assailing Mitt Romney, who kept the president on the defensive and presented a forceful case against his re-election.

For Mr. Obama, it was arguably the lowest point in his campaign for a second term. The campaign’s own focus groups and research indicated that he lost. Mr. Obama did not fully realize as he walked off the stage just how badly it had gone, but aides said he resolved to step up his game. “He doesn’t brood — he acts,” Mr. Axelrod said. “Whatever the concerns were about yesterday, he wakes up the next day ready to take it on again.”

Paul Ryan will more than hold his own. Even Sarah Palin did well against Biden in 2008, so Thursday could hold some surprises. That said, Republicans are lowering expectations just in case. Biden's a long-time Washington insider. Personally, I doubt he'll flop like President Clusterf-k.

More at the link.

Mila Kunis Is the Sexiest Woman Alive

An excellent choice.

At Esquire.

Venezuelans Vote to Oust Reelect Socialist Hugo Chávez

Here's George Moneo at Babalú, "The beginning of the end?": "Exit polls have Chavez behind Capriles, 51.3% to 48.06%. In Spanish at ABC.es."

And at Fausta's, "#Venezuela: The results – it’s Chavez."

And check the background report at the Wall Street Journal, "Venezuelans Turn Out to Pick a Leader: Tensions Run High in Polarized South American Nation, as Leftist Chávez Faces Toughest Election in His 14-Year Presidency."

Added: Here's Reuters, "Venezuela's Chavez re-elected to extend socialist rule":

Venezuela's socialist President Hugo Chavez won re-election on Sunday, quashing the opposition's best chance at unseating him in 14 years and cementing himself as a dominant figure in modern Latin American history.

The 58-year-old Chavez took 54.42 percent of the vote, with 90 percent of the ballots counted, to 44.97 percent for the young opposition candidate Henrique Capriles, official results showed.

Chavez's victory would extend his rule of the OPEC member state to two decades, though he is recovering from cancer and the possibility of a recurrence hangs over his political future.

Jubilant supporters poured onto the streets of Caracas to celebrate the victory of a man who has near-Messianic status among Venezuela's poor, and there was relief too among leftist allies around the region - from Cuba to Bolivia - who rely on his oil-financed generosity.

"I'm celebrating with a big heart," said Mary Reina, a 62-year-old Chavez supporter who lives in the hillside slum where the president cast his vote.

"Chavez is the hope of the people and of Latin America."

California Redemption Scam: Consumers Ripped-Off as State's Recycling Program Hit With $40 Million in Annual Fraud

I remember the first time I ever paid the "California Redemtion Value." It was back in 1989, in Fresno. I walked over to the Save Mart supermarket and bought some sodas, and I looked at the receipt and said, "what the...?" So I ask the cashier, "What is this, an extra tax"? He's says it's the new redemption value, "Do you vote"? As if that mattered. The state's environmental bureaucracy just squeezes this stuff by the electorate. Who knows when there's a new regulation? And they've been increasing the refund value to the point where it's almost 5 cents on a regular 12 ounce container. Unreal.

Of course, the promise of the "recycling" program is too good to be true. Redemption rates are in excess of 100 percent, with all kinds of scammers taking the state to the cleaners.

At the Los Angeles Times, "Recycling fraud costs state millions":

Just over 8.5 billion recyclable cans were sold in California last year. The number redeemed for a nickel under California's recycling law: 8.3 billion.

That's a return rate of nearly 100%.

That kind of success isn't just impressive, it's unbelievable. But the recycling rate for certain plastic containers was even higher: 104%.

California's generous recycling redemption program has led to rampant fraud. Crafty entrepreneurs are driving semi-trailers full of cans from Nevada or Arizona, which don't have deposit laws, across the border and transforming their cargo into truckfuls of nickels. In addition, recyclers inside the state are claiming redemptions for the same containers several times over, or for containers that never existed.

The illicit trade is draining the state's $1.1-billion recycling fund. Government officials recently estimated the fraud at $40 million a year, and an industry expert said it could exceed $200 million. It's one reason the strapped fund paid out $100 million more in expenses last year than it took in from deposits and other sources.

"The law says California has to make it easy to recycle … so anyone with a devious mind, it's so easy, they can just go right in," said Los Angeles County Sheriff's Deputy Dave Chapman, who has investigated fraud rings in recent months.

Under the state's 25-year-old recycling law, California charges consumers a deposit on most beverage containers sold within its borders. Anyone who brings empty containers back to one of about 2,300 privately run recycling centers can collect 5 cents for most cans and bottles and 10 cents for larger containers.

Only products sold in California are eligible. But a can is a can — and many recycling centers in California aren't that interested in where they come from.

Hence the influx from out of state. Last summer, the state Department of Food and Agriculture counted all vehicles driving into the state with used beverage containers through 16 border stations. The three-month tally was 3,500, including 505 rental trucks filled to capacity with cans.

Officials with the state Department of Justice said they have filed approximately 10 criminal cases this year against fraud rings bringing in cans from outside California.

Investigators looking into one case sometimes stumble across another.

More at the link.

The CRV is just one more unaccountable tax as far as I'm concerned. I pay it and grumble. Someone else is recouping the "deposits," and now there's evidence that it's criminals taking advantage of hard-working people. I blame the profligate state bureaucracy, a Democrat state bureaucracy.

Busty Elisabetta Canalis Almost Busts Out of Tight-Fitting Top While Out for Evening in Milan

Now that's some beautiful scenery.

At London's Daily Mail, "Wardrobe malfunction alert: Elisabetta Canalis almost reveals too much after she steps out in tight outfit."

'Rolling Stone'

From The Weeknd:

And at NME, "The Weeknd unveils 'Rolling Stone' video and writes open letter to fans - watch."

Unexpectedly! Gas Prices Rise Overnight to New Record

At the Los Angeles Times, "Gas prices in California rise to another new record."

And Bob Owens gets apocalyptic:

The polimedia seems to be vastly underestimating (or at least, under reporting) that at least some of the conditions for widespread civic unrest are coming to a head in California. When people miss just a few meals, society quickly falls apart. How much more stress can the overburdened system handle before falling apart? I’d say that I hope we don’t have to find out, but with California’s unavoidable bankruptcy and insurmountable bureaucracy, it is more likely that we’re really just facing a matter of “when.”

The New York Times is even on this story, "Gas Prices Rise Again Overnight in California" (via Memeorandum).

BONUS: At American Thinker, "Obama's gasoline prices; a highly regressive tax."

IMAGE CREDIT: Director Blue, "Yes, you can get $1.84 gallon gas in Cincinnati! Just ask!"