Barack Obama's fake Donations, Do they allow George Soros a method for donating over and over?

Via the Hillary Clinton Forum.net forum is a story link about how one can give invalid address information to the Barack Obama camp and still have the donation go through as approved. If this is true, and it appears to be, then why can't George Soros just donate as much money as he wants every month, using all the fake addresses and names as a cover? Apparently the answer is, anyone can use as many different ID's as they want, and in theory easily donate more than the 2,300 dollar limit.

Donations that may have come from overseas could be over 63 million dollars and climbing.

Fake Contributions to Barack Obama may allow the donor to donate more than the legal maximum if they don't do it all at once.

ACORN to be Barack Obama's Waterloo? It certainly helps explain how Barack Obama won so easily in the Caucus Contests Against Hillary Clinton.

Yes, math can be used to verify caucus fraud by Barack Obama's side. Barack Obama's 11 highest winning percentages against Hillary Clinton were ALL from caucus contests.

Primary Contests allow the voter a 12 hour time span to vote, the voter votes in the privacy of a voting booth, and there are a lot more voting places than caucues. Most voters travel much shorter distances to vote in a primary, and this is also the way it is done when people vote in November for our president.

Caucus votes are usually (but not always) started around 7PM. People first declare their vote publicly, then have to discuss their vote, then they vote again, many times using notebook paper to cast their "ballot". Caucus locations are much, much further spread out than when there are primaries. Caucuses can take from 2-4 hours to complete, all that time just to cast a vote.

Barack Obama won approximately 15 caucus state contests and 16-18 primaries, yet his top 11 highest winning percentages were ALL from his caucus victories, NONE were from his primaries. The odds of Barack Obama having his top 11 winning percentages all coming from caucus contests and none from his primary wins is well over 10,000 to one. It's just virtually impossible, unless some type of manipulation occurred, for Barack Obama to have his 11 highest winning percentages all coming from his caucus contest wins and none coming from his primary wins.

Caucus Contests use 88% less total voters to determine the same amount of delegates as states that hold primary contests. 88% less total voters in the caucus contests makes it a lot easier to manipulate results by having people show up who aren't even from that district.

Many caucus contests were held at night in early February in the great plains states which have very tough winters, once again favoring the youth attending and the elderly not attending. Other problems with caucus voting include older people not traveling at night in the winter whereas the younger kids embraced these events as a social gathering.

Even when ID was checked and people were from that voting district, it was very easy to double and triple vote since many times there were no official ballots, just notebook paper to vote on!

Many voters in the caucus contests that would favor Hillary Clinton were simply not able to travel within the very limited time frame and far far distances one would have to travel to vote in a caucus contest.

There are several examples where Hillary Clinton was leading or at the very least tied with Barack Obama in caucus state contest polling done just before the day of the vote, yet Barack Obama would still win the Caucus Contests by a 2-1 margin! Minnesota had Hillary Clinton leading by 7 points margin yet she lost the delgate count by a 2-1 margin!

Four states that held both primaries and caucuses each showed Hillary Clinton gaining massively on Barack in the primary vote as compared to the caucus vote. Nebraska, Washington State and Idaho all showed huge shifts towards Hillary Clinton when they held their primary vote after having a caucus vote. In Texas, Hillary Clinton actually won the primary vote and once again, lost the caucus vote by a 2-1 margin.

As additional proof, Hillary Clinton actually won more delegates than Barack Obama did from all the non caucus contests, also known as primary contests. Even when Florida and Michigan are not counted Hillary Clinton still won more delegates than Barack Obama did in all of the remaining primary contests!

Hillary Clinton won more delegates than Barack Obama did when over 30 million people voted (again not even counting Michigan and Florida, states that Hillary Clinton was easily ahead of Barack Obama).

Only approximately 1.1 million people combined voted in all of the caucus contests, and that is where Barack Obama got his delegate margin of victory. Yes, the will of over 30 million democratic voters was overruled by the will of 1.1 million voters in caucus contests that do not follow the voting rules that are in place when we vote for a president in November.

Barack Obama's entire lead in the 2008 democratic nomination race came from the caucus contests. Barack's years as "community activist" where he recruited people to register anything that moved came in handy. Billionaire George Soros (who was recently spoofed on a Saturday Night live CSPAN segment) helped fund Barack Obama in a variety of ways. There was most likely massive mail in voting that Barack Obama benefited from. North Carolina is one state where Barack Obama had a hundred thousand vote mail in lead over Hillary Clinton even before the official day to vote had arrived.

That was the same day when Indiana mysteriously had late votes coming in and Hillary Clinton's 6-8 point lead turned into only a one point victory.

Yes, Barack Obama most probably did cheat, and his handlers absolutely make sure he is never asked any questions about his questionable wins in the caucus contests. What is saddest of all is that Barack Obama and his followers are the worst violators of the concept of "fair reflection". Robert Wexler of Florida did not even know what Fair Reflection meant during the Florida meeting to determine how to not count their votes.

Fair Reflection is a key component of what the democratic party is supposed to believe in, yet Barack Obama threw it under the bus this year because it was the only way he could win.

For additional suspicious activities by Pelosi and Clyburn that felled Hillary Clinton and could be related to ACORN, Clinton delegates bought by Pelosi and Clyburn

Saturday Night Live Still Image of George Soros lookalike, Read the SNL caption over the Image, Wow!

(Edit Update - Feb. 03, 2010) Here is a link to the Transcript of this video located at Wall Street Change).

If you look to the right margin you will see a whole section devoted to George Soros article links. These articles were written several months ago by me. If I was right about George Soros back then, and several months ahead of Saturday Night Live, maybe I'm right about the Barack Obama caucus cheating as well...

Do you really want to vote for a candidate who gets other politicians disqualified over "legal technalities", but then actually still cheats in the undervoting caucus contests to win? I'm a lifelong democrat and I WON'T be voting for Barack Obama.

George Soros and his Power Grab, important information.

Cracking the Hillary Code (from 2006) George Soros backed Huffington Post reveals plot to take out Hillary Clinton back in 2006.

This is why Hillary Clinton is Behind; Arianna Huffington, George Soros Connection Exposed in their own Trading Places Movie Sequel.

Billionaire Boob & Sidekick HuffPuppy (aka George Soros & Arianna Huffington) are about to Demolish the Democratic Party & Hillary Clinton.

Arianna Huffington and Secret Billionaire Boyfriend George Soros Attack the Institution of Marital Relationships by Attacking Hillary Clinton.

Huffington Post Slobbers over Clinton Supporter / Fundraiser Jill Iscol.

----------------------------------------------

George Soros buys the nomination, by Ed Hamler.

I came to the same conclusions about Soros KNOWING NOTHING about what Mr. Hamler had written. We've both come to the same conclusion using different research methods.

Nevada Caucus Tactics Involved a Purely Republican Florida 2000 Maneuver by the Barack Obama Camp.

Click on Image to enlarge.

Click on image to enlarge.

Click on Image to Enlarge.

When Al Gore tried to get votes recounted in Florida in 2000, the Republicans accused him of trying to change the voting rules to benefit him. In actuality, because of a one week voter recount time limit, what Al Gore did was try and address voting discrepancies without creating massive chaos an entire state recount would cause. I find it shocking that a Florida recount would not automatically trigger additional time to recount the votes. Apparently the United States supreme court was comfortable with a florida recount system that sticks to a schedule even if that schedule precludes a legitimate statewide recount from being possible. (gasp).

Because of this, Al Gore was trapped into asking for pieces of the Florida revote pie, and that is when the Republicans hit him with the accusation that Gore wanted to change the rules until Gore won. In Nevada, a similar thing happened. The Vegas Strip culinary workers were able to set up close to a dozen voting locations along the vegas strip. The problem with this was the caucus voting was ONLY available to the hotel workers and no one else who lived or worked in the area. Additionally, speaking out in public for Hillary Clinton in this type of situation could make an employee feel like their job was in danger for going against their bosses. The percentage of selected delegates from these specific caucus locations was going to favor the culinary union over any one else that voted elsewhere in the Nevada Caucus.

The Barack Obama camp received the endorsement of the Las Vegas culinary union (and you gotta wonder what sleazy tactics went on to get it since Hillary Clinton is supported by Hispanics and the culinary union has a very large contingent of Hispanics). There were also reports of intimidation among the Hispanic union members by the higher ups to vote for Barack Obama.

When individual members of the teachers union brought up the various inequities that would give the culinary union an unfair delegate advantage over all other voting counties in the state of Nevada, they were immediately attacked on all fronts and charges of racism ensued. Bill Clinton appeared in a newsclip eloquently defending the lawsuit and the lack of fairness in allowing Vegas Strip voting to count for more than any other group in the state. Some people have posted this clip on youtube and tried to imply that Bill Clinton was somehow being arrogant or upset. Actually Bill Clinton was basically 100% correct in his comments.

Then came the "Florida Manuever" by the Barack Obama camp. When the Nevada lawsuit was filed, the Barrack Obama people and their bot friends accused the Clinton's of filing a lawsuit to change the rules only because they did not get the union's endorsement. This is the kind of accusation that damages a reputation and is something usually reserved for the opposite political party, as the Republicans did to Al Gore back in 2000. In this instance it is the Barack Obama camp doing "the Florida Manuever" to a fellow democrat, Hillary Clinton.

While there are instances in which both sides hammered each other over various political stances, the Nevada situation was different because the lawsuit was bringing up the issue of "Fair Reflection" and the Barack Obama camp had no stomach to make sure the Nevada Caucus fairly reflected the vote of the state. What was the Clintons reward for supporting the conceopt of "Fair Reflection" in Nevada?

You can google Nevada Caucus Lawsuit and you will find a preponderance of articles that take Barack Obama's position and unfairly paint the Clinton's as being elitists and against fairness. Some articles even claim the Clintons arer racist against Hispanics!

It appears to me that the DNC only believed in Fair Reflection when it benefited Barack Obama, and the DNC did not support Fair Reflection when it benefited Hillary Clinton.

Check out these links. 13 page Lawsuit document (Item 33 on page 6 gets to the heart of the matter

Pathetic Attempt to by Ben Smith to accuse the Clintons of "disenfranchising" the culinary workers union.

This one on Alternet claims it is a "dubious lawsuit".

How can it be a dubious lawsuit to ask that the percentage of delegates selected from the Vegas Strip be porptionately equal to the rest of the state???

The craziest part of all, and bears repeating, the Vegas strip caucuses were only open to the employees of the hotel holding the caucus. No LOCAL RESIDENTS WERE ALLOWED IN, AND, could you imagine saying in public that you supported Hillary Clinton in the middle of a culinary union vote in which the union higher ups had already supported Barack Obama?

AFTER CLICKING THIS LINK, CHECK OUT THE COMMENTS SECTION TO SEE THE OBAMABOTS IN ACTION.

Who would stand up in front of their bosses and upper management and speak on Hillary Clinton's behalf? The fear of losing one's job, whether valid or not, is more than enough to quell Hillary Clinton Supporters from standing up at a culinary caucus meeting and speaking on behalf of Hillary Clinton. Even if the likelihood of losing one's job not really there, the perception of punishment CAN EASILY BE THERE.

While the Clintons were then accused of being anti-hispanic in Las Vegas, Bill Clinton was also being accused of being racist in South Carolina. Bill Clinton, racist? It is such a laughable concept, yet the racism card was played over and over by the George Soros influenced media early on and often.

Newsweek, or is it NewsTweak, joins the George Soros, Kool Aid Drinking Party.

MSNBC tab on Newsweek's website. It's just one big incestuous news family spawned by George Soros. George Soros, Huffington Post, Moveon.org, MSNBC, Newseek, Daily Kos, Media Matters, all there to push forward the agenda of George Soros.

Jonathan Alter was on television with Keith Olbermann trashing and attacking John McCain, and his memory for defending Hillary Clinton from the Media Attacks she actually did suffer.

Just one week earlier, the magazine Alter works for, Newsweek, ran an offensive piece that claimed there is no way to cheat in national elections. The irony of the article was that it NEVER mentioned the caucus state votes, and it NEVER mentioned the concept of Fair Reflection.

The conclusionary quote to the Newsweek article is wrought with obfuscation. "It is very, very hard to swing entire elections through large-scale polling-place fraud, in part because to do so one needs to organize great numbers of voters willing to commit felonies by registering as Mickey Mouse. And then voting in mouse ears. If we could just put the myth of vote fraud to rest, we would go a long way toward restoring "voter confidence."

Um, what about caucus fraud in which only thousands have to be involved? what about the overall will of over 35 million being circumvented by a mere million caucus voters?

It's just part of the same old, same old, MSNBC, Newsweek, George Soros, Huffington Post, not there to post the real news, just the news that fits their own agenda.

To top it off, Newsweek has now run a poll that shows Barack Obama 15 points ahead whereas all over polls show Barack Obama ahead by 4-8 points. Is this the best we can expect from one of our "top" magazines?

Complete alignment with one political party over the other while holding onto the claim that these organizations are "news groups" is fraud, but actually dictating WHICH CANDIDATE is "elected" within a major political party just might be treason.

What Hillary Clinton Supporters are Fighting For.

I believe that George Soros, Huffington Post, MSNBC, MoveON.org and a few others spearheaded a move to secure the democratic nomination for Barack Obama. If this is true, AND they cheated to do it, then it is essential that this result be overturned, otherwise the affect it will have on future presidential races could be catastrophic.

If Barack Obama was assisted in winning the democratic nomination by George Soros, Huffington Post, Move On, and MSNBC, then in the future, viable democratic candidates might feel compelled to get the blessing of the above group or not even make an attempt to run for the presidency. Donors may not even bother donating money to a campaign if the candidate does not have the approval of those mentioned above since they will have all the power.

If MSNBC is successful in changing the way they report news and gain viewers in the process, and also get to select who the presumptive democratic candidate is before the public even casts a single vote, they will never change back to being a news station that reports the news, rather than manipulates it.

The higher ups who support Fox television news, upon seeing how that they lost the presidential race to a democratic candidate who was financially propped up and helped by so many forces, may begin interfere in the republic nominating process to a greater degree. Rather than waiting until the public elects the Republican nominee, Fox News and their higher ups may choose to take the mystery out of this step and in essence help pre-select the presumptive Republican nominee in the same manner that George Soros, MSNBC, Huffington Post and Move On have done with Barack Obama.

The fight to see "truth in voting" win out, also known as Fair Reflection, not only affects this election, but will have far reaching consequences in future presidential elections as well. A lot is at stake in seeing the real truth come out of the fraudulent caucus voting that helped the democratic presumptive nominee, Barack Obama gain an ill gotten advantage over Hillary Clinton.

MSNBC and Huffington Post Lay it on Thick as Hillary Clinton is Forced to Suspend her Campaign.

The false platitudes pour in from both Huffington Post and MSNBC over Hillary Clinton's forced suspension speech. Forcing a suspension speech from Hillary Clinton so early after the end of democratic nomination race, when Hillary Clinton had had as many popular votes if not more than the presumptive nominee (Barack Obama), is unprecedented in the history of the United States.

Fox News seems to support the presumptive Republican candidate, but did Fox News actually demand that John McCain be the nominee? Doubtful.

It appears that Fox did not have anywhere near as much of a hand in selecting the actual Republican candidate as MSNBC and Huffington Post have had in pushing Barack Obama over Hillary Clinton.

In the past, billionaire tycoons may have backed one political party over another, but this year a billionaire has actually controlled the american news media and internet news into favoring a specific candidate (Barack Obama) over the more popular candidate (Hillary Clinton), when both were with the same political party. This apparently takes the practice of "billionaire butting in" to a whole new, corrupt level.

From my point of view, disassembling the democratic party and reassembling it with higher ups that don't take their walking orders from George Soros and Arianna Huffington is the best way to save the democratic party in the long run. While Barack Obama talks a good game about change, if he is successful in his run for the presidency he will actually set back the democratic party a decade or more as future candidates will have to be approved by George Soros and Arianna Huffington.

At the end of the day, Barack Obama won because of the constant media attack against Hillary Clinton. The media attack was pinioned on the result of the fraudulent over votes in the caucus state contests. MSNBC and all news media refused to address the lack of Fair Reflection in the Great Plains Caucus contests. Barack Obama won by wildly inaccurate amounts in the caucus state votes, and all the media will say about this is that Barack Obama had better ground forces in those states.

Nobody dares to bring up the concept of "Fair Reflection", except for the coolest head on the block, Harold Ickes.

New Blog from Alessandro Machi, WALL STREET CHANGE, is now Online.

Wall Street Change

While the George Soros / Arianna Huffington led Media Attack against Hillary Clinton appears to be succeeding, I think it important to not lose sight of issues that affect every american on a daily level.

Wall Street fascinates me.

I understand that Wall Street represents a link to the global business community, but is the Wall Street Status quo acceptable to americans who are seeing their local economy suffer as a result?

When Wall Street Stock rises because a fortune 500 company reduces american labor force, even when that labor force was not actually losing the company money, it becomes clear that Wall Street's agenda is different from that which is decent for the american citizen. I'd like Wall Street Change to be a place where we build simple ideas into simple solutions that maybe one day get incorporated by Wall Street.

Billionaire Boob & Sidekick HuffPuppy (aka George Soros & Arianna Huffington) are about to Demolish the Democratic Party & Hillary Clinton.

Billionaire Boob, pseudo intellectual George Soros and sidekick Arianna Huffington close in on their cartoonish plot to take over the Democratic Party and install a not ready for prime time candidate, Barack Obama. As more and more toxic and shocking video emerges from Barack Obama's church denigrating white people for spawning from prior generations of white people, the democratic party marches on in its quest to nominate a man who professes to a religious upbringing, but cheated in the Caucus State Elections and now denys the vote of millions of voters in Michigan and Florida.

Can the democrats be trusted to run the Senate and House after this falls election when they let themselves be bought so easily by a billionaire boob and his side kick Arianna? Meanwhile a popular vote democratic majority sit by in amazement as they witness how complicent the democratic puppet leadership has become at the hands of Billionaire Boob and his Sidekick HuffPuppy.

Arianna Huffington and Secret Billionaire Boyfriend George Soros Attack the Institution of Marital Relationships by Attacking Hillary Clinton.

If you found out that Arianna Huffington and George Soros were secret lovers and had entered into a deal to destroy Hillary Clinton's chances to become the President of the United States, would you for a moment consider it an attack on all married couples in the United States?

You should.

It is difficult enough to stay married through thick and thin. The idea that a divorcee and her billionaire lover would try and destroy a married couples reputation, is repugnant.

What can be more anti family and shrewish than having a private affair with a billionaire admirer, who in an effort to please her, actually assists in the destruction of a married political candidate?

Hillary Clinton has already survived her own marital glitches without divorcing. While it is easy to judge the Clintons as falling short in their marital relationship, the Clintons seem to have raised a very healthy and knock your socks off child to womanhood and have also shown a level of marital teamwork that surely most married couples would admire, and strive to emulate.

That's right, in their own unique way, the Clintons are role models in how to raise a child, and in husband and wife teamwork.

If you found out that all the Clintons had worked for in their entire life was now being destroyed by a divorced women and her billionaire admirer, shouldn't you pause for a moment and ask yourself, just who is the good person, and who is the shrew, in this scenario?

Who do you stand for?

Do you stand for the secret, self absorbed pseudo intellectual couple who show their lust for each other by attacking a married couples reputation, or do you stand for the Clintons and their ability to lead a country, already proven once in the 90's and no doubt ready for an encore.

YOU have to stand up and be counted because the heads of the democratic party have been bought off by Nerds with Money, a lot of money, and your future is in the balance if you don't stand up and be counted. No matter what the rest of the inattentive media tells you, YOU can say no, and not accept the junk you are being fed by a billionaire boob and the divorced women he appears to lust after.

(editors note - this article was written the end of May 2008, when it had become abundantly clear that Huffington Post had helped lead the movement to keep Hillary Clinton from the 2008 democratic nomination and had used their supposed news reports to slant the race in favor of Barack Obama, and we are all paying a huge price now for that lack of journalistic integrity.)

This is why Hillary Clinton is Behind; Arianna Huffington, George Soros Connection Exposed in their own Trading Places Movie Sequel.

In the movie Trading Places. Eddie Murphy and Dan Aykroyd discover that two rich brothers have made a one dollar bet over their futures. I won't get into the subplot of Eddie Murphy being black and Dan Aykroyd being white as that is not point of this article.

The point is that George Soros and Arianna Huffington have some kind of alliance that wants to see Barack Obama win, at all costs to the democratic party. Barack Obama is actually a pretty good fellow on many levels.

I kind of see Barack Obama as a flim flam man underneath the hood, but I also see him as an intelligent man who can communicate with people. Barack also seems to be able to make a fine first impression, sort of like George Bush.

However, the truth is, and always will be, that Barack Obama's side cheated in the caucus states. Add to that the never ending attacks on the Clintons by too too many people in the media. Eventually, Fox NEWS started defending Hillary Clinton!

When one considers how popular the Clintons remain with the public we have to call this years democratic election a political coup spearheaded by George Soros on the East Coast, and Arianna Huffington on the West Coast.

A candidate like Hillary Clinton that can retain 50% of the popular vote while being attacked by so many entities IS THE STRONGER CANDIDATE. Now all that is left to do is find who out who George Soros made his One Dollar Bet with. Where is Rupert Murdoch when we need him?

How many Hi Profile Celebrity Pigs have lapped up the George Soros trough, Arianna?

2008 Alaska Caucus, quotes and comments from people who were there.

I know very little about the Alaska Caucus. Apparently Barack Obama originally won over 69% of the delegates. Anybody know what the actual popularity of both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama actually is in Alaska? Lol, 405 votes apparently decided 13 delegates. Is that possible? More importantly, is that an accurate way to allocate the delegates?

------------

I'm adding to this topic on August 13, 2008.

Here are a couple of quotes that I think some up caucusing very well...

Democracy??

So this is what democracy looks like? I don't know where that picture was taken but I sure didn't see any rally of any kind tonight while I was there. I stood in a line for 45 minutes listening or trying to listen to people scramble around not knowing what to do. When I finally did get herded to a classroom I handed the guy my blue card and wrote down on a yellow note pad who I wanted to vote for. I could have written the name 20 times if I wanted. I never really felt any part of anything other than confused. A big disappoitment for me, maybe I was just expecting too much. Oh well I wanted John Edwards anyway.

------------------------

and this comment...

February 5, 2008 - 11:34pm | DEM53

Understand

I understand that they were overwhelmed but that wasn't really my frustration. I was just expecting more from the whole process. The group as a whole should have been addressed and unified as Democrats. There were over five thousand Democrats gathered tonight and all the evening was spent separating us and not unifying us. There were many senior citizens that were lost in the shuffle and couldn't hear the directions that were being given. Maybe I was expecting too much.

------------------------

Fun Times...

I was there:

masses of Alaskans registering as Democrats for the first time, just wanting to be part of the movement... people of all kinds crowding in to have their vote counted...excitment...confusion..lots of laughter and smiles as we all went along with a weird but invigorating process of voting with our bodies...losing my family in the crowd...regaining my hope for America.

Heard at the caucus:

"go to your room", "be patient", "if you don't know where to go...find the map", "stand up" ,"sit down", "raise your hand", "when I touch your hand, put it down", "If you didn't get a blue card, use a yellow one", "move over here, line up and put your hand on the person front of you", "wait 5 minutes and we'll count you again", "now try to get people to come join your group", "If you don't have 15 percent you have to go home" ...whatever works I guess...

and my favorite from a forlorn lady with a clipboard as we were leaving -"Uh, anyone wanna be a delegate?"

fun times...

------------------------

"Wait five minutes and we'll count you again???? Senior Citizens lost in the shuffle.... I could have written the name 20 times if I had wanted.....

and perhaps the one that explains it best.... "There were over five thousand Democrats gathered tonight and all the evening was spent separating us and not unifying us".

--------------------------

Me again, this is not my party, this is not the democratic party that I know and am a part of. I blame George Soros for all of the problems. When a billionaire's only goal is to see that Barack Obama wins, we get a fixed election and people treated like their vote doesn't count.