I bet she steals candy from babies and older kids lunch money on the sly
when she's recuperating. She probably keeps a litter of puppies around to
kick and terrorize. just joking but I wouldn't be surprised............

On Sep 16, 2016 10:18 AM, "Bear Guy" <thatbearg...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> Thatbearguy
> @Thatbearguy
>
>
>
> Exclusive: Hillary Clinton Campaign Systematically Overcharging Poorest
> DonorsWells Fargo fraud department inundated with calls from low-income
> Clinton supporters reporting repeated unauthorized charges
> By Liz Crokin <http://observer.com/author/liz-crokin/> • 09/15/16 2:35pm
> [image: Hillary for America processed $94 in unauthorized charges to Carol
> Mahre's US Bank account.]
>
> Hillary for America processed a total of $94 in unauthorized charges to
> Carol Mahre’s US Bank account. This follows a pattern in which unwitting
> donors are charged multiple times, but always for a total of less than
> $100, which is a key trigger point for banks’ internal action systems. Photo:
> Courtesy Carol Mahre
>
> Hillary Clinton’s campaign is stealing from her poorest supporters by
> purposefully and repeatedly overcharging them after they make what’s
> supposed to be a one-time small donation through her official campaign
> website, multiple sources tell the Observer.
>
> The overcharges are occurring so often that the fraud department at one of
> the nation’s biggest banks receives up to 100 phone calls a day from
> Clinton’s small donors asking for refunds for unauthorized charges to their
> bankcards made by Clinton’s campaign. One elderly Clinton donor, who has
> been a victim of this fraud scheme, has filed a complaint with her state’s
> attorney general and a representative from the office told her that they
> had forwarded her case to the Federal Election Commission.
>
> “We get up to a hundred calls a day from Hillary’s low-income supporters
> complaining about multiple unauthorized charges,” a source, who asked to
> remain anonymous for fear of job security, from the Wells Fargo fraud
> department told the Observer. The source claims that the Clinton campaign
> has been pulling this stunt since Spring of this year. The Hillary for
> America campaign will overcharge small donors by repeatedly charging small
> amounts such as $20 to the bankcards of donors who made a one-time
> donation. However, the Clinton campaign strategically doesn’t overcharge
> these donors $100 or more because the bank would then be obligated to
> investigate the fraud.
>
> “We don’t investigate fraudulent charges unless they are over $100,” the
> fraud specialist explained. “The Clinton campaign knows this, that’s why we
> don’t see any charges over the $100 amount, they’ll stop the charges just
> below $100. We’ll see her campaign overcharge donors by $20, $40 or $60 but
> never more than $100.” The source, who has worked for Wells Fargo for over
> 10 years, said that the total amount they refund customers on a daily basis
> who have been overcharged by Clinton’s campaign “varies” but the bank
> usually issues refunds that total between $700 and $1,200 per day.
>
> The fraud specialist said that Clinton donors who call in will attempt to
> resolve the issue with the campaign first but they never get anywhere.
> “They will call the Clinton campaign to get their refund and the issue
> never gets resolved. So they call us and we just issue the refund. The
> Clinton campaign knows these charges are small potatoes and that we’ll just
> refund the money back.”
>
> The source said that pornography companies often deploy a similar
> arrangement pull. “We see this same scheme with a lot of seedy porn
> companies,” the source said. The source also notes that the dozens of phone
> calls his department receives daily are from people who notice the
> fraudulent charges on their statements. “The people who call us are just
> the ones who catch the fraudulent charges. I can’t imagine how many more
> people are getting overcharged by Hillary’s campaign and they have no idea.”
>
> The source said he’s apolitical but noted that the bank’s fraud department
> is yet to receive one call from a Donald Trump supporter claiming to have
> been overcharged by Trump’s campaign. “I’m only talking to you because what
> Hillary’s doing is so messed up, she’s stealing from her poorest
> supporters.”
> [image: Carol and Roger Mahre.]
>
> Carol Mahre has been charged multiple times after signing up for a
> one-time donation. Her son, Roger Mahre, is an attorney who filed a
> complaint with Minnesota’s attorney general. Photo: Courtesy Carol Mahre
>
> Wells Fargo recently came under fire after news broke
> <https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2016-09-09/wells-fargo-opened-a-couple-million-fake-accounts>
>  that
> various regulators fined the big bank $185 million for opening 2 million
> phony customer accounts without their customers’ permission. This massive
> scandal resulted in the firing
> <http://money.cnn.com/2016/09/08/investing/wells-fargo-created-phony-accounts-bank-fees/>of
> 5,300 Wells Fargo employees.
>
> Carol Mahre, an 81-year-old grandmother of seven from Minnesota, is one of
> the victims of Clinton’s campaign donor fraud scandal. In March, Mahre said
> she made a one-time $25 donation via Clinton’s official campaign website.
> However, when she received her U.S. Bank card statement, she noticed
> multiple $25 charges were made. Mahre, who said in an interview
> <http://www.kare11.com/news/investigations/kare-11-investigates-unauthorized-charges-by-clinton-campaign/229158541>
>  she
> only contributed $25 because she’s “not rich” and that’s all she could
> afford, contacted her son, Roger Mahre, to help her dispute the
> unauthorized charges.
>
> Roger, who is an attorney, told the Observer that he called the Clinton
> campaign dozens of times in April and early May in an attempt to resolve
> the issue. “It took me at least 40 to 50 phone calls to the campaign office
> before I finally got ahold of someone,” Roger said. “After I got a campaign
> worker on the phone, she said they would stop making the charges.”
>
> Incredibly, the very next day, Carol’s card was charged yet again and the
> campaign had never reversed the initial fraudulent charges. “I was told
> they would stop charging my mother’s card but they never stopped.” He added
> that he knows his mother did not sign up for recurring payments. “She’s
> very good with the internet so I know she only made a one-time payment.”
> Roger also pointed out that even if his mother mistakenly signed up for
> recurring monthly payments then she should’ve been charged for the same
> amount of money each month, not multiple charges for varying amounts on the
> same day or in the same month. Furthermore, Roger said that after the
> campaign was made aware of this situation, the charges should’ve stopped
> but they never did.
>
> The Clinton campaign overcharged Carol $25 three times and then
> overcharged her one time for $19, a grand total of $94 in fraudulent
> charges. The campaign’s overcharges to Carol were just a few dollars short
> of $100. This is in line with what the Wells Fargo bank source revealed to
> the Observer.
>
> Since the campaign failed to amend the problem for Carol, Roger contacted
> her bank, U.S. Bank. However, he ran into problems when he asked U.S. Bank
> to refund his mother’s money. Roger told the Observer that the bank would
> not reverse the charges and that a bank spokesperson told him that they had
> no control over companies that make unauthorized charges. At that point,
> Roger decided to contact his local news and filed a fraud complaint with
> Minnesota Attorney General Lori Swanson’s office on behalf of his mother.
> After local TV news Kare 11 ran a story, someone from U.S. Bank contacted
> Roger the next day and said that they had reversed and stopped the charges
> to his mother’s card.
>
> A representative from Minnesota’s Democratic attorney general’s office
> told Roger that this problem wasn’t in their jurisdiction and that they had
> forwarded the case to the FEC. However, FEC spokesperson Julia Queen told
> the Observer they have no record of the case. “We don’t have it,” Queen
> said. The Observer contacted Swanson’s office and did not hear back.
>
> Roger did eventually get a letter from a lawyer representing the Clinton
> campaign. In the letter, the lawyer wrote that his mother would be removed
> from their donor list; however, the campaign did not take any
> responsibility for the fraudulent charges.
>
> “They basically said that they weren’t accepting responsibility for this
> but they’d remove my mom from the donor list,” he said. Roger is less than
> happy with the way the Clinton campaign has handled this nightmare for him
> and his mother. “This is a load of crap!” Mahre said. “The
> self-righteousness of politicians drives me insane. If you and I did this,
> we’d be thrown in jail. This is theft, fraud or wire fraud—it’s a federal
> crime!”
>
> Since Carol’s story became public, Roger said he’s heard from other people
> who have been ripped off by the Clinton campaign. “I’ve heard this is
> happening to other small donors,” Roger said. “People will donate $25, but
> then when they receive their credit card statement, they are charged $25
> multiple times.”
>
> The incident hasn’t just left a bad taste in Roger’s mouth. Carol decided
> she’s not going to vote for Hillary even though she’s voted for the
> Democratic presidential nominee every election since President Dwight
> Eisenhower won reelection in 1956. “My mother is a lifelong Democrat and
> she’s voted every election in her life for a Democrat but she’s not going
> to vote for Hillary,” Roger said.
>
> *The New York Times* reported in 2007
> <http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/13/us/politics/13donate.html?pagewanted=print>
>  that
> Clinton’s first presidential campaign had to refund and subtract hundreds
> of thousands of dollars from its first-quarter total often because donors’
> credit cards were charged twice. Additionally, it was reported
> <http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/4/1/488052/-> that Clinton had to
> refund a stunning $2.8 million in donations, three times more than the
> $900K President Barack Obama’s campaign refunded.
>
> Another bank source told the Observer that Clinton’s motivation in
> purposefully overcharging donors is not only to rake in more money for her
> campaign but also to inflate her small donor numbers reported to the FEC.
> “This gives a false impression about how much money Clinton has raised,”
> the source said. “The money that the bank has refunded would not be
> reflected in the FEC filings till after the election. This gives off the
> illusion to the public that her support and the amount she’s raised is much
> greater than what it is in reality.”
>
> A Clinton campaign worker named Kathy Callahan, who worked on Clinton’s
> presidential campaign in 2008, claimed
> <http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/3/10/473007/-> in a blog post that
> Clinton fraudulently overcharged her by several thousand dollars. She wrote
> that she voluntarily left the campaign’s finance committee after she
> discovered $3,000 in unauthorized charges made by Clinton’s campaign to her
> Visa card. Callahan said the unauthorized charges caused $400 in overdraft
> and bank charges and put Callahan over the legal donor limit. Callahan said
> that after a month of “begging and pleading,” she wasn’t able to get her
> money back until she threatened to go to authorities. However, when she was
> finally refunded her money the Clinton campaign refused to compensate her
> for the $400 in overdraft and bank charges.
>
> Callahan also wrote that Matt McQueeney, who worked in the compliance and
> accounting department at Clinton’s campaign headquarters at the time, told
> her, “What happened to you with credit card errors is happening to others.”
> McQueeney reportedly parted ways
> <https://newrepublic.com/article/61351/voices-her-head> with the Clinton
> campaign shortly after this incident occurred. Backing up what McQueeney
> claimed, there were several incidents similar to Callahan’s reported in
> 2008 <http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/4/1/488052/->. Callahan and
> McQueeney could not be reached for comment.
>
> In 2001, the Clintons were accused of attempting to steal items donated to
> the White House during Bill’s presidency as he exited office. There was
> $190,000 worth of gifts in question that the Clintons shipped to their then
> new estate in Chappaqua, New York. Multiple donors said
> <http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=121856&page=1> that they had
> understood that the items they had donated during Clinton’s presidency were
> to stay in the White House as part of the 1993 White House redecoration
> project. Initially, the Clintons claimed that the items in question were
> given to them prior to President Clinton taking office; however, government
> records proved otherwise. Facing strong criticism, the Clintons decided
> to return <http://articles.latimes.com/2001/feb/10/news/mn-23723> several
> items including $28,500 in furnishings and they paid $86,000 for other
> gifts.
>
> Murmurs of theft are nothing new to the Clintons. In 2001, the Clintons
> were accused of attempting to steal items
> <http://articles.latimes.com/2001/feb/10/news/mn-23723> donated to the
> White House during Bill’s presidency as he exited office, including
> $190,000 worth of gifts in question that the Clintons shipped to their new
> estate in Chappaqua, New York. But Bill begs to differ.
>
> He recently compared himself
> <http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/294526-bill-clinton-compares-himself-foundation-to-robin-hood>
>  to
> Robin Hood and said that through their foundation he asks people with money
> to give to people who don’t have money. In reality, the Clintons steal from
> people who have little money and they’re robbing some of Hillary’s most
> impoverished supporters—including a poor elderly grandma—to fund her
> campaign.
> *Disclosure: Donald Trump is the father-in-law of Jared Kushner, the
> publisher of Observer Media.*http://observer.com/2016
> /09/exclusive-hillary-clinton-campaign-systematically-
> overcharging-poorest-donors/
>
> --
> --
> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "PoliticalForum" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to politicalforum+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to politicalforum+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to