Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Social media claim: Are contributions to BLM really going to DNC candidates?

#1
C C Offline
The "no" response
https://www.factcheck.org/2020/06/donati...go-to-dnc/

EXCERPT: There are a number of groups that use the phrase “Black Lives Matter” in their name. [...]  Kailee Scales, said that the claims about the money being routed to Democrats are part of “an organized disinformation campaign against BLM, from actors clearly trying to blunt the growing support for this movement. All contributions to the DNC are publicly reported to the FEC and review of FEC reports will confirm there has never been any donation from this organization,” she said.

[...] According to the IRS, “all section 501©(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. Contributions to political campaign funds or public statements of position (verbal or written) made on behalf of the organization in favor of or in opposition to any candidate for public office clearly violate the prohibition against political campaign activity.”

A Thousand Currents audit for 2019 shows that, as of June 2019, the organization held nearly $3.4 million in net assets for Black Lives Matter. It had released nearly $1.8 million to the group in the last fiscal year. The audit also provides a breakdown of how the foundation (referred to as the “fiscal project” under a statement of functional expenses, according to de Rivera) spent that $1.8 million in buckets — including on consultants and salaries.


- - -
The "yes" response ... (CNN executive: "These are not the right type of black guests to book on your show, Soledad." --parallel universe where Roland Martin was not the subject)

https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/H1toK3ODe9U
Reply
#2
stryder Offline

https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/_1CjYBSVY2g

I have a pet conspiracy that's been burning a while (wear your tinfoil hats liberally). It involves the original fallout of Cambridge Analytica (and some of the story from the Netflix documentary) certain questions were left to ask.

For instance: Cambridge Analytica was deeply rooted in Trumps original election campaign, when it all went pearshaped for Nix however one of his company members who'd been a part of Trumps campaign didn't just "turn" but then hid in a foreign country "beyond their finances" mentioning that they felt their life was threated. To me it actually suggests the story might of been a little different than reported.

It's known that Trump's demeanour implies that he'd like to be surrounded by a bunch of Yes-"women" of which Nix's turned workforce was likely one (It would explain her Financing) but that's not the question or point I'm trying to make, what question I have is "What happened to Nix's/Cambridge Analytica's Intellectual property?"

It's suggested via the documentary that the scare mongery about what Cambridge Analytica had proven capable of doing was "rebel rousing for Demagogues", to instil unrest and change. It was suggest that it was "Weaponised" but as with any seized weapon you'd assume it to be locked away in a vault or taken away to be destroyed. I think however that it was actually "Stolen" through what would be manipulated through a posed legitimate channel (I don't need to really put points as to where I'm suggesting it went).

It's been a few years since the bust up of Cambridge Analytica however it's been plenty of time for those that stole that information/methodology to weaponise it.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Embattled DNC Chief Debbie Wasserman Schultz Won't Speak at Convention C C 0 340 Jul 25, 2016 11:25 PM
Last Post: C C
  "Is she really going out with him?" -- Joe Jackson C C 0 563 Nov 24, 2014 04:10 AM
Last Post: C C



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)