WhatFinger

Stronger together, suckers

Well well . . . Hillary campaign accused of fraudulent charges to low-income donors' credit cards

By Dan Calabrese ——--September 16, 2016

American Politics, News | CFP Comments | Reader Friendly | Subscribe | Email Us

You know those horrible people who take your credit card information, supposedly for a one-time purchase or a single donation, then turn around and charge it again multiple times beyond what you authorized? Scam artists! Criminals! Who are these people and where do they get the nerve to prey on people like that? For one thing, it is usually people who know how to fly under the radar screen. For instance, if they know that no one investigates thefts under $100, they'll steal $99, or something less than that. People who know how to break the law without ever having to pay a price for it. Sound familiar? Of course it does:
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.” This is about as classic a Clinton scam as you're ever going to see. They know exactly how to push right up to the line without ever crossing it and actually facing criminal charges. And even though they are in violation of the law, and there's no doubt about that if you look at the facts, they know how law enforcement prioritizes criminal action, and they have every expectation that a) nothing will be done; and b) they can minimize any damage from exposure because they can claim it was all just a big misunderstanding and the media will cover for them. Even now, with what we've learned from this story, chances are the story won't go far unless someone (i.e. not the mainstream media) independently investigates it further and proves it's intentional and systematic. And even then, Hillary will be given cover unless someone can prove she knew about it and/or directed it.

Support Canada Free Press

Donate

If the public still doesn't understand that a) this is who she is; and b) this is how she would use the power of the presidency,

This is one of the reasons, as Rob told you the other day, no one trusts the media - because they cover up stuff like this if that's what they have to do to help Democrats. We need to make sure this story gains a great deal more life than the media want it to. Hillary is stealing, not only from unwitting donors, but from those who can least afford to be stolen from. That is no surprise to any of us who have followed her career. This is who she is. She cheats, she lies and she worries not because she never has to pay a price for any of it. If the public still doesn't understand that a) this is who she is; and b) this is how she would use the power of the presidency, they had damn well better take a good look at this story and wise up. November is getting awfully close, and despite the encouraging turn in recent polls, it is still not impossible that we could put this con artist in the White House.
Subscribe

View Comments
Dan Calabrese——

Dan Calabrese’s column is distributed by HermanCain.com, which can be found at HermanCain

Follow all of Dan’s work, including his series of Christian spiritual warfare novels, by liking his page on Facebook.

VIEW Comments

Sponsored