Posted on 10/05/2023 12:54:47 PM PDT by Red Badger
Recent investigations have unearthed disconcerting activities between Arabella Advisors, a consulting firm, and the Democratic Party, casting a dark shadow over the latter's financial integrity
Recent investigations have unearthed disconcerting activities between Arabella Advisors, a consulting firm, and the Democratic Party, casting a dark shadow over the latter's financial integrity. This connection has caused ripples of concern regarding undisclosed financial influences in our democratic processes. Let’s break down exactly what's going on.
What is Arabella Advisors?
Arabella Advisors is a consultancy firm, but it isn't just any firm. This company seemingly wields control over a vast multibillion-dollar network of "dark money" funds. These funds, which include notable names like the New Venture Fund and the Sixteen Thirty Fund, operate in a way that doesn't require them to disclose their donors, thus the term "dark money."
The Dubious Tangle:
Eric Kessler, the founder and sole owner of Arabella Advisors, also served pivotal roles in the New Venture Fund, namely its chairman and president. This dual role presents a stark conflict of interest. Arabella has reportedly received a whopping $230 million in management fees since 2006 from its dark money funds, which includes the New Venture Fund. When one entity controls both the funds and benefits from them, the potential for financial malfeasance looms large.
The Secure Democracy Deception:
Perhaps the most glaring issue is the New Venture Fund's control over Secure Democracy, which portrayed itself as a nonpartisan entity. This organization, in 2020 and 2021, pressed lawmakers in over 20 states to expand mail-in balloting and ran advertisement campaigns against vulnerable Republican senators. Internal documents and interviews suggest that the New Venture Fund may have overstepped legal boundaries by using its charitable resources to guide Secure Democracy's partisan political activities. Furthermore, they seemingly worked hard to hide this control, as acknowledging it would jeopardize their influence on Republican lawmakers and voters.
Photo by Joshua Woroniecki on Unsplash
The Mail-In Balloting Campaign and Potential Abuses
Mail-in balloting, a system allowing voters to send their ballots through the mail, became a significant focal point during the 2020 elections, primarily due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the need for safe, distanced voting. While the system does offer undeniable benefits, its rapid expansion, pushed by organizations like Secure Democracy, has raised concerns about potential vulnerabilities and abuses. Let’s delve into the nuances of the mail-in balloting campaign and the concerns surrounding it.
The Push for Mail-In Balloting:
The organization Secure Democracy, under the umbrella of New Venture Fund, mounted a robust campaign in 2020 and 2021 to advocate for mail-in balloting. They pressured lawmakers in over 20 states to expand the system and ran advertisements against certain Republican senators. The goal was clear: make mail-in voting widespread, ensuring a broader voter turnout.
Potential Abuses of Mail-In Balloting:
1. Voter Fraud:
Critics argue that mail-in balloting can be more susceptible to voter fraud than in-person voting. Concerns range from ballots being sent to deceased persons or those who have moved, to the potential of one person submitting multiple ballots.
2. Ballot Harvesting:
This refers to the practice of third parties collecting and submitting ballots on behalf of voters. While some argue it's a service to those who can't submit their own, others believe it's open to manipulation, with third parties potentially influencing the voter's choice or selectively submitting ballots.
3. Lost or Delayed Ballots:
The postal service can experience delays, leading to ballots arriving after the deadline. This could disenfranchise a section of the population simply due to logistical issues.
4. Lack of Voter Privacy:
Voting in person allows for a secret ballot. With mail-in balloting, there's a risk, however minimal, that others might see a voter's choices or coerce them into voting a certain way.
5. Complexity for the Voter:
While it might seem straightforward, mail-in voting often has specific steps that must be followed for the ballot to be counted. Mistakes in following these steps could lead to a voter's ballot being discarded.
The Role of Secure Democracy and Arabella's Network:
Secure Democracy's push for mail-in balloting, when viewed in isolation, could be seen as an effort to ensure greater voter turnout and safety during a pandemic. However, the organization's ties to New Venture Fund and Arabella's network, with their clear partisan inclinations, have raised eyebrows.
Internal documents and whistleblower accounts suggest that Secure Democracy's campaign was not as nonpartisan as portrayed. If true, the expansion of mail-in balloting wasn't just about enfranchising voters but could have had underlying political motivations, giving one party an advantage over the other.
Mail-in balloting offers a convenient method for many to cast their votes, especially in unprecedented times like a global pandemic. However, its rapid expansion and the potential vulnerabilities it introduces need thorough examination. The involvement of partisan organizations in pushing for its widespread adoption further complicates the narrative, necessitating a call for greater transparency and checks to ensure the integrity of the democratic process.
The Whistleblower:
Sarah Walker, a former executive director of Secure Democracy, appears to have pulled the curtain back on these shady dealings. Allegedly, after she highlighted that the charity's control over Secure Democracy could be legally precarious, she lost her job. Following her claims, the New Venture Fund swiftly shut down Secure Democracy and launched a new entity, Secure Democracy USA. This rapid response suggests that there may have been a direct link between Walker's revelations and potential legal implications tied to the organization's activities.
Implications for the Democrats:
The crux of the matter is that Arabella and its funds have been major contributors to the Democratic Party. In just two years, 2020 and 2021, they channeled a staggering $3.3 billion to catalyze the creation of left-leaning advocacy groups nationwide. If the legal investigations into Arabella’s activities find them guilty of any wrongdoing, it may have profound implications on the Democratic Party's financial sources and its political strategies.
In conclusion, for democracy to function at its best, trust and transparency are paramount. The intricate dealings of Arabella Advisors and its associated entities challenge this transparency. The Democrats, as beneficiaries of this vast network, face an imperative choice: to address these issues head-on, ensuring clearer financial transparency, or risk eroding public trust.
This is a dynamic story with more details arising each day. We will continue to cover it as it unravels! Stay Vigilant!
OK…..
Who gave them the money?
Nations hostile to The United States
heads up
this could be big
heads up:
Lawsuit Unearths Link Between Dem Megadonor SBF, Parents, and Democratic Dark Money Behemoth Arabella Advisors
The amount of discretionary money controlled by several new world order multibillionaires is staggering. Never before in human history have people had so much available money to spread around. Even though kings had great wealth, but it was mostly in the form of castles and land and jewels. It wasn’t just liquid money that could be spent instantly.
ThanQs for the ping!
Who gave them the money? Why, you did in part. You see taxpayers hand over billions to Planned Buthcherhood who then dump a significant portion of that federal money back into Democrat campaign organizations. A lot to those bankers (Wall Street) who spew fear on YouTube channels are themselves back-channel donors through their clandestine setups. I’m guessing most of the military industrial complex funnels money back to Democrats/Biden/Clinton. All this doesn’t even take into account illegal foreign donations that Obama and Clinton knowingly took.
Arabella is the brainchild of Democratic Party operative Eric Kessler, who first conceived of the company in 2005 after serving as a special assistant in the Clinton administration to then-Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt. Kessler is also tied directly to the Clintons, serving the now-defunct Clinton Global Initiative. Prior to that, Kessler was an environmental activist for the League of Conservation Voters, where he worked as national field director.
Eric Kessler comes from a wealthy Chicago family whose fortune originated with the 1998 sale of Fel-Pro, their auto-parts manufacturer and “fifth-generation family-owned business,” for a reported $750 million. He’s a board member of the Family Alliance Foundation, his family’s grantmaking nonprofit, which largely funds medical causes. The foundation also funds the World Resources Institute, an environmentalist nonprofit created with startup capital from the MacArthur Foundation that has hailed an extreme carbon tax proposal as “good starting point” for “cut[ting] emissions in line with the goals of the Paris agreement.”
Kessler co-owns three ritzy restaurants in the District of Columbia, one of which, Graffiato, closed in July 2018 following a sexual harassment settlement against co-owner and chef Mike Isabella. He’s also active on many boards, including the Chefs Action Network, the Washington Regional Association of Grantmakers, and the James Beard Foundation, which promotes liberal education and healthcare policies under the guise of “good food for good.”
Arabella Advisors has grown significantly since its 2005 founding. Today, it’s the largest philanthropy consulting firm in the country, servicing major clients like the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. From its Washington, D.C., headquarters, Arabella Advisors pulls the strings of the Sixteen Thirty Fund, a 501(c)(4) funding and fiscal sponsorship nonprofit, along with three 501(c)(3) “sister” nonprofits. “Simply put,” Arabella Advisors wrote in 2015, “to effect change, more philanthropists need to advocate.” That’s a good summary of the company’s services, which revolve around what it terms the “strategic incubation” of new leftist groups.
The Demoncrats have relied on dark money for their campaigns since Osama Obama received many untraceable money “gift” cards during his elections.
BKMK
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.