Skip to comments.Isn't SWISS CITIZEN Hansjorg Wyss's $100 million voter turnout drive for Hillary A CRIME?
Posted on 06/22/2016 12:58:40 PM PDT by CivilWarBrewing
I researched the citizenship of Swiss billionaire Hansjörg Wyss and although he lives in Wyoming, he apparently is NOT an American citizen.
My question to my fellow FReepers is this, ISN'T IT A FEDERAL CRIME FOR A PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE TO RECEIVE NOT ONLY DONATIONS FROM FOREIGN CITIZENS, BUT TO ENGAGE IN ORGANIZING VOTER DRIVES ON THEIR BEHALF USING THEIR DONATIONS?
I read this article: Memo Reveals Clinton Foundation Donors $100 Million Registration, Turnout Push
How is Hillary getting away with this?
Is Hitlery a Democrat? Then no.
Believe you are correct.
Send the information to the Trump campaign. They will know what to do
It’s a serious federal crime for foreign rich people to give huge amounts of money to help Republicans.
Obama removed the Borders , you are now a Citizen of the World ,so it’s OK
Trump should SUE Hillary and get this in court, PRONTO!
What the Clintons do, is they take the money, and say it was given to Bill for something, it goes into the Foundation for whatever the Clintons want it for...this is the problem reading Clinton Cash...there are so many people buying this and that, selling this and that, from this company to that person, back to the person who had it to begin with, but the IRS or the FEC doesn’t see it by doing this....
This is why Trump is calling out the Clinton Foundation, it’s all RICO....and if our government would get off the Senate or House floor that they are having a ‘sit in’ on, maybe they would investigate this and see what is going on...
If I can see it’s RICO then why can’t they???
And since they’re “married,” they can’t testify against each other.
Excellent question and issue.
It is a criminal violation of Federal Election laws for a campaign to accept foreign funds, be it from an foreign individual, PAC or corporation.
The ban on political contributions and expenditures by foreign nationals was first enacted in 1966 as part of the amendments to the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), an “internal security” statute. The goal of the FARA was to minimize foreign intervention in U.S. elections by establishing a series of limitations on foreign nationals. These included registration requirements for the agents of foreign principals and a general prohibition on political contributions by foreign nationals. In 1974, the prohibition was incorporated into the Federal Election Campaign Act (the FECA), [HTML] [PDF] giving the Federal Election Commission (FEC) jurisdiction over its enforcement and interpretation.
This brochure has been developed to help clarify the rules regarding the political activity of foreign nationals; however, it is not intended to provide an exhaustive discussion of the election law. If you have any questions after reading this, please contact the FEC in Washington, D.C., at 1-800-424-9530 or 202-694-1100. Members of the press should contact the FEC Press Office at 202-694-1220 or at the toll free number listed above.
Except where otherwise noted, all citations refer to the Act and FEC regulations. Advisory Opinions (AOs) issued by the Commission are also cited.
The Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) prohibits any foreign national from contributing, donating or spending funds in connection with any federal, state, or local election in the United States, either directly or indirectly. It is also unlawful to help foreign nationals violate that ban or to solicit, receive or accept contributions or donations from them. Persons who knowingly and willfully engage in these activities may be subject to fines and/or imprisonment.
Who is a Foreign National?
The following groups and individuals are considered “foreign nationals” and are, therefore, subject to the prohibition:
Foreign political parties;
Individuals with foreign citizenship; and
Immigrants who do not have a “green card.”
cartoon of port
Individuals: The “Green Card” Exception
An immigrant may make a contribution if he or she has a “green card” indicating his or her lawful admittance for permanent residence in the United States.
Domestic Subsidiaries and Foreign-Owned Corporations
A U.S. subsidiary of a foreign corporation or a U.S. corporation that is owned by foreign nationals may be subject to the prohibition, as discussed below.
PAC Contributions for Federal Activity
A domestic subsidiary of a foreign corporation may not establish a federal political action committee (PAC) to make federal contributions if:
The foreign parent corporation finances the PAC’s establishment, administration, or solicitation costs; or
Individual foreign nationals:
Participate in the operation of the PAC;
Serve as officers of the PAC;
Participated in the selection of persons who operate the PAC; or
Make decisions regarding PAC contributions or expenditure. 11 CFR 110.20(i).
(See also AOs 2000-17, 1995-15, 1990-8, 1989-29, and 1989-20.)
Corporate Contributions for Nonfederal Activity
Additionally, a domestic subsidiary of a foreign corporation (or a domestic corporation owned by foreign nationals) may not donate funds or anything of value in connection with state or local elections if:
These activities are financed by the foreign parent or owner; or
Individual foreign nationals are involved in any way in the making of donations to nonfederal candidates and committees.
Please note that many states place additional restrictions on donations made to nonfederal candidates and committees. 11 CFR 110.20(i). (See also AOs 1992-16, 1985-3, 1982-10, and Matter Under Review (MUR) 2892.)
Generally, an individual may volunteer personal services to a federal candidate or federal political committee without making a contribution. The Act provides this volunteer “exemption” as long as the individual performing the service is not compensated by anyone. 11 CFR 100.74. The Commission has addressed applicability of this exemption to volunteer activity by a foreign national, as explained below.
In AO 1987-25, the Commission allowed a foreign national student to provide uncompensated volunteer services to a Presidential campaign. By contrast, the decision in AO 1981-51 prohibited a foreign national artist from donating his services in connection with fundraising for a Senate campaign.
Non-election Activity by Foreign Nationals
cartoon of protestDespite the general prohibition on foreign national contributions and donations, foreign nationals may lawfully engage in political activity that is not connected with any election to political office at the federal, state, or local levels. The FEC has clarified such activity with respect to individuals’ activities.
In AO 1989-32, the Commission concluded that although foreign nationals could make disbursements solely to influence ballot issues, a foreign national could not contribute to a ballot committee that had coordinated its efforts with a nonfederal candidate’s re-election campaign.
In AO 1984-41, the Commission allowed a foreign national to underwrite the broadcast of apolitical ads that attempted to expose the alleged political bias of the media. The Commission found that these ads were not election influencing because they did not mention candidates, political offices, political parties, incumbent federal officeholders or any past or future election.
Assisting Foreign National Contributions or Donations
Under Commission regulations it is unlawful to knowingly provide substantial assistance to foreign nationals making contributions or donations in connection with any U.S. election. 11 CFR 110.20(h). “Substantial assistance” refers to active involvement in the solicitation, making, receipt or acceptance of a foreign national contribution or donation with the intent of facilitating the successful completion of the transaction. This prohibition includes, but is not limited to individuals who act as conduits or intermediaries. 67 FR 69945-6 (November 19, 2002) [PDF].
Soliciting, Accepting, or Receiving Contributions and Donations from Foreign Nationals
As noted earlier, the Act prohibits knowingly soliciting, accepting or receiving contributions or donations from foreign nationals. In this context, “knowingly” means that a person:
Has actual knowledge that the funds solicited, accepted, or received are from a foreign national;
Is aware of facts that would lead a reasonable person to believe that the funds solicited, accepted, or received are likely to be from a foreign national;
Is aware of facts that would lead a reasonable person to inquire whether the source of the funds solicited, accepted or received is a foreign national.
11 CFR 110.20(a)(4)(i), (ii) and (iii).
Pertinent facts that may lead to inquiry by the recipient include, but are not limited to the following: A donor or contributor uses a foreign passport, provides a foreign address,
makes a contribution from a foreign bank, or resides abroad. Obtaining a copy of a current and valid U.S. passport would satisfy the duty to inquire whether the funds solicited, accepted, or received are from a foreign national. 11 CFR 110.20(a)(7).
Monitoring Prohibited Contributions
When a federal political committee (a committee active in federal elections) receives a contribution it believes may be from a foreign national, it must:
Return the contribution to the donor without depositing it; or
Deposit the contribution and take steps to determine its legality, as described below.
Either action must be taken within 10 days of the treasurer’s receipt. 11 CFR 103.3(b)(1).
If the committee decides to deposit the contribution, the treasurer must make sure that the funds are not spent because they may have to be refunded. Additionally, he or she must maintain a written record explaining why the contribution may be prohibited. 11 CFR 103.3(b)(4) and (5). The legality of the contribution must be confirmed within 30 days of the treasurer’s receipt, or the committee must issue a refund.
If the committee deposits a contribution that appears to be legal, but later discovers that the deposited contribution is from a foreign national, it must refund the contribution within 30 days of making the discovery. If a committee lacks sufficient funds to make a refund when a prohibited contribution is discovered, it must use the next funds it receives. 11 CFR 103.3(b)(1) and (2).
(Return to top)
 This means that foreign nationals may not participate in donation activity, allocate funds for donations, or make decisions regarding donations (e.g., selecting the recipients, approving the making of donations, or approving the issuance of donation checks).
 The Commission has stated that this opinion is not superceded by AO 1987-25. Individuals may obtain further guidance in this area by requesting an advisory opinion about their proposed activity.
 Individuals and committees should consider requesting an advisory opinion before engaging in other types of political activity involving foreign nationals.
 This information must be included when the receipt of the contribution is reported.
 For example, evidence of legality includes a written statement from the contributor explaining why the contribution is legal (e.g. donor has a green card), or an oral explanation that is recorded in memorandum.
It is the only reason they are still married
No but here comes the interesting part...He has his part of the foundation, she has her part of the foundation and Chelsea has her part....Bill puts his money in a company that was ONCE owned by Hillary, but now it belongs to HIM, and she does the same thing...some of HIS speaking fees goes into a company that HE once owned, but this person sold it to that person, who sold it to another company that she once owned but now HE owns...see the laundering going on??? It’s confusing I understand that, but once you take the book page by page and graph it, it all makes sense...now if I can do that...why can’t anyone else, and I think that is exactly what Trump let out today...”Your game Hillary isn’t going to work any longer, we are on to you”...and if our government would do the job we are paying them to do...they would bring charges...
No, you’re not wrong. Helping a campaign with your goods and services, even if you don’t donate to it directly, is called an “in kind donation”, and those fall under the same restrictions as cash donations.
If it were for a “conservative” it would be illegal. Dems, not so much. SOP.
Interpretation of FEC revised penalties:
“FEC Increases Civil Penalties for Violations of Federal Election Laws
In final rules issued on June 15, 2005, the Federal Election Commission (FEC) made inflation adjustments increasing civil penalties for violations of the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA), the Presidential Election Campaign Fund Act and the Presidential Primary Matching Payment Account Act. The penalty increases apply to violations occurring after June 15, 2005.
FECA places limits on the amounts that individuals, political parties and political action committees (PACs) may contribute in federal elections and requires candidates, political parties and PACs to disclose contributions and expenditures. FECA also prohibits corporations, foreign nationals, labor organizations and certain other organizations from contributing to federal elections. The Presidential Election Campaign Fund Act and the Presidential Primary Matching Payment Account Act place expenditure limits and reporting requirements on presidential candidates who receive federal campaign funding.
The maximum penalty for contributions and expenditures made in violation of these statutes, but which are not knowing and willful violations, was previously the greater of $5,500 or the amount of the contribution or expenditure involved. The FEC has increased this penalty to the greater of $6,500 or the amount of the contribution or expenditure involved. The penalty for knowing and willful violations is the greater of $11,000 or 200% of the amount of the contribution or expenditure involved. Due to rounding rules, the FEC has not increased the penalty for knowing and willful violations.
FECA also prohibits any person from making a contribution in another person’s name. The maximum penalty for knowing and willful violations of this prohibition was previously the greater of $50,000 or 1,000% of the amount involved. The FEC has increased this penalty to the greater of $55,000 or 1,000% of the amount involved.
Under FECA, a candidate’s principal campaign committee must report within 48 hours any contribution of $1,000 or more that it receives after the 20th day but more than 48 hours before an election. The maximum penalty for campaign committees that fail to file notices within 48 hours of these last-minute contributions has increased to $110 plus 10% of the contribution.
FECA also prohibits FEC members and employees or any other person from publicizing FEC investigations or notifications without the written permission of the person who is subject to the investigation or notification. The maximum penalty for these violations of confidentiality, when made knowingly and willfully, has increased from $5,500 to $6,500. The maximum penalty for violations of confidentiality that are not knowing and willful is $2,200 and has not increased due to rounding rules.”
RE: “How is Hillary getting away with this?”
Hitlery, Slick Willy, Obola and the Whole rotten bunch of destructive parasite democrats and Republicans get away with Destroying our children’s country, only because we passively take it, instead of Marching on DC and state capitals.
We know better, and it’s our obligation to Shame the SH1T out of the crooked bassturds that are ruining this country.
How will we ever tell our kids we gave up without so much as a whimper?
Worst case his lawyers need to delay the trial until after 1/20/2016 (and make sure Hillary wins no matter what it takes).
Well, right or wrong, who would prosecute her?
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.