A disturbing pattern is emerging, casting a shadow over six Democratic lawmakers. Initially, they sparked controversy with a video that appeared to question the chain of command within the military, bordering on implications of sedition. Now, a deeper investigation reveals a potentially far more serious issue: alleged money laundering.
Investigative reporter Bob Cushman’s analysis of Federal Election Commission (FEC) data points to a network of suspicious donations funneled to Senators Mark Kelly and Elissa Slotkin, and Representatives Chris Deluzio, Maggie Goodlander, Chrissy Houlahan, and Jason Crow – quickly earning them the moniker “Seditious Six.” The data suggests these lawmakers benefited from illegally laundered campaign funds.
Cushman’s initial findings highlight 22 individuals, dubbed “smurfs,” who collectively contributed nearly three million dollars through over 95,000 separate, small-dollar donations. Each member of the “Seditious Six” received funds originating from one or more of these questionable sources.
The core of the issue centers around the potential hijacking of identities. The prevailing theory suggests these “smurfs” are unaware their personal information is being used for illicit purposes. Interviews with alleged donors conducted by journalists James O’Keefe and Charlie LeDuff corroborate this claim, revealing a complete lack of knowledge regarding the donations attributed to them.
Campaign strategist Jason Roe, in a discussion with Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Charlie LeDuff, revealed the staggering scale of the problem. Since 2004, ActBlue, a prominent online fundraising platform, has allegedly processed over 16 billion dollars. Roe also noted recent, abrupt resignations of senior ActBlue members coinciding with the emergence of fraud allegations and federal investigations.
Roe’s assessment was blunt: the activity constitutes fraud, money laundering, and the funneling of funds from outside the United States. He further stated that, for the first time in a decade, Republicans are now surpassing Democrats in fundraising, potentially linked to these irregularities.
The evidence focuses on individuals whose donation patterns defy logic. Take David Hutton, 71, of Paso Robles, California, who allegedly made 14,047 donations totaling over $344,000 – an average of 5.5 donations *per day* over seven years. Such a volume is statistically impossible, strongly suggesting identity theft.
The anomalies continue with Daphne Sanderson, 72, of Cape May, New Jersey, allegedly making 1,878 donations. William Hardy, 69, of Stratham, New Hampshire, supposedly donated $148,768 through 3,189 separate transactions. These patterns – frequent, small-dollar donations from elderly individuals – are consistent across multiple “smurfs.”
Further scrutiny reveals even more bizarre details. Numerous donations were for amounts as low as $2 or even 50 cents, a practice inconsistent with typical donor behavior. One individual allegedly made 38 separate donations of $12.86 on a single day, raising serious questions about the integrity of the data.
The FEC’s role is also under scrutiny. Critics argue the agency has been complicit in allowing this activity to persist for nearly two decades, failing to adequately oversee ActBlue and enforce campaign finance laws. The agency’s stated mission – to protect the integrity of the federal campaign finance process – appears to be directly contradicted by the evidence.
The list of alleged “smurfs” is extensive, including individuals like Mary Gibbons, 93, who allegedly donated $374,020, and Elizabeth Waffle, 87, with over 13,600 separate donations. Each case presents a similar narrative: elderly individuals with donation histories that are statistically improbable and indicative of identity theft.
Bob Cushman has stated he is forwarding this evidence to the appropriate authorities. The implications of these findings are significant, potentially reshaping the landscape of campaign finance and raising serious questions about the integrity of the electoral process.
