Far-left Democrat Zohran Mamdani is entangled in a serious controversy over his campaign funding. Reports indicate that his campaign has accepted approximately $13,000 in foreign donations, amounting to about 170 contributions. This practice is illegal, as U.S. law permits only American citizens and permanent residents to donate to political campaigns. Violating this rule can lead to fines and even imprisonment.
Despite some foreign funds being returned, reports confirm that Mamdani’s campaign still holds 88 foreign donations valued at $7,190. When questioned about why these funds have not been returned, the campaign provided no clear explanation. This failure to act raises alarming questions about the transparency of Mamdani’s fundraising efforts.
Republican mayoral candidate Curtis Sliwa expressed his concerns, stating, “Where there’s smoke, there’s fire, so I would be very concerned.” Sliwa underscored the potential dangers of foreign money creeping into the election cycle, suggesting this scenario paves the way for illegal funding mechanisms. “Foreign countries know you don’t have to go to war against America. All you gotta do is manipulate the election,” he warned.
The list of Mamdani’s foreign donors spans continents, with notable contributions from individuals based in Dubai, Germany, Canada, and Australia. Among them, James Furlaud, an environmental scientist from Australia’s University of Tasmania, contributed $2,100 to the campaign. Another significant donor, Ada Diaz Ahmed, an investor from Dubai, matched this amount.
Mamdani’s funding pattern extends beyond foreign contributions. The New York Post revealed that over half (53 percent) of his financial support from July to August came from donors outside New York City. This reliance on out-of-city finances casts doubt on Mamdani’s local support and raises questions about his commitment to the city’s constituents.
As election day approaches, Mamdani’s campaign faced an unexpected hit from an unlikely source – The Washington Post, a well-known liberal publication. In a harsh editorial, the paper dismantled Mamdani’s proposal for free bus services. They pointed out that “there is no such thing as a free bus,” highlighting that such an initiative would cost nearly $800 million per year, as even Mamdani has acknowledged.
Mamdani’s strategy isn’t merely about financial implications. The Washington Post also warned that previous attempts at similar initiatives in other cities often led to significant problems, with buses becoming “magnets of crime and vandalism.” Further, the editorial stated that while Mamdani claimed a pilot program last year led to fewer violent altercations between bus drivers and passengers, it merely meant that people who previously avoided buses altogether were now riding them, potentially compromising safety. The report concluded that quality often declines when services are offered for “free,” suggesting vulnerable groups, such as low-income New Yorkers who rely on buses, might ultimately pay the highest price.
This series of events paints a troubling picture for Mamdani as he navigates the political landscape of New York City. With questions surrounding the legitimacy of his campaign funds and significant pushback from major media voices, it remains to be seen how this will influence his electoral prospects.
"*" indicates required fields
