Independent journalist Peter Bernegger has taken a bold step by filing a complaint with the Federal Election Commission against Senator Raphael Warnock and treasurer Christopher Koob. The focal point of his allegations is a practice known as “smurfing,” a method of money laundering that has reportedly funneled over $62 million through small donations. Analyzing the data reveals disturbing patterns consistent with this fraudulent scheme.
In his findings, Bernegger points to an extraordinary number of rare surnames repeated in the donation records. A total of 4,793 uncommon last names appeared two to three times—statistics that defy the natural patterns of organic donations. This comparison to census data suggests something is amiss. As Bernegger stated, “This is statistically incompatible with organic donor behavior; and in comparison to the names on the US Census.” Such anomalies raise serious questions about the integrity of the fundraising methods being employed.
The numbers tell a grim story. Bernegger notes that Warnock’s committees have accepted nearly a million suspicious transactions, totaling over $57 million. His claim hinges on the assertion that these contributions are not merely coincidental but part of a larger, systematic approach to bypass legitimate campaign financing regulations. He boldly declared, “Warnock of Georgia is in the top five nationally for Smurfing – it may be only Biden has a higher Smurfing number.” Such comparisons highlight the scale of the alleged misconduct and position Warnock as a major player in this troubling narrative.
The implications of Bernegger’s claims extend beyond personal accountability. He accuses ActBlue of “stealing the identities of elderly senior citizens to carry out their scheme.” This assertion, if proven true, paints a picture of a corrupt system that exploits the most vulnerable for political gain. Bernegger’s commentary is rife with emotion, illustrating a profound concern about the integrity of the electoral process. “These are not common surnames, yet they repeat in the exact frequency band that synthetic generators produce,” he wrote, emphasizing the unnatural nature of these contributions.
Moreover, the complaint is fueled by accusations of wrongful actions tied to ActBlue, which is already under investigation by the FBI. Bernegger states that this organization is one of Warnock’s primary fundraising tools. He reported, “With such a large amount, you’ll find chunks of the $62,111,521 working its way into other Democrat campaigns.” This raises alarm bells regarding the interconnectedness of fundraising entities and the potential facilitation of illicit activity.
In a detailed breakdown, Bernegger highlighted two specific political committees associated with Warnock: the WARNOCK VICTORY FUND and WARNOCK FOR GEORGIA. Together, these committees reportedly accepted over 972,000 smurfed donor transactions, accounting for a significant portion of their fundraising totals. The sheer magnitude of these figures—64.9% of one committee’s transactions—poses questions that demand answers from electoral oversight bodies.
Bernegger’s persistence is evident as he committed to pursuing legal action if the FEC fails to act. “After the @FEC doesn’t do anything, then I’ll file suit,” he vowed, demonstrating his determination to seek justice. This unwavering approach resonates with those concerned about electoral integrity.
Reactions to Bernegger’s findings reflect a growing frustration among conservatives. Comments on his post reveal a belief that there is rampant illegal activity within the Democratic Party, alongside calls for greater transparency and accountability from investigative bodies. “There is so much illegal activity going on in the Dem party,” one user lamented, echoing a distrust toward those in power.
In summary, Peter Bernegger’s complaint raises critical questions about the legality and ethics of fundraising practices in political campaigns, particularly within Warnock’s operations. The allegations of smurfing and identity theft deserve thorough scrutiny as they challenge the foundations of campaign finance. The ramifications of these claims extend beyond individual culpability, touching the larger concerns of transparency and integrity in democracy.
"*" indicates required fields
