Tom Steyer (makes the Koch bros look like saints)

Search

New member
Joined
Jan 9, 2009
Messages
18,212
Tokens
[h=2]The Black Book of Tom Steyer[/h]Allegations of fraud plague hedge fund of Democratic super-donor





Tom Steyer believes in American democracy… for now (AP)

check-big.png
check-big.png
check-big.png
check-big.png
check-big.png
check-big.png
check-big.png


BY: Lachlan Markay
April 21, 2014 5:00 am
The former hedge fund of one of the Democratic Party’s most important donors was involved in a scheme to defraud foreign investors out of tens of millions of dollars, according to documents filed in a Texas court.
Farallon Capital Partners L.P., a fund run by Farallon Capital Management, the multibillion-dollar hedge fund founded by Democratic donor Tom Steyer, became a limited partner in a project to build a large shopping mall near Seattle, Wash., in the mid-1990s after it guaranteed a line of credit for the project.
According to the Texas case, Farallon and other parties involved in the deal operated “in conjunction with” foreign-owned corporations in Texas “to defraud a group of over three-hundred German investors out of approximately sixty-million dollars.”
A “Ponzi scheme” in which the companies planning to build what was to be called the Washington Supermall “transfer[red] millions of dollars in funds through ‘loans’ and ‘advances’ to other unrelated entities,” the plaintiffs alleged.
“At the end of the scheme,” the plaintiffs say, “after the money-drained Supermall project was sold in January of 1998, the remaining funds were distributed to the entities that had assisted the [foreign-owned] entities in their scheme, including … Farallon Partners, in improper preferential distributions that ultimately left the German investors with nothing to show for their $60 million investment.”
The case, which was dismissed on jurisdictional grounds—the court agreed with Farallon that it didn’t operate in Texas and hence could not be sued there—is being re-examined by the Republican politicians and activists scrutinizing the record of the billionaire and controversial environmentalist, who has pledged $100 million to help Democrats in this year’s midterm elections.
Another Farallon entity—Farallon Capital Partners L.P.—worked a separate shopping mall project that is also drawing the attention of critics, who say the hedge-fund bought companies and fired workers with little regard for the livelihood and concerns of the unemployed.
Farallon Capital Partners was involved in April 2007 in a joint venture to purchase Mills Corp., a Maryland-based shopping mall developer. “After the acquisition, dozens of Mills employees, including some executives, left the company or were laid off,” Washington Business Journal reported. Other Farallon-backed companies have seen layoffs well in excess of “dozens.”
Farallon and a pair of other financial firms teamed up with the World Bank in 1999 to buy Alpargatas, one of Argentina’s largest textile manufacturers.
Months later, the company laid off about half of its 6,000 employees.
“The company had already been battered during the 1990s by the drastic opening of the Argentine economy which came on top of an ill-advised attempt to diversify,” Latin Trade reported at the time. “This time, however, the idea was not to reduce operations as part of a restructuring, but simply to transfer them to neighboring Brazil to cut costs.”
Farallon’s history of layoffs is liable to spark attention with labor unions, a key Democratic constituency that has already found itself opposed to Tom Steyer’s agenda.
Steyer has vowed to throw his considerable political fortune behind candidates who oppose the Keystone XL pipeline. The pipeline, which an ABC News poll found is “overwhelmingly favored by Americans,” was delayed once again last week by the administration of Barack Obama, for whom Steyer bundled campaign contributions in the 2012 election.
Keystone opponents such as Steyer are “trying to destroy job opportunities for our LIUNA brothers and sisters,” Terry O’Sullivan, general president of the Laborers International Union of North America (LiUNA), wrote in a letter to union members in the districts of congressional Democrats who oppose the pipeline.
Steyer came under scrutiny last year when it was revealed that he still owned shares through a Farallon fund in a top competitor to TransCanada, the company building Keystone.
Steyer, who left day-to-day control of the fund at the end of 2012, said he directed Farallon to divest himself from the company. However, the hedge fund has maintained its stake and stands to benefit from a rejection of the pipeline.
Phil Kerpen, president of the conservative activist group American Commitment, is organizing a campaign to educate voters in the secret financial background of one of the most powerful men in American politics.
“Steyer has a history of ‘environmentally destructive business ventures,’” said a March ad from Kerpen’s group, which quoted from a Washington Free Beacon report on the controversial practices that sparked a divestment movement against Farallon in the 1990s.
Kerpen called Steyer a “shadowy, dirty energy billionaire” in a news release accompanying the video, noting that the opponent of climate change “helped finance the second-largest coal company in Indonesia.”
Kerpen is determined to highlight that conflict, as well as Steyer’s deep ties to the Democratic Party.
“Harry Reid believes the myth that corrupt, dirty billionaires call the shots on the right because in his party it really does work that way,” he said.
Farallon did not respond to a request for comment.
 

New member
Joined
Jan 9, 2009
Messages
18,212
Tokens
^^^^^^just another article you won't find in the lame stream media. Has Harry Reid ever mentioned these guys.....right.
 

New member
Joined
Jan 9, 2009
Messages
18,212
Tokens
[h=2]The Power of Steyer[/h]U.S. extends Keystone XL comment period, delaying final decision





Construction of the TransCanada Keystone XL Pipeline in Texas / AP

check-big.png
check-big.png
check-big.png
check-big.png
check-big.png
check-big.png
check-big.png


BY: Reuters
April 18, 2014 4:00 pm
(Reuters) – The Obama administration said on Friday it would extend the period of time for federal agencies to weigh in on the Keystone XL oil pipeline, giving no new deadline.
The move, which likely delays a final decision beyond November mid-term elections, angered Republican and some Democrat lawmakers who have urged President Barack Obama to make the final decision on TransCanada’s project after more than five years of government reviews.
Environmental groups hailed the move saying it underlined arguments against the pipeline.
Here is a selection of key comments from various groups:
LAWMAKERS:
Mitch McConnell, Republican leader in the Senate:
“It is crystal clear that the Obama administration is simply not serious about American energy and American jobs. I guess he wasn’t serious about having a pen and a phone, either. At a time of high unemployment in the Obama economy, it’s a shame that the administration has delayed the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline for years. Here’s the single greatest shovel-ready project in America – one that could create thousands of jobs right away – but the President simply isn’t interested. Apparently radical activists carry more weight than Americans desperate to get back on the job. More jobs left behind in the Obama economy.”
House Speaker John Boehner, Republican from Ohio:
“This delay is shameful. With tens of thousands of American jobs on the line and our allies in Eastern Europe looking for energy leadership from America, it’s clear there is little this administration isn’t willing to sacrifice for politics. For no reason other than the president’s refusal to stand up to the extreme left, good-paying jobs and North American energy remain out of reach. This job-creating project has cleared every environmental hurdle and overwhelmingly passed the test of public opinion, yet it’s been blocked for more than 2,000 days. And if we’ve learned anything from the events in Ukraine, it’s that energy security sends signals across borders, and nations in the region hoping for greater American energy exports will no doubt take notice of this egregious decision. There are no credible reasons to block this pipeline even one day more, and the House will continue to press the administration to move forward so we can put Americans back to work and strengthen our energy security.”
Senator Heidi Heitkamp, Democrat from North Dakota:
“Once again, we’re hearing more delays and more uncertainty over the Keystone XL pipeline. It’s absolutely ridiculous that this well over five-year long process is continuing for an undetermined amount of time. This most recent delay leaves everyone waiting in limbo – federal agencies, construction and energy workers and companies, state officials, and Canada. It hurts all of us when no decisions are made. I’ll keep pressing the Administration for a clear timeframe for the pipeline, as I did just last week with 10 other Democratic Senators. But because of this latest delay tactic by the Administration, I’ll continue to seriously consider other available options for approval.
Senator John Thune, Republican from South Dakota:
“On a day when many Americans are observing Good Friday and preparing for Easter, the administration took the opportunity to quietly announce yet another Keystone delay despite the five successful environmental reviews of the energy project. The president’s own State Department has said the Keystone pipeline will support more than 40,000 jobs – good jobs the administration has delayed for over five years. It’s disappointing that the president today chose to further pander to his extreme environmental donor base over the 10 million jobless Americans looking for work.”
CANADA:
Office of Prime Minister Stephen Harper, Director of Communications Jason MacDonald:
“We are disappointed that politics continue to delay a decision on Keystone XL. This project will create tens of thousands of jobs on both sides of the border, will enhance the energy security of North America, has strong public support, and the U.S. State Department has, on multiple occasions, acknowledged it will be environmentally sound.”
ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS:
Jim Murphy, Senior Counsel, National Wildlife Federation:
“This decision is yet another indication that the problems with this pipeline continue to grow and it’s a bad idea that needs to be rejected. The President and Secretary (John) Kerry have all the information they need to deny the pipeline. The facts show that it exacerbates the problem of carbon pollution and fails the President’s test. We are confident that ultimately the President will reject this project pipeline as it is clearly a step in the wrong direction and not in the national interest.”
League of Conservation Voters (LCV) Senior Vice President of Government Affairs Tiernan Sittenfeld:
“This is great news! Today’s announcement by the State Department that it is extending the comment period makes us even more confident that the harmful Keystone XL tar sands pipeline will ultimately be rejected. Not only does the pipeline lack a legal route, it clearly fails the President’s own climate test and threatens our waters while providing no benefits. As the administration continues to examine the Nebraska route and the disastrous climate impacts, we believe that President Obama and Secretary Kerry will find that this pipeline is not in America’s national interest.”
(Writing by Jonathan Leff; Editing by Frances Kerry)
This entry was posted in Issues and tagged Keystone. Bookmark the permalink.
 

New member
Joined
Jan 9, 2009
Messages
18,212
Tokens
Totally misrepresented by the lame stream media the Koch bros believe in and invest in this country:

"Economic freedom drives prosperity, and the study of it is vital to the continued progress of society. Through our grant-giving, we aim to advance an understanding of how economic freedom improves the well-being of people around the world. We also aim to provide opportunities that allow people to learn more about economic freedom and contribute to its advancement. Whether it is through sponsoring a reading discussion on a college campus or through a research grant, we give because we believe the ideas of economic freedom are vital to society’s progress and worthy of support."
 

New member
Joined
Jan 9, 2009
Messages
18,212
Tokens
The Koch's are longtime Libertarians. They are as shown above all about economic freedom which puts them anti-Democrat. As such they donate to Republican causes because that party is the only viable option and has a conservative pro economic base. So if you are rich and not a Democrat beware, the lame stream will be on you night and day. Meanwhile guys like Steyer get a pass. Thank God for the Koch's and the fact that they believe in exceptionalism and capitalism.
 
Joined
Sep 24, 2009
Messages
2,924
Tokens
The Black Book of Tom Steyer

Allegations of fraud plague hedge fund of Democratic super-donor





Tom Steyer believes in American democracy… for now (AP)

check-big.png
check-big.png
check-big.png
check-big.png
check-big.png
check-big.png
check-big.png


BY: Lachlan Markay
April 21, 2014 5:00 am
The former hedge fund of one of the Democratic Party’s most important donors was involved in a scheme to defraud foreign investors out of tens of millions of dollars, according to documents filed in a Texas court.
Farallon Capital Partners L.P., a fund run by Farallon Capital Management, the multibillion-dollar hedge fund founded by Democratic donor Tom Steyer, became a limited partner in a project to build a large shopping mall near Seattle, Wash., in the mid-1990s after it guaranteed a line of credit for the project.
According to the Texas case, Farallon and other parties involved in the deal operated “in conjunction with” foreign-owned corporations in Texas “to defraud a group of over three-hundred German investors out of approximately sixty-million dollars.”
A “Ponzi scheme” in which the companies planning to build what was to be called the Washington Supermall “transfer[red] millions of dollars in funds through ‘loans’ and ‘advances’ to other unrelated entities,” the plaintiffs alleged.
“At the end of the scheme,” the plaintiffs say, “after the money-drained Supermall project was sold in January of 1998, the remaining funds were distributed to the entities that had assisted the [foreign-owned] entities in their scheme, including … Farallon Partners, in improper preferential distributions that ultimately left the German investors with nothing to show for their $60 million investment.”
The case, which was dismissed on jurisdictional grounds—the court agreed with Farallon that it didn’t operate in Texas and hence could not be sued there—is being re-examined by the Republican politicians and activists scrutinizing the record of the billionaire and controversial environmentalist, who has pledged $100 million to help Democrats in this year’s midterm elections.
Another Farallon entity—Farallon Capital Partners L.P.—worked a separate shopping mall project that is also drawing the attention of critics, who say the hedge-fund bought companies and fired workers with little regard for the livelihood and concerns of the unemployed.
Farallon Capital Partners was involved in April 2007 in a joint venture to purchase Mills Corp., a Maryland-based shopping mall developer. “After the acquisition, dozens of Mills employees, including some executives, left the company or were laid off,” Washington Business Journal reported. Other Farallon-backed companies have seen layoffs well in excess of “dozens.”
Farallon and a pair of other financial firms teamed up with the World Bank in 1999 to buy Alpargatas, one of Argentina’s largest textile manufacturers.
Months later, the company laid off about half of its 6,000 employees.
“The company had already been battered during the 1990s by the drastic opening of the Argentine economy which came on top of an ill-advised attempt to diversify,” Latin Trade reported at the time. “This time, however, the idea was not to reduce operations as part of a restructuring, but simply to transfer them to neighboring Brazil to cut costs.”
Farallon’s history of layoffs is liable to spark attention with labor unions, a key Democratic constituency that has already found itself opposed to Tom Steyer’s agenda.
Steyer has vowed to throw his considerable political fortune behind candidates who oppose the Keystone XL pipeline. The pipeline, which an ABC News poll found is “overwhelmingly favored by Americans,” was delayed once again last week by the administration of Barack Obama, for whom Steyer bundled campaign contributions in the 2012 election.
Keystone opponents such as Steyer are “trying to destroy job opportunities for our LIUNA brothers and sisters,” Terry O’Sullivan, general president of the Laborers International Union of North America (LiUNA), wrote in a letter to union members in the districts of congressional Democrats who oppose the pipeline.
Steyer came under scrutiny last year when it was revealed that he still owned shares through a Farallon fund in a top competitor to TransCanada, the company building Keystone.
Steyer, who left day-to-day control of the fund at the end of 2012, said he directed Farallon to divest himself from the company. However, the hedge fund has maintained its stake and stands to benefit from a rejection of the pipeline.
Phil Kerpen, president of the conservative activist group American Commitment, is organizing a campaign to educate voters in the secret financial background of one of the most powerful men in American politics.
“Steyer has a history of ‘environmentally destructive business ventures,’” said a March ad from Kerpen’s group, which quoted from a Washington Free Beacon report on the controversial practices that sparked a divestment movement against Farallon in the 1990s.
Kerpen called Steyer a “shadowy, dirty energy billionaire” in a news release accompanying the video, noting that the opponent of climate change “helped finance the second-largest coal company in Indonesia.”
Kerpen is determined to highlight that conflict, as well as Steyer’s deep ties to the Democratic Party.
“Harry Reid believes the myth that corrupt, dirty billionaires call the shots on the right because in his party it really does work that way,” he said.
Farallon did not respond to a request for comment.

He should be in prison if true
 

New member
Joined
Jan 9, 2009
Messages
18,212
Tokens
[h=2]Documents Detail Tom Steyer’s Ties to Alleged $67 Million Ponzi Scheme[/h]Billionaire environmentalist’s hedge fund named as defendant in investor lawsuit





Tom Steyer / AP

check-big.png
check-big.png
check-big.png
check-big.png
check-big.png
check-big.png
check-big.png


BY: Lachlan Markay
April 23, 2014 2:15 pm
The hedge fund founded and until recently run by billionaire environmentalist Tom Steyer was deeply involved in an alleged Ponzi scheme that siphoned tens of millions of dollars from foreign investors, an analysis of public records shows.
Steyer, the founder and former senior managing partner of Farallon Capital Management, was listed as a top corporate officer of a Farallon fund that was named as a defendant in a 2005 lawsuit filed by those investors.
Other parties allegedly involved in the scheme have since been arrested on charges of financial fraud involving the project that allegedly provided the vehicle for the scheme.
Details of Farallon’s involvement came to light through a civil lawsuit in Texas alleging that Farallon and a number of other individuals and corporate entities were complicit in a scheme to defraud German real estate investors of $67 million.
Farallon’s status as a defendant in the case was first reported by the Washington Free Beacon earlier this week, but newly acquired court documents provide additional details about its alleged involvement.
Farallon denies any wrongdoing, and says it was only tangentially involved in the project. But allegations will likely receive attention as Steyer becomes more active in American politics. He has pledged to raise $100 million to elect environmentalist Democrats to Congress through expenditures by his political group, NextGen Climate Action.
Farallon was never found to have violated the law in connection with the scheme. Allegations against the company were dismissed on jurisdictional grounds before the court could rule on the merits of plaintiffs’ claims.
However, the lack of a definitive exoneration on the specific allegations could allow those allegations to come up in a political context as conservatives try to counter the massive amounts of money Steyer plans to pour into federal elections this year.
In the mid-1990s, according to the Texas complaint, German national Michael Vogelbacher approached hundreds of individuals to solicit equity investment for a shopping mall project near Seattle.
A number of those defendants later sued Vogelbacher and a handful of other individuals and corporations, including Farallon, for allegedly absconding with those funds.
“Vogelbacher structured the Washington Supermall Project as a multi-leveled limited partnership that provided Vogelbacher and his American partners…with virtually unlimited control over the Project, and a virtually unlimited ability to use (and ultimately take) the German investors’ monies,” according to the complaint.
The plaintiffs sought $30 million in damages, less than half of what they said was invested by the plaintiffs and others who Vogelbacher had approached, but who didn’t sign on to the lawsuit.
Vogelbacher set up a subsidiary of his real estate fund, Rosche Finanz, as a general partner in the supermall project. According to plaintiffs, he “ran” the master partnership spearheading the project “both directly and through…Rosche Finanz.”
The plaintiffs alleged that Vogelbacher and his partners extracted “fees” from the master partnership, drew loans from its pooled funds, and prolonged the scheme by paying investors from the pool of funds to which they had contributed, even though the project was losing money.
They dubbed this arrangement a “Ponzi scheme,” whereby Vogelbacher and his partners “prop[ped] up the borrowing partnerships when they needed money to pay a ‘return’ to its investors.”
In late 1996, the project was in financial trouble, and Vogelbacher and Rosche began looking to sell it. According to plaintiffs, the project’s partnership agreement required that returns from the sale be distributed to the German investors.
However, they say that all revenue from the sale—$12,560,000 paid in cash—went to Rosche and affiliated companies, and to two limited partners: Wells Fargo Foothill Capital Corp., and Farallon Capital Partners L.P.
Farallon became involved after it guaranteed a line of credit to a lender in the project. It was listed as a limited partner, but the Texas plaintiffs said it operated as a “de facto general partner” by exercising significant control over the operations of the master partnership.
That distinction was significant for the purposes of corporate liability. Under Texas law, a limited partner is not liable for a business’ debts unless it exercises control over its operations or financial decisions.
Documents filed in Texas court suggest that Farallon Capital Partners and Wells Fargo Foothill, frequently referred to in partnership documents as the LC (letters of credit) providers, did exercise such control.
The partnership needed Farallon’s approval, according to a document detailing its terms, “for any sale of the project, refinancing of the project, entering into or modifying any major lease, entering into any agreement with any partner or borrower or any affiliate thereof and with respect to any other major decision.”
“The approval of [Farallon and Foothill] will be required for major decisions relating to the Project,” the document said. “The structure is designed to minimize the consequences to … Farallon Capital Management Inc. … of a bankruptcy.”
Farallon spokesman Steve Bruce downplayed the hedge fund’s involvement in the supermall project.
“Farallon’s role was limited to providing a passive letter of credit alongside other financial institutions in support of a transaction that was sponsored, developed and controlled by third parties,” Bruce said in an emailed statement.
However, others involved in the project saw a level of involvement by Farallon exceeding its ostensible role as a limited partner.
“LC Provider’s control over WSMI elevates it to general partner status under general partnership law,” wrote Rosche Finanz’s attorneys in another document filed in court.
According to the plaintiffs, Farallon “used this control … to acquire an improper preferential distribution of monies from the limited partnership.”
Bruce denied any such improper conduct. “The allegations made against Farallon had no merit,” he wrote in his statement.
The court dismissed the case on jurisdictional grounds. An appellate court upheld that ruling, agreeing with Farallon that it had not operated in Texas and therefore was outside of the court’s domain.
As Washington law firm K&L Gates explained, Farallon and other defendants did not have “sufficient minimum contact” with Texas entities “even though they had, among other things: (1) held a meeting in Texas but did not discuss any business relationship; (2) conducted negotiations with Texas-based entities by fax and telephone; (3) received legal opinions from Texas lawyers; and (4) conducted due diligence regarding Texas entities.”
Bruce emphasized the jurisdictional issue in his statement. “The lawsuit against Farallon Capital Partners, L.P. was properly dismissed by the Texas trial court and confirmed on appeal in 2008,” he wrote.
Though it was not legally operating in Texas, Farallon Capital Partners appears to have reserved itself some control over the supermall partnership’s operations. Tom Steyer, meanwhile, was in a position to direct the internal operations of Farallon Capital Partners LP, the fund that acted as limited partner.
The LP is run by Farallon Partners LLC, its general partner, which is owned by Farallon Capital Management.
Documents filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) list Steyer as the LLC’s “senior managing member.” All of the LP’s listed partners were Farallon employees and listed the hedge fund’s mailing address on SEC filings.
In the Washington supermall project, Farallon had partnered with an individual who would later be arrested on allegations of financial fraud involving a number of projects, including the Washington supermall.
Conservative political groups have sought to tie politicians and political organizations that Steyer supports to what those groups say are socially or environmentally destructive business practices.
Phil Kerpen, president of the conservative group American Commitment and a frequent Steyer critic, was unsparing in his assessment.
Steyer “learned to rip off regular middle class workers by participating in a criminal Ponzi scheme,” he said in an email.
Kerpen compared his criticism of Steyer to an ongoing campaign by congressional Democrats to vilify libertarian philanthropists Charles and David Koch, and tie alleged misdeeds on their parts to groups and politicians that they support.
“Steyer is clearly the worst actor in American politics, the genuine article ‘malefactor of great wealth’ that Democrats can only pretend conservative donors are,” Kerpen wrote.
Steyer’s political group, NextGen Climate, did not return a request for comment by press time.
This entry was posted in Politics and tagged Democratic Donors, Tom Steyer. Bookmark the permalink.
 

New member
Joined
Jan 9, 2009
Messages
18,212
Tokens
“Steyer is clearly the worst actor in American politics, the genuine article ‘malefactor of great wealth’ that Democrats can only pretend conservative donors are,” Kerpen wrote. (from the above article)
 

New member
Joined
Jan 9, 2009
Messages
18,212
Tokens
[h=2]U.S. Intelligence, HHS Fail to Locate Foreign Malware Inside Obamacare Networks[/h]Healthcare.gov network was vulnerable to Heartbleed encryption bug





AP

check-big.png
check-big.png
check-big.png
check-big.png
check-big.png
check-big.png
check-big.png


BY: Bill Gertz
April 22, 2014 5:00 am
U.S. intelligence agencies and the Department of Health and Human Services investigated the software used by Obamacare computer networks but did not discover malicious code from Belarus, the HHS’ top information official said on Monday.
“Yes we have done a thorough review and we have worked with the intelligence community on that,” said Kevin Charest, HHS chief information security officer.
Charest, speaking to reporters following a recent cyber attack drill held by HHS and several healthcare companies, also said the department has urged the millions of new subscribers to Obamacare to change passwords to avoid losing personal data to the Heartbleed security software vulnerability.
There are no indications so far that Heartbleed has been used by hackers to steal encrypted data, Charest said.
The Heartbleed vulnerability was discovered earlier this month as a flaw in encryption software called OpenSSL. Healthcare.gov networks could be affected by the bug because some elements use the content delivery network operated by Akamai Technologies, Inc., which uses OpenSSL.
As a result, “we’ve put in new encryption keys, we’ve invalidated passwords and are now forcing folks to come in and reset their passwords,” Charest said.
“Again, it’s all just to ensure that we don’t have any compromise, and there is no evidence that there has been,” Charest said.
Meanwhile, the FBI warned last week that hackers are continuing to step up cyber attacks against health care networks.
“Cyber actors will likely increase cyber intrusions against health care systems—to include medical devices—due to mandatory transition from paper to electronic health records, lax cybersecurity standards, and a higher financial payout for medical records in the black market,” the FBI said in a notice to private industry dated April 17.
The cyber attack exercise called CyberRX was conducted April 1. One of its scenarios included a simulated cyber attacks that resulted in a major news network posting large numbers of usernames and passwords for patients, doctors, and nurses in the U.S. healthcare industry. This exercise scenario stated that “Healthcare.gov has been compromised,” affecting government offices, hospitals and insurance companies, according to a report on the exercise.
The report concluded that companies that practice sharing information can better respond to real cyber strikes.
Jim Koenig, a cyber security expert with Booz Allen Hamilton who took part in the exercise said one of its findings was that the current model of the national cyber security framework for critical infrastructure cannot protect healthcare organizations from current cyber threats.
“The growing adoption of new and connected health information technologies and widespread use of mobile devices continue to increase the industry’s exposure to potential attacks,” Koenig said.
Regarding the search for malware within Obamacare networks, Charest, the HHS information security chief, declined to comment on the role played by U.S. spy agencies in the investigation into whether there was software that originated in Belarus, a repressive dictatorship closely aligned with Moscow.
However, regarding an intelligence report from late January that warned that malicious foreign was likely inserted in Healthcare.gov network that could allow hackers to break and steal important data, Charest said: “We found no evidence of those claims being a reality.”
The Washington Free Beacon first reported the warning by U.S. intelligence agencies in late January urging the Obama administration to check the large-scale healthcare computer networks based on reports that software developers in Belarus helped produce the software.
The report raised new security concerns about the software and networks that connect millions of Americans to the federal government and more than 300 medical institutions and healthcare providers.
The report said that the use of software developers in Belarus had made the network a potential target for cyber attacks.
The warning followed the remarks of a Belarusian official, Valery Tsepkalo, director of a government-backed High-Technology Park in Minsk, during a radio interview. Tsepkalo said one of the technology park’s clients was “helping Obama complete his insurance reform” and that “our programmers wrote the program that appears on the monitors in all hospitals and all insurance companies.”
Following disclosure of the warning, the White House announced that an intelligence report outlining the potential security compromise had been withdrawn from circulation.
A senior Belarusian official, Alexander Martinkevich, deputy director of the High Technology Park, stated in an email that software developed in Belarus is now part of networks used by U.S. medical and insurance companies that are involved in Obamacare. However, Martinkevich said no Belarusian software firms directly took part in developing Healthcare.gov. “If we did, it would work from the first day of its launch,” he said.
U.S. intelligence officials feared the use of Belarusian software developers would allow secret “backdoors” to be installed within the network that would permit the theft of data that could be used for financial crime or intelligence gathering.
Shawn Turner, an intelligence community spokesman, said the report on the healthcare network security vulnerability was pulled from circulation because it had not been properly vetted.
Critics have charged that withdrawing the report was an example of the “politicization” of intelligence—suppressing intelligence data that presents unpopular information that upset policymakers.
Obamacare computer problems have plagued the controversial government healthcare program since its beginning.
The FBI, in its notice to industry, said the shift to electronic health records must be completed by January 2015 and “will create an influx of new [electronic health records] coupled with more medical devices being connected to the Internet, generating a rich new environment for cyber criminals to exploit.”
The health care industry “is not technically prepared to combat against cyber criminals’ basic cyber intrusion tactics, techniques and procedures, much less against more advanced persistent threats,” the notice states.
“The health care industry is not as resilient to cyber intrusions compared to the financial and retail sectors, therefore the possibility of increased cyber intrusions is likely.”
According to the FBI, the health care industry is “poorly protected and ill-equipped to handle new cyber threats exposing patient medical records, billing and payment organizations, and intellectual property.”
“Data analysis revealed multiple devices (e.g., radiology imaging software, digital video systems, faxes, printers) and security application systems (e.g., Virtual Private Networks (VPN), firewalls, and routers) were compromised,” the notice said. “Once medical devices are compromised, malicious traffic is transmitted through VPNs and firewalls.”
Compared to stolen Social Security numbers or credit card numbers, which cost as little as $1 each on the black market, electronic health records can fetch as much as $50 for one partial record, the FBI said.
Stolen health records can be used by cyber criminals to file fraudulent insurance claims, to acquire prescription medicine, and as part of identity theft.
This entry was posted in National Security and tagged HHS, Obamacare. Bookmark the permalink.
 

New member
Joined
Jan 9, 2009
Messages
18,212
Tokens
This shows the liberal posters on here for what they are. They run down the Koch Bros and this scum bag is one of theirs and a one percenter to boost. Not one liberal response.
 

New member
Joined
Jan 9, 2009
Messages
18,212
Tokens
[h=2]Steyer Hedge Fund Tied to Russian Oligarch Targeted by U.S. Sanctions[/h]Farallon Capital sold stake in Russian oil company to member of Putin’s ‘inner circle’





Billionaire Democratic donor Tom Steyer and Russian oligarch Gennady Timchenko / AP

check-big.png
check-big.png
check-big.png
check-big.png
check-big.png
check-big.png
check-big.png


BY: Lachlan Markay
May 7, 2014 11:59 am
The hedge fund founded and, until recently, run by billionaire environmentalist Tom Steyer was involved in a deal to sell a stake in a Russian oil company to a Russian oligarch who is the target of U.S. sanctions.
Farallon Capital Management sold a part of its stake in Russian firm Geotech Oil Services to the Volga Group, a Luxembourg-based investment firm owned by Russian billionaire Gennady Timchenko, in 2010.
Four years later, in April 2014, the U.S. Treasury Department announced that it would target Timchenko, Volga, and a number of companies associated with them, in a round of sanctions aimed at punishing Russia’s inner circle of oligarchs for the government’s invasion of Crimea.
Timchenko has been “acting for or on behalf of or materially assisting, sponsoring, or providing financial, material, or technological support for, or goods and services to or in support of, a senior official of the government of the Russian Federation,” according to the Treasury Department.
Farallon has a long—and troubled—history in Russia. It was targeted for legal action by the Justice Department in the early 1990s after it used U.S. government resources to influence post-Soviet economic policy in the country in ways that benefitted Farallon.
The fund’s ties to Timchenko could raise more questions about its activities in the country as U.S. lawmakers seek to dent Russia’s energy sector, which experts say the Kremlin uses to assert its influence in Europe.
According to top U.S. lawmakers on both sides of the aisle, Russia’s recent invasion of Crimea demonstrates the necessity of building the Keystone XL pipeline, which Steyer vehemently opposes and is trying to scuttle through massive donations to the Democratic Party.
“Americans look at what’s happening in Russia and Ukraine—I think it sends shivers up their spine and it should,” said Senate Energy and Commerce Committee chairman Mary Landrieu (D., La.) on Tuesday in remarks on the pipeline.
Rep. Paul Ryan (R., Wis.) recently said that approving the pipeline would send strong signals to the Kremlin.
“The signal is very, very important,” Ryan told CNN in March. “I think showing that [the invasion of Crimea] is going to make us move in that direction helps give our allies the kind of resources they need, and reduces Russia’s grip on this.”
Steyer has vowed to raise $100 million for Democrats who oppose the pipeline, which the American people widely support. His involvement in a political battle that lawmakers are seeking to tie to Russian energy policy could revive scrutiny of his hedge fund’s involvement in the country’s energy sector, which accounted for 52 percent of federal budget revenue and over 70 percent of the country’s exports in 2012.
Farallon was part of a consortium of investors that provided $100 million in financing for Geotech in 2008. According to Integra Group, a company with which Geotech later merged, the financing was used “to support expansion plans.”
Later that year, the consortium bought additional Geotech shares, bringing their combined ownership to 23 percent.
Two years later, Farallon sold “part of their investment … to Volga Resources,” according to Russian corporate attorney Anton Rogoza, who advised Farallon on the deal.
Volga purchased shares from Farallon, two other foreign investors in the company, and Geotech’s senior management.
Russia’s endemic corruption—the country is tied with Pakistan for the 127th spot on Transparency International’s 2013 Corruption Perceptions Index, just ahead of the Ivory Coast—makes an investor with such deep ties to Putin a valuable asset.
“Timchenko’s activities in the energy sector have been directly linked to Putin,” the Treasury Department said in a statement on U.S. sanctions, which dubbed him a member of Putin’s “inner circle.”
Timchenko “is rumored to be a former KGB colleague of Putin’s,” according to a 2008 State Department cable released by Wikileaks. Additionally, oil trading firm Gunvor, which Timchenko owned until March, “is rumored to be one of Putin’s sources of undisclosed wealth.”
Timchenko dumped his Geotech shares late last year, and continued selling his stakes in companies eventually targeted by U.S. sanctions before those sanctions went into effect.
Volga reportedly made $40.6 million on the sale of its Geotech stock.
A Farallon spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment by press time.
The hedge fund’s investment practices have come under increasing scrutiny since Steyer gave up day-to-day control and established himself as one of the foremost political financiers in the country.
Steyer’s critics have pointed to Farallon investments in coal-fired power plants, for instance, to allege hypocrisy on his part.
Farallon was also named as a defendant in a lawsuit alleging it was complicit in a $67 million fraud scheme.
 

Member
Joined
Apr 14, 2006
Messages
26,039
Tokens
This shows the liberal posters on here for what they are. They run down the Koch Bros and this scum bag is one of theirs and a one percenter to boost. Not one liberal response.

Bleeding Purple did post a general reply that this guy should be in prison so I award 1 point to Bleeding Purple. Keep this up Purple and I won't have to call you names like douche bag or loser anymore. Good work.

I also tagged you with a karma post fyi.
 

New member
Joined
Oct 22, 2013
Messages
578
Tokens
The Black Book of Tom Steyer

Allegations of fraud plague hedge fund of Democratic super-donor





Tom Steyer believes in American democracy… for now (AP)

check-big.png
check-big.png
check-big.png
check-big.png
check-big.png
check-big.png
check-big.png


BY: Lachlan Markay
April 21, 2014 5:00 am
The former hedge fund of one of the Democratic Party’s most important donors was involved in a scheme to defraud foreign investors out of tens of millions of dollars, according to documents filed in a Texas court.
Farallon Capital Partners L.P., a fund run by Farallon Capital Management, the multibillion-dollar hedge fund founded by Democratic donor Tom Steyer, became a limited partner in a project to build a large shopping mall near Seattle, Wash., in the mid-1990s after it guaranteed a line of credit for the project.
According to the Texas case, Farallon and other parties involved in the deal operated “in conjunction with” foreign-owned corporations in Texas “to defraud a group of over three-hundred German investors out of approximately sixty-million dollars.”
A “Ponzi scheme” in which the companies planning to build what was to be called the Washington Supermall “transfer[red] millions of dollars in funds through ‘loans’ and ‘advances’ to other unrelated entities,” the plaintiffs alleged.
“At the end of the scheme,” the plaintiffs say, “after the money-drained Supermall project was sold in January of 1998, the remaining funds were distributed to the entities that had assisted the [foreign-owned] entities in their scheme, including … Farallon Partners, in improper preferential distributions that ultimately left the German investors with nothing to show for their $60 million investment.”
The case, which was dismissed on jurisdictional grounds—the court agreed with Farallon that it didn’t operate in Texas and hence could not be sued there—is being re-examined by the Republican politicians and activists scrutinizing the record of the billionaire and controversial environmentalist, who has pledged $100 million to help Democrats in this year’s midterm elections.
Another Farallon entity—Farallon Capital Partners L.P.—worked a separate shopping mall project that is also drawing the attention of critics, who say the hedge-fund bought companies and fired workers with little regard for the livelihood and concerns of the unemployed.
Farallon Capital Partners was involved in April 2007 in a joint venture to purchase Mills Corp., a Maryland-based shopping mall developer. “After the acquisition, dozens of Mills employees, including some executives, left the company or were laid off,” Washington Business Journal reported. Other Farallon-backed companies have seen layoffs well in excess of “dozens.”
Farallon and a pair of other financial firms teamed up with the World Bank in 1999 to buy Alpargatas, one of Argentina’s largest textile manufacturers.
Months later, the company laid off about half of its 6,000 employees.
“The company had already been battered during the 1990s by the drastic opening of the Argentine economy which came on top of an ill-advised attempt to diversify,” Latin Trade reported at the time. “This time, however, the idea was not to reduce operations as part of a restructuring, but simply to transfer them to neighboring Brazil to cut costs.”
Farallon’s history of layoffs is liable to spark attention with labor unions, a key Democratic constituency that has already found itself opposed to Tom Steyer’s agenda.
Steyer has vowed to throw his considerable political fortune behind candidates who oppose the Keystone XL pipeline. The pipeline, which an ABC News poll found is “overwhelmingly favored by Americans,” was delayed once again last week by the administration of Barack Obama, for whom Steyer bundled campaign contributions in the 2012 election.
Keystone opponents such as Steyer are “trying to destroy job opportunities for our LIUNA brothers and sisters,” Terry O’Sullivan, general president of the Laborers International Union of North America (LiUNA), wrote in a letter to union members in the districts of congressional Democrats who oppose the pipeline.
Steyer came under scrutiny last year when it was revealed that he still owned shares through a Farallon fund in a top competitor to TransCanada, the company building Keystone.
Steyer, who left day-to-day control of the fund at the end of 2012, said he directed Farallon to divest himself from the company. However, the hedge fund has maintained its stake and stands to benefit from a rejection of the pipeline.
Phil Kerpen, president of the conservative activist group American Commitment, is organizing a campaign to educate voters in the secret financial background of one of the most powerful men in American politics.
“Steyer has a history of ‘environmentally destructive business ventures,’” said a March ad from Kerpen’s group, which quoted from a Washington Free Beacon report on the controversial practices that sparked a divestment movement against Farallon in the 1990s.
Kerpen called Steyer a “shadowy, dirty energy billionaire” in a news release accompanying the video, noting that the opponent of climate change “helped finance the second-largest coal company in Indonesia.”
Kerpen is determined to highlight that conflict, as well as Steyer’s deep ties to the Democratic Party.
“Harry Reid believes the myth that corrupt, dirty billionaires call the shots on the right because in his party it really does work that way,” he said.
Farallon did not respond to a request for comment.


you mean billionaire campaign donors of both parties are doing so to obtain special favors and run scams on people???? wow. thanks for the breaking news russ. in more breaking news, the sun came up again this morning. russ will be following that breaking news as well. thanks for keeping us up to date, russ.
 

Member
Joined
Apr 14, 2006
Messages
26,039
Tokens
you mean billionaire campaign donors of both parties are doing so to obtain special favors and run scams on people???? wow. thanks for the breaking news russ. in more breaking news, the sun came up again this morning. russ will be following that breaking news as well. thanks for keeping us up to date, russ.

I saw your name on the main forum page being the last person to post in here. I came in here to specifically read how stupid and partisan your post was going to be.

Thank you for not disappointing me.
 

New member
Joined
Jan 9, 2009
Messages
18,212
Tokens
[h=2]Tom Steyer’s Dirty Energy Record[/h]Share
Tweet
Email


Billionaire environmentalist Tom Steyer / AP

check-big.png
check-big.png
check-big.png
check-big.png
check-big.png
check-big.png
check-big.png


BY: Reuters
May 13, 2014 9:03 am
(Reuters) – Billionaire Tom Steyer has rapidly become one of America’s most visible environmental advocates, vowing to punish lawmakers who don’t oppose climate change and pledging to spend up to $100 million to put the issue center stage in the Nov. 4 elections.
His in-your-face tactics have made him fierce enemies on the right who accuse him of hypocrisy and claim that he made much of his fortune through investments in fossil fuel energy at Farallon Capital Management, the San Francisco-based hedge fund he founded in 1986.
Steyer, 56, stepped down as co-managing partner of Farallon in 2012 to devote himself to full-time activism because, as he later wrote, he “no longer felt comfortable being at a firm that was invested in every single sector of the global economy, including tar sands and oil.”
But he has provided few details of the extent of those fossil fuel investments or how he profited from them. He said in July 2013 that when he had left Farallon, which manages much of his estimated $1.6 billion wealth, he had instructed the fund to divest his holdings in fossil fuels. Neither he nor Farallon has said whether that process has been completed. Farallon declined to comment.
A spokesman for Steyer declined to comment for this article.
Until now, most of the conservative ire against Steyer has focused on Farallon’s energy investment record in the United States. Little attention has been paid to foreign investments such as its forays into Asian coal.
During Steyer’s tenure, Farallon helped finance coal project acquisitions in Indonesia andAustralia valued at more than $2 billion and covering some of the region’s biggest mines, some of which swiftly ramped up production afterward, according to a close examination by Reuters of company disclosures and interviews with people involved in the deals.
While Farallon has not made public its shares in these deals, sources familiar with the fund’s dealings say they amounted to at least several hundred million dollars.
The Asian coal investments were mostly conducted through Noonday – a unit of Farallon set up by Steyer’s deputy, Andrew Spokes, in 2004. Spokes co-led Farallon from 2007 and succeeded Steyer after his departure. In Steyer’s final note to investors in 2012, he said Spokes “embodies values in which I believe and which distinguish our firm.”
People familiar with Steyer’s management of Farallon said that while his main focus was on the United States, he would have signed off on those foreign deals and, as co-managing partner, would have shared in their profits.
“The discretion to make or break any investment rested with him,” said a Farallon investor, who asked not to be named.
The ramped-up production at the Indonesia mines contributed to Asia’s coal boom as demand for fuel surged in China and India and prices soared, according to industry analysts.
Farallon’s investments in Indonesia and Australia included projects that raised concern among local environmental groups over air and water pollution and coal’s role in global carbon emissions, which contribute to global warming.
Under Steyer’s stewardship, Farallon grew to become one of the world’s largest hedge funds. Farallon’s regulatory filings show energy currently makes up nearly 9 percent of its overall $19 billion portfolio.
“He made us a lot of money and his attitude has always been ‘whatever it will take to make money,’” said one former investor with his fund, who asked not be named because of his ongoing relationship with Steyer.
REWARDED WELL
As Steyer has become a bigger voice in U.S. politics, the Republican party and other conservative groups have sharply escalated their attacks on the big Democratic donor, raising questions about how he made his money.
Conservative attacks on Steyer’s record have mainly focused on his fund’s involvement in U.S. energy companies like Kinder Morgan, which has plans to expand an oil sands pipeline to Canada’s West Coast. Just before Steyer left Farallon in 2012, the fund held $125 million worth of Kinder Morgan securities, along with $220 million in shares of Nexen, a Canadian oil sands producer, according to U.S. filings.
Farallon’s investments contrast with Steyer’s aggressive campaign against fossil fuels in North America, in which he has targeted politicians who support TransCanada’s proposed Keystone XL pipeline from Canada to the United States and has urged universities to sell off their coal stocks, saying “a coal free portfolio is a good investment strategy.”
While little noticed, in Indonesia, Farallon helped finance the leveraged buyout of three coal companies, including the country’s No. 2 coal miner Adaro Energy in 2005. Indonesia is the world’s biggest coal exporter, according to the U.S. Department of Energy.
Farallon’s involvement in the Adaro deal laid the foundation for a 60 percent expansion in production at the firm that was lucrative for all involved, said Edwin Soeryadjaya, chairman of Saratoga Capital, which owns a major stake in Adaro. The Adaro buyout was valued at about $1 billion, according to Adaro’s website.
A source involved in the deal said Farallon’s share included $110 million in loans, and a direct purchase for $5.5 million of an 11 percent stake in the company that later surged in value.
“They were bullish on making money … If they didn’t like it they wouldn’t go with it, but for that they were rewarded very well,” Soeryadjaya told Reuters.
Farallon’s Noonday unit approached Adaro when Asian coal prices were $50 a tonne. When Adaro went public in 2008, coal prices were $170 a tonne, yielding a solid return for investors. Adaro’s coal output during that period soared 60 percent to 38.5 million tonnes.
Farallon made other inroads into Indonesian coal too, including helping to finance an Indonesian-led consortium’s purchase of Berau Coal, Indonesia’s fifth largest producer, in 2004 and Indonesian mining company Bumi Resources’ $500 million acquisition of Kaltim Prima Coal from BP and Rio Tinto in 2003. Production jumped at those mines, too. The amount of money that Farallon contributed in these deals remains unclear.
David Price, senior coal analyst at consultants IHS, said the leveraged buyouts funded by Farallon were important for raising Indonesia’s coal production, which quadrupled between 2002 and 2012 and triggered worries among environmentalists about pollution and carbon emissions.
“There was an enormous amount of Chinese demand for imported coal. So there was incentive to increase production,” Price said. “At the same time the leveraged buyouts were instrumental. Everyone knew at the time that the first thing the buyers would do was ramp up production in order to regain their capital expenditure as quickly as possible.”
A source familiar with Farallon disputed any link between the hedge fund’s investments and the surge in coal production, saying the investments did not give the fund any say on the Indonesian companies’ operations. “The biggest friend to rising production is prices, and Farallon can’t take credit for that,” the source said.
The Adaro mining site in Tanjung, South Kalimantan, produces some of the world’s cleanest coal – with low sulfur content and low ash, industry experts said. But there is still air pollution from coal dust and pollution of the Balangan River that Adaro uses to channel coal out on barges, said Arif Fiyanto, an activist at Greenpeace Indonesia, whose team monitors the area.
Saratoga Capital’s Soeryadjaya said Adaro worked hard to minimize impact on local communities.
CLIMATE CONCERNS
Farallon’s investments in Australia, meanwhile, laid the groundwork for the fund to become the biggest shareholder of Whitehaven Coal, which is developing one of the country’s biggest remaining coal reserves, Maules Creek. The mine has become a lightning rod for environmentalists worried it will deplete water supplies and destroy a forest, while producing coal that will add to carbon pollution.
Farallon provided a loan of $335 million for entrepreneur Nathan Tinkler’s acquisition of the mine in 2009, according to a source familiar with the deal. Tinkler’s company, Aston Resources, went public in 2010 and then was taken over by miner Whitehaven Coal in 2012.
Farallon loaned Tinkler more money to buy other mines, but when that loan came due in the midst of slumping world coal prices, cash-strapped Tinkler had to repay Farallon in the form of half of his stake in Whitehaven. Farallon became Whitehaven’s top shareholder by the end of 2013, after Steyer’s departure, according to public filings. Whitehaven’s share price had nosedived more than 60 percent over the preceding two years.
“Early investors made a lot of money. Farallon were part of that,” said a person familiar with the Maules Creek loan. But he noted investments made later, including those by Farallon, were showing losses. “It’s been a rollercoaster,” the source said.
The Maules Creek mine is due to start producing in 2015. Green groups, farmers, local Aboriginals and the community in the surrounding area worry it will destroy the Leard State Forest, hurt farms, spread coal dust on nearby towns, and damage sacred indigenous sites.
Whitehaven says it went through a rigorous environmental approval process and all of the issues have been addressed. The Maules Creek mine won state and federal environmental approvals following a three-year process, which included a court challenge by environmentalists.
“It (Maules Creek) has become the focus point for a lot of people who are concerned about inaction on climate change,” said Georgina Woods, New South Wales coordinator for the Lock the Gate Alliance, a coalition of environmental groups.
When Farallon won its initial stake in Whitehaven in 2012, Steyer, too, was worrying about climate change.
He quit in October 2012 after what he later described as a “Road to Damascus” awakening about the importance of tackling the issue, which he calls “the challenge of our generation.” He has since devoted time and millions of dollars to philanthropic causes, most centering around climate change. (Additional reporting by Svea Herbst-Bayliss and Rory Carroll, editing by Ross Colvin)
 

New member
Joined
Jan 9, 2009
Messages
18,212
Tokens
you mean billionaire campaign donors of both parties are doing so to obtain special favors and run scams on people???? wow. thanks for the breaking news russ. in more breaking news, the sun came up again this morning. russ will be following that breaking news as well. thanks for keeping us up to date, russ.

You in your ignorant bliss did not even know who Steyer was until this thread. Bet you had heard of the Koch bros though. LOL
 

New member
Joined
Jan 9, 2009
Messages
18,212
Tokens
[h=2]EXCLUSIVE: Democracy Alliance Network Revealed[/h]Funding ‘snapshot’ details nearly $40 million in Alliance support for 20 groups this year
Share
Tweet
Email


Jim Messina, David Brock, Neera Tanden / AP, americanprogress.org

check-big.png
check-big.png
check-big.png
check-big.png
check-big.png
check-big.png
check-big.png


BY: Lachlan Markay
May 19, 2014 1:00 pm
A secretive dark money group backed by George Soros and other liberal mega-donors is looking to steer nearly $40 million to left-wing groups in 2014 to support high-profile political and policy efforts, according to documents obtained by the Washington Free Beacon.
The documents reveal for the first time the Democracy Alliance’s full portfolio of supported organizations, a large network of powerful liberal groups looking to win key electoral and legislative victories.
The Democracy Alliance connects major Democratic donors with some of the largest and most influential liberal activist groups in the country. Previous beneficiaries, such as the Center for American Progress and Media Matters for America, are set to get millions more in 2014.
The list also reveals DA support for newer organizations, such as Organizing for Action, the advocacy group that succeeded President Barack Obama’s reelection campaign. That group has received official sanction from the White House, and operates websites and social media accounts branded with the president’s name.
In all, the document reveals, the Democracy Alliance hopes to provide $39.3 million to 20 organizations this year. If it meets those fundraising targets, it will likely be responsible for one out of every five dollars in those groups’ 2014 budgets.
Alliance-supported organizations will spend more than $175 million in 2014, according to budget projections contained in the document.
The Democracy Alliance is highly secretive in all of its operations. The donors it solicits and the organization to which it directs their financial support are prohibited from speaking publicly about its operations.
Security was tight at its recent conference in Chicago where reporters from the Free Beacon and Politico were rebuffed by attendees who would not answer questions about their involvement with the group.
The Free Beacon obtained and recently published a list of new Alliance “partners”—individuals and organizations that must pay $30,000 in dues and contribute at least $200,000 to DA-aligned groups each year—providing previously unreported details on its financial backing.
A document titled “Spring 2014 Democracy Alliance Portfolio Snapshot” offers details on the other side of the fundraising equation: the organizations to which the group’s partners will contribute millions this year.
The Democracy Alliance does not actually accept those contributions. Instead, it connects donors to a network of groups that it has vetted and strategically endorsed. The goal is to create a collaborative fundraising apparatus that maximizes the effectiveness of large contributions to left-wing groups.
Some of the groups that DA supports are established organizations with large budgets. The Center for American Progress, slated to get up to $5.5 million from DA donors this year, has a projected 2014 budget of more than $44 million, according to the funding snapshot. Media Matters will get up to $3 million, or more than a quarter of the group’s $11.67 million projected budget.
Other groups are set to receive an even larger portion of their revenue from Alliance donors. If the Alliance meets its fundraising targets, its partner contributions will be equal to 100 percent of the projected 2014 budget of New Media Ventures, 68 percent of the Youth Engagement Fund, 59 percent of Progressive Majority, and nearly half of the projected budgets of America Votes, the Black Civic Engagement Fund, and the Latino Engagement Fund.
Funding goals are broken down into “baseline” targets and “stretch” targets. They refer, respectively, to “the minimum level of continued support needed from the DA in order to maintain their current size” and “the level of meaningful support needed in order to enhance [recipients’] independent and [DA-]aligned efforts.”
Alliance-supported groups fall into two categories: “aligned network organizations” and “dynamic investments.”
The group did not respond to requests for additional information about how its support is broken down.
Total baseline funding for both aligned network organizations and dynamic investments in 2014 will be $27.1 million. Its cumulative stretch funding target for the year is $39.3 million.
Those funds will finance eleven “core functions” carried out by the various organizations the DA supports. They range from “fighting the right” to “perfecting data and tools” to “supporting progressive candidates.”
According to the snapshot, DA backs five organizations that “support progressive candidates”: America Votes, Catalist, the Center for American Progress, the New Organizing Institute, and Progressive Majority. CAP and NOI, unlike the other three, are nonprofit groups (each has a 501(c)(3) and a 501(c)(4) arm), and hence cannot devote a majority of their resources to political activities.
ThinkProgress, the blog of CAP’s 501(c)(4) Action Fund, has written approvingly of efforts to “mitigat[e] the damage caused by the Supreme Court’s 5-4 Citizens United ruling,” as the blog put it in an interview with Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D., Md.).
The Center for American Progress has warned that laws protecting the anonymity of (c)(4) groups can obfuscate the sources of political influence, and has called for laws that “require information on the source of funding for independent spending so that citizens know whose money is influencing their elections.”
Democracy Alliance critics say that speaks to a larger disconnect among groups that it supports: many of those groups decry secretive political spending while benefitting from a fundraising apparatus that discloses nothing about the millions in political and nonprofit contributions it facilitates.
The Alliance hopes to raise $1.6 million in 2014 for a group called the Fund for the Republic, which is critical of the prevalence of political dark money. The Fund does not publicly post information about its financiers. It makes the names of its donors available to those who request them, but will not say how much money they have donated.
Other DA-supported groups have employed that style of partial donor disclosure and been criticized by transparency advocates who say they are paying lip service to good government while shielding as much financial information as possible from public scrutiny.
The Sunlight Foundation scoffed at Organizing for Action (OFA) in 2013 when it released the names of high-dollar donors but refused to disclose information about their professional affiliations, which could make it easier to spot attempts at influence-buying.
“If OFA’s structure were motivated by accountability, we’d see a coherent policy about campaign finance disclosure, empowering public oversight of [the] group’s finances and donors,” wrote Sunlight policy director John Wonderlich. “Instead, we see conflicting messages about what kind of access a $50K donor can expect, and a disclosure policy that exists only in proportion to public outrage about Obama’s dark money.”
Jim Messina, Obama’s former campaign manager, founded OFA after the president’s reelection to serve as a perpetual campaign apparatus promoting the president’s legislative agenda. It has been criticized since its inception as a vehicle to sell White House and administration access to high-dollar Democratic donors.
OFA is slated to get up to $1 million from Alliance donors in 2014, but a number of those donors are already top OFA supporters. Amy Goldman and Philip Munger, both heirs to billion-dollar fortunes, recently signed on as DA partners. They have already donated a combined $1 million to the group.
It is not clear whether OFA contributions from Munger and Goldman came by way of the Alliance, because the group does not disclose that information. It serves as a “pass through” for donations to supported groups, so there is no public documentation revealing DA’s role in the fundraising process.
Instead, donations from DA partners simply show up as individual (or institutional, as the case may be) contributions to the organizations it supports. Because 16 of the 20 groups the Alliance is supporting this year are 501(c)(4) groups or have a (c)(4) arm, few contributions made through the Alliance will be public.
As CAP complained in its paper on laws governing such groups, “citizens have to search elsewhere to find the ultimate source of money for independent spending.” Anonymity of donors to (c)(4) organizations means there are often no available means of revealing DA-facilitated donations to top left-wing groups.
It is just that sort of opacity that many DA-supported groups ostensibly exist to fight, said John Perazzo, managing editor of Discover the Networks, a site that tracks left-wing donors and political organizations.
“Its members justify this hypocrisy by maintaining that their own donations are intended to advance a selfless, high-minded, moral crusade to improve America as a country, whereas conservative donors are allegedly motivated only by a desire to enrich themselves by supporting groups that promote policies like tax cuts and reduced business regulations,” Perazzo said in an email.
However, some Alliance donors benefit from policies that its supported organizations advance.
Rick Segal is a new DA “partner,” according to the list recently published by the Free Beacon. Segal, who bundled between $250,000 and $500,000 for Obama’s reelection effort, runs a financial services firm, Seavest Inc., that is expected to benefit from Obamacare, the Washington Examiner recently reported.
Other new partners are top officials at major labor unions, including the Communications Workers of America and the American Federation of Teachers. Alliance-supported groups regularly advocate for policies that boost union membership and finances.
Two new DA partners are top officials at the union-owned Amalgamated Bank. The bank’s finances are deeply entwined with those of the Democratic National Committee, which still owes Amalgamated more than $8 million from loans taken out during the 2012 campaign season.
The Alliance funding snapshot also reveals 21 groups that received DA support over the past nine years. They include some of the left’s leading campaign finance reform voices, such as Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, which frequently warns of the corrosive effect of secret money in the political process.
Other organizations previously backed by the Alliance include the radical environmentalist group the Sierra Club, the pro-abortion EMILY’s List, and the hard-left Hispanic advocacy group La Raza. A full list of supported groups in 2014 and prior is below.
[h=3]Democracy Alliance Network, 2014 (baseline funding target/stretch funding target):[/h]America Votes ($3.5 million / $4 million)
American Constitution Society ($1.2 million / $1.5 million)
Black Civic Engagement Fund ($1.5 million / $2 million)
Brennan Center ($2.4 million / $2.7 million)
Catalist ($500,000 / $750,000)
Center for American Progress ($3.23 million / $5.5 million)
Center for Community Change ($2.2 million / $3 million)
Center for Budget and Policy Priorities ($1.8 million / $2.5 million)
Common Purpose Project ($150,000 / N/A)
Fund for the Republic ($1.2 million / $1.6 million)
Latino Engagement Fund ($1.5 million / $2 million)
Media Matters for America ($2.4 million / $3 million)
New Media Ventures ($250,000 / $400,000)
New Organizing Institute ($750,000 / $1 million)
Organizing for Action ($600,000 / $1 million)
Progressive Majority ($650,000 / $800,000)
Progress Now ($1.6 million / $1.9 million)
State Voices ($1.4 million / $2 million)
Women’s Equality Center ($1.5 million / $2 million)
Youth Engagement Fund ($750,000 / $1.5 million)
[h=3]Previously supported:[/h]Advancement Project
Brave New Films
Campaign for America’s Future
Center for Social Inclusion
Citizen Engagement Laboratory
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington
Democracy Now
Economic Policies Institute
EMILY’s List
Free Press
Gamaliel Foundation
League of Young Voters
National Council of La Raza
National Security Network
Sierra Club
Sojourners
Third Way
USAction
Voter Participation Center
Young Democrats of America
Young People For (YP4) and Young Elected Officials (YEO) Network
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,119,746
Messages
13,572,180
Members
100,855
Latest member
hazeljames
The RX is the sports betting industry's leading information portal for bonuses, picks, and sportsbook reviews. Find the best deals offered by a sportsbook in your state and browse our free picks section.FacebookTwitterInstagramContact Usforum@therx.com