Four FBI Probes Related to the Clintons

How far behind in the investigation process is another dive into Sidney Blumenthal

Four FBI Probes Related to the Clintons Sharyl Attkisson

The following information is compiled from allegations contained in news reports and in public interviews by current and former law enforcement officials. All of those involved have denied any wrongdoing.

The FBI reportedly has 4 active probes related to the Clintons. Here’s how they dovetail.

1. Clinton Foundation: Four FBI field offices– New York, Los Angeles, Little Rock and Washington DC– have been involved in a lengthy probe of the Clinton Foundation charity. “Pay to play” allegations include the charity soliciting donations from corporations and foreign countries in exchange for access and policy considerations from then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, which she denies. Emails published this month by Wikileaks reflect consternation among various Clinton allies about the possible appearance of conflicts of interests. Chelsea, the Clintons’ daughter, worried about blurred lines between the charity and the for profit business of one of her father’s aides. In emails, the aide, Douglas Band, discussed how he’d arranged millions of dollars in income for Bill Clinton from foundation donors. He referred to the arrangement as “Bill Clinton, Inc.” Chelsea pleaded with her parents’ confidants to help get the charity’s house in order, and she enlisted outside lawyers to look at the foundation’s business practices. Emails indicate some interviewees told a team auditing the Foundation that donors “may have an expectation of quid pro quo benefits in return for gift[s].” Various FBI and Department of Justice officials have clashed over whether the probe into the charity is worthwhile. In February, senior Justice Department officials reportedly refused to authorize subpoenas, formal witness interviews or a grand jury in the case, believing the evidence was not compelling. In September, FBI investigators on the Clinton Foundation case asked to see the Hillary Clinton emails, but prosecutors reportedly denied them permission.


2. Anthony Weiner sexting: Weiner is the ex-Congressman who resigned in 2011 amid a sexting scandal. He’s married to top Hillary Clinton aide Huma Abedin. He withdrew from the race for New York mayor in 2013 amid another sexting scandal. And in August this year, he was caught allegedly sexting women again, sometimes with his infant son shown in photos. Abedin announced her separation from Weiner after the latest revelations. The FBI began a probe into whether Weiner had traded sexually explicit texts with a minor, and in the process of examining his computers, investigators ran across evidence of Abedin emails sent to and from Clinton’s insecure private server(s), which the FBI had previously investigated. The FBI Clinton email team met with the FBI Weiner team and they agreed the newly-discovered material was potentially relevant. FBI Director James Comey notified Congress on Friday.


Anthony Weiner, husband of top Hillary Clinton aide Huma Abedin. Weiner is under FBI investigation in a sexual texting case.

3. Hillary Clinton email: In July, FBI Director Comey said that Hillary Clinton had been “grossly negligent” in the mishandling of classified emails on private servers as secretary of state, but that there was no basis under which to charge her with a crime. However, the revelations of new Abedin emails that could be relevant to the investigation have returned the status of the case to “open.”


FBI probe of Hillary Clinton email is still active

Read Devlin Barrett’s article in the Wall Street Journal

4. Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe: Longtime Clinton ally, former Clinton Foundation board member, and former head of the Democratic National Committee, McAuliffe is also said to be under FBI investigation (led by the Washington Field Office). His lawyer has reportedly said the FBI probe is focused on whether McAuliffe failed to register as an agent of a foreign entity. There are also reports that the FBI is looking into six figures in campaign contributions from a Chinese businessman who also pledged $2 million to the Clinton Foundation while the donor was a member of China’s government, the National People’s Congress. Foreigners are prohibited from making political contributions in the U.S., but can donate personally if they have a green card, which the donor reportedly has.


Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe, a former Clinton Foundation board member, reportedly under FBI investigation

There are also questions surrounding McAuliffe’s campaign donations to the wife of a top FBI official, Andrew McCabe, as these various probes have moved forward. The Wall Street Journal reports that McAuliffe’s political action committee gave McCabe’s wife, Jill, $467,500 in late 2015 for her state senate race (which she lost). The FBI’s McCabe has reportedly been triaging for the two teams investigating the Weiner-Abedin email and the Clinton Foundation probes where they intersect. One official told the Wall Street Journal that on August 12, a senior Justice Department official called McCabe to express displeasure at learning New York FBI agents were still on the Clinton Foundation case. “Are you telling me that I need to shut down a validly predicated investigation,” McCabe reportedly asked. “Of course not,” reportedly answered the official, after a pause.

The FBI's Andrew McCabe and wife, Jill

The FBI’s Andrew McCabe and wife, Jill

McCabe reportedly recused himself from a separate McAuliffe matter due to McCabe’s wife’s political contributions from McAuliffe, according to the Wall Street Journal. The McCabes and McAuliffe have denied any conflicts of interest or other wrongdoing.

Preorder The Smear

Watch Full Measure on TV Sundays and replays online anytime


Comey’s Decision on Hillary Investigation Due to Hatch Act?

In 2012, Former U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder drafted an internal memo at Justice regarding election and Hatch Act guidance. The Hatch Act was likely under consideration in the decision for James Comey to pursue the Hillary email server investigation. The New York office of the FBI has taken possession of 4 devices from the Anthony Weiner/Huma Abedin home that include a laptop, a computer, an iPad and a cell phone. It is also noted there are as many as 10,000 (not confirmed) emails on the shared computer that was placed there by Huma, of which she says is unsure how they got there. To be clear, Hillary had a common practice of asking Huma to print out communications of email as they were difficult to read due to the size of the font. Huma complied at every request and often did so by forwarding emails to her yahoo account out of ease of the process. The hardcopies were then delivered to Hillary by courier or faxed on a secure fax machine located in SCIF’s in both Hillary homes.

It must be noted that several Hillary operatives were given ‘limited’ immunity by the Department of Justice and beyond the review of the emails found on the Huma Abedin devices, Comey also is tasked with the determination if any or all of those immunity agreements have been violate due in part to new evidence and most of all in provided testimony given by those such as Cheryl Mills, Justin Cooper and Heather Samuelson to list a few.

This matter will not be resolved before the general election however, it does have countless moving parts that will impact the winning candidate.

Additionally of particular note, David Kendall, Hillary’s long time lawyer of record had a number of boxes of printed out emails that were delivered to the State Department, 2 of which were never delivered. Further, the law firm, Williams and Connelly also made an arrangement with the FBI to turn over several computers. When the FBI arrived at the law office, 2 computers were in fact held back for reasons still unclear at this point. Both law firms did not have any security clearance to be in possession of any classified material.

A Private Computer System at State for Hillary?

comey-hatchcomey-hatch-2It should be noted that a company exists named the Clinton Executive Services Corporation (CESC) which is named on the contracts of agreements that hosted the servers in question. Both Huma and Cheryl Mills were the managers and administrators of this company where the emails in question were controlled. When it comes to the FBI investigation, yet another wing of this RICO and private intelligence operation concocted by Hillary has been ignored and that is of Sidney Blumenthal. He was in business with Cody Shearer and Tyler Drumheller (former CIA and now deceased). These 3 had a company together that sought business opportunities in the Middle East exploiting conditions as a result of the Arab Spring and Libya. Blumenthal had his own server, yet the FBI has not sought control of his and the question is why. Could it be there was executive privilege applied by Obama in this regard? It must also be noted that several files and communications are in fact known to be on the computer of the hacker Guccifer located in Romania. (from the 302 summaries of the FBI)




Justice Department’s Bank Terrorism Funding Radical Orgs/Activism

Congress held hearings, defunded several of these programs, but Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch found innovative methods to continue the funding by financial terrorism and extortion. This is all without the oversight of Congress and mostly in legal secrecy.


In part from the report by the Government Accountability Institute:

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Rep. Lamar Smith took a very direct approach

in his January 25, 2012 correspondence addressed to Eric Holder. He stated:

I am concerned that the terms of the Justice Department’s recent settlement

with Countrywide Financial Corporation and certain affiliates (collectively,

“Countrywide”) will allow the Department to give large sums of money to

individuals and organizations with questionable backgrounds or close

political ties to the White House without any guidelines or oversight. If that is

to be the case, this sort of backdoor funding of the president’s political allies

would be an abuse of the Department’s law enforcement authority.85

He was specifically addressing a December 28, 2011 DOJ settlement with Countrywide,

which required that Countrywide deposit $335 million into an interest-bearing escrow

account to remedy alleged violations of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act and Fair Housing



The Rise and Fall of ACORN

Saul Alinsky’s influence is undeniable. Since the publication of Reveille for Radicals

in 1946 and Rules for Radicals in 1971, grassroots organizations have been launched for the

purpose of community organizing and systemic social/political change.91 As the movement

grew, organizers created several national support organizations including the Industrial

Areas Foundation (IAF) which was founded by Alinsky. Other organizations that grew out

of the Alinsky philosophies included NACA, and ACORN. One of the first was The National

Welfare Rights Organization (NWRO), an activist organization founded in 1966, focused on

welfare rights.92 Both John Calkins, founder of The Direct Action and Research Training

Center (DART) and Wade Rathke founder of ACORN worked with the NWRO.93 Other

groups that appeared on the community organizing scene who modeled Alinsky’s style of

activism were groups like DART, National People’s Action (NPA) and La Raza.

One of the chief beneficiaries of this wealth redistribution by the federal

government has been ACORN. In its July 2006 report, “Rotten ACORN, America’s Bad Seed,”

the Employment Policies Institute described ACORN as a “multi-million-dollar

multinational conglomerate.”94 The report described ACORN’s hunger and pursuit of

political power:

ACORN’s no-holds-barred take on politics originates from its philosophy,

which is centered on power. An internal ACORN manual instructed

organizers to sign up as many residents as possible because “this is a mass

organization directed at political power where might makes right.95

This sentiment aligns with the Marxist underpinnings of the Students for a

Democratic Society, a group that housed Rathke. ACORN enjoyed rapid growth facilitated


through government grants and contracts before, during, and after the 2008 election.

Handwritten notes obtained from an FBI investigative file by Judicial Watch through a FOIA

request indicate ACORN’s headquarters was working for the Democratic Party.96 During

and after the 2008 election there were numerous allegations of massive fraud on the part

of ACORN.97 In 2009, several major scandals involving ACORN and its affiliated groups

broke into the national news. These included rampant embezzlement, fraud, and evidence

that ACORN and their affiliated groups were advising individuals how to break the law.98

A July 23, 2009 Staff Report for the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on

Oversight and Government Reform in its title asked, “Is ACORN Intentionally Structured as

a Criminal Enterprise?” Then offers the following findings in its executive summary:

The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) has

repeatedly and deliberately engaged in systemic fraud. Both structurally and

operationally, ACORN hides behind a paper wall of nonprofit corporate protections

to conceal a criminal conspiracy on the part of its directors, to launder federal

money in order to pursue a partisan political agenda and to manipulate the

American electorate.

Emerging accounts of widespread deceit and corruption raise the need for a

criminal investigation of ACORN. By intentionally blurring the legal distinctions

between 361 tax-exempt and non-exempt entities, ACORN diverts taxpayer and taxexempt

monies into partisan political activities. Since 1994, more than $53 million

in federal funds have been pumped into ACORN, and under the Obama

administration, ACORN stands to receive a whopping $8.5 billion in available

stimulus funds.

Operationally, ACORN is a shell game played in 120 cities, 43 states and the District

of Columbia through a complex structure designed to conceal illegal activities, to use

taxpayer and tax-exempt dollars for partisan political purposes, and to distract

investigators. Structurally, ACORN is a chess game in which senior management is

shielded from accountability by multiple layers of volunteers and compensated

employees who serve as pawns to take the fall for every bad act.99

One of the events described in the report was the cover-up of the embezzlement of

$948,607.50 by Dale Rathke, the brother of ACORN founder Wade Rathke.100 These and

other events led to a ban on all federal funding for ACORN affiliated groups in 2009.101

Fox News reported that the former director of New York ACORN, Jon Kest, and his

top aides renamed New York ACORN to New York Communities for Change (NYCC), used

the same office and stationary as New York ACORN and employed many of the same staff as

previously employed by New York ACORN.106 In 2013, Fox News and several other news

outlets reported that contracts for services known as Navigator grants under Obamacare

were awarded to former associates of ACORN and its affiliated organizations. Wade Rathke

had announced in September 2013 that The United Labor Unions Council Local 100, a New

Orleans-based nonprofit, would take part in a multi-state “navigator” drive to help people

enroll in Obamacare.107


In the most recent consent orders from Bank of America, Citigroup and

JPMorgan settlements offered credit for giving to nonprofits. These not only require banks

to make donations to nonprofits but incentivize them to give more than the required

amount. The evolution of these consent orders illustrates the growing effort by the current

administration to funnel money to these nonprofit groups.

The DOJ limited distributions to “HUD approved housing counseling agencies,” such

as the groups set to receive mandatory minimum payments under the Citigroup and Bank

of America settlements, and incentivized payments under many of these settlements. These

organizations had been preapproved by prior administrations. These included La Raza,

Neighborhood Assistance Corporation of America (NACA) and part of the old ACORN

network who in the wake of the scandal and congressional prohibition against further

funding restyled itself as the Mutual Housing Association of New York (MHANY). The HUD

website lists MHANY’s contact as Ismene Speliotis. Speliotis previously served as the New

York director of ACORN Housing. Furthermore, an examination of tax returns for the

nonprofit reveals that MHANY Management, Inc. maintained the EIN (72-1303737)

previously used by New York ACORN Housing Company, Inc. Between the 2007 and 2008

tax filings, only the group’s name had changed.147 This corporate entity was merely New

York ACORN Housing Company, Inc. rebranded with a new name and clothed in a new

“moral garment.” Despite the prohibition on ACORN funding from Congress, New York

ACORN Housing Company, Inc. had sidestepped congressional intent by simply changing its



In September 2012, FHC hosted its annual conference in Orlando. The keynote

speaker for day two: Judith Browne Dianis,198 longtime liberal activist, attorney, and

scholar.199 In its 2012 post-election newsletter, FHC published Browne Dianis’s editorial on

that election.200 She did not mention the word “housing” once. Instead, she denounced what

she termed “the greatest rollback on voting rights in more than a century.” This was her

terminology for the “partisan” voter ID laws passed that year, and the subject of so much

litigation. Furthermore, as its website clearly shows, Browne Dianis’s Advancement Project


was in the thick of this litigation.201 In her FHC editorial, she condemned those laws at

length, and called for Election Day to be made a national holiday, and a “next generation

voting-rights movement.”202 She denounced other practices that she claimed amount to

voter suppression. She quoted the recently re-elected Barack Obama on these same issues.

So who was she and how did she find her way to the editorial page of the FHC

newsletter and the keynote speaker slot at the FHC convention? Advancement Project’s tax

return for 2012 lists a grant of $25,000203 to a 501(c)(4) advocacy group known as Florida

New Majority.204 The grant was designated as “Voter Protection Program” – amounting to

nearly one-tenth of the approximately $280,000.00 in grants given out by Browne-Dianis’s

nonprofit, the Advancement Project, for such purposes that year.205 Interestingly, the

Florida New Majority’s 990 for 2012 says nothing about protecting voters, but includes

nearly half-a-million dollars to “reach and mobilize voters during the 2012 elections with

the objective of promoting progressive federal and state legislators…” (emphasis added)206


Asian Americans for Equality: Margaret Chin and John Choe

Margaret Chin cut her political teeth as a student activist in the Communist Workers

Party (CWP) while attending the City College in the 1970s. It was Chin who stood before

the cameras and condemned the killing of five of her party members in Greensboro, North

Carolina where the CWP had sponsored a “Death to the Klan” rally which led to an armed

confrontation with the Klan.221 The “Communist” moniker would not serve them well in

their efforts to influence politics in New York City, but a solution was forthcoming. In 1974,

protests erupted in Manhattan’s Chinatown and Asian Americans for Equal Employment

was formed to fight discriminatory hiring practices on a federally-financed construction

project. A “stunning civil rights victory” ultimately led to the founding of Asian Americans

for Equality (AAFE) and a continued focus on “civil liberties” issues.222 Chin, a founding

member of AAFE223 and other members of the CWP, found great success in identifying an

issue important to the community and wrapping themselves in it. We know this because of

the overlap of individuals involved the CWP and AAFE. Many of the founders of AAFE were

also active with the CWP. AAFE shared an address and phone number with the CWP for

several years. It seemed that CWP veterans regularly ended up as AAFE officers. Chin

served as President of AAFE from 1982 to 1986 and was associated with AAFE until 2008

when she began efforts to run for the city council. Her work at AAFE served as a launching

pad into New York politics and in 1986 and with the help of the progressive liberal group,

the Village Independent Democrats, she was elected to the Democratic State Committee

were she served two terms. The AAFE afforded Chin the kind of resources and respectable

platform from which she could chase her political aspirations.224

In 2009, AAFE announced it had joined the NeighborWorks America charter.225 With

this came the “seal of approval” from HUD and federal funding. NeighborWorks funding also

increased—from just over $250,000 in 2008, the year before the announcement, to over

$700,000 in 2013 alone. In total, since 2008, AAFE has received over $4 million in grants from

NeighborWorks.226 Some have not only lamented, but have charged that the AAFE has left

its activist routes to become no more than a “housing developer.” As the New York Times

described it:

Down from the ramparts, fists unclenched, their protest signs long ago set aside,

Asian Americans for Equality — leaders among a cadre of community groups that

brought thousands of demonstrators into the streets of Chinatown and to the steps

of City Hall in the mid-1970’s — is now a major landlord and residential developer.

That same article published the following criticisms:

“I think AAFE has aligned itself with business interests and political interests at the

expense of Chinatown’s residential and low-wage workers,” said Margaret Fung,

executive director of the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund. ”They

want to acquire properties or city-owned buildings so that they can be the

developers, instead of some other group. They favor themselves.”


A Rising New Star

In January 1993, an article in Chicago Magazine described how “a huge black turnout

in November 1992 altered Chicago’s electoral landscape-and raised new political

star.”243 Leading up to the election George Bush had been making gains on Bill Clinton in

Illinois. Carol Moseley Braun who had previously been seen as “unstoppable” was on the

ropes amidst allegations regarding her mother’s Medicare liability. Even so, she was able to

win her seat and Bill Clinton won the state. The article attributed their success to “…the

most effective minority voter registration drive in memory…” which was the result of the

efforts of Project Vote. At the helm of Project Vote was a young lawyer named Barack


Sandy Newman, a lawyer and civil rights activist who founded Project Vote

explained the work of the nonprofit organization in the election as follows:

Project Vote! is nonpartisan, strictly nonpartisan. But we do focus our efforts on

minority voters, and on states where we can explain to them why their vote will

matter. Braun made that easier in Illinois. (emphasis added)

Project Vote’s work in voter registration was hailed as the reason Braun was elected

drawing a direct correlation with voter registration activities and election outcomes.

Indeed, in another portion of the article the writer contrasts the old way of doing things

and the new paradigm created by Mr. Obama’s efforts through the nonprofit:

To understand the full implications of Obama’s effort, you first need to understand

how voter registration often has worked in Chicago. The Regular Democratic Party

spearheaded most drives, doing so using one primary motivator: money. The party

would offer bounties to registrars for every new voter they signed up (typically a

dollar per registration). The campaigns did produce new voters. “But bounty

systems don’t really promote participation,” says David Orr, the Cook County


The article suggests that the old political engine previously supplied by the “Regular

Democratic Party” had now been replaced by a 501(c)(3) nonprofit and its leader, Barack



Billionaire George Soros founded data utility company, Catalist, to mobilize liberal

voters through nonprofits. Catalist provides the advanced data analysis necessary for

micro-targeting and is building a base of voters and contributors for the exclusive use of

progressive left-leaning groups. Its compatriot is an organization called Nonprofit VOTE

whose goals include providing “high quality resources for nonprofits and social service

agencies to promote voter participation and engage with candidates on a nonpartisan

basis.”247 Their website mentions that Nonprofit VOTE is a nonpartisan organization, and

they acknowledge the demographics of the voters that nonprofits are most likely to reach

are “young, low-income, and diverse populations.”248 Studies have shown that this

demographic is most likely to vote Democrat. As the Wyss memorandum points out these

populations “tend to be reliably progressive on economic […] issues.”249

In 2012 and 2014 Nonprofit VOTE ran pilot projects to increase voter turnout

through nonprofits. The project report acknowledged the help of Catalist, LLC, an

organization that “works with and for data-driven progressive organizations to help them

effect change: issue advocates, labor organizers, pollsters, analysts, consultants, campaigns,

and more.”

The two stated goals of the project were to:

“For nonprofits already doing voter engagement and those considering it, the goal

of Track the Vote program was to provide tangible data to assess the impact of

nonprofits on increasing voter participation—using that data to ground their work

in outcomes and make the case for voter engagement as an ongoing priority.”

Read the full report here.


Have you Met Capricia Penavic Marshall? You Should….

Capricia P. Marshall past relationships:

DailyCaller: A hacker believed to be operating on behalf of the Russian government has released thousands of emails taken from the personal account of Capricia Penavic Marshall, a key Clinton world figure who worked under Hillary Clinton at the State Department.

The emails, which were released on the anonymously-operated site DC Leaks, are broken down into eight categories: “Atlantic Council,” “Clinton Foundation,” “Conversations with Clinton’s team,” “favor,” “fundraising,” and several others.

The Daily Caller’s investigative team is scouring through the records.

Marshall’s central importance to the Clintons’ political operations was realized earlier this year by Citizens United. The conservative watchdog group filed a federal lawsuit for Marshall’s State Department emails.

So what? Read on….

Pick for Protocol Post Corrects Failure to File Taxes in 2 Years

NYT’s: President Obama’s choice as chief of protocol for the State Department, a position that carries the status of an ambassadorship, did not file tax returns for 2005 and 2006, errors she corrected last November.

The nominee, Capricia Penavic Marshall, has placed blame for the problem on the Postal Service and on miscommunication between her husband and their accountant.

Ms. Marshall, who was the social secretary in the Clinton White House, notified the Obama administration about the late filings before she was nominated on May 14. She has since provided written answers to questions about the matter from Senator Richard G. Lugar of Indiana, the top Republican on the Foreign Relations Committee, which will hold a hearing on the appointment next Wednesday. The post requires Senate confirmation.

Tax issues have bedeviled several high-level Obama appointees and cost the administration at least two of its picks.

Ms. Marshall may fare better because, after ultimately filing the 2005 and 2006 federal and local paperwork, she was entitled to $37,259 in refunds, according to data she provided to Mr. Lugar.

The nominee and her husband, Dr. Robert Marshall, a Washington cardiologist, did not return calls seeking comment, nor did a White House spokesman.

Besides the president’s support, Ms. Marshall appears to enjoy the strong endorsement of Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and former President Bill Clinton, having worked on their campaigns.

An aide to Mrs. Clinton, Philippe Reines, said, “In the end, only two American taxpayers were adversely impacted by this inadvertent lapse.”

The couple learned something was awry, Ms. Marshall has said, when the Internal Revenue Service notified them last fall that their 2006 return had never arrived. She wrote that an agent “advised us that there were a large number of tax returns misplaced by the D.C. post office for the 2006 tax year.”

That call led the couple to the discovery that the authorities had no record of their returns for 2005 and 2006. No late fees or penalties were assessed when they later submitted the returns.

The protocol chief customarily helps plan events for visiting leaders and helps oversee protocol matters for the president and vice president abroad.

The last few items:

In 2000, as the Clinton Administration wound down, Marshall worked on Hillary Rodham Clinton’s successful New York Senate campaign, although in its aftermath her name figured in charges of campaign finance violations brought before the Federal Election Commission. In 2005, those charges resulted in a criminal trial for Clinton supporter David Rosen, at which Marshall testified. Rosen was acquitted.
In 2001, Marshall began working as a consultant to a number of nonprofit and private sector organizations, including two left-leaning media projects. In 2004, Marshall organized a Washington, DC, screening of director Michael Moore’s documentary Fahrenheit 9/11, and in 2005 she consulted on the short-lived ABC drama series “Commander in Chief,” which starred Geena Davis as the first female President. In 2006, Marshall signed on to be finance director for Clinton’s re-election committee, Friends of Hillary (FOH), and raised money for Clinton’s HiLLPAC. In 2007, Marshall joined Clinton’s presidential campaign as a senior advisor, leading the Surrogate Speakers Program and helping to coordinate women’s outreach. In 2008, in the wake of Clinton’s loss of the primary race to Barack Obama, Marshall became Executive Director of HiLLPAC and Friends of Hillary and oversaw the closure of both committees. More here.



Obamacare Proven Fraud and Single Payer

(Washington, D.C.) – Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW) expressed exasperation after the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released the final results of its 2015 undercover tests on the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) fraud prevention capabilities.  Amid naïve proclamations by President Obama that the ACA is “working exactly as it’s supposed to,” the GAO report reveals the sad reality that this law is uniquely prone to fraud and taxpayers have good reasons to worry.

GAO began “secret shopper” investigations in 2014 to test whether or not the federal healthcare exchange (marketplace) and select state marketplaces were able to detect and prevent falsified applications for subsidized health coverage from being accepted.  Those tests found that 11 of 12 fictitious identities received coverage and after a call to the marketplace in 2015, 10 of those 11 were re-enrolled for the following coverage year.

On September 12, 2016, GAO released the final results of its 2015 testing, which covered the federal marketplace and state exchanges in California, Kentucky, and North Dakota.  The results were similarly jarring.

All 10 fictitious identities that applied for taxpayer subsidies were approved, even after eight of the 10 failed the preliminary identity check.  Investigators were able to obtain subsidies after they provided false proof of income, documentation of citizenship, and Social Security numbers that began with zeroes.  The federal exchange made no effort to validate that information.  GAO also created fake applicants for Medicaid coverage, and the results were not much better:  seven of the eight fictitious applicants were approved for subsidized coverage.

Perhaps the most distressing revelation in this report is the following admission from federal and state marketplace officials:  “The marketplace or Medicaid offices only inspect for supporting documentation that has obviously been altered.  Thus, if the documentation submitted does not show such signs, it would not be questioned for authenticity.”

CAGW President Tom Schatz said, “The Congressional Budget Office estimates that subsidized health coverage through Obamacare will cost taxpayers $866 billion over the next ten years.  The fact that there is still no reliable system in place to prevent rampant fraud is a bad omen for taxpayers.  This damning report provides further justification for this flawed law to be completely overhauled and replaced.”

Citizens Against Government Waste is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization dedicated to eliminating waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement in government.

**** Heading to Single Payer:

In part from The Hill:

The McKinsey Center for U.S. Health System Reform, which studies the ACA and its implications, showed in an Aug. 18 analysis that the percentage of counties in the U.S. with five or more participating insurance carriers remaining in the exchanges will likely shrink from 51 percent in 2016 to 31 percent in 2017, and the number of counties having only one carrier participating will likely grow from 2 percent in 2016 to 17 percent in 2017. Pinal County in Arizona found out in August that it will have no insurance carriers participating in ObamaCare exchanges in 2017.

This massive insurer exodus from Obamacare markets not only creates a shrinking pool of competition and narrower networks, but could also be setting the stage for something far more devastating: the inevitable push for a single-payer or public option to either be added to, or replace, ObamaCare.

In an Aug. 2 Journal of the American Medical Association article, President Obama, despite the overwhelming evidence that heavy-handed government control has not worked to make quality healthcare more affordable, called for adding a public option; more tax dollars to prop up the exchanges; more government bureaucrats and politicians making decisions on how healthcare is delivered to our nation’s citizens; and pharmaceutical price controls, which would destroy research and development and deny patients access to promising new therapies.

One need only to look at the Veterans Administration to understand what a government-run, single-payer healthcare system looks like. Horror stories of long waits for treatment, bureaucratic inertia, fraud, incompetence, cover-ups and politics abound.

Others in favor of a complete government takeover demand “Medicare for all,” also a single-payer system, ignoring the fact that on its current trajectory, the Medicare trust fund will be depleted in 2028, two years earlier than projected in 2015. Only massive tax hikes, budget cuts to other government programs, or more borrowing will save it.

These pro-single payer zealots want to emulate the disastrous single-payer systems adopted in other countries, where program costs exceeded expectations and rose faster than predicted, price controls were enacted, rationing became necessary and higher taxes were imposed to cover ballooning costs. Indeed, they are pushing hard for the United States to replicate these failed policies on an even grander scale.

They are ignoring the results so far of ObamaCare: numerous co-op failures costing billions of dollars, skyrocketing premiums and crippling deductibles across the country. With a slew of insurers exiting the ObamaCare exchanges, the nation’s healthcare system is now even more perplexing and costly.

With about two months left until the presidential election, it is time to start thinking critically about healthcare and why moving toward a propped-up ObamaCare or adopting a single-payer approach are not the answers to fixing the country’s broken healthcare system.

Creating an environment where a true market-based system can flourish and in which the purchasing power and healthcare decision-making stands with consumers, not with Washington politicians and bureaucrats, is the way to go.

Schatz is president of Citizens Against Government Waste.