By "opting people in" to recurring donations, it would seem.


Quote:

Stacy Blatt was in hospice care last September listening to broadcaster Rush Limbaugh’s dire warnings about how badly Donald Trump’s campaign needed money when he went online and chipped in everything he could: $US500 ($657). It was a big sum for a 63-year-old battling cancer and living in Kansas City on less than $US1000 per month. But that single contribution — federal records show it was his first ever — quickly multiplied. Another $US500 was withdrawn the next day, then $US500 the next week and every week through mid-October, without his knowledge — until Blatt’s bank account had been depleted and frozen. When his utility and rent payments bounced, he called his brother, Russell Blatt, for help.

Quote:

But what the Blatts believed was duplicity was actually an intentional scheme to boost revenues by the Trump campaign and the for-profit company that processed its online donations, WinRed. Facing a cash crunch and getting badly outspent by the Democrats, the campaign had begun last September to set up recurring donations by default for online donors for every week until the election. Contributors had to wade through a fine-print disclaimer and manually uncheck a box to opt out.

This, I think, is the interesting bit...


Quote:

In effect, the money that Trump eventually had to refund amounted to an interest-free loan from unwitting supporters at the most important juncture of the 2020 race.

@Yadda, Richdude, The Mechanic, Mortdooley et al...it may be worth checking your bank statements...just in case, I mean.

It's interesting that one of the fund-raising arms is a "for profit", and one is not.

But which is which?


Quote:

Unlike ActBlue, which is a nonprofit, WinRed is a for-profit company. It makes its money by taking 30 cents of every donation, plus 3.8 per cent of the amount given. WinRed was paid more than $US118 million from federal committees the last election cycle; even after paying credit card fees and expenses like payroll and rent, the profits are believed to be significant.

But surely, the Republicans and their fund-raising "arms', would not seek to profit from the donations of "mom and pop" mug punters, would they?  :o

Or would they?

https://www.theage.com.au/world/north-america/it-felt-like-a-scam-how-trump-extracted-millions-in-unwitting-donations-from-supporters-20210404-p57ge2.html

Mix_Master wrote on Apr 4^th, 2021 at 6:49pm:

@Yadda, Richdude, The Mechanic, Mortdooley et al...it may be worth checking your bank statements...just in case, I mean.

;D ;D ;D

The "noble capitalist" profits while the chodes lick their wounds and complain.

Those butt-hurt Trump donors should look on the bright side. Over ten mil went to the Trump organization to pay off Mr Trump's debts.

Yes, while the chodes paid their overdraft fees and had their accounts frozen, the "noble Donald" had moved to Mar a Lago, which he renovated to his tastes (with a separate apartment for Melania). Gold toilets were essential.

Cometh the hour, cometh the man.

anyone stupid enough to donate to a known con artist like trump deserves to get scammed.

John Smith wrote on Apr 5^th, 2021 at 10:44am:

anyone stupid enough to donate to a known con artist like trump deserves to get scammed.

Yes, but JS, Mr Trump planned to save America from the leftards. If Mr Trump didn't get put back in, they may not have had a country left.

It said so in the emails. In CAPITALS, so it was really clear.

It was easy to miss the part about an extra $500 donation down the bottom. You had to untick the box to get out of it.

But what sort of person would do that? Mr Trump was asking for money to save AMERICA. Also, Mar a Lago needed a few renovations. Barron's new school fees don't come cheap. And Melania's shopping sprees - you don't want to know, it gives Mr Trump a headache just thinking about it.

So they didn't put that in the emails, big deal. This is just another fake news witch hunt.

We will make America great again, no?