Clinton campaign may have overcharged donors: Stealing from the impecunious, by Ashe Schow. This might be the story of the election.
An elderly woman who donated to the Hillary Clinton campaign says she was charged multiple times after she stipulated she would only be making a one-time donation, according to a report from the New York Observer.*
Carol Mahre, an 81-year-old grandmother from Minnesota who has voted Democratic since Eisenhower’s re-election in 1956, said she wanted to make a one-time donation of $25 to Clinton’s campaign. But when she received her U.S. Bank statement, she noticed that multiple charges of $25 (and one for $19) were made to her account from the Clinton campaign.
Mahre said she wanted to make only a one-time donation. Her son, Roger, agreed to help her get her money back, as she could not afford the multiple donations. …
Forty phone calls later, finally a promise to stop the charges, but still the charges did not stop.
Roger said his mother is “very good with the Internet,” and doesn’t believe she would have mistakenly signed up for recurring donations. But even if she had, why would the recurring donations change from $25 to $19?
A person from the bank’s fraud department explains:
“We get up to a hundred calls a day from Hillary’s low-income supporters complaining about multiple unauthorized charges,” the employee, who asked to remain anonymous, told Crokin. The source added that they had not received any calls about the Trump campaign and donations.
The source said this has been going on since the spring, and that the campaign stops after it has taken a little less than $100 from a one-time donor.
“We don’t investigate fraudulent charges unless they are over $100,” the source said. “The Clinton campaign knows this, that’s why we don’t see any charges over the $100 amount, they’ll stop the charges just below $100. We’ll see her campaign overcharge donors by $20, $40 or $60 but never more than $100.”
The Wells Fargo source said the bank refunds Clinton donors between $700 and $1,200 a day.
The source said he was apolitical but thinks what the Clinton campaign is doing “is so messed up, she’s stealing from her poorest supporters.” …
The whole thing has made Mahre decide not to vote for Clinton in November.
Selling ambassadorships, selling uranium mines to Russia, selling influence as Secretary of State and raking in hundreds of millions, that’s one thing. It was once considered that stealing from widows and orphans was the lowest of the low. Hillary’s campaign does it up to the $100 limit where the authorities get involved.
hat-tip David Archibald