Profitable Non-Profit
During her time in office, Abrams started and led two non-profit organizations: Voter Access Institute and Third Sector Development. From 2013-2016, both institutions received $12.5 million in donations combined.
The Abrams campaign refused to say where the millions of dollars came from in such a short time. Where did the money come from, and where did it go? Abrams is staying silent, and in doing so, gives her opponent, Republican Secretary of State Brian Kemp, low-hanging political fruit.
Voter Access Institute was intended to target individuals to get them to vote, while Third Sector Development focused on increasing the African-American voting bloc in the state. However, the Georgia Democratic Party only gained 3% more votes from 2010 to 2014, and the black voter turnout decreased by 2%.
Georgia Democrat Stacey Abrams
Abrams is Quiet GameMany politicians are known to lie. Now, Abrams is refusing to tell who gave that much money for a governor’s race. Her surreptitious behavior is concerning. Why would she give up a major campaign donor? Who could it be? Abrams is allowed to hide donors in a non-profit; however, it is uncommon practice as most contribution lists are made public.
On June 27, 2018, George Soros – the well-known globalist billionaire from Hungary – gave $1 million dollars to the Georgia Democratic Party and backed Abrams for governor.
Soros often attempts to influence America elections, and has written several books on open borders and globalization. Less than a year ago, the 87-year-old moved $18 billion of his own money to his American based organization, the Open Society Foundation, to plan for either his retirement or passing.
Dirty Donating
Large donations to one’s preferred political party are expected. However, creating a non-profit for political purposes then refusing to say who donated is illegal. Non-profits, or 501(C)(3), are purely for charity, according to the IRS.
Did Abrams set up her two non-profits for the sole purpose of funding campaigns for other public offices? Also, is she trying to avoid donor lists by laundering money through the Voter Access Institute and Third Sector Development? Unless the donation list is made public, we may never know. However, she is not helping herself look innocent. At this point, it seems nefarious.
If Abrams were using the money for purely charitable purposes, she would not hide donors. Voters have every right to know who is giving money to a candidate. America uses democratic principles in electing government representatives, and outside money that may affect a campaign needs to be exposed.
