NewMediaJournal.us
www.NewMediaJournal.us
Return
to Article
Kindle Compatible
Paul R. Hollrah, O.E.
Obama’s Double-Edged Sword
July
16,
2009
In a July 14
editorial titled “Picking on the Swiss,” the Wall Street Journal
criticizes the Obama Administration for attempting to require the Swiss
Bank, UBS, to turn over to the IRS the names of some 52,000 US taxpayers
who currently maintain secret accounts with the bank.
According to the Journal, “This sort of fishing expedition
expressly violates the U.S.-Swiss treaty on sharing tax information. The
original treaty dates back 30 years, and under the pact the Swiss
regularly provide the IRS with information on specific cases. But what
the IRS is attempting here is a mass search of U.S. taxpayers merely for
banking in Switzerland.”
In response, the Justice
Department argues that “UBS systematically marketed its private banking
services in order to avoid U.S. taxation,” which, in fact, they did.
The Journal
concludes, “Apart from the diplomatic ramifications, the government's
request for so broad a swath of information could well run afoul of the
Fourth Amendment's protections against unreasonable search. The Obama
Administration should use the court reprieve to rethink the whole case.”
Actually, it is surprising
that the IRS, currently supervised by Obama’s tax-cheating Treasury
Secretary, Timothy Geithner, would actually pursue such information. The
last thing that Obama needs is for U.S. authorities to have the names of
UBS’s American clients, a list that could then be compared with Obama’s
Federal Election Commission filings from the 2008 election.
Here’s a bit of
background, and why it represents a double-edged sword for Obama.
In a July 22, 2008 article
in The Nation magazine, titled, “Attack of the Global Pirate
Bankers,” it was disclosed that Robert Wolf, CEO of UBS Americas, had
been “outed” in six months of hearings conducted by the Senate Permanent
Subcommittee on Investigations, then chaired by Senator Carl Levin
(D-MI).
So, aside from being CEO
of UBS’s North American subsidiary, exactly who is Robert Wolf? Wolf is,
along with the world’s most evil man, George Soros, one of Obama’s two
top financial backers. He is also a highly influential member of Obama’s
Council of Economic Advisors.
In it’s article, The Nation tells
us, “Last week in Washington we got a rare look inside the global
private banking industry, whose high purpose it is to gather up the
assets of the world's wealthiest people and many of its worst villains,
and shelter them from tax collectors, prosecutors, creditors,
disgruntled business associates, family members, and each other.”
According to a Statement of Facts in the
June 2008 criminal trial of former UBS executive Bradley Birkenfeld, UBS
took significant steps to help American clients manage their Swiss
accounts without alerting U.S. government authorities. For example, the
Statement of Facts described how UBS advised American clients to
withdraw funds from their accounts using Swiss credit cards that “could
not be discovered by U.S. authorities,” to “destroy all off-shore
banking records existing in the U.S.,” and to “misrepresent the receipt
of funds from their Swiss accounts...as loans from the Swiss bank.”
The Nation
reported that, “To achieve these results, UBS established an elaborate
formal training program,” which coached UBS bankers on how to avoid
surveillance by U.S. Customs and law enforcement, how to falsify visas,
how to encrypt communications, and how to secretly move money into and
out of the U.S. undetected. It was, as I suggested in a July 28, 2008
column titled, “Who Owns Barack Obama,” the perfect instrument for
funneling illegal foreign contributions into the coffers of an ambitious
and unscrupulous American politician.
I suggested, just for the sake of
argument, that a billionaire international financier who wished to
influence the outcome of the American presidential elections, could
transfer unlimited sums of money through this device. A U.S. recipient,
such as the Obama campaign, could receive hundreds of thousands of
individual contributions via Swiss credit card transfers, with
fictitious payees being entered by teams of paid staffers working in a
“boiler room” setting. The owners of the Swiss accounts would receive
periodic statements indicating: a) debits of varying amounts, up to
$2,300 each, and b) offsetting credits provided by the wealthy, but
unnamed, “international financier.”
For most of the super wealthy,
especially those attempting to hide income and assets from U.S.
authorities, an unexplained debit and credit of $2,300, or less, would
not even raise an eyebrow. In super rich circles, $2,300 is “chump
change.” So who would ever know the source of such contributions? No
one. Would such a plan be bold, audacious, perhaps insane? Absolutely!
But then, the Obama campaign for President of the United States was
itself...bold, audacious, and insane.
Subsequent to the publication of that
column I received an e-mail from Kenneth Timmerman of Newsmax
asking what proof I had of my allegations. I indicated that I had no
specific proof but that, if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and
quacks like a duck...it’s almost certainly a duck.
Timmerman sent a team of investigators
to the Federal Election Commission and what they found was absolutely
astounding. In an October 20, 2008 article in Newsmax, Timmerman
provided details from FEC records that gave substantial weight to my
theory. In studying Obama’s FEC filings, Newsmax found more than
2,000 donors who had given substantially more than their $4,600 limit
($2,300 in the primaries and $2,300 in the General Election). The law
requires that such excess contributions must be returned to the donor
within 60 days of the donor going over his/her limit. However, many of
the donors contacted by Newsmax said that they had not been
contacted by the Obama campaign and that they had not received refunds.
For example, FEC records show that
Sandra Daneshinia, a self-employed caregiver of Los Angeles, made 36
separate contributions totaling $7,051.12. Thirteen of her contributions
were later refunded. However, in an odd coincidence those 13 refunds, in
amounts such as $233.88 and $201.44, came to an even $2,300, the maximum
amount allowable in any one election.
One contributor interviewed by
Newsmax, Ronald J. Sharpe, Jr., a retired schoolteacher from
Rockledge, Florida, is reported to have given $13,800...$9,200 over his
limit. However, Mr. Sharpe does not remember giving that much money to
Obama, nor has anyone from the Obama campaign ever contacted him about a
refund.
But these are relatively minor
infractions compared to 66,383 highly suspicious contributions, from
37,265 donors, whose contributions were not rounded to even dollar
amounts. For example, John Atkinson, an insurance agent in Burr Ridge,
Illinois, gave a total of $8,724.26. He gave in odd amounts such as
$188.67, $1,542.06, $876.09, $388.67, $282.20, $195.66, $118.15, and one
of $2,300.
Of the 66,383 contributions in odd
amounts, 44,410 were in unrounded amounts of less than $100, some 15,270
contributions were in unrounded amounts of between $101 and $999, and
704 contributions were in odd amounts greater than $1,000.
Lest anyone suggest that these 37,265
donors either emptied their piggy banks or emptied their pockets and
purses periodically and just sent it all to Obama, pennies and all,
allow me to suggest something a bit more sinister. I suggest that those
66,383 contributions are the proceeds of foreign currency conversions,
smuggled into the country as UBS credit card receipts, converted to U.S.
dollars, and reported to the FEC in the name of other unsuspecting Obama
donors.
If some American taxpayers are hiding
taxable income from the IRS through the use of a Swiss bank account,
it’s only fair that they be identified and punished. Every American
taxpayer who pays his/her taxes in full would agree with that. However,
if the United Bank of Switzerland is ultimately forced to turn over the
names of its 52,000 American depositors, and those names are then
compared with UBS credit card receipts received by the Obama campaign,
there’ll be hell to pay. It’s a double-edged sword for Obama and it
couldn’t happen to a better guy.
Given the newsworthiness of the
underlying story, the Wall Street Journal may wish to reevaluate
its editorial stance. The uncovering of a few thousand tax cheats is
small potatoes compared to the unearthing of the largest electoral fraud
in history...a fraud that facilitated the purchase of the presidency of
the United States.
About Paul R. Hollrah, O.E.
Paul R. Hollrah is a
freelance writer. He is a member of the Civil Engineering Academy of
Distinguished Alumni at the University of Missouri - Columbia and a
Senior Fellow at the Lincoln Heritage Institute. He currently resides in
Tulsa, Oklahoma.