Wife’s affidavit appears to contradict King Arthur

Posted on by

 

 

This site was the first to reveal the multiple donations to Barack Hussein Obama in the name of Arthur Donadio — reportedly a Republican candidate for Moore / Hoke district attorney.  That revelation has since become a major issue in the 2020 primary for district attorney.

 

Donadio responded on Facebook  to our revelation  by shifting some of the blame for the Obama donations (AND a donation to Trump nemesis Adam Schiff) to a woman in his life.

 

 

 

 

A notarized affidavit from one Tricia Donadio has been making the rounds indicating that Arthur Donadio had NO direct ROLE in the Obama donations (even though his money was used).  The affidavit suggested that Arthur Donadio’s name and employment information were tied to the donations so that they would match  the name on the account where the money came from.

 

PROBLEM:   Refer back to the Facebook screen shot just above.  Donadio talks about the 2012 presidential race and about how HE AND his “then-wife” were “concerned about a health condition and were interested in supporting the candidate who was not campaigning on eliminating coverage for pre-existing conditions.”

 

 

 

For the record,  I don’t recall 2012 GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney stating that he planned to eliminate “coverage for pre-existing conditions.”   (We did not find any 2012 donations to Republican Mitt Romney by Donadio in the 2012 election cycle.  We did find a number to Democrat Barack Hussein Obama.)

 

 

Regarding the point in the affidavit from Ms. Donadio about wanting the donation information to match what was on the credit card and bank account,  we could find no basis for such a concern.

 

According to the ActBlue website where the Schiff contribution was made, there was no mention of making the donation information match the card or account information. The site’s main concern was accurately identifying the actual donor and complying with federal law:

 

 

Not a word about the donor information matching the info on the card or account used.

 

The Federal Election Commission has more:

 

Reimbursing someone for a contribution or otherwise contributing in the name of another person can result in substantial civil penalties and jail time. 52 U.S.C. §§ 30122 and 30109 (formerly 2 U.S.C. §§ 441f and 437g). The FEC and the Department of Justice have prosecuted several such cases over the last few years. These violations sometimes occur when an individual who has already contributed up to the limit to a campaign gives money to another person to make a contribution to the same candidate. 11 CFR 110.4(b). In other cases, corporations have reimbursed employees for their personal contributions or have provided bonuses to employees with instructions to use the extra income to make contributions to a candidate, PAC or party committee. 11 CFR 114.5(b)(1). Organizations and individuals who engage in these types of reimbursement and employee bonus schemes can be penalized for making contributions in the name of another. Regardless of the circumstances, if your committee discovers that contributions that appeared to be legal when received were actually made illegally in the name of another, it must refund the money to the original source of funds if the identity of that source is known. Alternatively, your committee may disgorge the funds to the US Treasury or certain other recipients. For more information and instructions on how to disgorge the funds, see pages 33-34 of the Campaign Guide for Congressional Candidates.

 

Again,  nothing here about the donor information matching the name on the card or account the donation came from.

 

Sooooo —  was it a joint decision by husband and wife to “support” Barack Obama (like Arthur Donadio appeared to suggest  on Facebook in November)?   Or was it simply a decision by Donadio’s “then-wife” to donate under HIS name and employment information  (like the notarized affidavit claims) ?