// Elements a prosecutor would need to prove
- A contribution to a federal candidate, committee, or party.
- Made in the name of someone other than the actual source of funds.
- The actual source either knew or directed the use of the false name.
// What the platform's records tend to support
- Loan-to-self transactions on FEC reports without disclosed underlying source.
- Pass-through LLC contributions from entities formed days before the contribution and dissolved shortly after.
- Aggregate contribution patterns from individuals whose stated occupation or income would not support the contribution amounts.
// What public records cannot prove on their own
- The actual source of self-loaned campaign funds without subpoenaed bank records.
- Coordination between the LLC and the candidate vs. the LLC's principal acting independently.
// Leading cases
United States v. Cohen, 1:18-cr-00602 (S.D.N.Y. 2018)
Conviction of Michael Cohen for straw-donor scheme tied to 2016 campaign payments.
United States v. O'Donnell, 608 F.3d 546 (9th Cir. 2010)
Established that conduit contributions are violations even without the candidate's knowledge.
Reminder. This is an analytical mapping, not an indictment. Determinations of guilt require grand juries, indictments, trials, and proof beyond reasonable doubt — none of which a public OSINT site can substitute for. Use this map the way an ethics watchdog or investigative journalist would: as a framework for asking the right questions of the records that already exist.
GOBLIN HOUSE
[ Enter Database → ]