WASHINGTON – Today, the Committee on House Administration, the House Judiciary Committee, and the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform released a joint interim staff report titled, “Fraud on ActBlue, Part III: ActBlue’s Failure to Prevent Illegal Foreign Political Contributions.” 

 

The report reveals new details on ActBlue’s questionable fraud-prevention practices. This includes details that ActBlue did not actually require a valid U.S. passport to make political donations. ActBlue also repeatedly instructed its fraud-prevention analysts to “give the donor the benefit of the doubt,” ignore red flags about contributions, and in some cases, verify donors’ citizenship via social media accounts. According to reporting by the New York Times, ActBlue’s legal team voiced significant concerns about ActBlue’s past practices for screening foreign donations. The report details internal evidence of fraud and possible whistleblower retaliation at ActBlue. 

 

Excerpts from the report read:  

 

On ActBlue’s “passport verification process”: “According to ActBlue, ‘[i]f someone enters an address when making a contribution that includes a country other than the United States, they see a popup in the contribution flow requesting their passport number.’ ActBlue’s own policy states, however, that the ‘verification’ process requires only that a donor enter the correct amount of characters to complete the prompt; it does not actually require that the donor provide a legitimate U.S. passport number. Under ActBlue’s procedures, the passport verification feature ‘uses very basic validation—number of characters—to ensure that the number entered is a valid passport number, but [it does] not verify the information in any other way. . . . [It does] not, for instance, check the information provided against a government database. . . . [It] merely store[s] the information and continue[s] the contribution flow.’” 

 

On ActBlue ignoring red flags about suspicious contributions: “In its June 25, 2026, production to the Committees, ActBlue provided logs of staffers’ manual reviews of contributions that were flagged for potential fraud between October 9, 2022, and October 31, 2024. ActBlue supervisors recorded notes regarding the performance of each fraud prevention analyst during their shift, including recommending that certain contributions be either accepted or rejected. These entries reveal the frequency with which supervisors reinforced the ActBlue policy: ‘we give the benefit of the doubt to the donor.’” 

 

On concerns from ActBlue’s legal team and possible whistleblower retaliation: “Following Ting’s resignation, Zain Ahmad, the last remaining lawyer on ActBlue’s legal team, went ‘on leave’ and against company policy, had his access to internal systems revoked in late February 2025. Before his departure, Ahmad, consistent with his legal and ethical responsibilities, reportedly notified ActBlue leadership, including ActBlue’s Board of Directors, of credible allegations of misconduct at the company, including significant alleged violations of federal campaign finance law and false statements to Congress.” 
 

Read the full staff report and its exhibits here. 
 

Fox News Digital first covered this story. Read more here. 
 

For a timeline of the ActBlue investigation, click here.

###