• PODCAST
  • News
    • EXCLUSIVES
    • BREAKING
    • Analysis
    • HUNTER BIDEN HARD DRIVE
  • JOIN UP
  • Donate
  • CONTACT
  • SWAG
The National Pulse.
  • PODCAST
  • News
    • EXCLUSIVES
    • BREAKING
    • Analysis
    • HUNTER BIDEN HARD DRIVE
  • JOIN UP
  • Donate
  • CONTACT
  • SWAG
  • News
  • Politics

Zuckerberg Cash for Elections Included ‘Clawback’ Clauses for Counties that Didn’t Comply with His Demands

  • December 16, 2020
  • Natalie Winters
zuckerberg

SHARE THIS NEWS    


The Amistad Project, an election integrity watchdog group, highlighted in its recent press conference how Mark Zuckerberg placed constraints on the nearly half-billion dollars he funneled into the 2020 elections, including the ability to rescind donations if counties didn’t meet all of his demands.

The revelation adds to growing suspicions over Zuckerberg’s meddling in the 2020 election, including leveraging nearly all of his money to exclusively boost Democrat turnout.

Amistad Director Phill Klein explained in the group’s December 16th press conference how the Center for Technology and Civic Life (CTCL), which received nearly $400 million from Zuckerberg, included stipulations in its contracts with state officials and legislatures that they could demand their millions back if their request were not adhered to:

A clawback agreement in every contract that CTCL did with Mark Zuckerberg money that says if you do not follow our plan, we’re going to take back our money. All of it.

In short, “you have to do what we say,” according to Klein.

A fellow Amistad Project lawyer noted they found “clawback provisions in the CTCL contracts that were executed with local governments, local electoral officials” that “had within them specific language that said the electoral officials must spend the money on specific things.”

“Dropboxes, satellite voting, there was a whole host of things that were stipulations in the clawback agreements. And so what we have here is a private agency giving money to a local elected official and entering into a contract requiring these local precincts and electoral officials to do specific things,” he added.

“The claw back language in the CTCL agreements represents a longterm, contingent liability for counties and municipalities who received the CTCL grants. These liabilities pose long-term audit, bonding, or pension risks to those counties who received CTCL grants,” the Amistad Project’s official report notes.

WATCH:

SHARE THIS NEWS    




Your e-mail is required to confirm your vote. This is to stop spammers. If you use a fake email, your vote won't be counted.

Natalie Winters

Natalie Winters is an Investigative Reporter at the National Pulse and contributor to The National Pulse podcast.


You May Also Like
wuhan
View Post

“Yes, He Was Infected in the Lab!” – New E-Mails Confirm Origin of Chinese Lab Director’s Infection.

  • Natalie Winters
View Post

Unearthed Paper Shows Biden-Linked Group Demanding ‘Robust’ Audits & Admitting Machines Are Hackable Even Without Internet Access.

  • Raheem J. Kassam
cbs
View Post

CBS Affiliate Partners With Chinese Communist State TV to Air Documentaries ‘Showcasing Achievements’ of Brutal Regime.

  • Natalie Winters
The National Pulse.
  • What Is The National Pulse?
  • Privacy Policy
Edited by Raheem Kassam

Designed and Implemented by Wahagen Khabayan

Input your search keywords and press Enter.