General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsActBlue C.E.O. Invokes Fifth Amendment Repeatedly in Testimony to Congress
The chief executive of ActBlue, whose lawyers warned her that she might have misled Congress about how the Democratic fund-raising organization vetted its foreign donations, invoked her Fifth Amendment rights and declined to answer questions from a Republican-led House committee on Wednesday.
Over and over, the chief executive, Regina Wallace-Jones, declined to engage with questions from Republicans on the House Administration Committee. She had agreed to appear on Wednesday morning to discuss the committees investigation into the operations of ActBlue, which serves as the small-dollar financial engine of the Democratic Party and its candidates.
She invoked her Fifth Amendment right not to testify 22 times in response to questions from House Republicans, including when Representative Barry Loudermilk of Georgia asked whether she went by Ms. Wallace-Jones or Ms. Jones.
The Democrats at the hearing posed no questions to Ms. Wallace-Jones but instead attacked WinRed, the Republican fund-raising platform, and Ken Paxton, the Texas attorney general and Senate nominee who has mounted his own investigation of ActBlue.
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/06/10/us/politics/actblue-fifth-amendment-congress.html
Celerity
(55,176 posts)https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2026/06/10/actblue-ceo-why-i-will-invoke-my-5th-amendment-rights-before-congress/
https://archive.ph/lpmWn
Regina Wallace-Jones is the president and chief executive of ActBlue.
I am not going to Congress looking for a fight. And yet, when I testify today before members of the House, I will invoke my Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination. Invoking the Fifth Amendment is not an admission, or even an insinuation, of guilt. It is not a retreat. It is the only reasonable response to a proceeding that from the beginning has been about harassing a political opponents fundraising platform, not genuine oversight. Now it has become something far more dangerous.
Over the past two decades, the group I lead ActBlue emerged as the leading fundraising platform for the Democratic Party. We serve millions of small-dollar donors, and support more candidates and causes than any other organization in the country. For more than three years, ActBlue has worked in good faith with the investigation by congressional Republicans, produced thousands of pages of materials and answered dozens of questions. The investigation purports to be in support of legislative proposals to protect American elections. I want to be clear: ActBlue has consistently supported legislative proposals to secure campaign fundraising and ensure that everyone is playing by the same rules. We endorsed the GOPs proposed Secure Handling of Internet Electronic Donations Act in 2024, and we have already implemented key provisions of the proposed Campaign Finance Transparency Act, which was introduced last month and voted out of the House Administration Committee with bipartisan support.
However, this investigation isnt really about advancing legislative proposals. If it were, todays hearing would include the Republican fundraising platform WinRed. This blatant hypocrisy must not be overlooked. In April 2025, President Donald Trump ordered the U.S. attorney general to target ActBlue and cited the Houses investigation of the organization as a justification. Less than two weeks later, Republicans in Congress sent a letter to then-Attorney General Pam Bondi detailing their ongoing investigation into ActBlue while pledging to work collaboratively with DOJ. Bryan Steil (R-Wisconsin), the chairman of the House Administration Committee, which oversees election law, said publicly he was working to make sure the Department of Justice has the information they need to move forward in their investigation. Acting attorney general Todd Blanche recently said that investigating ActBlue is a priority of the department.
Again, this is not legitimate oversight. Its a coordinated campaign of political retribution. Wednesdays hearing is the latest assault in that corrupt campaign.
Congress has no constitutional authority to conduct criminal investigations. The Supreme Court has repeatedly made clear that this role belongs to the executive branch. When a congressional committee works with the Justice Department to target a political adversary, it is not legislating. It has crossed a red line that was drawn into the Constitution for a reason. The congressional committees investigating ActBlue have also made clear that they want to question me about communications protected by attorney-client privilege confidential communications between ActBlue and its lawyers that play a critical role in our commitment to complying with the law. My legal team tried to find a workable path with the committee to avoid waiving privilege over these protected communications if I were to testify. However, the committee rejected every reasonable accommodation we offered.
I want to make clear what is actually happening, because the pattern is now transparent and familiar.
snip
Fiendish Thingy
(24,308 posts)And half the time they have rejected my donations, even when I include my passport number.