Casinos and a Disgraced Crypto Ponzi Scheme Billionaire Bankrolled Abortion Referendums in 2022 Midterms

Tuesday, November 8th 2022 did not usher in the red wave that many had hoped for. And while it was definitely not a landslide election for the Republican party, it was, for abortion.

All five referendums on abortion went for the pro-abortion side. In Montana voters actually voted against requiring medical care for children born alive, let that sink in. In deep-red Kentucky, voters voted against an amendment that seeked to establish that murdering children in the womb is not a constitutional right.

Texas Catholic bishop Joseph Strickland described it best in a tweet after the election.

The mainstream narrative is that America repudiated the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs that overturned Roe v. Wade. Yet, most of the governors who enforced pro-life laws after Roe’s fall won reelection. As usual the biased pro-abortion mainstream media is not telling us the whole story.

A useful analysis, but one that the mainstream media will never do, is to focus on the fundraising.

Follow the Money

As we have detailed before in past articles on American Prolifer, the fundraising disparity between the pro-life side and the pro-abortion side was astounding.

In California, the ratio was 50-1, in Vermont, 25-1, in Kentucky 5-1, in Michigan it was 3-1, in Montana pro-lifers didn’t even organize a campaign committee to raise funds to support the born alive in infant protection law.

The funding disparity along with the political demographics of the state actually explain the results very well.

In California, the amendment was supported by 65% of the population, in Vermont by 77%, in Michigan by 56%, and in Kentucky by 52%.

Montana’s law, requires a small aside. While hardly pro-life (as it dealt with babies already born), Montana’s law was presented as an abortion issue by the abortion advocates. The born alive infant protection law is the type of law even some pro-choicers can support, but without any support from the pro-life side, even this mildest of laws, failed to pass.

To be fair, fundraising can, of itself, be a measure of popular support for a cause.

So the question is, did the American people throw their financial support in favor of abortion to give the abortion referendums an advantage over the pro-life side?

The answer is no.

In California, the largest donor to the abortion amendment was an Indian casino that was clearly giving money on an issue it didn’t care about in order to gain political favors and support for the issue it did care about, gambling. Read our in-depth report about the California pro-abortion campaign’s fundraising scandal that no one talked about.

In Michigan, the largest individual donor turned out to be a likely proxy for FTX crypto exchange and Alameda Research crypto fund ponzi schemer Sam Bankman-Fried. Nishad Singh, a 26 year old financial technology engineer at FTX with no record of political involvement until this past year gave a whopping $4.5 Million to support the Michigan abortion referendum.

In total, the great majority of Michigan’s abortion referendum funding came from twelve billionaire-level donors, 11 of whom were from outside of Michigan.

Clearly, the fundraising disparities in the California and Michigan referendums were not the result of overwhelming support, but of bankrolling by the mega-wealthy leftist elite.

What does it say about Democracy when the right to life of an entire class of people (the preborn) can be stripped away by the influence of a dozen mega donors?

Sam Bankman-Fried

Besides the election, the biggest news was the collapse of one of the largest digital currency exchanges, FTX. FTX was caught essentially operating a ponzi scheme whereby it took real assets from its users in exchange for tokens that it generated at zero cost. When users attempted to reclaim their assets, it became clear that FTX was insolvent, having lent out all of the collateral for its tokens.

What makes the FTX bankruptcy important, other than the obvious loss of billions of dollars in wealth, is the fact that Sam Bankman-Fried had become the Democrat party’s, and as we have seen, Michigan’s abortion referendum’s, biggest donor only after George Soros.

The American people, and specially, pro-lifers, should ask the Democrat party to return the donations that Sam Bankman-Fried and his associates gave to them from a company that did not have the assets to cover the deposits of its members.

Even leftist publication, Politico is calling the FTX ex-billionaire out.

The disgraced leftist, whose parents are both professors at Stanford University’s prestigious law school, is highly unlikely to have to face responsibility for his actions, especially given the fact that he bankrolled the party that is still in charge of federal law enforcement.

Conclusion

While it is clear that American is highly divided on abortion, a closer look at the campaign finances of the victorious abortion campaigns reveals that it was not popular support, but massive media bias and fundraising disparities fueled by political and financial sector corruption that made all the difference.

One critical observation is that while the marks of corruption are everywhere on the pro-abortion side of the equation, the pro-life side failed to show up. Not even organizing a committee to support Montana’s born alive law is inexcusable, and the lackluster fundraising from pro-lifers certainly shows that the pro-abortion side (small as it was) was more invested in an abortion victory than was the pro-life side.

In other words, the blood of the children is not only on the corrupt pro-abortion side but on the ineffectual pro-life movement that was not willing to put up a fight worthy of the defense of the right to life.