House Republicans say their investigation into ActBlue is continuing after a highly critical report raised fresh questions about whether the Democratic fundraising platform accepted foreign money and misled Congress about its safeguards.
“Whether it’s allowing fraudsters to steal taxpayer dollars or accepting illegal foreign donations through ActBlue, Democrats have proven themselves to be the party of fraud. Our investigation into ActBlue is far from over. We expect more documents and testimony in the weeks ahead,” House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., told Fox News Digital.
ActBlue is a major online fundraising hub used by campaigns and Democratic officials, including Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., Michigan Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed, and the Democratic leaders of both chambers of Congress.
Republicans have repeatedly accused ActBlue of maintaining weak donor-verification procedures, while the company says it has strengthened those controls since the GOP investigation began. Findings first reported by Fox News Digital, however, appear to show employees approving contributions even when they had concerns about the donors’ identities or locations.
ActBlue denies wrongdoing and indicated in comments to Fox News Digital that it does not intend to return any of the donations described in the report.
Committee on House Administration Chairman Bryan Steil, R-Wis., told Fox News Digital Friday that ActBlue’s own statements had raised significant concerns about its fraud-prevention system. He specifically cited a passport process that, he said, did not verify information against a government database or confirm that the passport details were genuine. “All options are on the table to ensure we get to the bottom of what is going on at ActBlue,” Steil said.
A spokesperson for House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, also confirmed to Fox News Digital that the panel would continue its “aggressive oversight of ActBlue,” including additional depositions.
The Oversight, House Administration and Judiciary committees are jointly involved in examining the Democratic fundraising platform.
Whether further depositions will produce new answers remains uncertain. In transcripts released Thursday, the Judiciary Committee said all 10 ActBlue employees and board members who participated in closed-door interviews invoked the Fifth Amendment rather than answer questions.
Among them was co-founder Matt DeBergalis, whose decision to invoke the Fifth Amendment was first reported by Fox News Digital.
ActBlue CEO Regina Wallace-Jones likewise invoked the Fifth Amendment during a public hearing.
The Republican report referenced a letter Wallace-Jones sent to Steil stating that donations made through the platform by individuals listing addresses outside the United States were required to include a passport number.
Republicans countered that the process did little more than check whether the submitted passport number contained a required number of characters. According to the report, it did not establish whether the number belonged to a valid U.S. passport, making the safeguard effectively meaningless.
The report also cited communications that allegedly showed ActBlue supervisors approving donations despite warning signs. In one memo, a contribution was described as a “great accept,” even though the note acknowledged that the donor sometimes used an IP address in Hong Kong. The memo added that none of the other available indicators raised concerns.
Another message appeared to argue that a rejected contribution “should have been accepted.” The note acknowledged that it involved a foreign contribution but pointed to matching names and email information, matching IP and billing data, a complete address with the appropriate country code, and a history of previously approved successful donations.
The communication also noted that the donor had entered an Arkansas state code—an apparent warning sign—but said the system could be unreliable when requiring state codes from foreign contributors.
In another instance, an ActBlue supervisor allegedly said a contribution had triggered “a lot of” alarms but argued that the donor should receive the “benefit of the doubt.”
A separate exchange appeared to show an ActBlue employee acknowledging that a donor using a Missouri billing address showed “all signs” of being from Canada. The employee nevertheless said the donor’s identity had been confirmed through X, formerly known as Twitter.
At the same time, the report’s evidence also appeared to show ActBlue staff defending the company and its procedures.
In one email, ActBlue employees described the company as the “target of bad-faith political attacks at the hands of ill-intentioned operators.” The organization has also previously told the committee that “there is no evidence that foreign donations through online or small-dollar contributions are a problem in US elections.”
The communications excerpts were included in the report and not independently verified by Fox News Digital.
It’s prompted a firestorm on the right, with House Republicans’ campaign arm demanding that Democrats return donations made through ActBlue.
“House Democrats cannot claim ignorance while continuing to rely on a fundraising platform facing serious allegations. The [National Republican Congressional Committee] officially calls on every House Democrat to cut ties with ActBlue and return any illegal contributions funneled to their campaigns through the platform,” spokesman Mike Marinella said.
But when asked if ActBlue would return any donations, the company pointed Fox News Digital back to its statement on the House GOP report.
“There’s nothing to see here. After we released findings of a third-party forensic analysis that completely undermined a central claim that they have made against ActBlue, Republicans are refusing to move on,” ActBlue said.
“Instead, they are orchestrating another political stunt before rushing out of town weeks early to go campaign. This coordinated campaign against ActBlue isn’t about the facts, or legislating, it’s about Republicans’ efforts to silence organizations they believe threaten their agenda.”
