Indian Authorities Raid Soros-Backed Organizations
India’s Enforcement Directorate (ED) on Tuesday conducted searches at eight locations in Bengaluru as part of an investigation into foreign exchange violations involving the Open Society Foundations (OSF)—founded by American billionaire George Soros—and its impact investment arm, the Soros Economic Development Fund (SEDF).
Sources told Indian media the searches were “carried out under the Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA) and involve the OSF along with various international human rights organizations,” The Economic Times reported.
The investigation centers on allegations that OSF procured foreign direct investment (FDI) and that some beneficiaries misappropriated these funds in violation of FEMA guidelines.
“Our teams carried out raids at eight locations on Tuesday in Bengaluru to investigate contraventions in foreign direct investment rules by SEDF and OSF in investments in various entities/individuals in India and subsequent utilization of those funds,” said one unnamed officer, the Hindustan Times added.
According to the reports, Soros-backed OSF sent nearly $3 billion to more than a dozen entities throughout India.
The unnamed officer added that a “preliminary investigation has revealed that OSF was put under the prior reference category by the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) in 2016, thereby restricting it from giving unregulated donations to NGOs in India.”
“However, in order to bypass this restriction, OSF set up subsidiaries in India and brought in funds in the form of FDI and consultancy fees, and these funds have been used to fund activities of the NGOs which is a FEMA contravention”, the officer added.
The Times reported that OSF began operating in India, the world’s largest democracy, in 1999, but that the Soros-founded group does not have any actual offices in the country.
In November, the then-Biden-controlled Federal Communications Commission (FCC) expedited its decision to approve a deal allowing Democrat megadonor Soros to acquire a major stake in over 200 radio stations.
Fox News reported at the time that the move has prompted an investigation by the House Oversight Committee, which is concerned about potential “politicization” and its impact on the 2024 presidential election.
The FCC’s approval of Soros’ acquisition of more than 200 Audacy radio stations drew criticism from a Republican commissioner who expressed objections to the decision, as well as other GOP members of Congress who see the move as blatantly partisan.
The FCC “adopted an order to approve Soros’ purchase of more than 200 radio stations in 40 markets just weeks before the presidential election,” which would allow him to reach up to 165 million Americans, Fox noted.
House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) and Rep. Nick Langworthy (R-N.Y.) have accused the FCC of expediting its review of broadcast licenses by bypassing standard procedures.
Audacy Inc. owns over 200 radio stations. Soros sought to acquire $415 million in debt in a Chapter 11 reorganization of the company, Fox reported.
In late February, FCC Chairman Brendan Carr provided an update on the agency’s investigation into Soros and his influence over local radio stations during a meeting with Republican lawmakers. Carr met with members of the Republican Study Committee, a group of 175 House Republicans, at their annual closed-door lunch.
A source told Fox News that Carr was set to brief lawmakers on the quick purchase of the radio stations. Carr also discussed broader strategies to counter left-wing media, the report said.
The focus of the GOP congressional probe regarding the purchase focused on Soros Fund Management’s stake in the sale. The investment firm holds a substantial share of foreign ownership, which triggered concerns that content broadcast by the stations could allow foreign governments to exert undue influence on the American public.
“The FCC is not following its normal process for reviewing a transaction,” Carr told lawmakers last fall regarding the sale.
“We have established over a number of years one way in which you can get approval from the FCC when you have an excess of 25 percent foreign ownership, which this transaction does,” Carr added. “It seems to me that the FCC is poised to create, for the first time, an entirely new shortcut.”
Nearly 150,000 California Mail Ballots Rejected In Primary
California election officials are examining why nearly 150,000 mail-in ballots were rejected during the state’s June primary, with late-arriving ballots accounting for most of the increase.
The higher rejection rate comes despite years of election law changes designed to make voting more accessible and ensure more ballots are ultimately counted.
According to data compiled by the California Secretary of State’s office, 148,241 mail-in ballots were rejected during the June primary, representing 1.73% of all mail ballots returned.
That marks an increase from the 2024 primary, when 108,982 ballots were rejected, or 1.56% of all mail ballots cast.
The largest reason for rejection was ballots arriving too late to qualify under California law.
State data shows that 93,479 ballots were rejected because they failed to meet the state’s deadline requirements.
California allows mail ballots to arrive up to seven days after Election Day, provided they are postmarked on or before Election Day.
Voting experts believe many of the rejected ballots received postmarks dated after Election Day, making them ineligible to be counted even if they arrived within the seven-day grace period.
Kim Alexander, president of the nonpartisan California Voter Foundation, said the timing of postal processing appears to be a significant concern.
“Ballots rejected due to lateness are caused primarily to being postmarked too late to count, not because they arrived too late to count,” Alexander said.
Election experts have questioned whether recent operational changes within the U.S. Postal Service may be contributing to delayed postmarks.
Earlier this year, a group of mostly Democratic U.S. senators wrote to the Postal Service expressing concern that mail-processing changes could affect ballot handling during federal elections.
Updated Postal Service procedures mean postmarks may reflect when mail is processed at regional facilities rather than when it first enters the mail system.
Because processing centers have been consolidated in some areas, election officials have warned that postmark timing could be affected.
Before the June primary, California election officials encouraged voters to mail ballots as early as possible because of potential postal delays.
The June election also featured a highly competitive race for governor, which some experts believe encouraged many voters to wait until the final days before casting ballots.
In addition to late-arriving ballots, approximately 44,000 ballots were rejected because election officials determined the voter’s signature did not match the signature on file.
Another 8,300 ballots were rejected because the return envelope did not contain a signature.
State records also show that 743 ballots were rejected because those voters had already cast another ballot.
Other rejected ballots involved missing ballots inside return envelopes or multiple ballots submitted in a single envelope.
The highest rejection rate in the state occurred in Tulare County, where 3.52% of returned mail ballots were rejected.
Alpine County and Merced County followed closely, each recording rejection rates of 3.36%.
California has frequently faced criticism for taking weeks to complete vote counting after major elections, largely because state law permits ballots meeting certain requirements to continue arriving after Election Day.
Following the June primary, President Donald Trump again criticized California’s election system, while the Department of Justice opened an investigation into election administration in Los Angeles County.
Election experts emphasize that the increase in rejected ballots should not be interpreted as evidence of widespread voter fraud.
A 2025 report by the Brookings Institution found documented cases of mail ballot fraud remained extremely rare, estimating roughly four cases for every 10 million mail ballots cast, The Associated Press reported.
State officials have not identified evidence of widespread fraud connected to the June primary, but the increase in rejected ballots is expected to receive additional scrutiny as election administrators evaluate whether changes in postal operations, voter behavior or election procedures contributed to the higher rejection rate.
