Millions Given to Obama’s Foundation Sent to Group Linked to George Soros
Public records show that millions of dollars given to former President Barack Obama’s foundation were later redirected to a progressive fund that has supported anti-Israel groups, including those accused of organizing encampments at Ivy League universities.
According to federal tax filings, the Obama Foundation — established to construct a 19-acre campus in Chicago featuring a museum, athletic facility, and gardens — transferred $2 million to the Tides Foundation in 2022 and 2023, the New York Post reported.
The cash was earmarked to “support local organizations that are working to reduce violence in communities,” according to filings by the foundation.
The Tides Foundation — which also receives funding from Democratic donor George Soros — serves as a fiscal sponsor for organizations that have not registered with the IRS as charities. The group is currently under review by the House Ways and Means Committee for its role in directing donations to groups including the Adalah Justice Project, Samidoun, and the People’s Forum.
These organizations have been linked to pro-Palestinian demonstrations and student encampments that followed the October 7, 2023, Hamas attacks in Israel, which killed 1,200 people, The Post reported.
Following publication of the story on Friday, a spokeswoman for the Obama Foundation said the $2 million in question was distributed to more than 50 organizations nationwide to reduce “surging summer violence” and to create “safe spaces” for young people.
“The Tides Center played an administrative role in the program by processing grants while Cities United [a nonprofit] managed the application process,” the spokeswoman told The Post in an email.
Tides has also overseen donations for the Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation, which filed a lawsuit in California Superior Court last year accusing the fund of “egregious mismanagement” of more than $33 million, according to court records. That case remains ongoing.
In addition to its donations to Tides, filings show the Obama Foundation directed more than $3 million in grants to Gofundme.org in 2022 and 2023 for unspecified programs described as supporting “grassroots leaders to empower girls through education.”
The Obama Foundation revelations and connection to an organization funded in part by left-wing billionaire Soros come as a senior Justice Department official has ordered more than half a dozen U.S. attorneys’ offices to draft plans for criminal investigations into Soros’ Open Society Foundation.
The directive, obtained by The New York Times, outlines potential charges including racketeering, arson, wire fraud, and material support of terrorism, The New York Times reported.
It is the latest sign that federal prosecutors are moving aggressively at the urging of President Donald Trump, who has publicly demanded that Soros face criminal charges.
The president sharpened his criticism of Soros after the killing of conservative activist Charlie Kirk in Utah this month.
At a rally, Trump threatened to use government levers to “go after” donors to progressive groups, specifically mentioning Soros by name.
Conservatives argue that the foundation supports unrest, violent protests, and property destruction.
On Monday, Todd Blanche’s office sent a memo to federal prosecutors in New York, California, Washington, D.C., Chicago, Detroit, and Maryland, instructing them to prepare investigative strategies.
The order was signed by Aakash Singh, a Justice Department lawyer tasked with coordinating between the deputy attorney general’s office and U.S. attorneys’ offices nationwide.
Singh cited a report by the conservative Capital Research Center, which tracks liberal spending in politics.
That report accused Soros-backed groups of funneling more than $80 million into organizations connected to terrorism or extremist violence.
“This D.O.J., along with our hard-working and dedicated U.S. attorneys, will always prioritize public safety and investigate organizations that conspire to commit acts of violence or other federal violations of law,” Justice Department spokesman Chad Gilmartin said.
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.
