Sam Antar exposes Zorhan Mamdani’s NYC mayoral campaign as a $1.7M "grassroots" facade—all initial funds from one bundler—while $2M+ came from billionaire-backed PACs like New Yorkers for Lower Costs (71% out-of-state donors) and Working Families Party (Gates, Spielberg). After his whitecollarfraud.com report, the Election Board scrubbed data overnight, hiding the bundler’s name. Comparing it to Kamala Harris’s 2020 small-donor inflation now under scrutiny, Stone frames Mamdani’s socialist agenda—defunding police, taxing "white people"—as a Trump-like outsider threat. Meanwhile, rural hospitals face Congress’s looming cuts, risking 24/7 emergency care for 5,000+ facilities nationwide. [Automatically generated summary]
Rural Americans deserve access to the best of what our country has to offer, especially health care.
Across every state, every community, America's rural hospitals are the first line of defense protecting our families, neighbors, and loved ones.
No matter where you live, hospital care doesn't clock out.
They're there 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 365 days a year.
Each year, America's over 5,000 hospitals care for millions of patients, providing 24-7 emergency care, delivering babies, cancer treatments, and other life-saving care that patients rely on.
Behind every one of those patients are doctors, nurses, and caregivers working tirelessly to keep people healthy and safe.
Hospitals are our community's lifelines.
They employ our neighbors and keep our families healthy.
But now, some in Congress are threatening access to care.
Tell Congress, protect patient care to keep America strong.
Don't cut rural health care.
Back in the Stone Zone, joining me now is Sam Antar.
Sam Antar is one of the most interesting individuals I've ever come across.
He's a former certified public accountant whose career trajectory took a remarkable turn.
He went from being the perpetrator of one of the largest security fraud schemes in American history to being an investigator of financial fraud.
He was the chief financial officer for Crazy Eddie.
You remember them, a major consumer electronics change in the Northeast during the 1980s.
Following his criminal conviction and his paying his debt to society, he reinvented himself using his extraordinary forensic accounting skill to ferret out white-collar fraud and crime.
His unique perspective and his technical expertise have made him an expert advisor to government agencies, law enforcement organizations, law firms and accounting firms, independent investment research firms, hedge funds, and other public companies.
He is one of the most meticulous researchers that I have ever met, and he's already established quite a track record.
It was Sam Antar who discovered the 22-year crime spree in which New York Attorney General Letitia James engaged in multiple instances of mortgage fraud.
Those conclusions by Sam Antar having now been referred to the U.S. Justice Department for prosecution.
Sam Antar has had a new analysis of the campaign of Democrat nominee Zorhan Mamdani that is mind-blowing.
Sam, welcome to the Stone Zone.
Thank you for having me on, Roger.
So you were with us, I don't know, maybe it was a week ago, and you pointed out that on the New York City's campaign finance board website, that the supposedly grassroots-oriented people-powered campaign of Mr. Mamdani had received zero in small contributions,
and that all of the money raised had come from bundlers, and that one particular bundler was responsible for $1.6 million of the $1.7 million that the campaign raised.
In other words, despite the fact that millions of people were following Miam Dami's campaign on Instagram, on YouTube, on X, on Facebook, not a single person pushed that donate button on his website.
How extraordinary.
And then, suddenly, after you and I had this interview and you published your extraordinary expose, which you can find at whitecollarfraud.com, whammo, overnight, the New York City Election Board changed all of that information.
Suddenly, that major bundler disappeared entirely, and suddenly their contributions and smaller donations popped up out of nowhere.
And of course, Politico, which is not a journalistic enterprise, but which is a propaganda front for the Democrat Party, dutifully reported all of this as if it was Sam Antar who made a mistake, when in fact it was the city campaign finance board acting in an act of subterfuge, in my opinion.
Sam?
Not only that, but it was the campaign's mistake too, because even if, I'm saying, even if, capital letters, if, even if the city was at fault, still the campaign should have looked at their own data on the campaign finance board's website.
They didn't.
Okay, this is just a way of getting back at me.
And that's fine.
But the other part of the story, which is extremely important, okay, is that even though he raised $1.7 million and it's no longer $1.6 and $1.7 million in direct contribution, even though he raised $1.7 million and it's no longer $1.6 million was bundled, there's still another part of the ecosystem that they chose to ignore.
In other words, he, two PACs that are completely aligned with him, raised over $2 million.
That's money, okay, that exceeds the amount of money he raised from direct contributions.
And when you look, when you peel at the layers, you see exactly who's behind those packs, and you see that he's not running a grassroots campaign.
I call it grassroots washing.
In other words, he's pretending to be a grassroots campaign if you look at layer one.
But when you go to layer two, you start seeing the billionaires that are behind him.
Yeah, it's quite interesting.
The rhetoric doesn't match the record.
In other words, he would have us believe that this is a people-powered campaign, that he's running against the dark money and running against the special interests.
When in fact, a piece that you have up right now exposes how he is the recipient of millions of dollars in dark money.
This is, by the way, the same exact psyop that we saw in Kamala Harris's campaign, where immediately after she was anointed as the nominee, a nominee that not a single Democrat primary or caucus voter voted for, not a candidate who was chosen in a completely undemocratic process, and they complain about Donald Trump trying to be a king.
They inflate the polls by oversampling Democrats to make it look like she is either leading Trump or tied with him.
They flood her campaign through Act Blue with small donations from donors that either don't exist or when you contact them, tell those contacting them that they made no such contributions.
Most of those donors giving many, many, many times.
By the way, all of that now currently under congressional investigation.
And of course, the handmaidens in the fake news media gobble this stuff up, creating this psyop that she was running a viable campaign.
She lost, we were told going into election day, it was nip and tuck.
She had a great chance.
She lost every swing state by big numbers.
And she lost the popular vote.
Donald Trump being the first Republican to carry the popular vote in decades.
So I see the same thing happening here.
The rhetoric sounds great.
It's a people campaign in the sense that they falsify where their money comes from, then they use that money to spread his populist-sounding agenda.
This is a recycling of the hope and change that we saw under Obama.
It all sounds great.
I mean, free bus transportation, that sounds great to a lot of people.
Defunding the police, opening Rikers Island, letting everybody out?
Not so great, if you ask me.
So they take this elitist money, and I'll let you break this down in a moment.
They take this elitist money, they use it for mass advertising, and they come up with this faux populist agenda.
My final point: Mamdami's rise is very much like the rise of Donald Trump.
He's perceived as an outsider challenging a corrupted system.
The difference is their prescription to fix it.
His prescription is known as communism and worst socialism.
If you look at his issue agenda, it is, first of all, soft on crime, do away with cash bail entirely.
Essentially, he says that violence is a social construct.
That means tells me he's going to open Rikers Island.
He wants to defund the police, as I say, and then he wants to raise taxes on, I'll be saying it, white people.
That's what he said.
He can't unsay that, although his surrogates keep saying, well, that's not what he meant.
No, that's exactly what he meant.
Sam, who are the two major dark money operations that funded this grassroots revolution?
Let me get to the first one, which is really interesting.
Out of the $2 million that's bent by these PACs that exceeded the amount of money he raised generically, which is $1.7 million, $1.3 of that $2 million comes from a pack called New Yorkers for Lower Costs.
Now, you think, okay, New Yorkers for lower costs.
It's New Yorkers, right?
But 71% of the money that went into that PAC came from out-of-towners.
And these were not regular out-of-towners.
These were billionaires and people from out of state.
You know, it's and they're pretending to be New Yorkers.
They're not New Yorkers.
They don't have to live with the consequences of putting this guy in.
They're just, you know, they're just supporting him.
One of the tech billionaires that supported this pack is a guy by the name Tom Preston Werner.
He's the co-founder of GitHub.
He gave them $20,000.
The big money that comes into this pack comes from out-of-towners.
A guy by the name of Munib Azhar, $151,000.
This guy, Muni, this guy, Ali, another $100,000.
Zaman, another $100,000.
All of these people, okay, 40% of the money going into this pack came from just five people and they're all out-of-towners.
So between the billionaires and the out-of-towners and the billionaire out-of-towners, you know, it makes it look like it's grassroots, but it's not grassroots.
71% of the money came from out-of-town donors.
That is number one.
Number two is you have the working people, working families party pack.
They spent $762,000 to help Mamdani and also oppose Cuomo.
Okay.
The Working Families PAC received $300,000.
This is where you go layers deep.
The Working Families Party received $300,000 from another PAC called Leaders We Deserve.
Leaders We Deserve, according to a Democratic analyst, a guy that's a Democrat, only spends 28% of its money on Democratic candidates, and the rest go to their cronies.
Another point to make is that this PAC is backed by Phobie Gates, billionaire, daughter to billionaire Bill and Melinda Gates, Steven Spielberg, and this guy Ronald Conway, who was the Silicon Valley godfather who invested early in Google and Facebook.
Now, I doubt that Spielberg is anti-Israel, but does he know where his money is going?
Does he know what people are doing with the money and what he's attaching himself to?
These organizations, okay, are funded by billionaires.
They're not me and you and mom and pops and our uncles and cousins.
No, these are people that are very, very wealthy that are behind the Mandani campaign.
Everything else is just the front.
Rural Americans deserve access to the best of what our nation has to offer, especially health care.
Across every state and every community, America's rural hospitals are the first line of defense, protecting our families, neighbors, and loved ones.
No matter where you live, hospital care doesn't clock out.
They're there 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 365 days a year.
Each year, America's over 5,000 hospitals care for millions of patients, providing 24-7 emergency care, delivering babies, cancer treatments, and other life-saving care that patients rely on.
Behind every one of those patients are doctors, nurses, and caregivers working tirelessly to keep people healthy and safe.
Hospitals are our community's lifelines.
They employ our neighbors and keep our families healthy.
But now, some in Congress are threatening access to care.
Tell Congress, protect patient care to keep America strong.
Don't cut rural health care.
Excellent, excellent analysis.
It is interesting here.
Key takeaway, as you point out, that PAC spending to benefit Mamdami's direct campaign contributions were 18.4% greater than what the candidate himself raised for his own campaign.
So much for the idea that his campaign was about rejecting elitist influence and was a challenge to dark money.
Everything about this guy seems to be relatively fraudulent, but his agenda for New York City is not fraudulent.
It's downright dangerous.
I had a vigorous conversation with former Congressman Pete King on the radio the other day.
I have huge respect for Pete King.
He was a great member of Congress.
He seems to favor former Mayor Eric Adams.
And I think Congressman King would like to see the field narrowed to give Adams a better chance to stop Mamdami.
I respectfully disagreed with him, despite the fact that our disagreement doesn't diminish in any way my admiration and respect for Pete King.
Slewa's Stance on Adams00:07:44
He's a great American patriot.
But I do see the frustration of the divided operation.
I've talked to Curtis Sleewa, the Republican nominee.
Wild horses could not get him out of this race.
Eric Adams is the incumbent.
He's filed as an independent.
All public polls and private polls show him running last, by the way, in this contest.
I think he is committed to the race as perhaps as a way to stay out of prison.
There's still three sealed indictments against him.
And then, of course, you have former Governor Andrew Cuomo.
Now, Andrew Cuomo is a political animal, but I also think his time may have passed.
He's carrying very, very substantial negatives because of the Me Too charges against him and the systematic, I would say deconstruction of Andrew Cuomo by Attorney General Letitia Nobody is above the law, James.
But he still continues to run second in the race.
Whether he will continue to run as an independent, having qualified for an independent line, is probably the hottest question in New York political circles.
If he were to withdraw, where does his vote redistribute?
Most of them are Democrats, but they're not socialist Democrats.
They're not likely to be progressive Democrats.
Do they go to Adams?
It's unlikely that they go to Sleewa, but Sleewa did get 30% of the vote, which is actually a high watermark for Republicans in his last race for mayor.
It's an intriguing race.
We're going to be following it very closely here in the Stone Zone.
If you're just tuning in, we're talking to Sam Antar.
He is the editor and publisher of whitecollarfraud.com, whitecollarfraud.com.
I urge you to check out his website.
He's laid out all the documentation of all of the numbers that we talk about here today.
And he's demonstrated that the Mamdani campaign, which being told is a grassroots phenomenon, is actually being financed with dark money, with big contributions from elites.
And it's amazing how the city's campaign finance board website, once Sam Antar revealed that they showed no small contributions and all of their money coming through one bundler, completely changed that overnight.
You're listening to the Stone Zone.
I'm Roger Stone.
Whatever you do, don't touch that dial because we'll be right back.
And we're back in the Stone Zone with Sam Antar, the fraud investigator extraordinaire.
Sam, you wanted to comment on Curtis Sliwa's campaign for mayor.
Yes, in contrast to the propaganda you get that Zaram Mamdani is a grassroots candidate, the only real grassroots candidate in this race is Curtis Slewa.
He only raised $300,000 in private funds versus Mamdani $1.7 million.
He spent only $250,000 compared to Mamdani excluding PACs of about $8.7 million.
Okay, so on yield per vote, dollar per vote, Sleewa is spending far less money to get far more votes.
So therefore, he is the only candidate that I could see.
I'm looking at the data right over here in front of me that that is grassroots.
Yeah, it's very interesting.
According to the New York Campaign Finance Board's filing, the Working Families National PAC is led by Joe Dinkin, who also serves as the National Deputy Director of the Working Families Party, while its treasurer is a Mike Boland, who holds the position of chief of staff to the National Working Families Party.
The PAC's mission statement explicitly states that it exists to support candidates endorsed by the Working Families Party.
Okay, so far so good.
And it's spending a reflex this alignment.
Every dollar in direct sport went to candidates with the Working Family Party's official 2025 ranked choice endorsement slate.
But another $540,000 was spent attacking the Working Families nemesis, Andrew Cuomo.
This organizational structure, if you ask me, raises serious questions about this institutional alignment complies with New York City campaign finance rules, specifically Rule 5-03, Section E, which requires independence between campaigns and expenditure committees.
The systematic coordination between party endorsements and PAC spending suggests that the Independence Party may have been more than structurally operational.
This funding structure actually fundamentally questions how authentic this is.
How does a $300,000 transfer from a PAC that spent 72% of its money on consultant enrichment represent the authentic grassroots support that formed the foundation of Mandami's political brand?
That is correct.
And also, you know, as I go deeper, because, you know, right now we're at layer two.
We'll get to layer three eventually.
But as you go, you can see that a lot of these entities supporting Mandami have overlapping managements.
This one's a treasurer here, while a secretary there.
This one is the head of the PAC here, where he's the co-head of another PAC.
We have a situation here where it's just a game of musical chairs.
That's all it is.
And this is very, very professionally structured.
So while it may be, it may be, let's say it is within the law, it violates the spirit of the law, at the very least.
And personally, I don't think it's within the law, but that's for lawyers to determine and for federal investigators.
But for sure, it violates the spirit of the law.
So in substance, maybe not in legal form, they are breaking the law.
All right.
I want to thank our guest, Sam Anchar.
Again, he's the editor and publisher of WhiteCollarFraud.com, an incredible website.
Urge you to check it out because the great thing about Sam is he documents with the actual documents everything that he says here on the show and everything he says in his great commentary.
I also want to thank you for joining us five days a week in the Stone Zone where we talk politics, news, history, style, and once in a while we talk about food because, well, I love to eat.
Until tomorrow, God bless you and Godspeed.
And as Donald Crump would say, God bless America.
Thanks for listening to the Stone Zone with Roger Stone.
You can hear the Stone Zone with Roger Stone weeknights at 8 on 77 WABC.
If you like the podcast, share it with your friends and listen anytime at WABCRadio.com and download the WABC Radio app.
Hit that subscribe button on all major podcast platforms.
Plus, follow WABC on social, on Instagram, TikTok, Facebook, and X. See you next time for a new episode.
So you never have to wonder what the heck is going on here.
Hospitals as Community Lifelines00:00:53
Rural Americans deserve access to the best our nation has to offer, especially when it comes to health care.
Across every state and every community, America's rural hospitals are the first line of defense, protecting our families, neighbors, and loved ones.
No matter where you live, hospital care doesn't clock out.
They're there 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 365 days a year.
Each year, America's over 5,000 hospitals care for millions of patients, providing 24-7 emergency care, delivering babies, cancer treatments, and other life-saving care that patients rely on.
Behind every one of those patients are doctors, nurses, and caregivers working tirelessly to keep people healthy and safe.
Hospitals are our community's lifelines.
They employ our neighbors and keep our families health.
But now, some in Congress are threatening access to care.
Tell Congress, protect patient care to keep America strong.