Third ActBlue Official Invokes Fifth Amendment as House GOP Foreign Donations Probe Continues

Kimberly Peeler-Allen, a member of ActBlue's board of directors, invoked her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination during testimony before the House Administration, Judiciary and Oversight committees on Tuesday, Sept. 1, according to sources familiar with her testimony cited by American Greatness and ZeroHedge.

She's the third person connected to the Democratic fundraising platform to take that step. ActBlue co-founder Matt DeBergalis invoked the Fifth during a closed-door deposition on Aug. 20, 2026. ActBlue CEO Regina Wallace-Jones asserted the same right during congressional questioning in June, according to American Greatness.

No criminal charges have been filed against ActBlue or any of its officials. Invoking the Fifth Amendment is a constitutional right, not an admission of guilt, and House Administration Committee Chairman Bryan Steil, R-Wis., acknowledged as much even as he expressed frustration with it.

"I've been frustrated, that individuals [in] ActBlue haven't answered our questions on the record," Steil told Fox News' Mark Meredith. "We've had individuals come, in public testimony, and plead the Fifth. They have a right to do that. And I understand why they did that. But I think the American people deserve to know exactly what's going on."

What Started the Probe

The House Administration Committee opened its review of ActBlue in 2023, looking at whether the platform's fraud-prevention procedures were strong enough to keep out foreign or fraudulent donations. Steil has repeatedly pointed to ActBlue's past policy of not requiring donors to enter a credit card CVV security code, a standard fraud check used by most online payment processors.

Steil has framed the concern in dollar terms: "We have an entity here with ActBlue, that has raised roughly $20 billion since its creation," he told Fox News. "We want to make sure that they have the fraud prevention protocols in place to make sure that foreign funds are not coming into U.S. elections."

The investigation escalated after The New York Times reported in April 2026 that ActBlue's own attorneys had internally warned that Wallace-Jones may have given Congress a misleading description of the platform's screening system. Wallace-Jones had called the system "multilayered." According to the Times, ActBlue's counsel warned the organization did not always follow the procedures she described to lawmakers, which the attorneys said created "a substantial risk for ActBlue."

That internal warning, if accurately reported, gives congressional scrutiny legitimate grounds. A platform moving $20 billion through the political system telling Congress its screening was multilayered, while its own lawyers flagged that the description didn't match practice, is the kind of discrepancy oversight committees exist to examine.

Separate State Action

Separately, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has sued ActBlue, alleging what Fox News described as "fraudulent and foreign donations." That's a civil lawsuit with unproven allegations, not a criminal charge or a court finding of fact, and it should be treated as such.

House Republicans have made stronger public claims than the committee's own official findings. Rep. Pat Fallon, R-Texas, told Fox News' Jessica Rosenthal that ActBlue "had become a money laundering operation for the Democratic Party," and said the platform's compliance staff was trained to do "almost no verifications." Fallon also claimed ActBlue's entire compliance team departed after the 2024 election, calling it evidence the group "got caught with their hand in the cookie jar." Those are Fallon's characterizations. No committee report or court finding presented in the available record confirms a money-laundering conclusion.

ActBlue's Defense

ActBlue spokesperson De'Andra Roberts LaBoo pushed back hard in a statement to Fox News Digital, framing the entire probe as partisan retaliation.

"President Trump and his allies are engaged in a coordinated campaign of political retaliation and retribution against organizations that they believe threaten them, from universities and law firms to civil rights groups and philanthropies. Now, they're working to target Democratic fundraising ahead of the midterms," Roberts LaBoo said.

She said ActBlue has raised a record amount of midterm-cycle contributions, with more than a million new donors giving an average of $36 each, and argued "no other platform does more to protect the integrity of small-dollar democracy, regardless of party."

Republicans reject the retaliation framing. Steil told Fox News' Mark Meredith the review began as "a review of online fundraising platforms and a determination whether or not those platforms had fraud prevention programs in place to prevent foreign funds from coming into U.S. elections," and said the scrutiny applies regardless of which party benefits.

What's Unresolved

The available record doesn't show whether ActBlue's competitor platforms, including Republican-aligned WinRed, faced comparable CVV or verification gaps during the same period, which would matter for judging whether this is a partisan target or an industry-wide fix Congress should legislate. It's also unclear whether the House committees will move toward a formal report, referrals, or legislation, or whether Peeler-Allen, DeBergalis and Wallace-Jones will be compelled to answer specific questions under any grant of immunity. For now, the investigation remains open, no charges have been filed against ActBlue or any named individual, and the House Administration, Judiciary and Oversight committees have not announced a date for their next public findings.