CISA Senator and Sector financial profits

Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act (CISA) Senator and Sector financial profits
	By: Anonymous -- Operation Cyber Privacy


..:::INDEX:::..
Preface {Line 36}
Introduction {Line 40}
Methodology {Line 44}
Evidence {Line 48}
Sectors
	Information Tech {Line 60}
	Securities & Investments {Line 66}
	National Defense {Line 72}
	Banks {Line 79}
	Security Companies {Line 93}
Senators
	Mike Rodgers {Line 103}
	Dianne Feinstein {Line 121}
	Tom Cotton {Line 141}
	Roy Blunt {Line 164}
	James Risch {Line 190}
	Dan Coats {Line 208}
	Marco Rubio {Line 233}
	Richard Mauze Burr {Line 260}
	Susan Collins {Line 281}
	James Lankford {Line 302}
	Barbara Mikulski {Line 318}
	Mark Warner {Line 338}
	Angus King {Line 356}
	Mazie Hirono {Line 374}
	Martin Heinrich {Line 389}
	HoR Dutch Ruppersberger {Line 404}
Summary {Line 422}


..:::Preface:::..
It is no secret that government officials linked financially to large corporations have used their political position to improve their personal financial assets as is in the case of CISA and similar legislation. In this document we have compiled evidence showing clear codependency of political and financial agenda within Congress.


..:::Introduction:::..
Each senator who has expressed favor for CISA has been identified as being in receipt of funding from corporations involved directly in defense/cyber defense or otherwise having finances tied up and invested into such corporations. Other senate committee members are responsible for coordinating the accounting of this attempt to raise stock in the defense and surveillance sector for personal gain, in turn utilizing tax dollars for personal investments.


..:::Methodology:::..
The information below was compiled via public records, personal financial affairs and corporate reporting documents.


..:::Evidence:::..
The information below was collected from publicly accessible and lawful websites. No released data was obtained illegally.


..:::Sectors:::..
The following sectors will get an increase in revenue if the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act (CISA) is passed.
Due to the vague language used in the 47 page bill, any of the following sectors and companies could potentially have an increase in annual budget.

The following companies contributed money to a senator campaign, have direct ties to the senator via a spouses, direct investments, or share information with the United States Government.

There are many corporations and companies out there who do and will benefit from the CISA bill passing, and linking every individual company would take an extended period of time and time is running out. Therefore, we only linked companies that were the most glaring examples. As we compile more data, it will be edited and released to the public in the spirit of true transparency.

	* Information Technology:
		* Reason: Many information technology companies give all of their research to the United States government. This means the government would be funding corporations and companies which would be giving them better tools to help spy on the citizens of the United States of America
			* Mantech International: Deliver upcoming information technology and technical services to U.S. federal government customers.
				* Delivery of the newest technology to federal government customers would allow a huge increase in annual budget for Mantech International.


	* Securities & Investment:
		* Reason: All of the corporations under securities and investment are hedge fund accounts. These accounts, according the the CISA bill, are at high risk from cyber terrorists and hackers, therefore must be protected. This would allow every account listed below to be eligible to receive budget funding from the federal government, money they do not need, to "protect their databases". Hedge fund corporations are infamous for not spending money on what it was granted for.
			* Elliot Management Corp: Hedge Fund Corporation
				* Invests heavily in Compuware, which is likely to receive money if CISA passes.


	* National/Electronics Defense:
		* Reason:
			* Harris Corp: An American communications company, defense contractor and information technology services provider that produces wireless equipment, tactical radios, electronic systems, night vision equipment and both terrestrial and space borne antennas for use in the government, defense and commercial sectors.
				* A huge provider in the American defense system AND in the technology field. They would receive large amounts of money from CISA for being a defense contract and an information technology services provider.
			* Honeywell International: A huge conglomerate who has ties in Defense Elements, such as aerospace, missiles, land mines, cluster bombs and napalm.


	* Banks:
		* Reason: The CISA bill will protect banks from "cyber terrorists threats". However, all of these banks are secure and do not have any viable issues with their online security. Therefore, the money given to them will be used for other purposes, such as funding senators or increasing their own pay checks.
			* Goldman Sachs Group, Inc: American multinational investment banking firm which has ties to numerous technology-inclined companies like Twitter, Apple, etc.
				* They are very likely to secure their large investments by contributing to senators that might swing the deal of CISA's passage to a landslide win.
			* Blackstone Group: American multinational private equity, investment banking, alternative asset management and financial services corporation.
				* They also own shares and/or companies that are technology-inclined and could possibly profit if a cybersecurity bill is passed.
			* Morgan Stanley: American multinational financial services corporation which is also dominant in technology investment banking.
				* They serve as lead underwriter for many of the largest global tech IPOs, including: Facebook, Apple, Netscape, Cisco, Compaq, Broadcast.com, Broadcom Corp, VeriSign, Inc., Cogent, Inc., Dolby Laboratories, Priceline, Salesforce, Brocade, Google and Groupon.
			* The Carlyle Group: American global asset management firm.
				* Currently owns shares and/or companies that are involved in security, technology, etc.
			* Wells Fargo: Wells Fargo & Company is an American multinational banking and financial services holding company.
				* As a bank, they are liable to protect their online severs which hosts banks account numbers and credit card numbers. While these should be protected, they have never had a breach in their security and have no need to have additional money for this.


	* Security Companies
		* Reason: Security companies would be given a steep increase in fundraising if the CISA bill is passed. While none of them have direct financial ties with the senators, the United States of America government has worked closely with these companies in the past for spying on citizens. Every security company would be given financial status; the ones below are a few examples out of many.
			* Stratfor: Strategic Forecasting, Inc. is an American publisher and global intelligence company.
				* As a third party security company, Stratfor will be given an increase in fundraising. As seen in the past, the government of United States of America enjoys to work with Stratfor to spy on the citizens of the United States.
			* Booz Allen: Booz Allen Hamilton Inc. is an American management consulting firm.
				* With the investments and status that Booz Allen currently have, they qualify to be given money if the CISA bill is passed. They have no need for this money, in turn it would be used for personal gain.


..:::Senators:::..

Sen. Mike Rodgers:
	* Spouse: Kristi Rogers
		* Description: Kristi Rogers was the president and CEO of Aegis LLC, a defense services company, also served as Managing Director of Washington Office at Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP since February 2013. They are heavily invested in this sector and would benefit tremendously if this bill passed.
			* Threat Level: Severe
	* Notes/Evidence:
		* Will make profits via his wife
		* Has no individual investments in her company
	* Links:
	* http://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/private/person.asp?personId=132859540&privcapId=24624470
		* Proof stating that Kristi Clemens Rogers previous work experience with the defense and security sectors
	* https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130417/16253022748/oh-look-rep-mike-rogers-wife-stands-to-benefit-greatly-cispa-passing.shtml
		* Article showing how Kristi Clemens Rogers will benefit from the CISPA bill passing, and since CISA is the same bill, the effects will be the same
	* http://pfds.opensecrets.org/N00009668_2013.pdf
		* Senator Mike Rodgers 2013 Offical Financial Report. Pages to Note: 5
	* Conclusion:
		* Senator Mike Rodgers will earn money through his wife. Kristi Rogers is heavily invested in the defense services and the CISA bill will increase the budget for the defence and security sector. This will allow Mike Rodgers and his wife to increase their personal annual revenue.


Sen. Dianne Feinstein:
	* Spouse: Richard C. Blum
		* Description: He is the chairman and president of Blum Capital. He serves as a director on a number of boards, including Playtex Products, Glenborough Realty Trust and is Chairman of CB Richard Ellis. He also serves as Co-Chairman of the World Conference on Religion and Peace and is Founder and Chairman of the American Himalayan Foundation and is a board member of the World Wildlife Fund and the Wilderness Society. He is also a trustee and a member of the executive committee of The Carter Center, founded by former President Jimmy Carter. He is in the top 1% of wealth in America.
			* Threat Level: Severe
	* Notes/Evidence:
		* Securities & Investment donated over $350,000 to her campaign
			* 4th highest donor
	* Links:
		* http://regents.universityofcalifornia.edu/about/members-and-advisors/bios/richard-blum.html
			* Richard Blum Information
		* http://foundsf.org/index.php?title=Richard_C._Blum_and_Dianne_Feinstein:_The_Power_Couple_of_California
			* Richard C. Blum and Dianne Feinstein is the "power couple"
		* https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cid=N00007364&cycle=2014
			* Senator Dianne Feinstein Fundraising for her campaign
		* https://www.opensecrets.org/pfds/assets.php?year=2013&cid=N00007364
			* Senator Dianee Feinstein assets
	* Conclusion:
		* With Senator Dianne Feinstein spouse having such a dominate stance in many different sectors, he would benefit highly from the CISA bill passing. There are many issues when a senator has a direct correlation with powerful people, and this is an instance where corruption runs deep. Not only will her husband gain profit from the CISA bill, so will her donors, the Securities and Investments department. This would allow a lot of money to be funnelled into both her own pocket and back into her campaign donors.


Sen. Tom Cotton:
	* Spouse: Anna Peckham
		* Description: Judicial Clerk  at the Montana Supreme Court until 2005, then  Assistant United States Attorney  at the U.S Attorney Office, In 2008 became and Attorney with Davis & Cannon, LLP and is currently a deputy General Counsel with the U.S Government.
			* Threat Level: High
	* Notes/Evidence:
		* Securities & Investment donated over $1,100,000 to his campaign
			* 2nd largest donor
		* Goldman Sachs Bank contributed over $50,000 to his campaign
			* 5th largest contributor
		* Wants to fund the defense budget more
	* Links:
		* http://nationalinterest.org/feature/we-asked-tom-cotton-what-should-be-the-purpose-american-13617
			* Senator Tom Cotton wanting to invest more Defense budget
		* http://dailyentertainmentnews.com/breaking-news/anna-peckham-cotton-arkansas-congressman-tom-cottons-wife/
			* Anna Peckham Information
		* https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cid=N00033363&cycle=2014
			* Senator Tom Cotton Fundraising for his campaign
		* https://www.opensecrets.org/pfds/assets.php?year=2013&cid=N00033363
			* Senator Tom Cotton assets
	* Conclusion:
		* Senator Tom Cotton, like all other senators, is heavily funded by Securities & Investment, a hedge fund company, who will be getting a portion of the money that CISA is funding. This would allow Senator Tom Cotton to get reinvested this way by them donating more to his campaign again. He also got money from the banks, who will also be getting some money that CISA is funding. Senator Tom Cotton also wants to increase the defense budget more, and with CISA coming around the corner, it is more than likely to have some correlation.


Sen. Roy Blunt:
	* Spouse: Abigail Perlman Blunt
		* Description: Nothing Important
			* Threat Level: None
	* Notes/Evidence:
		* Securities & Investment donated over $900,000 to his campaign
			* Largest donor
		* Goldman Sachs Bank contributed over $90,000 to his campaign
			* 3rd largest contributor
		* Reinstated plan to fund banks.
			* Giving banks more money for personal reasons
		* Pushing to pass  National Defense Authorization Act
			* Will give more funding to National Defense and Security
	* Links:
		* http://news.stlpublicradio.org/post/senate-backs-export-import-bank-part-highway-bill#stream/0
			* Senator Roy Blunt commenting on his idea for funding banks
		* https://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/blunt-defense-protection-spending/2015/06/13/id/650344/
			* Senator Roy Blunt wanting to push more survalince bills
		* https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cid=N00005195&cycle=2014
			* Senator Roy Blunt Fundraising for his campaign
		* https://www.opensecrets.org/pfds/assets.php?year=2013&cid=N00005195
			* Senator Roy Blunt assets
	* Conclusion:
		* Not only is Senator Roy Blunt largest donations came from the Securities & Investment sector, but also a large donor was Goldman Sachs Bank, who has ties in technology-inclined companies, which will be given more money to Goldman Sachs Bank, which can then be reinvested into Roy Blunt. Funding the banks for Senator Roy Blunt would help them get a larger money grant from the government due to the CISA Bill. Meanwhile, he is pushing for another security bill which Obama said they do not have the funding for. Either Senator Roy Blunt is terrible with dividing money proportionately, or he is getting something out of pushing all of these "defense and security" bills right now.


Sen. James Risch:
	* Spouse: Vicki Risch
		* Description: No importance
			* Threat Level: None
	* Notes/Evidence:
		* Honeywell International donated $15,000 to him for his campaign
			* 3rd largest donor
		* Has between $50,000-$131,000 in US Bank Account/Checking
			* Will raise if a security bill is raised
	* Links:
		* https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cid=N00029441&cycle=2014
			* Senator James Risch fundraising for his campaign
		* https://www.opensecrets.org/pfds/assets.php?year=2013&cid=N00029441
			* Senator James Risch assets
	* Conclusion:
		* Honeywell International is a large contributor to Senator James Risch campaign. With the security bill being passed, more money will be funnelled into the pockets of Honeywell International, which in turn will allow Senator James Risch to receive more money for his next campaign. He also has money invested in the US banks, so he will have an increase in money when the banks are given their cut of the defense budget.


Sen. Dan Coats:
	* Spouse: Marsha Coats
		* Description: Marsha Coats is the Indiana's Republican National Committeewoman. She has power of the the senate and can influnence them to vote one way or another
			* Threat Level: Low
	* Notes/Evidence:
		* Securities & Investment contributed over $300,000 to his campaign to get elected
			* Largest Donor
		* Has over $500,000 invested in Wells Fargo
		* Steep decrease in annual income
		* Pushing to reinvest in the banks
		* Pushing to pass defense bills
			* Wants more funding in the defense budget
	* Links:
		* http://www.journalgazette.net/opinion/sunday-centerpiece/FALL-FORECAST-8545161
			* Summary of Senator Dan Coats Actions, including but not limiting defense bills and reinvesting in banks.
		* https://gop.com/leaders/national-committeewoman-marsh-coats-in
			* Marsha Coats Information
		* https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cid=N00003845&cycle=2014
			* Summary of Dan Coats fundraising for his campaign
		* https://www.opensecrets.org/pfds/assets.php?year=2013&cid=N00003845
			* Summary of Dan Coats assets
	* Conclusion:
		* Senator Dan Coats will has started to lose money over the years. His main contributor to his campaign Security and Investments, and if CISA is passed then the security sector will increase significantly which will help his campaign to get elected again. With his personal finances decreasing, he will be more dependent on his contributors to raise money for his next election. His investments in Wells Fargo will also increase his income as Wells Fargo will have a steep increase in their economic status as they are also considered to be in the security sector. Meanwhile, he is also pushing to help reinvest in banks and give banks more money. He also wants to pass more defense bills, which would give money to the the companies that CISA would also fund.


Sen. Marco Rubio:
	* Spouse: Jeanette Dousdebes
		* Description: Has no ties to anything, "focusing on her kids"
			* Threat Level: None
	* Notes/Evidence:
		* Security and Investments sector contributed over $1,100,000 to his campaign
			* 2nd largest donor
		* Elliott Management contributed over $110,000 to his campaign
			* 2nd largest contributor.
		* Goldman Sachs Bank contributed over $90,000 to his campaign
			* 4th largest contributor
		* Have between $100,00-$250,000 invested in Citibank Miami, FL/Checking
			* Invested in banks; money would increase if a security bill passes
		* Wants to remove defense budgets
	* Links:
		* http://heavy.com/news/2015/04/marco-rubio-wife-jeannette-dousdebes-rubio-children-photos-miami-cheerleader-bio-job-colombian-kids/
			* Jeanette Dousdebes Information
		* https://reason.com/archives/2015/09/10/funding-the-us-department-of-offense
			* Senator Marco Rubio wanting to remove the defense budget
		* https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cid=N00030612&cycle=2014
			* Senator Marco Rubio fundraising for his campaign
		* https://www.opensecrets.org/pfds/assets.php?year=2013&cid=N00030612
			* Senator Marco Rubio assets
	* Conclusion:
		* Senator Marco Rubio has direct ties to his campaign funding from security, defense and telecommunication. With the increase of money, he could run a more efficient campaign for the next term. His assets are tied to banks which will allow him to increase his annual income significantly. The fact that Senator Marco Rubio wants to remove the defense budget means he has clear stake in the financial growth of the defence sector. Due to the circumstances that he wants a significant change like this right as the time CISA is about to voted on so more than enough reason to be suspicious.


	Sen. Richard Mauze Burr:
	* Spouse: Brooke Burr
		* Description: Brooke Burr is a partner with the real estate firm of Leonard Ryden Burr in Winston-Salem. She has more than 16 years of experience in residential real estate and received her degree in economics management from Salem College. In addition to her real estate career, Brooke serves as a member of the Poor and Needy Advisory Board of the Kate B. Reynolds Charitable Trust, serves on the Advisory Board of the Wake Forest University Baptist Medical Cancer Center and is involved in several other organizations throughout the community.
			* Threat Level: Medium
	* Notes/Evidence:
		* Doubled his wealth from 2004-2010
	* Links:
	* http://wonkette.com/407803/richard-burr-encouraged-wife-to-perform-single-family-bank-run
		* Burr trying to take all of his money out when the economy fell in 2008. Had this been accomplished, it would have crashed the stock market for everyone else. His concern was only his finances.
	* http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/10/15/is-richard-burr-married
		* Information on Burr's wife
	* http://apps.washingtonpost.com/politics/capitol-assets/member/richard-burr/
		* Burr's economic status from 2004-2010 & his 213% wealth growth
	* http://pfds.opensecrets.org/N00002221_2014.pdf
		* Senator Richard Burr's 2014 Official Financial Report. Pages to Note:
	* https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cycle=2014&cid=N00002221&type=I
		* Summary of Richard Burrs fundraising for his campaign
	* Conclusion:
		* Senator Richard Burr has had a steady increase in his revenue for some time now. Clearly he is earning money from an outside source and only cares about his own personal wealth. It is reasonable to assume that he may have backdoor deals with companies who stand to gain financially from the passing of CISA.


Sen. Susan Collins:
	* Spouse: Thomas Daffron
		* Description: Choose Senator Susan Collins as an intern for Sen. Bill Cohen’s congressional office in 1974. He considered himself her mentor. He served with both a liberal Democrat, Rep. Mo Udall of Arizona, and a moderate Republican, Sen. Charles Percy of Illinois. Appears to have no ties to current Senate besides his wife.
			* Threat Level: Low
	* Notes/Evidence:
		* Securities & Investment donated over $300,000 to her campaign.
			* 3rd largest donor
		* Has $15,000 invested in Wells Fargo Bank
		* Has up to $15,000 invested in Automatic Data Processing (ADP)
         -In September 1998, ADP acquired UK-based Chessington Computer Centre that supplied administration services to the UK Government.
	* Links:
		* http://www.centralmaine.com/2012/07/29/collins-future-husband-once-her-mentor_2012-07-28/
			* Thomas Daffron Information
		* https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cid=N00000491&cycle=2014
			* Senator Susan Collins fundraising for her campaign
		* https://www.opensecrets.org/pfds/assets.php?year=2013&cid=N00000491
			* Senator Susan Collions assets
	* Conclusion:
		* The investments that Susan Collions has in Wells Fargo and ADP will allow her annual revenue to increase highly. This means she would directly be earning money from the CISA bill and could reinvest in companies that would profit, such as Wells Fargo and ADP. Clearly this is the main purpose she has for passing the cyber surveillance bill.


Sen. James Lankford:
	* Spouse: Cindy Lankford
		* Description: No Importance
			* Threat Level: None
	* Notes/Evidence:
		* Commercial Banks contributed over $105,00 to his campaign
			* 5th largest contributor
	* Links:
		* https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cid=N00031129&cycle=2014
			* Senator James Lankford Fundraising for his campaign
		* https://www.opensecrets.org/pfds/assets.php?year=2013&cid=N00031129
			* Senator James Lankford assets
	* Conclusion:
		* Senator James Lankford gets campaign money from banks, who are likely to receive and increase funding if the CISA bill is passed. This is allow him to get more money for either his campaign or for his own personal wealth.


Sen. Barbara Mikulski:
	* Spouse: N/A
		* Description: N/A
			* Threat Level: N/A
	* Notes/Evidence:
		* Harris Corp contributed over $75,000 to her campaign
			* Largest contributor
		* Mantech International contributed over $20,000 to her campaign
			* 5th largest contributor
		* Defense Electronics donated over $160,000 to her campaign
			* 7th largest donor
	* Links:
		* https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cid=N00001945&cycle=2014
			* Senator Barbara Mikuiski Fundraising for her campaign
		* https://www.opensecrets.org/pfds/assets.php?year=2013&cid=N00001945
			* Senator Barbara Mikuiski assets
	* Conclusion:
		* Many of the donors that Senator Barbara Mikulski has would benefit from the CISA bill passing. Anyone in the banking or electronics system will profit, meaning they can reinvest in her for her upcoming campaign to help her get re-elected for the next term.


Sen. Mark Warner:
	* Spouse: Lisa Collis
		* Description: She has experience with successful communications strategies for political campaigns. Does non profit work.
			* Threat Level: Low
	* Notes/Evidence:
		* Securities & Investment donated over $1,750,000 to his campaign
			* Highest donor
	* Links:
		* http://www.powelltate.com/about-us/our-people/julie_heinrich/
			* Lisa Collis Information
		* https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cid=N00002097&cycle=2014
			* Senator Mark Warner Fundraising for his campaign
		* https://www.opensecrets.org/pfds/summary.php?cid=N00002097&year=2013
			* Senator Mark Warner assets
	* Conclusion:
		* While Senator Mark Warner has only one donor who would profit from the CISA bill passing, it is one of the largest donors out of everyone. This means that he would benefit highly from having the CISA bill passed so he can gain more money for his next election term.


Sen. Angus King:
	* Spouse: Mary Herman King
		* Description: Currently running a consulting business.
			* Threat Level: Low
	* Notes/Evidence:
		* Securities & Investment donated over $125,000 to his campaign
			* 4th highest donor
	* Links:
		* http://www.maryjherman.com/
			* Mary J Herman consulting business
		* https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cid=N00034580&cycle=2014
			* Senator Angus King Fundraising for his campaign
		* https://www.opensecrets.org/pfds/assets.php?year=2013&cid=N00034580
			* Senator Angus King assets
	* Conclusion:
		* Senator Angus King gets a large portion of his fundraising for his campaign directly from a sector who will see an increase in revenue if the CISA bill is passed. This will allow him to reinvest the money into his campaign or into something else he deems worthy.


Sen. Mazie Hirono:
	* Spouse: N/A
		* Description: N/A
			* Threat Level: N/A
	* Notes/Evidence:
		* No valid data
	* Links:
		* https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cid=N00028139&cycle=2014
			* Senator Mazie Hirono Fundraising for her campaign
		* https://www.opensecrets.org/pfds/assets.php?year=2013&cid=N00028139
			* Senator Mazie Hirono assets
	* Conclusion:
		* While no valid evidence for Senator Mazie Hirono was found, it does not mean that he doesn't have backdoor deals with companies


Sen. Martin Heinrich:
	* Spouse: Julie Heinrich
		* Description:
			* Threat Level:
	* Notes/Evidence:
		* No valid Data
	* Links:
		* https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cid=N00029835&cycle=2014
			* Senator Martin Heinrich Fundraising for his campaign
		* https://www.opensecrets.org/pfds/assets.php?year=2013&cid=N00029835
			* Senator Martin Heinrich assets
	* Conclusion:
		* While no valid evidence for Senator Martin Heinrich was found, it does not mean that he doesn't have backdoor deals with companies


HoR Dutch Ruppersberger:
	* Spouse: Kay Ruppersberger
		* Description:  Nothing Important
			* Threat Level: None
	* Notes:
		* Miscellaneous Defense programs donated over $70,000 to his campaign
			* Highest donor
		* Aerospace Defense donated over $40,000 to his campaign
			* 5th highest donor
	* Links:
		* https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cid=N00025482&cycle=2014
			* House of Representative Dutch Ruppersberger Fundraising for his campaign
		* https://www.opensecrets.org/pfds/assets.php?year=2013&cid=N00025482
			* House of Representative Dutch Ruppersberger assets
	* Conclusion:
		* House of Representative Dutch Ruppersberger has a lot of his campaign fundraising directly from sectors and companies who will earn money from the CISA bill passing. He was one of the initial people who wanted the CISA bill to be passed, and the reason is now clear why; so he can earn more for his campaign.


..:::Summary:::..
This document was compiled to show the clear financial reasoning behind the current incarnation of the CISA bill as well as give insight into the political landscape around the CISA bill. We have begun to analyse corporate ties within the senate's personal finances. The information contained in this document amounts to little more than speculation and theory, however, it paints a clear picture as too the reasoning being this legislation both in regards to finances as well as current direction on surveillance.

Fifteen senators who are heavily pushing the CISA bill have either direct campaign financing or personal financial assets invested in the passing of this bill. Many even have both. In most cases, we are seeing corporations receiving financial kickbacks from CISA, in turn funnelling money directly back into the campaigns of the senators who are voting yes on this legislation. It is not an uncommon cycle to present itself within the senate, but only when the data is compiled such as it is in this document, does the corruption become clear.

We will continue with this analysis and compile more data. As more information surfaces, it will be edited and released to the public in the spirit of true transparency.