>> Continued From the Previous Page <<
Investigators believe millions of dollars flowed through Abrams-linked organizations without proper disclosure while the groups worked aggressively to influence statewide elections and boost Democrat turnout operations across Georgia.
According to findings reviewed by the commission, the network allegedly raised roughly $4.2 million and spent more than $3 million supporting Abrams and other Democrats during the heated 2018 gubernatorial race.
The problem? Regulators say the money was never properly disclosed to the public.
Critics argue this wasn’t some technical filing error or bookkeeping oversight. They say it was a sophisticated political operation designed to move massive amounts of election-related cash while avoiding the transparency requirements imposed by Georgia law.
Then came another eyebrow-raising development.
Shortly after the record ethics settlement became public, the New Georgia Project quietly dissolved operations in 2025, effectively shutting its doors as scrutiny intensified.
To Republicans leading the investigation, that timing looks anything but accidental.
Georgia Senate investigators are now demanding testimony not only from Abrams, but also from two key figures who managed the organization behind the scenes: Lauren Groh-Wargo and Nsé Ufot.
Both women played major leadership roles inside the New Georgia Project while Abrams emerged as one of the Democratic Party’s biggest national stars.
Republican state Sen. Greg Dolezal made it clear the committee intends to dig much deeper into the operation’s financial activity.
“This committee has a responsibility to follow the facts wherever they lead,” said Republican state Sen. Greg Dolezal, the committee’s vice chairman. “Georgia law requires transparency and accountability in our elections.”
Georgia Lt. Gov. Burt Jones delivered an even sharper warning, arguing the case strikes at the heart of public trust in elections.
“When organizations secretly spend millions to influence elections while evading disclosure requirements, it undermines confidence in our democratic process.”
He added: “No one is above the law in Georgia.”
The committee says lawmakers want detailed explanations about who authorized the spending, where the money originated, and why the organizations failed to disclose activities regulators later determined were political in nature.
“The people of Georgia deserve to know who was involved, what decisions were made and how millions of dollars flowed through organizations that admitted to violating our campaign finance laws,” Dolezal said.
That means Abrams and her associates could soon face difficult questions under oath before state lawmakers.
The controversy also revives broader concerns surrounding Abrams’ political machine and its financial practices over the past several years.
After her failed 2022 gubernatorial campaign, reports revealed Abrams’ campaign operation was drowning in debt despite raising more than $100 million. Staff reportedly went unpaid while financial problems mounted behind the scenes.
Meanwhile, Abrams-backed voting rights organization Fair Fight Action spent years pushing election lawsuits alleging widespread voter suppression in Georgia.
Those legal claims ultimately collapsed in federal court.
Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger previously blasted the lawsuits as a stream of misleading accusations and meritless litigation that damaged confidence in the state’s election system.
Even the Biden administration’s Department of Justice eventually abandoned related litigation tied to Abrams-backed claims.
Now Republicans argue the latest ethics scandal paints an entirely different picture of the political operation Abrams spent years promoting to the country.
Abrams became a celebrity figure on the left after refusing to fully concede her 2018 loss, turning herself into a national fundraising powerhouse while warning supporters that Georgia’s elections lacked fairness and transparency.
But Georgia investigators now say the organization she founded may have been operating under a completely different standard behind closed doors.
And with subpoena power now officially in play, state lawmakers appear determined to force answers into public view.
