Silent For Too Long said:

---

You know are the CMs who jump all over every thread that has anything negative about Trump?

Weird they are conspicuously absent from this one. For some reason I thought a bunch of "Reagan Republicans" would be thrilled the DOJ is uncovering massive fraud.

---

Haven't seen our most prominent Reagan Republican post in some time. That shtick must have run its course and she changed user names on us.

Do yall really think anyone donating to SPLC didn't know what they were doing? Some of yall act like this would be scandalous to their donor base, like the planned parenthood body parts scandal, they'll prob get more money

🧵🚨 THREAD: How the Charlottesville rally and SPLC birthed an entire billion-dollar-plus "democracy" ecosystem 🚨

11 federal counts. Wire fraud. Money laundering conspiracy. But here's what the SPLC headlines are missing:

• The indictment describes a paid informant in the… pic.twitter.com/iCQeu550kB

— DataRepublican (small r) (@DataRepublican) April 22, 2026

Quote:

---

The indictment describes a paid informant in the leadership chat that PLANNED Unite the Right [Charlottesville]
That informant "helped coordinate transportation" to the rally... at SPLC's direction
There is ONE publicly identified organizer whose documented role was transportation coordinator
His Discord posts about running over protesters were made 26 DAYS before Heather Heyer was killed by a car
The indictment says postings were made "under the supervision of the SPLC"
Charlottesville then became the founding event for a billion-dollar political machine
SPLC installed itself as that machine's definitional gatekeeper

I report. You draw your own conclusions. As always, patience as I pull together the thread.

---

solishu said:

---

Silent For Too Long said:

---

You are trying way to hard to spin this. If everything they were doing was legal and above board they wouldn't be hiding money in the Caymans.

---

I'm not trying to spin anything. It's a criminal prosecution. SPLC are claiming that that these expenditures are for paying informants. I'm stating that I believe that if the government can prove that they were actually to incite criminality, than they will be able to secure convictions. If they are unable accomplish that, I think that the prosecution will fail.

---

Law enforcement agencies pay informants in the course of conductimg investigations as do private investigators. On the other hand, it's considered a breach of journalistic ethics for a reporter to pay informants (beyond simple reimbursement of expenses). What exactly is it in the charter of the SPLC that allows them to conduct investigations where they pay informants?

By paying informants, SPLC was functioning as a private investigator. 40 states and D.C. require licensing to be a PI. I am betting that SPLC never bothered to get a license in any state at any time.

As a 501(c)3, the SPLC would only be allowed to conduct investigations if it directly supports the charter that was approved by the IRS when they received the determination letter approving the 501(c)3 status.

The amounts of money that were paid to individuals makes it very obvious that the SPLC funds were not merely a stipend or incentive. One individual received $300k.

If SPLC was just paying informants, they wouldn't be indicted!!! It's not complicated!! Read the indictment!

This story is massive. Should be the most talked about thing on the news tomorrow besides the war.

This is the Trump that shines. The WH should be out listing all the persecution of SPLC, instead of selling BS on a new ME war.

So many coordinated attacks on private citizens exercising their free speech. A leftist mob. There should be prison time.

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

It wouldn't be the personal assets of the directors but rather the assets of the non-profit. A non-profit, at least in most states, does not have equity holders (which makes it a non-profit, not that it doesn't make more in revenue than it spends each year; kind of a misnomer in name). Thus, most non-profits have in their by-laws where their assets go if the entity is dissolved.

Let me guess: "Human Rights" Watch, ACLU, Act Blue, etc.

---

But those assets could still be traced. I'm thinking more like when people try to hide assets in advance of filing for bankruptcy. Those transfers can be nullified and the asset seized.

---

Forget forfeiture for a second because that's jumping the gun.

Here's the question I have for you: since it is the SPLC itself charged and not individuals, do these individuals within this org have any 5th amendment rights to refuse to testify? If they testify, it proves the government's case; if they don't, or they lie, the government can go after them for perjury or charge them individually.

I'm guessing the government, if they're truly pursuing criminal remedies for the organization, can grant them individual immunity. No?

Ulysses90 said:

---

solishu said:

---

Silent For Too Long said:

---

You are trying way to hard to spin this. If everything they were doing was legal and above board they wouldn't be hiding money in the Caymans.

---

I'm not trying to spin anything. It's a criminal prosecution. SPLC are claiming that that these expenditures are for paying informants. I'm stating that I believe that if the government can prove that they were actually to incite criminality, than they will be able to secure convictions. If they are unable accomplish that, I think that the prosecution will fail.

---

Law enforcement agencies pay informants in the course of conductimg investigations as do private investigators. On the other hand, it's considered a breach of journalistic ethics for a reporter to pay informants (beyond simple reimbursement of expenses). What exactly is it in the charter of the SPLC that allows them to conduct investigations where they pay informants?

By paying informants, SPLC was functioning as a private investigator. 40 states and D.C. require licensing to be a PI. I am betting that SPLC never bothered to get a license in any state at any time.

As a 501(c)3, the SPLC would only be allowed to conduct investigations if it directly supports the charter that was approved by the IRS when they received the determination letter approving the 501(c)3 status.

The amounts of money that were paid to individuals makes it very obvious that the SPLC funds were not merely a stipend or incentive. One individual received $300k.

---

This is a stretch. I'm pretty sure PI licensing in the states you reference prohibit one from HIRING OUT as a PI, not engaging in such behavior themselves. You can freely do what most any PI does on your own for your own "matters."

Sort of like electricians or attorneys, for that matter.

"SPLC's Funding of 'Unite the Right' Op Generated an Incalculable Return on Investment"

https://economiccollapse.report/splcs-funding-of-unite-the-right-op-generated-an-incalculable-return-on-investment/

Basically the SPLC https://t.co/dcCNCTuDEq

— Emily Jashinsky (@emilyjashinsky) April 22, 2026

Perfecto.

45-70Ag said:

---

🚨 BREAKING: Acting AG Blanche and FBI Director Patel announce a grand jury has INDICTED leftist NGO Southern Poverty Law Center on 11 COUNTS

This is MASSIVE!

SPLC said they were "fighting white supremacy," but they were "MANUFACTURING the extremism it purports to expose" by… pic.twitter.com/WtyvBUuwrW

— Nick Sortor (@nicksortor) April 21, 2026

About time, that place needs to be shut down.

---

If I remember correctly, that is Martin Luther King Jr's old socialist associates. They should have shut them down decades ago.

Wait until this dame attention is paid to all the criminal activities of NGO…

91AggieLawyer said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

It wouldn't be the personal assets of the directors but rather the assets of the non-profit. A non-profit, at least in most states, does not have equity holders (which makes it a non-profit, not that it doesn't make more in revenue than it spends each year; kind of a misnomer in name). Thus, most non-profits have in their by-laws where their assets go if the entity is dissolved.

Let me guess: "Human Rights" Watch, ACLU, Act Blue, etc.

---

But those assets could still be traced. I'm thinking more like when people try to hide assets in advance of filing for bankruptcy. Those transfers can be nullified and the asset seized.

---

Forget forfeiture for a second because that's jumping the gun.

---

No, it's not. Give them nothing and take from them everything. Now. Treasury has seized assets for way, way less.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Here's the question I have for you: since it is the SPLC itself charged and not individuals, do these individuals within this org have any 5th amendment rights to refuse to testify? If they testify, it proves the government's case; if they don't, or they lie, the government can go after them for perjury or charge them individually.

---

---

You can plead the 5th in any situation where you may incriminate yourself personally. That means that if you are an SPLC director, and you are asked a question, and answering that question may incriminate you, not SPLC, you are free to plead the 5th. A jury is not supposed to make an inference about SPLC's guilt based on the employee's silence in a criminal case, but, realistically, it looks pretty bad.

In a civil case, like, for example, trying to get back cash seized by the government, a jury can absolutely make an inference from the employee's silence as to the guilty of the employer.

Quote:

---

I'm guessing the government, if they're truly pursuing criminal remedies for the organization, can grant them individual immunity. No?

---

Why would they. SPLC is guilty as hell, and their hand is squarely stuck in the cookie jar.

91AggieLawyer said:

---

Ulysses90 said:

---

solishu said:

---

Silent For Too Long said:

---

You are trying way to hard to spin this. If everything they were doing was legal and above board they wouldn't be hiding money in the Caymans.

---

I'm not trying to spin anything. It's a criminal prosecution. SPLC are claiming that that these expenditures are for paying informants. I'm stating that I believe that if the government can prove that they were actually to incite criminality, than they will be able to secure convictions. If they are unable accomplish that, I think that the prosecution will fail.

---

Law enforcement agencies pay informants in the course of conductimg investigations as do private investigators. On the other hand, it's considered a breach of journalistic ethics for a reporter to pay informants (beyond simple reimbursement of expenses). What exactly is it in the charter of the SPLC that allows them to conduct investigations where they pay informants?

By paying informants, SPLC was functioning as a private investigator. 40 states and D.C. require licensing to be a PI. I am betting that SPLC never bothered to get a license in any state at any time.

As a 501(c)3, the SPLC would only be allowed to conduct investigations if it directly supports the charter that was approved by the IRS when they received the determination letter approving the 501(c)3 status.

The amounts of money that were paid to individuals makes it very obvious that the SPLC funds were not merely a stipend or incentive. One individual received $300k.

---

This is a stretch. I'm pretty sure PI licensing in the states you reference prohibit one from HIRING OUT as a PI, not engaging in such behavior themselves. You can freely do what most any PI does on your own for your own "matters."

Sort of like electricians or attorneys, for that matter.

---

As said on another thread, it is unlikely that SPLC issued 1099s to these supposed informants, which they should have done if this was actually done on the up and up. That could be one of the details that completely sinks this ship.

techno-ag said:

---

Im Gipper said:

---

If SPLC was just paying informants, they wouldn't be indicted!!! It's not complicated!! Read the indictment!

---

They're not paying informants. That's Democrat spin. They actually helped fund the KKK.

---

Quote:

---

Forget forfeiture for a second because that's jumping the gun.

---

Its literally the relief sought in the indictment!

Quote:

---

Here's the question I have for you: since it is the SPLC itself charged and not individuals, do these individuals within this org have any 5th amendment rights to refuse to testify?

---

Username does NOT check out!

So this is the narrative MS NOW is going with? Just ignoring the fact that the SPLC was paying these racists... One thing about the Left, they get their talking points out quickly without thinking about how ignorant they sound.

(Edit: I've removed the Twitter embed as the post on X was posted in reply to another post on X which had a screenshot of a post with offensive language. If you care to see the video from MSNOW, you can search 'western lensman splc' on X and it should be one of the first you see.)

backintexas2013 said:

---

The lib on this thread already went with the paid informants excuse. Guess we know what's next.

Also coming soon is "we weren't sure what they were doing we thought they were just informants"

---

Also, we aren't tax lawyers, so we didn't know we needed to issue 1099s.

Also, we aren't commercial lawyers, so we didn't know that hiding these payments in shell LLCs and breaking all KYC laws ever written by the SEC was illegal.

The ability to spin this is going to be temporary.

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

The ability to spin this is going to be temporary.

---

When you meet a liberal that will own what they did, let me know about it. I have never met one.

---

This. It's proven on this board every damn day. Zero accountability from any of them. It's always someone else's fault or whatever topic it is was started by the right.

I have one left wing friend who I stopped having serious conversations with because of his refusal to ever admit his side has done any wrong. He's still in the camp that antifa is a myth for God's sake. And this was a recent take by him about a month ago.

That's why liberalism is their religion.

And once again, there should not be a "non profit" organization in existence in the US.

pic.twitter.com/GocTuJecn0

— Lee B. (@goldenhelmet01) April 23, 2026

rab79 said:

---

And once again, there should not be a "non profit" organization in existence in the US.

---

This really makes no sense. Sorry!

solishu said:

---

Silent For Too Long said:

---

You are trying way to hard to spin this. If everything they were doing was legal and above board they wouldn't be hiding money in the Caymans.

---

I'm not trying to spin anything. It's a criminal prosecution. SPLC are claiming that that these expenditures are for paying informants. I'm stating that I believe that if the government can prove that they were actually to incite criminality, than they will be able to secure convictions. If they are unable accomplish that, I think that the prosecution will fail.

---

Paying informants is the responsibility of the police, is it not? Who made the SPLC the cops? I don't think I want to live in a police state run by them.