Southern Poverty Law Center Indicted

[txdot-guy]

Originally Posted by lustylad

Your logic escapes me. SPLC had no business "cultivating informants" at the hate groups it was dedicated to eliminate. And why would you need to pay people at all if they think you're an ideological compadre?

What made the SPLC do a complete volte face and decide it was a good idea to start subsidizing those very same hate groups instead of putting them out of business? We'll find out at trial!

What I find most interesting is your credulity about this case. It appears to me that you’re basing your entire argument on the assumption that the indictment is without flaw and that the motives of the prosecution are pure as the driven snow.

You then dismiss the statements by others some of whom are legal experts as nothing more than biased political propaganda.

Unless the prosecution has more evidence or testimony that speaks to the motives of the SPLC then I expect this case to be dismissed because the prosecution has been unable to prove the intent necessary to fulfill the basic elements of the crime.

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by txdot-guy

What I find most interesting is your credulity about this case.

What I find astonishing is your knee-jerk dismissal of the case without even reading the indictment.


It appears to me that you’re basing your entire argument on the assumption that the indictment is without flaw and that the motives of the prosecution are pure as the driven snow.

Lol! I never said the indictment was flawless or the prosecution wasn't partly motivated by politics. Jack Smith and Andrew Weissman were heavily motivated by partisan politics, but you never complained about them. At the end of the day, it should be facts and evidence that prevail, not political bias.


You then dismiss the statements by others some of whom are legal experts as nothing more than biased political propaganda.

Where did I do that? Oh wait, I didn't. Could you be confusing me with Lantern2814?


Unless the prosecution has more evidence or testimony that speaks to the motives of the SPLC then I expect this case to be dismissed because the prosecution has been unable to prove the intent necessary to fulfill the basic elements of the crime.

Ah yes, motives. You are so quick to impugn the motives of the current DOJ. Yet you twist logic like a pretzel arguing that the SPLC's motives were "pure as the driven snow", to use your phrase. The SPLC has around 370 employees and $170 million in annual revenues. All of its internal emails will be subject to discovery. What are the chances an email pops up where an employee says "Please get more of this informant stuff! It's great for our fund-raising"? Would that be evidence that speaks to a motive?

Even if the DOJ fails to prove fraud, the case will serve a useful purpose. What you don't want to discuss is how the SPLC's actions don't pass the SMELL test. The OPTICS are terrible. Win or lose, this will hurt their fund-raising. And that's a good thing. Any non-profit that is so hackish, partisan and hateful that they indiscriminately lump the Family Research Council and TP-USA in with the KKK and neo-Nazi groups deserves to have their 501 (c) 3 status revoked.

[pxmcc]

^^you are a good advocate for the right wing. some of your ideological colleagues, less so..

another good article analyzing this issue:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...rges-explained

[golferguy55]

Originally Posted by lustylad

Ok txdot, step down off your soapbox. Let's talk facts and evidence.

Here is what the DOJ's 11-count indictment alleges:

"Starting in the 1980s, the SPLC began operating a covert network of informants who were either associated with violent extremist groups, such as the Ku Klux Klan, or who had infiltrated violent extremist groups at the SPLC's direction. These informants were referred to by some individuals within the SPLC as the "field sources" or the "Fs."

F-37 was a member of the online leadership chat group that planned the 2017 "Unite the Right" event in Charlottesville, Virginia and attended the event at the direction of the SPLC. F-37 made racist postings under the supervision of the SPLC and helped coordinate transportation to the event for several attendees. Between 2015 and 2023, the SPLC secretly paid F-37 more than $270,000.00."

If the DOJ produces at trial this informant (F-37) who testifies under oath that he was instructed by the SPLC to make "racist postings" - it will be extremely damaging evidence. Then the DOJ can easily introduce into evidence some of the fund-raising letters mailed out by the SPLC in the wake of the 2017 Charlottesville rally. Everyone agrees the SPLC's donations soared in response to those mailings.

Still wanna call it a "manufactured" case that has "no basis in fact or reality"? Please keep in mind that F-37 is just one of many informants cited in the DOJ indictment.

The indictment goes on to say:

"To secretly funnel donated money to the Fs, individuals at the SPLC... opened a series of bank accounts... in the name of various fictitious entities. These fictitious entities were never incorporated, had no bona fide employees, and conducted no actual business."

If paying informants at the hate groups they told their donors they were working to "dismantle" is kosher and appropriate and above-board and defensible, maybe you can explain why they found it necessary to conceal this activity by laundering the payments through dummy companies?

Here's the actual indictment:

https://www.justice.gov/opa/media/1437146/dl

Great post LL. Let's see what response from guy has since he has you on ignore.

[lustylad]

From ‘Fine People’ to Assassinations
Left-wing extremists subsidize right-wing extremists because the audience is the media.

By Holman W. Jenkins, Jr.

April 28, 2026 5:01 pm ET

In a federal indictment last week the Southern Poverty Law Center, a longtime activist group against right-wing extremism, was accused of shoveling money to a right-wing extremist “informant” to help organize the notorious 2017 melee in Charlottesville, Va. If so, the disclosure by now is hardly even a cherry on top.

Charlottesville has long since come to betray all the cynicism of a pseudo-event. The neo-Nazi organizers knew a similar legal demonstration weeks earlier had ended in a riot when a much larger group of left-wing counter-protesters descended on the small, overwhelmingly liberal city. The city knew what was coming too when it issued the right-wing extremists a new permit. Its police department deliberately would opt to stand back and allow a publicly sanctioned event to be attacked by counterdemonstrators, inviting the state police, mustered nearby, to intervene and declare an unlawful assembly.

In the most neglected journalistic coup of all time, an article days before in the Atlantic provided readers a surprising preview of what to expect in Charlottesville, all the more borne out by last week’s federal disclosures. Left- and right-wing violent activists, writer Peter Beinart explained, had become the “unlikeliest allies” in manufacturing such episodes for media consumption.

“The extremist show is just starting,” I wrote at the time, as perhaps the only journalist in America not instantly to memory-hole Mr. Beinart’s instructive insight.

A young woman would be killed in the second Charlottesville riot. In discursive remarks, President Trump would note that outsiders were exploiting a local debate about a Robert E. Lee statue that featured “very fine people” on both sides, Mr. Trump adding, “I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis or the white nationalists, because they should be condemned totally.”

If you later wondered how the press could be so stupid, so gullible, as to fall for the unsourced, implausible, made-up allegations of the Russia-collusion hoax, Charlottesville is your answer.

Lacking is even the unprovability of a negative that collusion thumpers still cite to protect their self-esteem. Mr. Trump’s plain and accurate words about Charlottesville can be found in video and transcript form on the websites of news outlets that continue to mislead their audiences about what he actually said. Claiming Mr. Trump called neo-Nazis fine people is a lie anybody from Joe Biden and Barack Obama on down can repeat with serene impunity.

An old-school Washington Post editor would later lamely wish his paper had treated a former British spy making up Russia allegations as the real story, rather than straining to legitimize claims for which it found no evidence.

That is, he wished his paper had done what an intelligent 9-year-old, in a spirit of science, possessed of curiosity, would have done when presented with a new and unexplained phenomenon.

But that’s not how today’s media operates. Readers won’t fail to notice that, in the latest assassination attempt on Saturday night, Mr. Trump’s assailant offered a sheaf of rationalizations of a predictable kind. They were exactly the characterizations (traitor, rapist, pedophile) that major outlets indulge on air and in their pages because, gee, insisting to their audiences that these characterizations are unsupported by evidence wouldn’t be good for ratings or clicks.

Ad nauseam, I’ve written that Mr. Trump’s own defining political trait is his bottomless cynicism: Cynicism about the game of politics. Cynicism about the people who play it. A cynical determination to beat them at their own game of nonstop cynicism.

This engulfing cynicism goes a long way toward explaining a certain American public’s appetite for Mr. Trump. You might do worse than notice, in the Trumpian age, the media’s overly moist and repetitive celebration of the movie and play “Good Night, and Good Luck,” about CBS reporter Edward R. Murrow’s challenging of the lies of Joseph McCarthy in the 1950s.

Today’s media idealizes exactly what it isn’t—being too stupid, to boot, to realize how much its own lying about Mr. Trump legitimized him in the eyes of voters.

Next to the “fine people” hoax, only one thing has struck me as more completely cynical, to the point where I almost couldn’t believe what I was watching in real time. In the period 2022-24, this was Joe Biden’s deliberate, premeditated helping of Mr. Trump on the path back to the White House. Why? In Mr. Trump, the Biden campaign saw its only slender hope of sneaking its own visibly senile, unpopular incumbent to a second term.

Cynicism, of course, is the stuff of politics and will be until human nature changes. But it’s also true that an authoritative news media, defiantly standing as the guardian of the public space against provable, demonstrable lies, can be a check against it. What else might play this role is hard to see, though I guess some are holding out hope for artificial intelligence.

https://www.wsj.com/opinion/from-fin...tions-6cfe377a

[txdot-guy]

https://baptistnews.com/article/criminalizing-truth/
Criminalizing Truth
OpinionJennifer Butler | April 30, 2026

I have spent much of my life working at the intersection of faith and public life, often in rooms where people insist religion should stay out of politics.

I understand why. Faith has been used to divide, to dominate, to justify harm.

But what I am seeing now is something different and more dangerous. Faith is being weaponized to silence dissent and reshape reality itself.

The only way to respond is to reclaim it for liberation.

In their quest for absolute power, autocrats demand absolute loyalty. They achieve it by silencing dissent.

Here’s how it works.

On one front, political leaders elevate a distorted Christianity — one that advocates violence, enforces exclusion and punishes dissent. Criticism becomes betrayal. Dissent becomes a crime. It is an attempt to redefine Christianity in narrower, more exclusionary and ultimately nationalist terms.

On another front, immigration enforcement becomes a theater of fear — communities destabilized, due process eroded, neighbors turned against one another. The goal is not just enforcement. It is intimidation — an attempt to redefine America in narrower, more exclusionary, and ultimately white terms.

And now, on yet another front, the administration attempts to dismantle the very organizations that expose violent extremism.

Last week, the Justice Department indicted the Southern Poverty Law Center, alleging fraud tied to its use of informants — informants who helped disrupt violent hate groups.

For more than 50 years, the SPLC has tracked the Ku Klux Klan, exposed white nationalist networks and documented the rise of Christian nationalism. The group rose to national fame in the 1980s by financially breaking the modern Klan through strategic lawsuits on behalf of its victims. Their offices have been firebombed. Their staff threatened. Their work has saved lives.

Now, that work is being reframed as criminal. This is not new. It is a pattern.

Historian Steven J. Ross documents how, before and after World War II, civil society stepped in when the government would not. While federal agencies were slow — or unwilling — to act, groups like the ADL and the Anti-Nazi League infiltrated violent extremist networks and helped stop attacks before they happened.

In one case, an undercover operative infiltrated a fascist group known as the Columbians, who were plotting to bomb a Black Baptist convention in Savannah, Ga. She gathered hundreds of pages of evidence, leading to the group’s arrest.

This is the tradition the SPLC stands in: Ordinary people taking extraordinary risks to defend democracy when institutions fall short.

And that is precisely why they are being targeted.

Authoritarian power depends on rewriting reality — deciding who is dangerous, who is legitimate, who belongs.

“This is not just about policy. It is about control over truth itself.”

January 6 insurrectionists become heroes. Civil rights laws become “discrimination.” And those who expose violence become criminals.

This is not just about policy. It is about control over truth itself.

…

Pay attention to whose voices are being silenced and why. Support organizations that protect the vulnerable and expose violence. Stand with your neighbors when they are targeted. Tell the truth, even when it costs something. Use your faith voice to call people back to who they are.

Click the link above to see the full article.

[Precious_b]

Originally Posted by ICU 812

Wow. This gets "curiouser and curiouser" as Alice said in Through The Looking Glass.

And now down the rabbit hole: I wonder if anything like these allegations occurred prior to and during the events of Jan 20th 2020? Perhaps that was a false flag operation as well?

We will have to see how this plays out. Others here have called for a thorough and deep investigation or the current AG will get some Greyhound therapy.

I liken it to the salty reply of "Just wait."

Lets see what the new DOJ guy can do. Lord knows the last one totally ignored the oath about serving the American people and blatantly swore in to just serve the orange toad.

[rooster]

Originally Posted by lustylad

From ‘Fine People’ to Assassinations
Left-wing extremists subsidize right-wing extremists because the audience is the media.

By Holman W. Jenkins, Jr.

April 28, 2026 5:01 pm ET.....


https://www.wsj.com/opinion/from-fin...tions-6cfe377a

Dude. Please. Spare us the WSJ Psy-Op Eds. Really. You make your own points well enough. Quoting this populist crap diminishes them, for the most part.

(...even if it is Jenkins...who ain't no dummy fer sure...but never had a real job either....)

.

[rooster]

Originally Posted by lustylad

....SPLC had no business "cultivating informants" at the hate groups it was dedicated to eliminate.....

....What made the SPLC do a complete volte face and decide it was a good idea to start subsidizing those very same hate groups instead of putting them out of business?....

Well...at least you aren't gonna "pre-judge"...

(then again, there IS post #38....)

Originally Posted by txdot-guy

....Historian Steven J. Ross documents how, before and after World War II, civil society stepped in when the government would not. While federal agencies were slow — or unwilling — to act, groups like the ADL and the Anti-Nazi League infiltrated violent extremist networks and helped stop attacks before they happened....

Yeah. Most of the MAGAts here looking to justify the Trump Admin's actions against the SLPC repeat the pretense that this is something new. It is not. What the SLPC does is not at all new.

But this is certainly not the first attempt by MAGA to rewrite history.

I do give credit for the creativity here, though!

Fraud, money laundering...and my favorite...misleading donors! Donors who musta had noooooo idea that they did this kinda thing...after fifty-plus fucking years of doing it....

(Fuck me. Many of their donors probably fund them for the very reason that they KNOW that they are willing to do this kinda thing)

But please, MAGA....keep supporting this. All while we remind you that you elected these fucks because they were gonna stop this kind of "weaponization"....

.

[Salty Again]

Originally Posted by rooster

Well...at least you aren't gonna "pre-judge"...

(then again, there IS post #38....)



Yeah. Most of the MAGAts here looking to justify the Trump Admin's actions against the SLPC repeat the pretense that this is something new. It is not. What the SLPC does is not at all new.

But this is certainly not the first attempt by MAGA to rewrite history.

I do give credit for the creativity here, though!

Fraud, money laundering...and my favorite...misleading donors! Donors who musta had noooooo idea that they did this kinda thing...after fifty-plus fucking years of doing it....

(Fuck me. Many of their donors probably fund them for the very reason that they KNOW that they are willing to do this kinda thing)

But please, MAGA....keep supporting this. All while we remind you that you elected these fucks because they were gonna stop this kind of "weaponization"....

.

... So, yer answer is to just let it all go? ...

... Money Fraud all over the place - from Maine to Minnesota
to California and thus let the SPLC just continue on??

And cracking down on the Southern Poverty Law Centre
is "weaponisation"?? .... Crikey! ... THAT explains it. ...

#### Salty

[rooster]

Originally Posted by rooster

....
Fraud, money laundering...and my favorite...misleading donors! Donors who musta had noooooo idea that they did this kinda thing...after fifty-plus fucking years of doing it....

(Fuck me. Many of their donors probably fund them for the very reason that they KNOW that they are willing to do this kinda thing)

But please, MAGA....keep supporting this. All while we remind you that you elected these fucks because they were gonna stop this kind of "weaponization"....

.

Originally Posted by Salty Again

... So, yer answer is to just let it all go? ...

... Money Fraud all over the place - from Maine to Minnesota
to California and thus let the SPLC just continue on??

And cracking down on the Southern Poverty Law Centre
is "weaponisation"?? ....

You have completely twisted what I said. I am not surprised. Quite the opposite.

I did not say "let it all go." If there is fraud, let's see it. But again....I don't believe ONE FUCKING WORD that Todd Blanche says.

You have a different agenda.

You have no idea if there is "Money Fraud all over the place" and you are just repeating Blanche's sound bites to redemonstrate your MAGA fealty.

As for the "weaponization"...my statement maintaining that the corrupt Trump DOJ is again weaponizing their forces against someone that they don't like is far more likely to be correct than your assertion that they are "cracking down."

It's what these assholes do. And you rarely question it, if ever.

(I've sure never seen it)

.

[69in2it69]

Originally Posted by rooster

You have completely twisted what I said. I am not surprised. Quite the opposite.

I did not say "let it all go." If there is fraud, let's see it. But again....I don't believe ONE FUCKING WORD that Todd Blanche says.

You have a different agenda.

You have no idea if there is "Money Fraud all over the place" and you are just repeating Blanche's sound bites to redemonstrate your MAGA fealty.

As for the "weaponization"...my statement maintaining that the corrupt Trump DOJ is again weaponizing their forces against someone that they don't like is far more likely to be correct than your assertion that they are "cracking down."

It's what these assholes do. And you rarely question it, if ever.

(I've sure never seen it)

.

I've never seen him question the cult either. Not during Covid, not about everyone who took the vax dying and having to have their bodies burned in months, not about why Shitler is in the "files" more often than his partner, who just by chance happened to get a very nice upgrade to her federal funded visit to the greybar, and certainly not about a (likely) fabricated indictment that will get Todd a ticket to hangout with bambam Bondi.


Who wants to make odds on the whole thing getting thrown out when the info that he gave the grand jury is presented??

[fd-guy]

Originally Posted by Salty Again

... So, yer answer is to just let it all go? ...

... Money Fraud all over the place - from Maine to Minnesota
to California and thus let the SPLC just continue on??

And cracking down on the Southern Poverty Law Centre
is "weaponisation"?? .... Crikey! ... THAT explains it. ...

#### Salty

Avast. "Just let it go" is a nice little fantasy, but nobody said that. The point was that the indictment is thin, the prosecutors are conflicted, and even legal scholars looking at the actual charges said the case looks weak.

You still haven't engaged with any of that. It's just "fraud!" shouted a little louder each time, as if volume might eventually stumble into substance.

#### Still waiting