SPLC indictment and coverage: point and counterpoint
? 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
The DOJ indictment of the SPLC is a huge deal on many levels – including the way the press is already spinning it. First there was the preemptive strike: the Atlantic hit piece on Kash Patel that was basically anonymously-sourced gossip. Now there is the coordinated approach of the MSM, which is to say oh, the SPLC was only doing the perfectly normal thing of paying informants, just like the FBI!
But you know what? The SPLC is not a government investigative agency such as the FBI, which has such powers. It’s a nonprofit, tax-exempt organization that deceived its donors and deceived the banks. Nor were the people it paid mere fringe players reporting back on activities. The SPLC’s activities involved being major and organizing players in the “white supremacist” functions it purported to be fighting.
Help create the problem and magnify it, and then raise gobs and gobs of money off it, lying all the way by creating fake companies to hide what you’re doing. Not just business as usual, although the MSM would like its readers (and/or headline-readers) to believe that.
The story has made me go back to look up certain details of the infamous Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, the one that was so very useful to the Democrats and that Biden (or his speechwriters) made the centerpiece of his 2020 campaign. I found some fascinating things like this, from the late Scott Adams in 2023:
The 2017 Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, was “an American intel op against Trump.”
Not by the government, as far as we know. But at least to a significant degree by the SPLC.
There’s also this, which means more to me now than it did back in 2017 when the rally occurred [emphasis mine]:
Prominent far-right figures in attendance included [Richard] Spencer, entertainer and internet troll Baked Alaska, lawyer Augustus Invictus, former Ku Klux Klan Imperial Wizard David Duke, Identity Evropa leader Nathan Damigo, Traditionalist Workers Party leader Matthew Heimbach … Right Side Broadcasting Network host Nick Fuentes …
Fuentes, grifter extraordinaire; I’m convinced he’s never actually been on the right, either.
Of course, even without this indictment it’s been clear that the SPLC has long been a propaganda outfit that falsely lists some groups as being on the “far” right or being “hate” groups when they’re not.
Who was it that the SPLC paid? The indictment doesn’t say exactly – that is, it doesn’t name names but just describes positions. But the indictment is well worth reading; you can find it here. I can’t cut and paste from it, but here’s my summary.
It mentions that “unbeknownst” to donors, the SPLC funded “leaders and organizers” of these groups – which doesn’t sound like the usual informants. The organization called them “field informants” but they actively promoted racist groups. One of them, for example, was part of the leadership chat group that helped organize the Unite the Right rally . “The field source made racist postings under the supervision of the SPLC and helped coordinate transportation to the event for several attendees.” One of the “informants” was the “imperial Wizard of the United Klans of America”. Quite a few other were higher-ups in these organizations, not just nonentities.
To pay these so-called informants, the SPLC created covert bank accounts under fictitious entities, and they made false statements about the accounts and the entities. The indictment lists at least eight fictitious entities such as “Fox Photography” – all with no employees. The creation of these fake companies makes it quite clear that this was not just paying informants but a coverup about paying these people and something that was never disclosed to donors, plus something the SPLC knew was wrong. Why else lie and commit bank fraud? And they defrauded donors by saying the money they raised – and there was plenty of it – would be used to dismantle such groups.
The SPLC has always made me quite uncomfortable. They radiate lies and malice.
Proud Boys warned against attending Unite the Right, saying it was a trap.
One of the organizers was the guy who founded Patriot Front.
Oh, and one of the organizers was a big Clinton supporter until sometime after Trump was POTUS.
Just read that the Woman running for MI Governor was on the Board at the time of the Unite the Right.
Yes, the hit piece on Patal is disgusting. Yes, we see all this fraud and corruption, but nothing will happen. The left will never admit to any wrong doing, and no one will go to prison. At least not until the Dems take the WH.
Patriot Front, that astroturfed group of clean cut well dressed nerds that show up in U Haul rental trucks. They looked like low level FBI agents working a side hustle (to me anyway).
The good old days of “democracy.” (Sarc)
The criminal activity is bank fraud and money laundering. The indictment is in Alabama, where a federal jury might very well convict if the evidence is there. This might be the end of the SPLC. It’s ironic, since its first activity was financially destroying the KKK.
The subject of to whom these payments were surreptitiously made is the political scandal. They could ride that out, with the help of the legacy media, but the bank fraud is another matter.
Yeah, this is a big deal. I can’t wait to see what my D acquaintances say…..if at all.
Assuming only for the sake of argument that SPLC had hired infiltrators to do nothing more than merely spy, then
“To pay these so-called informants, the SPLC created covert bank accounts under fictitious entities”
would not be in and of itself nefarious. Obviously, spies would become ineffective if they were found to be in the employ of the SPLC as opposed to an apolitical entity.
Ira:
I am pretty sure that bank fraud is bank fraud and that if the SPLC had paid anyone from a fictitious entity that would have been illegal. The FBI can do it, but not the SPLC or the like.
In addition, there’s the fraud on the donors.
Setting up fictitious companies to pay people acting merely as spies is not in and of itself evil. Spying, depending on circumstances might be. And while there may be technical bank law issues, if the spying really was merely for protection and not to further acts that donors would not like, I think there is no fraud.
I am not so sure that paying someone from a fictitious company is illegal.
The fraud would be creating a problem that would not otherwise exist in order to collect donations.
Ira, read Neo’s response again slowly. Especially the first line.
I worked for an insurance and had to take yearly training on recognizing money laundering (even though my job was in tech, not sales). Active efforts to disguise the source and movement of funds, such as routing money through shell companies, is money laundering. It doesn’t matter why you are doing it, it’s a crime in and of itself. A financial institution that facilitates or permits it is going to be in big trouble, as is the group doing it.
It seems to be the DNC talking point that paying informants is not an issue which is true as far as it goes. Lots of media organizations pay people who provide them information but I don’t think I’ve ever heard of a media organization that didn’t make those payments directly and above board.
Would anyone be surprised if under-employed firemen set fires to prove to a town how much they were needed?
Same principle is at work here. The SPLC has been working its grift for decades. But, now, the sort of political extremism it made bank from is marginal at best. So, what’s an enterprising social justice warrior to do? Make a market for the product, that’s what!
Christopher B:
Actually, it’s not so common to pay sources in “journalism.” It’s considered tainted information when you do that – although not illegal if you pay directly and not through fictitious entities. It’s tabloids that do it, for the most part.
Christopher, from what I know of the federal money laundering law, there is no federal money laundering crime if the these elements of the following statutes are not met:
18 U.S. Code § 1956
(a)
(1)Whoever, knowing that the property involved in a financial transaction represents the proceeds of some form of unlawful activity, conducts or attempts to conduct such a financial transaction which in fact involves the proceeds of specified unlawful activity—
18 U.S. Code § 1957
(a) Whoever, in any of the circumstances set forth in subsection (d), knowingly engages or attempts to engage in a monetary transactionin criminally derived property of a value greater than $10,000 and is derived from specified unlawful activity, shall be punished as provided in subsection (b).
Maybe they should just change their name? Southern Informant and Protection Center (SIPC).
Another reason Democrats loathe and despise the Trump administration is the unraveling of their network of underhanded, fraudulent, corrupt organizations (USAID, SLPC, ACT BLUE, Hospice care, Learning Centers, Daycare centers, Immigration outreach law centers and charities).
It’s about time.
I have known the SPLC is a fraud for many decades now.., Awful that I, a simple single individual, should have recognized this so long ago. Where were the savvies? Home asleep?
Learing Centers, people, Learing.
Let’s get our terms straight!
— Cicero
The SPLC is at the heart of the Democratic social left power structure, though it has rivals in the environmentalist wing. The Dems (the ones at the top or the heart of the movement, anyway) knew it was bogus, but had a vested interest in keeping it going. The GOP elites probably were barely aware of it as significant.
(I know that sounds almost inconceivable, but I always remember a day when Hannity was interviewing a RINO with a high ranking status in the Senate. Hannity asked him about the Fairness Doctrine, which was being weaponized in an attempt to silence GOP voices, and he didn’t know what Hannity was talking about. I’m pretty sure his lack of comprehension was for real, it just wasn’t on his radar. He was there to represent business interests and nothing else mattered to him.)
We knew it was bogus, but couldn’t demonstrate it. The Dems had a vested interest in keeping it going, and now they’ll fight desperately to protect it…unless and until it becomes too much of a liability. At that point, the story will likelyu just disappear off all Dem-controlled venues.
I saw this elsewhere on the Web, but could it be that the dreaded White Supremacists are so rare that they have to be financed by Democrats to be viable? And Anti-Black Hate Crimes are so rare, that most of them are Democrat fabrications?
I can envision that some of the informants or spies or investigators working for (or on behalf of) the SPLC might not want to have their payments or income directly linked to the SPLC, and would prefer a less obvious connection via a no-name company or corporation.
I don’t know that that preference makes the indirect payment path less illegal than might otherwise be the case.
Maybe not really related to this “fraud” exactly, but it is commonly understood that many products get sold under brand names, all made by the same core manufacturer. These are often branded as different grades of quality vs. price, etc. In some ways that is “fraud” in not identifying themselves directly as the source of these products or services.
R2L, again, no, it doesn’t matter why you are doing it. The act of moving funds among entities you control for the purpose of obscuring its source and destination is the definition of money laundering.
Technically, I think the SPLC case involves “anti-money laundering”, which takes clean money and disguises its destination so that it can be used “safely” for dirty purposes (such as paying people to commit crimes). As opposed to “money laundering”, which takes dirty money and disguises its origin.
But it seems that both of these things are commonly called “money laundering”.
Nothing at all this morning from CNN, Drudge, and MsNow on this. Not surprised, though to be fair, minimal coverage from right sources. I doubt my D friends are even aware.
The other point is that the SPLC is a 501(c)3 charity. They are required, annually, to file an IRS Form 990 which reports their sources of income and their spending. Lying about the uses of donated funds should be cause to revoke their non-profit status.
Might be interesting to compare the SPLC’s extensive and elaborately-planned deceit and coverup with that of Obama’s and Brennan’s, et al.’s Russiagate**; and also with the grandiose, far-reaching and impressive plan for January 6; and also for the 2020 National elections—with the latest Virginia state elections and gerrymandering referendum thrown in for “good measure”…
…and see what patterns might be waiting to be discovered(!)
** Cf. (starring Gavin Wilde):
“Ukraine whistleblower witness touted Russia collusion claims and Nina Jankowicz while at Trump DoD”—
https://justthenews.com/accountability/russia-and-ukraine-scandals/ukraine-whistleblower-witness-touted-russian-collusion
File under: Good measure for good measure…
The NYT had an email on the story linking to an article on the indictment; but in the print edition it is well buried on p. A15. Of course the article had the usual “without evidence” trope:
Today there’s another story that is tries to spin it as purely political:
@Kate:They are required, annually, to file an IRS Form 990 which reports their sources of income and their spending.
It also lists the names of the people who signed off on these decisions and can go to jail for them, or for filing misleading information.
Certainly it lists the Board members and the most highly-paid employees. The person who signed off on the 990s is at high risk, and the entire Board as well. I sign one, myself, for a small all-volunteer non-profit. We are very careful to avoid donations for things outside the scope of our IRS approval document, and we carefully document where our money goes and report it honestly.
Kate, you are right to exercise caution because the IRS seems to enjoy hammering the little guys and leave the heavyweights alone. This time may be different though; AFAIK there has yet to be a high profile attorney from a Democrat adjacent law firm like Perkins Coie step up to the plate for the SPLC.
Do you think the media will stop citing the SPLC website “official” listing of hate groups and hate crimes? Of course not. It will still be the gold standard.
If the revelations about USAID taught us anything it is that NGOs are often anything but NGOs. How much of what the SPLC did was directly funded by taxpayer dollars.
My understanding is that it was the banks themselves that alerted the FBI to the money laundering scheme. They saw that there was illegal activity going on and alerted the authorities.
If Morris Dees had declared victory over white supremacists in 1990 and shut down the SPLC, he’d be a hero. But instead he turned an initially going organization into a grift.
Had a coworker come up to me yesterday who had listened to a podcast (!) on how horrible Patel was. How he was destroying the agency. People were leaving! It’s amazing how just a few months can destroy so much!
I didn’t even know where to begin with a rebuttal, and try to keep politics out of the workplace. I said nothing, and just nodded. How do you explain that the podcast was probably based on an intentional hit job to protect leftist organizations and leftist political operatives within the FBI?
In west Los Angeles, staying silent is often necessary, and the best you can do is not reinforce.
@ Neo > “I found some fascinating things like this, from the late Scott Adams in 2023:”
Any bets on PolitiFact taking down their post, much less fact-checking themselves and apologizing?
Just like every modern black claim of lynching has been exposed as a hoax, all the so-called “white supremacists” are liberals. Lies, hoaxes and race-baiting are long-standing liberal institutions.
So, it appears the SPLC was actually paying provocateurs to hire and organize real or imagined right wing groups and then trot them out for the benefit of the media.
I guess that there were not enough FBI (or other federal enforcement agents) to put on enough credible looking right-wing shows .
Why do I think that federal agencies knew exactly what the SPLC was doing.
Just a hunch.
Anyway, none of this would have had any significance if not for the media spreading the big lie.
You really cannot hate the media too much.
They are more influential (unfortunately) than Stalin’s Pravda or Izvestia or Hitler’s Der Sturmer because of the ease in spreading the lie via TV and the internet.
remember the splc and cair were co sponsors of the so womans march (that was as recent as 2022, they helped the security services, after 2020, some like mary mccord at justice was following a parallel track, around that time, when so called antifa was well in their element,
charlottesville looked like a similar incident, back in 1979, with the Klan and communist elements, thats probably where the organizers got the idea,
hbo got a front seat* for that op with richard spencer, who
ended up endorsing Biden, aint that a kicker, spencer to the right, angela davis to the left,
they were certainly trying to rehabilitate david duke, who had worn out his welcome from Russia to Iran,
*when certain
narratives are inconvenient like Helderman and Dominion in 21, they discard them
what was the last thing, the Atlantic got thing something right, the lockdowns, the Russia hoax, the whole January 6th panoply, maybe back when Robert Kaplan wrote his regional dispatches, a dozen years ago,
@Kate
A good place to start on rebutting is to point out how this is based on anonymous sources that could not and would not testify under oath from a reporter with a proven track record of lying and inventing sources, and to ask why if these were true Trump has not moved to turf Patel out like he has multiple times before to other people. And also that even hostile, anti-Patel witnesses like Joe Kent said nothing like this about Patel for months before. Am I supposed to believe if Patel were this drunk Kent and co would not have happily jumped on it to get him?
Sorry for the delay, still working on the analysis of Kent and AIU.
Ann in L.A. on April 23, 2026 at 12:59 pm said:
Had a coworker come up to me yesterday who had listened to a podcast (!) on how horrible Patel was. How he was destroying the agency. People were leaving! It’s amazing how just a few months can destroy so much!
I didn’t even know where to begin with a rebuttal, and try to keep politics out of the workplace. I said nothing, and just nodded. How do you explain that the podcast was probably based on an intentional hit job to protect leftist organizations and leftist political operatives within the FBI?
It’s interesting how the left has evolved on this. I was curious how people across the spectrum would react as they realized Russia collusion was a coup. The left has reacted in a very tribal manner as events unfolded, and refuse to admit what their side has done and then blame the other side. Logic and facts only go so far. Tribalism is rampant. It appears to be getting worse. Frankly it has to drive tribalism on our side as well, as it becomes obvious loosing politically caries greater risks than a lost election cycle.
There are still many folks who believe that the 9-11 disaster was an inside job or that the moon landings were a hoax or that the holocaust never happened, or that Trump is a Russian asset, etc. etc.
No matter what evidence is presented or how many guilty pleas come out of this SPLC fiasco, there will be ample true believers who are immune to reality and believe that the SPLC did nothing wrong and they are just being persecuted by Trump.
Unfortunately, there is no way to stop all these useful idiots from voting.
The USA is literally one election away from a self-immolation.