Indictment of Southern Policy Law Center

[Anonymous]

As a former AUSA myself, it’s so goofy to act like knowing a retired AUSA gives you some special insight into the situation. Those are the most mundane, unhelpful insights I can imagine. Did he also tell you that water is wet?

People on this thread have been saying there was no evidence. I have no special insight except for what an expert has told me. Someone who likely has far more experience than you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wake up, people.

This is part of the Administration’s plan to discredit and dissolve nonprofits.

They are distorting the facts for soundbites to shock people.

Anyone with half a brain realizes their tactics were aimed at infiltrating and disrupting hate groups…which they succeeding at. They obviously don’t—and weren’t—supporting hate groups.

This is so ridiculous. When will this madness end?

If they polled donors, they would undoubtedly support the tactics to disrupt hate groups. Duh.

DOJ should be ashamed.

Congress needs to step up.

This!

No, the nonprofits are discrediting themselves. Giving money to the KKK is not a charitable activity, and SPLC lied to its donors about its purposes. This is simple. You ignore the lying to the donors part.

Meanwhile in reality, 501(c)(3) nonprofits can and do pay informants. There is no blanket prohibition. IRS rules explicitly allow 501(c)(3) organizations to pay "informers" or tipsters for information on criminal activity when it supports their charitable mission (e.g., alleviating burdens on government by fighting crime or extremism).

Sorry, forgot the source: the federal tax code. 1.501(c)(3)-1(d)(2)

I don't see where the word "informer" is used or there is any language that would explicitly permit that activity. Can you show me what I'm missing?

You do know that money laundering is a crime? And, if you are paying "informants" to agitate and pay for transportation, that is a problem.

My retired AUSA source said that from reading the indictment that they likely have documentation and witnesses. He thinks it is likely someone from within the organization. He also said this will be a long time before trial. He said that there must be lots of "F" people from the numbers.

They better have documentation and witnesses showing that the SPLC lied to donors because it’s definitely not in the indictment.

[Anonymous]

This case will get thrown out. It's laughable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

As a former AUSA myself, it’s so goofy to act like knowing a retired AUSA gives you some special insight into the situation. Those are the most mundane, unhelpful insights I can imagine. Did he also tell you that water is wet?

People on this thread have been saying there was no evidence. I have no special insight except for what an expert has told me. Someone who likely has far more experience than you.

Uh huh.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SPLC is irrelevant

When was the last time they did any good for the US?

The SPLC cooperates with, and delivers training to, law enforcement agencies, focusing "on the history, background, leaders, and activities of far-right extremists in the United States". The FBI has partnered with the SPLC "to establish rapport, share information, address concerns, and cooperate in solving problems."

MAGA sez Back the Blue! Thin Blue Line! We Love Law-n-Order!

They won’t after this; they have been exposed.

They will once this corrupt and crooked Nazi-loving administration is gone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's sick and disgusting that sleazy dishonest MAGAs are now trying to peddle a narrative that right wing extremism doesn't exist and is purely a fabrication of SPLC. They are trying to destroy the people trying to expose extremism rather than having DOJ do its job to investigate. SPLC is investigating extremism because DOJ has and continues to fail us. This dishonest spin is dangerous for America.

This. And it's disgusting that Trump's crooked DoJ is siding with the neo-nazis and neoconfederates and white nationalists and other scumbag groups to try and destroy SPLC.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

So there were fine people on both sides.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SPLC is irrelevant

When was the last time they did any good for the US?

The SPLC cooperates with, and delivers training to, law enforcement agencies, focusing "on the history, background, leaders, and activities of far-right extremists in the United States". The FBI has partnered with the SPLC "to establish rapport, share information, address concerns, and cooperate in solving problems."

MAGA sez Back the Blue! Thin Blue Line! We Love Law-n-Order!

I know they did train law enforcement. I posted earlier that soon after taking his post, Kash Patel announced that the FBI would no longer collaborate with the SPLC or the ADL. This indictment was one and a half years in the making. Patel needs to show the appearance of competency right now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The FBI pays confidential informers in the KKK and other terrorists groups.

The overt corruption of the GOP is so crass that it boggles the mind. Nixon was a choir boy compared to this administration and the Republicans in Congress whom over and protect them.

This is such a ridiculous comparison and makes you look like you are excusing the inexcusable. The people who keep comparing an unregulated non-profit to governmental agencies that are subject to FOIA and other laws are just making the case for the indictment, not helping their cause.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The FBI pays confidential informers in the KKK and other terrorists groups.

The overt corruption of the GOP is so crass that it boggles the mind. Nixon was a choir boy compared to this administration and the Republicans in Congress whom over and protect them.

This is such a ridiculous comparison and makes you look like you are excusing the inexcusable. The people who keep comparing an unregulated non-profit to governmental agencies that are subject to FOIA and other laws are just making the case for the indictment, not helping their cause.

There is no "case" for this sham indictment.

[Anonymous]

And now the SPLC has been made into the bogeyman for everything bad that has happened to Trump and Republicans in the last decade. Great work everyone.

[Anonymous]

It’s almost surreal how the media and Democrats are whitewashing the allegations against the SPLC, casting them as the good guys who just happened to pay informants. Here’s a quick sample of what’s actually in the indictment:

• “active promotion of racist groups”
• “made racist postings under the supervision of the SPLC”
• “coordinate transportation to the event for several attendees”
• “directly paying leaders” (because nothing says “informant” like paying the guy in charge)
• “high-level SPLC employee who had knowledge the documents had been stolen”
• “donated funds would be used in the commission of state and federal crimes”
• “SPLC opened bank accounts connected to a series of fictitious entities”

All of that will have to be proven in court, but these are nonetheless extremely serious allegations. The indictment describes a sprawling scheme involving money laundering through fictitious front companies, multi-million dollar fraud against donors, conspiracy, the commissioning of burglary and theft, as well as tax and 501(c)(3) violations tied to funding the activities which the SPLC publicly claims to oppose.

[Anonymous]

This might have flied thirty years ago, but now you have to state your business when opening an account. Someone filed fraudulent documents with banks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

It’s almost surreal how the media and Democrats are whitewashing the allegations against the SPLC, casting them as the good guys who just happened to pay informants. Here’s a quick sample of what’s actually in the indictment:

• “active promotion of racist groups”
• “made racist postings under the supervision of the SPLC”
• “coordinate transportation to the event for several attendees”
• “directly paying leaders” (because nothing says “informant” like paying the guy in charge)
• “high-level SPLC employee who had knowledge the documents had been stolen”
• “donated funds would be used in the commission of state and federal crimes”
• “SPLC opened bank accounts connected to a series of fictitious entities”

All of that will have to be proven in court, but these are nonetheless extremely serious allegations. The indictment describes a sprawling scheme involving money laundering through fictitious front companies, multi-million dollar fraud against donors, conspiracy, the commissioning of burglary and theft, as well as tax and 501(c)(3) violations tied to funding the activities which the SPLC publicly claims to oppose.

The GOP has been making all kinds of “serious allegations” that have failed to hold up. I see another politically motivated persecution, and so will the jury pool. Come back when there is actual evidence for any of these claims.