Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of course they paid informants, how else would they get so much insider information? Right-wing extremists are notorious for informing on each other over ideological differences or plain old greed. Most people move up the ranks to grift this gullible base so why not get additional income as an informant?

Because it provides very wrong incentives to informants. If your income depends on you seeing things, you are going to see those things. This is particularly true in the shady world of informants.

I’m honestly kind of shocked at all the left-leaning people who are excusing the practice of paying informants and then going even further and using that paid information to fundraise, regardless of the accuracy of the information and regardless of the larger social impact. If Turning Point USA (say) was doing the same thing in reverse, there would be howls of fury and attempts to bring criminal charges. It is okay to say that SPLC is in the wrong here. Just because it’s an organization on your side doesn’t mean it can’t and shouldn’t be indicted.

It’s the sign the organization has lost its way entirely, and I say that as a donor.

Are you against law enforcement paying informants?

You're actually comparing the SPLC to law enforcement when the latter is trying to arrest and detain criminals ?

According to you, it’s unreliable information…therefore worse if done by law enforcement.

You seem deeply confused. Law enforcement pays informants for information, but that use is regulated by the many laws we have on policing. Furthermore, the information is then used for criminal prosecution and proceedings where the accuracy of the information matters, so informants who provide false information are both less useful to law enforcement and also subject to criminal prosecution themselves. Therefore, the motivations of the informants is going to be entirely different and the information itself will be subject to higher scrutiny.

SPLC has no level of scrutiny on the information it obtained, no legal obligations to comply with, and no restrictions on use of information obtained. Informants didn’t need to fear repercussion for providing false information, and in fact their only motivation was to continue getting paid. It’s appalling behavior from SPLC and calls into question most of their work over the past decade or so. I’m never going to donate again, and I hope this is fully prosecuted. The indictment is both detailed and very alarming.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of course they paid informants, how else would they get so much insider information? Right-wing extremists are notorious for informing on each other over ideological differences or plain old greed. Most people move up the ranks to grift this gullible base so why not get additional income as an informant?

Because it provides very wrong incentives to informants. If your income depends on you seeing things, you are going to see those things. This is particularly true in the shady world of informants.

I’m honestly kind of shocked at all the left-leaning people who are excusing the practice of paying informants and then going even further and using that paid information to fundraise, regardless of the accuracy of the information and regardless of the larger social impact. If Turning Point USA (say) was doing the same thing in reverse, there would be howls of fury and attempts to bring criminal charges. It is okay to say that SPLC is in the wrong here. Just because it’s an organization on your side doesn’t mean it can’t and shouldn’t be indicted.

It’s the sign the organization has lost its way entirely, and I say that as a donor.

Are you against law enforcement paying informants?

No, because law enforcement is subject to laws, including but not limited to FOIA, that provide accountability and limitations on what law enforcement can do with paid informants. It’s truly shocking that you are trying to conflate the two, unless you are taking the position that you are completely fine with non-governmental, third-party agencies taking on policing roles without oversight. Is that what you are advocating for?

Anonymous wrote:

Just another example of the far right’s inability to own their actions. Gotta come up with an excuse, preferably a conspiracy theory that dimwit MAGA can embrace and parrot.

Men?! Hardly! Beta boys who have shirk responsibility.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of course they paid informants, how else would they get so much insider information? Right-wing extremists are notorious for informing on each other over ideological differences or plain old greed. Most people move up the ranks to grift this gullible base so why not get additional income as an informant?

Because it provides very wrong incentives to informants. If your income depends on you seeing things, you are going to see those things. This is particularly true in the shady world of informants.

I’m honestly kind of shocked at all the left-leaning people who are excusing the practice of paying informants and then going even further and using that paid information to fundraise, regardless of the accuracy of the information and regardless of the larger social impact. If Turning Point USA (say) was doing the same thing in reverse, there would be howls of fury and attempts to bring criminal charges. It is okay to say that SPLC is in the wrong here. Just because it’s an organization on your side doesn’t mean it can’t and shouldn’t be indicted.

It’s the sign the organization has lost its way entirely, and I say that as a donor.

Are you against law enforcement paying informants?

You're actually comparing the SPLC to law enforcement when the latter is trying to arrest and detain criminals ?

According to you, it’s unreliable information…therefore worse if done by law enforcement.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of course they paid informants, how else would they get so much insider information? Right-wing extremists are notorious for informing on each other over ideological differences or plain old greed. Most people move up the ranks to grift this gullible base so why not get additional income as an informant?

Because it provides very wrong incentives to informants. If your income depends on you seeing things, you are going to see those things. This is particularly true in the shady world of informants.

I’m honestly kind of shocked at all the left-leaning people who are excusing the practice of paying informants and then going even further and using that paid information to fundraise, regardless of the accuracy of the information and regardless of the larger social impact. If Turning Point USA (say) was doing the same thing in reverse, there would be howls of fury and attempts to bring criminal charges. It is okay to say that SPLC is in the wrong here. Just because it’s an organization on your side doesn’t mean it can’t and shouldn’t be indicted.

It’s the sign the organization has lost its way entirely, and I say that as a donor.

Are you against law enforcement paying informants?

You're actually comparing the SPLC to law enforcement when the latter is trying to arrest and detain criminals ?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of course they paid informants, how else would they get so much insider information? Right-wing extremists are notorious for informing on each other over ideological differences or plain old greed. Most people move up the ranks to grift this gullible base so why not get additional income as an informant?

Because it provides very wrong incentives to informants. If your income depends on you seeing things, you are going to see those things. This is particularly true in the shady world of informants.

I’m honestly kind of shocked at all the left-leaning people who are excusing the practice of paying informants and then going even further and using that paid information to fundraise, regardless of the accuracy of the information and regardless of the larger social impact. If Turning Point USA (say) was doing the same thing in reverse, there would be howls of fury and attempts to bring criminal charges. It is okay to say that SPLC is in the wrong here. Just because it’s an organization on your side doesn’t mean it can’t and shouldn’t be indicted.

It’s the sign the organization has lost its way entirely, and I say that as a donor.

Are you against law enforcement paying informants?

One, ACLU is a NGO, not law enforcement. And two, the crimes they are accused of have nothing to do with “paying informants.” The crimes they are accused of “include several counts of wire fraud and of making false statements to a federally insured bank.”

Quite obvious.

When's the last time DOJ got a conviction on one of their political indictments?

What's theirr record of convictions obtained vs employees held in contempt of court or fired for incompetence?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of course they paid informants, how else would they get so much insider information? Right-wing extremists are notorious for informing on each other over ideological differences or plain old greed. Most people move up the ranks to grift this gullible base so why not get additional income as an informant?

Because it provides very wrong incentives to informants. If your income depends on you seeing things, you are going to see those things. This is particularly true in the shady world of informants.

I’m honestly kind of shocked at all the left-leaning people who are excusing the practice of paying informants and then going even further and using that paid information to fundraise, regardless of the accuracy of the information and regardless of the larger social impact. If Turning Point USA (say) was doing the same thing in reverse, there would be howls of fury and attempts to bring criminal charges. It is okay to say that SPLC is in the wrong here. Just because it’s an organization on your side doesn’t mean it can’t and shouldn’t be indicted.

It’s the sign the organization has lost its way entirely, and I say that as a donor.

Are you against law enforcement paying informants?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This fake crap happens all over.

My daughter was an undergraduate at UMich in 2015 and 2016 when 3 viral alleged “hate crime” incidents were committed and blamed on far-right extremism. Huge protests, multi-million giveaways, and the president of the university blamed Trump and MAGA.

Police fairly quickly discovered all 3 were hoaxes - committed by a middle aged black man, a college aged white girl, and a college aged Muslim girl on a student visa. Of course the fact they were hoaxes got 1/100th the original viral coverage received.

So you are arguing there is no far right extremism??

Yep. All fake to keep us scared, divided and conquered. Create fake boogeymen so the masses never collectively focus on the real boogeymen.

Pray tell who is the real boogeyman? The Pope?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This fake crap happens all over.

My daughter was an undergraduate at UMich in 2015 and 2016 when 3 viral alleged “hate crime” incidents were committed and blamed on far-right extremism. Huge protests, multi-million giveaways, and the president of the university blamed Trump and MAGA.

Police fairly quickly discovered all 3 were hoaxes - committed by a middle aged black man, a college aged white girl, and a college aged Muslim girl on a student visa. Of course the fact they were hoaxes got 1/100th the original viral coverage received.

So you are arguing there is no far right extremism??

Yep. All fake to keep us scared, divided and conquered. Create fake boogeymen so the masses never collectively focus on the real boogeymen.

I think the exposed Young Republican chats or TPUSA chapter chats disagree with your fake boogeyman claims.

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/10/14/private-chat-among-young-gop-club-members-00592146

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/article314988093.html

DP to add, if you want to call out real boogeymen, let's see Republican outrage over Trump's World Liberty Foundation scam, ya hypocrites.

As a three-time Trump voter, I'm outraged by his unbridled scams. However, Dems can't complain because they lied so much about him (e.g., Russiagate) that he's now bulletproof--no one will believe anything the media claims any more.

As for the indictment, even Alex Jones knew SPLC was funding this stuff years ago. It's not a secret but too many Dems have sought censorship and are now shocked by a little bit of sunlight. Guys, the call is coming from inside your house. SPLC's wire fraud deserves to be punished and it's past time for a little bit of accountability. Stuff like this is why Bondi was fired, by the way.

Wait, you still believe that Trump wasn’t compromised by Russia and that they didn’t interfere in the 2016 election?


Lmao

Trump is clearly compromised, but you're not paying attention if you think it was by Russians. You need only look at his actions during his second term to see who owns his butt. Better yet, you can see by the ways he's finally increasing his personal wealth in office through particular types of scams that he's in cahoots with the same group.

The idea there was interference in the 2016 election is so absurd you really shouldn't admit having ever believed it. It's like saying you think COVID came from a wet market. It's ok--most people can't do the basic reasoning to figure things out independently. Just realize that's who you are instead of embarrassing yourself with dated theories.

NP but the virology field actually still does believe the wet market source / animal spillover as a likely source of COVID, if you go into scholarly academic papers, regardless of the politics. Truly nobody knows and both lab vs natural spillover remain viable theories.

Anonymous wrote:

Ooh a member of a chat group. Was that person held civilly responsible by a federal grand jury for organizing and funding the rally? No.

The DOJ is publicly calling rightwing groups racist? Wowwww