re: Southern poverty law center indicted by grand jury. Laundered $ to white supremacy groups

quote:

---

Charlottesville would have been a non-story if it were not for the SPLC and the media coverage of it.
---

Holy fricking shite

---

Really?
The SPLC's perceived need to inject its own personally paid supremacist into the equation speaks volumes to the premise.

“Their intent is completely irrelevant and beside the point.

First of all, it’s 100% legal (though unsavory) for law enforcement agencies to fund criminal informants. Law enforcement trades cash for tips all the time. In theory, when it does happen, it includes records, receipts, is regulated by internal rules and policies, and is under LEO supervision.

But it is not legal for a private citizen or company to fund criminals. Not even as informants. You can’t cosplay as a cop and start making citizen’s arrests when somebody cuts you off in traffic. And you definitely can’t pay neo-nazis to organize violent rallies. Even if you mean well.

Second, their “good intent” is far from clear. One thing is conspicuously missing from the conversation over the SPLC’s “meant-well defense”: any evidence of prosecutions and convictions. If, over decades, the SPLC did use their informants to help shut down hate groups, then where is their track record, their belt of scalps? You would think the SPLC would have already posted that list on its website by now. You would think they’d be feeding allied reporters all the examples of all the bad guys they helped put behind bars using their informant network.

But … there’s nothing. No examples. No bad guys. No scalps. Under the law, when a reasonable person would speak in their own defense, but don’t— it can be inferred as an admission by acquiescence. It doesn’t look good. It looks like the SPLC’s hate-money never helped catch anybody.

So when you see someone claim without evidence that the SPLC was “only” infiltrating hate groups to turn the information over to the FBI or something, just ask: WHO??? Who was arrested? Who was prosecuted? Who was convicted by the SPLC’s heroic efforts?”

quote:

---

But it is not legal for a private citizen or company to fund criminals.

---

That only applies to the minor theft allegation, but not the larger indictment.

It's 100% illegal for a private citizen to pay another citizen for information on their private groups.

quote:

---

And you definitely can’t pay neo-nazis to organize violent rallies.

---

The SPLC isn't accused of doing this.

quote:

---

One thing is conspicuously missing from the conversation over the SPLC’s “meant-well defense”: any evidence of prosecutions and convictions.

---

The goal wasn't only for this, clearly, as they used the information for content, which the indictment states.

I also have no idea who you're even replying to or quoting. This sounds like a bot

quote:

---

That only applies to the minor theft allegation

---

Can you quote “minor theft” from the indictment?

Thank you

quote:

---

The dishonesty is in the intentional over-stating of these impacts.

If this informant is Richard B. Spencer or Jason Kessler, then maybe you have an argument.

---

Nah. You'd just extrapolate that the impacts of Spencer or Kessler were over-stated.

Not a bot. I am a long time listener, first time poster and submitted a link to the essay in an earlier post in this thread. I’m not making a judgement yay or nay, just posting this essay for thought. Might be a nothingburger, might not.

“ That’s sketchy enough, but the indictment really begins to grip when it describes the scores of fake bank accounts the SPLC created and used to launder money to its “informants” in the hate groups. It would go like this: the SPLC would dream up a preposterous-sounding business that didn’t actually exist. A few examples include: “Fox Photography,” the “Tech Writers Group,” the “Rare Books Warehouse,” and —I am not making this up— the “Center Investigative Agency (CIA).”

Those names! Rare Books Warehouse? Really? Was “Totally Legit Business, LLC” already taken? And … CIA? Are you kidding me? Did all the SPLC’s lawyers have a great laugh over that one? I bet they aren’t laughing now.

Anyway. Next, after brainstorming retarded names for their fake businesses, the SPLC would open a fake account at a bank, fund it, and use the money to pay “informants” and hate groups millions of dollars. We might call that a “left-wing laundromat.” The indictment calls it both “money laundering” and a “conspiracy to commit money laundering.”

Mind you, none of these businesses ever existed. No customers. No vendors. No products or services. To convince the banks to open accounts for their invisible businesses, the SPLC lied on the account applications. In writing. The DOJ now has it dead to rights.

Then —critically for the indictment— in 2021, one of the banks investigated SPLC’s accounts, discovered they were made up, closed them, and got the SPLC to agree in a letter confirming they were all fake and actually owned by the SPLC.

The DOJ has the letter.

The SPLC has lawyers. Lots of lawyers. Its lawyers, it turns out, did not bother to read the Bank Secrecy Act. The SPLC’s lawyers now need lawyers of their own.”

quote:

---

Not particularly. He was one guy who didn't appear to have any role and nothing in the indictment assess any role other than some racist posting online and giving a few rides.

---

For $270,000.

quote:

---

“ That’s sketchy enough, but the indictment really begins to grip when it describes the scores of fake bank accounts the SPLC created and used to launder money to its “informants” in the hate groups. It would go like this: the SPLC would dream up a preposterous-sounding business that didn’t actually exist. A few examples include: “Fox Photography,” the “Tech Writers Group,” the “Rare Books Warehouse,” and —I am not making this up— the “Center Investigative Agency (CIA).”

Those names! Rare Books Warehouse? Really? Was “Totally Legit Business, LLC” already taken? And … CIA? Are you kidding me? Did all the SPLC’s lawyers have a great laugh over that one? I bet they aren’t laughing now.

Anyway. Next, after brainstorming retarded names for their fake businesses, the SPLC would open a fake account at a bank, fund it, and use the money to pay “informants” and hate groups millions of dollars. We might call that a “left-wing laundromat.” The indictment calls it both “money laundering” and a “conspiracy to commit money laundering.”

Mind you, none of these businesses ever existed. No customers. No vendors. No products or services. To convince the banks to open accounts for their invisible businesses, the SPLC lied on the account applications. In writing. The DOJ now has it dead to rights.

Then —critically for the indictment— in 2021, one of the banks investigated SPLC’s accounts, discovered they were made up, closed them, and got the SPLC to agree in a letter confirming they were all fake and actually owned by the SPLC.

The DOJ has the letter.

The SPLC has lawyers. Lots of lawyers. Its lawyers, it turns out, did not bother to read the Bank Secrecy Act. The SPLC’s lawyers now need lawyers of their own.”

---

quote:

---

Not a bot.

---

There’s nothing there that says “minor theft”

Can you please quote it?

Thank you

quote:

---

There’s nothing there that says “minor theft”

---

Do you need the legal definition of theft, or something?

The informant stole 25 boxes from a racist group he was apart of.