reSee.it - Related Video Feed

In politics, money raised is crucial. A group found suspicious donations to Democrats totaling over $200 million through ActBlue, mostly from older, liberal, lower-income individuals. Many donors seem unaware of these contributions made in their name, suggesting identity theft. Examples include a woman making 1400 donations in 7 years and another making 52,501 donations in 700 days. These irregularities raise concerns about potential election law violations and national security risks. Despite 52 complaints filed, Democrats are reluctant to investigate. The magnitude of these questionable donations far exceeds previous concerns over foreign influence, warranting a thorough investigation.

I looked into Norm Eisen's NGO, State United Democracies Center, which is full of prominent figures. This organization receives $17 million in private donations. After researching, the only thing I could find that they did with the money was produce a low-quality Muppet show. All the videos they created with these knockoff puppets have less than 200 views. It makes you wonder, with all those famous names involved, is that the best thing they could do with $17 million? The result is awful; Jim Henson would be rolling in his grave. They didn't even promote the videos with ads. So, where did the $17 million go?

The speaker claims that "Ma'am Donnie's" Robin Hood persona is fake and that he is a manufactured communist candidate. Campaign records allegedly show that $1,600,000 of the $1,700,000 donated to his campaign was funneled through a single bundler. Only 77 individual contributions, totaling $0, had no bundler attribution. His campaign then received $7,000,000 in matching funds, and Super PACs added another $1,900,000, bringing the total to $10,600,000. The speaker asserts that "this guy" wants socialism, which is communism in disguise, despite growing up in a wealthy Manhattan neighborhood with a filmmaker mother and a professor father, attending private schools, and living in a $2,000,000 apartment. "Ma'am Donnie" is quoted as critiquing capitalism and advocating for a better distribution of wealth, echoing Dr. King. Despite being a "nepo baby" who got his first job at 29, he stated that he doesn't think billionaires should exist.

ActBlue is the largest among many organizations, including EMILY's List and the DCCC, that use the same software for fundraising, which some view as a corrupt scheme. This system allows Democrats to significantly out-fundraise Republicans, not due to greater grassroots support, but allegedly through illegal fundraising practices. If you exclude questionable funds, Republicans may actually raise more. This disparity in fundraising contributes to the perception of a balanced political landscape, which some argue is misleading. There are claims of election fraud and mail-in ballot issues, suggesting the political split might be closer to 75% for Republicans and 25% for Democrats, contrary to the perceived 50/50 balance.

An undercover reporter attended a fundraiser for Anthony Brown, who ran for Congress in 2016, organized by pro-Israel advocate David Oaks. Attendees discussed how money pressures congressmen and senators, and that bundling contributions is the best way to buy influence. The current contribution limit is $2,700 per person, but bundling contributions from 50-100 people can total a quarter million dollars. Oaks described a similar event in New York with Wall Street donors focused on Iran. Donors may hand the congressman an envelope with credit cards to swipe. The group avoids disclosure requirements by collecting credit card information and turning it over directly to the candidate, instead of depositing the money into an account. This way, campaign finance reports only show individual contributions without revealing the bundling. A minimum commitment of $10,000 over two cycles is expected. Giving money to another person at the meeting so they can donate more than the $2,700 limit would be illegal campaign contribution laundering.

FEC discovered suspicious donation patterns from unemployed individuals, with large sums donated through multiple transactions to ActBlue and Democrat campaigns. Investigator Tony Saruga found 400,000 new ActBlue accounts in 30 days. Harris campaign emails requested small donations using fear tactics, including fake names in their lists. The goal appears to be creating a facade of grassroots support while potentially funneling larger sums through these transactions.

There is a lot of money pouring into Kamala Harris' campaign, with a Swiss billionaire named Hans Georg Weiss contributing $20 million through 1.6 million individual donations from 400,000 donors. Allegations of fraud are now surfacing due to the scale of these donations.

The speaker questions the organic nature of rallies for figures like AOC and Kamala Harris. They claim that 84% of devices tracked at these rallies also attended nine or more Kamala Harris rallies or Antifa, BLM, pro-Hamas, or pro-Palestinian events, with 31% attending over 20. The speaker suggests this indicates paid attendance due to the travel and time commitment involved. They believe the Democratic party is artificially inflating its popularity by paying people to attend rallies and protests, creating "rally professionals."

GPS data analysis suggests that a Bernie Sanders and AOC rally in Denver had closer to 20,000 attendees, not the claimed 34,000. Eighty-four percent of devices present at the rally also appeared at nine or more other protests, including Antifa, BLM, pro-Hamas, pro-Palestinian demonstrations, and Kamala Harris campaign stops. Over 30% attended 20 or more of these events. Data analysts claim the crowd was tied to activist networks like the Disruption Project, Invisible Democratic Socialists of America, Rise and Resist, and Troublemakers, reportedly funded by ActBlue, with some backing from USAID. The speaker alleges that this indicates astroturfing and that the movement lacks genuine support, potentially splintering the Democratic party.

Discoveries on fec.gov revealed suspicious donation patterns from supposedly unemployed individuals. Four unemployed donors made nearly $198,000 in donations through thousands of transactions. They donated to various Democrat campaigns and PACs, raising questions about the source of their funds. Investigator Tony Saruga found over 400,000 new ActBlue accounts created in 30 days, with Harris campaign emails urging small donations. Fake names were inserted into ActBlue lists, showing up in official emails, suggesting a potential scam to create a facade of grassroots support while funneling larger sums.

Speaker 1 describes the scope of funding tracked by their organization. They state they have tracked over $60,000,000 according to the latest 990 disclosures, directed to approximately 14 groups—some national, others on the ground. Examples of groups involved include the ACLU (providing legal defense and facilitating trainings for some tactics described by Senator Corin) and Democracy Forward, Take Minnesota. Take Minnesota has reportedly received over $10,000,000 from these large NGO networks, including the Neville Roysingham network, Indivisible, National Lawyers Guild, CTUL, the Council on American-Islamic Relations, Minnesota Care, Minnesota 3-5-0, Voices for Racial Justice, and others. The speaker emphasizes that the total spans at least 14 groups and more than $60,000,000 in disclosed funding. Speaker 0 asks where the money is coming from and how it flows to these groups. Speaker 1 explains that they have built a database with hundreds of thousands of rows of grants from networks such as the Soros network, Arabella Funding Network, the Neville Royce Singham Funding Network, and many others, including Tides, the Ford Foundation Network, and the Rockefeller Funding Network. These are described as massive NGOs with billions of dollars to spend on all kinds of coordinated protest or, in this case, riot activity.

Mike Benz outlines a conspiracy tied to the Transition Integrity Project (TIP) and a June 2020 war game that purportedly sought “a way to use riots, nationwide riots, and do favors to the Black Lives Matter movement so that they would owe them favors back to take to the streets against Trump if Trump won the election fair and square,” while also needing “a robust, intentional, and specific strategy to go after the networks that enabled Trump's rise to power” so they could be jailed after Trump left office. Bubba Boyd, who has written about the event since August 2020, explains that the discussion will cover the key players in TIP, the plan to subvert the 2020 election, how rigging the election and four prosecutions of Trump flow from the June 2020 conspirators’ meeting, and excerpts from a January 2020 Donald Trump speech to the World Economic Forum that allegedly signals why Trump and Trumpism had to be eliminated. The publicly named sponsors of the war game are Rosa Brooks and Niles Gilman of the Berggruen Institute in Los Angeles, described as the “globalist home of Silicon Valley’s anti-Trump billionaires,” with branches in Venice and Beijing and a China branch in direct dialogue with Xi Jinping. Michael Anton is cited as the author of a Trump national security document who criticized TIP’s war game, stating they were planning a coup against the election and publicizing the war game to normalize the idea. Brooks’s background is summarized as a lawyer for George Shullis at the Open Society Institute, then a State Department attorney for regime change, then a Pentagon policy lawyer under Obama, while teaching at Georgetown Law. The narrative asserts she advocated impeaching Trump and a potential 25th Amendment move, and even a military coup, in a 2017 Foreign Policy piece titled “three ways to get rid of president Trump before 2020,” including the sentence: “For the first time in my life, I can imagine plausible scenarios in which senior military officers might simply tell the president, no, sir. We’re not doing that.” The claim is that she “couldn’t wait to launch a coup against Trump,” a portrayal attributed to a New York Times editorial response. In June 2020, Brooks and Gilman allegedly convened TIP’s war game about the 2020 election and its possible aftermath, with over 100 participants and 76 role players drawn from former Pentagon officials, the intelligence community, Silicon Valley, Wall Street, the media, and Republican and Democratic institutions. Names publicly associated with anti-Trump activity are listed, including John Podesta, Donna Brazile, Bill Kristol, Michael Steele, Jennifer Granholm, and other unnamed figures, all described as major players in attempts to nullify the 2016 election and overthrow the government. Benz is said to detail the TIP war games and concludes that to prevent a second Trump term, Biden would need a large victory margin to overcome fraud perceptions, with the insurrectionist scenario calling for control of the military, Black Lives Matter, and other street rioters. The narrative asserts that BLM raised about 90 million in 2020 with donors like the Democracy Alliance and the Ford Foundation, and that Mark Elias led financial filings associated with the effort. The discussion further cites Defense One articles from August 2020 that reportedly called for a military coup and a subsequent open debate within the military about accepting orders, and claims that Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley “was not about to obey any order from the president.” The appendix to TIP’s report allegedly debated criminally proceeding against Trump after leaving office and wiping out his “white supremacist and extremist base,” with a quote describing the need for a strategy to challenge networks that enabled Trump’s rise and remained “imbecible to the kind of pluralist democracy the founders intended,” implying a path toward removing Trump’s influence even after his presidency. The transcript also notes contemporary references to Arctic Frost, an FBI investigation linked to 2022 midterms, and alleged targeting of Republican election operations and other figures by the FBI. Excerpts from Trump’s World Economic Forum address and a January 2020 speech are presented to illustrate a moral and strategic framing against globalism and “radical socialists.” The presentation ends by inviting audience support and promoting further engagement, including a free newsletter.

Bad day for Zorhan Mandami, the front runner to become mayor of America's largest city, exposed as a total fraud. The video claims the socialist figure is drowning in a massive dark money scandal linked to George Soros. It asserts that tax dollars may have funded a new document show, with Mandami’s grassroots campaign allegedly receiving over 40,000,000 funneled through six fake tax-exempt groups, all tracing back to Soros's Open Society network. Investigators are said to report that these groups pretended to be independent but shared the same offices, the same staff, and the same bank accounts, describing the operation as coordinated—“almost like a political Ponzi scheme hiding in plain sight.” Whistleblowers allegedly filed 11 new IRS complaints, alleging Mandami’s machine used government grants totaling 52,000,000 to fund this fake movement. The implication is that Americans are funding a socialist movement in New York. Meanwhile, Mandami is described as living lavishly: he is said to have screamed “defund the police,” yet now pays for private security, dines at luxury Manhattan restaurants, and throws multimillion-dollar weddings guarded by Ugandan military forces, while presenting himself as one of the people. The narrator characterizes him as a “champagne socialist” funded by dark money and protected by elites, allegedly lying to working-class voters. The backlash is presented as real, with a new Atlas Intel poll indicating Mandami’s once-safe lead collapsing, Cuomo surging, and Republican Curtis Silva closing in fast. The narrative expands beyond Mandami to a broader political point: more than 25% of New Yorkers supposedly say they’ll flee the city if Mandami wins, described as the biggest exodus in modern New York City history. The speaker generalizes this to a “democrat doom loop,” arguing Democrats double down on extreme woke radicals, causing voters to flee. It’s claimed that blue states are emptying while red-led states are booming, and that Democrats are collapsing under their alleged lies and corruption. The conclusion offered is that when people go to the polls, Democrats lose the election or they lose the country, suggesting a turning tide. The video ends with calls to like the video, follow for more, and share comments, promising to catch viewers on the next one.

An undercover reporter attended a fundraiser for Anthony Brown, who ran for Congress in 2016, organized by pro-Israel advocate David Oaks. Attendees discussed how bundling individual contributions of $2,700 could yield up to $250,000 for a lawmaker, effectively "buying" them. Oaks described a similar event in New York with Wall Street donors focused on Iran. Donors can give credit cards to representatives who can swipe each card for a thousand dollars. The group avoids disclosure laws by collecting credit card information and turning it over directly to the candidate, bypassing earmarking regulations. This way, campaign finance reports only show individual contributions without revealing the coordinated bundling effort. A minimum commitment of $10,000 over two cycles is expected. Giving money to another person at the meeting so they can donate more would be illegal campaign contribution laundering, as each individual is subject to the $2,700 limit.

A Free Press report reveals that the "Trump resistance" is bankrolled by wealthy individuals. The organization "Families Over Billionaires," which opposes Republican tax cuts, doesn't accept public donations and is a trade name for Arabella Advisors, a dark money network. Arabella Advisors is funded by billionaires like Bill Gates, Reid Hoffman, Pierre Omidar, and George Soros. These organizations are structured within the Arabella network, obscuring the donors' identities. Such setups raise transparency concerns. "Families Over Billionaires" is staffed by former Biden and Harris officials, including director Michael Linden, previously with Biden's Office of Management and Budget. Currently, the organization is releasing YouTube advertisements featuring paid actors expressing concerns about tax cuts. While this doesn't discredit the organization's message, it's important to know that groups calling themselves grassroots may not be.

FEC data reveals that some senior citizens across the US are listed as donating thousands of times per year, with some allegedly linked to over $200,000 in contributions. I'm James O'Keefe with OMG in Annapolis, Maryland, investigating these claims. I went to people's houses to ask them about these donations. I spoke with one man who told me to ask Donald Trump. I spoke to Cindy Noe, whose records indicate she donated over a thousand times to ActBlue in one year, totaling almost $19,000. She said she only donates $5 occasionally. Another individual was listed as making 18,000 contributions totaling $170,000, which they denied. I called Garland Riggs, who was listed as making over 31,000 contributions. He denied this. I encourage you to knock on doors and ask your neighbors if they've donated to ActBlue or Biden for President and if they know how many donations were made in their name.

Speaker 0: I want to ask about what if you've changed position on what happened in the twenty twenty election. Speaker 1: Oh, I think it was rigged. Speaker 0: You think it was rigged? Speaker 1: Yeah. I know more now than I did then. What you'd have to do is in February 2021, was a Time Magazine article that was published, it was about Mark Zuckerberg investing $500,000,000 in a get out the Democrat vote campaign. And they focused on the swing states, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Georgia, Arizona. And they focused in what they did is they basically did what I would refer to as agency capture. And they went in and they captured the, the county clerks and the secretaries of states in these states. They basically said, we have a get out the vote campaign program, and if you will implement it exactly the way that we say that you must implement it, we will give you massive amounts of money to run your elections. But if you do not run it the way that we say, then we can claw all that money back. Well, think about it. If you're a small county in Wisconsin and you get $300,000 from Mark Zuckerberg's foundation to make sure that there are drop boxes in your, in your Democrat heavy areas, that there are, that you've got a, an RV going around and hauling people into the, into the polling places to vote. When you do that, if, if you do not carry out, you take that money, you sign that contract and you do not do exactly what that foundation said, you were gonna have to use public money to pay it back. You most likely would have ended up in prison. I mean, that's just one example of the way that the election was rigged. The Mark Zuckerberg money was huge. $500,000,000 concentrated in Democrat counties for the purpose of getting out the Democrat vote. Speaker 0: How do you know it was to get the Democrat vote out? Because how does exactly do what are the mechanics of that? Of how it was You Speaker 1: I have to read the article. And what the article does is it lays it out, and the title is something along the lines of how a secret group of people were able to save the twenty twenty election, meaning how were they able to get Joe Biden elected.

Fake NGOs are often fake charities, mostly run by Democrats, though Republicans may be involved to maintain silence. Billions of dollars are given to these Democrat-run NGOs, which then go through a network of additional NGOs. This is described as a giant money laundering scheme, where the terms NGO and money laundering are almost synonymous. Arrests are needed in this regard.

James O’Keefe and OMG report on FEC data indicating some senior citizens in the U.S. have donated large volumes of money, with examples of individuals attached to as much as $217,000 in contributions across 12,000 payments over three years, sometimes under variations of names and addresses. The team says the data, drawn from FEC and state records and organized by a group called election watch in Maryland, shows many contributions processed through ActBlue and groups related to political causes. In Annapolis, Maryland, O’Keefe notes the data and asks whether these donors are victims of or participants in a money-laundering scheme, or if they actually engaged in the activity—suggesting actions such as making phone calls or door-knocking to investigate. He describes the process as easy for citizen reporters: bring a microphone and camera (even an iPhone), knock on doors, and call donors to verify. He demonstrates by showing a chart of committees earmarked to receive donations via ActBlue and questions whether the donors are being duped or complicit. During on-camera interactions, he and his team cite a donor with 3,000 contributions totaling $32,000 at a given address, asking the person if she’s aware of such activity. The individual responds that they donated occasionally and not at the stated levels. They also reference the FEC record indicating donations to ActBlue and Biden for President, and question the accuracy of the donor’s claimed totals, while the donor denies making such large-scale contributions and expresses confusion over the situation. One profile highlighted is Cindy Ngo of Annapolis, Maryland, claimed to have contributed over 1,000 times in 2022 for $18,849.77 to ActBlue, which would require daily donations, a claim the interviewee disputes. The donor states they donate occasionally, around $5 at a time, and says they do not believe such frequent contributions were made from her address. The team remarks that the pattern is inconsistent with the donor’s response, noting that the frequency implied by the data does not match the donor’s account. Another profile discussed is Garland Riggs, described as an elderly donor with 31,073 individual contributions under his address, totaling about $230,000. When contacted, Riggs denies donating to ActBlue; he suggests his wife may have donated, but says the amounts are nowhere near the figures alleged. O’Keefe explains he will email the donor the information, including the FEC records, and asks whether Riggs believes someone else might be using his name. The report outlines a method for field inquiries: identify a target by name, confirm whether donations were made in their name and how many times, then ask follow-up questions such as whether they donated 3,000 times. The team emphasizes obtaining comment before publication and notes they have dozens of other homes in Maryland and hundreds nationwide matching the profile. They announce plans to continue calling and visiting more individuals. O’Keefe closes by noting the data came from election watch in Maryland, Gibson Group, and Maryland Twenty Twenty Watch, which have submitted a lawsuit to the U.S. District Court of Maryland regarding the grievance, and invites others to participate as citizen journalists. He directs viewers to okeefmediagroup.com for information on how to pursue similar stories.

Our undercover reporter explored how funding for congressmen is secured. David Oaks, a prominent pro-Israel advocate, invited Tony to a fundraising event, then called him to discuss details. The group is described as a leading and wealthy donor network in DC; Oaks emails a list of the people the group supports and notes that “this is the biggest ad on the global group and the that’s the wealthiest in DC.” The fundraiser took place in a wealthy Washington suburb. “The feedback group, it makes a difference. It really, really does. It’s the best bang for your buck, and the networking is phenomenal. Congressmen and senators don't do anything unless you pressure them,” a participant says. Speaker 2 explains the current contribution limit: “From any person to a candidate is $2,700.” They outline how to increase influence by coordinating many donors: “if you really want to add punch to that type of buying of favors, you get 50 or 100 people together at an event like this, all chipping in $2,700 and then you bundle it all together and hand over the total amount to the lawmaker.” This can total “anywhere up to a quarter million dollars,” enabling a group with aligned demands to effectively buy access. The fundraiser was for Anthony Brown, who ran for Congress in November 2016. One speaker claims, “This is direct spending. Brown's gonna use that.” Another adds, “He's actually saying, we're buying this, these office holders. And that's the point. We're chipping in all this money so we can hand over 100,000 or 200,000 to the office holders so we can buy them.” Oaks recalls a similar New York event with Wall Street donors. A participant comments, “In New York, we're just Taliban. We don't ask a goddamn thing about the Palestinians. You know why? Because it's a tiny issue. That's why.” The process involves backroom meetings with congressmen, where donors’ goals are stated, and donors like Jeff and Calvin—worth about $250,000,000—are highlighted. One attendee describes handing the lawmaker an envelope with 20 credit cards, each usable for a thousand dollars. There is a disclosure law intended to reveal potential money laundering in events like this: funds earmarked must disclose who showed up and how much each contributed to the lawmaker. The group putting on the event has no name and is described as an ad hoc political group; it pools money for legal reasons. The group avoids earmarking law by not taking money into its own account and then handing it to the candidate; instead, it collects credit card information and turns it over directly to the candidate. Campaign finance reports would only show individual donors, with no record that they acted together as a bundling group or that they attended the event. What would be visible is that person A gave $2,700, person B gave $2,700, and so on. In New York, the arrangement is described as a $10 over two cycles minimum commitment; some donors give more. If one donor gives $5,000 and another contributes $100, totaling $5,100, they acknowledge that would be illegal due to laundering of campaign contributions; the limit applies to the individual, and laundering through others is not permitted.

Peter reveals findings related to U.S. Senator Tammy Baldwin's campaign, indicating potential criminal money laundering. Data from the FEC shows numerous identical contributions made by individuals across the country at the exact same time, suggesting the use of computer bots to funnel money into her campaign. This method, referred to as "smurfing," appears to be a new technique alongside existing methods that involve both federal and state-level contributions. Peter explains that while some contributions are visible in the FEC database, others are hidden at the state level, requiring extensive data collection for comparison. He emphasizes that these tactics have not changed and are still being used to support Baldwin's campaign, similar to methods seen in other political campaigns.

The video reveals suspicious donation patterns on fec.gov, with unemployed individuals making numerous small donations totaling tens of thousands of dollars to ActBlue and various Democrat campaigns. Investigator Tony Saruga found over 400,000 new ActBlue accounts created in 30 days, with the Harris campaign sending emails asking for $1 donations using fear tactics. Fake donors were inserted into ActBlue lists, showing the campaign's desperation for small donations to potentially facilitate a larger scam.

We were covering an article about 55,000 Democrat NGOs discovered to be contributing to campaigns, moving things around, and pushing propaganda. It was discovered through AI that to figure out where the money's coming from, you have to go through layers and layers, and it's all funneling down to one group or another. It's a giant propaganda machine, a giant regime change machine.

Anthony Kevin, known as Danks from Dankster Intel, discusses how the Iran war discussion connects to a broader foreign influence operation. He asserts that Clock Tower X LLC is registered as a foreign agent for the government of Israel and, per FARA, is supposed to disclose which Salem Media properties and influencers receive messaging and how much is paid, but it does not. He identifies Brad Parscale as the principal of Clock Tower X and says Parscale “owns and has multiple other websites” that “do AI manipulation and bias” and “geofence American churches.” He argues that foreign governments don’t need to buy politicians directly anymore; they buy the architecture of influence through media distribution networks like Salem Media, which reaches tens of millions weekly across radio, podcasts, digital properties, and television. Key claims and points: - Clock Tower X LLC is a foreign agent for the government of Israel, integrated into Salem Media and aligned properties, with Parscale as principal. The organization purportedly performs AI manipulation and bias, and geofences American churches. - Salem Media is described as the ideological distribution infrastructure for conservative and Christian conservatives in the U.S.; its network influences audiences that shape beliefs about morality, truth, and political action. - The White House family (Don Jr. and Laura Trump) hold significant stakes in Salem Media. Salem Media also owns 30% of MXM, the company behind Don Jr.’s app, implying “business marriage” between the Trump family and Salem. - The money pathway: Israel’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) has a Hasbara budget reportedly totaling about $729 million for 2026, with notable increases from prewar levels (e.g., $150M in 2025). The budget flows not as direct government-to-organization grants but through three intermediaries (including Havas Media entities in Germany and the U.S.), then into multiple American entities including Clock Tower X LLC, with the aim of delivering narrative frameworks, monthly updates, and “high impact voices, distribution nodes.” - The operation includes two main streams: Stream one channels through Clock Tower X LLC (mandated to deliver narrative messaging, monthly updates, and influence/network maps) into Salem properties and related networks; Stream two goes to Show Faith by Works LLC (with a stated aim of geofencing 303 mega-churches and Christian universities) and Bridges Partners LLC, with large budgets dedicated to shaping content and messaging that portray Israel positively and frame Palestinian perspectives as extremist. - The process is not only about paying influencers (e.g., reports of $7,000 per post) but also about sophisticated, covert influence that uses AI, data, and narrative shaping. Danks explains “generative engine optimization” to flood the internet with biased content that AI identifies as authoritative, influencing coverage and search results that shape what influencers read and repeat. - The operation’s scale is described as the most prolific influence campaign besides APAC, due to its reach across media, apps, and social platforms, plus deep psychographic profiling of Trump coalition audiences (including Gen Z targets) and continuous data feedback through comments, chats, and API access to build ever-better persuasion maps. - The legal and oversight angle: FARA requires disclosure of who’s paying whom and for what messaging, but Danks contends the documents show only general references to “Salem Media Network properties and aligned properties,” constituting a FARA violation. He notes Pam Bondi dismantled the oversight mechanisms, reducing the likelihood of federal enforcement and shifting to civil actions. - On what this means for accountability, he argues that if this were Democrats or Russia (instead of Israel), the reaction would be equally strong, and he calls attention to the ongoing concerns about foreign influence infiltrating U.S. media and political discourse. - Danks references his site, americansfortransparency.org, which hosts an interactive map and documents detailing the flow of funds, the three intermediaries, and the participating entities (Clock Tower X LLC, Show Faith by Works, Bridges Partners) with direct FAIR filings and budget details. He emphasizes the site provides a way to explore the evidence and engage with the material directly. During the discussion, the host and Danks touch on the broader implications for media integrity, election culture, and how a foreign-influence framework might embed itself into mainstream conservative media networks, arguing the infrastructure enables propagandistic content to appear as editorial guidance or “narrative messaging” from within the organization. The conversation ends with acknowledgment of the scale and sophistication of the operation, a reiteration of the website americnasfortransparency.org, and thanks to Danks for sharing his analysis.

FEC data indicates that numerous senior citizens in the US are donating thousands of times annually, with some names and addresses linked to over $200,000 in contributions. We visited some of these individuals to verify the data, suspecting a potential money laundering operation. For example, Cindy Noe of Annapolis, Maryland, purportedly donated to ActBlue over 1,000 times in 02/2022, totaling $18,849.77, which equates to approximately three donations daily. When approached, Cindy acknowledged donating to ActBlue occasionally, but denied donating $18,850 or the possibility of her address being used for such purposes.