reSee.it - Related Video Feed

Joshua Peterson states that there was an inner circle at Turning Point USA that was constantly working against Charlie Kirk and his interests, including a Jewish influence within Turning Point that Kirk was not fond of and wanted to get rid of. He asserts that Kirk tried creating a Doge department, and that Kirk was assassinated. Peterson further claims that Kirk was unaware of an entire branch within Turning Point dedicated to the stock market. He says this stock market branch has been receiving millions of dollars over the past four years, as evidenced by the latest tax returns, which were filed late. He notes that this branch has had no knowledge or involvement from Kirk, yet still directed funds into stock market activities. He highlights a discrepancy in the staff of that branch, stating that the staff listing shows zero employees, yet the branch has been pouring $5,000,000 into funds for employees. Peterson questions how this could make sense and characterizes the situation as money laundering, suggesting a pyramid scheme behind the scenes at Turning Point that Kirk did not know about initially. He contends that Kirk was planning to expose this hidden branch, and that this exposure is what ultimately led to Kirk's death. Peterson also addresses a question from others about his own employment, confirming, “Yes, I did” work for Turning Point USA, and he intends to tag photos in the next clip to corroborate his employment.

Speaker 0: This is not just a story about violence and chaos; this is a money story. At the Government Accountability Institute, Peter Schweitzer and I followed the money to the top of what we call the protest industrial complex, Riot Inc. We found a network of NGOs—not just the Soros/Open Society network, but also the Arabella Funding Network, the Tides Funding Network, Neville Roy Singham and his network, Foreign Cash, and other big left-wing funders, including Hans Georg Wiese of Switzerland. They’re pouring money into this ecosystem. Here are three money facts about Riot Inc. Number one: Riot Inc. has many divisions like any corporation. It doesn’t just have the Antifa boots on the ground division; it has PR divisions, marketing divisions, and a well-funded legal division to get these boots back on the ground as quickly as possible. It has investors I mentioned. Number two: We have identified dozens of radical organizations—not just decentralized Antifa groups, but dozens of radical organizations—that have received more than $100,000,000 from Riot Inc. investors. These include lawyer groups and groups that advocate for calling good honest Americans fascists, etc. Number three: More than $100,000,000 in U.S. taxpayer funding has flowed into these funding networks, including at least $4,000,000 to these very groups themselves. There was an event in Atlanta called Stop Cop City; over 60 rioters were charged with domestic terrorism. These groups received money for that from both the billionaire class and taxpayer money. Additionally, this money helps fund decentralized crowdfunding platforms that support Antifa, the John Brown Gun Club of Elm Fork (which had links to the ICE facility attack), the Socialist Rifle Association, and others. Even though some groups don’t have LLCs or EIN numbers, they can still get paid. Some funding platforms are funded by this network that we call Riot Inc. Speaker 1: Do you know the name of any of the funders? Do you know the names? Because if you do, I’d like you to give them to Cash or Pam—or Christie? Speaker 0: Absolutely. Speaker 1: Or Christie? Speaker 0: Yes, we’ll do that. Speaker 1: As soon as you can. That’s all of you. Because you probably know the names after a certain period of time, you tend to find out. But these are people that do not have good intention for the country and that’s treasonous probably. So if you could, it would be very important if you could do that, it would be great. Speaker 0: it

The speaker argues that there are fake NGOs functioning as fake charities and that arrests should be made in relation to them. The claim is that these organizations are predominantly operated by Democrats, with occasional involvement by Republicans who are supposedly kept quiet by those false charitable activities. The speaker describes this pattern as evidence of a broader “uniparty” dynamic, suggesting that both major parties are involved in a system designed to influence politics. According to the speaker, the majority of the money flows to Democrats through these NGOs. They assert that billions of dollars are given to NGOs run by Democrats, and these organizations then channel funds through a large network of additional non-governmental organizations. This network allegedly creates a “giant money laundering scheme,” to the point where the speaker states that the words NGO and money laundering are almost synonymous. Key claims highlighted include: - Existence of fake NGOs that operate as fake charities. - A call for arrests related to these fake NGOs. - Predominant involvement of Democrats in running these NGOs, with occasional Republican involvement used to quiet concerns. - A description of a uniparty dynamic, implying bipartisan collusion or alignment in this activity. - Large-scale funding (billions of dollars) flowing to NGOs run by Democrats. - A subsequent cascade through a network of additional NGOs, forming a vast money laundering scheme. - The assertion that NGO activity and money laundering are nearly interchangeable in this context. The speaker emphasizes that the overall operation constitutes a substantial financial mechanism linked to political influence, portraying the NGO network as a conduit for laundering money rather than purely charitable activity. The overall framing is that the integrity of NGOs involved in political funding is compromised by this alleged system, tying NGO activity directly to money laundering in a way that equates the two terms in the speaker’s characterization.

The transcript centers on alleged mismanagement of funds from a Fire Aid benefit concert claimed to raise over $100,000,000 for Los Angeles fire victims. The speakers assert that residents are asking where the money went and imply a lack of transparency or accountability. Key points include: - The Fire Aid initiative reportedly raised about $100,000,000 for residents, community needs, and funds intended to help with the aftermath, yet there is no clear accounting of where the money ended up. - The Fire Aid website states that all direct donations will be distributed under the advisement of the Annenberg Foundation. The IRS Form 990 lists the Annenberg Foundation as a 501(c)(3) based in Kunshakin, Pennsylvania, in a certain office building. - A red flag is raised that only 33% of the Annenberg Foundation’s annual expenses go toward actual charity programs; the remainder goes to administrative costs, including executive compensation. - The transcript highlights Cynthia Kennard (referred to as Cinny) as top leadership, earning roughly three-quarters of a million dollars plus six-figure bonuses, described as nearly seven figures for one person. - There is a reference to a photo or moment showing Cynthia Kennard with Gavin Newsom discussing issues like homelessness, described as an “if you know, you know” moment. - A comparison is drawn with Doctors Without Borders, noting that it spends almost 90% of its money on actual programs and less than 1% on administrative costs. - Local journalists’ inquiries revealed that the Fire Aid site lists only three Palisades organizations among nearly 120 grant recipients: Kahelet Israel, Chabad of Pacific Palisades, and Palisades Charter High School; none appear to be specific to Pacific Palisades. - Attempts to contact the Annenberg Foundation were described as fruitless or thwarted, with extensions that didn’t lead to returns, referrals to a mysterious man named Philip (no last name), and no subsequently found contact. - The speakers conclude that the $100,000,000 was allegedly largely consumed by administration, with about 70% directed toward the organization itself and the rest disbursed to various other nonprofits, each carrying their own administrative costs, leading to the impression that much of the money disappeared. Overall, the dialogue portrays the Fire Aid fundraising as potentially lacking transparency and accountability, with accusations that the majority of funds may have been diverted to administrative costs rather than direct charitable use, and that grant dispersals to other nonprofits were not clearly explained or traceable.

The speaker discusses a wave of firings at Turning Point USA (TPUSA), claiming that 40 employees were dismissed “just like that,” with the rumor that they were let go because Erica Kirk believes some of them are moles. The speaker references a video shared by Candace Owens showing one employee being fired and explaining she had just finished two weeks of 80–90 hour work weeks around AmFest and after Charlie Kirk’s assassination in September, describing her as a stellar employee who was shocked and confused by the abrupt termination. Two central questions are raised: (1) what direction TPUSA is now going in under Erica Kirk, and (2) why certain individuals remain employed or are promoted despite controversy. The speaker highlights several individuals: - Andrew Covet: described as “a mole” who has allegedly leaked information to Candace Owens, implying he should have been fired but was not. - Mikey McCoy: portrayed as Charlie Kirk’s best friend who allegedly failed to act appropriately during Charlie Kirk’s public assassination, including footage of him being inches away from Charlie and then calmly walking away. The speaker notes that McCoy claimed Erica Kirk was the one he contacted immediately after the incident, but Candace Owens and others pressed him to show his phone logs. It later emerges that McCoy reportedly called his wife ten minutes after the incident, not Erica, according to a phone call record and Erica supporting this account; this discrepancy is presented as a point of concern. Despite the questions raised about his conduct, McCoy remains employed. - Dan Flood: head of Charlie Kirk’s security team, who was reportedly near Charlie at the time of the shooting; the speaker argues that Flood should have been fired but was instead promoted, with Erica Kirk maintaining leadership of TPUSA’s security. The speaker notes a contrast between the firings and the continued employment or promotion of these individuals, arguing that the 40 fired employees were “stellar” and the removals appear inconsistent with who remains or advances. The video and narrative emphasize that the publicized shooting of Charlie Kirk and the reactions of those closest to him have created ongoing suspicion about leadership decisions at TPUSA, particularly under Erica Kirk. Throughout, the speaker repeatedly questions: what direction TPUSA is taking under Erica Kirk, and why figures like Mikey McCoy and Dan Flood are retained or elevated while others are dismissed. The overall tone asserts that the firings reflect an unclear strategic direction and raise doubts about internal accountability. The closing statement reiterates the uncertainty about TPUSA’s future path under Erica Kirk, implying it diverges from what Charlie Kirk had envisioned.

A deep-dive connects a pattern of alleged misbehavior by Tyler Boyer and ties it to Turning Point Action and TPUSA. The discussion references a 2015 vote of no confidence concerning Boyer’s use of GOP county funds. The claim is that Boyer was accused of misusing MCRC funds, that “MCRC funds are not a personal account to be used without discretion or discipline,” and that he displayed “ongoing unethical financial behavior,” including “misuse of funds through repeated use of the MCRC debit card without receipts,” and that he “abused MCRC funds and violated federal election law,” with “blatant dishonesty in both internal and external communications as to amounts of funds and budget,” showing “chronic duplicity and deceptiveness in word and deed.” The resolution allegedly stated Boyer had been untruthful and duplicitous in communications and violated FEC filings and Arizona election laws on multiple occasions. It called for an immediate independent audit of the EGC’s financial records and offices and demanded Boyer cease and desist using the MCRC debit card and relinquish all MCRC credit or debit cards and physical checks in his possession. The vote of no confidence was described as deadlocked, but Boyer cast the deciding vote to defeat the resolution. A former board member alleged Boyer embezzled an inflated fundraising by $50,000. Excerpts of the vote and related reporting from 2015 are cited, noting that Boyer was “unfit to lead the party.” TPUSA did not respond to public requests for comment. The narrative then portrays Boyer as “the king of shady” and accuses him of being “directly responsible for all of the corruption” in TPUSA, while claiming he conflates issues and plays the victim. It references Candace Owens calling out TPUSA and Tyler Boyer on her show, with a clip claiming Boyer lied about a police directive to remove cameras. A former video is described, in which a person recounts seeing Charlie get shot and notes the camera operator was connected to Boyer. The thread supposedly includes Candace Owens describing Boyer as “the king of shady” and asserting Turning Point USA is a Mormon organization. The material contrasts Bean-like claims of organizational misrepresentation with statements that TPUSA donors halted long-time donations after concerns about Charlie Kirk’s leadership and calls for audits of the organization and suborganizations’ finances and culture. Additional allegations are referenced about Boyer’s involvement in Maricopa County politics, including alleged embezzlement concerns and relationships with young male interns or workers. It is claimed that Boyer is connected to various power placements at Turning Point USA and that he is fluent in Russian, with a note about UVU and Soviet studies, implying ties to a broader network. The output ends with a disclaimer that “everything stated in this video is allegedly” and that “these are no facts,” followed by a reminder that “these are my opinion” and that “everybody’s always innocent until proven guilty.”

Donors give money to TP USA. TP USA loans 350,000 of that into a company Charlie owned. That company uses it to buy a premium on a jumbo life insurance policy on Charlie's life. Once he dies, TP USA recoups its loan. The leftover millions go to whoever Charlie named his private beneficiaries. The payout was somewhere around 20 to 50,000,000 upon his death. The nonprofit pays the premiums now. The family gets paid later. The nonprofit merely recoups its loan. And often, the insured doesn't pay a dime, so the donor money does. The payout only triggers when the insured passes away. In short, charity money basically becomes a death benefit jackpot for private beneficiaries. The question is who controls the structure. The policy isn't owned by TPUSA. It's owned by a shell company called GGLF twenty twenty three LLC, owned by Charlie Kirk. So the main thing is they didn't run this through TP USA's books. They tucked it away in a Wyoming shell where nobody can easily see who benefits. All this comes from TP USA's own publicly available form 990. So it's a mailbox. All of these billionaires do this. Trump does this. Epstein did this. They use a trust, and smart people actually do this to keep the government's hands off of your hard earned money. A lot of people do. Yep. And it's legal. Like I said, you just search it up. This is just their paperwork. It's filed under oath. The shell company formed in May 2023, and that became public only recently, and then Charlie was assassinated. These people are covering up the truth behind what happened on September 10. And I've heard a lot of people saying, well, I don't believe that Charlie Kirk is dead. I believe that he's secretly alive somewhere. That's what it's sounding like. And until we see how these were set up, who's profiting from this, then we won't know. And Erica Kirk can absolutely show us, but they don't seem like they wanna show us anything. It's gonna continue to happen where people are gonna speculate, well, is Charlie Kirk privately sitting on an island somewhere with 20 to 50,000,000 and we don't see the kids because they're with him? Right. People are gonna continue to say that. If these people do not become transparent and start saying the truth, then how can they fault anyone for speculating? Because what we do know is that they're lying. So, of course, we're going to do our research. We're going to look into things. We're going to investigate. We're going to come to our own relevant conclusions. And if they are right or wrong or indifferent, we won't we'll never know because these people won't just tell us the truth because they are liars and frauds, they're the profiteers of Charlie's death on September 10.

The speaker asserts that Erica Kirk is not a grieving widow but a psychopath, contending there was a plan to hijack Charlie Kirk’s organization and that Erica was part of it. They claim Erica’s actions are highly suspicious: she delivers multiple speeches and participates in hours-long interviews while on a book tour, all while supposedly grieving, and they question where Charlie and Erica’s children are given she appears to be living it up on stage with fireworks. They allege she and Charlie did multiple interviews together discussing family roles and that the mother’s role in the home was vital, yet she suddenly becomes a CEO and nonstop public figure “overnight,” contradicting prior statements about Erica’s primary role at home. The speaker calls this a test of intelligence and dismisses the possibility of genuine intent. A central sign cited is Ben Shapiro’s appearance as the opening speaker at Amfest, despite not being on Charlie’s published list of Amfest speakers. The speaker notes that Shapiro speaks after Erica and uses the platform to bash Charlie’s close friends, including Tucker Carlson and Candace Owens, accusing Shapiro of hostility and implying ulterior motives. They mention Shapiro’s last podcast with Carlson involved controversial questions about a country, and they reference Fox News and other media figures as complicit, alleging they’re paid off by that country and are “singing along.” The speaker highlights that Turning Point USA raised $100,000,000 and frames the organization as deceptive, arguing that people are being fooled and should wake up. They urge warning peers—siblings, cousins, friends—about Turning Point at colleges and high schools, suggesting people should withdraw support and avoid recruitment. The claim is made that Erica Kirk’s ex-boyfriend, Cabot Phillips, now speaks on college visits on behalf of Charlie, despite Erica claiming she had dated nobody for five years before Charlie. Photos allegedly show Erica with Cabot on dates, and Cabot is described as suddenly joining Turning Point USA’s “debate me” movement. Overall, the speaker contends that Turning Point USA has been hijacked, that Erica Kirk and Charlie Kirk are involved in a calculated scheme, and that the leadership has been replaced or compromised, including the “killing” of their CEO. They urge people to stop supporting the organization and to inform others who might be recruited by it, insisting that common sense should prevail.

The transcript asserts that the government can provide funding to a so called nonprofit with very few controls, and that there is no auditing subsequently of that nonprofit. It emphasizes that with the 1,900,000,000.0 to Stacey Abrams, those involved “give themselves extremely lavish, like, salaries, expense everything” and that the nonprofit is used to “buy jets and homes and all sorts of things” and to “live like kings and queens” within the tax paradigm. The speaker reiterates that this pattern is not isolated to a single instance but is happening at scale. It is described as not being limited to one or two cases but as something being seen “everywhere.” Key points highlighted include: - Government funding to nonprofits occurs with very few controls. - There is an absence of auditing of the recipient nonprofit after the funding is provided. - A substantial amount, specifically 1,900,000,000.0, is directed to a high-profile figure identified as Stacey Abrams. - The recipients are portrayed as granting themselves lavish salaries, paying for expenses, and purchasing luxury assets such as jets and homes. - The overall implication is that funds are used to “buy jets and homes and all sorts of things,” leading to a lifestyle described as living “like kings and queens” within the tax framework. - The speaker stresses that this phenomenon is not isolated but is happening at scale, with examples seen “everywhere.” The speaker’s framing centers on alleged governance and accountability failures in nonprofit funding, pointing to large sums of money directed to an individual and the perceived use of nonprofit resources for personal luxury. The emphasis is on the scale of the practice and the lack of oversight, suggesting systemic repetition rather than isolated incidents.

The speaker recounts a chain of rumors and revelations following Charlie’s assassination at Turning Point USA. Water cooler chatter and tip-box tips revealed that several insiders were troubled by management and behavior at the organization, and one rumor stood out: Justin Strife allegedly placed an immediate phone call to a donor prospect on the day of Charlie’s death. The caller was speculated to be connected to a donor who had “a pretty big piece of bait on the hook for Turning Point USA”—a billionaire-level investment tied to the company’s potential IPO, described as life-changing money, possibly in the billions. This donor was said to be French American, named Pierre, with the speaker later realizing the donor could be Pierre DuPont, after mentioning the DuPont family in previous coverage. Only a handful of people were said to know about this secret, implying it was highly top-secret within the donations department, to the point where some involved at Turning Point USA had no knowledge of it. The speaker pursued corroboration with multiple sources at Turning Point USA, seeking to identify which donor was so central and why an immediate call would be significant. The possibility that a donor could be so influential as to impact an IPO and be worth billions raised questions about why such an offer would be on the table and whether Charlie himself knew about it. The speaker notes that billionaires typically do not part with money in this way, especially by offering pieces of their company to non-family members, amplifying the sense that the situation was troubling and entangled in dark, secretive dealings. Additionally, the speaker mentions another line of inquiry involving Andrew Colbert, a close family friend. A contact allegedly told the speaker that Andrew claimed Charlie’s refusal of “Bebe” caused him to miss out on millions, which the speaker flags as another rumor to be investigated. The broader concern is understanding the financial and contractual framework behind these tips and whether compensation or “tips” related to donations might be influencingPR decisions. The speaker underscores the need for transparent answers about who Pierre is, whether the donor is indeed Pierre DuPont, and how an IPO-sized fortune could be on the line. The emphasis is on demanding a clear explanation of these alleged connections, the nature of the secret, and the implications for Turning Point USA. The unresolved questions are framed around Pierre, his identity, and the alleged secret that could have changed the organization’s finances and leadership dynamics.

The speaker says they “followed the money” to what they call the “protest industrial complex,” “Riot Inc.,” and identified a network of NGOs funding the ecosystem. They state the funding extends beyond the Soros/Open Society network to other funding networks, including the Arabella Funding Network, the Tides Funding Network, Neville Roy Singham and his network, and “Foreign Cash,” along with “big, left wing” funders, including non-citizens. The speaker names Mr. Hans Georg Wiese of Switzerland as an example of such funders. The speaker presents three “money facts” about Riot Inc. First, they describe Riot Inc. as having divisions similar to a corporation: not only an “Antifa boots on the ground” division, but also PR divisions, marketing divisions, and a “very well funded legal division” to “get these boots on the ground back on the streets as quickly as possible,” alongside the investors previously mentioned. Second, they claim they identified “dozens of radical organizations” that received more than $100,000,000 from Riot Inc. investors, including “lawyer groups” that advocate for calling “good honest Americans fascists.” Third, they claim that more than $100,000,000 in U.S. taxpayer funding flowed into these funding networks, including at least $4,000,000 to “these very groups themselves.” They cite an Atlanta event called “Stop Cop City,” saying more than 60 rioters were charged with domestic terrorism and that these groups received money from both “the billionaire class” and “taxpayer money” for that. The speaker also claims that this money helps fund decentralized crowdfunding platforms used by groups such as “Antifa,” the “John Brown Gun Club of Elm Fork” (linked by the speaker to an attack on an ice facility), and the “Socialist Rifle Association.” They add that groups without LLCs or EIN numbers can still be paid through these crowdfunding platforms. The speaker closes by saying they will keep “following the money” and thanks the audience for leadership.

THE DOGE report alleges that funds are siphoned from the public through NGOs and government contracts. The speaker cites two examples: "Senator Sheldon White house is under the hot seat right now because he backed the legislation that approved $14,200,000 to go to ocean conservatory." A second case concerns "Family Endeavors" in Pecos, Texas, meant for overflow of immigrant children; it has been empty since 02/2021, while "we have been paying 18,000,000 million dollars a month" to keep it open. A board member was "one of Biden's transition team members." The presenter then says, "This is my opinion only. From this point on, everything I've told you so far is facts. You can go look it up online. This is my opinion only. I call that a payoff." They conclude, "That is how they steal from you. That is today's DOGE report."

The speaker alleges that the Pritzker family is a very prominent political family with 64 NGOs. They claim that for this single NGO, many people work for no compensation as trustees, while others are paid substantial salaries—upwards of a quarter of a million dollars. Specific figures cited include a Senior VP for Policy Research earning $400,000 a year, Strategy Affairs at $330,000 a year, and a VP at $300,000 a year. The speaker asserts there are 64 NGOs funded by taxpayers, stating, “that’s all your money.” The analogy used is that influential families in government are like a thief who found the bank vault door left open, with each NGO acting as “another bag for cash” that is filled and handed off to friends, with new LLCs created as needed. The speaker claims the NGOs “achieve anything? No. Not really.” and “Do they build anything? Certainly not. No.” The overall portrayal is that the NGOs are about distributing cash among associated individuals rather than delivering tangible results.

The speaker, who claims a background with the CIA and NSA and now runs a corporate intelligence firm, discusses an investigation into TPUSA (Turning Point USA). They present that on 09/02/2025 Charlie Kirk sent an internal memo announcing Justin Streiff as Chief Operating Officer, stating Streiff would lead a “doge like” effort into TPUSA’s financials and operations, described as an internal audit without triggering red flags. Eight days later, the speaker claims Charlie Kirk was murdered, and within the week Eric Kirk was announced as CEO, with the audit and the “doge like effort” never materializing. TPUSA is identified as a 501(c)(3) with public financials, enabling the speaker to review them. The speaker positions themselves as an independent investigator who followed the money to look for fraud or red flags, noting that a key part of such an audit is examining vendors and consultants. They focus on three entities: Lion Rock Ventures, Cloverstone, and GSM Strategies. The speaker asserts that these three LLCs shared a director and an address, and that Stacy Sheridan is the common individual involved in all of them. Sheridan is described as the TPUSA senior advancement employee, earning upwards of $200,000 annually to perform the same function allegedly outsourced to these consulting firms. The speaker implies that Sheridan owned the consulting businesses. A further red flag highlighted is the formation and quick dissolution of Lion Rock Ventures (formed in 2019 and dissolved about a year and a half later) and Cloverstone (formed and dissolved while Sheridan was performing the same job for TPUSA). The nine ninety forms for these entities allegedly show directors and Sheridan’s position sign conflict of interest forms, which the speaker claims indicates a conflict of interest given Sheridan’s dual roles. The firms are said to have generated nearly $3,000,000 across four years. The speaker mentions a $350,000 payment that is frequently discussed in relation to these deals, stating that they found it in the Form 990 (9/90) filings and that they will discuss it in part two. The transcript ends with “They do” and promises a continuation with a full write-up on a Substack channel and a new podcast next week, inviting support.

The transcript describes a network of “brightest minds” across media, tech, and politics who, it says, “play dumb” about racing and engage in “covering up each other's dirty tricks.” It suggests that influential figures are linked through relationships and coordinated conduct, framing the scene as interconnected rather than separate. It names “Elon” and then references “Sam and Mac and Chew,” implying that these individuals are part of the same ecosystem. The transcript also explicitly points to “Rotary Gates and Brad Smith too,” connecting those names to a broader theme of manipulation. It states that “rigging elections is nothing new,” and characterizes election outcomes as determined by “key swing states,” described as only “a few,” while claiming that “the future of civilization” is at stake. It then lists a series of mechanisms and alleged participants, including “illegal lottery, bribes and mistakes.” The transcript includes the phrase “Super Brad Schemmel was a super bad joke,” then continues with additional names and organizations: “Antonio Gracias and Aspen Institute.” It also references “Pritzker and Epstein,” followed by “Kimball Square Roots,” “Gable Man,” “Freemason and Rotary too,” and then “Flynn and Rakeland and the MyPillow crew controlling all sides.” Further, the transcript asserts that these groups and figures work together: “That's what they do.” It mentions “Titletown Tech and Microsoft build,” “Foxconn in China buy,” and “Kirk is shot, Orest's throat explodes,” presenting these as part of the same overarching pattern described earlier. The transcript continues with a broad set of names and media figures: “Alex Jones, Rogan and Elon enjoy your smoke.” It also includes “George Webb, Ian Carroll and the Cleanup Bros.” It claims that “no one asks about the super secret CNP no more,” framing this as a change in public attention or inquiry. Finally, the transcript concludes with: “Every branch,” reinforcing the idea that multiple sectors or divisions are involved within the same system.

Rally Forge is the focal point of the discussion about Turning Point USA’s money trail. The presenter analyzes TPUSA’s September filings from the five zero one (c)(3) while noting the differences with (c)(4) and (c)(3). He states that (c)(3) funds, not (c)(4), are restricted and that the (c)(3) brings in upwards of over $84,000,000 in 2021 and later “like over 120” (million). He later discusses the (c)(3) and (c)(4) dichotomy in political spending. Rally Forge emerges as a recurring top vendor to TPUSA via the (c)(3) filings: - 2017: Rally Forge is the number one vendor to the tune of $6.30 thousand. - 2018: Rally Forge is the number one vendor for the (c)(3) at $479,000. - 2020: Rally Forge again top vendor at $531,000. Rally Forge is said to be owned by Jake Hoffman, an Arizona state senator, former communications director at Turning Point USA, who, as of four days prior, was “going to take a lot of Arizona taxpayer money towards a memorial for Charlie Kirk.” The Guardian is cited as reporting in 2018 that Rally Forge was linked to American Progress Now and faced trouble for pushing ads to split the Democratic Party to help the Green Party, a move the presenter says benefited Republicans. After the 2020 elections, Facebook shut Rally Forge’s accounts for “troll farms,” including fake accounts and misinformation aimed at steering votes. Rally Forge’s accounts were banned, including Jake Hoffman’s and his employees’, while Turning Point USA’s (c)(4) funds claimed they did not know how the money was used; the presenter notes that they could claim ignorance about its use, whereas the (c)(3) funds had disbursement linked to Rally Forge. The presenter asserts that the ads were paid for by TPUSA’s (c)(4), but the efforts were carried out by Rally Forge under their (c)(3) alignment. Rally Forge then rebranded to 110 LLC, remaining connected via a UPS mailbox and the same “resource one” address, implying continued coordination. The presenter highlights Jay Kaufman signing on 12/14/2020 as one of Arizona’s official presidential electors, a fake elector, with Tyler Boyer (then COO) signing the same documents on the same day and time, facing nine felony counts of fraud, forgery, and conspiracy. The rebranding to 110 transferred over, and these activities purportedly continued to be funded by donor money. The speaker concludes that donor money from TPUSA is being used in ways that benefit Rally Forge/110 LLC activities, implying misalignment between donors and the use of funds for the activities described. The summary emphasizes that TPUSA donors’ money is purportedly fueling these operations, and that the “kids in these schools” hosting TPUSA events may not be receiving the intended benefits.

The discussion centers on four nonprofit entities linked to Turning Point: Turning Point USA, Turning Point Action, Turning Point Endowment, and America’s Turning Point. Three are 501(c)(3) organizations, Turning Point Action is a 501(c)(4). The difference highlighted is that 501(c)(3) organizations cannot engage in political activity, while 501(c)(4) can participate in up to 50% political activity; there is also Turning Point PAC, a 100% political activity entity. The speaker rejects the idea that having multiple nonprofit companies is normal, arguing that, typically, shell entities are created for distinct activities (e.g., Turning Point Endowment for investments; Turning Point Action as a 501(c)(4)), but questions why America’s Turning Point exists as a separate entity since its descriptions are similar to Turning Point USA and notes a key difference: Charlie Kirk managed Turning Point USA, while Tyler Boyer managed America’s Turning Point. The speaker suggests America’s Turning Point was created to provide Charlie Kirk plausible deniability and to give Tyler Boyer a separate 501(c)(3) that he could control, potentially without Kirk’s knowledge. The nine ninety form is cited as indicating that Turning Point USA’s other educational programs include campus leadership programs hosted by America’s Turning Point, with grants totaling $8,600,000. The speaker questions what those students are doing that costs $8.6 million and speculates that Tyler Boyer uses these students as a pipeline for work under his control. The speaker then posits a scenario: with the 2024 Trump election approaching, Boyer may need more people for ballot harvesting and could be transferring $8.6 million from Charlie Kirk’s Turning Point USA to America’s Turning Point to hire people for illegal political activity, presenting it as nonpartisan “get out the vote” work to avoid scrutiny. The claim is made that in photos there is no visible nonpolitical activity, prompting the assertion of likely illegality. Further allegations connect to Donald Trump, suggesting the letter with Trump’s alleged handwriting is important as evidence of misappropriated funds used for Trump’s campaign and a potential cover-up in which Trump would be involved. The speaker links this to Steve Bannon’s nonprofit fraud case, noting Bannon’s executives were charged for using funds for a different purpose than donors promised, and that Bannon’s outcome involved a guilty plea rather than prison, implying a harsher outcome for Turning Point’s leadership. The named individuals accused of knowledge or involvement include Tyler Boyer, CFO Justin Olson, Andrew Colvet, Blake Neff, and Erica Kirk, with a suggestion that anyone aware of the political activity and cover-up would face prison. The speaker calls for law enforcement action and criticizes Trump for allegedly tolerating election-related fraud among his associates, concluding with anger over the situation and a perceived hypocrisy.

The transcript claims the organizers “followed the money” to what they call “Riot Inc.” and its “protest industrial complex,” stating it involves a network of NGOs funded by multiple sources, including the Soros/Open Society network, the Arabella funding network, the Tides funding network, the network of Neville Roy Singham, “Foreign Cash,” and “big left wing funders.” It also says some funders “aren’t citizens of this country,” citing Mr. Hansjorg Veiss of Switzerland. The speaker presents three “money facts” about Riot Inc. First, like any corporation, Riot Inc. is described as having many divisions beyond an “anti… boots on the ground division,” including PR, marketing, and a “very well-funded legal division” intended to get “boots on the ground” back on the streets quickly. The transcript states that Riot Inc. has “investors that I mentioned.” Second, the speaker claims “dozens of radical organizations” have received “more than one hundred million dollars” from Riot Inc. investors. These organizations are described as including “lawyer groups” and groups that advocate labeling “good, honest Americans” as “fascists.” Third, the transcript claims “more than one hundred million dollars in US taxpayer funding” flowed into these funding networks, including “at least four million dollars” to “these very groups themselves.” It cites an Atlanta event called “Stop Cop City,” saying “over sixty rioters were charged with domestic terrorism,” and claims these groups received money for that from both “the billionaire class as well as taxpayer money.” The transcript further claims the money helps fund “de-decentralized crowdfunding platforms,” naming groups and references such as “Antifa,” “the John Brown Gun Club of Elm Fork” (stated as having links to an attack on an ice facility), and “the Socialist Rifle Association.” It adds that some crowdfunding platforms are funded by the Riot Inc network, and asserts that lacking LLCs or EIN numbers “doesn’t mean they can’t get paid.” The speaker closes by stating they will “keep following the money” and thanking leadership.

This is part three of a TPUSA Financial Series deep dive focused on the $350,000 life insurance policy. The speaker, who has prior experience with the CIA and NSA and now runs a corporate intelligence firm, presents his own analysis and notes that the opinions are for entertainment purposes only. He discusses an alleged development eight days before Charlie Kirk’s murder and references Justin Strife as COO, describing an internal assessment that raised red flags and a feeling of being kept in the dark. He emphasizes that the series uses public information to piece together patterns and has published a thorough Substack write-up (link in his bio). Key points and findings: - A shell LLC named GGLFM LLC appears in May 2023, with a Charleston mailing address traced to an asset management tax law firm. The Wyoming entity is described as a shell, and it is linked to a $350,000 life insurance policy involving Charlie Kirk. - The life insurance policy is described as a split policy: the donors pay the $350,000, TPUSA covers the same amount, and if something happens to Charlie Kirk, the payout would be split between TPUSA and Charlie Kirk’s payers. - The speaker notes that a $350,000 premium for a healthy 30-year-old male would typically correspond to a $30–$50 million policy value, highlighting the size of the coverage and implying it is substantial. - The question is raised: why in May 2023? The speaker asks what happened around that time to warrant such a life insurance policy on Charlie Kirk about a year and a half before his death. - TPUSA has existed since 2012, with revenue growth milestones: $8.4 million in 2017, $84 million in 2021, and around $8.4–$8.5 billion annually afterward, with 5% of proceeds typically going to schools. The speaker uses these figures to question the policy’s timing and purpose. - The speaker reports finding that GGLFM dissolved on July 9 (date appears in the Wyoming records) because they did not pay a $60 tax bill. On December 3, 2025, two and a half months after Kirk’s death, the tax bill was paid. This is interpreted as suggesting someone pursued the insurance policy after the dissolution event. - Questions posed include whether Charlie Kirk knew about the life insurance policy, who benefited financially from Kirk’s death via the policy, which insurance company issued it, and who collected the payout. - The speaker notes prior reporting about the LLC’s status changing and the life insurance policy appearing and disappearing, but asserts his own verification of the Wyoming records. The message ends with the promise of further information in Part Four and invites readers to stay tuned for additional details.

The speaker analyzes Ilhan Omar’s official financial disclosures and advances a narrative that Est Crew LLC (referred to as Est Crew Winery), a Santa Rosa, California winery linked to Omar, is fraudulent and morally problematic. They first cite the 2023 congressional financial disclosure showing Est Crew Winery valued at $15,000, with Omar hardly earning income from it. They then cite the 2024 filing showing the same company valued at $5,000,000, claiming Omar’s income is now sufficient to pay rent and labeling the growth as “incredible” and suspect. The speaker then examines the winery’s public presence to support the claim it is real. They reference Estrero’s social media pages (Facebook and Instagram) with last posts in 2023 and no presence on X (Twitter), suggesting a lack of ongoing activity. They check the official website, which describes Est Crew as “winemakers and memory curators” with a brand portfolio led by unnamed individuals, but note there are no apparent wine sales or activities listed. They visit Google Street View of the winery location and report an empty parking lot, arguing the business is not operational or properly named. Attempts to contact the winery are described: calling the phone number on the webpage results in a busy signal after multiple tries. The speaker then asserts the winery is fake, citing a New York Post claim that Ilhan Omar’s wealth “skyrocketed” from being “one of the poorest members of Congress” to “one of the richest,” with amounts suggesting the winery is fraudulent. They state a lawsuit accusing Tim Minette, Omar’s “third husband, no relation,” of swindling investors and defrauding them, with a connection noted to Keith Ellison (Minnesota’s attorney general who “used to work for him”) and a suggestion that Ellison has not investigated Somali fraud. The speaker concludes that the winery “is not worth $5,000,000” and “doesn’t even exist,” describing the company as fraudulent and demanding investigation. They label the entire enterprise as a lie, though state that it is not a lie for Omar in terms of her financial disclosures, which allegedly list substantial income and net worth tied to this fake winery. The closing phrase refers to the claim that the winery is “the devil’s lie.”

Speaker alleges that “within forty eight hours before Charlie passed away, his top Jewish donors were pulling funding from him, demanding that Charlie take their name off of the building that they had donated to Turning Point. And then once Charlie was killed, they said, never mind, put it back on the building.” He says Charlie had “alluded to a tremendous loss of money coming in” and that “more people are going to come out with information. This is all inevitable.” The speaker notes Beebe's PR blitz: “Beebe recently was on a PR blitz despite the fact that he was fighting this ninety six thousand front war because Israel didn't do nothing,” listing podcasts and asking, “Anybody find it weird you didn't do Charlie Kirk show?” Tomey is cited: “Charlie was implied that Charlie was penning love letters to him in May. I just love you so much.” He calls a “hostile takeover” and says after Charlie's death, supporters claim “the energy is Charlie died for Israel,” which is “literally untrue, and we're not going to allow it.” Okay? It's just not true.

The speaker describes a months-long forensics and fraud examination of Turning Point USA’s (TPUSA) financials and operations, beginning after Charlie Kirk requested a “doge-like assessment” into TPUSA’s finances and right before Kirk was assassinated. The speaker says the IRS later indicated it would begin examining nonprofits for hiding fraud, abuse, or extremism and for determining transparency in control of money—prompting the speaker to offer the investigation to the IRS. The speaker explains fraud types in an organization context, stating that wire fraud involves electronic lying to obtain money (e.g., email or bank transfers) and mail fraud involves similar conduct via the US Mail or FedEx/UPS, adding that each instance of a detected fraudulent letter or email would constitute an additional count. The speaker claims TPUSA could face “a lot of counts” if found guilty. A “Substack” post is referenced as containing a source document for how numbers were derived. The speaker describes two main ways charities commit fraud: (1) spending money differently from what donors are told, and (2) “self-dealing” where charity funds are used for the benefit of insiders or related LLCs/entities, including through vendor payments. The speaker lists “big red flags,” focusing on a claimed “63 cents” outcome: an analysis based on TPUSA’s IRS Form 990s alleging that for every $100 donated, 63 cents goes back to students. The speaker asserts that fundraising events and their costs mean the “63 cents” is not “of $1.” The speaker further describes an alleged transfer of $57 million to TPUSA’s own endowment, stating that TPUSA lists charitable contributions and program expenses in a way that makes spending appear normal while it is not, according to the speaker’s analysis. Additional red flags include a $999,000 payment to “Clock Tower” (Clock Tower LLC), described as slightly below a threshold the speaker says triggers reporting scrutiny. The speaker says the entity formed in 2019 before receiving the payment, had no listed officers, no identifiable ownership, no employees, no website, and was dissolved a year and a half after receiving the funds; the speaker claims the payment was for a research project “nobody saw.” The speaker also alleges over $20 million in vendor payments to LLCs or entities tied to Turning Point, citing a pattern involving Stacey Sheridan forming LLCs, receiving funds, dissolving them, and repeating. The speaker claims many vendors had worked for Turning Point or had ties to it, and that in a 2024 990 TPUSA had 62 vendors making over $100,000 that were not reported because only the top five are reported, describing this as a red flag that could be obtained through subpoena or discovery. Finally, the speaker alleges TPUSA was not independently audited in 2024, pointing to Form 990 Schedule 12A and stating the answer is “no.” The speaker claims that for many years co-founder Bill Montgomery’s personal financial advisors served as auditors and were paid for bringing in business, and says this undermines claims of independent auditing. The speaker says they will work with Treasury and is planning additional analysis after receiving 2025 and 2026 990s.

Speaker 0 outlines concerns about Tyler Boyer, alleging shady activities behind the scenes at Turning Point with underage or of-age younger boys and money laundering operations, and notes Brian Farrance’s extensive deep dive connecting dots. Speaker 1 presents a 2015 vote of no confidence involving Boyer and alleges misuse of GOP County funds. The account claims MCRC funds were not a personal account to be used without discretion or discipline, with ongoing unethical financial behavior, including repeated use of the MCRC debit card without receipts, and abuse of MCRC funds and violation of federal election law. It asserts Boyer exhibited blatant dishonesty in internal and external communications about amounts of funds and budget, demonstrated chronic duplicity and deceptiveness, and violated FEC filing and Arizona election laws on multiple occasions. The resolution demanded an immediate independent audit of the EGC’s financial records and offices, and for Boyer to cease and desist using the MCRC debit card and relinquish all MCRC credit/debit cards or checks. The vote of no confidence was deadlocked, but Boyer cast the deciding vote to defeat the resolution. A former board member alleged Boyer embezzled an inflated fundraising by $50,000. Excerpts of the vote are cited, and a 2015 article notes Boyer “proves once again that he is unfit to lead the party.” The speaker asserts TPUSA (Turning Point USA) does not respond to requests for comment. Speaker 0 continues, quoting a thread that labels Boyer as “one of the most dishonest gaslighting grifters,” directly responsible for corruption in TPUSA, and accuses him of conflating issues while playing the victim. It cites Candace Owens calling out Boyer on her show, claiming she knew Boyer was lying when he tweeted that a man was commanded by the police to take down cameras, and urges viewers to check a clip. Speaker 2 references a video in which a participant says the video shows what Boyer was doing before cameras were taken down, including an incident with Charlie getting shot and a camera operator who was hired by Boyer. A subsequent thread alleges Candace Owens on Halloween described Boyer as “the king of shady” and says Turning Point USA is a Mormon organization rather than a Christian one. Speaker 0 adds that there is no story anywhere about Boyer involving sexual assaults, cover-ups, embezzlement, or bribery, and notes donors halted long-time TPUSA donations after the Ingram family and Family Trust demanded a governance and audit response, with others echoing concerns. It mentions harassment by Turning Point shills and references to past scandals (Halloween, COVID) and allegations including sexual assault cover-ups, embezzlement, and bribery. Speaker 1 notes that after donors halted contributions, more donors joined the concerns, and that this was followed by harassment of TPUSA and spread of propaganda, with mentions of doxxing and defamation threats. The clip ends with Candace breaking down the story on the show last week. Speaker 2 concludes by recounting further alleged details about Boyer’s involvement in Maricopa County politics, including embezzlement accusations, his alleged pattern of hiring people around Charlie, and claims about Boyer’s background. It also mentions Tyler Boyer’s education—majoring in Soviet studies—and his fluency in Russian, implying ties to Ukrainian communities and challenging assumptions about Russian speakers. The transcript ends with a disclaimer that everything stated is alleged, an opinion, not facts, and that everyone is innocent until proven guilty, explicitly applying this to Tyler Boyer.

This is a deep-dive into TPUSA’s financials focusing on one of the largest vendors that appeared in the forms: Resource One, a printing company. The speaker, who previously worked for the CIA/NSA and now runs a corporate intelligence firm, frames the analysis as public and for entertainment purposes only, aiming to uncover why an audit was requested and to connect the dots in the nine-nine forms. Key findings and questions raised: - In the 2022 filing, Resource One appears as a new vendor with a charge of 2,900,000. - In the 2023 filing, Resource One becomes TPUSA’s top vendor, with expenses of just over 6,000,000 for printing services. - There is a discrepancy: TPUSA reports 6.1 million in printing expenses, yet a separate line item shows only 1.3 million spent on printing, leaving about 4.8 million unaccounted in printing expenses. The speaker asks, “Where’s the other 4,800,000?” - The Tulsa, Oklahoma address associated with Resource One appears to be a front; OpenCorporates lists the actual company as Worldwide Printing and Distribution, with Resource One doing business as Resource One. The LLCs connected to Resource One trace to Delaware, but the filing address points to Tulsa. - Worldwide Printing and Distribution is connected to James Moore, who is the CEO and the chairman of Moore DM Group. Moore DM Group is described as a $700,000,000 direct mail political conglomerate that brings in over $16,000,000 from PACs per FEC filings and has 33 subsidiary companies. Their website highlights political fundraising as one of their four major service lines. - The speaker notes that a 501(c)(3) cannot spend money on political activities, and TPUSA’s revenue reportedly comes largely from donations, making the financial links to a political fundraising conglomerate appear problematic. - The unaccounted $4.8 million is suggested to have gone to a politically affiliated entity; the speaker points to TPUSA’s 501(c)(4) or related arms and questions the clarity of the relationship. - Additional payments are noted: 1,100,000 paid to Conrad, another subsidiary of Moore, via TPUSA’s 501(c)(4) filings; 1,300,000 reported as printing expenses; 4,800,000 unaccounted for in relation to the Resource One/Worldwide Printing and Distribution connections. - The speaker mentions CREW has filed complaints about these issues and states that they have not been able to connect all the dots conclusively, but believes something noteworthy has been found. - The speaker reiterates that all claims are presented as alleged for entertainment purposes, and notes the White House’s stance on audits as a broader, related context. - Teases Part Three with more to come. Throughout, the speaker emphasizes tracing the money, the murky relationship between Resource One/Worldwide Printing and Distribution, Moore DM Group, and TPUSA’s fundraising-related expenditures, while highlighting discrepancies in reported printing expenses and the potential political nature of the funding. The segment concludes with a promise of further discoveries in Part Three.