reSee.it - Related Video Feed

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

Amanda Wick, senior investigative counsel for the House select committee investigating the January 6th attack on the US Capitol, revealed that the Trump campaign sent millions of fundraising emails to supporters, falsely claiming voter fraud and urging them to donate to the non-existent "official election defense fund." Instead, most of the money raised went to the newly created Save America PAC, which made contributions to pro-Trump organizations and individuals, including Trump's Chief of Staff Mark Meadows and the America First Policy Institute. The committee's investigation uncovered evidence of misleading donors about where their funds would go, highlighting the deception and betrayal by the Trump campaign.

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.”

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.

Nicole Shanahan and Harmeet Dhillon discuss a broad critique of how culture, law, and politics are shaping America today, focusing on cancel culture, political power, and the fight over election integrity, free speech, and American ideals. - On cancel culture and authenticity: The conversation opens with a claim that pursuing political or cultural conformity reduces genuine individuality, with examples of how people are judged or pressured to parroting “woke” messaging. They argue that this dynamic reduces people to boxes—race, gender, or immigrant status—rather than evaluating merit or character, and they describe a climate in which disagreement is met with denunciation rather than dialogue. They stress the importance of being able to be oneself and to engage across differences without being canceled. - Personal backgrounds and the RNC moment: Nicole Shanahan describes an impression of Harmeet Dhillon speaking at the RNC, highlighting the sense of inclusion across faiths, races, and women in the party. Dhillon emphasizes that this is not about a monolith “white Christian nationalist” stereotype, recounting her own experiences from Dartmouth, where she encountered hostility to stereotypes and where merit-based evaluation (writing, argumentation) defined advancement rather than identity. - Experiences with California and liberal intolerance: Dhillon notes a pervasive intolerance in California toward dissent on topics like religious liberty and climate justice, describing a glass ceiling in big law for pro-liberty work and a culture of signaling rather than substantive engagement. Shanahan adds that moving away from the Democratic Party to independence has induced personal and professional consequences, such as colleagues asking to be removed from her website due to investor concerns, reflecting broader fears about association in liberal enclaves. - Diversity, identity, and national identity: They contrast the freedom to define oneself with the coercive “bucket” approach to identity. They argue that outside liberal coastal enclaves, people feel freer to articulate individual identities and values, while California’s increasingly prescriptive DEI training is criticized as artificial and limiting. - The state of discourse and the danger of intellectual conformity: The speakers warn of a culture where questioning past work or adopting new ideas triggers denouncement and self-censorship. They cite anecdotal experiences—loss of board members, fundraising constraints, and professional risk for those who diverge from prevailing views—claiming this suppresses valuable work in fields such as climate science, criminal justice reform, and energy policy. - Reform efforts and the political landscape: They discuss the clash between incremental, evidence-based policy and a disruptive, progressivist impulse. Shanahan describes attempts to fix infrastructure of the criminal justice system through technology and data (e.g., Recidiviz) that were undermined by political dynamics. They emphasize the importance of practical, measured reform and cross-partisan cooperation, the need to focus on American integrity and governance, and the risks of pursuing “disruption” as an end in itself. - Election integrity and lawfare: A central theme is concern about how elections are conducted and contested. Dhillon outlines a view of targeted irregularities in swing counties and cites concerns about ballot counting, observation, and legal rulings. She argues that left-wing funders have built a sophisticated, twenty-year, lawfare apparatus, using nonprofits and strategic lawsuits to influence outcomes, notably pointing to the Georgia ballot-transfer activities funded by Mark Zuckerberg and his wife. She asserts that there is a broader pattern of using C3s and C4s to push political objectives while leveraging the law to contest elections. - The role of money and influence: They discuss the influence of wealthy donors, political consultants, and media in shaping party dynamics, suggesting Republicans should invest more in district attorney races, state-level prosecutions, and Supreme Court races to counterbalance the left’s long-running investment in the electoral apparatus and litigation strategy. They acknowledge that big donors and activist networks can coordinate to advance policy goals, sometimes at the expense of on-the-ground, local accountability. - Tech, media, and corporate power: The dialogue covers the Silicon Valley environment, James Damore’s case at Google, and the broader issue of woke corporate culture. Dhillon highlights the disproportionate power of HR in big tech and how employee activism around identity politics can influence careers and policy. Shanahan notes that Google’s founders are no longer central decision-makers, and argues for antitrust and shareholder-rights actions to challenge what they see as woke monopolies that do not serve shareholders or society. - The path forward: Both speakers advocate for courage to cross party lines, work for principled governance, and engage in issue-focused collaboration. They emphasize the need to reform infrastructure—electoral, health, educational, and economic—through competency, transparency, and bipartisan cooperation, rather than through dogmatic, identity-driven politics. They close with a mutual commitment to continuing the conversation, finding common ground where possible, and preserving the core American ideal that individuals should be free to define themselves and contribute to the country’s future.

Some voter rolls in swing states contain illegal aliens because they register their address as the processing center. Software integrating property tax records with voting files reveals voters not living at legal residences. These new illegal voters are inundating voting roles, especially in swing states. In 2022, 40,000 phantom voters were exposed in Wisconsin and removed. These are people who were dead, moved out of state, don't exist, or don't live at a legal address. Challenging the address is the most efficient way to get an illegal voter off the voting roll. Certain NGO groups, such as Catholic Charities, are helping illegal immigrants and are funded by the Republican Party. These groups don't believe in borders and feel fine registering people to vote. Dark money, evading campaign rules, tends to go to NGOs and other groups. Evidence suggests a lot of dark money is coming from Chinese-controlled groups and is trying to affect the election in favor of Kamala Harris. The Trump campaign and the RNC need to dedicate time, money, and energy to analyzing the voting file in the seven major swing states to find voters using illegal addresses and have those addresses removed.

"We barrel headlong into a permanent surveillance state in The United States." "Days before that event, Israel reportedly signed a $4,000,000 contract with a California firm called Show Faith by Works." "Now according to new reporting by investigative journalist Brian Farrance, that same company was behind what they described as the largest Christian geofencing campaign in US history." "After the memorial, even Turning Point's Andrew Colvitt openly admitted this on the Jesse Waters show that their tech partners had tracked more than 270,000 phones in and around the stadium." "Break a little bit of news on your program, Jesse. Our partners that do sort of geotagging with devices, they told us that they tracked over 277,000 devices in the vicinity of State Farm Stadium in Glendale, Arizona. 277,000." "these people consent to that." "Just so you understand, people who came to the event to mourn Charlie Kirk were digitally tagged under the label of outreach." "Reach out to these people afterwards." "And at the same time, reports suggest that Charlie had rejected an enormous financial offer connected to foreign interests, sparking internal turmoil at Turning Points USA."

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.

Michigan voter data is described as a state secret that Jocelyn Benson is safeguarding from the federal government, with the speaker claiming she told authorities they can’t have it and contrasting this with the idea of not wanting the federal government to have your social security number. The speaker then alleges that Benson “gives our voter data away” to a nonprofit, and that she has done so since taking office in 2019. The nonprofit identified is the electronic registration information center, ERIC. The claim is not that Benson gives data away to ERIC per se, but that she spends taxpayer money to provide data to ERIC. The speaker contends that on television Benson presents herself as the guardian of voters’ data, while, in reality, she uses public funds to share it. After ERIC receives the voter data, the speaker says it is sent to another nonprofit, the Center for Election Innovation and Research, or CEIR. The common thread alleged between ERIC and CEIR is a liberal operative named David Becker, who is said to have founded both organizations. The speaker asserts that in 2020, Becker’s CEIR gave Benson’s nonprofit $12,000,000 on the eve of the election. The claim continues that Benson used part of this funding to purchase Jocelyn Benson campaign ads. The speaker notes that this year, Lansing Republicans attempted to pull Michigan out of ERIC, as eight other states had already left, but the Republicans could not secure the votes to do so. The transcript suggests that Republicans facing Benson in the governor’s race should make this a campaign issue. It is presented as an easy story on the campaign trail: Jocelyn Benson’s friends obtain Michigan voter data and are paid to manage it, while Michigan taxpayers fund both sides of the lawsuit between Benson and the U.S. Department of Justice. The speaker connects the financial support from CEIR to Benson’s nonprofit with the broader political dynamic involving Benson and the DOJ.

The Third Precinct has been compromised. USAID used taxpayer money for BLM ($27 million), Soros (at least $260 million), and the WEF ($68 million). Taxpayers allegedly paid for these entities to burn down cities, destroy America, launder money to Democrats, and subsidize the WEF. USAID also funded Middle East Sesame Street ($20 million) and Ukraine ($1 billion). It is claimed that the prosecutor got fired because the money was not received. These actions are described as despicable, appalling, dangerous, and Democrat propaganda via fake news. It is considered an extremely dangerous use of taxpayer funds and a threat to democracy. This is just the tip of the iceberg.

Remember during COVID and the George Floyd protests? It seemed like money was being poured in to create outrage and destabilize the country in 2020, even though it felt artificial. It started after President Trump's inauguration with the pink hats, then transitioned into BLM and Antifa. The funding behind all of this seemed suspicious. Recently, we discovered USAID is one source. And just wait until we get to the Department of Defense and other departments! We've only scratched the surface of where this money is coming from.

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.

We followed the money to what is described as the protest industrial complex, referred to as Riot Inc., and to a network of NGOs funding it. The network includes not only 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 large left-leaning funders, with some participants not citizens of the United States. Mr. Hans Georg Wiese of Switzerland is cited as recognizing this international funding flow into the ecosystem. Three money facts are shared about Riot Inc. First, Riot Inc. operates like a corporation with multiple divisions beyond the visible “Antifa boots on the ground” unit, including PR divisions, marketing divisions, and a well-funded legal division designed to keep these boots on the ground on the streets as quickly as possible, in addition to the investors previously mentioned. Second, dozens of radical organizations have received more than $100,000,000 from Riot Inc. investors. These include lawyer groups and other organizations that advocate for portraying good, honest Americans as fascists, among other activities. Third, more than $100,000,000 in U.S. taxpayer funding has flowed into these funding networks, with at least $4,000,000 directed to the groups themselves (not only Antifa-type groups). An example cited is an Atlanta event called Stop Cop City, where over 60 rioters were charged with domestic terrorism, and these groups reportedly received money from both billionaire donors and taxpayer funds. The speaker notes that this money also supports decentralized crowdfunding platforms, which facilitate funding for groups such as Antifa, the John Brown Gun Club of Elm Fork (linked to the attack on the ice facility), and the Socialist Rifle Association. The absence of LLCs or EIN numbers for some of these groups does not prevent them from getting paid. Crowdfunding platforms are funded by the network identified as Riot Inc., enabling these groups to receive funds despite organizational formalities. The speaker concludes by thanking leadership and promising to continue following the money, emphasizing the cabinet’s leadership in this effort.

Speaker 0 frames this as “a money story” and says, at the Government Accountability Institute, they followed the money to the top of what they call the protest industrial complex, “Riot Inc.” They identified a network of NGOs beyond the Soros/Open Society network—“the Arabella funding network, the Tides funding network, Neville Roy Singham and his network, Foreign Cash”—and other “big left wing funders” like Hans Georg Wiese of Switzerland. He shares three money facts: 1) Riot Inc. “has many divisions... not just the Antifa boots on the ground division. It has PR divisions, it has marketing divisions, it has a very well funded legal division to get these boots on the ground back on the streets as quickly as possible.” 2) Dozens of radical organizations have received more than $100,000,000 from the Riot Inc. Investors, including groups that advocate for calling good honest Americans fascists. 3) 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; Stop Cop City in Atlanta; over 60 rioters charged with domestic terrorism. These groups received money from both billionaire class and taxpayer money; money funds decentralized crowdfunding platforms; Antifa, John Brown Gun Club of Elm Fork, Socialist Rifle Association; lack of LLCs or EINs doesn't mean they can't get paid. “Absolutely”—we’ll share the names of funders; “As soon as you can.” That’s all of you... “treasonous probably.”

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.

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.

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.

The MAGA movement is ascendant. Mark Zuckerberg, a major offender, is trying to infiltrate our movement. Last week, I showed how Zuckerberg funneled money to groups tied to lawsuits via a Twitter thread. The Chan Zuckerberg initiative has since altered its website, removing grants prior to 2024, conveniently erasing their actions to influence the 2020 election. Zuckerberg's Forward US, founded in 2013, along with the Chan Zuckerberg initiative, funds over a dozen organizations actively resisting President Trump through lawsuits, lobbying, protests, and more. Examples include Casa, suing over birthright citizenship; Make the Road New York, aiding illegal aliens in avoiding deportation; Vote Vets Action, opposing HECSAF confirmation; and the Center for American Progress, initiating numerous lawsuits. Even radical groups like the Black Alliance for Just Immigration, which smeared the Lake and Riley act, receive funding.

Brad Parscale, described as the chief strategy officer of Salem Media Group and previously Donald Trump’s 2020 campaign manager, is presented as central to a high‑impact, cross‑network operation tying Israeli government messaging to a large Christian conservative media ecosystem. The transcript asserts that Parscale is a registered foreign agent for Israel, with a $9,000,000 contract routed through the Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Havas Media Group. It notes that the foreign agent FARA filing was made in September, eight days after what is described as Charlie Kirk’s assassination, adding a provocative timestamp to the narrative. The core claim is that Parscale is not only the CSO of Salem Media Group but also the mastermind of a broad media reach. Salem is characterized as the largest Christian conservative media outlet/network in America, with 117 radio stations in 38 markets, and holdings including Town Hall, Red State, PJ Media, and Twitchy, plus the Salem Podcast Network, the Salem Radio Network, and the Salem News Channel. The network allegedly broadcasts through programs associated with Charlie Kirk, Dennis Prager, Laura Trump, Larry Elder, Hugh Hewitt, and others, and the speaker notes past involvement of Dinesh D’Souza. The implication is that Parscale’s role connects Salem’s operations to a wider set of conservative media voices and cross‑pollination across networks. A key timeline is presented: Parscale’s collaboration with Trump began in 2011 on basic website work for the Trump organization. In 2015, he was hired to build exploratory campaign websites, earning a $1,500 initial payment. By the end of the 2016 campaign, his firm reportedly received about $94,000,000 for digital work, including Facebook micro‑targeting and large‑scale small‑dollar fundraising. He was named campaign manager for the 2020 reelection bid, but in September 2020 he was Baker Acted in Fort Lauderdale after a SWAT response, with ten guns seized; his wife Candice reported bruises. He stepped away from the campaign and public life for four years. In January 2025, Parscale rejoined Salem Media Group, with a press release announcing his appointment as chief strategy officer, described by Salem’s CEO as a “huge win for conservative media.” Parscale’s statement referenced Salem’s Christian foundation and his renewed faith. Three months later, on April 14, Salem announced a deal involving Donald Trump Jr. and Lara Trump: Salem acquired a 30% stake in MXM News, a mobile news aggregation app co‑owned by Trump Jr. and Lara Trump, with Don Jr. and Lara Trump gaining significant ownership in Salem as part of the arrangement. Laura Trump had already joined Salem in 2024 as a podcast host, renewing an exclusive agreement. The transcript emphasizes the organizational convergence: Parscale as CSO, the Trump family’s increasing ownership involvement in Salem, and Laura Trump’s exclusive show. It also asserts that the FARA filing for Clock Tower X LLC states that Israeli government messaging would be integrated directly into Salem’s properties, funded by the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs via Havas Germany, with execution across the Charlie Kirk Show, Dennis Prager, Josh Hammer, Laura Trump, and other outlets. It is claimed that Salem Media Group itself does not appear as a disclosed entity in the filing, and that the delivery mechanism omits material relationships, implying a willful omission of foreign influence from the disclosure.

I'm definitely not buying Mark Zuckerberg's supposed MAGA conversion. After I posted a Twitter thread linking a group he donated to with organizations that are actively sabotaging Trump's agenda, Meta ran to the New York Times to smear me. Their defense was basically, "We gave money, but don't know what they did with it." Digging deeper, I found over a dozen organizations funded by Zuckerberg that are suing Trump and organizing protests against his policies. Zuckerberg hasn't publicly stated any intention to withdraw funds from these groups. He issued a letter apologizing for their impact on the 2020 election, but provided no evidence. The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative website, which previously listed thousands of grants to left-wing organizations, now only shows grants from 2024 onward, conveniently erasing the record of election interference.

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.

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.