Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
Posted on 04/23/2026 1:33:13 PM PDT by DFG
A number of congressional Democratic lawmakers have heaped praise on the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) despite a long history of concerns over the so-called civil rights organization’s finances.
Democrats on Capitol Hill have been quick to run to the defense of the SPLC over the last decade, even while concerns regarding the leftist group’s finances mounted, ultimately culminating in an 11-count federal indictment for wire fraud, conspiracy to commit concealment money laundering, and making false statements to a financial institution.
“Now, in other times, Democrats and Republicans alike would rely on the Southern Poverty Law Center to help us keep track of the movements of violent white supremacy in the country,” Democratic Maryland Rep. Jamie Raskin said during a hearing in December.
Raskin goes on to praise the SPLC as “a vigilant voice in civil society against radical white nationalist violence and extremism, neo-Nazism, and other forces across the political spectrum.” The Maryland Democratic congressman alleged that President Donald Trump is seeking to “undermine civil society organizations” like the SPLC, “and to reduce our ability to defend ourselves against the virus of racial violence.”
Like Raskin, Washington Democratic Rep. Pramila Jayapal defended the so-called anti-hate group last December. During a hearing, Jayapal scolded lawmakers for scrutinizing the SPLC’s finances and “using valuable committee time,” calling the action “unprecedented.”
“Based on what I’m hearing, the criticisms of the Southern Poverty Law Center seem to boil down to three things: one, that it has healthy finances and an endowment; two, that it collaborated with the Department of Justice during the Biden administration; and three, that it calls out white supremacy, including white Christian nationalism,” Jayapal said, before going on to praise the SPLC’s “important work.”
The Washington Democratic lawmaker subsequently argued that her Republican colleagues were only scrutinizing the SPLC because the group opposes the GOP’s “far-right policies and shines a spotlight on white supremacist ideology.”
Raskin and Jayapal are not alone in their praise of the SPLC. The group has received — albeit less direct — support from former President Joe Biden. SPLC staff were allowed by Biden to train and work with DOJ attorneys to combat alleged “hate crimes.” The SPLC Action Fund also endorsed Kamala Harris in 2024. Shortly after the endorsement, Harris began attacking Trump by misconstruing his comments regarding the 2017 Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia. Importantly, it appears that one of the informants and alleged agent provocateurs paid by the SPLC was involved in planning and coordinating logistics for the rally.
However, in the eternal words of either Ed Valenti or Billy Mays — depending on who you ask — “BUT WAIT, THERE’S MORE!”
While comments by both Reps. Raskin and Jayapal might seem to suggest a Democratic Party effort to run interference for the SPLC after likely catching wind of congressional and Trump administration investigations into the group, it is more exemplary of the political left’s penchant for turning a blind eye to ethical questions about the SPLC for well over two decades. In 2017, Politico Magazine ran a long feature regarding the Montgomery, Alabama-based activist group and its founder, Morris Dees. The outlet at the time stated that the SPLC has “built itself into a civil rights behemoth with a glossy headquarters and a nine-figure endowment, inviting charges that it oversells the threats posed by Klansmen and neo-Nazis to keep donations flowing in from wealthy liberals.”
Further, and more damming, fellow Democratic Party-aligned media figures, like leftist Ken Silverstein — a former Los Angeles Times investigative reporter who boasts bylines in The Nation, Mother Jones, Slate, and Salon — were raising questions about the SPLC’s shady finances over 25 years ago. In a 2000 essay for Harper’s Magazine, Silverstein details the SPLC’s relentless direct mail fundraising operation and Dees’s quasi-carnival barker act with fringe – and otherwise little-known, obscure, nor influential — neo-nazi figures like Richard Girnt Butler (who died in 2004).
“The Ku Klux Klan, the SPLC’s most lucrative nemesis, has shrunk from 4 million members in the 1920s to an estimated 2,000 today, as many as 10 percent of whom are thought to be FBI informants,” Silverstein writes, adding, “But news of a declining Klan does not make for inclining donations to Morris Dees and Co., which is why the SPLC honors nearly every nationally covered ‘hate crime’ with direct-mail alarums full of nightmarish invocations of ‘armed Klan paramilitary forces’ and ‘violent neo-Nazi extremists,’ and why Dees does legal battle almost exclusively with mediagenic villains-like Idaho’s arch-Aryan Richard Butler-eager to show off their swastikas for the news cameras.”
Silverstein added, “Today, the SPLC’s treasury bulges with $120 million, and it spends twice as much on fund-raising — $5.76 million last year — as it does on legal services for victims of civil rights abuses. The American Institute of Philanthropy gives the Center one of the worst ratings of any group it monitors, estimating that the SPLC could operate for 4.6 years without making another tax-exempt nickel from its investments or raising another tax-deductible cent from well-meaning ‘people like you.'”
It is honestly surprising that much more did not come out of Silverstein’s 2000 essay, as it — in many ways — raises some of the very questions now being examined in the federal grand jury indictment of the SPLC. Federal prosecutors contend the group wasn’t merely paying informants to take down and destroy white supremacist or neo-nazi extremist groups. Instead, the DOJ alleges the SPLC paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to key leaders in neo-nazi and KKK-aligned organizations, in effect funding the alleged violent extremist groups.
The SPLC would then, according to the indictment, fundraise from these extremist groups’ continued operations. To hide what could loosely be described as a ‘hate-group racket,’ the DOJ states that the SPLC created several fraudulent and unregistered business fronts to launder the payments it made to its so-called informants, including a former Grand Wizard of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan.
|
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
Totally team mates.
“despite”
As if they didn’t approve. Wholeheartedly.
SPLC is just another tool in assisting the communist takeover of the USA.
This story sort of came out of nowhere. But it is remarkable in the sense that it might be a result of investigation into USAID corruption. In which case, this whole general trend of new investigation and exposure might well be getting underway! Hallelujah!
Another aspect of this case and the Epstein affair is that they are acting like “tar babies”, pardon my archaic Uncle Remus reference, but if you have had contact or dealings with either Dees or Epstein, it will stick to you and cause endless problems. I heard about an old man who once said “if you trace a stink, which comes from decay, which comes from corruption, which comes from crime, you will find Democrats.
Southern Poverty Laundry Clearinghouse.
No surprise here ... the DemoNcratic Party supports anything or anyone that has a potentially evil outcome or supports an evil outcome.
Clearly true. With USAID gone, Kash may have just killed their next-favorite “charity”...
I hope we are not paying 200 dudes to be fake nazi’s.
BTW, where did the khaki army? No more marches now that adults are in charge
“This story sort of came out of nowhere”
This story has always existed. It is just a matter of who prints it and who reads it. The same is true of many stories on both the left and right.
What is the difference between SPLC and Candace Owens or Tucker Carlson designing the message to raise money, not to shed light on the truth?
The difference is wire fraud and money laundering.
But you are right Tucker and Candace are spinning a false story for the purpose of raising money and not getting at the truth.
I wonder if Epps was paid by SPLC.
I wonder if Nick Fuentes, who urged people to invade the Capitol but was never prosecuted, works for SPLC. (Somebody is funding him to destroy the right.)
Shouldn’t this be a RICO charge?
Bkmk
Some of us can remember when Dubya’s freeper fan club used SPLC material to silence any complaints about illegal immigration.
The Bush crowd smeared those who opposed to his amnesty attempt as motivated by xenophobia, nativism, and racism. And they turned to the SPLC for backup.
Birds of a feather.
Title corrected.
"$PLC is just another tool in assisting the communist takeover of the USA.
Posted on 4/23/2026, 1:55:35 PM by lgjhn23"
lgjhn23 said it right.
I was thinking the same thing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.