TALKING POINTS ISSUED: The Democrat Lie About the SPLC Indictment Has Been Formed, and Now They’re Running With It.
You’d hope in the face of such disturbing allegations, including the possibility that the SPLC paid for criminal activity to take place, that Democrats would at least keep their mouths shut while this played out. But no, they’ve quickly, in conjunction with a compliant press, formulated a lie and are running with it. Instead of admitting what the indictment (which was returned by a grand jury) actually says, they are claiming the SPLC was just innocently paying “informants.”
The Southern Poverty Law Center was indicted for paying sources to infiltrate hate groups, a tactic federal agencies have used for decades. https://t.co/flekWop4XX
— USA TODAY (@USATODAY) April 22, 2026
The DOJ uses paid informants all the time —why is it OK for them but not the SPLC? @splcenter plays a vital role in fighting hatred, yet has been unfairly targeted by Trump and House Republicans since day one.
This politicized intimidation needs to stop, now. https://t.co/8VjTgLsxU4
— Daniel Goldman (@danielsgoldman) April 21, 2026
I guess I’m going to have to explain this like I’m talking to a four-year-old, but the SPLC is not a law enforcement agency. The fact that the DOJ pays and uses informants to investigate crimes is not, in fact, relevant at all to what happened here. Yet, you’ve got Democrat Rep. Daniel Goldman (NY-10), ABC News, USA Today, the AP, and many others all running with this line that these were just payments to “informants.”
How exactly is allegedly paying someone who helped organize transportation to a neo-nazi rally just paying an “informant? What were they informing on? To who? About what? For what reason? That doesn’t even make any sense. The SPLC can’t indict anyone. They have no jurisdiction to investigate criminal activity, nor would they need “informants” to be able to say the Ku Klux Klan is bad.
Related: Jim Geraghty explores “How Your Tax-Deductible Donation Went to the Klan, Neo-Nazis, and the ‘Sadistic Souls:’”
Now, call me crazy, but I think that if you’re a member of the “Sadistic Souls Motorcycle Club,” you’re not a good person. I mean, it’s right there in the name. By the way, guess what the logo of the Sadistic Souls Motorcycle Club is? If you guessed the same SS Totenkopf that was tattooed on the chest of Democratic Senate candidate Graham Platner, you are correct! (“Are we the baddies?”)
I don’t know about you, but I would be extremely wary about ever putting any of my money or my organization’s money into the hands of anyone who was an active member of these groups.As you may have noticed, these are not small sums of money. Whoever F-9 is, he allegedly made more than a million dollars from the SPLC over nine years! While the program reportedly began in the 1980s, the indictment lists wire transfers going up to April 25, 2023.
The defense, put forth by the likes of MSNOW contributor and former federal prosecutor Joyce Vance, is that “the use of paid informants was essential to the intelligence the Center was gathering on the groups they were members of, including intelligence that was shared with the FBI.”
But how do we know that? Yes, the bureau did say on its old website that “the FBI has forged partnerships nationally and locally with many civil rights organizations to establish rapport, share information, address concerns, and cooperate in solving problems,” and it listed the SPLC as one of those organizations. But based on all available evidence, FBI didn’t ask, or hire, the SPLC to go around recruiting informants. The FBI has its own undercover agents and its own funds for recruiting informants. The SPLC decided, on its own, that paying hundreds of thousands of dollars to these members of hate groups was worth it.
Exit questions:
OK.
Well, I have questions then.
Why is the SPLC acting like a federal law enforcement agency?
Were they explicitly understood to be a partisan para-governmental intelligence apparatus being used to surveil the American public?
There’s no explanatory narrative that makes this… https://t.co/N5RE1NmPo5
— Coddled Affluent Professional (@feelsdesperate) April 22, 2026
Tweet concludes, “There’s no explanatory narrative that makes this stuff look good.”
Exactly. Which is why, beyond the modified limited hangout above, an omertà has been issued for the network news broadcasts: Omission: The Networks Fall Silent on the Indictment of the SPLC.
And as far as print media:
I'm always flummoxed when mainstream news sources describe a lawsuit, indictment, or pertinent document without actually linking to it. The SPLC indictment isn't linked in New York Times, AP, BBC, The Guardian, or any of first 10 sources I checked. Just have to take their word…
— Robby Soave (@robbysoave) April 22, 2026