EXCLUSIVE: Founder of Soros-Backed Legal Group Resigned Amid Internal Accusations of Racism

Progressive activist Miriam Krinsky was at the top of her game in early 2024. As the founder and leader of Soros-backed Fair and Just Prosecution (FJP), she helped support the day-to-day work of the nationwide wave of progressive prosecutors elected in the late 2010s and early 2020s. Then it all came to a screeching halt when her own staff accused her of being a racist, according to emails obtained by the Washington Free Beacon.

The post EXCLUSIVE: Founder of Soros-Backed Legal Group Resigned Amid Internal Accusations of Racism appeared first on .

Soros empire finally crumbling? The proof is piling up



Globalist progressive puppet master George Soros turned 95 years old last week on August 12.

“He's outlived almost all of the people that tried to stop him and, to be honest, most of the economies that he tried to collapse,” says Glenn Beck.

“You have toppled a few currencies just for sport; you have funded enough political movements all over the world to keep small nations in coups for over a century now; and you've turned philanthropy into a really terrifying word,” he adds, congratulating the billionaire on reaching his 95th birthday only “to see [his empire] all come apart at the very end.”

Since Alex Soros, George’s second son, was given control of Open Society Foundations and related financial entities in 2023, Glenn has reveled in watching him send the family empire spiraling into chaos.

You’re “the man who broke the Bank of England,” he says to George. “Your son is breaking another bank, but it seems to be yours.”

Glenn points out some of Alex’s biggest failures, most notably his decision to invest roughly $2 billion in an electric vehicle company called Rivian Automotive. Under Alex’s oversight, Soros Fund Management purchased nearly 20 million shares at $70-$100 per share, but in just a year’s time, the stock dropped to a laughable $18 per share, resulting in over $1 billion in losses.

According to HedgeFollow, a website that tracks and ranks U.S. hedge fund performances, Soros Fund Management currently holds a performance rating of one out of five stars, indicating it is among the least successful hedge funds in the country.

In July 2023 after Alex assumed control of operations, Open Society Foundations cut 40% of its staff worldwide, drastically limited new grants, and made significant changes to its operating model — all signs that the nonprofit organization was running “out of money,” says Glenn.

However, Alex’s “crowning achievement,” he says, was his involvement in Joe Biden’s 2022 Inflation Reduction Act, with OSF spending $1.6 million to lobby for provisions like electric vehicle tax credits tied to its Rivian investment.

But now that the Trump administration is taking drastic moves to repeal and limit the Inflation Reduction Act’s provisions, it seems that’s become yet another failure of Alex’s, too.

But it’s just the beginning of his long list of misfires. While Alex was pumping money into the Inflation Reduction Act, he was simultaneously “spending at least $4 million on Stacey Abrams' failed gubernatorial campaign,” says Glenn.

“Who would be this stupid? Certainly not George Soros’ son,” he mocks.

“Now it could be because at the time Rivian was starting to build a gigafactory right there in [Abrams’] state and he was asking the state for some subsidies. … Then she didn't win, and all that money was flushed down the toilet.”

Even the Soros-funded DAs who were installed to “collapse this country” are beginning to fail, as “more than a dozen have been removed from office by recalls and scandals,” says Glenn, adding that the dramatic increase in urban crime thanks to these soft-on-crime DAs was a “key factor” in the defeat of the Democratic Party in 2024.

“The second election of Donald Trump, you know — crime, immigration, and the economy were the big topics, which had to bother you because those were your big topics, too,” he taunts.

The Trump administration “cutting electric car subsidies,” “closing the borders, defunding all your little NGOs,” “going after your sanctuary cities, and, this week, taking crime on in D.C.” has got to be “mental torture” for 95-year-old George, who’s “just trying to make it to the pudding in the afternoon,” Glenn mocks. “To see your world fall apart. That torture must be relentless.”

To hear more of Glenn’s commentary, watch the video above.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Liberal Groups Protesting Trump's DC Crime Crackdown Received Millions From George Soros: Report

Two left-wing nonprofits spearheading protests against President Donald Trump's Washington, D.C., crime crackdown have received millions of dollars from liberal megadonor George Soros, according to a new report.

The post Liberal Groups Protesting Trump's DC Crime Crackdown Received Millions From George Soros: Report appeared first on .

Durham annex proves Russiagate was a coordinated smear



Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) last week declassified a 29-page document known as the Durham annex. Its publication has received remarkably little attention from major media outlets, despite containing one of the most significant intelligence disclosures since the origins of the Russiagate investigation.

The Durham annex is not conjecture, analysis, or political spin. It is a collection of sensitive intelligence reports, internal memos, and declassified emails compiled by the intelligence community and withheld from public view for years under the pretext of “source protection.”

The Durham annex reveals that the FBI ignored evidence in 2015 and 2016 suggesting that foreign governments were attempting to collude not with Trump, but with Clinton.

The declassified document offers a clearer view of what many Americans have long suspected: that the narrative surrounding Trump-Russia collusion was not only politically motivated but deliberately constructed by the Clinton campaign, facilitated by sympathetic actors within U.S. intelligence agencies, and ultimately endorsed by senior members of the Obama administration.

This trove of documents does not merely reinforce existing criticisms of the FBI’s conduct during the 2016 election. It provides evidence that the Clinton campaign approved a strategy to discredit Donald Trump by promoting a false association with Vladimir Putin. And it does so using intelligence collected from foreign surveillance of American political actors — surveillance that the CIA deemed credible enough to brief President Barack Obama directly.

The cover-up unraveled

Central to the Durham annex is a source codenamed “T1” — a foreign intelligence asset who intercepted Russian cyber-espionage activity targeting American entities, including George Soros’ Open Society Foundation, the Clinton campaign, and U.S. think tanks. The reports T1 relayed to U.S. intelligence included detailed assessments of internal American political strategy. In effect, T1 was watching Russian spies watch us — and reporting back.

T1’s identity remains classified, but strong circumstantial evidence points to a Dutch intelligence source. The Netherlands reportedly gained access to Russian cyber operations as early as 2014. Regardless of who provided it, U.S. agencies treated the intelligence from T1 as credible.

Then-CIA Director John Brennan quickly briefed President Obama, Vice President Biden, FBI Director James Comey, and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper. Those briefings included memos indicating Hillary Clinton had personally approved a plan to tie Donald Trump to Russian election interference.

One memo, dated 2016 and reportedly obtained through Russian surveillance of George Soros’ Open Society Foundations, outlined a Clinton campaign strategy: “Smear Donald Trump by magnifying the scandal” over Russia’s preference for Trump. That memo laid the groundwork for the Trump-Russia collusion hoax now known as Russiagate.

Intelligence running Clinton’s interference

The CIA labeled the intelligence “sensitive” and credible. The FBI rejected it. Agents claimed it relied on hearsay, appeared exaggerated, and might have suffered from translation errors.

That kind of skepticism might seem reasonable — if the FBI had applied the same scrutiny to the Steele dossier. Instead, they accepted that now-debunked document without verification and used it to justify surveillance warrants.

The inconsistency runs deeper than analysis. The Durham annex reveals that the FBI ignored evidence from 2015 and 2016 showing that foreign governments weren’t courting Trump — they were cozying up to Clinton.

One memo, written before Trump even announced his candidacy, described a foreign intelligence operative preparing to meet with a Clinton associate to discuss a “plan.” The operative was acting on direct orders from a foreign head of state.

RELATED: The Russia hoax and COVID lies share the same deep-state fingerprints

Photo by Gilbert Carrasquillo/FilmMagic

The precise content of the plan is redacted, but the FBI’s field office viewed it as serious enough to request a FISA warrant. That request, however, was left to “languish in limbo” by senior FBI officials, who subsequently warned Clinton in a defensive briefing.

Frayed trust, no accountability

The documents suggest a coordinated operation — one in which political, bureaucratic, and media institutions aligned to discredit a political opponent using information they had strong reasons to believe was false. The CIA deemed the intelligence worth a presidential briefing. The FBI discarded it. The media ignored it. And Clinton operatives implemented it.

This is not merely a scandal of partisan excess. Nearly 10 years after the first Hillary Clinton email leaks, and eight years after Trump’s unexpected victory, we are only now beginning to see the scope of institutional complicity in the Russiagate deception. The political cost may never be fully calculated, but the institutional damage — to the FBI, to the intelligence community, and to the trust of the American people — is already done.

Want more from Glenn Beck? Get Glenn's FREE email newsletter with his latest insights, top stories, show prep, and more delivered to your inbox.

Docs: Soros Executive Predicted FBI Would ‘Put More Oil Into The Fire’ Of Russia Hoax

'Later the FBI will put more oil into the fire.'

Soros-tied No Kings protesters plot to sabotage US Army's 250th anniversary parade



As President Donald Trump's administration prepares a grand and patriotic 250th anniversary celebration for the U.S. Army, George Soros-funded progressive activists are plotting a meticulously organized counterprotest to politicize the military milestone.

The White House has stated that the Grand Military Parade scheduled for June 14 in Washington, D.C., aims to "celebrate the legacy of the Army and express our deepest gratitude to those who have served and continue to serve in its ranks."

'That AFL-CIO is openly involved in sponsoring the No Kings rally should raise extreme concerns as to the rally's true purpose.'

"For 250 years, the U.S. Army has defended our nation, upheld the ideals of freedom and democracy, and served with courage at home and abroad. From the Revolutionary War to today, the Army's soldiers have embodied duty, honor, and sacrifice, ensuring the security of the United States and its people," the administration's America 250 website reads.

Despite this tribute to military service and national unity, progressive activists backed by wealthy donors and taxpayer-funded groups are orchestrating a nationwide protest to overshadow the Army's milestone with an anti-Trump agenda.

RELATED: White House hammers liberals for gaslighting about LA riots: Burning cities isn't justice — it's chaos

White House prepares for U.S. Army 250th anniversary parade. Photo by Kayla Bartkowski/Getty Images

Progressive protests target Army's anniversary

The Indivisible Project, a progressive organization formed in 2016 to counter Trump, and its "pro-democracy partner organizations" announced in early May a nationwide effort to protest the Army's parade.

With thousands of events registered across the U.S., the demonstration, dubbed the "No Kings Nationwide Day of Defiance," aims to steal the spotlight from the historic celebration by mobilizing against "corrupt, authoritarian politics."

The No Kings movement has framed the patriotic event as Trump's "self-aggrandizing $100 million birthday celebration," claiming the president is attempting to use the parade to flex his authoritarian power on the world stage.

However, that framing is misleading, as the parade's date coincides with multiple events: Trump's 79th birthday, the U.S. Army's 250th anniversary, and Flag Day.

When asked about the No Kings protests, Trump responded, “I don't feel like a king. I have to go through hell to get stuff approved.”

The No Kings movement has used alarmism to rally progressives against Trump, spreading unsubstantiated allegations that his administration is guilty of grave abuses, including suppressing free speech, detaining political opponents, threatening to deport American citizens, defying the court, and "disappear[ing] people off the streets."

"President Trump has already indicated that he's aiming for at least a third term," a No Kings host toolkit reads.

The No Kings movement is mobilizing its base with an exaggerated narrative that casts Trump as a menacing authoritarian dictator wielding unchecked power, painting him as a threat that demands urgent action to halt his perceived tyranny.

'All people who show up with guns are not going to be our enemies, and everybody who shows up with one is not going to be at an elevated risk for using their weapon.'

Beyond portraying the military parade as Trump's personal birthday celebration, No Kings is strategically avoiding staging protests in the D.C. area, instead hoping to draw attention away from the parade's venue.

Reclaiming the American flag is key for the movement to succeed in counterprogramming the Army's anniversary event. Those participating in the protests were encouraged to bring the American flag to "reclaim this symbol and remind the world that the freedom we stand for is freedom for all."

RELATED: 250 years after the British invaded my hometown

U.S. Army soldiers prepare for military parade. Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

Who's behind the No Kings protest?

The massive coordinated effort further fuels concerns that the recent protests, including those that led to destructive and violent riots in Los Angeles, are funded by activist organizations and left-wing groups with deep pockets.

While Indivisible Project claims it is a "grassroots" movement, advertising the No Kings protests as a "march against authoritarian politics and billionaire takeover," it relies on vast sums from left-leaning tycoons notorious for manipulating elections and movements. These considerable grants and donations enable it to organize the large-scale and synchronized rally while disguising its elite-driven agenda as a people-powered revolt.

Indivisible Project's most recent tax filings reveal that the group reported $12.6 million in revenue in 2023. Indivisible Civics, another 501(c)(3) under Indivisible's mission, reported $5.1 million in revenue in 2023. Combined, the two organizations have over $11 million in assets.

Further shattering Indivisible's "grassroots" claims, George Soros' Open Society Foundations has heavily funded the group, providing $7.2 million in grants since 2018, including $3 million in 2023.

DataRepublican has also linked No Kings' funding to the ACLU and its various local chapters.

Likewise, several local branches of the AFL-CIO, a massive labor union, sponsored the No Kings rallies, including in Minnesota, where Governor Tim Walz is slated to speak, and Kentucky. The AFL-CIO has received millions of dollars in taxpayer funds yearly. The AFL-CIO's Solidarity Center reported receiving $69 million in federal grants in 2023 and another $59 million in 2022.

"AFL-CIO is one of the key taxpayer-funded organizations in effecting regime change all over the world," DataRepublican warned. "That AFL-CIO is openly involved in sponsoring the No Kings rally should raise extreme concerns as to the rally's true purpose."

No Kings' reliance on billionaire backers exposes its hypocrisy, crusading against elite control while embodying the wealth-driven influence it claims to oppose.

RELATED: Billionaire Walmart heiress funds anti-Trump chaos, backs radical 'No Kings' protests

Photo by Paul Weaver/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images

Meticulous planning and endless resources

Since announcing the protests on May 6, in just over one month, the Indivisible Project and its partners have put together a highly structured plan for the demonstrations, including hosting regularly scheduled virtual meetings with volunteer protesters leading up to the rallies, assigning individuals to take on specific roles during the demonstrations, and providing numerous training and media assets.

Those who signed up to partake in the protests, particularly those volunteering to lead in any capacity, are provided with links to "Know Your Rights Training" hosted by the American Civil Liberties Union, "Safety and Deescalation Training," "Media and Messaging Training," and a 32-page "Peacekeeper Training Workbook."

Protest "hosts" are also provided with an 18-page "toolkit" and a help hotline available 12 hours a day from June 11 through June 14.

A No Kings team reviews and approves each scheduled event within 48 to 72 hours of the initial request. The group anticipates over 2,000 protests across the nation with millions of attendees.

Protesters are assigned to detailed roles for the demonstrations — acting as hosts, safety leads, police liaisons, peacekeepers, and media speakers — and provided coaching on how to show up to the event and respond to various situations.

No Kings' virtual training meetings revealed a sophisticated level of organization.

During a No Kings' "Host Update Call + Marshals Training" meeting on Wednesday evening, organizers provided de-escalation role-play scenarios to teach protesters how to handle hecklers, counterprotesters, and even "somebody on our side" who may try to "incite violent action" by bringing "paint balloons or rocks so that they can encourage other people to throw things."

The presenters also discussed the possibility of protesters and counterprotesters bringing firearms to the demonstrations in open-carry states.

"In an open carry state, you're going to have to really watch how people are showing up. Are they aggravated? Are they wearing a T-shirt that says 'Indivisible' on it? It's going to be subjective," Nadine Bloch, an executive training conductor with Beautiful Trouble, stated on the training call. "All people who show up with guns are not going to be our enemies, and everybody who shows up with one is not going to be at an elevated risk for using their weapon."

'Peaceful protests are part of the fabric of our nation, but Texas will not tolerate the lawlessness we have seen in Los Angeles in response to President Donald Trump's enforcement of immigration law.'

Also during the training call, Stephen Piggott with Princeton University's Bridging Divides Initiative addressed the potential for the presence of counterprotesters.

"We want to emphasize that recent anti-administration protests have remained peaceful, with only isolated incidents of conflict and minimal counterprotester activity. We looked at data from the two most recent nationwide protest days, May Day and the April 5 Hands Off protests. And we found that 99% of these protests — so 1,029 out of the 1,031 — saw no reports of violence or destruction," Piggott stated.

"Only about 4% of those protests — so about 36 of them — actually involved counterdemonstrations or counterprotests," he continued.

He claimed this year's protests have been "very peaceful" with "really not a whole lot of counterdemonstration activity."

Piggott further noted that "actors of concern," such as the Proud Boys and militia groups, have had decreased "offline activity" compared to last year. However, he noted such actors are "paying a bit more attention to the No Kings protest" following the "events in L.A. over the past week."

"What we are not seeing at all is widespread calls from actors of concern to mobilize in response to this weekend," he added.

Although the No Kings movement condemns violence, their training on managing “instigators” reveals organizers’ concerns about disruptions from their own supporters, not conservative "actors of concern," who, as Piggott noted, are less likely to mobilize.

RELATED: Florida sheriff makes clear to radicals that riots won't go their way: 'We will kill you'

Riots in Los Angeles on June 8, 2025. Photo by Mario Tama/Getty Images

Response

Legacy media outlets have bolstered No Kings' narrative, depicting the Army's 250th anniversary parade as Trump's authoritarian birthday spectacle and sidelining its patriotic ties to military history and Flag Day.

Following destructive anti-immigration enforcement riots in Los Angeles last week, which saw widespread property damage and arrests, No Kings' timing and the media's amplification of the movement's narrative raise fears of similar escalation.

'If any person assaults a federal law enforcement officer, they risk being prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.'

While the No Kings organizers have repeatedly condemned violence and rioting, others are convinced the gathering, particularly given the large scale of demonstrations, will devolve into lawlessness, raising questions about how Indivisible and its partner organizations plan to prevent such chaos at all of their events.

Texas Governor Greg Abbott (R) is one of the many who believe the demonstrations could result in destruction and violence similar to that which occurred in Los Angeles.

In preparation for the mass gatherings, Abbott announced earlier this week that he would deploy Texas National Guard troops to specific locations in the state to "ensure peace and order."

On Thursday, Abbott deployed over 5,000 Texas National Guard troops and 2,000 state police to prevent potential unrest, following clashes between protesters and law enforcement in Austin and Dallas earlier this week that led to roughly a dozen arrests.

"Peaceful protests are part of the fabric of our nation, but Texas will not tolerate the lawlessness we have seen in Los Angeles in response to President Donald Trump's enforcement of immigration law," Abbott declared. "Anyone engaging in acts of violence or damaging property will be arrested and held accountable to the full extent of the law."

An Immigration and Customs Enforcement spokesperson told Blaze News, "ICE respects the constitutional right of people to peacefully protest; however, assaulting, resisting, impeding, or harassing ICE officers and special agents or interfering in any way as they are executing their official duty is against the law. If any person assaults a federal law enforcement officer, they risk being prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.”

Blaze News senior politics editor Christopher Bedford revealed the broader progressive tactic.

"Everything you're seeing now — from the senator from California lunging through agents at the Secretary of Homeland Security, the rioting in Los Angeles, or the congresswoman assaulting a police officer in New Jersey — all of these things are intentional provocations in the hopes of setting something off and triggering an overreaction because they can't get their own grassroots motivated," Bedford stated.

No Kings, the Indivisible Project, the AFL-CIO, and the ACLU did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Blaze News.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Soros and McCain: The unholy alliance hidden in plain sight



Have we been missing a Soros-McCain family connection in front of our very eyes all this time?

Unlike his father, George, who operated behind the scenes and dismissed scrutiny as conspiracy theory, Alexander Soros flaunts his influence openly on social media. He’s proudly posted photos with Vice President Kamala Harris, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz (D), Bill and Hillary Clinton, and Democratic leaders like Rep. Nancy Pelosi (Calif.), Sen. Chuck Schumer (N.Y.), and Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (N.Y.) — to name just a few. He’s also showcased meetings with newer faces, including Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas), whom he called a “rising star.” Let’s hope he’s right.

What started as a quiet alliance between George Soros and John McCain has now become a visible partnership between their heirs, Alex and Cindy.

To paraphrase “The Big Short”: Alex isn’t confessing — he’s bragging.

His photos with high-profile Democrats have grabbed headlines, but it’s his posts featuring Cindy McCain that reveal something even more telling: a decades-long relationship between the Soros and McCain families.

On May 6, 2024, Alex shared a photo with Cindy at the McCain Institute Sedona Forum. The topic of the forum was “Securing Our Insecure World,” which used the “climate crisis” as a backdrop, and had a roster of speakers that included Democrats and RINOs such as Mitt Romney, Janet Yellen, Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs (D), David Axelrod, and former Secretary of State Antony Blinken.

In another tweet with Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), Alex indicated that stopping Trump was a topic of discussion, referring to Kelly as “inspiring as ever and attentive to the threat posed in November if Trump wins.”

Alex has also shared a photo of himself with Cindy McCain and his father at the Munich Security Conference. The two also appear in a photo discussing the World Food Programme. The earliest image of them together dates back to 2020, when Cindy served as chairwoman of the board of the Munich conference and Alex sat on the advisory council, according to the conference’s annual report.

The McCains have never hidden their disdain for Donald Trump or the modern Republican Party — views that earned them the “RINO” tag and de facto exile from today’s GOP.

RELATED: Alex Soros admits he’s more powerful than elected officials

Photo by Tom Brenner/Getty Images

Their ties to the Soros network don't mark a new alliance, but they do prompt questions about how the relationship began. The answer may lead directly back to John McCain himself.

To understand the dynamic between Cindy McCain and Alex Soros, you first need to understand the relationship between John McCain and George Soros.

In 2001, McCain launched the Reform Institute — a nonprofit think tank that operated as a convenient loophole for accepting unlimited, unregulated donations. Many of the Reform Institute’s funders also contributed to McCain’s presidential campaigns in 2000 and 2008 as well as to his Straight Talk America PAC.

Hypocritically, the Reform Institute has claimed it wants to “clean up” campaign finance. In 2008, the Reform Institute even sent out a fundraising appeal blasting George Soros as a Democratic mega-donor. Yet, it was taking Soros’ money as it criticized others for doing the same.

The Reform Institute accepted multiple contributions from George Soros — some as high as $100,000 — as well as from the Soros-backed Tides Foundation. The maverick also took money from Teneo, a firm co-founded by Bill Clinton’s longtime “bag man” Doug Band.

What started as a quiet alliance between George Soros and John McCain has now become a visible partnership between their heirs, Alex and Cindy. Their shared disdain for Trump and mutual investment in globalist initiatives reveal what many prefer to ignore: Real political power often hides in plain sight — until it doesn’t.

With his ascension to the helm of his father’s Open Society Foundations, Alex Soros inherits a political infrastructure from the Democratic Party — and from RINOs like John and Cindy McCain.

Editor’s note: This article, part of a series, has been adapted from Matt Palumbo’s new book, “The Heir: Inside the (Not So) Secret Network of George Soros.”

Alex Soros Mocks Fellow Billionaires Who Made Their Own Money: 'Bunch of Nice Jewish Boys Who Kind of Gamed the System'

Alex Soros, the heir to multibillionaire Democratic megadonor George Soros, in an interview mocked the founders of Facebook and Uber for having "really believed their own bullshit" and groaned at the mention of a climate group that his family has bankrolled for years.

The post Alex Soros Mocks Fellow Billionaires Who Made Their Own Money: 'Bunch of Nice Jewish Boys Who Kind of Gamed the System' appeared first on .

Left-Wing Prosecutor Won't Charge Minnesota State Employee for Vandalizing Teslas

A Minnesota prosecutor is allowing state employee Dylan Adams to skirt criminal charges for vandalizing Tesla cars and causing more than $20,000 in damages, even after surveillance footage caught Adams vandalizing the vehicles.

The post Left-Wing Prosecutor Won't Charge Minnesota State Employee for Vandalizing Teslas appeared first on .

Revealed: Pro-Kamala social media millions that couldn’t sync ‘Brat’ with ‘Democrat’



The abrupt withdrawal last year of President Joe Biden as the Democratic presidential nominee, followed rapidly by his replacement with Vice President Kamala Harris, irked many voters left out by the process. Yet social media seemed to ooze with enthusiasm and Gen Z-friendly hipster appeal.

Influencers flooded the web with neon matcha green pro-Harris videos synced to beats from singer Charli XCX’s album “Brat” released last year. The poppy rave videos, gushed journalists, showed that Harris embodied the confidently independent “brat” vibe conveyed by the music. Social media pages bubbled with memes celebrating Harris as the voice of queer and black youth, in contrast with the Republican agenda of “white supremacy.” Digital creator Amelia Montooth, in one viral TikTok video, kissed a woman and tried searching for pornography, actions her sketch suggested would be banned if Harris lost the election.

The attempted reach and spending of the pro-Kamala Harris 2024 effort is unprecedented.

Harris, a career politician favored by the Democratic Party’s establishment, never quite fit the bill as an icon of activist movements. But the sudden influencer buzz seemed to transform the stodgy former prosecutor into an icon of the cultural zeitgeist.

As it turns out, the tidal wave of enthusiasm was not entirely genuine. Much of the content, including Montooth’s videos, was quietly funded by an elusive group of Democratic billionaires and major donors in an arrangement designed to conceal the payments from voters.

RealClearInvestigations obtained internal documents and WhatsApp messages from Democratic strategists behind the influencer campaign. Way to Win, one of the major donor groups behind the effort, spent more than $9.1 million on social media influencers during the 2024 presidential election — payments revealed here for the first time. The amount was touted in a document circulated after the election detailing the organization’s accomplishments.

The effort supported over 550 content creators who published 6,644 posts across platforms TikTok, Instagram, YouTube, Twitch, and X. Way to Win coached creators on phrases, issue areas, and key themes to “disseminate pro-Kamala content throughout the cycle,” a post-election memo from the group noted.

The look behind the curtain reveals that at least some of the image-making around the Harris candidacy was carefully orchestrated by the same types of covert social media marketing often used by corporate brands and special interest groups. Such campaigns provide the illusion of organic support through the authentic appeal of trusted social media voices.

Way to Win, in internal messages, touted its work with a stable of Democratic Party-affiliated influencers and activists, including Harry Sisson, Emily Amick, Kat Abu, and Dash Dobrofsky. The group also overtly cultivated “non-political creators” — influencers typically known for travel vlogs, comedic skits, or cooking recipes — and seeded them with “positive, specific pro-Kamala content” that was “integral in setting the tone on the Internet and driving additional organic digital support.” The effort often took the form of talking points that were rapidly distributed to the in-network creators.

“Bro who is Tim Walz,” said @AbeeTheArtist, one of the TikTok creators backed by Way to Win. “He’s a football coach, that’s hard,” the influencer continued. “It’s time for Republicans to drop out, it’s not looking good for ya’ll!”

Identity appeals fall flat

In a series of internal presentations about the influencer campaign, Way to Win emphasized its data-driven approach. “We know what messaging works,” noted Liz Jaff, a branding strategist working with Way to Win, during a call with donors last year. She touted the use of an AI-based focus group tool developed by Future Forward, the Harris campaign’s primary super PAC.

Jaff also explained the process for developing talking points that could be inserted into organic-appearing messages and posts on social media. “We then convey that to the influencers, who take that into their own words,” continued Jaff. “We then test those videos and see what needs to be boosted,” she added, referring to paid media efforts to amplify specific TikTok videos or favored streamers.

The lofty promises of message mastery, however, often fell short. Way to Win directly financed a series of clunky YouTube shows and liberal identity politics-oriented social media skits designed to bring voters out to support the Harris campaign and Democrats more broadly. There’s little evidence that such measures moved any significant numbers of voters during an election in which Democrats lost historic levels of support from key constituency groups — the youth vote, Latinos, and black men swung significantly to Donald Trump last year, upending decades of voting patterns.

Ilana Glazer, a comedian who starred in the Comedy Central show "Broad City," received Way to Win funding for a series of election videos called “Microdosing Democracy,” in which she half-heartedly endorsed Harris as she lit a spliff of marijuana. Another TikTok and Instagram series backed by the donors, called “Gaydar,” featured interviews quizzing people on the streets of New York City about gay culture trivia with little election-related content.

Way to Win also funded a caravan with an inflatable IUD to Philadelphia; Washington, D.C.; Raleigh, North Carolina; St. Louis, and other locations. The tour, which featured content creators producing posts along the way, was designed to bring attention to claims that Trump would ban contraceptive devices.

In an apparent attempt to boost Harris’ support among black men, Way to Win directly funded a series of YouTube interview-style talk shows called Watering Hole Media.

“I heard a brother say to me, ‘Man, I didn't know I was going to be excited when Kamala was selected,’” said Jeff Johnson, a managing director with the lobbying firm Actum LLC who worked as a host for the Watering Hole Media series “Tap In.” “One brother said, ‘I’m not even fully sure why,’” continued Johnson. “No, seriously, he said, ‘When I look at her, though, she reminds me of my aunt,’ and I said yes, so there is this communal piece.”

The discussion, taped at the Democratic National Convention in Chicago last August, buzzed about the “through line” from the Black Panthers to the Nation of Islam to Harris' nomination, suggesting her candidacy represented another moment in radical black politics.

The Way to Win-sponsored media group sponsored many similar discussions attempting to buoy the Harris candidacy with appeals to racial identity politics.

Despite the well-funded efforts, few tuned in. The seven video programs produced at the DNC collectively garnered fewer than 1,000 views. One video had fewer than 40 viewers.

Where did the money go?

Questions have mounted over the campaign spending decisions by Harris and her supporting organizations. The Harris campaign and her super PAC spent over $1.5 billion in the last months of the campaign, with much of the money flowing to consultants and media advertising. Alex Cooper, who hosted Harris for an interview on her “Call Her Daddy” podcast, was baffled about why the campaign spent about $100,000 on a “cardboard” temporary studio set that “wasn’t that nice.” Others have raised similar concerns about payments to Oprah Winfrey’s production firm.

“Our 2024 creator program reached key audiences with nearly a billion views, but there’s more to do, and we’re applying lessons from last cycle,” a Way to Win spokesperson said in a statement to RCI.

“Sometimes in presidential campaigns, there are times when there aren't any cost controls,” observed Mike Mikus, a Democratic strategist in Pennsylvania. “The biggest question is whether they had any empirical evidence that this TikTok messaging would work.”

The payments occupy a hazy area of election law. Way to Win structured the funds through nonprofit corporations that paid various influencer talent agencies — firms such as Palette Management and Vocal Media. The money was not listed in Federal Election Commission disclosure portals that show political funds spent during the campaign.

While television or radio ads require disclaimers showing the groups responsible for paying for the advertisements, there are no equivalent mandates for TikTok stars or Instagram personalities who receive payment to promote election-related content. Despite some attempts to reform election transparency regulations, minimal progress has been made. The FEC has deadlocked over attempts to form new rules to govern the influencer space, leaving the entire medium virtually lawless regarding campaign cash.

Way to Win operates several entities and corporations, most of which do not disclose donors. The group did not respond to a request for comment for more information. However, the cache of documents about the influencer campaign pointed to some clues. Way to Win hosted a series of donor-only events in San Francisco and Washington, D.C., with representatives of the Open Society Foundations, the charity backed by billionaire investor George Soros. OSF did not respond to a request for comment.

Democrats are hardly alone in payola for influencers. Republican campaigns have spent several hundred thousand dollars on similar social media marketing agencies that tout the ability to seed content with popular accounts on X and TikTok.

But the attempted reach and spending of the pro-Kamala Harris 2024 effort is unprecedented. Way to Win justified the spending sprees as the only way to compete with pro-Trump voices and popular podcasts, such as Joe Rogan, which the Harris campaign eschewed.

“Our goal this year was to combat conservative content domination on Instagram and TikTok. We did that,” Way to Win claimed in a triumphant memo to donors after the election.

“Had more Americans gotten their media from Instagram and TikTok,” the December memo argued, “Kamala Harris would be the next president of the United States.”

Editor’s note: This article was originally published by RealClearInvestigations and LeeFang.com and made available via RealClearWire.