DOJ Indicts Southern Poverty Law Center for Secretly Funneling MILLIONS to Members of White Supremacist and Extremist Groups

Uncensored2008 said:
Douche Duck and NHB are the same person. NHB is one of the duck's socks. Pretty sure Douchey is "One White Duck" from AWE.
Click to expand...
Classic case of a sock puppet accusing the whole world of wearing socks, ironic, coming from someone who's clearly lost their other half. Maybe if you spent less time laundering your online persona and more time in reality, you'd realize the only magat here is the one staring back in the mirror.
 
Tobytone said:
You might be right, it's just sad.

What's really funny is the thumbs down from the freak and the dumbass freaky chick, lol. They're so confused. Personally, I think they're more than just a JPP couple.
Click to expand...
giphy.gif
 
QP! said:
the Judge, in this case is a magat short who magats have been running to with their cases and he jumps immediately to injunctions and has already been over ruled TWICE by the appelate court.

So do not bet against Strike 3 coming soon.

As i said in the other thread...
----

Judge who blocked this, already tried to block this referendum twice in two seperate rulings BOTH OVER RULED by the Apelate court, before the magats brought this to him for a third attempt?

I do not use the term 'activist judge' very often as there are very few of them, but it does seem this judge might be one.




-----

According to the Virginia redistricting amendment history, these prior rulings occurred earlier in 2026 as Judge Hurley repeatedly attempted to block the measure from appearing on the April ballot:

  • First Injunction (January 2026): Judge Hurley first blocked the redistricting process in late January. The Virginia Supreme Court overturned this decision on February 13, allowing the referendum to proceed as scheduled.
  • Second Injunction (February 2026): On February 19, Judge Hurley issued a second injunction based on separate legal grounds unrelated to the first ruling. This order was also lifted by the Supreme Court of Virginia, which maintained that the matter should be decided by the voters at the polls.
Click to expand...
Magat is not a word, Kewpie.
 
Into the Night said:
MAGAts isn't a word, Sybil.

What 'Trump fraudulent charity'?
Click to expand...
The controversy you’re referring to involves the Donald J. Trump Foundation, which was shut down after a major investigation by New York authorities. Here’s a clear, factual breakdown of what happened.



What the case was about​


In 2018, the New York Attorney General sued the foundation, alleging it had engaged in “persistently illegal conduct.”


The core accusation: the charity was not operating independently for public benefit, but was instead used to advance political and personal interests.



Key findings and allegations​


1. Misuse of charitable funds​


A judge found that foundation money was used improperly, including:


  • Supporting Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign activities
  • Paying for personal items like a portrait of Trump and event expenses
  • Settling legal obligations or benefiting Trump-related businesses (reported in investigations)

This type of behavior is often called “self-dealing”—using a charity’s money to benefit its own leaders.



2. Illegal political activity​


Charities in the U.S. are strictly prohibited from participating in political campaigns.


The foundation was found to have:


  • Made an illegal political donation (e.g., to a group linked to Florida AG Pam Bondi)
  • Coordinated a charity fundraiser that was effectively a campaign event


3. Lack of proper governance​


Investigators said the foundation didn’t function like a normal charity:


  • It lacked independent oversight
  • Decisions were allegedly directed by Trump or his associates
  • It operated more like a “checkbook” for business/political purposes (as described in the lawsuit)


The outcome​


  • In 2019, a judge ordered Donald Trump to pay $2 million in damages
  • The funds were distributed to legitimate charities
  • Trump admitted to multiple instances of misuse as part of the settlement
  • The foundation was dissolved (shut down)


Bottom line​


Authorities concluded that the Trump Foundation violated charity laws by using donated money for political and personal purposes, rather than strictly charitable ones.


It wasn’t a criminal fraud conviction, but it was a civil case with findings of illegal conduct and misuse of funds, resulting in financial penalties and the closure of the organization.
 
Into the Night said:
Magat is not a word, Kewpie.
Click to expand...
Yes—“magat” is a word, but it’s informal and context-dependent.


1. In Filipino languages​


In Tagalog, magat can mean something like noble, dignified, or worthy of respect. It’s not super common in everyday casual speech, but it exists in the language.


2. In modern internet slang (U.S. politics)​


In online political discussions, especially related to Donald Trump, “MAGAt” (sometimes written with a capital MAGA) is used as an insult for supporters of the “Make America Great Again” movement.


  • It plays on the word “maggot”
  • It’s considered derogatory and not neutral language


Bottom line​


  • ✅ Real word in Tagalog (neutral/positive meaning)
  • ⚠️ Slang in English (often offensive depending on context)
 
Grim Reaper said:
The paranoid parrot, nature's answer to the question, What if a sock puppet had an existential crisis? You've got more socks than sense, and frankly, the voices in your head deserve better company. Even a mime would tell you to shut up.
Click to expand...
He used to be both smarter and saner but is deteriorating into a hot mess. Notice how he claims to have originated the use of the name "Sybil" for psychotic sock puppeteers.
 
Grim Reaper said:
Yes—“magat” is a word, but it’s informal and context-dependent.


1. In Filipino languages​


In Tagalog, magat can mean something like noble, dignified, or worthy of respect. It’s not super common in everyday casual speech, but it exists in the language.


2. In modern internet slang (U.S. politics)​


In online political discussions, especially related to Donald Trump, “MAGAt” (sometimes written with a capital MAGA) is used as an insult for supporters of the “Make America Great Again” movement.


  • It plays on the word “maggot”
  • It’s considered derogatory and not neutral language


Bottom line​


  • ✅ Real word in Tagalog (neutral/positive meaning)
  • ⚠️ Slang in English (often offensive depending on context)
Click to expand...
Logic and facts do no work on psychos and/or MAGAts. :)
 
Grim Reaper said:
The controversy you’re referring to involves the Donald J. Trump Foundation, which was shut down after a major investigation by New York authorities. Here’s a clear, factual breakdown of what happened.



What the case was about​


In 2018, the New York Attorney General sued the foundation, alleging it had engaged in “persistently illegal conduct.”


The core accusation: the charity was not operating independently for public benefit, but was instead used to advance political and personal interests.



Key findings and allegations​


1. Misuse of charitable funds​


A judge found that foundation money was used improperly, including:


  • Supporting Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign activities
  • Paying for personal items like a portrait of Trump and event expenses
  • Settling legal obligations or benefiting Trump-related businesses (reported in investigations)

This type of behavior is often called “self-dealing”—using a charity’s money to benefit its own leaders.



2. Illegal political activity​


Charities in the U.S. are strictly prohibited from participating in political campaigns.


The foundation was found to have:


  • Made an illegal political donation (e.g., to a group linked to Florida AG Pam Bondi)
  • Coordinated a charity fundraiser that was effectively a campaign event


3. Lack of proper governance​


Investigators said the foundation didn’t function like a normal charity:


  • It lacked independent oversight
  • Decisions were allegedly directed by Trump or his associates
  • It operated more like a “checkbook” for business/political purposes (as described in the lawsuit)


The outcome​


  • In 2019, a judge ordered Donald Trump to pay $2 million in damages
  • The funds were distributed to legitimate charities
  • Trump admitted to multiple instances of misuse as part of the settlement
  • The foundation was dissolved (shut down)


Bottom line​


Authorities concluded that the Trump Foundation violated charity laws by using donated money for political and personal purposes, rather than strictly charitable ones.


It wasn’t a criminal fraud conviction, but it was a civil case with findings of illegal conduct and misuse of funds, resulting in financial penalties and the closure of the organization.
Click to expand...
Oh. You bring up the conviction by Twitter case again, Sybil.

You Democrats are the lowest of the low.
 
Into the Night said:
Oh. You bring up the conviction by Twitter case again, Sybil.

You Democrats are the lowest of the low.
Click to expand...
the feathered conspiracy theorist finally met reality, turns out even your echo chamber won't echo that nonsense. Maybe try facts instead of squawking your delusions into the void?
 
Dutch Uncle said:
apnews.com

Judge fines Trump $2 million for misusing charity foundation

A judge in New York ordered President Donald Trump to pay $2 million for misusing his charitable foundation.
apnews.com apnews.com
New York state Judge Saliann Scarpulla imposed the penalty after the president admitted to a series of abuses outlined in a lawsuit brought against him last year by the New York attorney general’s office.

Among other things, Trump acknowledged in a legal filing that he allowed his presidential campaign staff to coordinate with the Trump Foundation in holding a fundraiser for veterans during the run-up to the 2016 Iowa caucuses. The event was designed “to further Mr. Trump’s political campaign,” Scarpulla said.

In a defiant statement issued Thursday evening, though, Trump suggested he was neither sorry nor in the wrong.

“I am the only person I know, perhaps the only person in history, who can give major money to charity (19M), charge no expense, and be attacked by the political hacks in New York State,” he wrote.
Click to expand...
Fixated on the conviction by Twitter case, eh?

You Democrats are the lowest of the low, Sybil.
 
Dutch Uncle said:
No man can be both happily married and a woman-hater. The JPP MAGAt male pattern is elderly and divorced Euro-American males who blame others, specifically women and minorities, for a lifetime of fuckups and elderly health issues. As a group, they are weak and fearful.
Click to expand...
MAGAt isn't a word, Sybil.
Democrats like you hate women.
Democrats like you hate children.

You can't blame YOUR problems on anybody else.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top