Full Todd Blanche, Kash Patel press conference reveals Southern Poverty Law Center indictment

[0:05] Good afternoon. Today, a few minutes ago, in the Middle District of Alabama, a grand jury [0:13] returned an 11-count indictment charging the Southern Poverty Law Center with six counts of [0:19] wire fraud, four counts of bank fraud, and one count of conspiracy to commit money laundering. [0:27] According to the charges in the indictment, the SPLC is a non-profit entity that purports to [0:34] fight white supremacy and racial hatred by reporting on extremist groups and conducting [0:39] research to inform law enforcement groups with the goal of dismantling these groups. As the [0:47] indictment describes, the SPLC was not dismantling these groups. It was instead manufacturing the [0:54] extremism it purports to oppose by paying sources to stoke racial hatred. The indictment describes [1:04] this conduct in detail, but one troubling example is that the SPLC was paying a member of the [1:11] leadership group that planned the Unite the Right protest in Charlottesville, Virginia in 2017 that [1:19] resulted in the death of one person and injured dozens more. This particular person being paid by [1:27] the SPLC allegedly received approximately $270,000 over the course of eight years. In total, [1:36] according to the indictment, between 2014 and 2023, SPLC paid at least $3 million for the [1:45] to eight individuals at least. These individuals were affiliated with the Ku Klux Klan, United Klans of [1:54] America, National Socialist Movement, Aryan Nations Affiliated Sadistic Souls Motorcycle Club, the [2:02] Nationalist Socialist Party of America, Nazis, and the American Front. Now, as the indictment lays out, [2:12] after SPLC paid members of these extremist groups, it created work product that reported on these [2:18] activities that the members participated in or contributed to. And to that end, it was doing the [2:25] exact opposite of what it's told its donors it was doing, not dismantling extremism, but funding it. [2:33] To carry out this scheme, SPLC created bank accounts in the name of at least five completely fictitious [2:39] organizations that had no bona fide employees or legitimate business purpose. The money was passed from [2:47] SPLC to one sham account to a second sham account and then loaded onto prepaid cards to give to the [2:54] members of the extremist groups. This was designed to shield the source of those funds. And because of [3:00] this, SPLC is also charged with one count, as I said earlier, of conspiracy to commit money laundering. [3:07] In conclusion, I want to thank the acting U.S. attorney in the Middle District of Alabama, Kevin Davidson, [3:15] who's in his district right now and not able to be with us, for bringing this important case, [3:21] along with the FBI team in Alabama for their hard work during this investigation. This investigation [3:28] is ongoing. And I'd like to ask Director Patel to say a few words as well. [3:39] Thank you, General Blanche. What we're here today is to announce what the what the general just told [3:46] you. The Southern Poverty Law Center, in a massive sweeping indictment, has been charged with [3:52] allegations of fraud and using the banking system to perpetrate that fraud. I just want to talk about [3:58] a couple of brief things here. The Southern Poverty Law Center themselves advertise to raise money to [4:05] dismantle violent extremist groups for a period of at least a decade. They use their donor network to [4:12] raise money to purportedly dismantle violent extremist groups. However, the SPLC, the Southern Poverty Law [4:19] Center, use the money they raised from their donor network to actually pay the leadership of these [4:26] very groups. I just want to say that again. They use the fraudulently raised money by lying to their [4:32] donor network, thousands of Americans, to go ahead and actually pay the leadership of these supposed [4:38] violent extremist groups. The groups, as the general laid out, include the Ku Klux Klan, [4:44] the United Klans of America, Unite to Right, National Alliance, the National Socialist Movement, [4:53] the Aryan Nation Motorcycle Club, and the National Socialist Party of America, and also the American [4:59] Front. In at least one of these matters, our investigation revealed that funds were used to [5:06] facilitate the commission of further state and federal offenses, totaling over $3 million. [5:13] Furthermore, our investigation revealed that the Southern Poverty Law Center, on top of perpetuating [5:20] this widespread, decade-long, multi-million dollar fraud, conducted more criminal activity. [5:29] They attempted to hide their criminal activity from our financial banking network. They set up shell [5:36] companies and entities around America so that the financial institutions that we rely on as everyday [5:41] Americans were deceived in believing that money was not coming from the Southern Poverty Law Center [5:46] in the perpetration of this scheme and fraud, but rather fictitious entities they stood up to [5:51] perpetuate this ongoing fraud. This is a serious and egregious violation of a group that purported to [5:59] dismantle violent extremist groups, but in turn actually only fueled the hatred. This is an important [6:05] case brought by the president, by President Trump's administration. We're thankful for the president for [6:10] his leadership and funding of not just the FBI and DOJ, but his commitment to go out there and wipe out [6:15] fraud and conspiracy and waste and abuse wherever it occurs, including the Southern Poverty Law Center. [6:22] Even though this money was made to appear to be coming from legitimate people and legitimate entities, [6:29] we at the FBI, with our great partners at the Department of Justice and in the state of Alabama, [6:34] were able to comb through a decade worth of material, a scheme that took a decade to build, [6:40] so that we were able to follow the money, because money never lies, and they got caught. As the Attorney [6:46] General said, these charges are varying. They are widespread and wide ranging, and this investigation is [6:53] very much ongoing. Today we're here to announce the charges of the Southern Poverty Law Center, [6:58] and this investigation and the individuals who are responsible will be brought to justice. Thank you, [7:02] General. Thank you, Director Patel. Any questions? I'd like to know why individual people are not [7:13] mentioned in this indictment. Is that something that's going to come down the pike? Is this just [7:17] an indictment of the entity? Can you kind of explain, could people face charges here, or is this the [7:21] indictment and you're done? So, yes. I mean, as we said, the indictment, this investigation is very much [7:27] ongoing, and today the Grandeur returned indictment against only one entity, the Southern Poverty Law Center, [7:34] and we'll go from there. But as you'll see from the indictment itself, it should be obvious from the [7:42] indictment that the investigation is ongoing. I just want to make sure I understand, you're [7:47] alleging that the Southern Poverty Law Center was paying the leaders of KKK and other groups to [7:55] continue their operations? Is that... I'm not alleging it. The Grandjury returned an indictment that says that. [8:03] And so, what the investigation found, according to the indictment that was returned today, [8:10] is that they were paying... So, Southern Poverty Law Center was raising money, asking folks to give [8:16] them money to dismantle racism. And over a very long period of time, they were using some of the money [8:22] they raised from donors to pay to, they called them, field, you know, basically to informants [8:29] for information, for access, to just pay them for certain, to do certain things. And so, yes, [8:39] that's exactly what the indictment charges. [8:41] I was wondering if this is going to expand perhaps to more groups, perhaps. There's been a lot of [8:48] accusations about particular groups like the Patriot Front that get a lot of, you know, traction. And more so, [8:55] is the government, or is this indictment, I should say, making the case that some of these matters [9:00] where they've tried at great lengths to sort of make connections to people on the right per [9:08] percent? I mean, Charlottesville was very much associated by, you know, the media with being sort [9:14] of like, you know, part of a right-wing kind of thing. You know, they're like, good people on both sides [9:19] type of thing. I mean, is this, are we seeing a sort of the Southern Poverty Law Center was trying to [9:25] create narratives using these types of groups to, you know, shape American public opinion? [9:30] Look, I think what the Southern Poverty Law Center has said over the years is available for the [9:36] world to see. It's on their website. It's in other forms. The indictment speaks for itself. I'm not going [9:41] to talk outside the four corners of the indictment. It lays out what the grand jury found. And obviously, [9:48] there's a whole body of public information around what the Southern Poverty Law Center has done [9:52] over the past, you know, several decades. I mean, in some of these instances, these are groups that [9:59] have been either their membership has been dismantled or they've definitely fallen out of public view. [10:04] I'm just wondering the legal theory of how, you know, these payments allegedly went on to actually [10:09] benefit the groups. Did you see the money go to the groups themselves rather than just the individuals [10:14] who were paid informants essentially? And then I have an off-topic effort. [10:18] So the, look, I want to be careful to keep any comments that we make inside the indictment. [10:27] And so what the indictment lays out is payments to individuals who had leadership positions within [10:35] these organizations. That's what the grand jury found. And so to the extent that those individuals [10:42] receiving, one received over a million dollars, okay, to the extent over several years, to the [10:48] extent that there's any link between that individual receiving the money and benefits to [10:54] that organization, that's not in the indictment. But because, again, it's not that individual who's [11:01] charged with a crime. It's that individual was an informant or what have you. And it's Southern [11:06] Poverty Law Center that made those payments to the individual. But it wasn't, you know, look, [11:11] the payments were not made to these individuals in exchange for a service separate and apart from [11:18] their work within these organizations. So, you know, that's, that's, I think, speaks for itself. [11:24] And just an off-topic. Obviously, you've read the Atlantic article that's now a subject of a [11:28] defamation lawsuit. I absolutely did not read that article. But go ahead with your question. [11:32] I just, you know, without, obviously, it's in litigation now. Have you separately just heard any [11:38] concerns, given your supervision over the FBI director, about any problems with drinking? [11:45] I have a lot of, I have a lot of concerns. And my concerns are completely around the anonymous [11:51] reporting that comes forth constantly. That, that, you know, reporters have an obligation to report. [11:57] And, and they have due diligence that they're supposed to do. And when an entire article is [12:01] based on anonymous sources, and there's things in the article suggesting, for example, for example, [12:08] apparently, that senior DOJ personnel were informed of something. That's me. I wasn't informed. No one [12:15] called me about that. So, like, listen, I did not read that, that, that article. It is a subject of [12:20] litigation. But, but, you know, I've already spent too much time talking about it. Next question. [12:24] Go ahead. On that, Todd, I'm sorry. The, the FBI director's on camera with the U.S. Olympic hockey [12:30] team chugging a beer. I mean, do you think that that's appropriate conduct for the FBI director? [12:34] That has nothing to do with the article. I mean, look, there, there's, there's, there's, there's, [12:39] there's complete hit pieces. And, and you guys are in this business, and you know what they look like. [12:45] And the fact that you're asking repeated questions about them almost is an admission of such. [12:50] But when you have a bunch of people who are hiding behind closed curtains, um, saying things, [12:55] but not willing to say it publicly, and there are certain parts of the, of the article that [12:59] are blatantly false, because apparently I was told something that I wasn't, uh, it's, it's suspicious. [13:04] You're in the back. Uh, thank you, Mr. Acting Attorney General. Can you explain, [13:09] again, what the fraud is here exactly? Are you saying it's illegal for the SPLC to pay money to people [13:15] that are in hate groups or something about the way this was done makes it because it's not [13:22] automatically illegal, is it? No, that's right. This is a good question. So, and again, I summarized [13:28] the indictment and it's now public for everybody to read, but, but SP, the Southern Poverty Law Center [13:32] is a 501 , okay? They're required to, um, under the laws associated with a non-profit to, to, to have [13:38] certain transparency and honesty in what they're telling donors they're going to spend money on and what [13:43] their mission statement is and what they're raising money doing. And so, as the indictment points out, [13:48] um, there's different ways that they raise money and, um, and no, and no fundraising efforts that, [13:54] that the investigation found did they say, oh, and by the way, we're going to give a million bucks to [13:59] the Ku Klux Klan. So that's, so that's fraud. So that's wire fraud. So, and then the bank fraud part [14:05] of it is, is you have KYC, you have an obligation to tell your financial institution what, what the, what the, [14:10] what the corporation or the entity that you're opening an account, um, for does. And the allegations [14:16] in the indictment are that these were fictitious companies that were set up. And so there's certain [14:21] information sworn to by SPLC executives about what the entities were doing that, that we allege is [14:28] false. Can I just follow up on, can I, can I, can I have one follow up, Mr. Go ahead. On the hiring of, uh, Joe DiGenova to work for the department, [14:36] can you just tell us a little bit, I understand you went down to Florida, um, perhaps to take part [14:41] in his swearing in or, or bring him on board. Can you explain why he's being brought back to the [14:45] department after 40 years? So, I mean, look, I think that we, everybody in this administration, [14:53] whether it's department justice or elsewhere, we're always looking for good people. And he's somebody who [14:57] has a deep bench, as you said, he's, he's been in this business for, for decades. Um, and, and when we had [15:02] the opportunity to ask him to join the team and help, um, we readily did. Um, I have an on topic [15:09] and an off topic, if you'll allow me. Um, are you able to explain a little bit more about what led to [15:13] this investigation? Were you guys tipped off by a former employee or how did, how did you guys discover [15:18] this? Uh, no, I can't talk about that, but it, it's been going on for a long time. There was a time [15:26] that it was, it was shut down for a while during the, um, the last administration. Uh, I don't know [15:34] why. And, and it was, was started again over the past year or so. And, and, uh, and that brings us [15:42] to today. You mean the investigation began before this administration and then was shut down during [15:49] the Biden administration? That's my understanding. I don't have information beyond what I just said [15:53] around that. Um, uh, I wanted to ask about the Brennan and the John Brennan investigation. If [15:58] you can explain why the career prosecutor who had been leading that investigation, um, was removed, [16:04] and if you have, you have or had concerns that that investigation is not moving quickly enough? [16:09] I don't have any concerns about that investigation. And again, the, um, reporting around that really is [16:16] just a source purely from leaks and not actually accurate reporting is not something I'm going to comment [16:22] on and, and never will comment on. Could I ask you just to clarify one thing? Obviously, [16:27] the Bureau had a long relationship with the SPLC. Is it your understanding that the previous leaders [16:34] at the Bureau knew this was happening and didn't view it as a crime? Or is that the Bureau did not [16:40] know this was happening? It is, it is my understanding that SPLC never told anybody in law enforcement [16:47] that they were paying off the Ku Klux Klan. And I don't think that should surprise anybody. [16:50] Uh, thank you, Mr. Acting Attorney General. I'd like you to both weigh in on a recent [16:56] memo from the Office of Legal Counsel declaring the Presidential Records Act unconstitutional, [17:02] so saying that presidents no longer need to preserve their documents or turn them to the government. [17:07] What do you say to critics who suggest this basically eliminates transparency and accountability [17:11] around how the White House operates, especially given how much time you guys are spending [17:15] investigating the previous administration? Well, look, I think there is no dispute that this [17:22] administration in just 14 months has been a lot more transparent than the last administration or in any [17:27] administration. So if critics are suggesting that somehow we're not being transparent, I don't [17:32] find that credible in any way, shape, or form. As far as the recent OLC opinion regarding the PRA, [17:39] that is something that has been heavily litigated in D.C. and elsewhere. And OLC issuing that is not the [17:45] first, that's not the first place that you see that, that it's unconstitutional. I mean, I think there's a lot of [17:50] places that you can go to, to think through the, of why that is. The memo speaks for itself and, and, and, [17:57] and I don't have much to say about it beyond that. [18:00] Dr. Patel, do you want to weigh in on that? [18:02] The president has this pending billion dollar lawsuit against the IRS. He sort of said that this [18:08] is like he's negotiating with himself. How can you assure, can you, is there anything you do to assure the [18:13] American people that taxpayer dollars are being protected? How are those negotiations being handled? [18:17] I'm, I'm, I'm most certainly not going to talk about ongoing litigation and it wouldn't be [18:22] appropriate for me to, to comment about, about that case given, given its status right now. [18:28] Broadly with the, you know, the various interests, the competing interests there, right? You have [18:31] the president in the White House pressing obviously for some personal money and then you have him being [18:37] your boss. How, how do you sort of just broadly speaking, how do you sort of handle that sort of [18:42] issue? I mean, we, we handle, the Department of Justice handles complicated decisions involving [18:46] those type of issues every day, all day, and not just this Department of Justice. Every [18:51] Department of Justice handles issues like that. I mean, you have decisions that an attorney general [18:56] or, or his, or her staff have to make that are, are difficult and complicated and we do it. Attorney [19:02] generals before me have done it and, and we'll be able to handle it in an appropriate and ethical manner. [19:08] Thank you, Acting Attorney General. A question for you and then a question for the FBI Director. [19:12] You spoke about the timeline of the investigation. I know you said you have not much more to say about [19:17] that, but I am curious if you can talk about if it started in 2017, 2018, and just given what you [19:22] said about the Biden administration turning it off, how is the Department of Justice ensuring this [19:27] investigation remain, remains free from political influence? Well, I mean, look, it's free from political. [19:35] There is nothing political about this indictment or this investigation. SPLC has lawyers and if they think [19:40] that I'm wrong about that, they're going to be free to make a motion in front of a judge like every [19:44] other defendant in the country. As far as what, I just don't know information. It wasn't that far ago. [19:50] It was within the past four or five years, but there was a decision made. I don't have any insight into [19:55] why it was made to, to, to not pursue the investigation. And, and we, we, we started it again [20:03] and, and that brings us to where we are today. I do want to give you an opportunity to respond directly to [20:09] the allegations in the Atlantic article that your unexplained absences created a national [20:15] security risk. And beyond that, can you say definitively that you have not been intoxicated [20:20] or absent during your tenure as FBI director? I can say unequivocally that I never listened [20:27] to the fake news mafia. And as when they get louder, it just means I'm doing my job. This FBI director [20:33] has been on the job twice as many days as every director before me. What that means is I've taken [20:39] half as many days off as those before me. What that means is I've taken a third less vacation [20:46] than those before me. What that means is that this FBI with this department of justice has dropped the [20:51] murder rate 20 points. What that means is this FBI with this department of justice has captured eight [20:56] of the top 10 most wanted fugitives in the world, twice as many as the Biden administration did in [21:01] its entire four years. What that means is this FBI has seized enough fentanyl off the streets to kill [21:06] 178 million Americans, a 31 percent increase. What that means is this FBI and this DOJ has arrested 43 [21:13] percent more spies in 14 months in the entirety of the Biden administration. What that means is this [21:19] FBI has seen a reduction in opiate overdose deaths up to 20 percent alone. What that means is that we have [21:28] found 6300 child victims, 6300 families have their kids back. That is a 22 percent increase from the [21:37] Biden administration. I'm on the job. I'm the first one in. I'm the last one out. I'm like an everyday [21:44] American who loves his country, loves the sport of hockey and champions my friends when they raise a gold [21:49] medal and invite me in to celebrate. I've never been intoxicated on the job and that is why we filed a [21:54] $250 million defamation lawsuit and any one of you that wants to participate, bring it on. I'll see you [22:00] in court. Can you explain the computer login issue? Just explain the computer login issue. You were not [22:04] able to log into the, your lawsuit contends that you were not able to log into the system. What did you [22:09] think after you were unable to log into the system? Let's have a survey. How many of you people believe [22:15] that's true? Hang on. Did you communicate? You asked the question. Let me answer it. No, no. Did you communicate with [22:21] anyone that you thought you were fired after you, you were unable to log in? The problem with you and [22:26] your report, don't cut me off. You asked the question. Straightforward question. The problem [22:30] with you and your baseless reporting is that is an absolute lie. It was never said. It never happened. [22:37] And I will serve in this administration as long as the president and the attorney general want me to do so. [22:43] And every time you guys report false lies, every time you guys raise baseless questions, when we are here [22:50] to talk about the Southern Poverty Law Center's $3 million decade-long scheme to fraudulently fleece [22:59] Americans, you are off topic. The simple answer to your question is you are lying. And every time you do so, [23:12] I've answered your question. It's simply as follows. I was never locked out of my systems. Anybody who says [23:19] your lawsuit says the opposite. Anyone that says the opposite is lying. Thank you. [23:25] The lawsuit that you filed says that directly. [23:27] Man, stop. You're being extraordinarily rude. And I know maybe that's part of your profession, [23:32] but please just stop. If you ask a question, he can answer it. And then now you're interrupting me. [23:38] Like, just a little bit of respect, man. Just a tiny little bit. Try it sometime. Go ahead. [23:43] Earlier today, Senate Majority Leader John Thune once again was pleading for an end to the Justice [23:50] Department's investigation into Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell. How do you respond to a direct [23:56] request like this from someone in your own party? [23:58] I haven't received the response – the request, you know, formally yet. I mean, listen, [24:04] this is an ongoing investigation, and that's something that we can't talk about aside from [24:09] saying, yes, it's an ongoing investigation. And the senator knows that, and other senators [24:14] know that as well, and we'll get through it. But it is an ongoing investigation, and we can't [24:20] really talk about it, especially not in public. But we'll try to address any senator, not just a [24:26] senator from the Republican Party's concerns about that. [24:30] Director Patel, you said in an interview over this weekend regarding the election into whether [24:35] the 2020 presidential election was stolen. You said that there were going to be arrests coming, [24:40] and I promise you it's coming soon. Hoping you could just elaborate a little bit on what that meant. [24:45] Sure. We have many ongoing investigations into large-scale conspiracies, and like we did today, [24:54] we'll be announcing those arrests when the grand jury returns those indictments. [24:57] All right. Just one more question, sir. [25:00] I have an on-topic and off-topic. On the Southern Poverty Law Center, [25:04] my understanding was from the video that the group posted today that this program [25:09] about paying the informants had ended. I wasn't clear about when that was. Do you have any information [25:14] about when this program stopped paying informants, and then if there's a statute of limitations issue [25:20] there? I just wasn't sure how far back we're talking. And then I'll have another on-topic. [25:23] So look, all I can tell you is the indictment alleges a very long period of time [25:28] that includes up to 2023. So that's, that's, I can't speak beyond, you know, when it, you know, [25:34] if anything has been happening since then, just what the grand jury found. [25:37] Okay. And then I also wanted to ask a follow-up on Joe DiGenova. You know, looking back at, [25:43] he's, he's been very vocal over the years about his thoughts about the 2016 investigation, [25:48] about the intelligence assessment. One quote that he said in an article in 2020 was, [25:54] there's no doubt John Brennan was the primogenitor of this entire counterintelligence investigation. [25:59] It was John Brennan who went to James Comey and basically pummeled him into starting a [26:03] counterintelligence investigation against Trump. Brennan's at the heart of this. Given those prior [26:09] statements, isn't there possibly a conflict of interest, or at the very least, a perceived conflict [26:16] of interest having him... So I, I don't think it's unusual, and it... oversee this investigation, [26:21] and has he... It's not, not something that, sir, he has, he has to... He's been vetted for conflicts [26:26] prior to being... Make sure that he's doing everything ethically. I'm sure that he would... hired at the [26:30] Justice Department. I don't know. He has to make sure that everything he's doing is not... I'm not sure [26:35] what the conflict of interest would be, because in conflict with, with whatever rules that somebody has [26:40] said something, um, in the, the rules that we have in this, in this building, passed about, about a [26:46] particular... But the, the mere fact that he has spoken about it, that doesn't create a conflict [26:51] necessarily about, about, um, his perception. That's not what the conflict, you know, conflicts are [26:57] designed. He didn't have, he didn't have access to grand jury to, um, for just that. And I, I think, [27:02] Commission, he didn't have access to witnesses, and so... It creates a sense of bias, doesn't it? Like he's coming into the... [27:08] Like, like any prosecutor, I expect... Investigation with preconceived views... [27:12] That, that he will follow the facts, and... About a target of your investigation, isn't that... [27:17] And those facts come from witnesses and, and grand jury... I mean, I, I just... [27:21] Completely disinformation. All right. Thanks a lot, guys. I appreciate it.