Time to Shut Down the Money Fueling College Campus Riots
These individuals are trained to “rise up, to revolution.”
Tent cities have been set up at colleges across the United States, in which some of them are organized by branches of the Soros-funded Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP). The SJP parent organization has been funded by a network of non-profits ultimately funded by, among other billionaire left-wing investors as well.
These “Tent Cities” become the basecamp for illegal protests that result in riotest behaviors and criminality. These basecamps, often funded by another Soros-funded group called US Campaign for Palestinian Rights (USCPR) provides up to $7,800 for its community-based fellows and between $2,880 and $3,660 for its campus-based “fellows” in return for spending eight hours a week organizing “campaigns led by Palestinian organizations.” These individuals are trained to “rise up, to revolution.”
As an example, at the “Gaza Solidarity Encampment” at Columbia University, students sleep in tents apparently ordered from Amazon and enjoy delivery pizza, coffee from Dunkin’, free sandwiches worth $12.50 from Pret a Manger, organic tortilla chips and $10 rotisserie chickens.
Soros has also given billions to the Open Society Foundations which his son Alexander. whose partner is Huma Abedin, Hillary Clinton’s top aide now controls. In turn Open Society has given more than $20 million to the Tides Foundation, a progressive non-profit “fiscal sponsor” that then sends the cash to smaller groups.
So, what can be done? Nonprofits and money bundling organizations like the Tides Foundation can potentially fuel illegal behavior through funding by providing financial support to entities or individuals engaged in unlawful activities. This can happen inadvertently, where the organization may not be aware of the illegal activities being supported, or it could occur intentionally, where the organization knowingly provides funding for illicit purposes.
Here are some ways in which nonprofits and money bundling organizations could inadvertently or intentionally fuel illegal behavior:
Lack of Due Diligence: Nonprofits may not conduct thorough due diligence on the recipients of their funding, allowing funds to flow to organizations or individuals involved in illegal activities.
Use of Intermediaries: Funds may be channeled through intermediaries or shell organizations to obfuscate their ultimate destination, making it difficult to trace the money and identify illegal activities.
Political Influence: Nonprofits and money bundling organizations may support political causes or campaigns that engage in illegal activities such as campaign finance violations, bribery, or corruption.
Funding Extremist Groups: In some cases, funds provided by these organizations may inadvertently or intentionally support extremist groups involved in illegal activities such as terrorism or organized crime.
RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) laws could potentially play a role in investigating and prosecuting crimes involving nonprofits and money bundling organizations. RICO was originally designed to combat organized crime but has since been applied to a wide range of criminal activities.
Under RICO, individuals or entities engaged in a pattern of racketeering activity can be charged and prosecuted, and their assets can be seized. Racketeering activities can include various criminal offenses, such as fraud, money laundering, bribery, and extortion. If it can be established that a nonprofit or money bundling organization is involved in a pattern of racketeering activity, either directly or indirectly through its funding activities, RICO laws could potentially be used to investigate and prosecute those involved. However, proving a pattern of racketeering activity can be complex and requires substantial evidence.
The United States Attorney’s Office in each district in which has these protests need to ensure the prosecution of RICO style cases are accomplished to reign in seditious criminal behavior and the fomenting of riots. Individual state’s Attorney’s General should also ensure that state RICO statutes are used in the enforcement and prosecution of these offenders. If a state does not have this statute, or has a statute with insufficient criminal penalties, their respective legislatures should affect such statutes swiftly. This legal redundancy must be in place in case the U.S. Attorney General is unwilling to fulfill his responsibilities in enforcing the law.