@Sleepy___P @jay_dee_4_real @DiligentDenizen Don't you mean "mountain of overwhelming evidence "? 🤣🤡
English
Bigpapapaco
100 posts
Bigpapapaco
@MichellePcha
Husband, father & Papa. America 1st and only. Anti-communist. Infidel and bad goy. Christ is King of Kings and never forget, Jesus loves YOU 🙌🙏
Katılım Kasım 2022
125 Takip Edilen17 Takipçiler
@MichellePcha @jay_dee_4_real @DiligentDenizen Via online, text, and in person communications, evidence shows TR confessed to nearly every person he spoke to. Zero evidence has been presented to the contrary. It’s not even a matter of he said - she said. It’s literally unanimous. On top of a pile of forensic evidence…
English
Uh oh… looks like I just dropped THE RECEIPTS on the RECEIPT 🤯
The FEDslop network is CRASHING OUT
Grab your girlfriend, your popcorn and some refreshments as We save the country from darkness. 🇺🇸🫡👇🏻
x.com/i/spaces/1DGle…
English
@Sleepy___P @jay_dee_4_real @DiligentDenizen I wouldn't consider it evidence but since you are so willing to stake your opinion on hearsay, yes. Multiple sources, trusted by me, have spoken to his family members and they believe he was set up & did not pull the trigger. Wouldn't make sense if he confessed to family.
English
@MichellePcha @jay_dee_4_real @DiligentDenizen He’ll plea. Are you aware of any evidence indicating Robinson has claimed innocence to anyone, at anytime?
English
@Sleepy___P @jay_dee_4_real @DiligentDenizen 🤔🤔🤔 soooo hearsay? I ask again, doesn't it seem odd to even have a trial if he's already admitted guilt & as you seem to believe will be pleading guilty? I'm not atty but I have stayed at many Holiday Inn Express & pretty sure they could have skipped the pretrial hearing if so
English
@MichellePcha @jay_dee_4_real @DiligentDenizen Prosecution directly referenced his confessions to Twiggs via note, text and in person, as well as his discord confessions. His parents statements are documented and in the charging document.
English
@Sleepy___P @jay_dee_4_real @DiligentDenizen It doesn't strike you as odd that never at any point during the pretrial did the prosecution mention that he has already confessed 3×? Seems like they could have saved much time & energy by presenting his confessions and the witnesses he confessed to! 🤔🤔🤔
English
@jay_dee_4_real @DiligentDenizen What evidence would you like me to consider?
English
Wow 👀
theleahfiles@leahfiles
Part 3 of TPUSA's fraud playbook: Stacy Sheridan. And spoiler alert, she ranks higher than Bowyer or Kolvet. Stacy Sheridan is TPUSA's inside fundraising boss AND she owns the outside firm the charity pays to raise its money. She sits on both sides of the same check. More than $88 million in donations has run through her hands, and her private companies quietly kept ~$5+ million of it. She is the highest-scoring name in this series so far. Who is Sheridan? Stacy Sheridan spent two decades as a professional fundraiser at Pepperdine, the Reagan Foundation, and the Gary Sinise Foundation. Turning Point then hired her as its Senior Advancement Director on a salary north of $180,000. Her job was to raise the charity's money. So she did, into companies she owns. Three of them, GSM Strategy, then Lionrock Ventures, then Cloverstone Ventures. Each one billed the charity she already worked for. Each one traced back to her only through another state's corporate records and her own home address, never as the owner of those companies on the tax return itself. As each drew scrutiny, it went dark and the next one appeared. She turned a nonprofit's donor base into a private revenue stream, made herself almost invisible on paper, and made herself indispensable in person. Today she sits at the right hand of TPUSA's new CEO, Erika Kirk, closer to the money than she has ever been. What she is doing: the four signatures of an inside job This looks like an insider-controlled fundraiser, a specific and well-documented form of self-dealing. It has four signatures, and Sheridan hits all four. 1. Same hand on both sides: the employee who helps decide who gets hired to raise the money owns the firm that gets hired to raise it. She is the buyer and the seller of the same service, sitting on both sides of a table with no one across from her. 2. Custody and control: she does not just get paid, she holds the donations. The money lands in her company's account first, and she is the one who counts it and reports the number to the IRS and to the people who gave it. The insider who profits is also the one keeping the books. 3. The relay: not one company. Three, in a chain. Each terminated or gone dark the moment it drew a reporter, each reborn in a more sheltered state than the last. The entities keep changing names but the owner never changes. 4. Concealment: the return never says she owns the firm it pays. You only learn that in another state's records. In Minnesota, Cloverstone, whose sole officer is Sheridan, registered under oath as an independent outside professional fundraiser. Based on the record, it is not. Individually, each can have an explanation. But if I have taught you one thing, it's that stacked is where the real picture is and stacked, they are the textbook architecture of running a charity for the private benefit of an insider. Let's look deeper into Sheridan's red flags: 1) Stacy Sheridan is a salaried TPUSA employee, its Senior Advancement Director. She also owns Cloverstone Ventures, the charity's number-one outside fundraiser. Confirmed in state corporate records. WHY BAD ACTORS DO EXACTLY THIS: the cleanest way to take from a charity is to never take from it, just sell to it. You do not touch the donation. You own the company the charity hires to collect it, and you set the price. Buyer and seller are the same hand, and every "fee" is a check she writes to herself. 2) Cloverstone is a custody fundraiser. In FY2025 it held custody of $19.3 million in donations, forwarded $18.8 million to the charity, and kept $482,568. Sheridan is also listed personally as a custody fundraiser, another $3.1 million through her own name. Over five years her firm has had custody of more than $88 million in donor money. WHY BAD ACTORS DO EXACTLY THIS: custody is the whole game. A normal vendor sends an invoice. A custody fundraiser holds the account the money lands in before the cause ever sees it. She is not a vendor, she is a tollbooth on her own employer's donations, counting the cash and reporting the one number nobody else can see. 3) She is paid as a fundraiser three ways off the same donors: through Cloverstone, under her own name, and as a salaried employee. Across the years her private companies have kept roughly $5 million in fees (Lionrock ~ $1.4 million, Cloverstone ~ $3.5 million, GSM ~ $200,000), on top of a six-figure salary. WHY BAD ACTORS DO EXACTLY THIS: you never take one big number that trips an audit. You take modest cuts off many angles of the same transaction you also control. Salary for being staff, company fees for being the vendor, personal billing for the third straw in the same cup. Sliced up, each looks fine. Stacked, it is a faucet she controls. 4) It is a relay of shell companies. GSM Strategy, then Lionrock, then Cloverstone. California's records show Lionrock is now terminated, and Cloverstone never registered in California at all. WHY BAD ACTORS DO EXACTLY THIS: you retire the entity the second it gets named in a story and reopen another one in a more sheltered state. Each new shell resets the trail to zero and strips one more public record. The money never stops. Only the name on it changes. The constant across all three is her. 5) On the tax return, Cloverstone reads as an ordinary top contractor. The return never says its owner is the charity's own development director. WHY BAD ACTORS DO EXACTLY THIS: the trick is to make the insider read as an outsider. Book the payment to what looks like a third-party firm on the federal form, and keep the one document that exposes it, the ownership record, in a different agency in a different state. Two systems that never touch, so the conflict never surfaces in one place. 6) To raise from Minnesotans, Cloverstone had to register with the Minnesota Attorney General as a professional fundraiser, post a $20,000 bond because it takes custody of donations, and file reports certified UNDER OATH by both the fundraiser and the charity. Registration #02304, now lapsed. WHY BAD ACTORS DO EXACTLY THIS: pick the lie. Either the "independent fundraiser" she swore to the State of Minnesota is really the charity's own development director, or the federal return that treats it as arm's-length is the false one. Both cannot be true. She is on both. How a charity actually loses over this A 501(c)(3) has one iron rule: it must be run for the public, not the private profit of its own insiders. When an insider makes money off the charity through a company she owns, an examiner runs three questions. Was it disclosed on Schedule L, the section built for exactly these insider deals? Was it approved by an independent board with the conflicted person out of the room? Was the price fair, or did the firm charge more than a normal outsider would? Here is what it can cost them. First, the scalpel: excess-benefit taxes under IRC Section 4958, a 25% excise tax on Sheridan personally, rising to 200% if she does not pay it back, plus a tax on the board members who signed off. Then the real penalty: a 501(c)(3) is flatly barred from letting its earnings benefit an insider, which is private inurement, an absolute prohibition. If the IRS concludes the charity is run for the private enrichment of the people who control it, it can revoke the exemption outright. Donations stop being deductible. The custody detail is what turns a conflict of interest into an inurement case: the insider who profits is also the one holding and counting the money. Some CYA: A conflict of interest is not automatically a crime. An insider-owned fundraiser can be legal IF it was disclosed on Schedule L, approved by an independent board with the conflicted person recused, and priced at a true market rate. That was not on the 990s I saw, but that is exactly what a review would test. No government agency has publicly questioned, investigated, or charged Stacy Sheridan; the questions here are mine, drawn from public filings. And most of the money she had custody of did reach the charity; the issue is the structure and the fees, not a claim that she pocketed the $88 million. I am not saying she stole anything. I am saying this is the exact setup regulators are trained to look for, and donors deserve to know their money passes through an employee's private company before it reaches the cause.
QST
@ShaneCashman Hey @ShaneCashman idk if I missed sumn but just went to catch up on IWL & realized I didn't need to feel guilty for missing the show bcuz there hasn't been 1 for a couple weeks! I hope all is well for you & the fam & you are still in my prayers every day 🙏 Christ is King 💯🙏
English
Bigpapapaco retweetledi
I have seen the receipt without it being blurred.
I also spoke directly to the owner of the restaurant who recovered the charge and spoke with the FBI. There is going to be no way around this one Viva— it's banking. You can save this tweet and keep accusing me of dishonest (as is your new grift)—but what I reported is completely true and the truth always ages well.
English
Bigpapapaco retweetledi
The only marriage Candace ruined was Ben and Jeremy’s.
English
Bigpapapaco retweetledi
We’re watching Jack Posobiec’s entire career go down in flames in real time.
English
Bigpapapaco retweetledi
Late show to accommodate the World Cup Semi. 😩
Today we have an Exclusive Recording of the LONE person to have recorded the alleged shooter dropping onto Losee Rooftop. Remarkably, the prosecution, defense, and Feds have not followed up with him.
His stunning testimony will make you understand why.
Also— Israel has spent millions on the war for your mind via bots and influencers. They are now angry that their campaign has failed.
Join us LIVE:
youtube.com/live/puuMVxEu5…
YouTube
English
Bigpapapaco retweetledi
Let's expose the fraud playbook TPUSA's structure follows, one person at a time.
First up, Tyler Bowyer.
Fraud within organizations, especially when dealing with executives, is more often than not, structural. The goal isn't to steal a lump sum, it's to build a system where money moves constantly among related entities so that no single document ever shows the whole picture, insider pay is relabeled as arm's-length business expense, and the ultimate recipient is hidden behind a layer. You don't write yourself a check. You'd design exactly what I have been seeing across all TPUSA entities.
Here's what Tyler Bowyer's playbook looks like:
1. On his own charity's return, Bowyer is the Chief Operating Officer AND its #1 outside “vendor”. $288,255 for “COO SERVICES,” invoiced from his house.
WHY BAD ACTORS DO EXACTLY THIS: a salary gets audited and a vendor invoice doesn't. Executive pay triggers board sign-off, comparability studies, reasonableness tests, an excise tax. A “purchased service” melts into the expense pile. So you stop being an employee getting paid and start being a company getting hired by yourself. Billing it from your house is the tell: there's no firm on the other end. It's you, writing invoices to a charity you run....
2. His pay is split across three entities. $288K from the charity, $88K from the political arm, $0 from TPUSA. Total: ~$376K.
WHY BAD ACTORS DO EXACTLY THIS: everyone who might catch you pulls one filing at a time. Put the whole number on one return and it draws the excess-comp tax and the headline. Slice it across three affiliates and each piece looks modest. You're not hiding the money, you're hiding the total, and betting nobody cross-references three separate 990s. They usually don't, which is why it's one of the first things I do.
3. His public role is politics, he's COO of Turning Point Action, the (c)(4) political arm. Yet the tax-deductible (c)(3) charity pays him roughly three times what the political arm does.
WHY BAD ACTORS DO EXACTLY THIS: charity money is the cheapest money in the building. It's tax-deductible, so it's easier to raise and comes in bigger amounts. If a person's real work is political and you load that salary onto the charity, you're paying for work the charity is legally barred from doing, with subsidized dollars, and the donors wrote off politics on their taxes without knowing it. You push every cost onto the entity with the cheapest money and the least scrutiny for that line. Whether this split reflects real charitable work or a misallocation is exactly what an audit would settle, and it's the first thing I'd pull his time records for.
4. The charity paying him takes 100% of its money as grants from TPUSA, spends nearly all of it, and holds nothing. In its 2023 return it booked $3.7 million in salaries against zero employees on its federal wage form. The next year it reported 124.
WHY BAD ACTORS DO EXACTLY THIS: a satellite entity is a second set of books you fully control. Money leaves the closely-watched flagship as a "grant", which looks charitable, lands in a smaller entity nobody audits hard, and gets spent there on payroll and insiders with a fraction of the oversight. And millions in salaries booked against zero reported employees is the classic ghost-employee signature, wages to people who may not exist, or to insiders dressed as staff. Maybe 2023 was a filing error. That's the innocent read. But a swing from zero to 124 is the exact anomaly a forensic examiner reconciles first, because it's also how payroll fraud hides.
5. Within a few months of Charlie Kirk's assassination, as control of a nine-figure network changed hands, Tyler Bowyer opened five companies all within 54 days of one another. Four are anonymous Wyoming LLCs using one Cheyenne "mailbox". One is named “Vote LLC.” One is “Tyler Bowyer Inc.,” at the same address he already invoices the charity from.
WHY BAD ACTORS DO EXACTLY THIS: the entire purpose of an anonymous LLC is that no one can prove YOU got paid. Send money to “Victory Advisors LLC” and the trail dead-ends at a mail drop. Stand up a personal corporation at your billing address and your fees now flow through a company with one more wall between the cash and your name. And you build the pipes before the money moves, right when the org is in transition and everyone's looking at the funeral instead of the filings.
6. He co-owns Resolute Media, run out of a building on the charity's campus, and chairs Superfeed, the for-profit the movement pays, with Erika Kirk's own mother on the board.
WHY BAD ACTORS DO EXACTLY THIS: self-dealing is invisible when the counterparty wears a different name. You don't embezzle from the nonprofit, you sell to it, at your price, through a company you own. The charity pays “Superfeed” or “Resolute,” it reads as a normal vendor, and the profit lands with the same people who run the charity.
7. On their signed federal returns, TPUSA and Turning Point Action both answered "No" to the question regulators scan for self-dealing: any business transactions with an officer, or with a company an officer controls.
WHY BAD ACTORS DO EXACTLY THIS: that box is the one you most need blank, because a "yes" invites the audit you're avoiding. And here's the defense they'll reach for, so let me get ahead of it. They'll say the "No" is technically correct: officer pay gets reported elsewhere, and this schedule only captures a company an officer owns more than 35% of. Fine. But that's exactly the problem. Those thresholds are the exits. Officer comp is excluded. A 34% stake is excluded. So a person can be paid by the charity, own a slice of the vendors it hires, and chair a company it does business with, and still, truthfully, check "No." The schedule built to expose insider dealing has doors an insider can walk right through. A "No" here doesn't mean there's nothing to see. It means the only way to see it is the one thing they haven't handed over: the ownership percentages and the payment records. That, again, is the audit.
The pattern: Every one of these findings align to what someone committing fraud would do and reveals a behavioral pattern: to make the money harder to see, the recipient harder to name, and the total harder to add up. Real fraud isn't loud. It's a hundred small, individually-defensible decisions that all lean the same way, toward the insiders and away from the light. One of these could be considered a "quirk", but all seven, across every entity, for years, it is a design.
I can't prove intent from a tax form. Intent lives in the bank records and the operating agreements, and those aren't public. But every structural choice here is the one a person with something to hide would make. That is the reason to open the books.
Tyler Bowyer (and all of TPUSA, but I'll get there in the following parts) needs a real forensic audit, by the IRS, by the Arizona AG, by anyone with the subpoena power to pull what a 990 will never show you.
They built the structure betting nobody would read the filings or pay attention. I'm paying attention.
Part 2 coming next. Who do you want? Erika Kirk or Andrew Kolvet?
English
I think Candace Owens has known what happened to Charlie for a while now but just says random stuff to get people to put it together
When she was talking all the men alone wearing maroon I’m not gonna lie I thought it was a type of black autism I wasn’t familiar with.
Looking back she def saw that the play was to confuse the ID process and make it look like Robinson was everywhere they needed him to be.
I respect that. In the past I’ve “truthed” people too much too fast and they go blank slowly back away. Being right doesn’t matter it’s how it’s communicated.
Well done Candace. Ironically I just learned how to have better impulse control from a black. Which is pretty funny
English
@Groypgru @IanCarrollShow @groypgru it appears you need to change your name. May I suggest getting rid of the 1st R? GOYpgru... there fixed it for you 🤡
English
@IanCarrollShow Except Israel is a country, not an assassin. All countries have assassins, that does not make them assassins. This framing is beyond dishonest, its outright stupid. And flies in the face of all the evidence.
English
Imagine you go into business with the world’s most famous and prolific assassin.
You spend 8 years building a massive business using his money. Very useful business to him too.
Then he starts doing things you don’t really love and you make some comments on it, you start to argue a bit.
Then you text him and say, I don’t like where this is going, you leave me no choice but to leave the pro-you cause.
A couple days later you’re assassinated.
This is the Charlie Kirk assassination.
English