Untitled Document

[00:00:00] This week, I received a letter from [00:00:02] Turning Point titled, "Demand to cease [00:00:04] and desist defamatory comments." This is [00:00:07] the first step when someone sues you for [00:00:09] defamation. [00:00:10] I know there are a lot of people out [00:00:12] there making videos about Turning Point, [00:00:14] so you should pay attention to this. [00:00:16] They have started sending out cease and [00:00:18] desist letters, and for some reason, [00:00:21] they've decided to start with me. [00:00:23] Apparently, they cannot handle the [00:00:25] criticism from my teeny tiny YouTube [00:00:28] channel. [00:00:30] This letter is showing the world the [00:00:32] type of organization Turning Point has [00:00:34] become under Erica Kirk. They want to [00:00:37] send legal letters to small YouTube [00:00:39] creators. [00:00:41] So, we're going to go through this [00:00:42] letter. And by the way, if any of you [00:00:45] know a good lawyer in Arizona that [00:00:47] handles defamation cases, have them send [00:00:49] me an email through my website because [00:00:51] I'm looking for a lawyer. [00:00:58] >> [music] [00:01:10] >> Turning Point states in the letter, [00:01:11] "Turning Point entities are not looking [00:01:13] for litigation. Rather, their interest [00:01:15] is in the truth and making sure the [00:01:17] public record is accurate." So, they are [00:01:19] claiming they do not want to sue me. But [00:01:23] I view this letter as a threat to sue [00:01:25] and I think any reasonable business [00:01:27] person would do the same. A cease and [00:01:29] desist letter is the first step towards [00:01:31] a defamation lawsuit. [00:01:34] I interpret this letter as turning point [00:01:37] telling me to shut my mouth or they're [00:01:39] going to sue me. [00:01:41] I do not understand what Erica Kirk is [00:01:43] doing. Out of the hundreds of people [00:01:46] posting on social media about Turning [00:01:48] Point, why are they targeting me? Why [00:01:52] are they so worried about what I am [00:01:54] saying that they're sending me legal [00:01:56] letters? I am one of the smallest [00:01:58] YouTube channels in my market segment. [00:02:01] Who do they think I am? I'm a working [00:02:04] accountant with a small YouTube channel. [00:02:06] I have no money. I have no power. I have [00:02:09] no influence. I don't know how much [00:02:11] money they think they're going to get [00:02:13] from suing me. All I have is the truth. [00:02:18] And I'm not going to stop speaking the [00:02:19] truth because Erica Kirk doesn't like [00:02:21] it. [00:02:23] The one good thing about a lawsuit is [00:02:26] that everything will be out in the open [00:02:28] and Turning Point will quickly find out [00:02:31] that I have nothing to hide. The letter [00:02:33] came from a lawyer named Paul Edgar [00:02:36] Herald from Southbend, Indiana. It seems [00:02:39] like this is Turning Point's lawyer. I [00:02:41] looked him up and I cannot find that he [00:02:43] has been admitted to the state bar of [00:02:45] Arizona in order to practice law in [00:02:46] Arizona. So, I'm not exactly sure how [00:02:49] he's going to sue me in Arizona, but [00:02:51] maybe he's working with other lawyers. [00:02:53] In the letter, they order me to please [00:02:56] confirm that you will publicly correct [00:02:58] your false statements immediately. [00:03:01] This is not what I was going to talk [00:03:02] about this week, but Turning Point is [00:03:05] demanding that I communicate their [00:03:07] statements publicly. So, here we go. [00:03:11] They include a whole list of statements [00:03:13] they claim are false that I have made in [00:03:16] my videos about TurningPoint. [00:03:19] Now, I'm not interested in spreading [00:03:21] false information. So, I'm glad that [00:03:23] Turning Point reached out to me because [00:03:24] if I said something wrong, I am happy to [00:03:27] correct it. So, let us go through the [00:03:30] statements where they have a problem. [00:03:32] And you're going to want to hear this [00:03:33] because some of these are wild. On [00:03:36] November 16th, I posted a video called [00:03:39] Bombshell. Did Turning Point USA commit [00:03:41] fraud? They say these are false claims. [00:03:45] Charlie Kirk ordered a Doge style audit [00:03:47] that was never conducted. Here is my [00:03:49] first problem with this letter. They do [00:03:52] not include the actual quote that I said [00:03:55] in the video. This is a paraphrase [00:03:58] statement of what I said and they are [00:04:00] saying that the paraphrase statement is [00:04:03] a lie. [00:04:05] you have to tell me exactly what I said [00:04:07] that was supposedly a lie. And they do [00:04:10] this through the whole letter. So, my [00:04:13] request to this lawyer in future [00:04:15] letters, because I'm assuming there's [00:04:17] going to be more, please include the [00:04:19] actual quote that I said so that I can [00:04:22] respond to your accusation. [00:04:25] But I'm going to at least try to [00:04:26] interpret what they are saying. I spoke [00:04:29] in my video about a memo that Charlie [00:04:31] Kirk wrote eight days before he was [00:04:33] murdered. In the cease and desist [00:04:35] letter, they say indeed, Turning Point [00:04:38] USA's COO announcement concerning the [00:04:41] Doge effort never used the word audit. [00:04:44] So, this is breaking news. Turning [00:04:47] Point's attorney has now confirmed that [00:04:49] the Charlie Kirk memo is authentic. We [00:04:53] now have legal confirmation this did [00:04:55] happen. It seems like their problem with [00:04:57] my video is that I called it a Doge [00:05:00] audit when in the memo it is written as [00:05:03] Doge effort. So they want everyone to [00:05:06] use the word effort and not use the word [00:05:09] audit. [00:05:11] This letter is seriously hurting my [00:05:13] head. Whatever word you use, the memo is [00:05:17] clearly talking about an evaluation of [00:05:20] Turning Point. But we cannot use the [00:05:22] word audit. We have to call it an effort [00:05:25] or they are going to sue you. The letter [00:05:28] goes on to say, "The announcement makes [00:05:30] clear that Turning Point USA was doing [00:05:32] what it has always pledged to donors, [00:05:34] ensuring it was being efficient with its [00:05:36] funds and time and making changes to [00:05:38] foster greater efficiencies. Moreover, [00:05:40] Turning Point USA hires a third party [00:05:42] audit firm to conduct an audit every [00:05:44] year." This is all just their opinion. [00:05:47] This is how they are interpreting [00:05:49] Charlie Kirk's memo. [00:05:51] They think that Charlie Kirk wrote this [00:05:53] memo and they think it means that they [00:05:55] do not have to do anything. [00:05:59] How convenient. [00:06:01] They think that Charlie Kirk wrote a [00:06:03] memo just to tell people to keep doing [00:06:05] business as usual. Well, my opinion and [00:06:08] the opinion of many other people was [00:06:10] that Charlie Kirk's memo meant something [00:06:13] different. This is not a statement of [00:06:15] fact. It is an opinion. This is another [00:06:18] problem I have with this letter. Most of [00:06:20] the statements they mention are opinions [00:06:23] just like this one. If you are going to [00:06:26] accuse me of defamatory statements, they [00:06:28] need to be facts, not opinions. [00:06:31] If I have a fact wrong, let me know and [00:06:34] I will happily correct it. But I will [00:06:37] not change my opinion of this memo to [00:06:39] whatever you want. But since it is so [00:06:42] important for TurningPoint, I have no [00:06:44] problem with specifying that Charlie [00:06:46] Kirk's memo used the words Doge effort, [00:06:48] not Doge audit. The next statement is [00:06:52] someone at TurningPoint decided not to [00:06:53] file 990 forms. At the time I made that [00:06:56] video, those forms were not publicly [00:06:59] posted. Those forms were posted after I [00:07:01] made that video, and I have already made [00:07:03] a correction about that. The next [00:07:05] statement is in 2023 $650,000 [00:07:09] may have been funneled from TurningPoint [00:07:10] USA through Turning Point Action to [00:07:13] Turning Point Pack to evade campaign [00:07:15] finance restrictions. They are [00:07:17] referencing this chart from my video. [00:07:20] They claim money actually went from [00:07:22] Turning Point Action to Turning Point [00:07:24] USA as a reimbursement for event [00:07:26] expense. There was nothing nefarious [00:07:28] about that transfer. I'm not sure they [00:07:31] are contradicting what I am saying. [00:07:33] According to their own statement, [00:07:35] TurningPoint USA used their own donor [00:07:38] funds to pay for an event on behalf of [00:07:41] Turning Point Action, freeing up Turning [00:07:43] Point Action funds, which they then [00:07:45] transferred to Turning Point Pack. They [00:07:48] are saying that later Turning Point [00:07:50] Action reimbured Turning Point USA for [00:07:52] that event. But that doesn't change what [00:07:55] I was saying. Additionally, in my video, [00:07:58] I specifically said, again, this is not [00:08:01] necessarily illegal if they structure [00:08:03] their transactions correctly and utilize [00:08:05] campaign finance loopholes, but it [00:08:08] certainly looks unethical. That is my [00:08:10] opinion. This money did move between the [00:08:14] organizations. I'm allowed to have my [00:08:16] opinion. On November 30th, I posted a [00:08:19] video called Explosive: More Fraud at [00:08:21] Turning Point USA. They say these are [00:08:24] false claims. there was more fraud at [00:08:27] TurningPoint USA. I assume they are [00:08:30] referring to the title of the video [00:08:32] here. They of course are saying that [00:08:34] there is no fraud at Turning Point USA. [00:08:37] The content of the video is me going [00:08:39] over the evidence of fraud and sharing [00:08:41] my opinion. Now, technically a true [00:08:43] statement would be that no one has been [00:08:45] convicted of fraud at Turning Point USA. [00:08:48] But whether fraud is going on right now [00:08:50] is an opinion. This is what happens in [00:08:53] every criminal court case. Both sides [00:08:56] look at the facts. One side gives their [00:08:58] opinion that they are innocent. The [00:09:00] other side gives their opinion that they [00:09:01] are guilty. Turning Point is looking at [00:09:04] the financials and claiming that they [00:09:05] are innocent. I understand that. I'm [00:09:08] looking at the same financials and [00:09:10] thinking they look suspicious. I did not [00:09:13] even say in my video that they committed [00:09:15] fraud. I think I'm very fair and [00:09:18] balanced when I say, "Now, for legal [00:09:20] reasons, I have to say that I do not [00:09:22] have any evidence of a crime. We would [00:09:24] need an investigation of the books at [00:09:25] Turning Point to know for sure. What I [00:09:28] am saying is that there are red flags in [00:09:30] the financials at Turning Point and a [00:09:32] lot of questions that need to be [00:09:34] answered. That sounds to me to be pretty [00:09:37] fair and balanced and the complete [00:09:39] opposite of what they are accusing me of [00:09:41] saying. They cannot take my statements [00:09:43] out of context and accuse me of [00:09:45] defamation. [00:09:47] I have the right as a journalist to [00:09:49] report on Turning Point's Financials. [00:09:52] Their opinion that they have not [00:09:54] committed fraud is just an opinion. My [00:09:57] opinion is that it looks suspicious. [00:10:00] Now, it is nice that we have this letter [00:10:02] with their official statements. But the [00:10:04] letter does nothing to change my [00:10:06] suspicions. It does not address most of [00:10:10] my questions. Instead of answering my [00:10:12] questions, it is the precursor to a [00:10:14] lawsuit unless I change my statements. [00:10:18] That does nothing to reduce my [00:10:20] suspicions. For the sake of avoiding [00:10:22] miscommunication, I can change the title [00:10:25] of the video if that makes them more [00:10:26] happy. I already changed it from more [00:10:29] fraud at TurningPoint USA to more fraud [00:10:32] at Turning Point USA. Allegedly, the [00:10:35] next statement is that America's Turning [00:10:37] Point had ghost employees. The letter [00:10:39] explains America's Turning Point had 80 [00:10:42] employees in FY23 and 108 in FY24. [00:10:46] There was however an inadvertent error [00:10:48] in America's Turning Point filing which [00:10:51] failed to note these employees and [00:10:53] America's Turning Point is in the [00:10:54] process of rectifying that inadvertent [00:10:56] error. So I was right. There was [00:11:00] something wrong. They did put incorrect [00:11:03] information on the 990 form. There were [00:11:06] missing employees they were not [00:11:08] reporting. They have confirmed it. And [00:11:12] just to be clear, this was not some [00:11:14] minor mistake. This was around 80 [00:11:17] employees that were somehow missing. [00:11:19] Their complaint is that it's not correct [00:11:21] to use the term ghost employees. [00:11:25] I don't know if I necessarily agree with [00:11:27] that opinion, but that is their [00:11:28] position. [00:11:30] I find this incredible. [00:11:33] How are they going to sue me for this? [00:11:35] They admit that I am right that the [00:11:38] employees were not reported correctly. [00:11:40] They don't like the wording I used. How [00:11:43] is that defamatory? [00:11:45] The next statement is that donations to [00:11:47] Turning Point Action increased from [00:11:49] $10.7 million in FY23 to $27.2 million [00:11:53] in FY24 and suggested that Tyler Boyer [00:11:57] may have been recruiting these donors [00:11:58] away from Turning Point USA to undermine [00:12:01] MAGA and benefit himself. Again, this is [00:12:05] not exactly what I said, and I find [00:12:07] their paraphrasing of my statements a [00:12:10] little silly. They are claiming that [00:12:13] Tyler Ber never tried to undermine [00:12:15] Charlie Kirk in any of his decisions. [00:12:18] Tyler Ber never tried to benefit himself [00:12:21] in his role at Turning Point. I find [00:12:23] those claims a little excessive. What I [00:12:27] actually say in my video was sharing my [00:12:29] opinion on the financials, which I'm [00:12:31] allowed to do. When you see Tyler [00:12:33] Boyer's organization growing so much [00:12:35] faster than Charlie Kirk's organization, [00:12:38] that looks to me like a corporate [00:12:40] takeover from the inside. That is my [00:12:42] opinion which I'm allowed to have. Now, [00:12:45] of course, I cannot know what is going [00:12:47] on inside Tyler Boyer's mind, but that's [00:12:50] not what I said in my video. I was not [00:12:52] speaking about his state of mind or his [00:12:54] motivation. I do not know that. The [00:12:57] letter goes on to explain that donors [00:12:59] naturally direct more money towards [00:13:01] election activities in election years, [00:13:02] especially to organizations like Turning [00:13:04] Point Action that can engage in lobbying [00:13:06] and political activity during election [00:13:08] years. Accordingly, you are wrong to [00:13:10] assert that the increased donations to [00:13:12] Turning Point Action any sort of [00:13:14] wrongdoing on Mr. Ber's part. So, their [00:13:17] explanation is that all the changes in [00:13:19] the financials can be explained by the [00:13:21] election. That is their official [00:13:23] explanation. [00:13:25] I do not believe it and that is my [00:13:27] opinion. On December 7th, I posted a [00:13:30] video called Top 10 Clowns of the Year. [00:13:33] In this video, I called Turning Point my [00:13:35] number one clown of the year. I talked [00:13:38] about the now infamous interview with [00:13:39] Turning Point's chief security person [00:13:41] talking about the day that Charlie Kirk [00:13:43] was murdered. I point out the massive [00:13:45] contradiction where he says they were [00:13:48] not allowed to fly drones. Then I show [00:13:50] the interview with Frank Turk where he [00:13:52] says he was watching drone footage with [00:13:54] Charlie Kirk. This part is breaking news [00:13:57] because I'm not aware this has ever been [00:13:59] discussed. The lawyer in this letter [00:14:02] says the following. There was no [00:14:04] discrepancy. [00:14:05] UVU prohibited Turning Point USA from [00:14:08] flying drones for security purposes [00:14:10] during the event, but did allow a [00:14:12] Turning Point USA media production drone [00:14:15] to briefly fly over the location before [00:14:18] the event to collect limited B-roll [00:14:20] footage? First of all, how could this be [00:14:23] defamatory if I had no idea about any of [00:14:26] this? Second, I find this explanation [00:14:30] absurd. [00:14:32] You are telling me that the security [00:14:34] team was not allowed drones, but the [00:14:37] media team was. [00:14:39] That is the official explanation from [00:14:41] Turning Point's lawyer. My honest [00:14:44] opinion is I do not believe that. But if [00:14:48] that did happen, that is really silly [00:14:51] and it may have cost Charlie Kirk his [00:14:53] life. On December 14th, I posted a video [00:14:56] called Tim Pool Rants about Turning [00:14:59] Point. They say these are false claims [00:15:03] asking whether money sent to 110 LLC was [00:15:06] to bribe Jay Kaufman. Again, that's not [00:15:09] exactly what I said. They are [00:15:11] complaining that I'm not allowed to ask [00:15:14] questions. I cannot ask questions about [00:15:17] 110 LLC. I cannot ask questions about [00:15:20] Jake Hoffman. [00:15:22] I think those are fair questions to ask [00:15:25] given that Turning Point sends them [00:15:26] millions of dollars as one of their [00:15:28] largest independent contractors. [00:15:31] This is America. I'm allowed to ask [00:15:34] questions. [00:15:36] But I think it is fair for Turning Point [00:15:38] to also state their official position. [00:15:40] They claim TurningPoint contracts with [00:15:43] 110 LLC for legitimate services. The [00:15:46] money you ask about is spent on [00:15:47] marketing and advertising services. and [00:15:50] he claimed that it is a bribe is false. [00:15:52] The second statement is asking why [00:15:55] America's Turning Point lists COO Tyler [00:15:58] Ber as an independent contractor. Again, [00:16:01] they are saying I'm not allowed to ask [00:16:03] questions. [00:16:05] Does Turning Point see the irony in [00:16:07] this? [00:16:09] Charlie Kirk died under a tent with the [00:16:12] slogan, prove me wrong. His whole [00:16:16] college campus tour was about asking [00:16:18] questions. And now Turning Point is [00:16:21] sending out legal letters to small [00:16:23] YouTube channels accusing them of [00:16:25] defamation for asking questions. [00:16:29] I was asking the question why their COO [00:16:32] was an independent contractor. I think [00:16:34] that is unusual. That is my opinion. [00:16:38] Turning Point is now stating their [00:16:39] official position. America's Turning [00:16:41] Point lists its COO as an independent [00:16:44] contractor because his substantive role [00:16:46] for America's Turning Point is more in [00:16:48] line with the contractor classification. [00:16:50] So this is new information. Now we know [00:16:53] TurningPoint is intentionally doing [00:16:55] this. This is not a mistake. They are [00:16:58] intentionally classifying their COO as [00:17:01] an independent contractor, which means [00:17:04] they are not withdrawing payroll taxes [00:17:06] to send to the IRS. [00:17:08] Now, if I were their CFO, I would not do [00:17:11] this. But for some reason, their CFO, [00:17:14] the politician Justin Olsen, has [00:17:16] determined with all of his accounting [00:17:18] expertise that this is the best way to [00:17:21] classify their employees. [00:17:24] Whatever the reason, this is [00:17:25] TurningPoint's opinion about an IRS [00:17:27] classification. It is not a statement of [00:17:30] fact, and I'm allowed my own opinion. [00:17:32] The letter also states, "More generally, [00:17:35] you have accused the Turning Point [00:17:36] entities of being shell companies. This [00:17:39] too is false. They are arguing about [00:17:41] what can be defined as a shell company. [00:17:44] They don't want anyone to call Turning [00:17:46] Point's multiple organizations shell [00:17:48] companies. [00:17:50] Personally, I do not agree that it is an [00:17:52] incorrect use of the definition. Turning [00:17:55] point is moving money between [00:17:57] organizations like some kind of shell [00:17:59] game. A shell game is a classic street [00:18:02] hustle and magic trick. So, in my [00:18:05] opinion, I think it would be appropriate [00:18:07] to call them shell companies. But if [00:18:10] Turning Point is so upset about the word [00:18:12] Shell Company, I have no problem calling [00:18:15] them something else from now on. On [00:18:18] December 28th, I posted a video called [00:18:20] Shocking Turning Point Fraud Gets Worse. [00:18:23] They claim you recklessly repeated many [00:18:26] of the previously described falsehoods [00:18:28] and again directed viewers to the home [00:18:29] address of Mr. Ber which has resulted in [00:18:32] threats to Mr. Boyer's safety. Let me [00:18:35] explicitly state that I condemn any [00:18:38] violence, any threat, any harassment [00:18:40] being sent to any employee at Turning [00:18:42] Point. Do not even harass them on X.com. [00:18:46] Do not retweet at them. Do not send them [00:18:48] angry messages. Keep your comments in my [00:18:51] comment section. [00:18:53] Just for the record, I will repeat what [00:18:55] I have previously said. And I have to [00:18:58] tell people, please do not go to Tyler [00:19:01] Ber's house. That is not appropriate. I [00:19:04] was in no way calling for violence [00:19:06] against Tyler Boyer, and you are [00:19:08] absolutely false in claiming that I was. [00:19:12] In the video, I blacked out Tyler [00:19:14] Boyer's address, which I did not have to [00:19:16] do. He put the address himself on a [00:19:19] public document. That's not my fault. [00:19:21] That's his fault. Don't blame me when I [00:19:24] have tried to protect his privacy. So, [00:19:27] that is the letter. There are more [00:19:29] paragraphs of legal language that I [00:19:31] skipped, but that is pretty much the [00:19:33] letter. I have to say that in general, [00:19:36] most of the things they brought up were [00:19:38] nitpicky little things like they don't [00:19:40] want me to use the word audit or the [00:19:41] words shell company. Those are not even [00:19:44] facts. But I am going out of my way to [00:19:47] adjust for some of their requests. And I [00:19:50] want to mention something else. [00:19:53] Take a moment and think of all the [00:19:55] statements they listed in this letter as [00:19:57] problematic. I think it's around 11 [00:19:59] statements they are claiming are false. [00:20:02] Now, think about all the things I've [00:20:04] talked about in my videos on turning [00:20:06] point. There are a lot of other things [00:20:09] that I have said in my videos that were [00:20:12] never mentioned in this letter. They did [00:20:15] not say I got those statements wrong. I [00:20:17] think that is very telling. Again, I [00:20:21] have no desire to spread false [00:20:23] information. Some of their statements in [00:20:25] this letter were actually very helpful [00:20:26] in answering some of our questions. So, [00:20:28] I hope that this video cleared up any [00:20:30] confusion. I will be honest with you [00:20:33] guys. Getting a legal letter like this [00:20:35] is scary. [00:20:37] I don't know why Turning Point is [00:20:39] attacking me like this. I don't have a [00:20:42] lot of money. Lawyers are expensive and [00:20:45] I'm going to need a good one. [00:20:47] So, I'm going to ask for help. If you [00:20:50] like my videos, consider signing up for [00:20:52] a membership. That is money that I would [00:20:55] use if this turns into a lawsuit. If you [00:20:58] want to provide additional support, you [00:20:59] can also donate directly from the [00:21:01] homepage of my website on wolves and [00:21:03] finance.com. [00:21:05] I really appreciate all my members and [00:21:07] I'm so thankful for your support, [00:21:09] especially in times like these. I'm Zach [00:21:12] from Wolves and Finance. Thank you for [00:21:14] watching. [00:21:17] >> [music] [00:21:24] [music] [00:21:34] >> Heat.