wavePod

Get Wave AI

Massive Astroturf Campaign To SHUT UP Candace Owens - The Jimmy Dore Show | Wave AI Podcast Notes

Back to The Jimmy Dore Show

Massive Astroturf Campaign To SHUT UP Candace Owens

The Jimmy Dore Show

Fri Jan 02 2026

Summary

The Jimmy Dore Show: "Massive Astroturf Campaign To SHUT UP Candace Owens"

Release Date: January 2, 2026
Host: Jimmy Dore
Guests/Regulars: Kurt, Mike (Anonymous Commentator), Ryan Matta

Episode Overview

In this lively and combative episode, Jimmy Dore and his panel dissect an alleged, highly coordinated online campaign to discredit Candace Owens and her investigation into the murder of right-wing figure Charlie Kirk. Dore draws parallels between the tactics used against Owens and previous media manipulation campaigns, suggesting a larger effort—funded and orchestrated in part by political actors and gambling platforms—to suppress dissenting voices and muddy the waters around high-profile controversies.

The episode features deep dives into astroturfing, shell company financial shenanigans related to Turning Point USA, and how modern bounties incentivize influencers to push specific narratives. Cited throughout are notable social media threads, clips from Charlie Kirk, and detailed overviews of suspicious political funding apparatuses. The tone is skeptical, sarcastic, and charged with Dore's signature outrage toward establishment power structures.

Key Discussion Points and Insights

1. The Astroturfed Anti-Candace Owens Campaign

Alleged Online Coordination: The episode opens by explaining an influx of social media accounts and influencers suddenly turning against Candace Owens for her investigation into Charlie Kirk's assassination.
- Discussion of Evan Kilgore: Once a supporter, Kilgore publicly distances himself from Owens, claiming concern about the credibility of her lead witness, Mitch Snow ([00:15–08:50]).
- Dore's Position: Jimmy and co-hosts argue that skepticism towards Candace is less about facts and more about coordinated discrediting efforts.
Paid Smear Tactics:
- Right-wing influencers appear to be promoting similar talking points and retweeting promotions from PolyMarket—a political gambling platform with alleged ties to the Trump administration ([09:48–13:39]).
- The show scrutinizes simultaneous attacks on Candace Owens, connecting them to possible paid promotions, suggesting, "If this guy [Mitch Snow] was garbage, no one would care… there certainly wouldn't be tons and tons and tons of posts about it." — Jimmy Dore ([15:36])
Skepticism of Payments and Motives:
- While not directly accusing all critics of being paid, Dore repeatedly suggests the timing and content are “obviously” coordinated and “AstroTurfed,” even as he remains careful about making direct accusations ([22:40–23:24]).

2. Dissecting the Influencer Bounty System

Ryan Matta Explains “Clipping” and Bounties:
- Matta breaks down, with detailed hypothetical and real-world examples, how PACs and shadowy actors buy influence by posting bounties for certain narratives ([51:20–54:51]; [55:18–58:21]).
- Influencers are incentivized with per-view fees to repeat keywords or themes and can rack up significant sums by covering trending paid topics.
- This system blurs the line between organic discussion and manufactured consensus.
“This is how the game’s played, guys. So just hope you guys are up to date. My name is Ryan Matta, motherfuckers.” — Ryan Matta ([54:51])
Global Participation via Bounty Platforms:
- Many “viral” tweets can be traced to accounts outside the U.S., further to bounty hunting by non-participant actors ([54:55–55:08]).

3. Turning Point USA, Shell Companies & Shady Finances

Wolves in Finance Segment:
- A recurring theme is the convoluted financial structures within Turning Point USA and associated PACs, namely millions being funneled through 110 LLC—a business operating out of a UPS store mailbox ([26:49–49:47]).
Key Details:
- The address is linked to Arizona State Senator Jake Hoffman, with conflicting accounts of the company’s age and legitimacy.
- The web presence of the company is minimal, unindexed by Google, and unchanged since inception—a major red flag according to the panel ([30:35–31:33]).
- Possible connections between Breaking Point executives and those profiting from these structures.
- Charlie Kirk, before his murder, had begun probing the financials, ordering a full audit—which, pointedly, “they are not doing” after his death ([43:12–43:51]).

“It is extremely suspicious that she still refuses to do an audit.” — Kurt ([47:06])

4. Charlie Kirk’s Warning & Motive Discussion

Charlie Kirk Clip:
- Dore plays a prescient Kirk soundbite about the intelligence agencies’ dominance over U.S. politics and their active involvement in manipulating public opinion ([20:05–21:06]).
“We have a super government that exists above Congress… [these agencies] run the country… run the intel agencies… run the country.” — Charlie Kirk ([20:30])
Speculation on Motives:
- Discussants hypothesize that Kirk’s emerging stance against the intelligence community and his push for financial transparency could have motivated a cover-up, and fueled the aggressive backlash against Candace Owens’ investigation ([21:06–23:24]).

5. Media Manipulation Patterns: Past and Present

Parallels with Earlier Campaigns:
- Dore references similar patterns—such as campaigns to keep junk food as part of SNAP benefits—where allegedly minuscule payments can drive massive online advocacy ([23:39–24:41]).
“They were being paid hundreds of dollars, not thousands… being pro-SNAP benefits, being able to buy junk food." — Jimmy Dore ([24:33])
Skepticism Toward “Organic” Outrage:
- The hosts return to the point that genuine opposition would never generate such a sustained, networked response absent shadow funding and coordination ([59:37–60:45]).

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

On Investigation vs. Smear:

“They're acting like Candace has come to conclusions and she hasn't. She's just following leads, which is what every good investigator does… And this might come. Mitch's story might come to a dead end, but right now it hasn't.” — Jimmy Dore ([03:36])
On Burden of Proof:

“The burden of proof's on the government… It's not on Candace Owens. She could just raise a reasonable doubt if she wants.” — Anonymous Commentator ([04:18])
On PolyMarket Influence:

“It begs the question, were they paid to come out against Mitch Snow?… I can't verify the veracity of that.” — Jimmy Dore ([09:48]; [12:11])
On the Financial Shell Game:

“So I tracked down [110 LLC] to the parking lot of a strip mall… It is operating out of a UPS store mailbox.” — Kurt ([26:49–27:34]) “Tyler Boyer needs to answer the simple question, where did he get the $650,000?" — Kurt ([37:25])
On the Astroturfing System:

“Are we really buying that this trans shooter… Why isn't Benny Johnson…talking about the fact that most likely this was a professional hit job carried out by Israel? Everybody's silent on except Candace Owens and Carolyn and the OGs.” — Ryan Matta ([58:12])
Meta Reflection:

“If she's so crazy, if she's so crazy, she's so out of her mind... Why would anybody care? Again, this is—it's obvious what's happening. It's obvious this is coordinated. It's obvious this is AstroTurf.” — Jimmy Dore ([59:37])

Timestamps for Key Segments

Astroturfed Smear Campaign Overview: [00:15–09:41]
PolyMarket and Paid Influencer Discussion: [09:45–15:36]
Turning Point USA and Shell Company Deep Dive: [26:49–49:18]
Paid Influence System Explained (Ryan Matta): [51:20–54:51]; [55:18–58:21]
Charlie Kirk Clip on Intelligence Agencies: [20:05–21:06]
Conclusions & Recap: [59:37–60:45]

Summary Takeaways

Astroturfing is Real & Pervasive: Dore and his co-hosts portray the influencer attacks on Candace Owens as emblematic of the new landscape where coordinated, paid social media campaigns can shape narratives and silence inconvenient investigations.
Financial Chicanery and Shell Games: Behind much of the political drama are networks of non-transparent companies and suspicious financial flows, which Dore argues demand far more public scrutiny.
Systemic, Not Organic: Organic backlash is differentiated from manufactured dissent by its timing, volume, and cross-platform identicality, often incentivized by bounties and influencer marketing infrastructure.
Establishment vs. Whistleblower Pattern: The episode paints a familiar portrait of how voices that threaten established power structures—by questioning official narratives or exposing financial corruption—often fall victim to ruthless, coordinated suppression campaigns.

For listeners new to the episode:
Jimmy Dore and his panel use their typical sarcasm, suspicion, and expletive-laced humor to walk step-by-step through complex stories of online manipulation, urging the audience to question the authenticity of what trends on social media, especially when orchestrated so obviously—according to them—against figures like Candace Owens. The episode is a crash course in skepticism toward digital consensus, and a warning about the ease with which well-funded actors can commandeer the public conversation.

Loading summary...

Transcript

Jimmy Dore (0:03)

Come see me on tour in Pottstown, Pennsylvania, Waikiki, Hawaii and the Comedy Store in Los Angeles. Go to jimmy dore.com for a link for tickets establishment.

Kurt (0:14)

Media sucks.

Jimmy Dore (0:15)

August light and so good luck bullshit we can't afford why he's fomenting this watch and see as his jack golf the medium speeds and jumps the medium and hits him head on. It's the chim. So if you want to see how this paid for Mockingbird 2.0 media works going against Candace Owens, we'll show you. But first let me show you this. This is a guy named Evan Kilgore who at first was posting lots of stuff that was supportive of Candace Owens. Asking questions and investigating every lead because that's what she's doing. People like, well, what's her theory? It doesn't matter what her theory is. She wants to invite an investigator, investigates every lead and sees where it goes. And if it goes nowhere, then it goes nowhere.

Kurt (0:59)

Yeah.

Anonymous Commentator (1:00)

My theory is you're lying to me. That's my fucking theory.

Jimmy Dore (1:02)

Her theory is she's being lied to and she's trying to find out why. Evan Kilgore says, I mean, this is a quick example of how things work.

Anonymous Commentator (1:09)

Never heard of him, by the way.

Jimmy Dore (1:10)

I wanted to get on here to say something and know I will open myself up to thousands of hate comments for it. That's okay with me. What I want to tell you, all I know is that after a great deal of thought and conviction, I can no longer support the direction of Candace Owens investigation.

Anonymous Commentator (1:25)

You can't support the direction of it?

Jimmy Dore (1:27)

What you mean her asking questions and why we're being lied to?

Anonymous Commentator (1:31)

Candace Owens investigation, dipshit. It's a thing about Charlie Kirk.

Jimmy Dore (1:34)

Yeah.

Anonymous Commentator (1:35)

So let's say that she got it wrong with Mitch, whatever his name is. What bearing does that have on I'm being lied to?

Jimmy Dore (1:40)

Jimmy Dore (9:48)

So here it is. There appears to have been a paid influencer campaign against Candace Owens for Wahookah Charlie Kirk whistleblower Mitch Snow. Yesterday, a coordinated personal smear and disavow campaign launched across social media against Mitch Snow, with some surprising right wing accounts coming out against him. What's interesting is that these same accounts also appear to be doing paid promotions for Poly Market. It begs the question, were they paid to come out against Mitch Snow? So this is what Diligent Dennison is saying. Right. I am now speaking with one of Mitchell Snow's ex best friends. Spoiler alert. There's nothing trustworthy about what Mitt says about his past and no reason to believe him now. I'm sorry. You can hate me all you want. I'm interested in the truth. That's Evan Kilgore. So that's not how you do an investigation about what if a guy's saying is true. So here it is. So he's one of. Here's the poly market. Evan Kilgore reposted the Poly market, breaking. The odds of Tim Waltz being criminally charged are soaring amid the expose revealing fake Somalian daycare centers. I love and support Candace Owens and have immense respect for her and her work and the investigation to Charlie Kirk. I cannot in good faith get behind Mitchell Snow. So this has been. So this is their showing. And then let's watch the poly. Oh, there she is retweeting Polymarket. So they're. They're also even accusing Tim Pool of this. So I know. I can't, I can't. I'm not vouching that this connection is real. I mean, it's real that they're connected, but whether they're. Whether they're being paid by Polymarket to launch this obvious astroturf campaign against Candace Owens and Mitch. I can't. I can't verify the veracity of that. And so they even go after Tim Pool, which. Come on, really? So Trump is up 11% on polymarket. Holy shit. So they're insinuating that Tim Pool is on the take going after Candace Owens because of Polymarket. I find that hard to believe.

Kurt (30:50)

This on the website. You can see a sample marketing example with Turning Point Action listed on the ad. I think it is very suspicious that he is advertising that if you pay him money you are also going to get the support of Turning Point Action. You should go check this website out. There's not a lot on it. It is literally one page. What is even crazier is that if you look the website up using the Wayback Machine, you will see that the website has not changed at all since 2021. I will repeat, this marketing company has not made a single change to its website since 2021. Additionally, the reason the website is so hard to find is that it is not indexed by Google. If you search on Google site 110io you will receive zero results. So this supposed marketing company has a website that you cannot search for on Google? This really does not do anything to convince me that this is anything other than a fake shell company. Jay Kaufman has also explained that he does not give out the address or details of his operations because of political persecution from what he calls the insane murderous left. I'm sorry Jay Kaufman, but that explanation is not good enough. You are a state Senator and you have to prove you are not taking bribes. You cannot claim security reasons as a shield to stop anyone from knowing the details of your suspicious business. This would be like if Donald Trump decided not to let anyone know the addresses for his hotels. You could not know anything about his golf courses for security reasons. That would be ridiculous. You chose to live a public life. You do not get to keep your business a giant secret. There's nothing wrong with a state senator running his own company, but it has to be an actual business and not a way for him to launder money. Let's assume that Jake Hoffman is completely innocent. This is still a stupid thing for him to do. It is stupid just for appearance's sake. It looks really shady. Imagine if Joe Biden had a UPS store mailbox where people would walk in and drop off millions of dollars. Oh yeah, Joe Biden did have multiple show companies that didn't seem to do anything and we had hearings about it for two years. How come all these Republicans got upset over Joe Biden but no one wants to talk about what Jake Hoffman is doing? So let's take a closer look at 110 LLC. You can go to transparencyusa.org which shows election related expenditures in the US and state elections. 110 LLC received over $4 million from Arizona election campaigns and a small amount related to Wisconsin campaigns. Now this is just a portion of the revenue that was reported as part of state elections. We know the actual revenue numbers for 110 LLC are much higher because this doesn't even include all the money paid to them by Turning Point. Another person I talked about in my videos is someone named Tyler Boyer. Just as a reminder, Turningpoint is made up of four main shell companies and Tyler Boyer is the COO of Turning Point. Action and America's Turningpoint. Tyler Boyer is important because the Turning Point shell companies that Tyler Boyer managed just happen to be the same shell companies paying 110 LLC. Let me show you how Tyler Boyer describes the first time that he met Charlie Kirk.

Kurt (37:25)

But I don't think it is a stretch to say that it is my opinion that Tyler Boyer was likely involved in the creation of 110 LLC. If Tyler Boyer is a partner, that means that he would receive a share of the profits of every dollar that flows through that UPS store mailbox. Now, I don't have any evidence of this, but there are some interesting facts that you should know. I mentioned in my previous video that Tyler Boyer lives in a massive mansion. I'm not going to show it on the video, but you can go look for it yourself. His address is listed on the IRS 990 forms. His house is luxurious. There are multiple buildings, a pool, a private basketball court. Well, I have the paperwork from when he bought his house, and this is pretty shocking. It was also purchased in 2021, four months after 110 LLC was created. The property was worth $1.95 million, and he put a down payment of $650,000. Let me explain how wild this is. Here is court paperwork from 2017 of a lawsuit where Tyler Boyer was involved. He had been fighting this lawsuit since 2010 over some unpaid fees from a condo development. The court order, the exact condition of the judgment is $11,401.32 as of June 8, 2017. So Tyler Boyer owes this money and he was taken to court. It was reported in the news that his wages were garnished because of this debt. So as of 2017, Tyler Boyer was struggling financially. This is not the type of thing you see from someone who has a lot of money. This begs the obvious question. How in the world did he get $650,000 in cash to use as a down payment on his house? Do any of you find this suspicious, that someone in 2017 can be broke and in four years have $650,000 in cash? Tyler Boyer needs to answer the simple question, where did he get the $650,000? The first major customer of 110 LLC was Carrie Lake. Kari Lake at this time was running for governor of Arizona. Carrie Lake had a SuperPAC called Put Arizona first right before the primary. Put Arizona first, received a $2.3 million donation, put Arizona first, then turned around and gave the $2.3 million to One Ten, LLC.

Ryan Matta (52:04)

Because all the accounts are different. You want as many accounts as humanly possible, basically competing to earn their share of the 50,000. So along with the bounty. So the bounty, this is the actual job itself, will have requirements. So the requirements for this specific job that I just made up would be a 39 to 90 second video attacking Candace Owens. The keywords that you need to put in the actual title of the post, Candace Owens lied about Erica Kirk. Now I can go on and say Candace Owens is crazy and she lied about Erica Kirk. I don't have to put keyword word for word, but those specific keywords have to be used for my tweet to actually be eligible to earn a percentage of this bounty, right? And then the platforms I need to post it on can be X, IG, TikTok, YouTube. Now, if I post the same video and I post it on X and ig, it's I'm gonna get two links, right? So each one of those videos is gonna be earning its portion. It's not combined. It'll be on each of you post IG, TikTok, YouTube and on each platform, you get a million views. Or to say each platform, you get 100, 000 views. Then you'd earn 40 bucks, $10 per 100,000 views. Okay, and then so what does that get like, why are people incentivized to do this? Let me just break this down. If you put up $50,000 bounty and you're paying $10, right? Per 100,000 views you get 10 divided by 50,000 is 5,000. Five thousand times a hundred thousand gives you 500 million views total. Now if nobody earned that, that that bounty will stay open. So sometimes you'll see like a job, let's say bounty slash, you know, 25,000 remaining or 4,000 remaining or whatever the amount of remaining money is and the job. I didn't put the data up there, but you know, let's just say that was posted a month ago. You know, that might be an old job, but it might, something might start trending or going viral. Candace might put a new video and you go back and they're like, oh shit, nobody's actually competing for that. Oh, I'm gonna, you know, take a stab at it. I'm trying to earn my percentage of that bounty. And so what it looks like is basically you have your bounty, which is the job attack Candace Owens. You submit your link here and then once you submit your link there, it'll attach it to basically like your profile and you'll have like a scrolling percentage counter. So it might be like every, you know, like the minimum might be a thousand views. So every thousand views you earn $0.10 or whatever the equation is, right? And then you won't see it. But there's just like everybody, this person, let's just say they put out 50,000 views to get 5 bucks, 100,000 views, get 10 bucks, 55 bucks, 10 bucks. 10 million views get you a thousand bucks, 100k views, 10, you know, 20 million views get you $2,000. And then you just basically will have a running total on that bounty, you know, to say like 39,000 left, 10,000 left, $5,000 left, and then once it runs out, you're done, right? So once the bounty bottoms out like, so that's why, you know, if you're doing this, you're probably like, if there's only a thousand dollars remaining at that bounty, you might not want to create a video. Because if your video gets a million views, you're only going to earn, you know, you don't start. Okay, so yeah, so like you put a video get 10 million views and there's only a thousand dollars left in that bounty, you're only going to get paid for the first, you know, million views. Because once that caps out, you're done. There's no additional payouts after the bounty ends. So it's first come, first serve. And that's how these sites work. And I made A video that actually showed you.

Ryan Matta (55:18)

It's really important to understand how the fake new media, right, you are the new media. We're maga or the new maga media, how all of these influencers are all getting paid via these different platforms that pay content creators and put up bounties for specific keywords or topics. So, for example, you talk about the Trump assassination, or you talk about Charlie Kirk Shooter being trans, and you all put out the same keywords in your title. And then once you create that post, you add your link to these platforms and then you get paid a percentage of that bounty. Let me show you how this works. Okay, so the first thing I want to do is go to Grok and it said what websites pay influencers for clipping and posting content. Platforms that pay influencers for clicking and posting content are and it says whoop content, bix, starlit clips and clips. And now there's probably a ton of others. But so I set up and I went and got into starlet clips. So whatever's. When you go to starlit clips. So check this out. So this is in their discord. So they basically post here and they show you. Okay, if you post on TikTok, we're paying 30, 30 for a hundred thousand views. We're paying for reels on Instagram, I believe thirty dollars for a hundred thousand views. Shorts, we're paying 30 for 100,000 views. And Twitter and X, we're paying 15 per 100,000 views. Okay, now it's funded or clip for Bardan. So here's the Bardan post Bardan's clips everywhere. So basically this guy creates a video and if you take his video and you cut clips from his video, his podcast or whatever the case may be, and then you submit your links, every time Your link gets 100,000 views, there's a total bounty. And I don't know if they're where the bounty is. We'll have to look into it a little bit. But basically, if there was like, say this would be like a $5,000 bounty. So they're going to pay up to $5,000 for the first person that actually submits and gets X amount of views for every 100,000. So if you've got a video that got like, you know, say 50 million views and you use one of his clips and you submitted it, you might be able to drain that entire bounty before anybody else even gets their clips submitted. And there's tons of these different websites out there. Like I said, I've showed you just a few. Now, another one is a different style, which is Bix. So you go into Bix and you basically you add a service like, I'm willing to create content on politics or whatever. And then brands or packs could actually come over here and go, boom. We want to, we want to automatically choose your service. So they say, boom, here's a thousand dollars to make a tweet on whatever, right? So you can put up a services. I post tweets on X, you know, for a hundred dollars a tweet. And they could go, boom. They can send you the information. They would pay you for the gig. They would tell you what, you post it and you post it. Once you post it, you submit the link. And then these platforms act like an aggregator or these websites act like, like an escrow account, right? Like, so when you're doing a real estate deal and you're closing on your house and it's transferring the deed from one person's name to the, your money basically goes in escrow. So it's in limbo there. So neither party controls it, the banks actually control it. And when you sign the documents or you pay the loan, then it transfers ownership, right? So this is the same thing. There's a bounty, there's a reward that's put up, and then that reward is already in a third party. So once you submit your link, and if your link meets all the criteria keywords, blah, blah, blah, blah, as soon as that gets 100,000 views, you're instantly getting paid. Boom, boom, boom, boom, boom. And that's how you see all the fake MAGA media, all using the same exact talking points, saying the same exact script. It's not because they're getting views, they're getting paid on extra. Their views. Guys, come on. Are you really going to kill your timeline and put out some stupid shit they don't even care to report on just to put it out for fun? Because you want to help the Trump administration. You're an independent journalist, of course you're not. You're only going to report on things if you think they're valuable or you're getting paid for it. Okay, so now let's do this. Let's show you guys how much money and how easy it is to clean up on shit like this and how much these dudes actually make. So it's $30,000 or it's $30 for 100,000 views. Okay, let's go here. Charlie Kirk assassinated by a leftist trans activist. This is Benny Johnson, 2.5 million views. So 2.5 million divided by 100,000 is 25. 25 times 30 is what, $750 just for one post. So if somebody put up a bounty for anybody that was talking about the activist being a trans shooter, okay, and you're getting paid roughly $30 for 100,000 views, you're literally going to make $750. Benny Johnson got that one post would have. Now I'm not saying he did. I'm not saying that that's one. I'm just giving you an example of how much money these influencers could be making.