Report: DOJ Probing China-Based Neville Roy Singham’s Financing of U.S. Activist Groups
Singham is married to Jodie Evans, one of the leaders of Code Pink.
Fox News has reported that the DOJ launched an investigation into China-based Marxist tycoon Neville Roy Singham’s funding of far-left socialist groups.
Singham is married to Jodie Evans, one of the leaders of Code Pink.
A Manhattan grand jury issued subpoenas connected to a probe started by U.S. Attorney Jay Clayton for the Southern District of New York.
“The investigation is examining the movement of the money in Singham’s financial network and attempting to determine if Singham, the organizations he funded or their leaders committed wire fraud, bank fraud, money laundering or other financial crimes, according to sources familiar with the matter,” according to Fox News.
🚨 BREAKING: DOJ opens grand jury investigation into Marxist tycoon Neville Roy Singham and alleged money laundering or other financial crimes from his base in China to funding far-left nonprofits in the U.S. and the world
WATCH how the money flows.
READ our @FoxNews Digital… pic.twitter.com/nVzHF0R1qU— Asra Nomani (@AsraNomani) June 29, 2026
Fox News mentioned how the move comes after the network documented “how Singham pumped $285 million from his base in Shanghai into a Goldman Sachs philanthropy fund and two shell corporations that then fed the money into a constellation of nonprofit organizations, media operations and activist groups pushing sectarian division, identity politics and support for socialist politicians.”
However, two lawmakers asked the acting Attorney General, Todd Blanche, to investigate Singham.
In June, Senate Intelligence Committee chairman Tom Cotton (R-AR) asked Blanche to investigate “foreign influence efforts targeting the buildout of American AI infrastructure.”
House Energy and Commerce Committee chairman Brett Guthrie turned to the FBI and the chairmen of the President’s Council of Advisers on Science and Technology for “information on the influence effort.”
Singham’s name has appeared numerous times since August 2023, two months before Hamas invaded Israel on October 7.
The first major report I can find on Singham appeared in The New York Times:
On the surface, No Cold War is a loose collective run mostly by American and British activists who say the West’s rhetoric against China has distracted from issues like climate change and racial injustice.
In fact, a New York Times investigation found, it is part of a lavishly funded influence campaign that defends China and pushes its propaganda. At the center is a charismatic American millionaire, Neville Roy Singham, who is known as a socialist benefactor of far-left causes.
What is less known, and is hidden amid a tangle of nonprofit groups and shell companies, is that Mr. Singham works closely with the Chinese government media machine and is financing its propaganda worldwide.
—
But Mr. Singham, 69, himself sits in Shanghai, where one outlet in his network is co-producing a YouTube show financed in part by the city’s propaganda department. Two others are working with a Chinese university to “spread China’s voice to the world.” And last month, Mr. Singham joined a Communist Party workshop about promoting the party internationally.
The New York Times noted how “the line between him and the propaganda apparatus is so blurry that he shares office space — and his groups share staff members — with a company whose goal is to educate foreigners about ‘the miracles that China has created on the world stage.’”
In September 2025, the Ways and Means Committee exposed The People’s Forum, a U.S. nonprofit, as a likely propaganda arm for the Chinese Communist Party.
A letter from the committee pointed out that The People’s Forum received $20 million from Singham, describing him as “a wealthy U.S. expatriate living in Shanghai with long-documented CCP ties, which was funneled through shell companies and donor-advised funds.”
In March, Fox News disclosed Singham’s 172-page report, showing “a worldview that reframes history, challenges Western power and calls for a ‘new world order’ promoted by Chinese President Xi Jinping and the Communist Party of China.”
“If we want to, therefore, have a new world order that is based on multilateralism that President Xi and CPC and China have proposed, we have to undo the ideological damage that has been done by the narrative of World War II,” Singham told a Global South Academic Conference.
Singham has framed himself as a new Mao:
In his study, “80th Anniversary of the Victory of the World Anti-Fascist War,” Singham invoked the “truth” of Mao from the communist leader’s book “On Protracted War,” where he wrote, “The richest source of power to wage war lies in the masses of the people.”
Singham’s study revealed not just an interpretation of history, but a strategy.
“The war never strategically ended,” Singham wrote. “It simply changed form.”
At the core of his thinking is a rejection of the West and the United States of America and its system of free enterprise, or “fascism,” as he calls it derisively.
“The liberal fiction of three competing systems — democracy, fascism and communism — obscures the truth,” Singham wrote. “Fascism is capitalism in crisis, its mask dropped. The real struggle was never between three systems but between two: socialism and capitalism, with fascism as capitalism’s emergency response to revolutionary threat.”
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.





Comments
Take him and his loopy wife out. Frankly I don’t care that it is against the law. They both represent dangers to the republic. Yamato them.
You won’t do shit
This is the tactic of the atheist left. It never works, and always results in a pile of dead bodies.
I suggest you read Isaiah 55 ten times.
And no, I’m not a pacifist.
Sedition is probably beyond legal reach, but it is the actual situation
As the adage goes, “follow the money.” A Federal investigation of this intensity ought to have the effect of closing the faucet on the source of funds before the midterms.
One common sense fix is to eliminate PAC to PAC and NGO to NGO transfers. Another common sense fix is to limit fundraising for political purposes (broadly not just campaign donations) by requiring candidates to limit for statewide offices 10% out of State contributions and to 10% out of district for offices with districts (CD, State Legislature, Municipal). In the State where you are both domiciled and resident you can give as much as you please to Statewide Candidates and unlimited amounts to the candidates for officials who rep your various districts.
Those proposals are about as “common sense” as those proposed by Everytown or the Brady Gang.
How can you dictate to a non-government organization to whom it may give its money? The money belongs to it, and it may give it to whomever it likes.
And restricting political donations is directly against the first amendment. Everyone has the inalienable right to try to influence voters in any election, regardless of where that person lives. If there are people running for Congress on a platform of confiscating Elon Musk’s money, are you really suggesting you have a right to prevent him from trying to persuade their would-be constituents to vote against them, just because he happens not to live in those districts?! That’s perverted.
The easiest way to stop the transfers is to have Congress pass a law that such transfers are banned. I would rather see NGO’s banned from the US and its territories.
A great start would be to make it illegal for a ‘Non Government Organization’ to receive any government money in any way, no matter how many times it is laundered through other entities. ‘Non Government’ should mean ‘No Government’ funding.
That would turn the USA into the USSR or the Third Reich. People have the inherent unalienable right to form organizations and to give them money, which those organizations have the right to give to other people or organizations.
Opinions vary.
Lets use your example of Musk and Bolsheviks. As a practical matter the only government that could seize his personal wealth is the State he resides/domiciled in and the Federal gov’t. Same for his business interests. In both cases he would be able to pump unlimited $ to candidates and PACs in the State and districts where there’s a physical nexus. For the Federal gov’t all he needs is one Senator to refuse unanimous consent to advance the ‘seizure bill’. He’d have the opportunity to contribute to the campaigns both Senators of his State of residence and his various business would have the same opportunity for the States where his business interests are domiciled. Plus the CDs both he and the business were domiciled. That’s not including unlimited funds to a Presidential candidate who could single handedly veto the legislation.
For that matter there’s no prohibition on Musk or his businesses making campaign donations to candidates outside of those areas. The limitation is on the total % of ‘outside district/State’ of the total fundraising of the candidate/PAC. If the folks in that State/District raise $1 Million then interested parties, including Musk, may contribute up to 10% threshold of that amount; $100K in total.
For NGO/Charity the individual or business could give unlimited funds to the ‘save the squirrels’ NGO. However ‘save the squirrels’ would be required to use funds to ‘save squirrels’ and nothing else. They shouldn’t be allowed to deceive donors or others and instead of using donated $ to ‘save squirrels’ they give it to BLM.
Seems really common sense that NGO/PACs should use the funds raised on their advertised pet issues and not as part of a deceptive shell game. Same for unlimited campaign donations to ‘your’ candidates based on your residence/domicile.
IMO, what’s perverted is folks/businesses form outside a State/District sniveling unlimited $ to candidates/PACs to influence the elections of a State/District in which they have no physical nexus. It’s literally an attempt to buy an election from out of State/District. Same for NGO/PAC shell game transfers where donors who gave to support X cause have their funds redirected to Y or Z cause.
Seems vey common sense to oppose the current non transparent system which inventivized deception and pouring tens of $ millions into a State/District where those sending $ do not reside, don’t have a business and lack any physical nexus.
You seem to have a weird idea of what an NGO is. An NGO is literally any organization that is not part of the government. Legal Insurrection is an NGO. So is your stamp club or gardening club, or your kids’ gaming club or baseball team or scout troop. If you and I agree to pool our resources to achieve some project that we both want and neither of us can afford on our own, we’re an NGO.
So it’s obvious that NGOs have the exact same rights as natural people. They are composed of natural people. If you have a right and I have the same right, then we must have the same right when we work together. That’s the basis for Citizens United.
Unanimous consent is only required in order to bypass the rules. If they bring the bill up in the ordinary course they don’t need unanimous consent. And you’re telling me that he must allow people to vote for these people who would confiscate all his money, and do nothing?! The first amendment guarantees his right to try to persuade their voters to vote against them.
And what of the House? 435 seats and he’s only allowed to make his case to the voters in 2 of them!? WTF? Your percentage limit is irrelevant, because what if they’re maxed out on that 10%? What does that have to do with his inherent fundamental right to defend himself by persuading voters? If the first amendment allows such a thing then it’s completely useless.
You are way off this time, Milhouse.
Many of these NGOs get relaxed reporting requirements, donor privacy, and tax advantages for NOT engaging in political speech or action — 501c’s for just one example. That designation is an agreement between the government and the organization that it will SURRENDER its “right” to political activity in return for valuable tax and privacy advantages.
It makes no sense to allow such an entity to act as a “drop box” for dark money, then turn around and redistribute it to every Tom, Dick. and Harry political activist organization in the country.
What “reporting requirements” are you talking about? There are in general no “reporting requirements” for private organizations. By what right would a legislature be able to impose such requirements?
If an organization gets special tax treatment because it has a specific purpose, and it doesn’t stick to that purpose, then its classification can be changed. But most organizations don’t get any special treatment.
Easy.
Step 1. NGO funnels 500k to Dem campaign or Dem operative… or just buys Hunter Biden some hookers and blow while kicking 10% up to the big guy.
Step 2. NGO gets 50 million dollar grant.
Step 3 NGO funnels another 20 million to Dem operatives, 10 to their own wallets, and 20 to activist groups who then people to come attack ICE all over the country.
Step 4. Repeat. Except with proven success, put a zero behind all numbers. Again and again and again.
You seem not to understand what NGO means. Almost all NGOs get no taxpayer money. Legal Insurrection is an NGO. It gets no taxpayer money.
Many of these NGOs are regulated as 501 c(3) charities. They can’t spend their money however they like. Billionaires love to do politics through charities because they get a tax deduction and their money goes farther. Congress can and should:
— require more detailed reporting to the IRS of charity funds
— Amend laws so funding coordinated political street theatre consisting of minor criminal acts, as well as immigration fraud and benefits fraud falls under RICO
— Make it easier for the DOJ to obtain broad warrants to surveil these kinds of organizations
Since Singham is outside the US, the DOJ does not a warrant to record his communications, but they need one to penetrate many of his NGOs. If he is indicted, he can be captured the same way as Maduro. I doubt we would grab him inside China, but if he goes on a foreign trip…
If you want to know how bad this anti-American CCP loving ahole is just read his Wikipedia entry. Yes I know Wikipedia is far left biased. However, if he comes across as trash on wikipedia just imagine how bad he really is,
So basically he is antifa
If it can be established that he funded them, he should be droned.
In China?! Are you trying to start WW3?
Millhouse is right. It should be a heart attack.
Easier to make a few little adjustments to his car brakes. Alternatively borrow some Polonium from Brother Putin.
Ahh a better approach would be to plant evidence of massive fraud engineered by him. Xi hates fraud and tends to 86 the culprits.
Billionaires love to travel around the world. Just watch him and wait. Get him on the high seas.
Singham is a demonically manipulated dick.
I think you’ll find he’s the manipulator, not the manipulated.
Make them as UNCOMFORTABLE as possible.
Follow the rice.