What communications or emails did N’Dure Cain provide to the Texas Observer about Dallas Justice Now and outside funders?
Executive summary
N’Dure (Dante “Ndure”) Cain provided the Texas Observer with internal emails that he said show an intermediary, identified as Salahuddin, forwarding content and instructions from Jason Swart, the CEO of Crowds on Demand, to people associated with Dallas Justice Now — evidence Cain used to argue he was not authoring certain DJN messages and that outside operatives had a hand in the group’s output [1] [2]. Cain also told the Observer he did not control DJN’s social media, newsletters, or the op-eds and statements later attributed to him, and those claims were part of the Observer’s reporting connecting DJN to outside PR actors and opaque funders [1] [3].
1. What Cain handed over: emails showing forwarded content and instructions
Cain showed the Texas Observer emails that, according to the Observer’s account, documented Salahuddin forwarding him content and “instructions” originating from Swart, the Crowds on Demand CEO, which Cain presented as proof of outside direction or scripting for at least some of Dallas Justice Now’s messaging [1] [2].
2. Cain’s explanation in those communications: disclaiming authorship and control
In interviews and in the context of the emails he provided, Cain told the Observer he did not control DJN’s social media or newsletters and that he did not author the written statements and op-eds later published under the group’s name or attributed directly to him, a claim the Observer reported alongside the forwarded-email evidence [1].
3. The Observer’s framing: emails as part of a larger pattern connecting DJN to outside operators
The Observer paired Cain’s emailed materials with interviews, analysis of archives, and other internal communications to argue a pattern in which surrogates and PR firms appeared to steer or seed content for DJN and allied “zombie” groups — reporting that highlights the emails Cain provided as one piece of a broader investigation into outside influence and funding opacity [1] [3].
4. What the emails do not, in the reporting, prove about funding or control
The Observer’s coverage, as presented, stops short of asserting the emails themselves identify specific donors or complete chains of financial control; the outlet notes repeated uncertainty over who actually funds DJN and related outfits, and the organization “has never issued a statement” about ties to a Republican PR firm that created a test site for the group — a gap Cain’s emails did not fill in reporting available [3] [4].
5. Competing signals and alternative viewpoints in the record
The reporting includes alternative signals: right-leaning outlets such as the Dallas Express published and amplified DJN statements and at least once quoted a DJN representative in attack pieces, while representatives later said Cain had been replaced and that Salahuddin “brought me into this assignment,” suggesting multiple actors and contested accounts of who ran DJN’s public-facing work [1] [2] [5]. The Observer’s use of Cain’s emails is thus presented as corroborative but not dispositive; other sources and actors quoted in the story offer different versions of involvement and responsibility [1] [5].
6. What can and cannot be concluded from Cain’s materials as reported
As reported by the Texas Observer, Cain’s communications establish that he received forwarded material linked to Crowds on Demand’s CEO via Salahuddin and that Cain disavowed authorship of certain DJN outputs, which supports the Observer’s contention of outside scripting or influence; however, those emails as presented do not, in the available reporting, map a full funding ledger or definitively prove that donors directed specific campaigns, leaving questions about who financed DJN and to what extent private funders shaped strategy unresolved [1] [3] [4].