Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
What organizations or communities support Julie Green and how have they responded to her predictions?
Executive summary
Julie Green is supported primarily by her own organization, Julie Green Ministries International, which publishes her prophecies and links to her social channels and donation/merch pages [1] [2]. Outside of her ministry, she has visible followings in MAGA-aligned circles and some sympathetic religious commentators; mainstream coverage documents both supporters (campaign appearances, audience receptivity) and critics who note failed or extreme predictions [3] [4] [5].
1. Julie Green Ministries: the organizational base and distribution network
Julie Green’s central institutional support is Julie Green Ministries International (JGM), which hosts her prophecies, media and a list of official social accounts, and solicits donations and merchandise purchases — indicating an organized media and fundraising operation that amplifies her predictions to followers [1] [2] [6]. The ministry emphasizes which social accounts are “true” JGM accounts, signaling both active official outreach and a need to police imitators [2] [7].
2. Religious followers: reception and reinforcement within spiritual communities
Within religious communities that follow JGM, her daily videos and written prophecies are circulated and treated as warnings or calls to action; the ministry’s Prophecies page posts regular dated messages asking believers to respond spiritually [6]. Devotees and commenters on faith-oriented outlets and message boards endorse her work and frame fulfilled or soon-to-be-fulfilled items as proof of calling, a dynamic noted in sympathetic writeups that urge readers to “watch” older materials and pray for discernment [8].
3. Political allies: appearances, amplification, and shared audiences
Julie Green has been publicly associated with conservative political figures and MAGA-aligned media ecosystems. Reporting documents appearances for or endorsements by figures such as Doug Mastriano and places her squarely in pro-Trump networks; mainstream outlets describe her as a self‑styled MAGA “prophet” whose political prophecies (e.g., about an “overthrow” or reinstatement) resonate with some right‑wing audiences [3] [4]. These connections provide a political amplification pipeline beyond explicitly religious followers [4].
4. Media attention: critics, skeptics, and fact-checking outlets
News outlets and watchdog sites have cataloged several controversial and specific claims by Green — for example, alleged predictions that public figures would die or be involved in murder and claims about Biden being a body double — and have used those examples to question her record and intent [3] [5]. Fact‑oriented critics have framed her prophecies as part of a “MAGA pipeline to God,” highlighting failed or extreme predictions to discredit the prophetic reliability she claims [5].
5. Public reaction: polarizing effects and contested credibility
Responses to Green’s prophecies are polarized: supporters treat them as divine revelation and mobilize around them through donations, streaming channels and social posts [1] [2], while critics and some journalists depict them as politically motivated or factually dubious — citing past sensational claims and the mixing of political aims with spiritual authority [3] [4]. This split creates both a committed base and a robust chorus of public skepticism [5].
6. Independent commentators and analysis of motive and influence
Commentators such as Diana Butler Bass and others frame Green’s role as amplifying the grievances of those who feel politically and culturally marginalized; that analysis suggests her prophecies function not only as spiritual messages but as political reinforcement for audiences seeking social reordering in line with their values [9]. Observers point out an implicit agenda: propping up particular political narratives while offering religious justification for them [9].
7. What the available sources do not cover
Available sources do not mention independent audits of JGM’s finances, internal membership numbers, or comprehensive data on which of Green’s prophecies have been empirically “fulfilled” by neutral standards; they also do not provide direct polling of how many people change political behavior because of her messages. For claims about exact follower counts or conversion effects, current reporting is silent (not found in current reporting).
8. Bottom line for readers weighing support and response
If you assess Julie Green’s influence, recognize two concrete facts in reporting: JGM is her organized platform for distribution and fundraising [1] [2], and mainstream coverage documents both explicit political entanglements and critical cataloguing of controversial predictions [3] [4] [5]. Supporters view her as a divinely guided prophet whose messages justify political hope and action [8]; critics view her prophecies as politically charged and factually problematic [5] [3]. Decide accordingly, keeping in mind that reporting documents influence and contention but does not, in these sources, settle questions about prophetic accuracy over time (not found in current reporting).