Fact check: What evidence exists for outside funding of LA demonstrations and riots?

1. Summary of the results

The evidence for outside funding of LA demonstrations and riots presents a complex picture with both documented government funding and ongoing investigations into potential foreign influence.

Documented Government Funding:

The most concrete evidence involves state and federal government funding to activist organizations. The Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles (CHIRLA), a key organization involved in anti-deportation protests, received substantial public funding: $73.6 million from California in 2023 and 2024 ^[1], with nearly $34 million in government grants in fiscal year 2023 alone ^[2]. Additionally, CHIRLA received $450,000 in grants from the Department of Homeland Security for "citizenship education and training" ^[2]. The organization's total government contract revenue reached $33,966,572 in the fiscal year ending June 2023 ^[3].

Potential Foreign Influence Under Investigation:

The FBI is actively investigating possible monetary connections to the riots, including potential Chinese influence ^[4]. Republican investigators are examining alleged links between U.S. billionaire Neville Singham, who is reportedly connected to the Chinese Communist Party, and funding for the Party for Socialism and Liberation, which has organized protests in Los Angeles ^[5]. However, no concrete evidence of this connection has been publicly disclosed.

Disinformation Campaigns:

Multiple sources confirm that foreign adversaries including China, Russia, and Iran are exploiting divisions in American society through disinformation campaigns ^[6], with Russia specifically amplifying conspiracy theories about the LA protests ^[7].

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

The original question lacks important context about the distinction between legitimate government funding for immigration services and direct funding for protest activities. While CHIRLA received substantial government funding, this was primarily designated for immigration services rather than explicitly for demonstrations ^[3].

Alternative perspectives include:

• Government officials and Democratic politicians would benefit from framing the funding as legitimate support for immigration services rather than protest funding
• Republican politicians and conservative groups benefit from highlighting potential misuse of taxpayer funds and foreign influence to discredit the protests
• Foreign adversaries, particularly Russia and China, benefit from amplifying conspiracy theories and disinformation to increase social division ^{[7] [6]}

The analyses reveal that much of the "outside funding" narrative involves conspiracy theories and misinformation, including claims about "Soros-funded" agitators ^[8] and paid protesters ^[9], which are being amplified by both foreign disinformation campaigns and domestic actors.

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original question itself may inadvertently promote a misleading narrative by conflating different types of "outside funding." The question assumes the existence of such funding without distinguishing between:

• Legitimate government funding for immigration services that organizations like CHIRLA use for their broader mission
• Actual direct funding specifically for protest activities
• Unsubstantiated conspiracy theories about foreign or wealthy individual funding

The framing risks amplifying disinformation that foreign adversaries are actively promoting. As noted in the analyses, AI chatbots and social media are making LA protest disinformation worse ^[9], and the spread of conspiracy theories about paid agitators is part of a broader misinformation campaign ^[8].

The question also fails to acknowledge that while investigations are ongoing regarding potential foreign influence ^{[4] [5]}, no concrete evidence has been publicly presented to substantiate claims of direct foreign funding for the demonstrations and riots.