How have other QAnon figures used MLMs and what regulatory or law‑enforcement actions have followed?
Executive summary
QAnon figures have increasingly funneled followers into multi‑level marketing (MLM) operations—selling everything from silver to “patriot” products—by blending recruitment pitches with conspiracy narratives and doomsday financial advice, practices that watchdogs warn can resemble pyramid schemes and that in at least one reported instance provoked an FBI tip from a political opponent [1] [2] [3]. Regulators have not launched a wave of public criminal prosecutions tied specifically to QAnon‑linked MLM activity in the reporting reviewed, but mainstream consumer authorities and platforms have repeatedly signaled concern about MLM business models and inauthentic disinformation networks that monetize conspiracies [2] [4] [5].
1. How QAnon figures moved into MLMs: examples and scale
Prominent conspiracy promoters like Phil Godlewski and Richard “Citizen Journalist” Potcner have directed followers toward MLM-style schemes—Godlewski pushing silver through operations tied to 7k Metals and similar ventures and Potcner urging purchases of silver from the same suppliers—actions documented in lengthy reporting on QAnon’s commercial pivot [1] [2] [3]. Other QAnon‑adjacent personalities have plugged companies such as Patriot Switch and encouraged recruitment and commission structures common to direct‑sales networks, signaling a broader pattern rather than isolated incidents [6] [1].
2. The playbook: blending conspiracy content with sales pitches
The convergence looks strategic: influencers sanitize or reframe QAnon themes—“save the children,” distrust of institutions or claims about imminent financial resets—inside aspirational, lifestyle MLM messaging that emphasizes entrepreneurship, financial freedom, and community membership, a tactic previously documented in the overlap between direct‑sales culture and Q‑aligned “pastel QAnon” influencers [7] [5]. That rhetorical mashup makes recruitment a political and identity act, not merely a business solicitation, amplifying pressure on followers to buy in and recruit others [7].
3. Why critics call it a pyramid in plain clothes
Reporting and commentary warn that while many MLMs are legal, the structure—rewarding uplines for recruiting downlines rather than retailing products to outside customers—can mirror illegal pyramid schemes; critics argue the combination of apocalyptic or utopian conspiracy promises with speculative assets like silver multiplies the risk that participants will lose money [1] [2] [3]. Journalists and analysts have explicitly described some QAnon‑linked promotions as turning the movement into “a literal pyramid scheme,” noting the speculative legal and ethical boundary the promotions inhabit [3].
4. Law‑enforcement and regulatory follow‑up reported so far
The public, documented responses have been uneven: conservative activist Jeanette Geary told reporters she contacted the FBI and other agencies about Godlewski’s silver operation, reflecting at least one instance of a formal tip rather than a prosecutorial action; reporting does not show subsequent criminal charges against Godlewski in the sources provided [1] [8] [2]. At the institutional level, consumer authorities like the Federal Trade Commission have long warned potential distributors to be wary of pyramid dynamics in MLMs—guidance experts cite when discussing QAnon‑linked schemes—but the reviewed reporting does not cite specific FTC enforcement actions tied to the named QAnon promoters [2] [5].
5. Platform and media responses as de‑facto regulation
Beyond criminal enforcement, platforms and media ecosystems have pushed back: social platforms have policies against inauthentic monetization and disinformation that can limit reach for Q‑aligned sellers, and journalism has exposed networks profiting from conspiracies, which functions as reputational pressure and can cut off acquisition channels for dubious schemes [4]. This type of non‑legal intervention—deplatforming, fact‑checking, and investigative exposure—has been a primary mechanism reducing reach even when formal prosecutions are absent [4].
6. Stakes and unanswered questions
The documented pattern shows QAnon actors leveraging MLM incentives to monetize followers and recruit new ones, drawing regulatory scrutiny in the form of tips to law enforcement and sustained warnings from consumer advocates, but the reporting leaves open whether regulators will bring targeted civil or criminal cases against particular QAnon promoters; public evidence of prosecutions tied specifically to those actors was not found in the sources reviewed [1] [2] [4]. Given the documented overlap between conspiracy ecosystems and direct‑sales culture, continued monitoring by consumer protection agencies, platforms, and investigative reporters is likely to be the proximate check on these practices until and unless explicit enforcement actions appear [5] [4].