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.
Which individuals and organizations fund or support the Election Truth Alliance?
Executive summary
Available sources show the Election Truth Alliance (ETA) is an organization that publishes election analyses and solicits donations on its website [1] [2]. Public reporting links ETA to specific investigations — e.g., a Clark County, Nevada analysis — and notes that their allegations have been described as speculative by some outlets [3] [4]. Available sources do not provide a comprehensive, attributed list of ETA funders or institutional backers beyond its own donation page [2].
1. Who the Election Truth Alliance says it is — mission and fundraising pitch
ETA presents itself as a nonprofit election‑analysis group that conducts data reviews and seeks funding for investigations; its website posts statements, reports and a donation page inviting support for “Election Analysis: Ensuring Fair and Transparent Results” [1] [2]. The site publishes position statements (for example responding to claims about an NSA forensic audit) and releases election data analyses such as a North Carolina 2024 report [1]. Those materials indicate ETA actively solicits public donations, but they do not, in the available reporting, name major institutional funders or specific large donors [2].
2. Public reporting on ETA’s work and how that affects interest in its funding
Independent press and wire pieces have amplified ETA’s findings — for example, an EIN Presswire item republished by Fox4KC summarized ETA analysts’ claims about “patterns consistent with election fraud” in Clark County, Nevada, and quoted ETA leadership [3]. Broader media syntheses that mention ETA, such as a Wikipedia article about 2024 post‑election controversies, note ETA as one of several groups alleging irregularities but characterize those allegations as speculative rather than proven [4]. That media attention likely increases public interest in who funds ETA, but the cited articles do not identify ETA’s donors [3] [4].
3. What reporting and public databases say about named allied groups and similar-sounding entities
Search results returned organizations with similar names — e.g., “Alliance for Truth” and “ALLIANCE FOR TRUTH PAC, LLC” — with OpenSecrets and FollowTheMoney profiles, but those entries are separate entities and do not appear in the available material as direct funders of ETA [5] [6] [7]. OpenSecrets entries show limited or no reported expenditures for the similarly named PAC in queried cycles [7], and FollowTheMoney provides state campaign‑finance data for an “ALLIANCE FOR TRUTH” entity [6]. Available sources do not state that these organizations finance the Election Truth Alliance; they merely show that groups with overlapping names exist in campaign‑finance databases [5] [6] [7].
4. What is explicitly missing from current reporting
No source in the provided set gives a list of ETA’s institutional donors, major benefactors, or audited financials. ETA’s own donation page solicits contributions [2], but does not — in the available excerpts — display a roster of backers or 990 forms. Public databases shown here (OpenSecrets, FollowTheMoney) profile similarly named groups but do not tie their receipts or expenditures to ETA in the reporting we have [5] [6] [7]. Therefore: available sources do not mention specific individual or organizational funders for the Election Truth Alliance beyond its general fundraising asks [2].
5. Conflicting viewpoints and why funding transparency matters
Some reporting treats ETA’s statistical claims as serious leads worth auditing (as in the Fox4KC/EINPresswire summary of ETA’s Clark County analysis), while other outlets frame ETA’s allegations as speculative within a larger set of contested 2024 post‑election claims [3] [4]. That split in coverage underlines why independent disclosure of donors or audited finances matters: funder information helps the public assess possible conflicts of interest, the scale of resources behind investigations, and whether findings are independently replicated [3] [4]. Available sources do not supply that disclosure for ETA itself [2].
6. How to follow up if you want verified funder information
Based on the reporting shown, next steps to find verified funders would include: (a) checking ETA’s full website for financial disclosures or annual reports beyond the donation page [2]; (b) searching FEC/IRS/990 filings for any nonprofit name variants; and (c) querying campaign‑finance databases (OpenSecrets, FollowTheMoney) for linked EINs or committee IDs and cross‑referencing them with ETA leadership names. The current sources demonstrate that databases exist for similarly named entities [5] [6] [7] but do not, in available excerpts, confirm a funding relationship to the Election Truth Alliance.
Final note: This analysis relies strictly on the provided sources; they document ETA’s public fundraising appeals and some news coverage of its analyses but do not identify individuals or organizations that fund or support ETA beyond those general references [1] [2] [3] [4].