How Was the Project Veritas Board ABLE To Remove James O'Keefe?

Apologies if this was already asked but can anyone explain to me HOW the Project Veritas Board was ABLE to remove James O'Keefe? I 'd assumed this was because he had a minority share in the business. But looking online with mult search engines, I cannot find any evidence of other shareholders. If it is a non-profit, then perhaps it runs by a different set of rules. But I cannot fathom THE OWNER being kicked out of his own business by his employees.

If I'd been in that situation and was being treated badly by my board members, I'd fire them. If they resisted, they'd be escorted out by security or police and they could dispute it legally between our lawyers. I cannot fathom that if attempting this, my own employees could laugh at me and INSTEAD have MY security, or the police, escort ME from my own business. I think I'd have to see a shrink because I'd feel super gaslighted by ideas of LEGAL OWNERSHIP and basic rules of business.

Obviously, I'm not a businessman. Just trying to figure out who really owns Veritas and how this happened.

a reply to: LoneCloudHopper2

I was wondering the same thing. I don't get it.

a reply to: LoneCloudHopper2

I was wondering the exact same thing. Bunch of things do not add up in this story. The CABAL got their long scaly fingers on this too, I would assume... The only thing I am certain of now a days is that everything is uncertain and anything we thought we might have known we had no clue about.

Only things we can rely on in todays world are corruption, greed and manipulation by the people in power.

We lost this planet to those things a long time ago.

Hopefully we can regain control soon before we are all eating bugs...

I'm wondering the same thing too ❓

a reply to: LoneCloudHopper2

It seems like if a shareholder holds more shares of the company than the owner, than through the board, they can remove the owner. So, don’t ever let anyone in your company own more shares than you, or you no longer own the company.

I am not a business owner. Probably because business is such a cold, cruel entity.

PV just uploaded a video talking about the situation. It looks like the remaining PV employees are standing behind James 100% so that destroys the whole narrative the employees didn't like him. They mentioned how James assembled the team over time and they repeatedly state they want him back. But they are going to try moving forward anyway without him because they have important work to do.



The problem is, the viewers can no longer trust PV in the same way we used to knowing that they have "masters" who can influence their reporting, and not in a good way. After reading the comments under the video I don't think there's any way PV can move forward without James. This comment makes a very good point imo:

Give an ultimatum to your board, restore James as CEO or walk. That is what takes courage. Injustice for one is an injustice for all. Stand with James. No James, no project Veritas. I would never give a dime to a group who treats their courageous founder like this. No Veritas for me until the board resigns & James is reinstated! This is what you need courage to stand for & not nearly your paycheck.

We'll see if this ends up being a great PR Stunt 😎

Stranger things have happened 😎

There has been a few updates but apparently they want JOK back after massive backlash from the community.

They have a board of directors....a VOLUNTEER board of directors. But here's a bit I found which explains a little but verifies nothing:

www.newsweek.com...

Matthew Tyrmand is one of the Project Veritas board of directors, which on Monday made a series of allegations about the conduct of the controversial organization's founder and now-former CEO James O'Keefe.

Project Veritas describes itself as conducting undercover reporting to expose "corruption, dishonesty, self-dealing, waste, fraud, and other misconduct in both public and private institutions." However, the organization's reportage has often been seen as false or misleading.

On Monday, O'Keefe posted a video in which he claimed that he had been removed as the group's leader, prompting concern from Republican figures and a mass exodus of Twitter followers.

In response, the Project Veritas board of directors put out a statement in which it said it had not fired him, but claimed it had discovered "financial malfeasance" on O'Keefe's part. Newsweek has contacted O'Keefe for comment on the allegations.

Who Are the Project Veritas Board Members?
According to tax-exemption filings with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) from 2019, Tyrmand is listed as a director of Project Veritas, along with Colin Sharkey and John K. Garvey. More recent records are not listed.

George Skakel was identified by Intelligencer as another long-serving board member. He is not listed on recent IRS filings for Project Veritas, but is listed as a director on filings for Project Veritas Action, a related organization, along with Joseph Barton.

Michael Swartz, found of frat gear providers Old Row, claimed Tyrmand was the "ringleader" in a "coup" that led to the ousting of O'Keefe. Tyrmand was also fingered as leading the alleged coup by Alex Bruesewitz, a conservative political strategist.

This whole incident gives Project Veritas a big black eye. Time will tell how it all ends up.

And here's another article with some better detail.

Who is accused of what, exactly?
The board of directors of Project Veritas has accused O'Keefe of “financial misfeasance.” Its allegations of financial improprieties by the man who until recently served as the group’s chairman include that he spent money donated to the organization on various luxuries for himself, such as charter flights and theater tickets.

If the accusations prove valid, it is possible that this misuse of Project Veritas funds could imperil the group’s tax exemption. A tax-exempt organization cannot use its money to benefit certain individuals, especially insiders such as its leaders and major donors. It can pay its employees, but the staff and its leaders cannot receive unreasonable compensation or any other type of benefit that looks like the tax-exempt organization is sharing its profits with them.

While it sounds odd that a nonprofit would have profits, it is not. The rule for nonprofit and tax-exempt organizations is not that they cannot make profits; it is that, unlike for-profit entities, they cannot distribute their profits to shareholders.

2. Why would it be a big deal if Project Veritas were to lose its tax-exempt status?

Tax-exempt status provides at least three benefits to Project Veritas.

First, these groups don’t need to pay taxes on most of their revenue.

Second, and likely more importantly, it means that donations to Project Veritas are tax deductible for many wealthy supporters. Through what’s known as the charitable deduction, donors can essentially get a subsidy from the federal government for their donations.

The third benefit: Tax exemption can provide a veneer of legitimacy to an organization by signaling to some potential donors that the federal government has approved of its activities.

But, in fact, tax exemption does not represent any type of government approval. That’s because the government cannot deny tax-exempt status on the basis of ideological disagreement.

3. How has James O'Keefe responded?

O'Keefe acknowledged in a long video posted to the Vimeo video platform that he had been forced out. The board has declared that he has had the opportunity to meet with its members to discuss allegations of financial misdeeds and mistreating staff members. But the man who founded the group 13 years ago has declined to take that opportunity.
theconversation.com...

The fact he has declined to meet and discuss with the board doesn't sound good but it could simply be a matter of him not wanting to deal with them because of personality issues or other issues. Who knows. Sounds like he wants to move on.

Funny how they claim financial misdeeds because they are gunna go broke without James. People are pulling support left right and centre. There is no Veritas without James IMO.

It’s like if kiss decided to kick out Gene Simons and Paul Stanley… for the good of the band…..idiots
a reply to: StoutBroux

originally posted by: StarsInDust
a reply to: LoneCloudHopper2

It seems like if a shareholder holds more shares of the company than the owner, than through the board, they can remove the owner. So, don’t ever let anyone in your company own more shares than you, or you no longer own the company.

I am not a business owner. Probably because business is such a cold, cruel entity.

2 words,

steve jobs.

ned an employment contract even as owner.

Just because a business isn't publicly traded doesn't mean it doesn't have investors.

On top of that a majority shareholder can be forced out under certain circumstances. See: Vince McMahon last year.

a reply to: LoneCloudHopper2

PV is dead in the water.

I'm curious to see what's next for O'Keefe.


My guess is that PV received a boatload of money on the condition that O'Keefe gets kicked out.


How that works I'm not sure.

I bet They blackmailed him.
and Made him say taking money.

Veritas has upset a lot of high up people.
now Veritas DIES.

a reply to: LoneCloudHopper2

Project Veritas is incorporated as a tax exempt organization (501 c 3) under the IRS code


www.investopedia.com...#:~:text=Section%20501%20%28c%29%20%283%29%20is%20a%20portion%20of,%28c%29%20%283%29%20are %20exempt%20from%20federal%20income%20tax.

As such it does not belong to the creator, ie not his private property

The board of directors was put into place to lend Legimatacy to potential donors

Unfortunately the people appointed to the board turned out to be corporate stooges , more concerned with keeping in good with the cronies on Wall Street than in carrying out its mission

When push came to shove the board decided to get rid of o'keefe for embarrassing their friends on Wall Street

Video of James take on the matter on Vimeo:
James Remarks to PV Staff: "I've been removed from CEO and Board"

He claims they said he misused funds for a wedding, $12000.
He then mentions the money was spent on a staff Christmas party, and seems confuse as to what this wedding is stating he himself never got married.

He also showed a screenshot of texting between one of the people who seems to want him gone and a journalist.
Journalist asks James colleague about what is to be gained from getting rid of James and they replied

"I get a pay rise?"

a reply to: ChaoticOrder

Thanks for sharing. IMO, any PV employees loyal to James and true journalism should dig and expose the corrupt board members. They could be forced to resign for professional or legal reasons.

a reply to: StoutBroux

Thanks for sharing. Puzzling situation.

a reply to: Athetos

Ego and greed were part of it for sure. A lot of people are wondering if Pfizer had a hand in it too, bribing board members. Guess we'll to wait and see what comes out.