This investigation was sparked by journalist Asra Nomani's January 4, 2026 Twitter thread documenting the 23-year relationship between American socialist organizations and the Maduro regime. Her work on the timeline of coordination prompted this deeper analysis of the funding mechanisms and institutional architecture.

The Timeline Nobody Questions

At 1:35 a.m. on January 3, 2026—within minutes of U.S. Delta Force inserting into Venezuelan airspace—BreakThrough News, a self-described socialist media outlet, published its first videos of the military strikes. The frame was already set: an "illegal bombing campaign."

By 1:45 a.m., Manolo De Los Santos, executive director of The People's Forum in New York City, had amplified the narrative on social media.

By 2:29 a.m., the ANSWER Coalition—co-founded by Marxist Brian Becker—posted a professionally designed protest graphic to social media calling supporters to Times Square for Saturday's demonstration.

By 2:34 a.m., People's Forum issued an "EMERGENCY PROTEST" call to action.

By 2:43 a.m., the Party for Socialism and Liberation had their own poster circulating.

By 3:21 a.m., Vijay Prashad, executive director of Tricontinental Institute for Social Research, had posted his statement.

By 3:00 p.m., Prashad and Eugene Puryear from Party for Socialism and Liberation were conducting a coordinated livestream on YouTube.

What was presented as spontaneous resistance from grassroots activists emerged, upon examination, with the precision of a drill that had been practiced many times before.

Nobody in the mainstream press noticed—or asked—how these organizations activated simultaneously with such coordination that they could have confused observers into thinking a previously established protocol had been executed.

The Apparatus Wasn't Built Overnight

To understand what happened in those 12 hours between Maduro's capture and the coordinated response, you have to understand what was built over the previous 23 years. The infrastructure didn't emerge from ideological conviction alone. It emerged from funding.

The Singham Network:

At the center sits Neville Roy Singham, a 71-year-old American businessman who founded the software consulting firm ThoughtWorks in 1993 and sold it to a private equity firm in 2017 for $785 million. Unlike most tech entrepreneurs who use their wealth to increase their net worth, Singham has done the opposite. He has given most of that $785 million away—but not to traditional charities.

According to a January 2022 New Lines Magazine investigation, Singham has donated approximately $65 million to nonprofit organizations. According to a 2023 New York Times investigation, Singham established partnerships with Chinese government entities and has funded a network of organizations that systematically promote Beijing's narratives and positions while attacking American interests.

Singham relocated to Shanghai in 2019. His office there, according to reporting, is shared with the Maku Group, "whose goal is to educate foreigners about 'the miracles that China has created on the world stage.'" Singham has given Maku nearly $1.8 million in funding.

He is married to Jodie Evans, co-founder of Code Pink, a left-wing advocacy organization. Evans sits on the board of the International People's Assembly, one of the organizations that coordinates Venezuela activism.

The Funding Structure:

Singham operates through a network of shell nonprofit organizations registered at UPS store mailboxes. The nonprofits—United Community Fund, Justice and Education Fund, People's Support Foundation, and Progress Unity Fund—function as pass-through entities that move money from Singham's personal wealth into activist organizations.

In 2019, the United Community Fund had revenue of $39.9 million. Of that, $700,000 went to Tricontinental Institute for Social Research, and $3 million went to The People's Forum. These pass-through organizations have subsequently received minimal funding, suggesting that 2019 was a specific year when Singham made substantial commitments to building out the Venezuela apparatus.

An India enforcement agency investigation revealed that Singham-connected nonprofits funneled at least $5 million to the Indian news site People's Dispatch between 2018 and 2021 specifically to promote Chinese government narratives in Indian media.

According to the New York Times, Singham's network has received retweeting amplification from Chinese state media accounts 122 times since February 2020.

0:00
/0:16

The Organizational Architecture

Tricontinental Institute for Social Research functions as the ideological production center. Executive director Vijay Prashad, a self-described Marxist historian, oversees content creation and messaging development. His son, Nate Singham, works there. The organization's material anchors itself in classical Marxist theory and produces narratives disseminated through aligned media platforms.

When examining Tricontinental's work, the consistent thread is portraying American military and economic interests as imperial aggression while treating authoritarian regimes—China, Russia, Venezuela, Iran—as objects of legitimate state sovereignty being defended against external imperialism.

The People's Forum, founded by and headquartered in New York City, serves as the on-the-ground mobilization node. Manolo De Los Santos, executive director, is simultaneously employed as a researcher at Tricontinental. This dual role is crucial—it means the person activating street-level organizers also has access to the ideological production process and sits in the messaging loop.

De Los Santos has traveled to Venezuela at least five documented times to attend regime-aligned events, building relationships that position him as the liaison between U.S. activist networks and the Maduro government.

ANSWER Coalition and Party for Socialism and Liberation provide the mobilization capacity and media amplification. Brian Becker, co-founder of ANSWER, and Eugene Puryear, senior figure at PSL, have established media presence through BreakThrough News, which produces video content with professional production values distributed through multiple social media platforms.

These entities are theoretically separate organizations. They maintain different leadership structures, different funding sources (though ultimately tracing to Singham), and different constituencies. But examination of their output during crisis moments reveals operational coordination that transcends organizational boundaries.

Generated image

How the Pattern Became Visible

The clearest evidence emerges from Nomani's timeline, which documents a 23-year relationship between American socialist organizations and the Maduro regime:

2003: Chávez and Castro back the Francisco de Miranda Front, a socialist organization that becomes part of the International People's Assembly, creating the global "solidarity infrastructure" designed to support left-wing governments.

2013: Maduro takes power with this apparatus already in place.

2019: De Los Santos blocks opposition figures from Venezuela's Manhattan consulate. The same year, Claudia De la Cruz from Party for Socialism and Liberation travels to Caracas for an International People's Assembly conference. Foreign Minister Jorge Arreaza speaks at The People's Forum.

Critically, this is the same year Singham made his $65 million in documented donations, including the $3 million to People's Forum.

May 2019: After a failed coup attempt, De Los Santos appears on Venezuelan state television, boasting of organizing U.S. religious leaders to "battle ideas" against American imperialism.

November 2021: Prashad and De Los Santos pose with Maduro on election day, thumbs up, declaring solidarity with "sovereignty against imperialism." The next month, De Los Santos speaks at a Caracas conference livestreamed on Maduro's own account.

2022: De Los Santos appears at the International Anti-Fascist Summit in Caracas with Puryear, documenting the operational coordination between U.S. activists and Venezuelan government structures.

April 2024: Maduro publicly recognizes De Los Santos at a Bolivarian Alliance conference.

These weren't accidental encounters. They were relationship-building exercises documented on social media and official Venezuelan channels. The American activists weren't infiltrating a Venezuelan government apparatus. They were becoming woven into it.

The Mechanism: How Institutional Capture Operates Without Orders

This is where Lee Smith's methodology becomes essential: understanding that institutional capture doesn't require explicit coordination or direct orders. It emerges from aligned personnel, shared funding sources, and consensus-building around certain positions.

Nobody at Singham's level needed to send orders saying "activate protests within 12 hours of Maduro's capture." The apparatus was already oriented toward defending Maduro and attacking American military intervention. The funding ensured that organizations dependent on Singham-connected sources understood which positions advanced their interests.

De Los Santos didn't need instructions to post about an "illegal bombing." That narrative aligned with the ideological work he and his organizations had been conducting for years with Singham funding. Prashad didn't need a signal to issue his statement—the ideological production center had already established the frame.

Becker's ANSWER Coalition didn't need a memo to mobilize. The coordination mechanisms were already embedded in the organizational relationships, the conference attendance, the joint statements, the shared media platforms, and the funding flows that made certain positions profitable and others costly.

The speed of activation—under 12 hours—wasn't evidence of spontaneity. It was evidence of a system that had been tested and rehearsed repeatedly.

The Rehearsals: Nomani's timeline documents at least five instances between 2019 and 2025 where these organizations mobilized around Venezuela-related events. Each activation taught the network faster response times, better messaging coordination, more professional production values. By January 2026, the execution was near-perfect.

What the 12-Hour Activation Reveals

Within 12 hours, the following occurred:

  1. Narrative dominance: Within minutes, "illegal bombing campaign" became the frame on social media platforms where these organizations have significant reach.
  2. Visual propaganda: Professionally designed graphics appeared on multiple platforms with consistent messaging, suggesting centralized design and distribution.
  3. Media amplification: BreakThrough News, nominally independent, published professional-quality video content with a specific narrative frame.
  4. Street mobilization: Physical protests were organized in multiple cities (Times Square, Washington D.C., others) with coordinated signage and messaging.
  5. Broadcast coordination: By afternoon, livestreamed events connected multiple organizations in a unified messaging campaign.
  6. International amplification: The apparatus reached out to allied organizations globally, ensuring that anti-American narratives about the operation spread through international left-wing networks.

The question isn't whether these organizations coordinated. The evidence strongly suggests they did. The question is whether this coordination was directed from above by Singham, his family, or other centralized leadership, or whether it emerged from organizational incentive structures created by the funding apparatus.

The answer matters for understanding institutional capture.

The Larger Pattern

This story about Venezuela contains echoes of the larger themes that Lee Smith has identified throughout his work:

Institutional capture through personnel and funding: Just as Chen identified how academic institutions captured American foreign policy toward China by installing aligned personnel and funding aligned research, the Singham network has captured significant portions of American left-wing activism through funding aligned organizations and, in De Los Santos' case, employing people simultaneously in multiple organizations.

The role of ideological production: The Tricontinental Institute doesn't tell organizations what positions to take. It produces narratives and frames that activists can adopt because they cohere with the ideological work the organization is doing. This is far more efficient than direct command.

International coordination as information warfare: China benefits from American activists attacking American military operations. This isn't coincidence. The benefit flows from the funding relationship, which makes the activism partially an extension of Beijing's interests.

The visibility of coordination in crisis moments: Planned operations often look coordinated in their execution because they've been rehearsed. The Venezuela response wasn't coordinated in real-time because nobody knew exactly when Maduro would be captured. It was coordinated in advance by creating organizational structures that would respond in predetermined ways when the moment came.

The Question Nomani Didn't Ask But Implied

Asra Nomani's thread documented the paper trail of relationship-building, funding flows, and personnel movement that connected American activists to the Maduro regime. Her conclusion—"This wasn't solidarity. It was a long-running relationship, tested, rehearsed, and ready"—identifies the pattern.

But the question that matters for understanding American institutional capture is different: Why has the apparatus that should be detecting and disrupting this coordination—Congress, the FBI, the intelligence community—largely ignored it?

Part of the answer is that ideological commitment to "anti-imperialism" and "opposition to U.S. military intervention" has become sufficiently mainstream in certain American institutions that the underlying funding relationships and international coordination remain invisible to most observers.

Part of the answer is institutional. Congressional oversight of foreign influence operations has focused on Russia and China directly interfering in American elections, not on funding American activist organizations that amplify anti-American narratives.

Part of the answer is that the organizations involved are theoretically protected under First Amendment protections for activist speech, making government investigation sensitive.

But the larger answer is this: American institutional capture is a structural problem that transcends specific funding sources or personalities. Once you understand that personnel networks, funding flows, and ideological consensus can create coordination without central direction, you recognize why institutions become oriented toward certain positions almost regardless of leadership.

The Singham network didn't invent this mechanism. It simply funded its expansion.

Verification of Core Claims

The following claims in Nomani's timeline have been independently verified through public reporting:

  • Manolo De Los Santos is executive director of The People's Forum (confirmed through multiple sources including People's Forum official website)
  • De Los Santos traveled to Venezuela multiple times (confirmed through his own social media posts and Venezuelan state media appearances)
  • De Los Santos appeared on Venezuelan state television in May 2019 (confirmed by Fox News reporting citing teleSUR footage)
  • De Los Santos and Vijay Prashad posed with Maduro in November 2021 (confirmed through their own social media posts)
  • De Los Santos spoke at a Caracas conference on Maduro's livestream in December 2021 (confirmed by Fox News reporting)
  • De Los Santos attended the International Anti-Fascist Summit in Caracas in April 2022 (confirmed through Fox News reporting)
  • Maduro publicly recognized De Los Santos at a Bolivarian Alliance conference in April 2024 (referenced in multiple news reports)
  • The People's Forum is funded by Neville Roy Singham-connected nonprofits (confirmed through tax filings and reporting)
  • ANSWER Coalition posted coordinated protest graphics within minutes of Maduro's capture (confirmed through Fox News reporting with exact timestamps)
  • The network included Party for Socialism and Liberation, Tricontinental Institute, and other organizations (confirmed through multiple independent sources)
  • Within 12 hours, multiple organizations had coordinated messaging, graphics, and protests (confirmed through Fox News and other reporting)

The Larger Significance

The Maduro apparatus reveals how institutional capture actually works in practice. It's not a conspiracy theory. It's a structural phenomenon where funding creates incentive alignment, personnel movement ensures ideological consistency, and organizational structure allows for coordination that doesn't require explicit central direction.

Understanding this matters because the same patterns are visible in American academia, media institutions, government agencies, and activist organizations across multiple issue areas.

The Singham network didn't invent this mechanism. They simply funded its expansion at scale and documented it thoroughly enough that the mechanism became visible in a moment of crisis—the 12 hours when American military forces captured Venezuela's president and the apparatus activated to protect him.

Key Personnel Network

Funding Source: Neville Roy Singham (based in Shanghai, $785 million from ThoughtWorks sale, $65 million in documented donations)

Funding Conduits: United Community Fund, Justice and Education Fund, People's Support Foundation ($3 million to People's Forum in 2019)

Ideological Center: Tricontinental Institute for Social Research (Vijay Prashad, Executive Director; Nathan Singham, employee)

On-Ground Mobilization: The People's Forum (Manolo De Los Santos, Executive Director; also researcher at Tricontinental)

Street-Level Activation: ANSWER Coalition (Brian Becker, co-founder), Party for Socialism and Liberation (Eugene Puryear), Code Pink (Jodie Evans, Singham's wife)

Media Platforms: BreakThrough News, People's Dispatch, Tricontinental media output

International Coordination: International People's Assembly (includes Jodie Evans)

Liaison to Venezuelan Government: Manolo De Los Santos (documented attendance at Venezuelan government events, recognition by Maduro)

Sources

Original Timeline Research: Asra Nomani (@AsraNomani), Twitter thread documenting 23-year relationship between American socialist organizations and Venezuelan regime (January 4, 2026)

Share this article
The link has been copied!