There is still some confusion regarding what led to Project Veritas founder James O’Keefe’s ouster from the investigative journalism group he launched more than a dozen years ago.
Although the board claimed that O’Keefe mismanaged donor funds, there has been significant speculation that he was pushed out for some other reason.
O’Keefe himself seemed to suggest that a recent undercover video exposing Pfizer’s apparent plans to produce mutated versions of COVID-19 might have been a factor in his abrupt departure.
“That is the only thing that has changed,” he said of the Pfizer story. “And then, suddenly, an unusual emergency happened just a few days after that.”
Was Pfizer involved with O’Keefe’s removal from Project Veritas?
BANNON: “I can’t separate out the power of what he did with Pfizer, add that to Naomi Wolf & War Room’s posse doing all that analysis of 50 reports..about Pfizer docs, those 2 were the pincer moves on Pfizer..”🔥 pic.twitter.com/tryj4jgXRg
— LionHearted (@LionHearted76) February 22, 2023
Subsequent statements from both the organization and its founder have resulted in further uncertainty regarding whether O’Keefe resigned or was fired.
In any case, the board’s decision has clearly resulted in backlash from former Project Veritas supporters. Even as O’Keefe’s social media audience grows, the number of Twitter followers for Project Veritas cratered when the news first surfaced.
On Monday alone, nearly 200,000 users unfollowed the account — and the follower count has been in freefall ever since.
For their part, remaining Project Veritas employees seem desperate to retain as many once-loyal followers as possible. In a clear effort to differentiate the “Project Veritas Team” from its board, the former sent out an email attempting to change the narrative surrounding O’Keefe’s departure.
According to the “team,” O’Keefe was merely placed “on a temporary suspension until the audit was completed” and was not actually fired.
“We can’t stress how separate the board’s role is from daily operations here at PV,” the email stated. “We are still grinding and pursuing stories of great public importance.”
The statement concluded that “there are 60+ of us here at PV who remain passionately dedicated to James’ mission” in his absence.
“While we cannot control online narratives, and unfortunately cannot chime in to individually defend ourselves in the public sphere at present, we can assure you we remain steadfast and determined to expose corruption.”
At one point, the email pleaded with recipients to “continue to give us a chance,” but it appears from the mass social media exodus that a considerable portion of its once-sizable audience is unwilling to comply with the request.
