Probably true when they donated money. Certainly not true when they put up posters or claimed to support things. Fraudsters cloaking themselves in the names of things is pretty common throughout hot button political issues, although sometimes it's fraud and sometimes it's unintentionally mismanaging money. I mean, the trucker thing in Canada raised millions of dollars, and while some of it has not been transferred because of the apparent fraud, only $1 million was only ever planned to be spent on the trucker thing and the other $7 million was destined for the organizer's bank account.

In general, there are no trademarks on social movements, and it's a tough problem.

> the missing $60M that was spent on properties

It’s not missing, it's the money they reportedly had on hand at last account.

(And if anyone knew it had been spent on properties, it still wouldn't be missing.)

> it's the money they reportedly had on hand at last account.

Exactly. Everyone knows that the 'missing' $60M didn't go to their own causes, but was spent on themselves (and everything else unrelated to BLM), just like what fraudsters would do. They were successful at manipulating the emotions of their supporters and executed a magnificent scam that even tricked the largest of companies.

So we are still defending fraudsters?

> Everyone knows that the 'missing' $60M didn't go to their own causes, but was spent

No, they don't, that's rather the basis of the (still inaccurate) characterization of it being missing.