NOM’s ‘Dirty Money’ And Dirty Tactics Revealed In Shocking New Exposé
NOM, the National Organization For Marriage, is accused of skirting campaign finance laws, money-laundering, and being funded by literally a handful of major donors, according to a new, extensive, and shocking exposé by E.J. Graff at The Advocate. In “Dirty Money,” Graff points to NOM’s increasingly harsher rhetoric, greater willingness to attack homosexuality and LGBT people, totuting its ability to protect donors’ identities, and state-by-state lawsuits attempting to overturn financial disclosure laws.
“In internal documents (which came to light because of a lawsuit that NOM brought against campaign finance disclosure, NOM v. McKee), NOM wrote, ‘One key advantage we now have is the capacity to protect the identity of our donors,’†Graff reports.
“NOM puts its hundreds of thousands of dollars into state campaigns in ways that protect its donors from being identified,” Graff writes:
Its campaign finance philosophy is that the best defense is a good offense: With the help of James Bopp, the lawyer who brought the notorious Citizens United lawsuit to the Supreme Court, NOM has repeatedly launched lawsuits arguing that states’ campaign reporting laws are unconstitutional efforts to chill free speech, even though it has just as repeatedly lost.
Watching NOM closely is Fred Karger, a gay California Republican who believes that NOM is a secret cabal actively conspiring to undermine campaign finance laws. Karger writes to state election commissions to convince them of the same. At Karger’s prompting, California, Maine, and Minnesota are investigating NOM’s campaign finance tactics.
Each year, according to NOM’s tax filings, two or three donors give NOM between $1 million and $3.5 million apiece; another two or three give between $100,000 and $750,000; and 10 or so others give between $5,000 and $95,000. In 2009 the top five donors made up three fourths of NOM’s budget; in 2010 the top two donors gave two thirds of the year’s total donations; and in 2011 the top two donors gave three fourths of NOM’s total income. But those funders’ identities are a mystery. Their names are redacted on NOM’s federal tax returns. Under federal campaign laws, none of those names have to be disclosed.
But if, as Karger alleges, those donors are actually using NOM as a way to contribute to state issue campaigns, that would be illegal. The states in which NOM runs campaigns (via locally registered groups) require donors to publicly disclose their names and addresses and sometimes their employers. The allegation is that NOM establishes state campaign organizations against marriage equality as pass-through groups, with local partners that do little. NOM solicits major donations from its large contributors for these campaigns and donates to the local fights so that NOM, not the individual, will be listed as the donor. If true, that’s fraud and “financial structuring,†the technical term for money laundering. (Calls to the four state organizations asking for comment were not returned.)
And then there’s the matter of just how unhinged and on-edge NOM president Brian Brown appears:
When asked why so many more people were willing to be listed as donors to the marriage equality campaigns than to the other side, Brown was impatient and exploded with anger at how LGBT extremists — condoned, in his view, by the marriage equality movement at large — attacked his side with “a campaign of intimidation, hatred, and attacking donors.†Gay extremists, he said, are attempting to “punish people…for exercising their First Amendment rights to speak up and stand for what they believe in, to donate to what they believe in…. They want to hurt people. They want to hurt people! Put that in the article! They want to hurt people!â€
When questioned on this, Brown became ever more emphatic. “I don’t think you understand the reality that donors on our side get death threats, I don’t think you understand the reality that it’s not a joke when a guy [Floyd Lee Corkins] comes into the Family Research Council with a gun, I don’t think you understand that creating an environment in which it’s OK to demean human beings because of their views is wrong. I can respect people and I support their constitutional right to give and to support their position to advance gay marriage. What we are asking for is the same respect. And at this point we are not getting it.â€
And then comes the truth that NOM is really not willing to publicly promote, but that sits at the heart of the anti-gay organization:
The head of NOM’s nonprofit educational arm, the Ruth Institute, Jennifer Roback Morse, promotes her stance with a prominent article headlined “Why Opposing the Gay Lobby Is Not Antigay.â€
However, since Maggie Gallagher ceased being NOM’s board chair, the Ruth Institute has skated over the edge of being actively antigay. Last year Carlos Maza of Equality Matters attended the Ruth Institute’s annual training program for “emerging leaders†in how to talk about marriage and LGBT issues. He writes, “What I saw at the conference — selling a book that labels gay people as pedophiles worthy of death, distributing Bible quotes to college students similarly calling for gays to be killed, hosting entire speeches devoted to condemning gays and lesbians as deviant sinners — represented a brand of antigay extremism that I assumed even NOM would have shied away from.†He listened to a lecture from antigay author Robert A.J. Gagnon announcing that homosexuality was “self-degrading,†inflicts “measurable harm,†is unhealthy, emotionally dangerous, unacceptable to God, and leads to depression, substance abuse, and disease. The weekend, Maza writes, taught “that gays and lesbians — including me — are unstable, dangerous, and unworthy of raising their own families.†The reading list included materials saying that lesbians and gay men are in a “rebellion against God,†that our relationships are inherently “unstable, unhealthy, and promiscuous,†and relying on such discredited authors as George Gilder and Paul Cameron.
Graff notes an important point, one with which we agree: since Gallagher’s supposed resignation, NOM has become increasingly hate-filled and “religious” — and it seems clear Brian Brown is, if not the cause, at the very least the messenger.
Graff’s article in The Advocate is important and one that many need to read. For all those who think this is a simple case of differences of opinion in the culture wars, Graff proves it’s anything but.
Â
Image of dollar bills by Revisorweb via Wikimedia
Enjoy this piece?
… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.
NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.
Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.
 |
The White House has confirmed President Donald Trump is moving to push the controversial SAVE America Act further right — which could make it even easier for the left to reject.
Many were confused or critical when President Trump claimed on Thursday that the SAVE Act — a voter ID bill that critics say will disenfranchise millions of Americans — would reshape rules for sports participation and health care access for transgender people, which the current text of the bill does not actually do.
According to Trump’s Truth Social post, the bill requires voter ID and proof of citizenship to vote, and no mail-in ballots except for illness, disability, military, or travel. It also bans “men in women’s sports,” and “transgender mutilation surgery for children, without the express written approval of the parents.”
The president, after uproar from the right, dropped the parental approval portion and called to ban all transgender surgery for children.
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt was asked on Friday about Trump’s additions to the legislation.
READ MORE: ‘Pure Amateur Hour’: Trump Slammed for ‘Absolutely Racing to Betray His Voters’
After declaring that he wants the SAVE Act passed “as soon as possible,” Leavitt acknowledged that Trump “has added on some priorities” to the bill in recent days, “namely no transgender transition surgeries for minors. We are not gonna tolerate the mutilation of young children in this country. No men in women’s sports. The president putting all of these priorities together, it speaks to how common sense they are.”
“These are all common sense priorities of this president that are backed by the vast majority of Americans and he wants Republicans to act on them as quickly as possible,” she claimed.
According to Democracy Docket, Leavitt’s comments “mark the first time the White House has publicly confirmed that Trump is pushing to attach anti-transgender policies to the SAVE America Act.”
Noting that even if the Senate were to pass the legislation with Trump’s latest priorities in it, the bill would have to head back to the House, Democracy Docket reported, “for another vote — a potentially difficult hurdle given the narrow margin by which it passed initially.”
But, even “without those additions, the bill faces long odds in the Senate, where most legislation requires 60 votes to pass and where Democrats have vowed to block it.”
Republican Majority Leader John Thune has said he opposes changing the Senate’s filibuster rules to help the bill’s passage.
READ MORE: ‘Dreaming of Gilead?’ WaPo Hit for Op-Ed Mourning Lack of Evangelicals in ‘Halls of Power’
Image via Reuters
President Donald Trump and his administration are under fire for what critics say is a lack of planning for his war against Iran. The fallout is already being felt in the economy, from rising gas prices to sinking financial markets, and a myriad of other potential crises.
“I’ve seen a lot of Presidents fall short of their promises but I’ve never seen any President just doing the opposite of everything promised on purpose,” charged U.S. Senator Brian Schatz (D-HI). “Prices, Epstein, wars. Just absolutely racing to betray his voters.”
One hour later, he followed up, writing: “Did they think this through?”
The Atlantic’s Karim Sadjadpour earlier this week reported, “I have spoken with current and former U.S. officials privy to the decision making” on Iran, “who describe a total lack of planning and contradictory aims among those worried about the war effort and those more concerned about the war’s domestic political implications.”
Democratic National Committee (DNC) Chairman Ken Martin earlier in the week charged: “Trump and his incompetent administration had no plan to get Americans out of danger after their planned attack on Iran. Now, American citizens are stuck in an active war zone. This is a complete disaster.”
READ MORE: ‘Dreaming of Gilead?’ WaPo Hit for Op-Ed Mourning Lack of Evangelicals in ‘Halls of Power’
On Friday, the State Department said that 24,000 Americans had returned from the Middle East, but thousands more remain. The “vast majority” of those who returned “were able to make their way home on their own through commercial means,” the Associated Press reported.
The rapidly rising price of oil and gas, and access to them, appear to be among critics’ greatest concerns.
“Apparently no one in the White House thought starting a war in the Middle East might affect oil prices,” lamented U.S. Senator Ruben Gallego (D-AZ). “Now families are paying the price at the pump for pure amateur hour.”
Longtime journalist Jim Roberts delved even further.
“Listening to White House official Kevin Hassett this morning is making it crystal clear that the Trump administration had no plan for dealing with the disruption of energy supplies in the Mideast,” he wrote, adding: “And now the Pentagon is trying to figure out how to protect ships in the Strait of Hormuz.”
The Atlantic’s Derek Thompson warned, “By April, energy experts say, the Iran War could be a full blown energy crisis.”
Citing reporting from the Financial Times, macroeconomist Philip Pilkington wrote that the “Trump administration forgot to refill its Strategic Petroleum Reserve before launching Total War in the Middle East.”
Patrick De Haan, the widely cited head of Petroleum Analysis at Gas Buddy, referencing President Donald Trump’s remarks about the price of gas rising, warned: “it doesn’t appear the admin is yet aware there’s actually a problem, so that means there’s nothing yet to fix. I do hope this changes soon.”
READ MORE: ‘Flashing Red’: Jobs Report Sparks Expert Warnings of Recession — or Even Stagflation
Image via Reuters
Washington Post readers are pushing back against the paper and an op-ed that laments what its author sees as a shortage of evangelical Christians in the “halls of power.”
“Evangelicals are 23 percent of U.S. adults and one of the most loyal Republican voting blocs, with 81 percent backing Donald Trump in 2024,” writes author Aaron M. Renn. “Yet despite six of the nine Supreme Court justices being appointed by Republican presidents, there are no evangelicals on the Supreme Court.”
The Supreme Court “is just one of the many elite institutions in which evangelicals are absent or underrepresented,” he continues. Declaring that evangelicals “have excelled in politics,” he points to U.S. Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO) and House Speaker Mike Johnson as examples.
Arguing that evangelicals “are also prominent in well-run and profitable businesses with relatively low cultural impact, such as food processing (Tyson Foods) and retail (Hobby Lobby),” he says that “they are all but absent from the leadership of prestigious universities, major foundations, Big Tech companies, leading financial firms and large media companies.”
READ MORE: ‘Flashing Red’: Jobs Report Sparks Expert Warnings of Recession — or Even Stagflation
“A stronger evangelical presence in elite institutions could strengthen them while addressing polarization and public mistrust,” he continues. “The lack of evangelicals in the halls of power contributes to anti-institutional public sentiment. It also deprives those institutions of an important pool of talent.”
Washington Post readers scorched the op-ed and the paper.
“The author remarked, more than once, of the lack of formal education among the vast numbers of evangelicals,” wrote one reader. “He then questions the lack of said evangelicals on corporate and college boards and in executive offices. Am I the only one seeing a connection here?”
“Is this not a request for a new DEI program to benefit evangelicals?” asked a reader.
“I am an evangelical Christian,” said a critic. “Please don’t hold up Mike Johnson or Josh Hawley as an example of what Christ calls us to be. Perhaps the reason for our absence in the halls of power is the fact that the majority chose to elect an amoral, corrupt narcissist to be president. We should be absent from that depth of depravity.”
READ MORE: Revealed: The Real Reason Kristi Noem Was Fired
One reader encouraged the author to “go see the musical Godspell and see just how far off the mark the American Evangelicals are.”
“Since when did adherence to fundamentalist religious beliefs become a litmus test for government or institutional leadership?” asked a reader. “Aren’t we currently bombing a country based on that system? This ‘newspaper’ is devolving into an internet forum.”
“So now MAGA wants DEI for Evangelicals,” said one reader. “This is fantastic stand-up comedy material.”
“In some cases, not all, the author is confusing evangelical with fundamentalist,” wrote one critic. “The author is also narrowing the meaning of evangelical by using a political frame, not a theological frame. Many evangelicals define themselves via strict adherence to Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount (or the Plain) … I wish the author had explored at least modestly the increasing breadth of what the designation ‘evangelical’ represents in Christianity, not on Capital Hill.”
“Do you expect to be trusted in fields of science when you deny evolution?” asked a reader.
“Evangelical Christianity is the antithesis of intellectual pursuit, science, and progress,” wrote a reader.
And one critic, appearing to refer to “The Handmaid’s Tale,” charged: “Dreaming of Gilead, are you?”
READ MORE: Trump’s Iran War Triggers Gas Price Shock — Especially in Red America
Image via Reuters
‘Dreaming of Gilead?’ WaPo Hit for Op-Ed Mourning Lack of Evangelicals in ‘Halls of Power’
‘Pure Amateur Hour’: Trump Slammed for ‘Absolutely Racing to Betray His Voters’
‘Flashing Red’: Jobs Report Sparks Expert Warnings of Recession — or Even Stagflation
White House Confirms Trump’s Shift That Pushes SAVE Act Further Right
White House Confirms Trump’s Shift That Pushes SAVE Act Further Right
‘Pure Amateur Hour’: Trump Slammed for ‘Absolutely Racing to Betray His Voters’
‘Dreaming of Gilead?’ WaPo Hit for Op-Ed Mourning Lack of Evangelicals in ‘Halls of Power’
‘Flashing Red’: Jobs Report Sparks Expert Warnings of Recession — or Even Stagflation
Revealed: The Real Reason Kristi Noem Was Fired
News3 days ago‘Dereliction of Duty’: Trump Officials Slammed Over Failure to ‘Keep Americans Safe’
News4 days agoRubio Scrambles to Contain Iran War Revolt
News3 days agoIntel Expert Calls Out Trump Defense Secretary for ‘Criminal Incompetence’
News1 day agoRevealed: The Real Reason Kristi Noem Was Fired
News2 days agoWhy Trump Is ‘Losing Control’ in Iran: Scholar
News4 days agoNoem Pins Botched Pretti and Good ‘Domestic Terrorist’ Claims on Agents on the Ground
News4 days agoIn 24-Hour Flip Trump Administration Now Plotting New Offensive Against Law Firms
News3 days ago‘Borderline Criminal’: Ex-Trump Official Says DHS Least Ready Yet for Terror Attack
