Posted on 11/02/2005 12:17:55 PM PST by Lurking Libertarian
But there is another side to Jay Sekulow, one that, until now, has been obscured from the public. It is the Jay Sekulow who, through the ACLJ and a string of interconnected nonprofit and for-profit entities, has built a financial empire that generates millions of dollars a year and supports a lavish lifestyle -- complete with multiple homes, chauffeur-driven cars, and a private jet [...][snip]
That less-known side of Sekulow was revealed in several interviews with former associates of his and in hundreds of pages of court and tax documents reviewed by Legal Times. Critics say Sekulow's lifestyle is at odds with his role as the head of a charitable organization that solicits small donations for legal work in God's name.
For example, in 2001 one of Sekulow's nonprofit organizations paid a total of $2,374,833 to purchase two homes used primarily by Sekulow and his wife. The same nonprofit also subsidized a third home he uses in North Carolina.
At various times in recent years, Sekulow's wife, brother, sister-in-law, and two sons have been on the boards or payrolls of organizations under his control or have received generous payments as contractors. Sekulow's brother Gary is the chief financial officer of both nonprofit organizations that fund his activities, a fact that detractors say diminishes accountability for his spending.
According to documents filed with the Internal Revenue Service, funds from his nonprofits have also been used to lease a private jet from companies under his family's control. And two years ago, Sekulow outsourced his own legal services from the ACLJ, shifting from a position with a publicly disclosed salary to that of a private contractor that requires no public disclosure. He acknowledged to Legal Times that his salary from that arrangement is "above $600,000" a year.
(Excerpt) Read more at law.com ...
Sekulow's financial dealings deeply trouble some of the people who have worked for him, leading several to speak with Legal Times during the past six months about their concerns -- before Sekulow assumed his high-profile role promoting President George W. Bush's Supreme Court nominees.
"Some of us truly believed God told us to serve Jay," says one former employee, who requested anonymity out of fear of reprisal. "But not to help him live like Louis XIV. We are coming forward because we need to believe there is fairness in this world."
We would all feel much better if he were poor. Why don't we investigate some of the top brass at the ACLU?
I've been waiting for an investigation of Ralph Nader for 40 years.
"At the time of his successful Supreme Court debut, Sekulow was also dealing with a trial of another sort. His private practice, which focused on creating tax shelters and financial deals for the renovation of historic buildings in Atlanta, collapsed when investors sued him for securities violations related to the renovation deals. He and his firm filed for bankruptcy protection in 1987, and more than a dozen creditors filed suit. A later story in the Atlanta Constitution said he left a trail of angry investors and employees. "God brought Jay to his knees then," a former employee told Legal Times."
A lot of people lost a lot of money. Sekulow and Roth were using money from the new investment projects to try to finish the underfunded older renovation projects. It became a house of cards and the whole thing fell down. Sekulow's bankruptcy ended the claims of investors. A unit of investment was $75,000; the invetors never got a cent back from Sekulow.
Ronn Owens had a guy on this week that wrote the book on Liberal Hypocrisy. When Nader was ready to publicly attack one company, he would buy stock in their competitor.
Yet, Jesse Jackson is JUST FINE INDEED to get rich off his non-profit. ;)
So it's OK for non-prifiteers like Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson and Louis Farakhan to live lavishly, but not OK for Jay Sekulow.
Uh huh. Just wanted to get that straight.
I first heard of Jay Sekolow on Paul Crouch's Trinity Broadcast TV show, I thought they backed him.
Last time I heard lawyers sometimes make money. Those who argue for corporations and for governments make big money. Jay may not be working only for the ACLJ and the presumption that he is bad simply because of wealth may not be justified.
The latest fad is to presume rich people are bad, but the press ignores John Kerry, Teddy Kennedy and George Soros because of their own hypocrisy.
I am highly suspicious of writings which smear people simply because of their wealth and do not state how they obtained it (which would possibly be profitable for us all).
It may be wrong to smear or slander Jay Sekulow because of his position and/or wealth.
This is a typical lib attack that hopes to peel off Christian supporters by portraying him as a "Jim Bakker." At $600,000, you can afford three homes pretty easily, and the Bible says a "Workman is worthy of his hire."
I don't care what they say about Jay Sekulow. I like him. He's done great work over the years. If he benefits from it, so what? He's worked hard.
He stands up to the ACLU - that is all I care about. I don't care if he robs little old ladies in his spare time (okay, that is a bit of a stretch). But all I want is a good lawyer who isn't afraid of the ACLU. Nothing more - nothing less.
I first heard of him on Pat Robertson's 700 Club. He heads the ACLJ. It's based on Christian beliefs. It was to counter ACLU..
Someone should look into Jessy Jackson's finances :)
Or Al Sharpton's.
funny you mention his name alongside a tv preacher --- they are both cut from the same mold "Send Me Money!" Only slightly different form those on the ":dark side" in that these are "our crooks". no?
Yes - they both do good (according to OUR standards) but their main purpose seems to be the same as all of the greedy "money changers" that Jesus drove from the temple. There was a reason the Jesus said that it would be easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than it would be for a rich man to enter heaven.
I really believe he was specifically referring to lawyers and tv evanglists (yes I know there was no tv preachers - back then they were called the pharisees!)
The amount of the salary doesn't bother me very much. The fancy accounting practices outlined in the article do start to smell a bit, if there's any truth to the thing.
Sekolow IS an Attorney after all. Not a Monk that has taken a vow of poverty. sheeeze. I guess the ACLU all live under bridges in their respective nests.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.