Posted on 07/19/2023 8:10:35 AM PDT by CFW
When the late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg accepted a $1 million prize from a liberal billionaire’s foundation, she pledged to pass the money to a list of designated charities. Four years later, it is unclear where Ginsburg sent that money—an ambiguity that experts say raises conflict of interest concerns.
The Berggruen Institute, a private foundation founded by billionaire investor Nicolas Berggruen, awarded Ginsburg its annual $1 million Philosophy & Culture award during a swanky star-studded event in December 2019. At the time, ethics experts raised red flags over Ginsburg’s acceptance of the prize, noting that the bounty far exceeded the $2,000 limit placed on honoraria by Judicial Conference regulations. But Ginsburg temporarily assuaged those concerns when she pledged to donate the prize money to more than 60 charities that reflected her personal causes, including the American Bar Foundation, the American Cancer Society, and the Metropolitan Opera.
(Excerpt) Read more at freebeacon.com ...
How does the Metropolitan Opera qualify as a charity? Isn’t it a business?
“How does the Metropolitan Opera qualify as a charity? Isn’t it a business?”
I guess it depends on who is giving the MET the money.
I thought I had included the two paragraphs below in my excerpt, but apparently not:
“What Ginsburg failed to mention was that she also directed the Berggruen Institute to conceal the full list of her designated charities from the public, a spokeswoman for the institute told the Washington Free Beacon. The Berggruen Institute even engaged in some creative accounting in its Form 990 tax return to ensure the recipients remain shrouded in secrecy.
“That list, per her wishes, is not for publication,” Berggruen Institute spokeswoman Rachel Bauch told the Free Beacon.”
Oh yeah. They never relent. They are on the march, and that march is no longer hidden in the shadows, because it’s no longer necessary to operate in the shadows.
typical liberal hypocrite
This is America, you can’t force Ruth Bader Ginsburg to share her bribe.
Now only Ruth and the devil know the truth.
Nope, it is owned by a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization.
“Oh yeah. They never relent. They are on the march, and that march is no longer hidden in the shadows, because it’s no longer necessary to operate in the shadows.”
I think part of the left’s current attack on SCOTUS is meant to be a warning. For one, it’s letting them know their recent rulings were not appreciated and they need adjust their thinking. And next, it is a warning for them not to interfere in the left’s persecution of President Trump. “You are teetering on the edge, SCOTUS! Lean much further right and interfere with our plans, and we will add five members who will rule as WE say!”
Democrats ignore the fact that the Supreme Court is a co-equal branch of our government and is not, in fact, under the rule of the legislative or executive branch. Sheldon Whitehouse, the most vocal Senator on the left on SCOTUS issues, is the worst offender of them all.
The Met is a 501(c)(3).
1/4 went to fund Hunter’s cocaine and strippers habit. 3/4 went to the Biden crime bribery network
'Do it to Julia! Do it to Julia! Not me! Julia! I don't care what you do to her. Tear her face off, strip her to the bones. Not me! Julia! Not me!' -- George Orwell, "1984", end of chapter 5
obama kept the noble peace prize money he said he would give to charity. The clintons stole all the money they could from their charity foundation and the Haitian charity.
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.