‘I Just F***ed Up’: Court Reform Group Accidentally Leaks Donor List

A group advocating for an overhaul of the Supreme Court may have torpedoed its own organization after one of its staffers accidentally emailed its donor list to the press.

Gabe Roth, executive director of Fix the Court, an activist organization linked to ongoing efforts to reform the Supreme Court, sent confidential tax forms to the Washington Examiner after an inquiry into a previous failure of the organization to file its Form 990 in 2021. Roth said that he had “misunderstood the filing instructions” and sent the outlet copies of the organization’s Schedule B 2021 and 2022 forms.

Almost immediately, Roth realized his mistake.

“S***, I’m not legally allowed to send you those,” Roth replied one minute later. “I really messed up. Can you call me now?”

According to several tax lawyers, it is not, in fact, illegal to disclose donor lists to the public.

“It’s a mistake,” Alan Dye, an attorney who has specialized in nonprofit tax law since 1975, said. “It’s been made before by a lot of organizations. Overdisclosure is not a crime.”

According to their website, Fix the Court advocates for 18-year term limits for Supreme Court Justices and for greater transparency and accountability at the highest court in the land. The organization circulated spurious sexual assault claims against then-prospective Justice Brett Kavanaugh in 2018, and reportedly purchased the domain names Brettkavanaugh.com and Brettkavanaugh.net for that purpose. Fix the Court has also blasted Justice Clarence Thomas for not formally disclosing certain gifts he received from billionaire Harlan Crow.

The forms revealed that the group brought in $290,000 in revenue in 2021, primarily from two other left-leaning non-profit organizations: the New Venture Fund and the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation.

“As you can see if you’ve reviewed the forms, I’m not a good fundraiser,” Roth said. “I’m not a good CPA. I’m a klutz.”

Roth was paid $162,138 by Fix the Court in 2022.

“I have only two foundations that give me money, and if their names become public, they’re never going to talk to me again,” Roth lamented. “Fix the Court is over. My screwup this morning probably cost me my job.”

Roth also told the Examiner that he “wanted to fix the mistake as soon as possible” as his “donors don’t want their names out there.”

Parker Thayer, investigative researcher at Capital Research Center, a conservative think-tank, said that Roth’s reaction reveals that his group is “not serious about transparency.”

“They have attempted to smear honorable men like Justice Thomas over his own financial disclosures but are apparently terrified at the thought of someone obtaining their own,” Thayer said.

http://www.stationgossip.com/2023/05/i-just-fed-up-court-reform-group.html

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/courts/supreme-court-dark-money-group-leaked-fix-court-clarence-thomas

https://www.scribd.com/document/646123145/2022-Schedule-B-Form-990-FTC#download&from_embed

Canadian Police Arrest Teenager Handing Out Bibles During Altercation With ‘Pro-Transgender’ Activists: Report

Today I was handcuffed and put in a paddy wagon for offering students bibles on a public sidewalk in Calgary.

I was released and told if I returned I would be arrested and charged.

I continued handing out bibles.

For I am not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ.

http://www.womensystems.com/2023/05/canadian-police-arrest-teenager-handing.html

Revealed: How the sugar industry paid prestigious Harvard researchers to say fat (NOT sugar) caused heart disease

Newly-unveiled papers reveal sugar industry bribed Harvard scientists

It was in the 1960s - before conflict of interest had to be reported

After 'bad press' for sugar, industry chiefs commissioned a new review

They told Harvard professors to say fat was a worse cause of heart disease

The finding shaped public views of nutrition for years

The sugar industry paid prestigious Harvard scientists to publish research saying fat - not sugar - was a key cause of heart disease, newly unveiled documents reveal.

At the time, in the 1960s, conflict of interest disclosure was not required.

It meant sugar chiefs could work closely with researchers to re-draft and re-draft their paper until it was 'satisfactory' - without having to report their involvement.

The result shaped public health approaches to nutrition for years.

The findings, revealed today in a special report in JAMA Internal Medicine, has sent shockwaves through the research community.

'I thought I had seen everything but this one floored me,' said Marion Nestle of New York University, who wrote an editorial on the new findings.

'It was so blatant. And the "bribe" was so big.'

'Funding research is ethical,' Nestle said.

'Bribing researchers to produce the evidence you want is not.

The warped research appeared in a 1967 literature review in The New England Journal of Medicine.

It pointed to fat and cholesterol as the dietary culprits of heart disease, glossing over evidence from the 1950s that sugar was also linked to heart disease.

According to the new report, the NEJM review was sponsored by the Sugar Research Foundation (SRF), which is today the Sugar Association.

Its role in the study was not disclosed until 1984.

Harvard professor of nutrition Dr Mark Hegsted co-directed the SRF's first heart disease research project from 1965 to 1966.

In the new report, Laura A. Schmidt of the University of California, San Francisco and colleagues have uncovered correspondence that shows how Dr Hegsted was commissioned by the SRF to reach a specific conclusion.

Archives from the University of Illinois and the Harvard Medical Library reveal that the foundation set the objective for the literature review, funded it and reviewed drafts of the manuscript.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-3785753/How-sugar-industry-paid-prestigious-Harvard-researchers-say-fat-NOT-sugar-caused-heart-disease.html?ito=amp_twitter_share-top