Calling Leonard Leo: Tikvah Tablet Goes into the Koch Brothers Gutter with the Capital Research Center

59 views
Skip to first unread message

David Shasha

unread,
Sep 14, 2022, 12:20:41 PM9/14/22
to david...@googlegroups.com

What is the Capital Research Center? The Whore of Trump Goes into the Right Wing Gutter

 

I have already presented a plethora of information on the Barre Seid Leonard Leo Billion Dollar Dark Money issue:

 

https://groups.google.com/g/davidshasha/c/BqTfL1TZ4MM/m/T3SaPg3sAwAJ

 

It is highly likely that the Tikvah Trumpscum are looking to schnorr for some of that cash bonanza!

 

And what is the best way to do that?

 

To pay obeisance to the Koch Brothers and the Dark Money Right Wing WOKE Intersectionality:

 

https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/for-profit-dc-firm-staging-americas-grassroots-movements-arabella-advisors

 

That’s right, the Whore of Trump needed a hit-piece to expose – Trumplike in its Projection! – a purported Left Wing “equivalent” of the Seid-Leo SHANDA.

 

To do this, she had to find someone in something called the Capital Research Center.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_Research_Center

 

https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Capital_Research_Center

 

I have taken the liberty of including the complete entry provided by Source Watch, which is a deep dive into the Right Wing Fascist Conspiracy that is guaranteed to make reasonable people wretch.

 

Read it very carefully.

 

It is interesting to see Capital’s “investigative reporter” Hayden Ludwig, a new figure in Whore of Trump Tikvahworld, attack groups on the political Left, when in point of fact his own group is knee-deep in the usual suspects of Trumpworld and the Radical Right.

 

That is what Tikvah Tablet would call “objectivity”!

 

Just like Banana Republic AG Barr did his “audition” for Trump, so too is Alana Newhouse working to get noticed by the Seid-Leo cabal, as she goes out of her way to deploy the Right Wing assassins in order to take down Liberal institutions and funders.

 

 

David Shasha

 

The For-Profit D.C. Firm Staging America’s ‘Grassroots’ Movements

By: Hayden Ludwig

Behind the closed doors of an unassuming philanthropic consultancy in Washington, D.C., is one of the most powerful lobbying forces in the United States. The Atlantic has called it “the massive progressive dark-money group you’ve never heard of” and “the indisputable heavyweight of Democratic dark money.” The Washington Post believes its potent lobbying arm is reason enough for Congress to enact forced donor disclosure laws, while Politico labelled it a “dark-money behemoth.” “The system of political financing, which often obscures the identities of donors, is known as dark money,” wrote The New York Times, “and Arabella’s network is a leading vehicle for it on the left.”

Meet Arabella Advisors, the brainchild of ex-Clinton administration staffer Eric Kessler and the favorite tool of anonymous, billionaire donors on the progressive left. Since 2006, the Arabella hub has overseen a growing network of nonprofits—call them the “spokes”—that collected $2.4 billion in the 2019-20 election cycle, nearly twice as much as the Republican and Democratic national committees combined.

These nonprofits in turn manage and supervise a vast array of “pop-up” groups—mainly political attack-dog websites, ad campaigns, and “spontaneous” demonstrations staffed by Arabella’s network of activist professionals who pose as members of independent activist organizations. These groups—such as Fix Our Senate, the Hub Project, and Floridians for a Fair Shake—typically emerge very suddenly in order to savage the political opposition on the policy or outrage of that particular day or week, then vanish just as quickly. The pop-ups do not file IRS disclosures or report their budgets, boards, or staff. In most cases, their connection to Arabella goes unreported. Many of them have offered sympathetic ordinary voters the opportunity to donate to whatever the “grassroots” cause happens to be, when in fact the money feeds back into Arabella’s enormous dark-money network.

The relatively novel and innovative model of political activism perfected by Arabella, which was founded 2005, went more or less unnoticed until 2018, when I was reporting on the activist groups that attempted to prevent the Senate confirmation of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh. Among the sea of picket signs outside the court in July 2018 was the name of an unfamiliar group: Demand Justice. A search of the IRS nonprofit archives showed the name itself wasn’t listed. What did turn up in an online search was a downtown address on Connecticut Avenue shared by dozens of other organizations, including the Arabella “spoke” that appeared to be running Demand Justice, Sixteen Thirty Fund.

It isn’t uncommon for political groups to share expensive D.C. office space, especially when they’re affiliated, like the Center for American Progress (CAP) and its lobbying arm, CAP Action. But Arabella’s arrangement is unique: A for-profit consultancy (Arabella Advisors) is the central hub; four (perhaps five) tax-exempt nonprofits (New Venture Fund, Sixteen Thirty Fund, Hopewell Fund, Windward Fund, and possibly North Fund, all founded and led by Arabella leadership) are the spokes; and countless ephemeral pop-ups branching out from the nonprofits.

In early 2019, the Capital Research Center (where I work) released a report on the network. Since then, my colleagues and I have collected large amounts of data on Arabella’s origins, lobbying, pop-up campaigns, board connections, and donors, which helped lay the groundwork for later reporting on Arabella in mainstream outlets like The Atlantic and New York Times—which have since acknowledged that the political “left” has outraised and outspent the political “right” using dark money in recent years by a margin of nearly 2 to 1.

And yet today, the vast majority of American voters remain unaware of Arabella’s existence, even as it promises to play an increasingly central role in American politics, and as the culture wars and fight for control of federal institutions reaches a fever pitch in the fall of 2022.

Before Arabella Advisors, there was Eric Kessler. Today he is the company founder, principal, and senior managing partner, and at one point served as a board member for four of the Arabella network’s five nonprofits. Kessler is considered by many in Washington to be a leading expert on philanthropy and foundation-giving.

Kessler’s career began over 30 years ago not in philanthropy but in grubby political activism. In 1990, he was a student at the University of Colorado where he met David Brower, founding director of the Sierra Club and a population-control advocate who created the environmental groups Friends of the Earth and the Earth Island Institute, among others. Over Tanqueray martinis, according to the Earth Island Journal, Brower convinced Kessler to hitchhike to San Francisco as an Earth Island volunteer focusing on water conservation problems in Siberia.

In 1993, Kessler became national field director for the League of Conservation Voters, a powerful environmental lobbying group—also founded by Brower in 1970—that spends heavily on boosting Democratic turnout each national election cycle. In 1996, following successful campaign work, Kessler was appointed to President Bill Clinton’s Department of the Interior under Secretary Bruce Babbitt, an aggressive regulator who had run the League of Conservation Voters from 1988-93. From 1999 to 2005, Kessler was senior manager of the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs, which promotes a progressive vision of democracy in developing countries (he now serves on the board).

The crucial turn in Kessler’s life came in 1998, when his family sold its fifth-generation auto parts company in Chicago, Fel-Pro, for a reported $750 million. At 26 years old, Kessler had become quite wealthy. He got involved in his family’s charity, the Family Alliance Foundation, a modest grant-maker to health care research whose board still includes him and his parents.

In 2005, Kessler left the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs to found Arabella Advisors. While it remains unclear exactly what inspired it, the company’s current business model—a for-profit hub that directly controls a series of nonprofit spokes—was visible at the beginning. Almost immediately after Arabella was formed, Kessler started the 501(c)(3) Arabella Legacy Fund, now called New Venture Fund, the largest nonprofit in the Arabella network.

The Arabella hub has since added three more spokes—the 501(c)(3) Hopewell and Windward Funds and 501(c)(4) Sixteen Thirty Fund—and perhaps a fifth, semirelated (c)(4) sibling, North Fund, which shares common characteristics. All except North Fund share the same address. (It’s perhaps worth noting that in 1630, when the Puritan John Winthrop and his followers departed England for Massachusetts, a new venture that led to the founding of Boston, they traveled aboard the ships Arabella and Hopewell. “Windward” is likewise a nautical term.)

Why so many nonprofits? There are advantages in shuffling money around and having multiple different pots to collect cash from different donors. Windward Fund appears more focused on environmental causes, while Hopewell supports many of the network’s pro-abortion rights campaigns. The Sixteen Thirty Fund was created with seed funding from the Sierra Club and the radical defunct group ACORN, among others. In turn, the Sixteen Thirty Fund appears to have provided seed capital for the North Fund in 2019, which almost exclusively provides money to state ballot initiatives. If nothing else, this arrangement makes the money harder to follow.

Arabella Advisors itself makes its money from client consulting fees—typically from wealthy donors and left-leaning foundations—and management fees charged to its nonprofit network. The company likes to convey the impression that, as outgoing Arabella CEO Sampriti Ganguli said, according to an Atlantic report, it’s a “relatively small business-services organization that does HR, legal compliance, etc.” for the nonprofits that just happen to share its address and hire Arabella for contract work—$182 million of it for pop-up campaign staffing, office space, and similar services between 2008 and 2020.

Strictly speaking, Ganguli’s description is accurate. But it also helps obscure the reality of how large and active the network really is.

Kessler at one point served on the boards of all four main “spokes” alongside the company’s general counsel and CFO. Although they’ve since expanded board membership beyond Arabella itself, New Venture Fund, the largest spoke, is still led by ex-Arabella managing director Lee Bodner. Furthermore, many of Arabella’s pop-up campaigns have two components: Lobbying, run through Sixteen Thirty Fund, and research or fundraising, run through one of the (c)(3) spokes. In short, the incestuous nature of Arabella’s network is a feature, not a bug, of its business model. It is, moreover, a prime selling point to donors. So why hide it?

It’s possible to observe money entering the Arabella pot and money leaving it, but there is no way to connect any particular grant to any individual donor.

From a donor’s perspective, the Arabella network may offer a way to direct large amounts of money into favored political causes while minimizing outside scrutiny.

The IRS requires 501(c) nonprofits to file annual Form 990 disclosures revealing budgets, boards, and any grants paid out. But only private foundations must publicly report their donors—making it easy to trace a donation, for example, from Warren Buffett to the Buffett Foundation to Planned Parenthood.

Alternatively, by routing financial contributions through the New Venture Fund, and then on to the final recipient, that donor’s name is washed away. His or her contribution is pooled with money from other donors and later paid out as New Venture Fund grants. In other words, it is possible to observe money entering the Arabella pot and money leaving it, but there is no way to connect any particular grant to any individual donor.

In 2020 alone, the “spokes” paid out $896 million this way, virtually all of it to politically active organizations.

Private foundations are also barred from election intervention and, with certain exceptions, from donating to 501(c)(4) groups like the Sixteen Thirty Fund, since the latter are allowed to spend significantly more money on lobbying than their (c)(3) counterparts and may engage in limited electioneering, such as campaign ads and endorsements. Donations to 501(c)(4) groups are not tax-deductible, unlike their (c)(3) counterparts. When a donor gives to a (c)(4), it’s typically for lobbying or electoral purposes.

The bulk of the Arabella network’s revenues come from foundation contributions, which is all the more notable given how much money circulates internally between the spokes—roughly $103 million in 2020. Did foundation money end up supporting Sixteen Thirty Fund’s election work in past elections? It’s impossible to tell. But money is fungible; foundation grants may not have been used for lobbying, but it’s not hard to see how they can free up other Sixteen Thirty Fund money for political work.

In the first quarter of 2022, for example, Sixteen Thirty Fund spent $2.3 million lobbying Congress on drug pricing caps in the Build Back Better bill, “election integrity,” and “filibuster reform.” Since 2020, Sixteen Thirty Fund has spent $7.8 million lobbying Congress on annual appropriations bills, statehood for Washington, D.C., the CARES Act, “Senate rules reform proposals,” Medicaid expansion, and the For the People Act (H.R. 1).

Critics have likened this practice to charitable “money-laundering” for washing away the identity of donors, but it isn’t unique to Arabella or to the political left: The more famous Tides Foundation in San Francisco pioneered pass-through grants in the late 1970s, while DonorsTrust offers a similar “dark money” service to conservatives.

A deliberately ominous but squishy term coined a decade ago by the left-leaning Sunlight Foundation to criticize anonymous spending by conservative groups in the 2010 midterm elections, “dark money” is today widely used to disparage one’s political opponents in general. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., the Senate’s top “dark money” hawk, has compared the anonymous spending of groups he disagrees with to treason—while ignoring the $3.7 billion in “dark money” that benefited groups he does agree with in 2020 alone.

In 2020-21, the Sixteen Thirty Fund curiously spent roughly $2.9 million lobbying for congressional Democrats’ “For the People Act” (H.R. 1), which would strip donors of their anonymity, currently interpreted as a right protected under the First Amendment. Director Amy Kurtz claims H.R. 1 is part of Sixteen Thirty Fund’s goal to “reduce the influence of special interest money in politics.” Yet when asked to discuss her own group’s donors, Kurtz hid behind the First Amendment, telling Politico that “we remain equally committed to following the current laws to level the playing field for progressives in this election and in the future.”

Similarly, when the $5 million it poured into Montana’s pro-marijuana legalization campaign in 2020 raised questions from state regulators, North Fund refused to violate its donors’ free speech rights: “North Fund strictly follows all disclosure requirements at local, state and federal levels, and donors decide for themselves whether to disclose their contributions.” When pressed to name the donors to its campaign for D.C. statehood, a North Fund spokeswoman told reporters, “We don’t disclose the names of our funders.” (In fact, nearly half of the North Fund’s 2020 revenues, and 100% of its 2019 revenues, came from other Arabella nonprofits.)

In November 2021, The Atlantic’s Emma Green put the obvious question to Ganguli, Arabella’s CEO at the time: “You might call [Arabella’s] work political ... Why should people with a lot of money be able to do this anonymously?”

Green: You spend your days serving the interests and needs of billionaires. Also, theoretically, you’re part of a progressive world that thinks that’s wrong and unjust. ... I wonder if you think it is okay for groups like this to be able to operate under the cover of darkness.

 

Ganguli: That is what the law allows for. When the laws change, we will make sure we are perfectly compliant with them. Projects and donors have every opportunity to share publicly what they do and don’t do. It’s not incumbent on Arabella Advisors to opine on what that should be.

After enough prodding, Ganguli appeared to concede that Arabella is no different than one of the most persistent and salient boogeymen among political progressives:

Green: You both take advantage of similar legal structures, federal regulations, and the ability to put lots of money toward politics, little p. They just work on the opposite side, for opposite causes. Do you feel good that you’re the left’s equivalent of the Koch brothers?

When historians look back on this period in American political history—what they might think of as the second Gilded Age—they could do worse than to consult the list of top foundation donors to the Arabella network’s flagship, New Venture Fund, between 2009 and 2022.

There’s no comprehensive list of donors to Arabella’s nonprofits, but all nonprofits are required to publicly disclose to whom they contribute. Over the years, it has been possible to trace grants to Arabella’s 501(c)(3) nonprofits from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation ($375 million), Ford Foundation ($125 million), Intel co-founder Gordon Moore’s Moore Foundation ($113 million), Warren Buffett’s Susan Thompson Buffett Foundation ( $111 million), William and Flora Hewlett Foundation (of Hewlett-Packard fame; $71 million), Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (Johnson & Johnson co-founder; $54 million), the Rockefeller Foundation ($43 million), W.K. Kellogg Foundation (Kellogg’s cereal; $37 million), David and Lucille Packard Foundation (Hewlett-Packard’s other co-founder; $33 million), and the John and Catherine MacArthur Foundation (an insurance and real estate mogul; $24 million).

Foundations are generally barred from funding 501(c)(4) nonprofits’ activities, since the latter may spend more on lobbying than their (c)(3) counterparts and may even endorse candidates (foundations and (c)(3) groups may not). In practice, this means the 501(c)(4) Sixteen Thirty Fund’s donors are more obscure. We’ve traced grants from the get-out-the-vote group State Engagement Fund “to support nonpartisan voter engagement and mobilization” in the 2018 election; the National Education Association; eBay founder Pierre Omidyar’s Democracy Fund Voice; AFSCME, a government employees union; Planned Parenthood; Tides Advocacy, associated with the Tides Foundation; and George Soros’ Open Society Policy Center. Any contributions from individual donors are impossible to find, because they won’t appear on any IRS disclosure due to privacy laws.

It’s generally impossible to connect these specific donors with the grants ultimately paid out by the Arabella network. In other words, we can see money going into the nonprofits—though not all of it—and money exiting them, but we can’t link those specific dollars together. It’s a gigantic, multi-billion-piece jigsaw puzzle in which you’re never certain how many pieces are missing from the set. But what’s obvious is that when many of these foundations want to quietly fund political causes, they turn to Arabella—particularly during election years.

In 2020 alone, New Venture paid $44 million to America Votes, which bills itself as the “coordination hub of the progress community”; $25 million to the Center for Tech and Civic Life, which reportedly used $350 million from Mark Zuckerberg to boost Democratic turnout in key cities; $5 million to the Voter Registration Project, which targets likely Democratic voters in battleground states; and $2.3 million to State Voices, which runs a network of get-out-the-vote groups.

The smaller Hopewell Fund directed $8 million in 2020 to ACRONYM, the voter registration group whose infamous app, Shadow Inc., was responsible for screwing up the Iowa Democratic caucuses in 2019, causing the Iowa Democratic Party chairman to resign. It also gave millions to other get-out-the-vote groups, including Stacey Abrams’ Fair Fight Action.

In 2020, Sixteen Thirty Fund paid out $129 million to America Votes; $15 million to Future Forward USA Action and $7.5 million to its political action committee (PAC); $10 million to Bill Kristol’s Defending Democracy Together; $4.5 million to the Democratic super PAC Priorities USA Action; and $3.5 million to the League of Conservation Voters, Eric Kessler’s old employer, to name just a few.

All told, Sixteen Thirty Fund paid $44 million into partisan PACs in the 2020 election, including $11.3 million to two PACs aligned with then-candidate Joe Biden—Victory 2020 and Unite the Country—making Sixteen Thirty Fund their largest and second-largest donor, respectively. Victory 2020 was run by a former chief of staff to Democratic operative David Brock’s Media Matters for America.

In Colorado, Sixteen Thirty Fund ran a $4 million campaign to unseat Republican Sen. Cory Gardner under the name “Rocky Mountain Values,” which described itself as an “organization made up of real Coloradans—not special interests.” (Gardner lost reelection.) In Arizona, Sixteen Thirty Fund pumped $4 million into “Honest Arizona,” a 501(c)(4) formed six months before the November election and led by an activist tied to Majority Forward, itself an affiliate of the Democrats’ Senate Majority PAC in Washington, to defeat Republican Sen. Martha McSally. (McSally also lost reelection.)

In Maine, Sixteen Thirty Fund gave $3.9 million to “Maine Momentum,” a campaign to defeat Republican Sen. Susan Collins that claimed to be “totally Maine-based” until local and national reporting revealed that its money came from Washington, D.C. In Iowa, the self-described “grassroots” group Iowa Forward used Sixteen Thirty Fund cash to campaign against Sen. Joni Ernst for “voting to gut our health care.” In North Carolina, Sixteen Thirty Fund gave $7 million to Piedmont Rising (based in Philadelphia, despite its name), which spent $1.2 million opposing Republican Senate candidate Thom Tillis. (Collins, Ernst, and Tillis all won their elections.)

In 2019, Sixteen Thirty Fund provided $9.3 million to North Fund, which appears to be the Arabella network’s mysterious new fifth spoke. In 2020, the Sixteen Thirty and New Venture Funds together gifted North Fund $30.5 million, approximately half its budget. North Fund in turn paid Arabella Advisors $942,000 in consulting fees that year. The original donors in this case, as in all others, remain unknown.

Saurabh Gupta, Arabella’s general counsel, sits on North Fund’s board. The group is led by Jim Gerstein, a Democratic consultant for GBAO Strategies who previously headed Democracy Corps, the polling outfit created by legendary Democratic strategists James Carville and Stan Greenberg.

In 2020, the North Fund committed $1.1 million to the successful defeat of Colorado’s proposed 22-week abortion ban. The Sixteen Thirty and North funds together provided $7 million of the $9 million campaign to pass the state’s paid family medical leave legislation, which succeeded; their opponents spent less than $800,000.

In Missouri, North Fund put at least $1.1 million into a campaign to defeat Republican-proposed changes to the state’s redistricting process and campaign finance laws, which lost, and an unknown amount into Missouri’s pro-Medicaid expansion campaign, which passed. In Ohio, North Fund gave $1.7 million to an unsuccessful bid to raise the state minimum wage to $13 per hour.

North Fund gave $7 million to Future Forward USA, a nonprofit whose super PAC spent $29 million supporting the presidential candidacy of Joe Biden. It also gave $250,000 to Yes on National Popular Vote, a group pushing states to bypass the Electoral College by giving their electoral votes to whichever candidate receives the most votes nationwide. And it gave $100,000 to LUCHA, an Arizona group whose staffers harassed Democratic Sen. Kyrsten Sinema in an Arizona State University bathroom in October 2021 for her lack of support of President Biden’s Build Back Better Act.

Needless to say, North Fund is pouring millions of dollars into 2022 Senate races. The group launched a $4 million ad campaign called Opportunity Wisconsin to run negative ads against Republican Sen. Ron Johnson, making it one of the top-spending outside groups in the state for a seat Democrats aim to flip in November.

North Fund also appears to house many of the Arabella network’s most extreme pop-ups, its network of transitory and difficult-to-trace campaigns.

North Fund runs 51 for 51, the campaign to grant statehood to the District of Columbia, which would grant two additional Senate seats to the Democratic Party. Just Democracy, another North Fund pop-up, advocates for abolishing the Electoral College, ending the Senate filibuster, and court-packing. Voting Rights Lab Action opposes anti-election fraud measures, while the Democracy Docket Action Fund has financed state-level gerrymandering campaigns meant to give Democrats an edge in future races. North Fund’s Accountable Tech campaign advocates for censorship of conservative “disinformation” on social media platforms. Accountable Tech opposes Elon Musk’s embattled purchase of Twitter, claiming his reinstatement of banned conservatives will “further toxify our information ecosystem and be a direct threat to public safety.”

These types of pop-up groups have been a feature of the Arabella network from the beginning. The name of the first pop-up remains elusive, but we know it aimed to convince conservative evangelical churches to adopt progressive environmental ideology around global warming and carbon reduction policies. Dubbed Creation Care, the goal was to build a “grassroots movement of Evangelicals” using an “environmental toolkit for pastors ... to integrate creation care teaching into their ministry” and sermons:

Worship materials will be created for various topics, including global warming, air and water pollution, endangered species and the environment’s effect on human health. ... In addition, the Pastor’s toolkit will include materials ... to educate Pastors regarding creation care’s basis in Scripture, as well as fact sheets for Pastors and their congregations on various environmental topics and suggestions for how congregations can take action to care for God’s creation.

Creation Care turned out to be something of a well-funded failure, garnering $2 million—$240,000 from the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation and another $494,000 from Patricia Bauman, who is tied to the Democracy Alliance, which coordinates spending to boost Democratic turnout.

Since then, Arabella’s pop-up campaigns have grown more sophisticated. Demand Justice, Arabella’s most famous pop-up alumnus, can perhaps claim more credit than any other group for mainstreaming the revived campaign to pack the Supreme Court and the unsuccessful but landmark campaigns to prevent Senate confirmation of Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett.

Demand Justice, which has since spun off as an independent nonprofit, was formed in 2018 and led by the activist Brian Fallon, who previously served as press secretary of Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign. Public filings also list Ezra Reese of Perkins Coie, a law firm aligned with the Democratic Party, as a beneficial owner.

Demand Justice was the group initially responsible for providing protesters dressed in costumes from A Handmaid’s Tale outside the Supreme Court to protest Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearings and purchased the website StopKavanaugh.com.

The group was in fact prepared to protest whomever Trump planned to name to fill the Supreme Court seat previously occupied by Anthony Kennedy. At one of these rallies in July 2018, I noticed and photographed unused pre-printed signs protesting the four potential picks that at the time remained on Trump’s shortlist. Another former Arabella pop-up, Fix the Court, purchased the website BrettKavanaugh.com and filled it with links to sexual assault support groups.

Demand Justice maintains its own shortlist of favored judges, which included Ketanji Brown Jackson before she became associate justice of the Supreme Court. Jackson’s rapid ascent from a district court to the U.S. Court of Appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court all in less than one year received a $1 million lobbying assist from Demand Justice.

At least two former Demand Justice staff members were hired by the Biden White House: senior counsel Paige Herwig, a former Demand Justice deputy chief counsel, and former press secretary Jen Psaki, a Demand Justice communications consultant who advised its get-out-the-vote project, Supreme Court Voter.

Arabella Advisors has recently denied any association with Demand Justice, pointing out that the latter is an independent, unaffiliated nonprofit as of the Jackson confirmation process. In fact, Demand Justice was a project of Sixteen Thirty Fund for three years until mid-2021, when it received its own tax exemption as a separate 501(c)(4). In other words, Arabella’s attempt to deflect association with Demand Justice since Jackson’s nomination appeared to confirm Demand Justice’s status as an Arabella-run pop-up during the confirmations of Kavanaugh and Barrett.

The court fights point to a conspicuous feature of Arabella’s network as a whole: Despite the amount of money it can raise and deploy, it’s been able to buy relatively few political victories. And despite billions of dollars in funds and a seemingly infinite supply of professional activists and mega-wealthy donors, the dominant image of Arabella’s political significance is of a handful of people in their 30s dressed up as fictional characters unsuccessfully protesting Supreme Court nominations on weekday mornings.

For now, it seems, no amount of “dark money” can turn evangelical ministers into climate change activists or convince Mainers to get rid of Susan Collins. Perhaps that, if nothing else about Arabella, should give Americans continued confidence in their democracy.

Hayden Ludwig is a senior investigative researcher for the Capital Research Center in Washington, D.C.

From Tablet magazine, September 14, 2022

 

Capital Research Center

By: SourceWatch

The Capital Research Center (CRC) is a right-wing "investigative think tank" established in 1984 to examine the influence of money in politics. CRC focuses on "unions, environmentalist groups, and a wide variety of nonprofit and activist organizations."[1] CRC says, "We do have a specific point of view. We believe in free markets, Constitutional government, and individual liberty. But facts are facts, and our journalists and researchers go where the facts lead them."[1] CRC produces a podcast,[2] political commentary,[3] and a print magazine called Capital Research.[4]

CRC is an associate member of the State Policy Network.

Contents

News and Controversies

CRC Among Several Conservative Nonprofits Funding Climate Science Disinformation Ads on Facebook

In October 2020, a report found that 51 Facebook ads questioning the credibility of climate science had been viewed over 8 million times in the first six months of 2020, despite the social media website's promise to prohibit ads debunked by third-party fact-checking organizations.[5] Nine right-wing nonprofits, including Capital Research Center, Clear Energy Alliance, Competitive Enterprise Institute, CO2 Coalition, Mackinac Center for Public Policy, Prager University, Texas Public Policy Foundation, Turning Point USA, and Washington Policy Center, collectively spent $42,000 funding these advertisements.[5]

Criticism of Former Black Lives Matter Fiscal Sponsor Thousand Currents's "Domestic Terrorist" Board Member

In June 2020, a Capital Research Center piece by President Scott Walter criticized charity Thousand Currents for having Susan Rosenberg on its board.[6] Walter shared this criticism on prominent conservative radio and television programs, characterizing Rosenberg as "a convicted domestic terrorist" and discussing the connection between Thousand Currents and Black Lives Matter.[7][8]

Thousand Currents served as the fiscal sponsor of the Black Lives Matter Global Network Project from 2016-2020,[9] when the Tides Foundation assumed the role.[10]

Rosenberg was a member of Thousand Current's board as early as 2014 according to tax filings[11] and was the board's Vice Chairman in 2020 according the charity website's Board of Directors page.[12] The Board of Directors page is no longer available on the charity's website.[13] CRC claims the page was deleted within hours of the publication of Walter's story.[6]

Rosenberg was a member of the May 19th Communist Organization, which was responsible for a "string of violent and spectacular operations from 1979 to 1985: armed robberies that led to the murder of police officers and security guards, audacious prison breakouts and a bombing campaign that in addition to the U.S. Capitol targeted government buildings in Washington and New York."[14] She was arrested in 1984 on several charges, including possession of unregistered explosives and firearms, and sentenced to 58 years in prison.[14][15] Her sentence was commuted by Bill Clinton in 2001.[14][15]

Fact-checker Snopes ruled that Rosenberg was an active member of a revolutionary left-wing organization which engaged in violent illegal activities but disputed her characterization as a "domestic terrorist", saying, "In the absence of a single, universally-agreed definition of 'terrorism', it is a matter of subjective determination as to whether the actions for which Rosenberg was convicted and imprisoned— possession of weapons and hundreds of pounds of explosives— should be described as acts of 'domestic terrorism'".[15]

"Climate Dollars" Section of CRC Website Disputes Robert Brulle Study and Related Media Coverage

Drexel University sociologist Robert J. Brulle studied the 2003-2010 funding of climate change denial groups, finding that 91 organizations had "an annual income of just over $900 million, with an annual average of $64 million in identifiable foundation support."[16] In an interview, Brulle named the Koch Foundation, the Sarah Scaife Foundation, and the Sierra Foundation as leading funders during the studied time period.[17] Brulle's study claims "there is evidence of a trend toward concealing the sources of CCCM [climate change counter-movement] funding through the use of donor directed philanthropies".[16] Brulle said in an interview that climate denial funding from DonorsTrust and Donors Capital Fund "started out very low, 3 percent in 2003, and by 2009, [accounted for] about one-quarter of the funding of the climate countermovement..."[17]

Capital Research Center's "Climate Dollars" study criticizes Brulle's study and related media reporting. CRC used the Guardian article originally entitled, "Conservative groups spend $1bn a year to fight action on climate change"[18] as an example of a news story mischaracterizing the findings of Brulle's study. CRC argues Brulle's study measured income rather than spending and did not determine how much of groups' spending went towards climate change denial in comparison to other political projects.[19] CRC's study additionally compares the funding of climate skeptic groups to that of environmental advocacy groups, claiming that "In 2010, environmentalist groups’ income was $3.7 billion vs. $1.5 billion for skeptical groups. In 2014, environmentalists outpaced skeptical groups by $4.6 billion to $1.7 billion."[20]

CRC Launches Copy of CMD's Sourcewatch

In December 2017, CRC launched Influence Watch, a version of Center for Media and Democracy’s Sourcewatch focused on the political left-wing.[21]

Influence Watch received $125,000 in support from the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, representing over a quarter of the project's budget. Influence Watch is a "signature project" of CRC's president Scott Walker, who worked for Rick Berman's astroturf attack group Berman & Co..[21]

As described in Bradley's grant proposal, "The website will be constructed in partnership with Berman and Company (where Walter worked briefly as director of development), and CRC is collaborating with the American Legislative Exchange Council and the Heartland Institute to make use of their data as it builds the new website’s profile list."[21]

Dangerous Documentaries

CRC produces "Dangerous Documentaries", which include feature-length documentaries as well as shorter films and web-series.

"Architects of Woke", a 2019 series of short videos, "takes aim at far-left post-modernist and Marxist thinkers and activists responsible for the spread of identity politics from college campuses to society at large."[22] The series investigates figures such as Judith Butler, Slavoj Žižek, Stokely Carmichael, Howard Zinn, the Chapo Trap House podcast, and the 1619 Project.

Longer films include "The Jack Kemp Playbook", "America Under Siege: Antifa", "America Under Siege: Soviet Islam", and "America Under Siege: Civil War 2017".

In October 2019, Dangerous Documentaries released a feature-length documentary entitled "No Safe Spaces", which features Prager University founder Dennis Prager and libertarian comedian Adam Carolla, who visit "college campuses across the country, interviewing students and professors, comedians and commentators on the left and right, and those who have been impacted by the silencing of different voices on campus, analyzing the value of so-called safe-spaces."[23] Other individuals featured in the documentary include Ben Shapiro, Tim Allen, Alan Dershowitz, Sharyl Attkisson, Van Jones, Dave Rubin, Candace Owens (formerly of Turning Point USA), Cornel West, Ann Coulter, and Jordan Peterson.[24]

"Defund the Left" Campaign

As part of the conservative campaign to 'Defund the left', Capital Research Center produces a range of publications targeting foundations, unions, and left-wing activist groups. The organization's website includes news devoted to "Foundation Watch",[25] "Green Watch", [26]"Labor Watch",[27] and "Organization Trends".[28]

CRC Hosts State Labor Reform Conference

Mary Bottari reports in "Bradley Foundation Bankrolls Attacks on Unions" as part of the Bradley Files investigation,

"The “State Labor Reform Conference” on October 4, 2013, was hosted by the Capital Research Center (CRC), bringing together “75 state policymakers, policy researchers and analysts, and activists from 15 states” (Meeting of the Bradley IRA Committee, 11/12/13). The president of CRC is Scott Walter, a former employee of Berman and Company.

The list of participants is a “who’s who” of anti-union activists and organizations funded by Bradley (Meeting of the Bradley IRA Committee, 11/12/13).

[Grover] Norquist was there again and so was Kersey. On a panel called “Coalition and Communication,” PR spin doctor Richard Berman of Berman and Co. was there “representing” his front group Center for Union Facts, discussed further below. Jonathan Williams was there representing the corporate bill mill, the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC).

Jennifer Butler, VP of External Relations of the State Policy Network (SPN), was there. SPN groups operate as the policy, communications, and litigation arm of ALEC, giving its cookie-cutter bills a sheen of academic legitimacy and state-based support.

In a panel called “Lessons from Wisconsin,” “Wisconsin Secretary of Administration Mike Huebsch, delivered lessons that Wisconsin has learned on labor-policy and public-pension reform and talked about how Wisconsin can be a good model for other states and localities” (Meeting of the Bradley IRA Committee, 11/12/13). Also presenting, Brett Healy of the Bradley-funded MacIver Institute and Jennifer Toftness from Wisconsin Assembly Speaker Robin Vos’ office.

In a panel called “Lessons from Michigan,” F. Vincent Vernuccio, Director of Labor Policy for the Mackinac Center, was featured along with Terry Bowman, from a group called Union Conservatives, and Patrick Colbeck, Republican State Senator from Michigan.

There was also a panel on “Preventing and Responding to Legal Challenges” with Raymond LaJeunesse, VP and Legal Director for the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation.

The final panel, “Beyond Right to Work,” featured newcomer James Sherk from the Heritage Foundation. Sherk has worked on a new strategy to defund unions at the local level, with ALEC-style “right to work” ordinances. He was in Wisconsin in 2015 testifying on behalf of ALEC’s private-sector verbatim “right to work bill” and candidly testified that it would “drive down labor costs,” also known as wages. Sherk recently got a job in the Trump White House as a labor advisor. Diana Furchtgott-Roth, Senior Fellow at the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research, and Earl Taylor of the Goldwater Institute also presented."[29]

Lobbying Efforts

CRC lobbied members of Congress against supporting measures to limit greenhouse gas emissions in 2003. Then-president Scanlon joined 32 other conservative groups warning against "alarmist statements about climate change and science contained in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee's State Department authorization bill". It warned House Committee members against accepting the Senate version of the bill, saying, "The Senate committee findings include exaggerations, misleading statements, out-of-context citations, and reliance on discredited sources."[30]

In August 2002, Scanlon was a co-signatory to a letter from the Center for Freedom and Prosperity which complained that "we are particularly concerned that the tax code is making it very difficult for U.S based companies to compete in global markets. The corporate tax rate in the United States is much too high and we compound the damage by taxing income U.S. taxpayers earn in other countries".[31]

Ties to the Bradley Foundation

The Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation contributed at least $2.5 million to Capital Research Center from 1998-2015, including $63,000 from the Bradley Impact Fund from 2013-2015. (More funding information available below).

CRC and Richard Berman's Interstate Policy Alliance Consult for Bradley on Right-Wing "Infrastructure" Investments

As Mary Bottari reported in 2017 as part of the Bradley Files investigation, "In 2015, Bradley asked Berman’s (Interstate Policy Alliance) and the allied Capital Research Center (CRC) in Washington, D.C. to conduct an assessment of “second tier” states for consideration as “potential targets of opportunity” to enhance their infrastructure investments... The CRC/IPA evaluation of the quality and potential of states’ existing conservative infrastructure and recommended investments in eight states: Colorado, Missouri, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Maryland, Georgia, Maryland, Virginia, Georgia, and California in that order."[32]

Bradley's Barder Fund documents note, "Given IPA’s Bradley supported role in trying to help all state think tanks, they were quite keen on the report’s contents being kept confidential."[32]

Opposition Research On CMD and the "Left"

The Center for Media and Democracy (CMD)'s 2017 expose on the Milwaukee-based Bradley Foundation revealed that CMD has been a subject of CRC "opposition research."[33]

From the CMD series:

As part of its opposition research funding, Bradley recommended $115,000 in 2016 for the Capital Research Center run by Bradley-ally Scott Walter to develop “an online encyclopedia of the left” in conjunction with Berman that mimics the Center for Media and Democracy’s Sourcewatch.org wiki. CRC wants to focus on the anti-ALEC groups and the Democracy Alliance, a group of liberal funders.

“This will be a comprehensive, wiki-style resource that provides in-depth profiles of left-of-center individuals and organizations based on the model of the Center for Media and Democracy’s website Sourcewatch.org…CRC plans to take a page out of Sourcewatch’s playbook by ensuring that its new, wiki-style encyclopedia of the left is thorough, regularly updated and written in a manner that is accurate and measured in order to attract and retain a larger audience. The website will be constructed and in partnership with Berman and Company [where Walter worked briefly as director of development], and CRC is collaborating with ALEC and the Heartland Institute to make use of their data as it builds the new website’s profile list,” (Capital Research Center, Grant Proposal Record, 8/16/2016).

“Sourcewatch is a widely used resource that significantly influences public opinion regarding the activities of center-right groups and individuals. While there are a number of conservative resources that profile organizations and individuals on the Left (such as David Horowitz’s DiscoverTheNetworks.org, Heartland Institute’s LeftExposed.org, Berman and Company’s ActivistFacts.org and the Center for the Defense of Free Enterprise’s UndueInfluence.com) CDC will build upon and complement their efforts adding value through its more comprehensive coverage, superior search engine optimization, and wiki-style format,” (Capital Research Center, Grant Proposal Record, 8/16/2016).

CRC Hires Former Bradley VP Michael Hartmann

Former Vice President for Programs at the Bradley Foundation, Michael Hartmann, now works for Capital Research Center (CRC) as a Senior Fellow and Director of the Center for Strategic Giving.[34] While Hartmann was at Bradley, it paid CRC to work with the PR spin doctor Richard Berman’s Interstate Policy Alliance (IPA) to assess states for consideration as “potential targets of opportunity” to strengthen its infrastructure investments.[35]

An internal email from Hartmann to Bradley CEO Michael Grebe states that CRC President Scott Walter recruited Hartmann: "As discussed, new Capital Research Center (CRC) president Scott Walter has been in discussions with me ways about in which I could perhaps contribute to CRC's work...It would include compensation from CRC."[36]

Bradley Files

In 2017, the Center for Media and Democracy (CMD), publishers of SourceWatch, launched a series of articles on the Milwaukee-based Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, exposing the inner-workings of one of America's largest right-wing foundations. 56,000 previously undisclosed documents laid bare the Bradley Foundation's highly politicized agenda. CMD detailed Bradley's efforts to map and measure right wing infrastructure nationwide, including by dismantling and defunding unions to impact state elections; bankrolling discredited spin doctor Richard Berman and his many front groups; and more.

Find the series here at ExposedbyCMD.org.

Ties to the Council for National Policy

As of September 2020, CRC's president Scott Walter is a member of the Council for National Policy.

Council for National Policy

The Council for National Policy (CNP) is a secretive, Christian Right organization of funders and activists founded in 1981 by activist Morton Blackwell, commentator Paul Weyrich, direct-mail pioneer Richard Viguerie, right-wing activist Phyllis Schlafly and Left Behind author Tim LaHaye. Anne Nelson's book about CNP, Shadow Network: Media, Money, and the Secret Hub of the Radical Right, describes how the organization connects "the manpower and media of the Christian right with the finances of Western plutocrats and the strategy of right-wing Republican political operatives.”

CNP membership as of September 2020 is available here.

Ties to the Coal Industry

CRC has received large donations from pro-fossil fuel groups like Exxon and the Koch Family Foundations through its Claude R. Lambe Charitable Foundation.[37] In November 2010, CRC published a report criticizing the Sierra Club for its work in transitioning the US away from coal plants, portraying it as an attack on "American prosperity."[38]

Koch Wiki

Charles Koch is the right-wing billionaire owner of Koch Industries. As one of the richest people in the world, he is a key funder of the right-wing infrastructure, including the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) and the State Policy Network (SPN). In SourceWatch, key articles on Charles Koch and his late brother David include: Koch Brothers, Americans for Prosperity, Stand Together Chamber of Commerce, Stand Together, Koch Family Foundations, Koch Universities, and I360.

Ties to the Tobacco Industry

Documents released as a part of the settlement by tobacco companies with U.S. state governments revealed the close relationship between CRC and Philip Morris. See Capital Research Center and the tobacco industry for more details.

Ties to Berman and Company

CMD's 2017 expose on the Milwaukee-based Bradley Foundation revealed that the foundation is helping fund CRC. From the CMD series[33]:

...Bradley funds the “Capital Research Center” to work with Berman on projects. The Center is not part of the Berman operation, but is run by a former Berman employee, Scott Walter. It received $2.5 million from Bradley between 1998-2015.

CRC paid Berman and Company $132,700 in 2016 for "Web, Communications, and Social Media," according to its annual IRS filing.[39]

Funding

The Capital Research Center is not required to disclose its funders but major foundation supporters can be found through its IRS filings. Here are some known contributors:

ExxonMobil

While CRC publications identify corporate funding of what they perceive as liberal non-profit groups, they do not disclose their own corporate sponsors. However, voluntary disclosures and documents revealed as a result of court actions provide a small window into how CRC interacts with corporations. In 2002, ExxonMobil donated $25,000 to the CRC for the Green Watch project with another $25,000 in 2003, according to corporate giving reports no longer available on Exxon's website, but still available via ExxonSecrets.org. "Capital Research Center and Greenwatch has received $215,000 from ExxonMobil since 1998," and up to 2006, according to ExxonSecrets. [40] According to Exxon's website, the oil company gave another $50,000 in 2007, for "public information and policy research." [41]

Core Financials

2020:[42]

  • Total Revenue: $4,880,833
  • Total Expenses: $5,508,989
  • Net Assets: $9,624,327

2019:[43]

  • Total Revenue: $4,627,330
  • Total Expenses: $5,575,112
  • Net Assets: $9,423,363

2018:[44]

  • Total Revenue: $2,942,556
  • Total Expenses: $4,790,958
  • Net Assets: $9,355,163

2017:[45]

  • Total Revenue: $2,544,852
  • Total Expenses: $4,357,883
  • Net Assets: $11,945,962

2016:[39]

  • Total Revenue: $2,990,989
  • Total Expenses: $2,844,996
  • Net Assets: $13,759,125

2015:[46]

  • Total Revenue: $2,561,903
  • Total Expenses: $2,030,597
  • Net Assets: $14,254,129

2014:[47]

  • Total Revenue: $2,291,002
  • Total Expenses: $1,777,994
  • Net Assets: $15,085,690

2013:[48]

  • Total Revenue: $2,404,390
  • Total Expenses: $1,756,451
  • Net Assets: $14,831,662

2012:[49]

  • Total Revenue: $2,038,009
  • Total Expenses: $1,678,713
  • Net Assets: $12,940,363

Personnel

As of April 2022:[50]

Staff

  • Scott Walter, President
  • Kristen Eastlick, Senior Vice President
  • Christopher Krukewitt, Chief Financial & Operations Officer
  • Beth Bottcher, Philanthropy Officer
  • Ken Braun, Senior Investigative Researcher
  • Katie Cagle, Digital Media Associate
  • Heather Cordasco, Senior Philanthropy Officer
  • Laura Elliott, Chief of Staff
  • Kate Flack, Development Manager
  • Michael Hartmann, Senior Fellow and Director, Center for Strategic Giving
  • Catherine Heravi, Staff Accountant
  • Sarah Lee, Director of Communications and External Resources
  • Hayden Ludwig, Senior Investigative Researcher
  • Madeline Matney, Development Associate
  • Jon Rodeback, Managing Editor and Director of Content
  • Robert Stilson, Research Specialist
  • Parker Thayer, Investigative Researcher
  • Dan Thompson, Vice President of Philanthropy and Development
  • Michael Watson, Research Director

Former Staff

  • Caleb Sutherlin, Social Media Coordinator
  • Joseph (Jake) Klein, Film and Video Producer
  • Shane Devine, Investigative Researcher
  • Carolyn Brandt, Administrative Assistant
  • Chenelyn Barker, Development Associate
  • Jack Klein, Film & Video Producer
  • Ian Johnson, Development Assistant
  • Hayden Ludwig, Communications Associate
  • Dan Thompson, Vice President of Philanthropy & Development
  • Matthew Vadum, Senior Vice President

Fellows

  • Dr. Steven J. Allen, Vice President & Chief Investigative Officer
  • Michael Hartmann, Senior Fellow and Director, Center for Strategic Giving (former Vice President of Programs, Bradley Foundation)
  • Martin Morse Wooster, Senior Fellow

Board of Trustees

A 1996 report by CultureWatch said CRC's list of Trustees "reads like a Who's Who of the establishment right."[51]

National Advisory Board

Contact Information

Capital Research Center
1513 16th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20036

EIN: 52-1289734

Phone: (202) 483-6900
Fax: (202) 483-6990
Email: con...@capitalresearch.org
Web: http://www.capitalresearch.org
Facebook: @capitalresearchcenter
Twitter: @capitalresearch

Articles and Resources

IRS Form 990 Filings

References

  1. ↑ Jump up to: 1.0 1.1 Capital Research Center, About, organizational website, accessed October 14, 2020.
  2. ↑ CRC, Podcast, organizational website, accessed October 24, 2020.
  3. ↑ CRC, Commentary, organizational website, accessed October 24, 2020.
  4. ↑ CRC, Publication, organizational website, accessed October 24, 2020.
  5. ↑ Jump up to: 5.0 5.1 Louise Boyle, "Climate denial ads get 8 million views on Facebook despite firm’s ‘commitment to tackle misinformation’: study", Independent, October 8, 2020, accessed October 24, 2020.
  6. ↑ Jump up to: 6.0 6.1 Scott Walter, "A Terrorist’s Ties to a Leading Black Lives Matter Group", Capital Research Center's Organization Trends, June 24, 2020, accessed October 15, 2020.
  7. ↑ Scott Walter, "Media Silence on the Truth of Black Lives Matter: Scott Walter on the Bill O’Reilly Show", Capital Research Center's Media Hits, July 24, 2020, accessed October 15, 2020.
  8. ↑ Scott Walter, "Black Lives Matter’s Convicted Domestic Terrorist: Scott Walter on The Mark Levin Show", Capital Research Center's Media Hits, July 7, 2020, accessed October 15, 2020.
  9. ↑ Thousand Currents, Black Lives Matter, organizational website, accessed October 15, 2020.
  10. ↑ Tides Foundation, "Tides Welcomes Black Lives Matter As A New Partner", organizational website, Perspectives by Tides, July 2, 2020, accessed October 15, 2020.
  11. ↑ Thousand Currents, 2014 IRS Form 990, organizational tax filing, January 15, 2015.
  12. ↑ Thousand Currents, Board of Directors, organizational website. Archived from the orginal on June 24, 2020, accessed October 15, 2020.
  13. ↑ Thousand Currents, Thousand Currents Website, organizational website, accessed October 15, 2020.
  14. ↑ Jump up to: 14.0 14.1 14.2 William Rosenau, "The Dark History of America’s First Female Terrorist Group", Politico, May 3, 2020, accessed October 15, 2020.
  15. ↑ Jump up to: 15.0 15.1 15.2 Dan MacGuill, "Did a ‘Convicted Terrorist’ Sit on the Board of a BLM Funding Body?", Snopes, July 14, 2020, accessed October 15, 2020.
  16. ↑ Jump up to: 16.0 16.1 Robert J. Brulle,"Institutionalizing delay: foundation funding and the creation of U.S. climate change counter-movement organizations", Springer Link, December 21, 2013, accessed October 24, 2020.
  17. ↑ Jump up to: 17.0 17.1 Robert J. Brulle, "Robert Brulle: Inside the Climate Change 'Countermovement'"], PBS Frontline, October 23, 2012. Archived March 29, 2015, accessed October 24, 2020.
  18. ↑ Suzanne Goldberg, "Conservative groups spend up to $1bn a year to fight action on climate change", Guardian, December 20, 2013, accessed October 24, 2020.
  19. ↑ Climate Dollars, Echo Chamber, Capital Research Center, accessed October 24, 2020.
  20. ↑ Climate Dollars, Climate Dollars, Capital Research Center, accessed October 24, 2020.
  21. ↑ Jump up to: 21.0 21.1 21.2 David Armiak, "‘Influence Watch’ Website Launched: Berman, ALEC, Heartland Copy CMD’s Sourcewatch.org Site", ExposedbyCMD, December 20, 2017.
  22. ↑ Dangerous Documentaries, "Architects of Woke: Judith Butler’s War on Science", Capital Research Center, March 8, 2019, accessed October 23, 2020.
  23. ↑ Dangerous Documentaries, No Safe Spaces, Capital Research Center, October 25, 2019, accessed October 23, 2020.
  24. ↑ No Safe Spaces, FAQ, documentary website, accessed October 23, 2020.
  25. ↑ CRC, Foundation Watch, organizational website, accessed October 24, 2020.
  26. ↑ CRC, Green Watch, organizational website, accessed October 24, 2020.
  27. ↑ CRC, Labor Watch, organizational website, accessed October 24, 2020.
  28. ↑ CRC, Organizational Trends, organizational website, accessed October 24, 2020.
  29. ↑ Mary Bottari, Bradley Foundation Bankrolls Attacks on Unions, ExposedbyCMD, May 8, 2017.
  30. ↑ CEI Staff, "Conservative Groups Raise Alarm on Climate Resolutions", Competitive Enterprise Institute News Release, Archived from the original on September 27, 2007, accessed October 15, 2020.
  31. ↑ Coalition for Tax Competition, Lobbying Letter to William Thomas, Archived from the original on March 13, 2010, accessed October 15, 2020.
  32. ↑ Jump up to: 32.0 32.1 Mary Bottari, "Bradley Foundation Bankrolls Front Groups of Discredited PR Spin Doctor Richard Berman", ExposedbyCMD, May 9, 2017.
  33. ↑ Jump up to: 33.0 33.1 Mary Bottari Bradley Foundation Bankrolls Front Groups of Discredited PR Spin Doctor Richard Berman, CMD, May 9, 2007.
  34. ↑ CRC, Michael E. Hartmann, organizational website, accessed October 24, 2020.
  35. ↑ Mary Bottari, "Bradley Foundation Bankrolls Front Groups of Discredited PR Spin Doctor Richard Berman", ExposedbyCMD, May 9, 2017, accessed October 16, 2020.
  36. ↑ Michael Hartmann, [Internal Email on CRC Fellowship from Michael Hartmann to Michael Grebe], Bradley Files, March 28, 2016.
  37. ↑ "CRC Funders" Media Matters, accessed November 2010.
  38. ↑ "The Sierra Club’s War on Coal" CRC, November 2010.
  39. ↑ Jump up to: 39.0 39.1 Capital Research Center, [paper copy on file with CMD 2016 IRS Form 990], organizational tax filing, November 13, 2017.
  40. ↑ ExxonSecrets, Factsheet: Capital Research Center and Greenwatch, ExxonSecrets.org. Archived September 8, 2020, accessed October 24, 2020.
  41. ↑ ExxonMobil Corporation, 2007 Worldwide Contributions and Community Investments, company document. Archived November 18, 2008, accessed October 24, 2020.
  42. ↑ Capital Research Center, 2020 IRS Form 990, organizational tax filing, November 10, 2021.
  43. ↑ Capital Research Center, 2019 IRS Form 990, organizational tax filing, November 11, 2020.
  44. ↑ Capital Research Center, 2018 IRS Form 990, organizational tax filing, November 14, 2019.
  45. ↑ Capital Research Center, 2017 IRS Form 990, organizational tax filing, November 14, 2018.
  46. ↑ Capital Research Center, 2015 IRS Form 990, organizational tax filing, August 1, 2016.
  47. ↑ Capital Research Center, 2014 IRS Form 990, organizational tax filing, May 8, 2015.
  48. ↑ Capital Research Center, 2013 IRS Form 990, organizational tax filing, May 8, 2014.
  49. ↑ Capital Research Center, 2012 IRS Form 990, organizational tax filing, May 10, 2013.
  50. ↑ Capital Research Center, Staff, organizational website, accessed April 2022.
  51. ↑ Bill Berkowitz, "Crowded Universe of Right-Wing Think Tanks", Culture Watch online, October 1996. Archived from the original on February 26, 2002, accessed October 24, 2020.

 

Tablet magazine Capital Research Center.doc
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages