(Jacob Bruns, Headline USA) Although Marxist plutocrats are currently bankrolling a strategic smear campaign against Justice Clarence Thomas and other conservatives on the U.S. Supreme Court, with the hope of discrediting it and undermining its legal authority, liberal justices have likewise enjoyed the benefit of wealthy friends.
The late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg allegedly accepted a $1 million “prize” from one such leftist billionaire, globalist investor Nicolas Berggruen.
But after Gingburg promised to send it to various charities of her choice, the money was never actually accounted for, the Washington Free Beacon reported.
Nearly four years since her receipt of the Berggruen Institute’s Philosophy & Culture award in December 2019, it remains unclear to which charities Ginsburg—who died in September 2020—sent the money.
Though some of the money went to the American Bar Foundation and the American Cancer Society, Ginsburg appears to have directed the Berggruen Institute, which handled the distribution of funds, to keep most of the 60-plus charities secret.
“That list, per her wishes, is not for publication,” the institute’s Rachel Bauch said.
The secret list has led to much concern on the part of those who would like to see the high court remain above reproach and to transcend partisan political disputes.
But according to Mark Paoletta, a former general counsel for the federal Office of Management and Budget, the lack of transparency is deeply problematic from an ethical standpoint.
“Ginsburg required that her list of entities she showered with funds be confidential and we don’t know how many of them appeared before the Court when Justice Ginsburg was serving,” he noted, adding that the left’s hypocrisy has been exposed.
“With all of the Left’s wailing about transparency, this is the antithesis—but crickets from the Left. … They just want to attack the Court because it is no longer acting like a super legislature to enact unpopular progressive policies like affirmative action.”
Former IRS tax law specialist Patrick Sternal noted that the Berggruen Institute engaged in some advanced accounting maneuvers in order to conceal the final destination of the Ginsburg funds, calling it a “workaround.”
“There is some legal gray area here, but the foundation should probably have treated the prize as a grant, not a line-item other expense,” Sternal said. “It’s strange that [Ginsburg] didn’t want to make the recipients’ names public.”
