Connect with us

Politics

This is how much money BLM raked in last year

A financial statement, reviewed by the AP, revealed that the BLM Global Network Foundation raked in a whopping $90 million last year

Published

on

As many its supporters rioted, looted and destroyed businesses and burnt cities to the ground, Black Lives Matter raked in tens of millions of dollars in 2020, according to a detailed examination of the organization’s finances. 

A financial statement, reviewed by the Associated Press, revealed that the Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation raked in a whopping $90 million last year. 

And with funds continuing to grow exponentially, the global network wants to build its infrastructure to become more widely known, BizPacReview reports. 

“We want to uplift black joy and liberation, not just black death. We want to see black communities thriving, not just surviving,” said an impact report. 

While Black Lives Matter gained explosive media attention this summer, the organization is not new. Their notoriety first came about in 2014 surrounding the death of Eric Garner, then they became the center of media attention again in 2020 following the death of Gorge Floyd. 

The global foundation told the Associated Press that $21.7 million was committed to grants for both official and unofficial chapters around the country, as well as 30 black-led groups. 

So, after spending nearly a quarter of its assets on the grants, the foundation ended the 2020 year with more than $60 million. 

The organization said individual donations through its main fundraising platform averaged $30.76. Several major businesses and corporations have given money to the organization, including DoorDash, Deckers, Amazon, Gatorade, Microsoft, 23andMe, AirBNB, Glossier, Nabisco, Dropbox, Fitbit, Tinder and Cisco. 

However, foundation officials refused to identify the group’s most prominent donors. Additionally, the report does not state specifically where the money went, though around $8.4 million was put towards expenses. 

“One of our biggest goals this year is taking the dollars we were able to raise in 2020 and building out the institution we’ve been trying to build for the last seven and a half years,” co-founder Patrisse Cullors told the Associated Press

Organization leaders admitted that in recent years, the organization hasn’t been transparent when it comes to its finances, but that an effort is now being made to be more open.

But, it remains unclear how the organization was able to rake in $90 million in just one year.

Continue Reading
6 Comments

6 Comments

  1. Donna

    February 24, 2021 at 2:04 pm

    REALLY? GREAT! NOW PROSECUTORS NEED TO INDICT, FREEZE ALL ASSETS AND TAKE THEM TO COURT OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER!

  2. Carl

    February 24, 2021 at 2:18 pm

    How much was spend on funding riots?

  3. Al Lemons

    February 25, 2021 at 11:08 am

    I can tell you specifically that Northrop Grumman gave one million to BLM.

  4. Larry D

    February 25, 2021 at 1:11 pm

    What about the $9 Billion their actblue website says they have???

  5. Mich

    February 27, 2021 at 3:50 pm

    Well, I guess they are on a good start to have enough for their reparations then, huh? Js

    • H. Jones

      March 10, 2021 at 10:25 am

      My thoughts! You collect money for a cause, give the money to that cause. And sure, they do not want to name all their funding sources. Would be telling to reveal how much money came from global billionaires like George Soros.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Politics

‘Every Word Of This Is False’: Ted Cruz Factchecks Ilhan Omar’s Attack On Coach Kennedy Prayer Case

Published

on

Rep. Ilhan Omar

On Monday night, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) factchecked Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) after she made multiple false claims about the Supreme Court ruling in Kennedy v. Bremerton School District, in which the Court ruled 6-3 that a public high school football coach in Washington state had his First Amendment rights violated when he was punished by his school district for praying on the field after games where students could see.

As previously reported, “In 2008, high school football coach Joseph Kennedy began a tradition of praying at midfield after each game. Over time, his players and even members of the opposing team began to join him. In September 2015, a school administrator addressed the matter with Kennedy after an opposing team complained and the coach briefly stopped his prayers.”

“On October 14, 2015, Kennedy told the school district that he was planning on resuming his prayer tradition at the next game. The school district told the coach that his prayers violated the district’s policy, but Kennedy continued to pray at the next two games. The school district subsequently placed him on administrative leave, banned him from participating in the football program, and refused to renew his contract for the following season. Kennedy took the issue to federal district court, arguing that the school district had violated his First Amendment rights,” the report added.

In response to the Supreme Court ruling in favor of Kennedy, Omar tweeted, “The Supreme Court just ruled that public school teachers can pressure students to join in prayer at public school events but can also retaliate against those that don’t join in. Religious freedom is dead in America.”

“Every word of this is false,” Cruz responded.

Omar’s claim that the Supreme Court’s decision allowed to teachers to “pressure students to join prayer” is false. The Court’s ruling just protected Coach Kennedy’s religious freedom to pray publicly.

Omar was also incorrect in claiming that there would be retaliation against students who did not join Kennedy in prayer – the coach’s tradition of praying after games began with him praying alone at midfield after football games. Kennedy’s school district even noted that Kennedy had “not actively encouraged, or required, participation.”

Additionally, in contrast to Omar’s claim that “religious freedom is dead in America,” the Supreme Court ruling actually strengthened protections of religious freedom.

Writing for the majority opinion, Justice Neil Gorsuch explained, “Respect for religious expressions is indispensable to life in a free and diverse Republic—whether those expressions take place in a sanctuary or on a field, and whether they manifest through the spoken word or a bowed head.”

“Here, a government entity sought to punish an individual for engaging in a brief, quiet, personal religious observance doubly protected by the Free Exercise and Free Speech Clauses of the First Amendment,” Gorsuch added. “And the only meaningful justification the government offered for its reprisal rested on a mistaken view that it had a duty to ferret out and suppress religious observances even as it allows comparable secular speech. The Constitution neither mandates nor tolerates that kind of discrimination. Mr. Kennedy is entitled to summary judgment on his First Amendment claims.”

Continue Reading

Nation

Leo Terrell: Not One Democrat Can Justify Roe V. Wade

Published

on

Leo Terrell: Not One Democrat Can Justify Roe V. Wade

Continue Reading

Leo's Hot List