A Look At HRC: Hypocrisy, Money and Agenda – Part I

You Will Be Made To CareThe following is a multi-part series on the Human Rights Campaign.

The Human Rights Campaign along with their local NC pal, Equality NC,  are demanding documents related to HB 2 according to ABC 11:

The organizations specifically want all the email correspondence between Gov. Pat McCrory, the Executive Branch, General Assembly, and the groups North Carolina Values Coalition or Alliance Defending Freedom.

Opponents of HB2 believe something is suspect, and that there was some sort of plot to ram the legislation through. They filed an “open records request” Thursday so they could have access to those documents.

What is suspect here is a fishing expedition for names of individuals to target and also hypocritical. Show us your donors, Human Rights Campaign.

“This outside spending group does disclose its donors to the FEC, but no non-generic donors/employers have been identified that have contributed more than $1000. Donations from affiliated organizations are excluded when calculating the top donors.” Source: Open Secrets

No, Human Rights Campaign touts a long list of readily recognizable corporate sponsors, yet won’t divulge any information about which ones fund them and how much.  I’ll have a separate post on the money this week.

Another example of The Human Rights Campaign’s hypocrisy and ‘by any means necessary’ style of attack takes us back to 2012.

In 2012, HRC had no problem posting the tax documents of those they consider their opponents.  The Human Rights Campaign posted the illegally obtained IRS return for the National Organization for Marriage in what was arguably a coordinated effort to take down the Mitt Romney campaign.

In 2013, the IRS identified the employee who committed a felony by leaking the documents and to whom they were given. As a result, the IRS fined $50,000.

According to the Daily Signal, the documents were leaked to Matthew Meisel, a Boston LGBT activist. Meisel then turned around and gave the tax return documents to HRC, who posted them on their website.

The Daily Signal also noted who was president of HRC at the time and who he had dealings with:

HRC’s president at the time, Joe Solmonese, was tapped that same month as a national co-chairman of President Barack Obama’s re-election campaign.

In 2011, the year before the IRS leak,  Obama attended HRC’s annual dinner and was photographed waving at the crowd in with Solmonese.

Switching gears to the current present, Ghad Griffin, President Obama called him to congratulate him on overturning California’s Proposition 8, which was originally a ballot item passed by a majority of the state’s voters.

Griffin’s apparent main goal is to get a LGBT activist judge nominated to the Supreme Court.

Given the congratulatory history between HRC, Griffin and Obama, the nomination of Garland Merrick is perhaps of greater concern than before.  Elections have consequences.

More to come in part two.

Advertisements

About A.P. Dillon

A.P. Dillon is a Co-Founder and Managing Editor at American Lens. She resides in the Triangle area of North Carolina and is the founder of LadyLiberty1885.com. Her past writing can also be found at IJ review, Breitbart, FOX news, Da Tech Guy Blog, Heartland Institute, Civitas Institute and StopCommonCoreNC.org. Find her on Twitter: @APDillon_
This entry was posted in Elections, LadyLiberty1885, LGBT, Liberals Gone Wild, NCGA, The Articles, Transparency, You Will Be Made To Care and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to A Look At HRC: Hypocrisy, Money and Agenda – Part I

  1. Pingback: A Look At HRC: Hypocrisy, Money and Agenda – Part IV | Lady Liberty 1885

  2. Pingback: A Look At HRC: Hypocrisy, Money and Agenda – Part III | Lady Liberty 1885

  3. timothypeck says:

    “Human Rights Campaign, Equality NC, are demanding documents related to HB 2”

    I think this is an effort to gather evidence for their lawsuit. If the case against HB2 is anything like Romer v. Evans, it will have to be shown that the law was motivated by “animus” toward a group. To me, this telegraphs that the lawsuit is in trouble and more damning evidence is needed; hence, the document request.

Comments are closed.