In a CNBC interview last week, Warren Buffett distanced himself from Bill Gates, his longtime friend whose foundation has enjoyed his largesse. In doing so, he affirmed the very point for which he had me arrested at the 2023 Berkshire Hathaway annual shareholders’ meeting. During my shareholder presentation, I cited Buffett’s “philanthropic” partnership with Gates, asserting that it posed a reputational risk to the company because of Gates’s relationship with Jeffrey Epstein.
Here’s what Buffett had to say three years later:
Becky Quick: Have you talked to Bill Gates about any of this?
Warren Buffett: I haven’t no, I haven’t talked to him at all. But, since the whole, thing was unveiled, I don’t want to be in a position where I know things. It’s a moment. I could get called as a witness.
Becky Quick: Are you going to continue to give money to the Gates Foundation? You have every June since 2006?
Warren Buffett: Well, yeah, actually, I we do it every year. Yeah, but I’ve done it around June 30th, most of the time. And, and I’ll wait and see what unfolds… (italics added)
During my remarks in 2023, I was interrupted about one minute into my allotted three-minute presentation by a Berkshire executive who told me to stay “on topic.” I appealed to the chair, occupied by Buffett, to be allowed to continue. Buffett ruled in my favor; his only caveat was to keep to my three-minute allotted time. I went on for another thirty seconds before my microphone was cut when I referenced Gates relationship with Epstein. I was then placed under arrest and hauled out the arena. The whole event went viral.
This was the first time in corporate history that a shareholder proxy presenter was thrown out of an annual meeting. The farcical charge of criminal trespassing was dropped a few days later. My lawsuit against Buffett and Berkshire will soon be heard by the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit based in St. Louis.
Even more astonishingly, Buffett made comments to Quick that echo my criticisms of the Gates Foundation and Buffett’s support for it.
I have argued that the Gates Foundation is something less than a “charity” because it serves primarily as a public relations firm to make billionaires look good. (A mission that it has failed.) I’ve argued further that Gates and Buffett didn’t really “gave away” their money because it remained under their control and was spent on their favored social and advocacy causes. I’ve pointed out that despite its size and influence, for years its board consisted of just three people— Gates and his then-wife Melinda, and Buffett.
Becky Quick: Is there anything that you’ve read or been read from the Epstein files that concerns you about the money that you donate to the Gates Foundation, money you’ve given in the past?
Warren Buffett: There was a lot I didn’t know.
Becky Quick: Like what?
Warren Buffett: Well, I didn’t know a lot of things. I mean, there were three trustees of the foundation and I’m sorry that we only met once a year. I did not ask probing questions… and incidentally, the, the guy, the CEO of the foundation wasn’t necessarily present during all these things, but he’s not the real CEO. I mean, in the end Bill ran the foundation….
Becky Quick: What did you learn then?
Warren Buffett: I learned that I didn’t know what was going on, and and, which didn’t mean something terrible was going on, necessarily, but I, I certainly didn’t know what was going on. We didn’t. And I didn’t ask the questions either, though…
And Buffett sounded even more like me by suggesting that the Epstein scandals would prompt Congress to act against big, politicized foundations that enjoy tax-exempt status, strangely ignoring the fact that he and Gates are big causes of the problem. Although rambling a bit, Buffett recalled the days of Wilbur Mills and the last time the tax code was revised.
Becky Quick: What, what are the consequences…?
Warren Buffett: The consequences are very likely to be, in my view, same thing that happened back in 1969, when, when, the Johnson administration left, and the Ford Foundation, hired a whole bunch of people that that were let go from government and it’ll take, it takes something where Congress feels that that they’re better off going after the foundations than not. And, foundations have got money, and foundations have plenty of more power in Washington…in ‘69, I think what Wilbur Mills was, was head of the Ways and Means Committee, I don’t remember exactly, how it came about, but that was the last that was a big revision of what foundations could do. I think this will have the same effect.
There was nothing controversial about NLPC’s shareholder proposal. The so-called independent chair proposal asserts that the posts of chairman of the board and chief executive officer be held by different people. This reform has been introduced by both conservative and liberal shareholder activists at dozens of companies as a matter of good corporate governance.
Or course, Berkshire is a special case, given the (mostly favorable) public perception that Berkshire Hathaway IS Warren Buffett. But that made the proposal more relevant to the company, not less, because the company’s reputation is so dependent on Buffett’s personal reputation and relationships.
Nor was there anything inflammatory or nongermane about my raising the Gates issue, as Buffett’s lawyers have argued in court. Gates’s relationship with Epstein was in the headlines then and more so now. The fact that it brought discomfort to Buffett was not grounds to have me arrested.
Buffett concluded his thoughts about Epstein by telling Quick, “…they can’t bury it now. I mean, it’s, it’s gone too far.” Well, Buffett sure tried to bury it when I raised it publicly to his face among thousands of his adoring fans. I’m glad he’s come around to my point of view.
