A New York Times article from the weekend (republished here by the Seattle Times) is chock full of news developments related to NLPC’s activities and initiatives. The gist of the story is that liberal political and advocacy donors are so demoralized by the aggressive actions by the Trump administration, that they have dialed back significantly on their contributions, causing a domino effect in the reach and effectiveness of the left-wing activist groups. First excerpt from the article:
The result is a political environment that is strikingly different from 2017, when money poured into Democratic causes, fortifying existing organizations and seeding a flowering of new groups to fight different parts of Trump’s agenda.
Now, some of those same organizations are struggling to survive, in part because few new major liberal donors have emerged since 2017. Groups that support LGBTQ+ rights, promote gender equity and champion other progressive causes have cut staffing and announced that longtime leaders are leaving…
The downsizing has reached some of the most storied brands in Democratic politics.
Human Rights Campaign, the nation’s largest LGBTQ+ advocacy group, laid off 20% of its staff in what it called a “strategic restructure.” This month, the Center for American Progress, the party’s most prominent policy group, cut 22 people — 8% of its staff.
NLPC’s Role: HRC has been the biggest driver of gender ideology and gender dysphoria normalization in culture and the workplace, with a near takeover of Corporate America‘s human resources policies. NLPC has pushed back on HRC’s agenda with shareholder proposals the last couple of years at Microsoft, Disney, Johnson & Johnson, PepsiCo and Visa, pressuring those companies to examine their health benefits for employees that pay for sex change operations for child dependents, while refusing to cover care to reverse those body-altering treatments.
@Disney #discriminates against #detrans – we will confront them at the company’s annual meeting on April 3 … #Disney #detransition #discrimination @WaltDisneyCo @donoharm @JanuaryDoNoHarm @ChoooCole @RobertIger — WATCH BELOW: pic.twitter.com/491hBPpOhp
— NLPC (@NLPC) March 27, 2024
Further, last year NLPC called out Mondelez International — maker of Oreo — for attaching the iconic cookie brand’s reputation to PFLAG, an LGBTQ advocacy group that promotes transgender advocacy to schoolchildren.
As NLPC has pointed out numerous times in the past, HRC has pressured cowardly corporations to adopt its destructive agenda largely through its Corporate Equality Index, for which companies in recent years have boasted about receiving 100-percent scores for aligning with HRC’s agenda. With the current blowback against DEI and the trans agenda, many companies have stopped cooperating with HRC.
Second excerpt from the New York Times article:
Aides to Reid Hoffman, the billionaire LinkedIn co-founder and one of the biggest Democratic donors, have signaled that he is now much more reluctant to fund progressive political projects. A spokesperson for Hoffman said that “he thinks that the Democratic Party strategy needs to reform, and when it does, he’s happy to hear new ideas and new pitches.”
Hoffman has also voiced publicly what many donors have said privately: He expects retaliation from Trump.
“There’s a greater than 50% chance that there will be repercussions from a misdirection and corruption of the institutions of state to respond to my having tried to help Harris get elected,” he said on the podcast “The Diary of a CEO.”
NLPC’s role: Hoffman, who we have opposed for re-election to the board of directors at Microsoft for two years, is unhinged.
First, where did he come up with the “greater than 50% chance” that he will face “repercussions” for supporting Kamala Harris? Are there odds in Vegas on that? Is there some national bureau of statistics that has issued that finding? Did Microsoft’s AI algorithm spit that out?
Millions of people supported Harris — like Hoffman’s fellow Microsoft board member Penny Pritzker — and will not face “repercussions” of any kind for that activity. Neither will Hoffman, nor will the hundreds of other celebrity and wealthy endorsers who poured millions of dollars into Harris’s campaign.
Now whether Hoffman has any culpability related to his friendship with Jeffrey Epstein and the trip he took to Pedophile Island is another story. As is Hoffman’s funding of the lawfare lawsuit of E. Jean Carroll and the laughable New York trial in which she accused Trump of raping her in a department store dressing room. George Stephanopoulos is still trying to live that one down. Or the implied threat Hoffman made within days of the assassination attempt on President Trump last July, when he said he wished he had made him an “actual martyr.”
Whether Hoffman faces “repercussions” related to any of those, or any other of his political or Trump Derangement Syndrome stunts, depends on whether he broke the law or not.
Third and final excerpt from the New York Times article:
A few Democrats are still coming to terms with their party’s actions last year.
Late last month, Dmitri Mehlhorn, a former adviser to Hoffman who remains close to him, emailed his political list complaining that Democrats should not have committed what he called “Bidencide” by pressuring the former president to exit the race.
“I believe the USA is entirely over as the kind of political project that lends itself to your work,” wrote Mehlhorn, who will not be around to directly experience the consequences of Democrats’ defeat.
He has moved to Canada.
NLPC’s role: We called out Mehlhorn’s dirty hands on behalf of Hoffman throughout our reports that called for the LinkedIn billionaire to be booted from Microsoft’s board, as well as from the Defense Innovation Board.
After Hoffman’s irresponsible “martyr” remark, Mehlhorn — who has been long been joined at Hoffman’s hip, providing him a layer of deniability when it comes to his underhanded political tactics — suggested that the Butler, Pa. assassination attempt was staged by Trump. After an instant and fierce social media blowback, Hoffman allegedly parted ways with Mehlhorn. Finally Hoffman came across an anti-Trump statement that was too outrageous even for him to be associated with.
Except now we know from the Times that the Hoffman and Mehlhorn separation was a ruse, so it was only for optics, not for principle.
