Best of CRC Media Hits for November 2020

November was a busy month in Washington, DC, with all eyes on the election and the fallout that came immediately after. As such, most media outlets focused on those things. However, that did not stop our researchers and analysts from contributing to the fray in the form of op-eds (CRC had several in November) as well as some well-timed radio hits and appearances in news stories.

But perhaps the best thing CRC did this month in the world of media outreach was we covered our bases on the issues. Everything from the losing nonprofit fundraisers in the 2020 election, to the Paris Accord, to the proposed Biden transition, to foreign influence in the nonprofit sector was appropriately researched, analyzed, and sent out into the media wild.

The breadth of the coverage shows exactly how CRC is expanding its policy reach, and we’re excited to see what the new year holds.

“The Lincoln Project’s Most Cherished Cause Is Itself“
American Thinker, Kristen Eastlick (Op-Ed), November 25, 2020

There’s a philosophy debated among political operatives in Washington, D.C. that suggests being in the opposition party automatically means better business. The Lincoln Project gurus, who billed themselves as ostensibly “true” conservatives, decided to embrace that philosophy and spend millions of donor dollars fighting to ensure Donald Trump lost the election and Democrats were elected in down ballot races throughout the country.

With the exception of the general election, which technically hasn’t yet been decided but has been called by most media outlets for Joe Biden, the Lincoln Project took the “whopping” $39 million it raised from July through September, and promptly lost.

In fact, according to the Washington Free Beacon, the organization went 0-7 in key Senate races. According to FEC filings, the Lincoln Project boasted $67 million in total receipts this cycle, and spent $59 million total — $19 million of it against Donald Trump. That’s about $40 million lost on down-ballot races.

“Money Can’t Buy the Senate”
The Hill, Michael Watson (Op-Ed), November 19, 2020

It’s a common belief: Money — whether spent on campaigns, party-building, or the “independent expenditures” that are campaign work in all but legal classification — “buys” elections. Democrats campaigning for Senate and their supporters put that proposition to the test in the 2020 elections in a big way, channeling tens of millions through big-money super PACs and small-dollar fundraising vehicles like ActBlue.

Most of them lost.

In North Carolina, Democrat Cal Cunningham outraised incumbent Republican Sen. Thom Tillis by more than two-to-one. Outside spenders backing Cunningham also outspent those backing Tillis. Cunningham lost.

In Iowa, it was the same story: Democrat Theresa Greenfield outraised incumbent Republican Sen. Joni Ernst by more than two to one and was supported by more outside spending. Greenfield lost.

Indeed, as of writing, OpenSecrets data show that Democratic candidates outraised Republicans in each of the top ten most expensive Senate races nationwide, winning three and losing six, with the Georgia race to be decided in a runoff.

“Big Philanthropy Transitions to the Biden Administration”
The Giving Review, Michael Hartmann (Op-Ed), November 18, 2020

The presidential-transition teams that Joe Biden announced last week include more than 20 members who are identified as being employed by left-of-center philanthropic foundations or grantmaking entities in America.

George Mason University professor of government Alan Abramson told The Chronicle of Philanthropy’s Dan Parks that the list shows that the incoming Biden administration views philanthropy as “a storehouse of knowledge and experts.” Given Big Philanthropy’s monocultural insularity, some concern might be warranted.

“Can the Paris Accord Be Back On?”
Freedom & Prosperity Radio, Hayden Ludwig (Guest), November 21, 2020

On this Monday edition of Freedom & Prosperity Radio Joe Thomas is joined by Hayden Ludwig, Investigative Researcher at Capital Research Center, to discuss the end of the Paris Accord.

“Backdoor Foreign Influence Schemes Should Continue To Be A Presidential Priority”
Washington Examiner, Sarah Lee (Op-Ed), November 15, 2020

Later in October, the Department of Education released a report detailing a disturbing failure by universities and academic institutions to report “$6.5 billion in funding and resources from foreign sources including China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Qatar,” something they are required to do by law.

Though not without some controversy, these moves were likely necessary in an age of Russia collusion hoax investigations in which covert influence-peddling is often linked, legitimately or not, to national security threats.

But there is, as Capital Research Center’s Special Projects Manager Robert Stilson wrote, a question of donor privacy, a protection afforded donors to keep them from suffering harassment in an age that also embraces “cancel culture” and smear campaigns against people that don’t express the “correct” political opinions.

“Ditch Paris and Save America”
RealClearEnergy, Hayden Ludwig and Kevin Mooney (Op-Ed), November 4, 2020

More than Donald Trump and Joe Biden were on the ballot on Tuesday, but with the noisy election you’d be forgiven for missing what may be the most important energy policy decision in decades.

Today marks the formal withdrawal of the United States from the disastrous Paris Climate Accord, exactly one year after President Trump kept his pledge to lift the “unfair economic burden imposed on American workers, businesses, and taxpayers” by the global warming agreement. “I was elected to represent the citizens of Pittsburgh, not Paris,” Trump announced early in his presidency.

He’s correct. By one estimate based on a U.S. Energy Department model, the Paris Climate Accord could have cost the average family of four over $20,000 in lost income, raised household energy prices by as much as 20 percent, and cost the economy $2.5 trillion by 2035.

“Biden Transition Leans on Left-Wing Groups for Staff”
Fox News, Brittany De Lea, November 20, 2020

President-elect Joe Biden is working on staffing to ensure a smooth transition into the White House in January – and appears to be leaning on left-wing organizations to help him.

Biden last week announced members of the agency review teams, which include at least 20 individuals, who work for left-leaning philanthropic foundations or groups, as reported by think tank Capital Research Center.

Those organizations include the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Bloomberg Philanthropies, the Century Foundation and the California Community Foundation.

People from the groups are working in the State Department, the Department of Education and the Justice Department, among others,  the Capital Research Center report said.

Agency review teams consist of hundreds of officials who study key information on the day-to-day operations of federal agencies.

“Antifa, Black Lives Matter Linked to Violence Against Trump Supporters in Washington”
The Epoch Times, Zachary Stieber, November 14, 2020

Thousands of Trump supporters turned out for a large march to protest against alleged election fraud. Some pro-Trump marchers also engaged in violence.

While a collection of videos showed chaos and it was difficult to discern who instigated the fights, other footage from reporters on the ground showed anti-Trump protesters assaulting pro-Trump marchers without provocation.

In at least several cases, people affiliated with Antifa or Black Lives Matter were the ones carrying out the assaults.

Trump supporters walking in downtown were assaulted by pro-Black Lives Matter supporters, the Daily Caller’s Jorge Ventura reported. One man was sucker punched by a black male from behind who was holding a sign that said “Trump/Pence Out Now!” video footage showed. The slogan was promoted by Refuse Fascism, a radical left-wing group that, according to the non-profit Influence Watch, is an offshoot of the Radical Communist Party and has been present at many Antifa events.

“Dark Money Confirms Biden Will Pack the Court Even If He Won’t Say So Out Loud”
The Federalist, Sarah Lee (Op-ed), November 2, 2020

Conservatives’ calls for Democratic candidates to take a position on court-packing have grown louder since presidential candidate Joe Biden called for a “commission” to study altering the court, but here’s the deal: It’s immaterial if the candidates admit to a desire to expand the court because there’s a behind-the-scenes movement of millions in dark money aiming to accomplish that very thing. Follow the money to find out where Democrats plan to go. . . .

Start with Demand Justice, the group that helped organize and fund the vitriol against now-Justice Brett Kavanaugh during his 2018 confirmation hearing. Arguably the leader of the smear campaign labeling Kavanaugh a gang rapist, among other things, Demand Justice is nothing if not transparent in its desire to pack the court. It even invokes the Democratic Party’s platform in pushing this plan.

“China’s Green Offensive: GOA’s FOIA Featured in Series”
Government Accountability & Oversight, Chris Horner, November 1, 2020

Capital Research Center has published a series by investigative journalist Kevin Mooney, “China’s Green Offensive”.

This item, “China’s Green Offensive: The Obama State Department”, includes reference to an important suit brought under the federal Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) on behalf of the Institute for Energy Research. Excerpts:

Natural Resources Defense Council. In particular, Jack Schmidt, NRDC’s director of international programs, exchanged several messages with Obama State Department officials including Todd Stern, who was a special envoy for climate change at the time of correspondence in 2014 and 2015. Several messages are heavily redacted in the FOIA records, making it difficult to flush out key details. But as noted in an interview with this author, Chris Horner, an attorney for Government Accountability and Oversight, finds there is enough information to show that the NRDC had a hand in formulating the Obama administration’s approach to the Paris Agreement.

“Paris is a treaty according to all historical and common-sense considerations,” Horner says. “Pretending otherwise satisfies a publicly stated priority of the French hosts of the Paris talks, of the Obama White House and the Obama State Department, and of the NRDC, which emails suggest was the State Department’s adviser on this issue.”