Shaun King's dog: Scratch a leftist; find an oligarch or, maybe, a toddler

Shaun King, the lily-white Black activist, may have a failing that seems to be common to all left-leaning activists: he believes that the money his followers send to support his cause is really meant to support him.  To that end, it's being reported that King (AKA Talcum X) used $40,000 of his PAC's money to buy an award-winning mastiff.  Even dog-lovers might find that a grift too far.

The Washington Free Beacon has the story:

Grassroots Law PAC, which the progressive grifter founded to elect soft-on-crime local officials, paid roughly $40,000 since December to the California-based Potrero Performance Dogs, according to campaign finance disclosures. The payments are labeled for "contractor services," making their purpose difficult to discern. But days after a $30,650 payment in February, King welcomed a "new member of the King family": an award-winning mastiff bred by Potrero named Marz.

King, who has been hounded for years by allegations of fraud, has not been accused of any wrongdoing in relation to Grassroots Law. But the payments for a dog raises [sic] questions about whether the former Bernie Sanders surrogate is using PAC contributions the way donors intended.

Before you get too emotional about the donors whose money went to the dogs, let me hasten to assure you that they can afford the loss.  The largest donor to Grassroots Law PAC is an heiress of the Hormel meatpacking company.  Another multi-million-dollar donor is Dustin Moskovitz, a Facebook cofounder, who, along with his wife, wrote some mighty big checks.


Image: Shaun King.  YouTube screen grab.

The Free Beacon article details other accusations to the effect that King is no stranger to enriching himself at the expense of those whom he purports to serve.  I have no idea whether the allegations are true.  So far as I know, no judge or jury has found him guilty on any charges.

What's interesting, though, is how many of these Black Lives Matter activists stand accused of using their supporters' money for their own benefit.  Most notable are the charges against the Black Lives Matter organization itself:

Black Lives Matter spent millions on luxury properties in Los Angeles and Toronto, according to the first public accounting of its finances.

In Canada, Toronto-based non-profit M4BJ purchased a 10,000-square-foot downtown property for the equivalent of $6.3 million. The former headquarters of the Canadian communist party was named the Wildseed Centre for Art and Activism by Canadian BLM members who said it was purchased using cash from BLMGNF.

The purchase of the Toronto home was part of an $8 million "out of country grant" in North America, to conduct "activities to educate and support black communities, and to purchase and renovate property for charitable use," according to BLMGNF's latest federal tax filing for fiscal year 2020. The group said it planned to use the space as its main office in Canada.

[snip]

The IRS filing also lists the group's Los Angeles compound as an asset. In October 2020, BLMGNF secretly bought a sprawling mansion in Los Angeles, spending nearly $6 million on the purchase of the Studio City compound, which includes a soundstage, six bedrooms and a swimming pool.

The thing about communists (and all these Black Lives Matter activists espouse hard-left policies) is that they are obsessed with money.  Indeed, the sole value they have is money: who has it, who shouldn't have it, who deserves it, and who should control it.

Because leftists' worldview revolves entirely around money, it shouldn't surprise anyone that, once they encounter money, they become supremely acquisitive.  Just think of Bernie Sanders, the lifelong communist who never held a real job, but whose recent political fame turned him into a property-rich multi-millionaire.  As far as I know, he's resisted any impulses he might have had to share his wealth.

Ultimately, high-level communists invariably seem to develop a one-way "share the wealth" philosophy that is exactly like the Toddlers' Creed: no matter the source of the money, once it passes through their hands, it's theirs forever:

This may explain why so many communist dictators amassed fortunes in the billions (e.g., Hugo Chávez, Fidel Castro, the Ceausescus, Yasser Arafat, etc.): the only measure of value they have for anything is financial, and their policies give them virtually unlimited access to money.  Who cares if those same policies, coupled with the dictators' greed, destroy the people they purportedly serve?

So, while I don't know if Shaun King wrongfully used donor money to buy a $40,000 dog, one can certainly see that the charges against him are consistent with what we know of leftists who have easy access to other people's money. 

If you experience technical problems, please write to helpdesk@americanthinker.com