NOM

THE CHURCH’S FIRM – 60 MINUTES reports on the $100 billion fortune built by the secretive investment arm of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and a whistleblower’s allegation that instead of spending the money on good works, hundreds of millions were used to bail out businesses with church ties. Sharyn Alfonsi speaks with David Nielsen, a former senior portfolio manager at the church’s firm, about his role in a federal investigation and decision to come forward. Guy Campanile is the producer.

This is kind of weird. When I looked for this there were several links, but the content had been removed, even on the CBS website. I would not doubt that the church is pulling every possible string to minimize the visibility.

I just did a search and found this as well as an article from the SLC Trib.

https://www.saltlakemagazine.com/lds-ch ... 0-minutes/

I'm looking forward to watching this even though I'm not a big 60 Minutes fan.

This may be the straw that breaks the camels back !!

Most of the links seem to be working now, except the one on the CBS News site:
https://www.cbsnews.com/video/the-churc ... 00-10abd1h

Hagoth wrote: ↑Sat May 13, 2023 6:45 am Most of the links seem to be working now, except the one on the CBS News site:
https://www.cbsnews.com/video/the-churc ... 00-10abd1h

Worked fine for me.

I laughed at this exchange:

Reporter: What do you think about the idea that secrecy builds mistrust?
LDS Manager: Well we don't feel it is being secret, it is confidential.
Reporter: What's the difference?
LDS Manager: Um...

"Um..." withstanding, I'll let you brave souls screen it for me to see how much of a fluff piece it is before I watch. There's no excuse for what they did to deceive members about how rich the church is. None. Any attempt to rationalize it away as if it wasn't a bad thing boils my blood.

Just This Guy wrote: ↑Sat May 13, 2023 7:03 am
Worked fine for me.

Yes, they all came back, one by one.

Transcript is up @ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/mormon-whi ... 023-05-14/

The 60 Minutes program:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3_Fhq7sEHo

If I could have interjected a few questions into the interview with the First Bishopric guy:

"How do you and the First Presidency answer the temple recommend question about honesty in your dealings?"

"Do you/they have special privilege that excludes them from the moral behavior that their own rules that would make a regular member unworthy to enter the temple if they did the same things?"

"Why won't the people calling the shots explain themselves to the public? Why do they hide behind people like you? Don't they claim to be God's mouthpiece to the world? Why won't they account for their behavior?"

"You keep alluding to the Second Coming as the reason you need to have these investments. "I'm happy to learn that the global economy, the stock market, and the banking system will be strong and fully functional after the apocalypse, so Jesus can have plenty of liquid funds to pave the streets with gold and get that milk and honey flowing! Otherwise it wouldn't seem very stupid and non-prophetic to horde all that money that could be helping people right now if your prophets knew it would become worthless when we're all wearing the mark of the beast and our eyeballs are falling out. Can we get one of your prophets, seers, and/or revelators to verify this in an official statement?"

What would've been fantastic would've been having David Nielsen there to help with follow-up questions because this answer sounded particularly false to me:

"Christopher Waddell: In any given month you may have an average of nine transfers going from Ensign Peak back to the church to fund all church operations. All humanitarian work— education work, all the work of the church they fund."

From everything we know the Ensign Peak fund is not used whatsoever to fund church causes, so what do they mean there are 9 transfers per month funding the church when we're told tithing covers their yearly expenses.

Seems like they're trying to very intentionally conflate things to confuse those who are watching into thinking that the church is funded by Ensign Peak...

What would've been fantastic would've been having David Nielsen there to help with follow-up questions because this answer sounded particularly false to me:

"Christopher Waddell: In any given month you may have an average of nine transfers going from Ensign Peak back to the church to fund all church operations. All humanitarian work— education work, all the work of the church they fund."

From everything we know the Ensign Peak fund is not used whatsoever to fund church causes, so what do they mean there are 9 transfers per month funding the church when we're told tithing covers their yearly expenses.

Seems like they're trying to very intentionally conflate things to confuse those who are watching into thinking that the church is funded by Ensign Peak...

jfro18 wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 10:58 am "Christopher Waddell: In any given month you may have an average of nine transfers going from Ensign Peak back to the church to fund all church operations. All humanitarian work— education work, all the work of the church they fund."

From everything we know the Ensign Peak fund is not used whatsoever to fund church causes, so what do they mean there are 9 transfers per month funding the church when we're told tithing covers their yearly expenses?

Seems like they're trying to very intentionally conflate things to confuse those who are watching into thinking that the church is funded by Ensign Peak...

I think RFM would call this an ongoing deception. I bet that pissed the SEC off when they heard it.

moksha wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 1:50 pm

jfro18 wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 10:58 am "Christopher Waddell: In any given month you may have an average of nine transfers going from Ensign Peak back to the church to fund all church operations. All humanitarian work— education work, all the work of the church they fund."

From everything we know the Ensign Peak fund is not used whatsoever to fund church causes, so what do they mean there are 9 transfers per month funding the church when we're told tithing covers their yearly expenses?

Seems like they're trying to very intentionally conflate things to confuse those who are watching into thinking that the church is funded by Ensign Peak...

I think RFM would call this an ongoing deception. I bet that pissed the SEC off when they heard it.

I would have liked to hear the direct quote when Waddell told 60 minutes that "it was the church's lawyers that advised them to create the shell companies." I wonder if he used the same "relied on legal counsel" that they used in the statement, or did he make a more direct statement. Does anyone know if the SEC could investigate this? I understand that if this defense had been raised it would have been mentioned in the statement and would have prompted further questions. It is deceptive, also.

I would like to bear my testimony that the church is true. The leaders of the church know the covenant path. I wish to follow my loving leaders. To do so, I set up 13 shell companies to pay my tithing through. This is the way. I also have learned from my leaders how to evade paying taxes, which allows me to pay more in tithing to the church. I am working on protecting sexual predators from the law and punishment. That is the sure sign of truth. Have I ever told you the story of when I was in a spiral death dive in a small airplane where the right engine suddenly burst into flames spewing fiery oil but miraculously landed safely in a farmer’s field? Yes, it’s true and a lady in a red hat was sitting next to me….

2bizE wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 7:00 pm I would like to bear my testimony that the church is true. The leaders of the church know the covenant path. I wish to follow my loving leaders. To do so, I set up 13 shell companies to pay my tithing through. This is the way. I also have learned from my leaders how to evade paying taxes, which allows me to pay more in tithing to the church. I am working on protecting sexual predators from the law and punishment. That is the sure sign of truth. Have I ever told you the story of when I was in a spiral death dive in a small airplane where the right engine suddenly burst into flames spewing fiery oil but miraculously landed safely in a farmer’s field? Yes, it’s true and a lady in a red hat was sitting next to me….

Ha ha ha!

Sometimes I feel like testimonies are just as absurd as this.

The longer I’m out the crazier it all sounds.

Something that I do not understand from the 60 Minutes interview was with the Former IRS, Tax Law guy…he said the IRS will likely not do anything to the church for using its non-prophet EPA fund to bail out the Insurance company…he said there were too many political risks…what does that mean? How would going after the church by the IRS be a big risk?

2bizE wrote: ↑Tue May 16, 2023 12:30 pm Something that I do not understand from the 60 Minutes interview was with the Former IRS, Tax Law guy…he said the IRS will likely not do anything to the church for using its non-prophet EPA fund to bail out the Insurance company…he said there were too many political risks…what does that mean? How would going after the church by the IRS be a big risk?

Basically if the IRS were to go after any religion it would set off a political firestorm of people who are claiming the government is trying to shut down or at least impede religion.

Sadly he's right because the moment they went after the Mormon church it would be in every religion's interests to try and stop it because they all know that once that door gets opened even a crack they could be next... and none of them want that kind of oversight or accountability.

jfro18 wrote: ↑Tue May 16, 2023 2:02 pm

2bizE wrote: ↑Tue May 16, 2023 12:30 pm Something that I do not understand from the 60 Minutes interview was with the Former IRS, Tax Law guy…he said the IRS will likely not do anything to the church for using its non-prophet EPA fund to bail out the Insurance company…he said there were too many political risks…what does that mean? How would going after the church by the IRS be a big risk?

Basically if the IRS were to go after any religion it would set off a political firestorm of people who are claiming the government is trying to shut down or at least impede religion.

Sadly he's right because the moment they went after the Mormon church it would be in every religion's interests to try and stop it because they all know that once that door gets opened even a crack they could be next... and none of them want that kind of oversight or accountability.

But this is exactly what needs to happen in this country! The bogus legalized form of pyramid ponzi non-taxable schemes (religions) need to end IMO. It's a big drain on society and a huge waist of resources just to give a few rich white guys more money and assets than they could ever use in their lifetime...off the backs of widows and families that are struggling to make a living.

RubinHighlander wrote: ↑Tue May 16, 2023 4:36 pm
But this is exactly what needs to happen in this country! The bogus legalized form of pyramid ponzi non-taxable schemes (religions) need to end IMO. It's a big drain on society and a huge waist of resources just to give a few rich white guys more money and assets than they could ever use in their lifetime...off the backs of widows and families that are struggling to make a living.

I agree 100% - but it won't happen anytime soon because neither party wants any part of going after religions and their tax exempt status and the IRS is too afraid to enforce the laws. It sucks how much power religion has given how often we're told that religion is being persecuted right now.