The court case identifies nine alleged self-dealing examples. My review has identified at least 48 conflict-adjacent transactions, relationships, or capital-flow patterns that appear to fit recurring structures. This page is a public index to that broader map.
*This is a live archive that focuses on conflicts relevant to the current litigation/public record and is updated weekly with additional occurrences of concern.
Types of Self Dealing Discussed
Direct self-dealing
Conflict-adjacent transaction
One-degree-removed benefit
Governance overlap
DAF / philanthropic opacity
Public-benefit narrative laundering
The One-Degree-Removed Pattern
This archive tracks transactions and relationships in which benefit, influence, or exposure appears to be routed through adjacent entities, renamed organizations, donor-advised funds, nonprofit vehicles, or close associates. The concern is not that every one-degree-removed transaction is unlawful. The concern is that the repetition itself becomes ethically significant. If the transaction is defensible, it should be able to survive being named directly.