Ep 336 – Mormon Leaks


Posted January 13th, 2017

Matt and Tom sit down with Ryan McKnight and Privacy P Pratt (not his real name) to discuss General Authority pay stubs, the difference between mormon- and wiki- leaking, and leaks and leakers and just a bunch of leaking stuff in general.  You’re in for a real treat (as opposed to urine for a real treat).  Cuz details matter.



  • black_but_delightsom

    Awesome! I cant wait to listen!

  • Orrin Dayne

    Heather’s impression of Dehlin (whether her original or impressions thereof like Matt’s) will always bring a smile to my face. Love it.

  • I agree that the value of the perks that don’t show up itemized on a pay stub are tremendous. Your kid’s and grandkid’s college taken care of, your medical expenses taken care of, your retirement a moot point, someone to drive you wherever you want to go . . . Under those circumstances, a hundred and twenty grand goes a long way. But . . . Even if the perks got them into the $400K/yr. range, it’s still kind of anticlimactic. People who do a lot worse job of running their particular organizations make a lot, lot more. (I’ve always wanted to be one of those CEOs who, after making twenty or thirty million a year for four or five years, is paid forty or fifty million to go away, Even here, in backward New Mexico, we’ve paid college football coaches four million plus to go away. Hell, I don’t even know the rules of football. I could do a lot worse job than that guy and I’d go away for two-million-five, no muss, no fuss, no legal battles.)

    I also believe in transparency for transparency’s sake, though. If you’re going to take money from people who can’t really afford it, and operate in a tax-exempt environment, you’d better be up front about what the money’s for. In fact, as a matter of policy, the so-called Church shouldn’t be taking money at all from people living below whatever passes for the poverty line in whatever country they live. It’s like Trump’s and even Romney’s tax returns; if everything you do is on the up and up, why must it be hidden? Huh? There is no reason that the law shouldn’t require organizations with tax-exempt status of any kind to publicly publish full and accurate financial statements at least once a year. If you’re going to indulge in even the appearance of impropriety, you can do it on your nickel, not ours.

    • Thomas Moore

      There is a huge difference between what is legal, and what is ethical. The LDS inc machine claims that none of the G.A.’s are paid by tithing. This may be true, because the “for profit” businesses have to “donate” a lot of their income as tax write-off. (Just like Romney got a way with not paying taxes or such a little amount before he started running for public offices). So here’s all of these “charitable” donations to a non-profit which can be used for “administrative and consulting”. Also as Ryan and Privacy pointed out; if the church did become transparent, “would it bring back the inactives and/or apostates??? Doubtful. Would it possibly drive active members or offend active members? Likely.” So There really is no push to become transparent. Just like soooooo many members, I also touted the “We are a lay ministry”, yes we pay some lawyers, secretaries, BYU professors. But no Apostle, Prophet, Seventy would get paid for the blessing of preaching the gospel. Even today, I have to redirect my relatives and friends to Mormon_Leaks to prove that the leaders do get paid. I’m with you though, employment pay should not be “Not Secret, but Sacred” and hidden from members.
      Just like Donald Trump was even patted on the back for legally avoiding income taxes, by using the losses he had back in the 2008 or using bankruptcy laws and legal “offshore” investing…It’s probably enough to keep him out of prison (he’s bound and determined not to be an Al Capone or Martha Stewart) it definitely isn’t ethical or culturally/socially acceptable.

  • Martine Dirick Smith

    Just finished. Great episodes as most of the time–I almost wrote “as always” but that wouldn’t be quite correct.

    First I’m going to stick up for the guys–GAs. There are a lot of comments made about the fact that they’re paid and Bishop’s and SP and others, including AAs, are not. Let’s remember that all those guys started out as Bishop’s and SP. They’ve done the unpaid jobs.

    Except for President Hinckley–and other church presidents–and Packer in his last few years, I don’t believe they are routinely given a driver. The three apostles that lived within 5 blocks of me all drove themselves and Oaks gave Wirthlin a ride to work in his last years. I ran into Faust at the cemetery one early Memorial Day morning about 10 years ago; he was driving his big car himself. He came to me to ask questions about the family. I’ve seen Oaks and Nelson working on their own house. Gardners? Housekeepers? Highly doubt, at least not as a standard perk.
    They work Tuesday-Sunday, every month of the year except for July when they’re all off, and most of December. Their weekend is Monday.

    In a Facebook thread, one of James faust’s granddaughters said she paid full tuition at BYU. She also said he lived a fairly simple life. She’s left the church but felt she needed to set this part of the record straight.

    That said, there are many other, unseen, perks. Based on observations and conversations with the family of a 1Q70, many of lives every day activities are facilitated. Locally owned businesses give GAs and their families deep discounts on cars, household items, trips, excotic vacations in homes owned by wealthy members. Job placement for children. Those things, I’ve seen.

    A search for GA’s real estate shows the church owns some of the homes–Holland, Oaks house was on the market for a very long time, then ownership seemed to have switched to the church.

    The child of a of 1Q70 admitted to me that she always kept her ecclesiastical endorsement at BYU although totally inactive at the time.

    I strongly agree that Hinckley’s “modest stipend” was totally misleading and an inappropriate representation of the truth.

    The church’s acknowledgment of the payments should have included a statement detailing the additional benefits, not included in the stubs.