By Alexander Wilson-
Pressure is rising on former Black Lives Matters co- founder, Patrick Cullors to explain how she funded the $3m four homes she purchased in Los Angelis, following news that she has pent an extra $35 erecting a security gate at one of her properties.
Cullors stepped down as executive director, on April 27, after her extravagancies were exposed by the Daily Mail.
But The Eye Of Media.Com believes she crumbed under the pressure of media scrutiny, likely tipped over by our own push, forcing her to step down. Cullors said that BLM had helped many black organizations, and supported the homeless in their support for Back Lives Matters. Ms Cullors and those taking over from her have been contacted again by this publication to justify the lavish purchase of the properties in question, and do so satisfactorily
Black Lives Matters was set up to address the issues faced by Black people, who felt they were being marginalized through grave and injustices and police brutality that amounted to their lives being of no value.
Critics of the Black Lives Matters Movement say the group don’t look after their own. Some say the term Black Lives Matters is inappropriate in itself because All Lives Matter. The latter is seen as misunderstanding the view that its name was formed to signify the thousands of black lives treated as though they were worthless, in a way that does not happen at the same rate to white lives.
The discussion gets broader and more emotive when the idea that financial donations intended to advance the BLM course is suspected to have been used to luxuriate the lifestyle of Ms Cullors.
The ambitious African American woman had blamed the attacks against her in relation to the four homes she purchased with $3m to right wing racist attacks, even though she has also been the subject of fierce criticism from back journalists and back-led media organizations.
She said in her defense to slights of corruption that she is an author, youtuber, and college professor, and also has deals with Netflix.
Observers associated with this publication insist that her claims are not enough to vindicate her from the potential suspicion and allegations of corruption. ” We need to know exactly how much she has earned from each of the various sources of income she has outlined, to confirm that the at least exceed $3m, Victoria Mckeown keeping tabs on her story said. It’s simply not good enough for her to step down and escape a much needed investigation, on the baseless grounds of a racist campaign against her.
It comes following a recent excusive by the Daily Mail that the property will have an electronic gate at the driveway portion, a walk up door, and call box, and other safety measures, cameras.
Last week, Daily Mail published On Tuesday of the property, revealing the fencing and gate project was near completion.
We have not put a link to the Daily Mail article to avoid the possibility of having the sharing of the story blocked. Members of the public who shared The Daily Mail’s initial article about Ms Cullors article, were blocked from sharing the story by facebook and twitter.
The social media giants told The Eye Of Media.Com that it was against their policy to publish photos that could endanger the safety of those whose properties are in the photo.
However, facebook failed to address other incidences in which properties of subjects written about had been published in the paper.
The new – and pricey – installation comes amid backlash over Cullors’ multimillion dollar housing portfolio.
DailyMail.com can also reveal that Cullors paid for the $1.4million Topanga Canyon home in cash.
‘There is no mortgage holder on the property,’ a local realtor who checked the title documents confirmed.
The home was purchased by the entity name ‘Abolitionist Entertainment, LLC,’ the realtor say.
This publications wants Ms Cullors to be explicit about her earnings from the books she has authoured and her Netflix deals, or clearly state that she had earned from her sources of income over the $3m she spent on the multiple houses.
Experts say that she wouldn’t be able to confidently state this unless it is true because of the high possibility of either someone leaking the truth, or A future discovery about those facts which could have potentially criminal implications on her.