Is TransparencyUSA.org Removing Contributions After Exposé of Government Bias and Corruption in Texas Courts?

“At Transparency USA, our mission is to provide clear, accurate, easy-to-understand information about the money in state politics.”

According to Transparency USA, they receive funding from a range of donors, including government agencies, multilateral institutions, foundations, the private sector, and individuals. Donations may be unrestricted or tied to specific projects or programs.

This “freedom” apparently allows certain donations to be conveniently erased from the database, as evidenced by the joint husband-and-wife donation from Margaret “Maggie” Layrisson, a partner at Serpe Andrews, and her husband Louis “Louie” Layrisson, a partner at the prominent Texas law firm Baker Botts.

As I (Mark Burke) demonstrate in this follow-up post, this particular donation has been removed, likely due to the power dynamics at play and the influence of corrupt government entities.

The investigation into this matter was triggered by contentious litigation, an ex parte hearing, and the subsequent quashing of my subpoenas, all of which led to an inquiry into the relationship between Serpe Andrews and Judge Lauren Reeder.

This inquiry revealed that the Layrissons provided an in-kind contribution valued at $2,326, specifically for “Food, Beverages, and Valet for the Reception” at a hotel hosted for Judge Reeder’s political campaign. For reference, see p. 12, footnote 6 of the motion above.

However, upon further review of the same article and its hyperlinks, it appears this in-kind contribution (the hotel reception payment described) has been erased from the public record, and it has also been removed from Judge Reeder’s list of donations.

It’s important to note that in-kind contributions must be disclosed under Texas law, and failure to report such contributions can raise serious legal and ethical concerns.

Specifically, as outlined in my motion and on related articles here and on lawsintexas.com, this failure to disclose has direct implications for the transparency and integrity of judicial campaigns, particularly when the contributors—such as the Layrissons—have a direct professional relationship with the judge.

This situation implicates significant conflict of interest issues, as detailed in relevant case law and legal authority cited in the motion.

These include concerns regarding undue influence, the appearance of bias, and potential violations of ethical rules governing judicial conduct and campaign finance.

See p. 12, footnote 6 of the motion and generally for further details and supporting case law.

This is only one act in a series of troubling events surrounding government harassment and litigation targeting Mark Burke and his business and family interests.

Since I began publishing a series of legal blogs exposing judicial and governmental corruption, I have found myself increasingly in the crosshairs of those who seek to silence me.

What started as a pursuit of transparency and accountability has evolved into a relentless campaign of legal and personal attacks, seemingly orchestrated to intimidate and discredit me.

From the quashing of subpoenas to the erasure of critical donations and the questionable removal of information from public records, these actions paint a disturbing picture of a system under siege—one in which powerful interests manipulate the levers of government to target those who dare to challenge them.

Each step of this saga has revealed deeper layers of corruption, influence, and undue power wielded by those who should be held to the highest standards of integrity.

The in-kind contribution, erased from public record, is not an isolated incident but rather a reflection of a larger, more insidious pattern. This is a calculated effort to obscure the truth and ensure that those who hold influence remain shielded from scrutiny.

As these events unfold, it becomes clearer that the system itself is compromised, and those who challenge its integrity face mounting retaliation.

However, let me be clear: I will not be intimidated.

This campaign of harassment, legal manipulation, and corruption will not deter me from my mission and that of my investigative legal blogs.

I have amassed more than sufficient evidence of the fraud, corruption, and waste that runs rampant.

I have documented on my blogs the illegal protection of lawyers who corruptly practice before the court, shielded by full immunity from prosecution.

I will continue to seek accountability and justice—not only for myself but for the citizens harmed by the judicial and government corruption that seeks to silence the truth.

LITAMO will be the last stand.

If they proceed with illegal actions, LITAMO will stand as the fortress where our liberty, property, and land remain inviolable, and we will defend them live, for the world to see.

Should they be cowards, they will strike unprovoked, in the shadows of darkness, hoping to escape the light of public scrutiny and condemnation.

This is not just a personal battle; it is a stand for the future of justice, and the protection of the rights that belong to every citizen, especially against unlawful takings and the erosion of our fundamental property rights.