Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

What Role Have Scalia And Thomas Played In The Koch Money Machine?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-20-10 02:56 PM
Original message
What Role Have Scalia And Thomas Played In The Koch Money Machine?

What Role Have Scalia And Thomas Played In The Koch Money Machine?

Earlier today, ThinkProgress Lee Fang revealed several documents outlining the details of one of right-wing billionaire Charles Kochs secret convenings of corporate political donors. As Koch revealed to the Wall Street Journal in 2006, the purpose of these meetings is to recruit captains of industry to fund the conservative infrastructure of front groups, political campaigns, think tanks and media outlets. Buried in this document, however, is a surprising revelation about the role two supposedly impartial jurists have played in these extended fundraising solicitations: Past meetings have featured such notable leaders as Supreme Court Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas.

A Supreme Court justice lending a hand to a political fundraising event would be a clear violation of the Code of Conduct for United States Judges, if it wasnt for the fact that the nine justices have exempted themselves from much of the ethical rules governing all other federal judges. Nevertheless, a spokesperson for the Supreme Court tells ThinkProgress that (t)he Justices look to the Code of Conduct for guidance in determining when they may participate in fundraising activities. Under that Code:

Fund Raising. A judge may assist nonprofit law-related, civic, charitable, educational, religious, or social organizations in planning fund-raising activities and may be listed as an officer, director, or trustee. A judge may solicit funds for such an organization from judges over whom the judge does not exercise supervisory or appellate authority and from members of the judges family. Otherwise, a judge should not personally participate in fund-raising activities, solicit funds for any organization, or use or permit the use of the prestige of judicial office for that purpose. A judge should not personally participate in membership solicitation if the solicitation might reasonably be perceived as coercive or is essentially a fund-raising mechanism.

Scalia and Thomas participation in these fundraising gatherings also call into question whether they can be impartial in any number of cases brought by Koch-aligned groups seeking immunity to the law. Most significantly, the Koch brothers have contributed significantly to efforts to stop the Affordable Care Act from going into effect, and a number of attendees at the Kochs secret meetings include health industry moguls with a direct financial stake in the litigation challenging health reform (Justice Thomas wife, of course, actively lobbied against the Affordable Care Act).

Court observers hoping that Scalia and Thomas will recuse themselves from cases backed by the Kochtopus shouldnt hold their breath, however. During the Bush Administration, Justice Scalia infamously refused to recuse himself from a suit against Vice President Dick Cheney even after it was revealed that Scalia and Cheney went on a duck hunting trip together during the pendancy of Cheneys case. Scalia also came under ethical fire when he skipped Chief Justice Roberts swearing in ceremony to attend a junket to a Ritz-Carlton resort funded by the right-wing Federalist Society; and Thomas accepted more than $42,000 in free gifts in just six years on the Supreme Court.

At the very least, however, Scalia and Thomas should publicly disclose exactly what role they played in supporting Kochs secret fundraising network. These fundraising meetings exist for the purpose of eliminating laws and regulations that corporate America does not like, and a sitting Supreme Court justice can do a great deal to advance this purpose (indeed, Scalia and Thomas both already handed an enormous gift to the Kochs corporate network by joining the egregious decision in Citizens United v. FEC). The two justices attendance at these events raise serious questions about whether Scalia and Thomas are deciding cases impartially or whether they are pushing the exact same agenda as all the Koch events other attendees.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-20-10 02:59 PM
Response to Original message
1. They greased the express rails for Global Fascism (NWO) via Citizens United decision
Edited on Wed Oct-20-10 03:02 PM by blm
Bush1 and 2 made sure their NWO loyalists would overturn democracy in this nation in favor of the Global Fascism they have long envisioned.

Dumbass teabaggers are so dense they are acting as the NWO's front line.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-20-10 03:16 PM
Response to Reply #1
5. After Alito's reaction at the SOTU
none of them should be trusted. They knew and were warned about the consequences of Citizens.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-21-10 12:04 PM
Response to Reply #5
19. They knew EXACTLY why they were put on the Supreme Court by the fascist elite intent on destroying
American democracy and what is left of a free citizenry, all for the New World Order of the corporatists.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bitwit1234 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-20-10 03:36 PM
Response to Reply #1
8. That they did and you can say the coluded with the Koch Bros.
just like Scalia who got a free hunting trip paid for by the VP cheney before he voted on that energy case. Of course he "Said" he could be impartial and we all see how that went.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue Owl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-20-10 03:04 PM
Response to Original message
2. Oh, just a little under-the-table, old-west-style "justice" for money
You know, just the selling-out of our democracy.

:mad:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue Meany Donating Member (986 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-20-10 03:12 PM
Response to Original message
3. IMO, this is grounds for impeachment of the 2justices n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue Owl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-20-10 03:13 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. wouldn't that be sweet
:fistbump:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Parker CA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-20-10 03:22 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. Absolutely!! We can only hope. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-20-10 03:34 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. It certainly is - let's see if this administration has the guts to do it...
For the sake of the country, I sure hope so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dr Fate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-20-10 03:53 PM
Response to Reply #3
10. It is at least grounds for an "under oath" investigation. But dont hold your breath.
Edited on Wed Oct-20-10 03:55 PM by Dr Fate
Sounds too much like something "the far left" might want, if you catch my drift.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dr Fate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-20-10 03:52 PM
Response to Original message
9. The DEM controlled legislative branch needs to hold the judicial branch accountable.
Edited on Wed Oct-20-10 04:00 PM by Dr Fate
Hearings should be in order.

Supreme Court justices can be investigated for impeachable offenses, just like Bill Clinton was.

At the least, elected DEMS should go on TV and make strong, on the record charges and threats to put them under oath- just to expose the excuses the guilty parties will make.

Anyone agree?


I know it wont happen, I'm just trying to see if anyone else thinks it should.

Any ideas for what elected DEMS should DO about this?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
besdayz Donating Member (173 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-20-10 03:55 PM
Response to Original message
11. a
Scalia is the typical god complex strict constructionist who feels, because he decides the law, that he is above it...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Quantess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-20-10 04:35 PM
Response to Reply #11
14. He has all of afterlife to pay for his role in creating struggle for millions of Americans.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glinda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-20-10 04:05 PM
Response to Original message
12. K & R
MSM should take a serious look at this because our Democracy is absolutely at stake here. Someone should investigate this and pressure publicly for disclosure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mod mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-20-10 04:14 PM
Response to Original message
13. Exactly why the Dems should have fought election fraud in 2000 & 2004!
The far Corporate RW has infiltrated not only the GOP, the SCOTUS, control of the media but also the Dem Party. They are NOT willing to play fair so Obama's attempt to work with them has been for nil.

Thomas voted on Citizen's United despite the fact his wife personally benefitted financially from the ruling:

http://crooksandliars.com/node/38281/print

These guys could care less about fair or ethical.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dr Fate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-20-10 04:41 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. If DEMS learn from such mistakes, what would be their excuse for not picking up the fight from here?
Nothing is truly stopping the DEM congress from pushing for hearings, starting Monday. Great way to get free TV time right before an election- and a great way to energize the base. But I'm sure we can come up with an excuse. "Not enough time" ought to do it.

Okay- But they DO have time to go on TV for a a few minutes. Right? Nothing stopping elected DEMS from going on TV TONIGHT and all this week-droppping phrases like "if they have nothing to hide, they should be glad to go under oath" and "it looks like there could be some impechable offenses", etc.

It would be great if all the DEM candidates could demand that their opponents either defend or condem this. Surely we dont have an excuse for why they cant do that- or do we?

Nothing stopping any of the above, and yet it wont happen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mod mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-20-10 10:02 PM
Response to Reply #15
17. "and yet it wont happen". Unfortunately, you're absolutely right.
I remember working so hard to get them elected in '06 so that someone would finally address the fraud and make public the mountain of evidence we gathered going inside BoEs etc. They got elected, we re-gained control but much to my chagrin, nothing happened. Silly me, for hoping.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Historic NY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-20-10 05:00 PM
Response to Original message
16. Impeachment time...what did they know & when did they know it & how they decided to act.
Independent judiciary my ass.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jillan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-20-10 10:10 PM
Response to Original message
18. This is one time when I am very very interested in hearing Jonathan Turley's opinion.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Jul 10th 2014, 09:42 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC