Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas attended at least two donor events for the Koch network, according to a ProPublica report published Friday.

Thomas in 2018 went to a private dinner for donors at the group’s annual summit in California and was brought in to speak with the hopes that the access would encourage donations, according to the report.

Charles and David Koch over the years built an influence network that poured millions into conservative and libertarian causes. David Koch died in 2019.

Thomas did not disclose the trip to the summit on his annual financial disclosure, though ProPublica did not identify who paid for the private jet flight.

  • poprocks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    9 months ago

    Of course he did. We need to remove the lifetime appointments to the Supreme Court as there are literally no ramifications for this shit. Fuck these asshats

    • Fredselfish@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Secret? Shit he will come out and say he proudly attended. What exactly are we doing about this? Not a peep from the Biden administration? Fuck this asshat.

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas attended at least two donor events for the Koch network, according to a ProPublica report published Friday.

    Thomas in 2018 went to a private dinner for donors at the group’s annual summit in California and was brought in to speak with the hopes that the access would encourage donations, according to the report.

    Charles and David Koch over the years built an influence network that poured millions into conservative and libertarian causes.

    Thomas did not disclose the trip to the summit on his annual financial disclosure, though ProPublica did not identify who paid for the private jet flight.

    The Supreme Court has a narrow definition of banned fundraising that only applies to events that raise more money than expenses incurred, or where guests are actually asked to contribute funds.

    But Republicans have opposed the push, portraying it as an attempt to tear down the court’s conservative majority, giving the bill slim odds of passage.


    The original article contains 423 words, the summary contains 159 words. Saved 62%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!