Supreme Conspiracy: How The Koch Brothers and Clarence Thomas Overthrew Democracy

In developing countries and dictatorships it’s not unusual or unexpected for the judicial system to be corrupt and biased. In America, it used to be a source of pride that our judicial system was fair and followed the letter of the law. Apparently, those days are gone and we are seeing the result of biased court decisions in this election cycle with unprecedented corporate donations to Republican candidates.


The Supreme  Court’s decision to give personhood to corporations (Citizens’ United v Federal Election Commission) so they can donate unrestricted amounts to politicians outraged just about everyone; except conservatives. One would like to imagine the court reached its decision after hearing the arguments and considering the implications it would have on America, but it doesn’t look like that was the case.

A gathering of conservative corporate leaders, financial experts, and conservative pundits met at an event sponsored by the Koch Brothers to strategize the 2010 elections and beyond. The stated purpose of the event was to eliminate 90% of regulations and preserve prosperity for corporate America.


There are volumes written on business’s goal of taking control of the government to enrich the wealth of corporations and the oil industry, and the Citizen’s United decision all but handed control to the Koch Brothers and their cohorts.

Two Supreme Court associate justices attended similar meetings put on by the Kochs and it begs the question: Did Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas take direction on how to rule in cases that favor corporate America? Whether or not there was any impropriety, further investigation is necessary to see if the justices are complicit in the Kochs’ plans. In particular, did Clarence Thomas and his wife (Ginni) conspire with the Kochs to proffer rulings for favors? It is a valid question.

Ginni Thomas is the head of a Tea Party group, and an anonymous donor handed over $500,000 to start her PAC. It is now well known  that the Koch brothers funded and promoted Tea Party groups, but there is no way of knowing if the Kochs funded Thomas’s Tea Party PAC  because they don’t have to reveal who made the donation, and it may be because of the Citizen’s United ruling.


Supreme Court justices are not supposed to bring personal political beliefs into their decision making process, but Scalia and Thomas attending a strategy session for destroying regulations and promoting corporate interests certainly looks suspicious. Justice Samuel Alito was asked during his confirmation hearings if he would bring his conservative beliefs into the cases he may hear and he said absolutely not. His decisions have leaned favorably toward corporations.

America is in decline because corporate interests take precedent over working people, and it has never been as blatant as in this election cycle. The protection against unfair spending and foreign influence is gone, and it was bought and paid for by conservative corporate interests.

It’s horrendous that corporations buy votes in legislative houses, but it is a travesty when two Supreme Court justices attend Republican Party and corporate leaders’ strategy sessions for the next election cycle.

If there is any justice in America, there will be an investigation into the Koch brothers, their group of industrialist leaders, foreign influence in campaigns, and the Supreme Court justices in their employ.  In particular, Clarence Thomas should be investigated for ethical impropriety concerning his wife and Koch brothers’ Tea Party funding.

Americans deserve truthful answers from Thomas and Scalia regarding their attendance and involvement in planning corporate strategy in this election cycle to assure Americans the Supreme Court is impartial. Unfortunately, conservatives are not inclined to give truthful answers whether they are politicians or Supreme Court Justices.

15 Replies to “Supreme Conspiracy: How The Koch Brothers and Clarence Thomas Overthrew Democracy”

  1. And you have to wonder exactly how far an investigation would get in even getting started. Especially after next week. Supreme Court justices can be compromised and its obvious we have a couple of them. Why would they be so obvious as to meet with the Koch Brothers?

    I frankly do not think an investigation will bear fruit. But it’s sure necessary

  2. Do you guys have a facebook or myspace fan webpage? I searched for one on facebook but could not locate one, I’d love to become a fan!

  3. There will never be an investigation on this matter. Money in America buys influence, and keeps wealthy people out of court – and away from scrutiny.

    Thomas was an incredible mistake, and Scalia spends most of his time in public promoting himself.

  4. Thanks so much:-)

    We’re working on a FB page soon. In the meantime, please follow us on twitter and or sign up for rss feed or email alerts and we promise to alert people when the FB page is done.

  5. Although I feel that the effects of Citizens United are deleterious, I can’t argue with the ruling. Corporations already retained “personhood”; no part of that was newly minted in this case. Corporations are legally distinct entities and considered individuals in the eyes of the law. The Court was merely making the law consistent (which, by the way, is the sign of a stable judiciary). Additionally, I don’t think I need to point out that it takes more than two justices to decide a case. As a matter of fact, most of the justices joined the majority, including Kennedy plus Ginsburg and Stevens in part. If you want to be upset about something, be upset that corporations are considered distinct individuals in our legal system. Good luck with that battle, however, because this is very much and area of “settled law”. In my opinion–and yes, I’m an extremist here–there should be no money in politics. A complete proscription of campaign contributing. Since it is an all or nothing situation, I choose nothing. How will they pay for ads? They won’t; they’ll need to speak with actual people. What about operational costs and overhead? There’s federal funding for campaigns, and everyone gets it equally. Use it how you wish.

  6. The side with the most money always wins in America. Sadly this is what we’ve become. I hope that someday we can get somebody elected who will actually change the way we do business but as I’ve slowly realized both Republicans and Democrats aren’t the ones for the job. Maybe Americans will actually do something someday and vote for somebody who isn’t already bought and paid for.

  7. I have never respected Clarence Thomas, as he has always come against the underdog in issues where he has ruled. But this is really over the top, and is a clear case of a conflict of interest on his part and that of Anthony Scalia. They are clearly on the side of corporations over the working people they are supposed to be protecting, and it’s disheartening to see so many Americans voting against their own best interests. They vote against their own interests even after being armed with information that clearly shows where the far right is coming from. It’s a truly sickening spectacle.

  8. You talk about “corporations” giving money freely, but you don’t refer to other, similar organizations who have been giving money, to buy legislation, for decades. The Supreme Court ruling just leveled the playing field, and now the Progressives are feeling the pinch that conservatives have felt for most of the 20th century. I agree with JP that “[m]aybe Americans will actually do something someday and vote for somebody who isn’t already bought and paid for.” Money didn’t used to play such an important part in the election process, before The Depression, but then again, politicians weren’t marketed like they were so much mouthwash, either. I believe the message here SHOULD be to take ALL the money out of politics, so that statesmen, people who believe in making this a better nation for everyone, can rise to elected office. Elected based on their IDEAS, not their popularity with people who have money. Do that, then we can stop “handicapping the races” based on how much money a candidate can pull in for the campaign.

  9. Tell that to someone who doesn’t know any better. These corporations want their profits without accountability, and the involvement of Supreme Court justices in this travesty is a blatant conflect of interest. You talk about “handicapping the races.” Well, what on earth do you imagine this is about?

  10. So lets see. Liberals don’t like this decision, but what was the case ACTUALLY about?

    Citizens United made a right wing movie, similar to what Michael Moore does, and was not allowed to show it within so many days of an election because of the McCain Feingold campaign finance reform. When Michael Moore made a politically slanted move there was no such restriction. So in effect it was a case about the government deciding to limit free speech based on the political leanings of the free speech.

  11. All of the Conservative Right Wing Supreme court Justices should be investigated
    for selling the country to the highest bidder!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.