Big Bucks For Justice Ginni

(H/T: @RashedNewlife on Twitter)

Why would a dark money group pay Clarance Thomas’s wife Ginni $600K Ameros?

A little-known conservative activist group led by Virginia “Ginni” Thomas, the wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, collected nearly $600,000 in anonymous donations to wage a cultural battle against the left over three years, a Washington Post investigation found.

The previously unreported donations to the fledgling group Crowdsourcers for Culture and Liberty were channeled through a right-wing think tank in Washington that agreed to serve as a funding conduit from 2019 until the start of last year, according to documents and interviews. The arrangement, known as a “fiscal sponsorship,” effectively shielded from public view details about Crowdsourcers’ activities and spending, information it would have had to disclose publicly if it operated as a separate nonprofit organization, experts said.

The Post’s investigation sheds new light on the role money from donors who are not publicly identified has played in supporting Ginni Thomas’s political advocacy, long a source of controversy. The funding is the first example of anonymous donors backing her activism since she founded a conservative charity more than a decade ago. She stepped away from that charity amid concerns that it created potential conflicts for her husband on hot-button issues before the court.

And I am the Czar of all the Russias.

The investigation brings in all the usual fiends in Ginni Thomas orbit:

The concept for Crowdsourcers had taken shape during discussions with “35 of the best thinkers about what the left is doing,” she said.

Thomas said partners in the effort included Cleta Mitchell, chair of the Public Interest Legal Foundation, a nonprofit that submits amicus briefs to the Supreme Court in election law cases. Mitchell planned to establish a political action committee to “protect President [Donald] Trump,” according to a slide Thomas displayed during the closed-door meeting. James O’Keefe, the founder of Project Veritas — known for hidden-camera stings that aim to embarrass liberals — would lead an effort to “protect our heroes,” she said. And Richard Viguerie, a pioneer in conservative direct-mail campaigns, would head up an effort to “brand the left,” she said.

Mitchell said in a brief phone interview that she did not know anything about Crowdsourcers and that nothing ever came of the political action committee.

“Ginni has asked me over the years to do a lot of different things,” she said. “I always try to respond.”

O’Keefe and Viguerie did not respond to requests for comment.

And of course, there is the other whopper:

Thomas described herself as having a key role in bringing Crowdsourcers together. “I’m not the answer person. If anyone knows me, you know this. I’m merely a convener,” she said. “I find the talent and I put them in a room and I help them talk to one another.”

“They pay me for my connections,” Ginni didn’t wink, “not to influence Clarence with small, unmarked, non-sequential bills.”

This entry was posted in Clarance Thomas, Ginni Thomas, SCOTUS. Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Big Bucks For Justice Ginni

  1. gruaud says:

    Well, there’s no unseeing that, unfortunately.

    Liked by 3 people

  2. beckymaenot says:

    This is just corruption. Plain and simple. Justice Thomas should be impeached.

    Liked by 2 people

    • MDavis says:

      He should be impeached, but the threat of impeachment doesn’t have the weight it used to.
      Agnew resigned rather then face an impeachment that would mess up the process of Nixon appointing his own successor.
      Here’s what I found about SCOTUS impeachments – none have resulted in removal so far.

      In 1969, Abe Fortas became the first—and, to date, only—Supreme Court justice to resign under the threat of impeachment. Named to the court by President Lyndon Johnson in 1965, Fortas was forced to step down due to financial improprieties that involved him agreeing to act as a paid consultant to the family foundation of a man under investigation for securities fraud.

      Thus it has always been. Those with the power only leave through impeachment when someone with more power (or prestige or money or any combination) insist on it.

      Liked by 1 person

  3. w3ski4me says:

    The Rethugs finally have the court just the way they wanted it. And no Democrat can be allowed to expand and liberalize their court. And all from the minority party. You really have to ‘love’ this. Democratic rule is so yesterday.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. purplehead says:

    I would like to give credit to the artist who drew that wonderful cartoon: Victor Juhasz


Comments are closed.