The Dark Money Game (2025) s01e02 Episode Script

- Ibrahim
X : @sle1i
Hello.
- How are you?
Fine. How are you?
- Good.
FBI WIRETAP
I kind of like the word 'dark'.
'Shady', I don't know what shady is.
I get that.
My problem with 'dark money' is that
nobody knows it's not reported
Donors don't have to state
their names.
Let's say that.
Secret groups hiding behind
Secret groups, donors.
- Hiding behind it.
In Mexico they call it a bite.
Here's a 'bonus',
with thanks from the union.
In Congo it's 'beans for children'.
A small advance. For the weekend.
In North Africa a cop asks
if you'll pay for his next cup of coffee.
In China it's called tea money.
In France it's a wine pot.
In America it's called campaign finance.
As long as we say 'contribution' or 'super-PAC'
instead of 'bribe'
everything is allowed.
I want you to understand we are
doing nothing illegal
absolutely nothing.
I've spent almost 20 million dollars
in the last eight weeks.
Twenty million.
- Yes.
We're talking about billion-dollar
companies.
Deep pockets. They don't give a damn.
They are anonymous corporate donations.
The question is: what do you do with it?
Are you helping with an election or is it
for your own interests? Yes?
This is based on a ruling
by the Supreme Court.
Corporations can do this. Nobody
can do anything about that.
Members can say they knew
nothing about it
because it cannot be coordinated
with an agreed action.
So they can get a lot of money and
say: 'I didn't take any money.'
Bribery is found all over the world, but
only in America did we make it legal.
That didn't just happen.
It was a carefully executed project,
realized by an unholy alliance
of wealthy businessmen and
religious extremists
who decided that the word of God
was the sound of money.
Jane, how did you initially get into
the dark money thing?
Why did you start following it?
I used to be a reporter
for the Wall Street Journal.
So I knew a thing or two
about corporations, power, and money.
But I had no idea of the scale.
To be clear
I don't really believe in conspiracies
in American politics.
But I do see that
a small group of people
has bought a disproportionate amount of influence
and that's what this story is about.
JUSTICE FOR UNIONS
I AM A MAN
KEEP ABORTION LEGAL
In the 1960s and early '70s
social issues motivated people
to take to the streets en masse.
Carbon monoxide. Who suffers more
from that than the poor?
There was an anti-war movement
that directed its anger
at companies that produced weapons.
There was a consumer movement, led in part
by Ralph Nader.
Companies maximize sales
profit, and power at the expense
of consumer well-being.
All kinds of rules were imposed
on large corporations
to combat pollution. And there were major efforts
to hold tobacco companies
accountable for cancer.
American business was very angry.
I don't think most smokers
get cancer.
We need more research.
I am against any form of
government regulation, in any area.
It targets all industry
in this country.
It targets
free enterprise.
The pressure to regulate large corporations
threatened their profits.
Their comfortable spot at the top of
American life was in jeopardy.
The threat of crippling
anti-business legislation
is now greater than I have ever
experienced.
I don't know if the business world has ever
known such a situation.
POWELL'S RESIDENCE, VIRGINIA
Lewis Powell was
a very successful lawyer
who worked for the tobacco companies.
Most of the time I did
corporate law work.
I served on the board of directors of
several major corporations.
He was on the board of Philip Morris, so
this was a personal matter.
He felt all of this was coming
for the tobacco industry and him.
The Chamber of Commerce, the largest
business lobby in the country, asked him
to tackle those trends
that big business found very threatening. They wanted a battle plan.
CONFIDENTIAL - ATTACK ON
AMERICAN FREE ENTERPRISE
Lewis Powell wrote
a famous memorandum
that more or less set the conservative agenda
for the future
to tackle what he and others
felt was a 'liberal takeover'.
COMMUNISTS, NEW LEFT,
REVOLUTIONARIES, EXTREMISTS
WOULD DESTROY THE WHOLE SYSTEM
If you were to make a plan
like a football coach
what kind of play would the memorandum
be?
More or less Vince Lombardi.
A brilliant plan. Ruthless.
In his eyes, American
business was threatened with doom.
AMERICAN ECONOMIC SYSTEM
UNDER ATTACK
If we do nothing, he said,
capitalism could die.
THE AMERICAN BUSINESSMAN
IS THE 'FORGOTTEN MAN'
'The enemy is not the hippies', he said.
'It is not the protesters.
The real enemy is the public opinion
of the elite.'
It was the intellectuals,
the professors.
It was pastors in their pulpits,
politicians in power
and it was the law and
the courts, he said.
MISSED OPPORTUNITY IN COURTS
And if American business
wanted to regain power
it had to unleash
a counter-revolution
and take back all those pillars of
political power.
It was a call to action
for the business world.
So they poured huge amounts of money into
influencing politics.
But the problem is that the agendas
of large corporations are not popular.
They don't get the necessary votes
to do what they want.
In a democracy you need votes.
That's how you get your way.
The majority decides.
There was a riddle.
How could you win without those votes?
Corporations in America had plenty of money,
but they had to invest it in something
that people would rally behind,
something they could defend.
That became the unborn child.
American evangelicalism
changed drastically
since I joined it.
That was in the mid-1970s,
when I was 16 years old.
I grew up in Buffalo, New York.
My family was religiously neutral.
A typical dysfunctional family
of the '70s.
My father was a Jew, my mother
an Episcopal Christian.
But they encouraged their four children
to explore religions and
make their own choices.
When I heard Jesus' message
in the Sermon on the Mount, 'blessed are the poor'
which was about the lost,
the marginalized, the peacemakers.
That fit our family's ethics,
which were actually anti-war.
Then I said: 'I like that message.'
I became a born-again Christian and I've
never regretted it.
NATIONAL COMMUNITY CHURCH
CAPITOL HILL
NEW ALLIANCE OF EVANGELICAL
CHRISTIANS PRESENTS
My father had raised me with the idea
that the Republicans
were the party of big business.
The Democrats were the party
for the common man.
And he saw himself as a common man.
The first vote I cast
was for the candidate I thought
looked most like Jesus.
His name was Jimmy Carter.
He was a Democrat.
But by the time I finished
my seminary training
in the early '80s
that changed radically.
This nation cannot continue to close its eyes
to the killing of 4,000
unborn children every day
since the Roe v. Wade decision.
As Christians we believe
that from our Creator
we received unalienable rights,
including life.
Mary, Mother of God, pray for us
now and at the hour of
Life for all people, born and
unborn, we would say.
Roe v. Wade was the wall
where every attempt
to abolish abortion clashed.
We had to take down Roe v. Wade.
And Ronald Reagan and other
Republican leaders promised
to put an end to abortion
in America.
I believe that ending a pregnancy
is taking a human life.
Evangelicals like me immediately said:
'This is our chance.'
We must support this.
Governor Reagan takes
a big lead.
A huge lead, bigger than anyone
ever dared to predict.
Governor Reagan, we want to show you
what the US map looks like
since 8:00 PM. All yours.
The anti-abortion movement originally pinned
its hopes
on the normal political process
and in elections.
They hoped they might get a bill
through Congress
that would destroy Roe v. Wade
and make abortion illegal again.
They had high expectations,
but they were not met
because in reality the conservatives
had a hidden agenda.
In the current crisis, government is not
the solution to our problems.
Government is the problem.
It's time to reawaken
this industrial giant
and relieve our heavy tax burden.
Those will be our first priorities and on these principles
no compromises will be made.
Tonight the Senate rejected a proposal
for a constitutional amendment
that would allow Congress and the states
to ban abortion.
All indications are that Mr. Reagan will
keep his distance, which he did today.
Pro-life protesters were tense
because Reagan did not keep his promise.
Yet they had mobilized
their movement for him.
Ronald Reagan signed the largest
income tax cut in history.
The Reagan Bush administration had
used right-wing religious people
to force tax cuts and deregulation.
But the evangelicals who campaigned
for the rights of unborn children
were not heard.
STOP GOVERNMENT OVERREACH IN ABORTION
We thought this was a matter
of life and death.
You can't say: 'Well, you know
this year a number died and
next year a few less
and eventually we'll put an end
to all that killing.'
It wasn't right. Something needed
to be done urgently.
What about the rights of babies?
The organization I was part of
was a national movement.
We blocked clinic doors, lay down
on driveways
and we blocked roads.
Step to the side of the road,
or you will be arrested.
We campaigned for peace
in the womb
for the cessation of violence
against unborn children.
Where did you get that?
Is it real?
- It's real.
This is not a political issue.
This is not an issue of rights.
This is not a social issue.
This is a dead baby.
You're crazy, man.
The anti-abortion activists are
extremely disappointed
in the Republicans, who are not
abolishing the right to abortion.
Their conclusion was: 'The only way
to roll back Roe v. Wade
is to kick the bums out,
get rid of the establishment'
including the Republican establishment
in Washington.
And the only way to do that
is with a whole lot of money.
WELCOME TO TERRE HAUTE
BOPP LAW FIRM
ABORTION ISSUE PU
TO THE TES
ENTRENCHED IN CONSERVATIVE CAUSES
I was born and raised in Terre Haute,
Indiana, third generation.
I got interested in politics
early in my life.
My dad was very interested in politics
and often talked about it at the table.
He was a conservative.
I started reading myself
at a young age, in high school,
about political philosophy
and also military strategy.
I literally read hundreds of books
on military strategy
tactics, wars and such,
battles, all that kind of stuff.
My father, as a doctor, firmly believed
in the concept 'do no harm.'
That was his view on abortion
based on.
So from a young age I wanted to
help the pro-life movement,
in any way possible.
First I wanted to be a doctor
like my dad, my grandpa, and my uncle.
But organic chemistry made me
decide to become a lawyer.
The first national group
I represented
was the National
Right to Life Committee.
The National Right to Life Committee
was the anti-abortion movement
that was launched by the Catholic Church
in America.
The Right to Life Committee has about
one and a half million members in all 50 states.
And they want political power.
One of our concerns is that abortion
is the ultimate form of child abuse.
It is the killing of a child.
My first job as a lawyer
for National Right to Life was
figuring out how to destroy Roe v. Wade
and executing that strategy.
CHRISTIAN COALITION
We spent money on speeches
in the political world
and on supporting pro-life candidates.
But unfortunately
the pro-life movement was attacked.
The Christian Coalition, according to the FEC
helped Republican President George Bush
get re-elected.
How? By printing and distributing
28 million voter guides.
According to the FEC, that help violates
federal election law
and they should have reported those expenses
to the FEC.
Unfortunately, there are strong forces
in Washington that have a problem
with citizens and civic groups
participating in our democracy.
One thing officeholders do to
guarantee their re-election
is impose limits on contributions,
the lower the better.
They don't tolerate criticism. They want to silence people.
And communication is limited by limiting
the money spent on it.
The free speech aspect
is important here
and that goes back to the 1970s.
Make your voice heard for President Nixon.
In 1972, dark money flooded
Richard Nixon's re-election campaign.
Bundles of checks and briefcases full of cash
arrived by plane
from New Jersey and Texas,
Mexico and Saudi Arabia.
The donors wanted to buy influence with
a president who was immensely corrupt.
DOES THE PRESIDENT HAVE A MORAL COMPASS?
When I was in the Senate, I heard that
before the Watergate scandal
things were even more extreme.
Back then people would come by
with briefcases full of cash.
Nixon and the Watergate scandal
made it clear
that campaign contributions
encourage corruption.
I will resign as president
tomorrow afternoon.
That led to the passage of the
Federal Election Campaign Act in the early '70s.
The Federal Election Commission said:
'We are going to limit campaign contributions.'
That was inherently contrary to
the First Amendment.
Soon a number of major donors
in American politics tried
to destroy those reforms.
For example, the Koch family from Kansas.
They have a huge oil fortune
and are extremely right-wing.
They were fiercely opposed to
all kinds of federal services.
They called it a matter of principle
but it was also a position that
was good for their wallets.
KOCH INDUSTRIES INC
THE COMPANY WITH A FUTURE
They wanted to be able to use
their family fortune
to shape American politics.
They helped finance
the lawsuit
to weaken campaign finance
restrictions.
They were involved in the lawsuit
Buckley v. Valeo.
It's a very complex case, but
it's the beginning of a process
that defines spending money
as a matter of free speech.
They say: money is speech.
When you spend money, you reach citizens.
So it's a form of expression.
It's not 'money is speech.'
That's a misdescription.
The Supreme Court states: 'If you
limit spending on expression
you limit expression.'
A few years after the Buckley case
there is the case First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti.
That case argues that corporations have
First Amendment rights.
ENERGY FOR A STRONG AMERICA
The government recognizes the enormous potential
of American coal.
Energy for a strong America.
This was a triumph for business.
Thanks to those two lawsuits
there was now: 'Money is speech' and
'Corporations may express their opinion.'
After those two lawsuits
corporations have the right to spend money
on politics.
A crucial vote in both decisions
was Lewis Powell.
Do you remember him?
CONFIDENTIAL MEMORANDUM
Two months after his Powell Memorandum,
he was appointed to the Supreme Court.
The judiciary exercises in our system
a much greater influence
than any other court
in any country whatsoever.
At the party in honor of his appointment,
his former employer Philip Morris
gave a handmade robe decorated
with the Marlboro logo.
The message did not go unnoticed
by Powell, the court, and Jim Bopp.
Jim Bopp used the argument
'money is speech' and said:
'First we have to take down the rules
around campaign finance
and then we can tackle Roe v. Wade.'
I thought we needed a vehicle
to bring together a number of conservatives
to provide support
for the First Amendment aspect
of campaign finance.
That led to the creation of the
James Madison Center for Free Speech.
The First Amendment of
the US Constitution
is the first and greatest campaign finance
reform in our country.
He is assisted by a number of
billionaires and business interests
because they too want to use their money
to influence American politics.
Thus, the billionaire DeVos family
from Michigan
joins the board of Jim Bopp's
tiny organization.
Betsy DeVos was one of my clients
and she was a strong supporter
of the First Amendment.
So she was on the board.
And then there was Mitch McConnell.
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Senator Mitch McConnell is
a major proponent
of raising limits on federal donations.
Many of you are familiar
with the Buckley case.
From my perspective, that was largely
a very good decision.
Mitch McConnell was one of the first
in the Republican Party
to support the First Amendment in the context
of campaign finance.
They all find it an appealing thought
that they are making America better
by no longer limiting spending.
Money led McConnell to work
with Jim Bopp
along with millionaires who financed Bopp's work
but wanted to remain anonymous.
They did support election manipulation
preferably with dark money.
I can't say exactly
where that fusion of big business
and social, or even religious,
conservatives began.
But when we started moving in that world
it was populated by numerous
wealthy moguls.
ONLY IN AMERICA: THE EXTRAORDINARY STORY
OF FOSTER FRIESS - 2022
People like Foster Friess appeared.
When I was young, they used
Bayer Aspirin as a contraceptive.
Girls put them between their knees
and it wasn't expensive.
Excuse me, to be honest, I need a moment
to recover from that, Mr. Friess.
Foster Friess was the son of
a cattle rancher, a billionaire
and a born-again Christian.
He always said God was the chairman
of his board.
He thought climate change was a hoax,
was for lower taxes on the rich
and against what he called
'government charity' for the poor.
It clashed a bit with Christianity,
but that didn't matter.
People like him got things done.
We believed in our mission and our goal
and one of the things that frustrated us
in achieving it
was a lack of money. We needed money.
COUNCIL FOR NATIONAL POLICY - 10 YEARS
There is an entity called the
Council for National Policy
a secret cabal of people
who came together to devise strategies
for a successful conservative
revolution in America.
In that context, Foster Friess said to me:
'We need each other, don't we?
You guys do good things and you need
my money for that.
And I need to make more money
so I can give you more.
What do you think of that?'
I thought it was a good deal.
The Council for National Policy
has an informal motto, which is:
'Where doers meet donors.'
It unites filthy rich entrepreneurs
who are not really concerned
about abortion
with the extreme religious right,
which is hugely concerned about abortion.
Whenever you talked about government regulation,
the argument was always:
'Eventually the same figures
that control my business
will also try to gain control
of your church.
So it is in your interest and mine
that we strip that monster
of its power.'
That convinced a lot of
religious conservatives.
We had an aphorism, based
on a Bible verse:
'The wealth of the sinner is stored up
for the righteous.'
Why not? Let's baptize the billionaire's money. We can do that.
And that is how that alliance was born.
Spending money simply became a higher purpose.
They don't want to call it a form
of corruption, which it actually is.
How are you? How's it going?
Hello. Shall I talk to these guys?
How are you?
- Hello.
Russ Feingold, candidate for the Senate.
When I was first in the Senate, I saw
members of Congress getting into trouble.
They were getting too much money
from interest groups
and stopped thinking about the home front.
And they wanted to make sure powerful players,
the tech companies, pharma companies
Exxon Oil, or whatever,
called the shots.
Through a loophole in the legislation
political parties received a lot of money,
which should never have happened.
All kinds of techniques were used
both by people in Clinton's administration
and by Republicans.
It was all about who had the most money.
Your campaign received tens of thousands of dollars
in illegal contributions. Is that true?
I don't know anything about that. No idea.
I don't know the funding details of this.
Maybe you do?
It was a mistake. I didn't know
it was a fundraiser.
You accept plane tickets, hotels
and dinners
and you don't feel any obligation?
- Not at all.
The American way: the more money,
the louder the voice.
The situation has meanwhile become so large
and so controversial
that the call to change the system
is growing louder.
It is time for this to stop.
It is time for parties to no longer accept gifts
nor secret or anonymous donations.
We must be a party of the people again.
And we can achieve that with
the McCain-Feingold Act.
McCain and Russ Feingold worked together
and they proposed changes to federal
campaign finance laws.
Russ Feingold was a senator
from Wisconsin.
People want a senator who knows the problems
of ordinary families and that's me.
That is one of my three promises
as a Senate candidate.
They are on my garage door.
He was a progressive Democrat.
Come inside.
We have plenty of closet space.
Look, no skeletons in the closet.
Among other things, he wanted to take
the politics out of politics.
They thought money was bad
and wanted to get rid of it.
Our proposal targets TV advertising
that clearly supports or attacks
a candidate
avoiding just a few words
to bypass certain laws.
It was an attempt to set a limit
on interests allowed to spend
unlimited money
on commercials that were clearly
election ads.
That would cripple National Right to Life
and limit our chances to advance
the pro-life agenda.
We finally succeeded in 2001.
On this vote there are 59 ayes
and 41 nays
and the amended bill
has passed.
This is incredibly stupid, colleagues.
What Powell's helpers didn't like
was that it worked.
It clearly worked.
It limited the influence of dark money
on campaigns.
That's why big business
in this country fought so hard.
And Mr. Bopp was one of their
main lawyers.
From a constitutional perspective,
the fact of the matter is that
restrictions on free speech spending
is limiting free speech.
Jim Bopp becomes obsessed
with finding ways to destroy
those reforms.
He doesn't just file one lawsuit.
He files one after another.
It's a full-on war against
the campaign finance system
and it all comes from an office
in Terre Haute, Indiana.
There was a lawsuit led
by Senator McConnell.
About 12 lawsuits were filed.
They were all consolidated
into one case.
I represented McConnell.
But the Supreme Court largely upheld
the McCain-Feingold Act.
They were very disappointed in the Court,
especially in the Republican judges
who had been appointed by
Republican presidents.
We thought they had to adhere to
a conservative legal philosophy.
But I found out
how the court works.
It is a judicial body,
it is an institution.
They have their own culture,
their own way of working.
It's really all about them,
not about you. It's about them.
In the mid-2000s
I hosted a group
of Catholic multi-millionaires.
I had asked friends
to arrange a meeting
with Antonin Scalia.
He is a staunchly conservative Roman Catholic.
We shared the same political philosophies
and ideology.
So there we were in that room,
with our hero.
He looked around and with a stern look
he said, 'Roe v. Wade will not
be overturned in your lifetime and mine.
For that, we need to send other figures
here.'
And he pointed to the courtroom,
further down the hall.
That immediately made the plan we needed
concrete.
We had to change the court itself.
The Reagan administration had a slogan:
'Personnel is policy.'
That was a variation on
a Russian revolutionary idea
'dig from within.'
You can change institutions by
putting loyalists in them
true adherents, who care more
about ideology than the law.
The Powell Memorandum
had a similar idea
about how they could capitalize on
a missed opportunity in the courts.'
By having activist judges appointed,
the courts become
an instrument for 'social,
economic, and political change.'
It was a long-term strategy aimed at
finding, cultivating, and training
sympathizers in
American universities.
I was interested
in politics and government.
In our family, ever since Roosevelt,
we were
mainstream Democrats, I would say.
So I thought I was too.
I studied law at the University
of Chicago and had various professors.
Some were conservative and libertarian
in orientation, like Antonin Scalia.
Then I realized I am not a socialist
nor a liberal.
I believe in free speech,
individual freedom, limited government.
I now identify as
a constitutional conservative.
STUDENTS AGAINST CORPORATE MANSLAUGHTER
At the time, there was a predominant
liberal legal mindset.
Conservatives like Bork and Scalia
were not featured often.
We decided to set up student chapters
where we could debate
those ideas and the law.
Then we founded the Federalist Society.
My name is David McIntosh.
I am national co-chairman
of the Federalist Society.
The speakers will inform us tonight
about the nature and
the importance of the separation of powers.
With a group of three, four, five people
we organized everything and
we debated the issues of the day.
I say I don't know how they
came to that judgment
before they asked parishes to give more.
I could give more.
There were many debates.
At the law school we debated
each other among ourselves.
We pushed each other to strongly disagree
and then we went out for a beer together.
It was my role to always dream big,
as it were.
The dream was: to start a revolution
in how people saw the world.
Like a conservative version of
Mao's Hundred Flowers Campaign
Federalist Society chapters
sprouted up across the country.
FEDERALIST SOCIETY CHAPTERS, YALE
But that trend went largely unnoticed
except by one curious journalist.
As a grad student I combined
my political, personal,
practical interests
with my journalistic instincts.
I was interested in social formations
and how they grow organically
and can change societies and cultures.
In my articles I used
a lot of Marxist theory.
I focused on
left-progressive movements
civil rights, the environment,
women's emancipation.
DEFEND THE RIGHT TO ABORTION IN NY
I was writing for
Congressional Quarterly at the time
and quickly came into contact
with the Federalist Society there.
They had a completely
different worldview
but that Marxist frame of reference
and that way of thinking
I thought I also saw in
the Federalist Society.
I looked for events
and just walked right in.
I introduced myself.
I was quickly accepted and admitted
by the members and leaders of
the Federalist Society.
I was interested in the language
they used
and in how they conducted the debates.
Many young people came
to be inspired
by the rhetoric of their first
faculty advisor, Antonin Scalia.
Professor Scalia taught
constitutional law
and his main contribution was
original intent doctrine.
The idea of originalism
and textualism was
to interpret the Constitution
by looking at the Constitution.
You can only deviate from that
to determine
what the original intent of
the original authors was.
This was a minority view at the time.
People sometimes ask me:
'When did you become a textual'
how did you become a textualist?
'When did you start eating people?'
As if it's some
As if it's something crazy.
I mean, when did you start
not being a textualist?
You have a text. You have to read the text.
It was a purely intellectual idea.
But did it turn out to be nicely aligned
with a concurrent political project
that was interested in
limited government
and rolling back legislation and
destroying Roe v. Wade?
Yes. Did those puzzle pieces fit together?
Of course.
I've been involved with the Federalist Society
since its inception and
I even believe I got this tie for it.
This is James Madison, in case you
don't recognize him, in profile.
No originalist would call Roe v.
Wade a correct decision.
Because there is no right to abortion
in the Constitution.
Read it yourself, you won't find it.
I think the Federalist Society
is no different from
other lobby groups.
The Federalists are lobbyists.
That's what it boils down to.
They say they are faithful
to the Constitution
originalism, textualism.
You have to read the text and
decipher the meaning
but you don't do that with
a tricorner hat on your head.
FEDERALIST SOCIETY EVENT 1987
Most people describe
the Federalist Society
as something conceived
by students
a ragtag group, and in part it was.
But that group of students was
funded by big money.
Specifically, private foundations
of conservative billionaires.
THE J.M. FOUNDATION
COVINGTON & BURLING
DICK & BETSY DEVOS FOUNDATION
MADISON CLUB GOLD
($ 50,000 OR MORE)
And finally, a number of corporations.
US CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
The rise of the originalist
perspective, voiced
by Judge Scalia, his followers
and the growth of the Federalist Society,
the circle kept getting bigger.
I spoke with as many people
in that organization as possible
and there was someone whose name
was in all the mastheads.
He was never there.
I never saw Leonard Leo
but quite a few people told me
that he wasn't just on the masthead
he was going to go far.
Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen.
My name is Leonard Leo and I'm
an executive vice president at the Federalist Society.
Leonard Leo has conservative
legal views.
But he is not an intellectual. He is
an operator, someone who
His greatest strength is
that he understands money and power.
He was closely involved and very important.
But he was never in his office.
So at one point I asked:
'Where is Leonard?
It feels like "Where's Waldo?"
What is he actually doing?'
He was, in a sense,
the missing puzzle piece.
My first interview with him
was unforgettable
because of the abundance of
Catholic imagery
that covered almost every surface.
Every place where you could put or
hang something, a wall or a desk
you saw an image of
the Blessed Virgin or a saint.
He was a deeply religious man.
I'm Catholic myself, but I
was completely blown away.
Leo believes in an older,
more conservative Catholic Church.
He is a member of the Knights of Malta
whose origins date back
to before the Crusades.
He is also a follower of Opus Dei
a secretive, ultra-right sect
within the Catholic Church.
Opus Dei originated in Spain in 1928.
The founder, Josemaría Escrivá
was supported by the dictatorial
leader Generalísimo Franco
at a time when Franco wanted to
re-Christianize Spain
by making God's law the law
of the land.
Who wants to start?
Father.
This seems to me a good opportunity
to hear the founder give an overview
of the spirit of Opus Dei.
Listen, my son, don't tell me
you don't know what Opus Dei is.
It is the sanctification of work.
It tells every Christian, whatever their
profession or situation in life may be
take care of your public relations on earth,
and those of heaven as well.
In that way
you do not stray from your path as
a Christian. You sanctify your work.
It seems that over time
the spirit of Escrivá
and his determination
to sanctify work
settled into the mind
of Leonard Leo.
Each of us is called to
seek the kingdom of God.
by engaging in
temporal affairs
and orienting them according
to the will of God.
In our work we must proclaim the gospel
to those we serve
and in everything we do.
This work of evangelization applies to
every facet of life
including legislation, public policy,
and politics.
Escrivá was a controversial figure.
He defended extraordinary freedom
to make money
and ruthless restrictions
on the sex lives of men
and especially women.
While fighting sexual passion
as something demonic
he sought spiritual revelation
through corporal mortification
including self-flagellation, wearing
hairshirts
and a metal chain with barbs,
called a cilice.
I chastise my body.
Leo sat on the board of the Opus Dei
Catholic Information Center
which boasted that its chapel,
named after Escrivá
was the closest tabernacle
to the White House.
CIC priests helped convert or guide
a number of powerful people
toward a conservative Catholicism
that followed the path of Opus Dei.
Opinion maker Larry Kudlow,
Governor Sam Brownback
and two famous judges,
Robert Bork and Clarence Thomas.
In the modern era, Leo and
other Catholic conservatives were
inspired by
Pope John Paul II
who wrote the text Evangelium Vitae.
That was meant to firmly establish
once and for all when life begins.
All human life from the moment
of conception is sacred.
John Paul said that man and woman
become one flesh in God
who makes himself known that way.
'Before I formed you in the womb,
I knew you.
And before you were born, I consecrated you.
Every individual's life is part of
God's plan from its very beginning.'
John Paul concluded that every egg,
once fertilized
was no longer part of
the mother's body.
Consequently, abortion, even an hour or day
after fertilization, is murder.
Let us call upon our gracious God,
while sharing blessings
In a recent poll, 56% of
American Catholics said
that abortion should mostly be legal and
the woman's choice, not the state's.
But radical-conservative Catholics
like Leonard Leo
want the state to adopt their religious
beliefs
and ban abortion,
without exception.
They are even attacking the legal right
to contraception.
Leonard Leo was a key leader
in the Federalist Society
for decades.
And he had a great deal of influence
as Federalist Society chapters
spread across the country.
One nation under God, indivisible
He was able to identify very sensible,
smart lawyers.
He encouraged them to contact each other,
to form a group.
What they do, and Leo has done that
for years
is pick out the very smart,
young law students.
I taught at Yale, Harvard,
Stanford, and Marquette
and everywhere I saw them recruit those young,
smart people and say:
'If you follow our views on certain
issues, we'll help your career.'
The organization's chapters
grew steadily
as the students graduated
and became lawyers.
They then ended up in academia,
the legal profession, or government.
And Leonard Leo called
this process a pipeline.
The intention was to create
a pipeline.
A pipeline that started
in the law school
and flowed into the legal world
via a network or infrastructure
of people across the country
who could exert influence
on the main centers of power
in our legal culture.
This is more than just
an intellectual operation.
The metaphor is industrial.
We mine the earth for raw materials
and through the pipeline they go to
the federal court.
The Federalist Society says it
plays no role in politics.
In fact, they don't even endorse judges.
Yet over the years, Leonard Leo
regularly takes leave
to advise the White House on
judicial nominations.
So he does take a stand on
which judges are appointed.
And that connects the Federalist Society
with big money; he is very good
at raising money
and with those in power.
Judge Roberts may be confirmed
to the Supreme Court very smoothly
but there was at least one obstacle today,
when it was revealed
that John Roberts was on a membership list
of the Federalist Society.
He does not recall membership or
dues in the Federalist Society.
Judge Roberts, can you explain why you
are listed as a board member
of the Federalist Society?
- You don't have to answer.
It's fine.
- In 1997, when you weren't a member?
I think he's not answering questions.
- No, thank you.
Judge Roberts did great.
He answered the questions as faithfully
and objectively as he could.
The Roberts era at the Court
begins now.
Now the president must choose a successor
for the moderate Sandra Day O'Connor
often the deciding vote on controversial
issues like access to abortion.
Christian conservatives prayed
and demonstrated at the Court
for the appointment of Samuel Alito.
Justice Alito would move the Court in
the right direction
toward the end of Roe v. Wade.
So the future on the Supreme Court
is a little brighter as far as we're concerned.
Justice Samuel Alito is no stranger
to the Federalist Society.
He has been a member since 1987.
Repeat after me: 'I, Samuel A. Alito Jr.
Do solemnly swear'
I've known Leonard for a long time.
I've only met him a few times.
Rob Schenck, National Clergy Council
Most evangelicals don't recognize
Catholics, and he is Catholic.
So there is a slight discomfort in that regard,
but on the pro-life issue
he was respected as someone
who truly believes in it
and as an effective strategist
in the court.
I saw him as someone living
in a different world
the world of legislation and
judicial nominations
which is a separate science and art.
Meanwhile, we knew we had to work
on the current members of the Court who
had themselves said they were anti-abortion
and pro-life.
Antonin Scalia was pretty steadfast
but even he sometimes sent signals
that we saw as potentially weak.
He might have been too quickly willing to
compromise with liberal friends
like Ruth Bader Ginsburg, for whom he
seemed to have a special fondness.
And we found that reprehensible.
We just wanted the judges
to be braver.
Over the years we had seen how
conservative lions or lionesses
came to the Court.
And suddenly there was the allure
of liberal legal culture
that drew them away
from their conservative core principles.
The conservatives on the Court
had had plenty of opportunities
to overturn Roe v. Wade.
We followed it and when we thought:
this time it's going to happen
they failed.
The Court has reaffirmed the right
to abortion by a majority
as enshrined in Roe v. Wade.
Someday we will look back on
this terrible failure of the Court.
We remind the Court that there is
a long way to go
to regain the moral integrity of the Court
and this country.
God bless the United States
and this honorable Court, please.
We thought we needed to fix that problem
and let them know there were many people out there
who wanted them to stay true to
their conservative principles
and would reward them for it.
I remember a lecture by
Newt Gingrich, in which he said:
'If you're looking in from the outside
you have to make a lot of noise
to be heard.
But once you're inside, and you make
that much noise, they throw you out.
So learn to do your work in silence.'
That set the tone for a campaign
a silent, almost invisible one that I
called "Operation Higher Court".
We don't often think about the justices
of the Court that way.
They're just like Greek gods.
They are highly educated people
breathing thin air.
And there are specific points along which you
can enter their private world.
I discovered there was a sort of front door
to the Court
a side door, and there was literally
a back door.
To influence judges, you have to go in
through the back door.
THE TEN COMMANDMENTS
I had purposely bought the building
as our headquarters
opposite the back door of the Court.
That was a strategic plan.
I am standing in front of our ministry center
on Capitol Hill.
Do you see the Ten Commandments behind me?
We are opposite the Supreme Court.
If you could see behind the camera,
that's where it all happens.
Father Schenck is very cunning
in a way.
He knows the judges' schedules and knows
when they go to lunch
and he knows when they go out in the morning,
some go to church.
He intercepts them and makes it look
as if he bumped into them.
They like talking to clergy because they
know how well we know people.
We hear their confessions.
We hear them say things they
tell no one else
sometimes not even their own spouses.
This is Rob Schenck with Faith and Action
It was a means
to get the opportunity to build relationships,
friendships.
These are people who read the law
all day
and there are only ever nine of them
in the United States.
They are rather lonely individuals.
We, the judiciary, are an
extremely undemocratic sector.
It's not for everyone. You have to have
a particular mindset for it
because we are not society
as a whole.
One thing I learned early on was
that what happened in that building
was not equal.
To use the old cliché:
'some were more equal than others.'
If you were a privileged and
prestigious person
and especially if you had money, you had
access to that court
in a way that others did not.
So we decided to give them some friends.
People don't realize it, but the Court has
a bustling after-hours social life.
There are parties, soirées, and dinners.
I could get an invitation
and brought along people I called
invisible missionaries.
ROB SCHENCK'S PROPOSAL
FOR FOSTER FRIESS
He invites his donors to attend
banquets with the justices.
BY PARTICIPATING, MR. FRIESS WILL:
HAVE UNIQUE ACCESS TO
THE JUSTICES' SOCIAL LIFE
TO INVITE YOU AND MRS. DEVOS
TO A UNIQUE DINNER
HOSTED BY SUPREME COUR
CHIEF JUSTICE JOHN ROBERTS
And he tries to convert them quietly
and very subtly.
YOU ARE NOW PART OF OPERATION
HIGHER COUR
BRING WITNESS OF BIBLICAL TRUTH
TO JUSTICES
Perhaps they are interested
in his Christian agenda
but they also want other things.
They are wealthy businesspeople.
They also want to win cases
before the Supreme Court
and get good decisions
for their businesses.
So you see both sides trying to get
into the Supreme Court
and persuade those judges, who live
in a lonely bubble.
The invisible missionaries
were smart people.
They knew the nature of the relationships
they were entering into.
You have to have a certain status.
You have to have something to offer.
Those are the terms of that relationship.
It really is a quid pro quo.
MAY THE LORD RETURN YOUR INVESTMEN
A HUNDREDFOLD
MAJOR DONOR RECOGNITION
The most successful couple I deployed
were Don and Gayle Wright.
They were wealthy businesspeople.
He was a real estate developer.
They were both very committed
to our cause and actually
much more conservative than I am.
They adopted the vision and ran with it.
Especially Gayle, she was particularly effective
at building rapport
with what we called our targets,
justice-couples.
Over time they successfully built
strong relationships
with Justice Alito, Justice Scalia.
WE'LL SURELY BE THERE AFTER LUNCH WITH NINO.
Their best relationship was
with the Thomas family.
Of course they referred to them
as CT and Ginni.
They were very gracious hosts
and very generous friends.
To all of them. I don't know
all the details.
Honestly, I didn't want to know
what they were up to.
Whatever it was, our donors
were very pleased.
They saw the justices becoming bolder,
more brazen, and more confident.
And so they rewarded us
and the justices they had built
relationships with.
2008 DONATIONS SO FAR
$12,000 - $8,891.67 - $10,000
$14.73
$50,000
$75,000
The most important moment of validation
for me came one evening.
It was after a social dinner
at the Court
and I saw Justice Thomas.
He looked at me and said:
'Keep doing what you're doing. It's working.
It's working.'
It worked for others, too.
Over time, a number of businesspeople found
ways to curry favor
with the justices.
The wealth of the sinner
serves the righteous.
They did see eye to eye
after a few cocktails.
No justice enjoyed more
'generosity' than Clarence Thomas.
Much of his bounty came from one man,
Harlan Crow, a real estate mogul
whose father was once the largest
landowner in America.
Crow gave $500,000 to establish
a right-wing foundation
run by Thomas's wife, Ginni,
with Leonard Leo on the board.
Crow also gave Thomas a $19,000 Bible
he paid for luxury trips for Thomas
on Crow's plane and superyacht
and he bought a house for
Thomas's mother.
Furthermore, a $267,000 RV was delivered
to Thomas
thanks to a loan from
a millionaire insurance executive
whose company later had a case
before the Supreme Court.
Do you find this relaxing?
- Oh, yes.
You're away from the nastiness of Washington.
The final ruling in that case, written
by Thomas, allowed
insurers to evade liability
when they denied patients critical care.
And the loan for the RV was suddenly
considered paid off by the millionaire.
Over time, powerful interests turned
the Supreme Court
into a band of crusaders wanting to
fight for a different legal landscape.
That was the moment for Jim Bopp to
return to the battlefield.
WELCOME TO TERRE HAUTE
I have found that politics,
litigation
and war strategy all three operate
according to the same strategic rules
and the same tactical rules.
The statistic I always look at first
is, how many times did we try?
I have argued hundreds of cases
in various courts
and courts, and I've won nine
in the federal Supreme Court.
I became the most important lawyer
for campaign finance cases
in the existence of the United States.
80% SUCCESS RATE IN SUPREME COUR
Our ultimate goal was to overturn various
clauses
of the McCain-Feingold Act and
reclaim free speech.
James Bopp looks for ways
for outside groups
especially anti-abortion activists,
to buy victory.
The biggest victory was the one in 2010,
which was the Citizens United case.
How did Citizens United
land on your desk?
I picked up the phone and it was
David Bossie.
David Bossie was anti-abortion and Catholic,
and had been a Republican operative for years.
For his nonprofit group
Citizens United
he made sensationally
agressive ads.
They made a documentary
about Hillary Clinton
called Hillary: The Movie.
I'm holding the DVD Hillary: The Movie
in my hand.
This is serious stuff.
- Yes, a 90-minute documentary.
We wanted to make a movie
about Hillary Clinton
so we can teach the American people
who she really is.
She is all controversy
and shady deals.
She wants to be the first female
president.
Isn't that great? It's a woman.
She can walk and talk.
A clause in McCain-Feingold
imposed a blackout, so 60 days
before the general election
no ad could mention the name
of a federal candidate.
The FEC, Federal Election Commission, didn't get us. We sued the FEC ourselves.
David Bossie said: 'Argue my case
so I can release my film.'
McCain-Feingold criminalized
political speech.
When do we say enough is enough?
Where do we draw the line?
Ruthless. Vindictive.
Untruthful.
- I find her terrifying.
I filed the case.
The hardest part is getting the case
accepted by the Supreme Court.
Absolutely. I mean, there are
some 5,000 appeals.
They accept about 100 per year.
I handled the case at the hearing
and got it accepted.
Hello, my name is Jim Bopp.
I am chief counsel for the
James Madison Center for Free Speech.
This hugely complicated system
of rules
imposed largely by McCain-Feingold,
is suffocating.
The Constitution protected the political
activities of people in this country.
If they come here and say
that is corruption
don't believe a word of it.
In making his case
Citizens United initially
put forward a limited argument.
Namely, that a documentary
is not an ad
and that showing Hillary: The Movie
should not be restricted.
The government cannot prove that
a 90-minute documentary
by an ideologically oriented
small company poses a threat
to quid pro quo corruption
or anything resembling it.
The argument convinced me.
As a filmmaker
I wanted free speech.
Many who followed it felt the Court
could rule for Citizens United
and uphold their right to screen the Hillary film
shortly before an election.
But Chief Justice Roberts
had a different plan.
Roberts decided to broaden the scope of the case, which is rarely done
and to use Citizens United
as an excuse to put an end
to all limits on corporate
campaign finance.
Justice Souter felt that was an abuse
of the Court's authority
so he wrote a dissenting opinion
against Roberts.
To preserve his credibility,
Roberts waited until Souter retired
for a special announcement.
Case number 08-205, Citizens United
v. Federal Election Commission
will be re-argued later this term.
By re-arguing the case,
Roberts suppressed
the publication of Souter's dissent and
assigned the pro-business opinion
to a former corporate lobbyist,
Justice Kennedy.
The case has a second aspect.
The government may not suppress
independent corporate expenditures.
Political speech is indispensable
to democratic decision-making
and that applies to the speech
of a corporation as well as an individual.
Along with Kennedy and
other pro-business justices
Roberts turned a case about
a documentary into a referendum
on whether corporations and unions
could fund elections without limit.
JUSTICES TURN MOVIE CASE INTO BLOCKBUSTER
They could have actually said
in this case
the ban on this type of documentary
violates freedom of speech.
Instead of simply doing
what the Court was supposed to do
namely, issue the narrowest applicable
ruling such as
this is okay because of this exception
or doctrine.
But that's not what happened.
We are concerned because the Court
is deploying a special argument
to destroy this law that protects
our democracy.
If it is done purely on the basis
of the First Amendment
so that we cannot make a law, they are preventing
the government
the representatives of the people, from ever
reforming campaign finance.
I got a decision immediately
and I was very pleased.
The U.S. Supreme Court today struck down
a nearly 100-year-old law
and ruled that corporations may now
spend unlimited money on political campaigns.
Corporations and unions may now
spend as much as they want
directly on campaigns.
Let's be honest, candidates hope
that money will buy your vote.
Political TV ads are expected
to break all records.
DONATE
Citizens United?
- Yes.
I think that is one of
the worst decisions
the judiciary has ever made
in this country.
Yes, 'money is speech.'
That's the message. Money talks.
Everybody that expression
was often used
even before Citizens United,
'money talks.'
Indeed, and now it has been given
a megaphone with Citizens United.
It made it possible
for wealthy people
to spend unlimited money and for
corporations to spend unlimited money
to support any candidate of their choice
in America
as long as they didn't give the money
directly to the candidate
because that would be bribery.
Instead, they had to set up so-called
independent organizations.
Those became the super PACs.
The law before Citizens United
came along
was that PACs could only give
a maximum of $10,000.
So a super PAC that could spend
unlimited money was impossible
until Citizens United said:
'Corporations are allowed to do this.
They are allowed to create these things, as long as they don't coordinate.'
Of course they do.
On either side of the aisle
a senator walks into a room with
a bunch of rich people and says:
'I'm doing this. We're working on such and such.' And then he leaves.
Then the politicians come in
to ask for money.
So it's a sham.
To the extent that you can buy attention
with money
if you look at the overall trend,
in 90% of elections
the person who spent the most money
also won.
And if you have a lot more money
than the other side
you can completely drown out the other side. And you can also lie.
STATE INVESTIGATES IF EXXON
LIED ABOUT CLIMATE
For years, Exxon had lied
to consumers
about what their own scientists
had discovered
regarding how fossil fuels
caused climate change.
Now Exxon and other oil producers
could influence candidates
by funneling money into
friendly super PACs.
And politicians could pay for expensive
advertising campaigns
by finding one or two well-disposed
financiers.
And by routing their money through
nonprofit corporations
they could keep the source
of their donations secret.
In that situation,
anti-abortion activists could
have more influence than ever over
which candidates got elected
and what kind of judges
were appointed.
Breaking news. Justice Antonin Scalia
the most influential conservative on
the Supreme Court, has died.
He died in his sleep after a day
of quail hunting, near El Paso, Texas.
Justice Scalia was known as a
vocal conservative on the Court.
He was an opponent
of abortion rights
who once labeled Roe v. Wade
a 'terrible decision.'
Antonin Scalia was on our side.
This was potentially a terrible problem.
The most important issue
with this vacancy
is that four justices were appointed
by Democrats and four by Republicans.
This is the most important vacancy
of this generation.
His death has massive implications for
major cases currently before the Court.
His body will arrive tonight
in Virginia.
The souls of the righteous
are in the hands of God.
In the eyes of fools they seemed to have died.
But they are in peace. He tested them,
like gold in a crucible.
And accepted them as a burnt offering.
They think they've lost the Court,
after all those years of hard work
ever since the George W. Bush administration.
So now the conservatives
think they are doomed.
Good morning. Please take a seat.
Having completed this exhausting
process, I am nominating today
Chief Judge Merrick Brian Garland to
be a member of the Supreme Court.
That was in 2016, at the start of a year
that had a presidential election.
Normally the Democratic president,
Barack Obama
would nominate a judge and the Senate
would then advise and consent.
There would be hearings and
they would confirm or not.
But that didn't happen.
Will Judge Garland get a hearing?
No, I don't think so. Maybe the next
president will appoint a candidate.
I hope not.
But the next president
will make this decision.
Mitch McConnell paralyzed the system
to prevent Barack Obama
from filling that seat.
That was a hugely
antidemocratic act.
A break with democratic norms
and traditions.
This is Merrick Garland
To justify this action required
a PR campaign
required a PR campaign
funded by Leonard Leo.
He has ignored the Constitution for years.
And now, in his final days,
President Obama wants
to appoint a liberal judge
to the Court.
Don't let President Obama and Senator Bennett
manipulate the Court.
Let the people decide.
We need to be smart as a movement.
We need to understand
that the appointment of judges now
is more like political campaigns.
That's how he views it. It's just
a kind of campaign
and campaigns cost a lot of money.
Leonard Leo's groups spent
some seven million dollars
on a PR campaign asking the public
to keep that seat vacant.
The ads were accompanied
by threats
to fund primary challenges, to fire senators
who didn't go along with McConnell's plot.
The campaign worked.
But now traditional conservatives
and anti-abortion evangelicals
had a different problem.
Donald Trump was gaining momentum.
Our country needs a truly
great leader
and we need that leader now.
We are going to make our country great again.
2016 was a crucial moment for me
because I had grown up
in New York State
and Donald Trump had played a role
in the background my whole life.
Mr. Trump, how does it feel to take pictures
of these Playboy Bunnies?
Somebody's got to do it.
Partial-birth abortion
the elimination of third-trimester abortion,
a major issue in Washington.
Would President Trump ban
partial-birth abortion?
Listen, I'm pro-choice.
Trump's mouth is his biggest problem.
As a politician, anyway, I think. He is
a reckless New Yorker.
A classic brash New Yorker.
I knew he was the complete opposite
of what I believed as a Christian
regardless of my conservative political
and social views.
Hillary.
Most people thought
Hillary Clinton would be elected.
This is a challenge for them.
And what happens? Who comes up with a plan?
Leonard Leo.
This is on Drudge today:
'World Order in Danger.'
With a picture of Donald Trump.
When you planned to come here
you might have expected there to already be
a candidate, but not Donald Trump?
No, probably not.
But as a Catholic boy, I know I shouldn't
have optimism, but hope.
So you hope that
Leonard Leo makes a list of
potential Supreme Court justices.
That list is full of people
who are anti-abortion
and aligned with the goals
of the religious right.
And he finds a way to get that list
to Donald Trump.
He gave me a list.
The Federalist Society was heavily
involved in this.
There are many conservative people who love
me and everything I stand for.
But they want to know my position, because aside from defending our country
perhaps the most important thing is the choice
of Supreme Court justices.
That affects generations.
Those people have
a very high intellect.
They are pro-life. So this is my list.
I thought: what is going on here?
Is Leonard Leo in charge now?
I couldn't believe what I was reading.
I thought, something is not right here.
Social movements change. Of course.
But back when I used to go there
they weren't the kind of people
who I think felt comfortable
with a President Trump.
Leonard gave him the list and
the Federalist Society
backed Leonard on this because they
wanted the right people on the Court.
Trump took that list and used it
as a political campaign.
The judges I will appoint are
pro-life, and I have listed 20 of them.
I will appoint people from the list.
I will not deviate from that list.
I found it offensive
and it is not right
that any group should have this much influence
over a public official.
No one was ever so transactional
in American politics.
Trump couldn't care less.
Heaven knows what his views are,
but he sees everything as a deal.
If I say this, religious right
voters will vote for me.
The list works wonders.
I humbly and gratefully accept
your nomination
for the presidency
of the United States.
I remember sitting at the convention
in Cleveland
when Donald Trump was chosen
as the nominee.
I leaned over to one of
my fellow evangelical leaders
and said: 'Are we really going to do this?'
Are we going to elect this man
who is so hostile?
He is hostile to everything we believe in.
And he looked at me and said:
'Doesn't matter how bad he is.
He's going to give us the court
we need.'
Do you support Donald Trump?
Will you vote for him in November?
Without a doubt. The thing I keep
thinking about
as a lawyer, is the U.S. Supreme Court.
Tonight voters decide who
the 45th U.S. president will be.
Donald Trump, our projection shows,
will win in Kentucky
Florida, Tennessee, Mississippi,
North Carolina, Alabama, Ohio.
AP projects that Donald Trump
has won the state of Pennsylvania.
USA.
- This is the race.
USA.
At that stage, I had a way to
deny and ignore my doubts.
Because when you play the role I had,
you are entirely
I was entirely dependent
on my donors
on those invisible missionaries
who were the largest donors
to my organization.
And I knew that if I questioned any part of our
conservative agenda
let alone our commitment to
the Republican Party
if I questioned any of those things
I knew I would be punished by the withdrawal
of that financial support.
I got a call from a colleague,
who said:
'Rob, I know you don't like Trump
but he is working off Leonard's list.'
Leonard Leo, thank you for being here.
We had a list you worked very hard on,
others did too.
And it had an impact.
Leonard, considering you're the third most powerful
person in the world, I have to say
That's right. God help us.
Trump may have been the most appalling
figure ever in the White House
in reality, Leonard was in the White House.
He was the solution to a true
conservative majority on the Court.
ACTON LECTURE SERIES - ACTON INSTITUTE
For constitutionalists, our unlikely
45th president is
to quote his predecessor,
the change we've been waiting for.
He is certainly a man with an eye
for opportunities
and he recognizes the chance that
history has given him
to change the American judiciary
for the better.
Leonard Leo heavily influenced
who Trump nominated to
the Supreme Court.
But his role in how they were confirmed by the Senate was just as important.
A web of dark money groups, connected by Leo
funded the campaign to pressure nervous senators
to support Trump's nominees, most notably Brett Kavanaugh.
I was pushed onto the bed and Brett got on top of me. I tried to call for help.
When I did, Brett put his hand over my mouth to keep me from shouting.
That scared me the most
and had the biggest lasting impact on my life.
I was having trouble breathing
and I thought Brett might accidentally kill me.
ASSAULTED WOMAN ACCUSES KAVANAUGH AND WAS AFRAID HE WOULD KILL HER.
FROM KAVANAUGH'S COLLEGE DAYS
THIRD WOMAN ACCUSES SUPREME COURT NOMINEE
After three women accused Kavanaugh of sexual assault
the group Independent Women's Voice stood ready to defend him
with four million in cash
thanks to Leonard Leo's dark money network.
IWV was an offshoot of another non-profit that was founded
to defend Clarence Thomas against Anita Hill.
Judge Thomas commented on what I was wearing
in terms of how sexually attractive it did or didn't make me.
He talked about things he had seen in pornographic films, regarding things like
women having sex with animals
and films showing group sex or rape scenes.
This time, IWV defended Kavanaugh.
Lacking credible evidence, Democrats decided
to determine Kavanaugh's guilt or innocence based on
his drinking as a student and remarks in yearbooks.
Is that the world our children should grow up in?
The campaign funding came from an obscure
501(c)(4) non-profit group called BH Fund
that was founded in 2016.
The tax return stated that the chairman of BH Fund
was none other than Leonard Leo.
It was funded by an anonymous $24 million donation.
Who was that person?
Why did this man or woman want Trump's nominee appointed so badly?
Was there a personal relationship with one of the candidates?
The answer to that is a mystery, because by law
the source of the money can remain secret.
Never in modern history have more judges been appointed
than we have seen in recent years.
As we move forward, we will see
some fundamental changes in the way our courts
deal with fundamental questions about the size and scope of government
and about the nature of rights and freedoms in our country.
Quick question, Leonard. I'm right in front of you.
Thank you for taking on this position.
I don't think anyone ever received
so much trust, responsibility for this third branch of government
than you do now. We are grateful and proud to have you here.
The President is signing the commission.
The President is signing the commission. Everyone should remember that.
I was at a dinner with him and you
and I saw how he follows your advice, and we are very happy about that.
Any advice on how we can help you achieve what you want to achieve?
First, and first and foremost, I think
there must be continuous vigilance regarding the judicial selection process.
That is the lesson we learned from the Reagan administration, right?
Legal personnel becomes legal policy.
So we must keep fighting hard to transform the federal judiciary.
No one profited more
from a new conservative supermajority on the Court
than Leonard Leo's dark money network.
In 2021, he was rewarded by a sympathetic billionaire
with the largest political donation of all time
1.6 billion dollars.
Leo used that money to fund dark slush funds
that paid millions to a network of right-wing groups
including a group that went to the Capitol riot on January 6th.
Stop the steal.
Drag them out.
He paid his own firm over $55 million in consulting fees
bought a second home in Maine
and launched expensive campaigns and aggressive ads
that aired constantly on TV, targeting all his opponents.
DEMOCRATS ATTACK CATHOLIC FAITH
These barbarians, secularists, and fanatics
have become increasingly numerous in recent years.
They control and use many levers of power. But still
we must not give up hope for the ultimate success of the new evangelization.
With God all things are possible
and He enables us to carry out His mission
no matter how impossible it seems.
Reason alone will not win this battle.
Prayer and reparation are of urgent and powerful importance.
For only God can break Satan's lies
and free the people he has enslaved.
I heard echoes in Leo's words of the chatter
of Catholic priests from my childhood.
He seemed to believe that the earthly path to spiritual salvation
led directly to the chambers of the Supreme Court.
EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW
Welcome, I'm Catherine Hadro, and this is EWTN Pro-Life Weekly.
The Court is setting the date
for a major abortion case that could challenge Roe v. Wade.
Oral arguments for
Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization will take place on December 1st.
Leonard and Trump had kept their promise
to put a pro-life majority on the court.
At that moment, I reflected on
the discussions I had had with the justices who were certain to vote
against 'Roe', who would overturn 'Roe'.
I knew it was a fait accompli. The case was closed.
All my old colleagues and friends were overjoyed.
And I did not share in their joy.
I actually had a lot of regret.
My view of abortion had been largely shaped
by my mission
to build a new society where no one would ever want an abortion
because life was perfect.
Over time, I had doubts.
But I buried those doubts.
One night I remembered a time I was arrested
for my protest activities.
I was in jail and there was a woman
about three cell doors down from mine.
She kept screaming that I was there. She was clearly very upset.
And she kept calling out for her babies.
'Who's going to take care of my children? Give me my children. I need to get to them.'
She screamed the whole time I was there.
And that was terrible.
In my pro-life imagination, every time a woman cried like that
she was surrounded by white church ladies with pink cheeks
who would help her and bring her everything she needed.
That is what pro-life people did.
We cared for women in need with children, born or unborn.
But no one came.
No one came to this woman
while I was there and that was hugely unsettling.
I took that experience with me after I was released.
I took it home and it visited me at night.
And I realized
that I had never heard that woman's voice in 30 years of anti-abortion activism.
That led to a succession of other similar moments of truth.
And that forced me to face reality.
To put abortion in the real world
not my fantasized, religious, magical world
but the real pain and despair
of real people living their real lives.
All kinds of flashbacks appeared.
This is the craziest thing I've ever seen. You're crazy, man.
I was completely unaware of the violence
of my statements at the time, of the traumatization of women
when we laid on the ground in front of the doorway
of a healthcare facility they needed.
I was short-sighted enough
to never consider that I would never be pregnant.
I will never face that question. How can I be so sure?
All of this shook my belief system.
I left my organization, where I had worked for over 30 years
and I knew that if I publicly voiced my support for Roe v. Wade
I would lose everything, and ultimately that's what happened. I lost everything.
I WAS AN ANTI-ABORTION ACTIVIST NOW I SUPPORT ROE V. WADE
But now I saw that whole complex and difficult
issue of abortion very differently than before.
The protests have been swelling all day here outside the court.
In seconds, the ruling will come down
and the tension among activists on both sides was almost unbearable.
Hands off.
OVERTURN ROE? NO
It's just been announced.
The Court has ruled on the future of abortion rights in the US.
According to Justice Alito, the Constitution does not confer a right to abortion.
Roe and Casey are no longer applicable.
Reproductive freedom was
defined since Roe as a right, a human right.
And that was taken away
by destroying Roe with the Dobbs decision.
No justice. No peace.
It triggered an explosion of demonstrations across the country.
Vote them out.
Your applause for James Bopp.
Thank you very much and what a wonderful day it is today.
There is no constitutional right
to abortion in the U.S. Constitution. Period. End.
My very first assignment was figuring out how to destroy Roe v. Wade.
I am blessed to see the fruits of that labor.
In writing the opinion
Justice Samuel Alito showed tender respect for the unborn child
but absolutely no respect for the mother.
ABORTING A CHILD WAS 'MURDER'
To support his view that abortion could once again become a crime
he cited deeply religious 17th-century judge Matthew Hale
who supported a man's right to rape his wife
and had two women hanged for witchcraft.
All the justices who voted in the majority were promoted by Leonard Leo.
How many justices in the majority in the Dobbs decision are Catholic?
All of them.
THOMAS, J., CONCURRING
When you look at the wording of Justice Thomas's concurrence
you see that the possibility exists that the availability of contraception
and also same-sex marriage are now in danger.
The country is becoming increasingly secular
and yet the court is becoming increasingly pious.
It's an extremist movement.
FEDERALIST SOCIETY NATIONAL CONVENTION - 2022
The Federalist Society officially takes no position on issues like abortion.
But after the Dobbs decision
the Federalist Society held its national convention.
And Justices Barrett and Alito took the stage.
A massive applause erupted.
Thank you all for being here tonight.
It's nice to hear a lot of noise that isn't from protesters outside my house.
FEDERALIST SOCIETY NATIONAL LAWYERS CONVENTION 2024
The glasses are full, but they should overflow, right?
The Court's recent decisions are, to say the least, very gratifying.
This is the biggest setback for the administrative state
since 1935 at least, or even ever.
Since John Roberts has been Chief Justice, big business has won more cases
in the Supreme Court than in the last 100 years.
In West Virginia v. EPA
the Court rolled back regulations on air pollution
and limited the government's power
to use regulations to protect the public.
Then the Court revoked the Chevron doctrine
a 40-year-old precedent, cited 17,000 times in lower courts
that gave agencies the power to look at the day-to-day details
of laws affecting large corporations.
By revoking Chevron, the pro-business justices
took that power away from doctors, scientists, and engineers
and gave it to themselves.
Without any relevant expertise, judges and justices could now decide for themselves
whether they favored people or profits in applying the law.
In the early days, because I was a minister
an ordained member of the church, I supported the judges
'you are just as ordained by God as I am.
You are here by God's guidance.'
But I came to an obvious conclusion.
The judges are just as human as any human being.
And they are susceptible to the same temptations
and the same sins.
THE TEN COMMANDMENTS
We used money and religion
to cloud the judges' judgment.
If they can be bribed
and I think I may have seen them being bribed
then that erodes trust.
When you sit down, look at it, and realize what we were doing
We were corrupting the court.
For the fourth time in a month, a news report raises ethical questions
about Justice Clarence Thomas
and his financial dealings with wealthy friends.
Politico later reported that Justice Neil Gorsuch
had sold a property in Colorado to the CEO of a law firm
that regularly appears before the court
and failed to disclose that the CEO was the buyer.
The cynicism of the billionaires and judges mingling with each other
makes you realize that when it comes to the power of big business
the deal is done.
Supreme Court corruption can only be regulated by themselves.
Despite minor reforms, the Court showed it had no problem
with bribery, through a decision that was literally garbage.
In 2013, the city of Portage, Indiana, needed five garbage trucks.
Peterbilt Company was awarded the $1.1 million contract.
PETERBILT CLASS PAYS
After the deal closed, Peterbilt sent a $13,000 check
to the man who awarded the contract, Mayor James Snyder.
Believing this was a bribe
a jury convicted Snyder of bribery and sentenced him to prison.
But the Supreme Court had mercy
and overturned his conviction, because Snyder got his money
after awarding the contract.
With one stroke of the gavel
bribery of politicians now became a 'legal business deal.'
As long as you called them fees.
The Court ruled it was a fee, a tip. And it's legal.
What this court has done is redefine corruption
for the benefit of the super-rich.
Decisions like this are perhaps the greatest
return on investment.
In 2024, the cost of the presidential campaign rose
to over five billion dollars. That money, much of it dark or anonymous
came from fewer and fewer super-rich Americans.
2.3 billion flowed to the Republicans
and 2.7 billion to the Democrats.
You could say it's a fair fight.
Or you could say
that both parties are equally corrupt right now.
Jesus Christ, Son of God, born of the Virgin
conceived by the Holy Spirit
For the past 20 years, Jane has looked at the influence of money and religion
on American politics.
She studied the playbook, started by the Powell Memo
pushed forward by Citizens United and driven by religious conviction
that has ushered in a new era of massive corruption.
I fear we are at the beginning of a phase
of crony capitalism that may go even further than that of the Gilded Age.
Ladies and gentlemen, the President-elect of the United States
the Honorable Donald John Trump.
Right before the 2024 election
the Supreme Court ruled that the President of the US
can never be prosecuted for actions within the core powers of his office.
Please raise your hand and repeat after me
'I, Donald John Trump, do solemnly swear'
In practice, this means the president may now accept bribes
before deciding who gets pardoned, which laws he vetoes
and which wars he starts.
'So help me God.'
Congratulations, Mr. President.
Is there a logic to money?
Or does money get what it wants regarding the outcome?
For example, when so much money from the wealthy comes in
do they also advocate for the little guy?
No, absolutely not.
Numerous studies show that the little guy currently barely counts
when it comes to their priorities. In public opinion, you see
that they have different priorities than the richest people in the country.
But it is the richest people in the country
whose priorities are served.
We will dream boldly
and nothing will stand in our way, because we are Americans.
The future is ours.
We will not forget our country. We will not forget our Constitution.
And we will not forget our God.
We must not.
Our golden age has just begun.
I've noticed that being rich is always an advantage.
Having money is always an advantage.
You can buy a nicer house, a nicer car, you know
steak every night, whatever you want, good wine.
And you can pay for speech if you want.
So having money is always an advantage
and people with money will always have an advantage. Always.
Regarding reports about perks for wealthy businessmen
Justice Thomas said he was told
that 'personal hospitality' did not need to be reported.
In response to a similar report, Justice Alito said that
no 'reasonable and unbiased person' would doubt
his ability to decide cases impartially.
by: ibrahim