Roberts spent $80,000 helping Bush get elected in 2004

Check this out. Does this say what I think it says? That Roberts was working has a lobbyist and spent $80,000 helping Bush get elected in 2004? Then he became a member of the Bush Transition Team? I guess now we know how much a seat on the Supreme Court costs.


Lobbyists Bankrolling Politics
Bush gets nearly four times as much as Kerry

WASHINGTON, May 6, 2004 — More than 1,300 registered lobbyists have given slightly more than $1.8 million to President George W. Bush over the last six years, according to a Center for Public Integrity study comparing the donations of all registered lobbyists from 1998 through March 2004. Sen. John Kerry received $520,000 from 442 lobbyists during the same period.

Such numbers account for a significant percentage of those who ply the influence game. In fact, the lobbyists who donated to Bush have represented about 6,000 clients; those who gave to Kerry, approximately 3,000 clients. Combined, these figures add up to more than half of all the companies that hire lobbyists, according to the Senate Office of Public Records. The SOPR says that there are currently 24,000 lobbyists registered to represent 15,000 clients.

Registered Lobbyists Appointed to Bush's Transition Teams and Their Activity

Justice John Roberts - Hogan & Hartson - $80,000

http://www.publicintegrity.com/bop2004/report.aspx?aid=273

for a seat on the USSC. :mad:

Yikes! :yoiks:

$80,000 was what he spent as a lobbyist on behalf of Hogan & Hartson.

It would be nice to know who his clients were.

When was the last time a supreme court nominee was a "registered lobbyist"?

and also a "Democrat" state that he was completely non-political.

yea right..

wasn't he already on the bench at that time?

he was appointed in 2003

not to sound stupid, but aren't federal judges, as are all federal employees, prohibited from partisian political activity?

It would be significant if that is true.

wanted to know about Roberts. I want to know his connection to Bush's election and is this payback for doing a dirty deed for the dimson. I hate that kind of shit because there are so many more people who are really more qualified that a guy who's been a judge for just 2 yrs. Don't smell right.

Good catch. :)

His last donation was in 2000 and it doesn't look like he's been a big donor over the years

http://www.capitaleye.org/Roberts.7.20.05.asp


3/12/93

$850

Hogan & Hartson PAC

3/16/94

$850

Hogan & Hartson PAC

3/2/95

$850

Hogan & Hartson PAC

5/25/96

$925

Hogan & Hartson PAC

3/18/97

$925

Hogan & Hartson PAC

10/29/97

$500

Peter G. Fitzgerald (R)

12/10/97

$250

Peter Rusthoven (R)

3/11/98

$975

Hogan & Hartson PAC

4/15/98

$750

Peter Rusthoven (R)

6/25/98

$500

Peter G. Fitzgerald (R)

10/23/98

$235

Peter G. Fitzgerald (R)

3/30/99

$975

Hogan & Hartson PAC

3/8/00

$1,100

Hogan & Hartson PAC

4/11/00

$500

Richard G. Lugar (R)

8/3/00

$1,000

George W. Bush (R)

Total
$11,185  

It was money he (through his company) spent has a registered lobbyist during the Bush Campaign. At least that is how I'm reading the article.

In return, the Ctr for Public Integrity is claiming that Roberts was given a spot on the Bush Transition Team has a reward.

Funny, I've seen no other mention in the media that he was a member of the Transition Team. You would think that he close ties to the WH would rate a mention?

from what I've read about his political work, he seems like he's been the good little foot soldier

I don't think he'll be any sort of independent voice on the court if he's approved

he doesn't seem like the brightest bulb on the tree

there's something that people are missing--no one can be involved in politics for most of their life and not have more of a paper trail

I mean, we all contribute to causes, but to pony up this kind of sum and then get some payback seems a bit extreme. It sort of puts to rest any kind of "nonpartisan" status for the Supreme Court nominee (not that one existed after 2000)

One must not only avoid impropriety, but the appearance of impropriety.

Of course, that was before 9/11 changed everything *sarcasm*. Remember Cheney's duck hunting trip with Scalia?

I thought this was their 2004 contributions.

If dead people can't vote, how can they contribute? I mean except for Chicago.

this Olson is a Justice.

for a Supreme Court candidate to be a registered lobbyist for Bush. ??? If we can get a confirmation on this, we should put this out there for public consideration. I don't think most people would think it is too cool. Good work DYEW.

on May 6, 2004. I think that should be reliable enough?

Here's another huge one from Robert's Company that he was partners in.

Agriculture Clayton Yeutter - Hogan & Hartson $460,000

Both of these citations are listed in the first chart.

SERIOUS contributors...

Probably we should get this info out to progressive orgs--the ones on Skinner's list?--and see if they are aware of it...

:kick:

Still alive in the Google newsgroup circa Jul 25 2001.

Unfortunately the actual article is long gone.

http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.politics.democrats.d/browse_thread/thread/d123d516cca0dadc/21b6db3e3007a803?q=%22John+G++Roberts%22+contributions&rnum=3&hl=en#21b6db3e3007a803

that Roberts and his firm Hogan & Hartson handed out. I am finding that there is a lot more where that came from. Check this link out.

http://www.publicintegrity.com/bop2004/report.aspx?aid=273

http://newsmeat.com/judiciary_political_donations/John_G_Roberts.php

How can the guy give to his own firm's PAC?

same? different?

<nt>

CHEAP!
To be a Bu$h Pioneer you have to go up to a quarter meg at least!

Does anyone know about that? I thought he was part of Bush's offensive team, stopping the recount in Fla and getting the Supreme Court to appoint him.

He wrote most of their legal briefs even though he didn't put his name on any of them. Gee, I wonder why not? And even gave Jeb advise on how to NOT COUNT the VOTES. I have serious concerns about someone who is obviously a very partisan, political, activist becoming a SC Justice.

He seemed to be writing new laws... how to appoint a president.

legitimate questions.

...now we know, to bushco and the rest of the repig juggernaut, the only litmus test required for appointment to any office - judicial, ambassadorship, bureaucrat, you name it - is how much money did you contribute, or raise. Would like to see all the SC candidate's contribution to bush...whataya bet who'll have come out on top. In fact, I'm prepared to predict that if this issue gets enough play that one or more of the other 'spurned' candidates just might take 'em to court. How wonderful would that be?

THE SUPREME COURT IS FOR SALE! THE PRESIDENT IS GIVING COURT APPOINTMENTS TO CAMPAIGN DONORS!!!!!!

How much did he personally contribute ? I think that is something that the public should be aware of ...