Something funny went on there.
He looks gay here but all three of these guys are now married to woman
Posted on 07/15/2012 6:56:47 AM PDT by jmaroneps37
President Barack Obama signed his executive order stopping deportation of some young illegal immigrants who entered the United States as children a scant 13 days before Justice John Roberts flipped his no to a yes allowing the President’s premier legislation to become the law of the land just as Obama’s reelection campaign ramps up.
Now some observers are wondering if questions asked about the Roberts’ private adoptions in 2005 during his confirmation hearings might have had a “lingering” effect.
According to underneaththeirrobes.blog.com, “Perhaps the children were born in Ireland but were in Latin America immediately prior to their adoption.” The same blog refers a little later to a NEW YORK TIMES report saying they were adopted privately.
Attorney Roberts was only able to play an advisory role for the Bush team even though he was in Florida during the Bush-Gore 2,000 election crisis because he was under stress and preoccupied with the adoption of his son, according to another report by Dan Klaidman of NEWSWEEK.
So we now learn of the deep divide that the Roberts flip flop is causing in the Supreme Court. “Instead, the four (conservative justices) joined forces and crafted a highly unusual, unsigned joint dissent.
They deliberately ignored Roberts’s decision as if they were no longer even willing to engage with him in debate.” says the gateway pundit who is using the word compromise to characterize what Roberts did!
“…Roberts’ past suggests conservatives might have been misled… [his]… being their champion on the bench. While working …law firm of Hogan and Hartson, Roberts behind the scenes did pro bono work for the gay rights advocates by preparing arguments in the gay movements’ most important legal victory, the Romer v. Evans 1996 case in front of the Supreme Court....
(Excerpt) Read more at coachisright.com ...
This is rich considering we have an undocumented pResident.
MMmmm. Well, it could be that he is smarter than us all, helping us in the election, and, in the event that Obama wins anyway, then waiting for someone to sue on the grounds that the “tax” is not a legitimate tax (it is neither an excise tax or an income tax; Roberts was vague, and ruled only that it is not a direct tax), and redeeming himself in our eyes by voting that the plaintiff is correct. Long shot? Maybe. But, not impossible.
“Either way we lose with him.”
Ditto that.
New Zealand you say?
“Either way we lose with him.”
Ditto that.
New Zealand you say?
Very strange, the manner in which he adopted these children, no? Is he another Jerry Sandusky?
Is he married?
Never mind, read the article. yes he’s married.
Seeing that this came up in his confirmation hearings and is a problem, wouldn’t one be more inclined to think the Dems would have filibustered it then, as they always do? This “thoery” makes no sense at all.
He has turned out to be weak-minded, and susceptible to pressure from the Washington establishment and the media. The Obama criminal organization had to know his weakness. They did their research. They began their attacks early and often, a very risky move unless they knew he would cave. Try that with a principled judge who can be angered, and see where it leads. It doesn’t matter what Roberts is or was. He is nothing but a toy now. The best that can be hoped for is that Romney and the Republicans can play with him when the time comes. I hope they have watched and learned.
My money is on your hypothesis. So sick of all of the conservative ranting against Roberts.
Beards. Just like McGreavy, the ex Gov. of NJ.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.