Is John Roberts Drifting Left?

TNR ^ | 05/02/2015 | By Brianne J. Gorod

[frog in a pot]

While your #76 may offer sound advice, the situation may be beyond that.

An Administration that can blackmail a USSC Justice can, when it is finished with him, also coerce him to resign and open the way for nomination of a justice to replace him.

I.e., it can get rid of Roberts a lot faster than we can.

It would appear in the absence of political opposition of the sort that would have the guts to "Bork" a nomination (and who among us would bet on that), the balance of the court could take a sharp turn to the left.

[rodguy911]

Actually, its worse than that. Great post by the way.

Roberts wound up writing both the for and against on obamacare which he deemed a tax—yeah right.

Scalia spent at least a month trying to get him to change his mind or at least explain why he went over to the dark side. Roberts never would give him an explanation.Curious at best.

I've searched many sites, articles, etc. researching how Roberts smuggled his kids into the US from Central America.

You have to believe its an amazing coincidence that he changed his mind half way through the scotus obmacare deliberations or you can believe the truth that the regime found out about the kids and blackmailed him big time and still are.

Read the NYT article that found out the truth but backed off probably due to regime pressure even thogh it was years ago.

They learned this crap from bill and Hill who blackmailed others all the time.

http://conservativepoliticalforum.com/political-discussion-and-debate/how-roberts-was-blackmailed-to-support-obamacare/

The link above gets into it pretty good.

Heres a clip from the link above:

"Many of us have questioned what caused Roberts to switch his vote on ObamaCare at the last minute, as reported by CBS, and doing so, so late that the Conservative Justices were forced to rewrite their majority opinion to be minority dissent.

According to some sources, Roberts wrote both the majority and a large portion of minority dissenting opinions. The liberal news outlet Salon.com has a story on July 3, 2012, "Roberts Wrote Both ObamaCare Opinions", written by law professor Paul Campos, citing "a source within the court with direct knowledge of the drafting process."

In this Salon article, Campos rejects the claim that the conservative minority wrote the dissenting opinion in response to Roberts' majority opinion. Instead Campos' source indicates that Roberts authored as much as the "first 46 pages" of the dissent, a full 70%, originally intended to be the majority opinion entirely rejecting ObamaCare. Only after Roberts switched his vote at the last minute did the remaining four Justices author the final 19 pages of that dissenting opinion.

In support of this, Campos points out that it is extraordinary "in the court’s history that a dissent has gone on for 13,000 words before getting around to mentioning that it is, in fact, dissenting", and yet there are repeated references to dissent from the majority opinion in those last 19 pages.

These facts may answer that question.

Roberts Adoptions:

In 2000 Justice Roberts and his wife Jane adopted two children. Initially it was apparent that the adoptions were "from a Latin American country", but over time it has become apparent that the adopted children were not Latin American, but were Irish. Why this matters will become evident.

(I learned that Roberts' wife wanted a blonde boy and a blonde girl from her mother's home country of Cork Country, Ireland. That's where these kids are from. They took the birth parents along with the kids to Central America to(smuggle the kids into the US) do the "adoption")

In 2005 the NY Times began investigating Roberts life as a matter of his nomination to the Supreme Court by George Bush. The Times was shortly accused of trying to unseal the adoption papers and intending to violate the anonymity of the adoption process... however there is more to the story.

Drudge did an article in 2005

http://patterico.com/2005/08/04/drudge-says-new-york-times-is-investigating-robertss-adoption-records/

[frog in a pot]

Thank you for the links.

Even while some speculate about possible corruption with the Judicial and Executive branches, one would think the ultimate objective is to deny O another USSC nomination.

In my view, it is absolutely not in the nation’s interest to remove Roberts, or for him to resign. The nation can cure whatever the current damage is, but not so easily that of a justice who would give the court a far left balance for decades to come.

It seems to me the GOP needs to shield Roberts with whatever it can do legislatively so as to remove any leverage that may be used against him.

Unfortunately, we are clearly unable to move as quickly as the other party and several steps behind in what could become a very ugly, long-term scenario. We may soon see the start of that if the first couple of steps were to seduce or compromise Boehner and McConnell.

[rodguy911]

There is a lot of research still to be done on this stuff/allegations. Lots of people to interview, records to be searched, etc. etc.if no one is doing it it’s a darn shame.

[frog in a pot]

That is correct, of course, and it all takes time. Under the circumstance we must assume we have very little time.

One hopes the GOP today realizes it must quickly fashion a worse-case legislative remedy that it can quickly formalize (and in the meanwhile slide a draft under Robert's door).

As a matter of fact, since the basic framework of the issue was discussed in the media some time ago, as soon as the GOP read Robert's extraordinary decision in the Obamacare case it should have started working on the remedy. (Even if those two event are reversed in time, the result was a reasonably clear signal.)

It will be more than a shame if the GOP has not done so.

[David]

To your #82:

That is a really excellent job.

The idea is really not to impeach him immediately--at least not before 2017; the idea is that a significant amount of mail to Congress on the topic will tend to sharpen his focus on the present issues.

Members here should each copy your #82 and write a physical letter to both their Member of Congress and to at least one Member of House Judiciary.

[rodguy911]

Thanks very much David much appreciated. I did email that post to Sharyl Atkisson but she doesn't know me from Adam. One can only imagine the volume of mail she gets and the work load she is under.

But we do need someone at her level to do the on the ground research that would involve trips to Ireland, Central America, elsewhere to dig out what happened or didn't.

[Leep]

If, and i suspect his is, compromised/corrupt would that change anything he ruled on?

[Salvation]

Please Pray This Week for Traditional Marriage – The Supreme Court Is in Session

[Salvation]

So right.

[Salvation]

What would have happened if Borg had made it?

[Salvation]

Oops

What would have happened if Bork had made it?

[David]

Thanks very much David much appreciated. I did email that post to Sharyl Atkisson but she doesn't know me from Adam. One can only imagine the volume of mail she gets and the work load she is under. But we do need someone at her level to do the on the ground research that would involve trips to Ireland, Central America, elsewhere to dig out what happened or didn't.

I don't think we need to do much work digging into the background. The story is fairly well known. What you have to do is bring it to the attention of the Political Establishment.

It is an ideal opportunity for the letter writers. Enough letters to reflect a real broad interest will get one of the committees off the dime.