Posted on 06/10/2013 12:44:11 PM PDT by TheMantis
During their discussion, Mr. Beck raised an intriguing possibility: Was Chief Justice John Roberts blackmailed by the Obama regime into changing his ruling on Obamacare at the last minute? Given what he knows about the NSA, Mr. Binney couldn't rule such a thing out.
(Excerpt) Read more at examiner.com ...
Especially, since one of them filthy conservative justices mouthed the words "that's not true" right in the middle of his first teleprompted SOTU speech!!!
It's his vengence!!! (pure and simple) He's full of poisonous resentment over the way this country was not founded on the correct ideas... ideas taught him by professors in his affirmative (action) educational process of becoming a constitutional expert!!!
Yup.
Of course, if true, I hope it can be proven and that more whistle-blowers emerge with credible accounts of the ongoing violations of Americans constitutional rights that define the criminal enterprise known as the Obama administration. I also hope that the media will finally begin to abandon Obama and the American people will wake up and realize they've been terribly conned and are fast becoming mere subjects of a Marxist dictator and his regime who violate laws and abuse citizens constitutional rights with relative impunity because they have the media in their pocket and will use any dirty tactic to co-opt or destroy anyone who stands in their way.
If these revelations don't stop Obama - and I'm not fully confident they will - then America is truly doomed to become a fascist nation and it's citizens freedoms destroyed while they are distracted by rubbish that passes as entertainment and serial lying from corrupt leftist politicians and their media lapdogs.
Everyone is subject to the said ‘storage’ of communications only until need dictates the drilling down into details.. and subsequent ‘further investigation’.
Words that should send chills up and down the spines and legs of everyone,, including chrissy matthews. mayve that’s where his tingle really came from,, he knows how gubamint works..
I keep trying to explain. The Obamacare decision was not about Roberts. It was about Kennedy. He is a reliable liberal vote when it really matters, but he will only do so when he is the *deciding* vote. The man is bizarre. He wants to be in the legal books as the deciding vote.
He *wanted* Roberts to vote against Obamacare, so he, Kennedy, would be in the law books forever. And it would have been Obamacare with all the bells and whistles. The liberals and Kennedy would make it a 5-4 decision, and there was nothing Roberts could do to stop it.
When Roberts outmaneuvered him to vote *for* Obamacare, Kennedy was livid. But make no mistake, Obamacare was going to pass, one way or another. No matter what happened.
But why did Roberts do this? Because of the one thing that makes the Chief Justice different from the other justices. When he is with the majority, he can decide *who* writes the majority decision.
And he chose himself to write that decision. However, he could not have totally nuked Obamacare when he did so, or the liberal justices would have refused to sign on, and written their own decision.
So instead he subtly inserted two “poison pills” into the decision. And both really, truly matter.
The first was that he said that the Obamacare mandate was not a regular law, but a *tax*. Why? Because Democrats have long used the filibuster trick to prevent Republicans from overturning the Democrats big government schemes. So unless the Republicans literally had 2/3rds of BOTH houses of congress, they could not overturn Obamacare.
But tax law is different. You cannot filibuster changes to tax law. It just takes a simple majority, 51% of both houses, to make changes. This means the next time the Republicans control the house, senate and presidency, they can KILL OBAMACARE DEAD! Just bare majorities, and the Democrats cannot block them from doing it.
The other poison pill we are seeing right now. The fight at the state level about expanding Medicaid or not.
But why does that matter? Because in his decision, Roberts wrote that, while the federal government may mandate state programs, it has to pay for them. That is, the Democrats wanted Obamacare to be a continual drain on the states, that every time the Democrats voted to expand Obamacare, that expansion would have to be paid for by the states.
“I want to give my girlfriend a fur coat, and make you pay for it.”
And this poison pill actually matter *more* in the long run, because the Democrats have used this trick for years. The states bitterly complained about it, calling it “unfunded mandates”.
And Roberts decision in Obamacare opens the door to states suing the federal government to end 70 or more years of federal expansions of mandated programs. This isn’t just Obamacare, or LBJ’s Great Society welfare state, this hits them going back to FDR’s New Deal.
I’m not even sure the other conservative justices even (at least publicly) realized what Roberts had done at the time.
But Roberts really set into motion some huge changes in the future, and the Democrats will not like it one bit.
What? A couple million illegals walk every year (two for sure under the noses of Congressmen in broad daylight), and the Justice can be blackmailed about HIS two adopted children?
Such blackmails are never overt as in the movies about the mob. Roberts is fully aware of his adoption problem. That might have been sufficient.
This is why we refer to my two yr old’s boy part as his
“Chief Justice”
Assisting in the destruction of liberty and freedom for all Americans is treason. And if it was just to protect some dirty little secret he had? Then may he tremble before the God who will judge him for assisting in the dismantling of the greatest nation He ever allowed to exist.
Except HIM!!!
Obama has said the Constitution is “deeply flawed”.
Geez, I hope you are right. But if this is case, why aren’t there more lawsuits against unfunded mandates making their way through the courts?
The only good news is that as a tax, it’s repeal is not subject to a Senate filibuster.
Of course, as Scalia noted, having to read the entire thing would be an 8th amendment violation.
The record for ‘the most traitors hanged in a single day’ would be a bright light in this otherwise black time in our history.
Yes we can!
Arnold”the groping Gov.” was when He backtracked on Global Warming!
“Did the Obama regime blackmail John Roberts to change his Obamacare decision?”
When a man suddenly does the opposite of what he historically would have done and then tries to justify it with mental and legal contortions, there has to be a reason. Coercion is certainly a likely reason ESPECIALLY with what we know today.
The Republic is lost.
That’s what I think
I’ve had posts deleted for using that word. Even the moderators sometimes don’t know what it means.
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.
