Posted on 08/04/2005 8:48:41 AM PDT by kennedy
XXXXX DRUDGE REPORT XXXXX THU AUG 04, 2005 11:35:09 ET XXXXX
NY TIMES INVESTIGATES ADOPTION RECORDS OF SUPREME COURT NOMINEE'S CHILDREN
**Exclusive**
The DRUDGE REPORT has uncovered a plot in the NEW YORK TIMES' newsroom to look into the adoption of the children of Supreme Court Nominee John G. Roberts.
The TIMES has investigative reporter Glen Justice hot on the case to investigate adoption records of Judge Roberts’ two young children, Josie age 5 and Jack age 4, a top source reveals.
Judge Roberts and his wife Jane adopted the children when they each were infants.
Both children were adopted from Latin America.
A TIMES insider claims the look into the adoptions are part of the paper's "standard background check."
Roberts’ young son Jack delighted millions of Americans during his father’s Supreme Court nomination announcement ceremony when he wouldn’t stop dancing while the President and his father spoke to a national television audience.
Previously the WASHINGTON POST Style section had published a story criticizing the outfits Josie’s and Jack’s mother had them wear at the announcement ceremony.
One top Washington official with knowledge of the NEW YORK TIMES’ plans declared: “Trying to pry into the lives of the Roberts’ family like this is despicable. Children’s lives should be off limits. The TIMES is putting politics over fundamental decency.”
One top Republican official when told of the situation was incredulous. “This can’t possibly be true?”
Developing...
Isn't it? If the children were already grown it would still be beyond the pale but to even contemplate trying to find an irregularity in the adoptions of a couple of moppets, taking a chance on perhaps ruining their lives is unbelievably outrageous.
And here we thought the left was always for the "little people" - apparently not if there's political advantage or an inconvenient pregnancy involved.
My own parent would have difficulty accessing her adoption records if so desirous. As the child, it would be near impossible. Yet the NYT's scum seeks to violate the parents, the young children and the birth parents in this manner?
There is a reason they slipped from Number one to Number six in papers sought to refer to first, and they'll continue that slide with mud like this.
I didn't catch all of this (I will on the re-cast),but what I did see Brit outraged about was a response to one of the panelists claiming that maybe they got "special" treatment or perhaps they did something "under the table".
Brits heated response was, "have they been accused of something? Is there a reason to suspect impropriety? Since when do you look for something just because it MIGHT be there?"
It's just like everything else. Pay for gas before pumping, etc. We're all assumed to be criminals today.
Yes, at least he had enough sense to be ashamed though when challenged. Ceci, to me, seemed to be silenced more because she couldn't articulate a solid defence than because she understood hos sick this was on the part of the Times.
btw, I LOVE that Bill has been on the panel the last couple of nights. When's he's on I know I have a journalist of integrity that doesn't stoop to the NYT's practices...but is a conservative. brit can handle three liberals but it's nice when he has re-inforcements.
And why I will continue to do my part to help them in their race to the bottom.
That man is just so handsome, in a Paul Gigot way.
I agree. When I found that picture, I couldn't believe The Washington Post would hire anyone as a "Fashion Editor" who dressed like she did...plus her slip was a couple of inches longer than her dress.
It's sad that two former reputable newspapers such as The NY Times and The Washington Post have sunk to the level of the gossip sheets you find by the checkout counter in the grocery store. Actually, I think the two are worse because many folks still consider them reputable papers while they seek to slime, smear, and destroy anyone with whom they disagree, or who they suspect has a different political ideology.
The New York Times is the lowest of the low. It has no standing to assert the myth that it's "the paper of record". It's sunk to the level of supermarket tabloids.
They have sunk beneath the supermarket tabloids.
I'm right there with ya, Badger.
They are true scumbags.
It's time for us to get in this fight and put those b@stards at the Times on their knees!
MAYBE IT'S TIME FOR FR TO START SNOOPING INTO WHAT GOES ON IN THE LIVES OF THE PEOPLE AT THE NY SLIMES!
See how those commie b@stards like a dose of their own medicine.
"Hmmmmm...seems that the Chelsea Clinton standard no longer applies..."
Yep. That gal got busted for underage drinking...and the Clintons had her detail get in the middle of it.
(Explains why no Secret Service agent outsid of the CLinton circle liked them).
She got busted for other stuff too.
These sound like the exact words used by child molesters.
Hot on what case??? Is somebody disputing that the children are adopted? Is somebody suggesting the children are not adopted? Were they kidnapped? Switched at birth?
THIS is why people hate the so-called MSM.
I was (honest!) gonna pick that up much earlier but lacked your level of self confidence.
There are mostly whites in Argentina (97%), Chile (94%) and Brazil (55%). Even Bolivia is 15% white. Compare this to Mexico, which is only 9% white.
That is exactly what Bill Sammons said tonight on the panel discussion with Brit.
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.