Posted on 03/23/2019 5:02:42 AM PDT by SkyPilot
Chief Justice John Roberts arrived at the Valletta campus of the University of Malta on July 3, 2012, to teach a class on Supreme Court history. As he emerged from the back seat of a black sedan, he held his brown leather briefcase in front of him, almost as a shield. He wore a blue blazer, striped button-down shirt, and tan khakis. His clothes looked crisp, though his face was haggard. He was as exhausted and distressed as he had been in years. Roberts had left behind a storm in Washington over his opinion upholding President Barack Obama's health-care overhaul -- the Affordable Care Act -- a stunning validation of Obama's signature domestic achievement that transformed public perceptions of the chief justice. Republicans in Congress had been fighting the law dubbed Obamacare at every turn for two years, and all the GOP presidential candidates in 2012 had vowed to repeal it. And now Roberts, a nominee of President George W. Bush, had saved it. Going forward, the chief justice would be viewed with skepticism by conservatives, despite also having taken the lead on limiting racial remedies and voting rights, helping roll back campaign finance regulations and voting for stronger Second Amendment gun rights. Roberts' moves behind the scenes were as extraordinary as his ruling. He changed course multiple times. He was part of the majority of justices who initially voted in a private conference to strike down the individual insurance mandate -- the heart of the law -- but he also voted to uphold an expansion of Medicaid for people near the poverty line. Two months later, Roberts had shifted on both. The final tallies, 5-4 to uphold the individual mandate and 7-2 to curtail the Medicaid plan, came after weeks of negotiations and trade-offs among the justices.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
A Supreme Court justice negotiating for political reasons rather than protecting the Constitution is an act of pure evil. The perspectives that words don’t mean what they say will in the long run be far more dangerous to American freedom and to the rule of law than the national socialists, the soviet socialists, and today’s socialists combined.
The elites wanted “health insurance” for everyone - not “health care”. Now people have plans they can barely afford offering care they can’t afford at all.
Nancy Pelosi sold this sh!t sandwich to Americans by saying Americans shouldn’t be tied to jobs for health insurance - and this law forces people to cling to their jobs to avoid even worse plans/costs in the marketplace. Just another socialist entitlement for those who won’t work, nothing else; it becomes obvious when they trot out the hard-luck cases any time repeal is discussed. The cement has dried with the Republicans’ unwillingness to repeal this burden; it is now as much a fixture as food stamps.
Robert’s children were threatened with exportation because of illegal adoption practices. He caved a nation to save his illegally formed family.
So true; it is an added entitlement for the unproductive (at much lower costs - if any at all - than “makers” pay), and an added tax on the American taxpayers - and that is why it is administered BY THE IRS.
What we in the public assume Supreme Court rulings are based upon.
What they are really based upon.
Roberts says he doesn't care. He gets the Federal Employee Health Benefits system, and a taxpayer salary of $267,000. And whatever else he makes in bribes and graft.
It is actually surprising to me what was revealed in this article, and I am quite cynical.
Now bow down and be "thankful".
Yes, I have heard that.
Probably true.
If Roberts really was threatened by Obama goons regarding his children, he could have called security, and immediately gone before the cameras and told the public that they attempted to blackmail him by taking his children away.
The public would have hailed Roberts as a hero.
I think the adoption story is true, but so are other "rumors."
#22 - wow.
By CNN as well.
I think it is the media and Deep State's way of reminding Roberts that they have the goods on him. And, in the upcoming cases before the court (National Emergency, Immigration, Gun Control, etc.), Roberts needs to vote the "right way."
Read the transcripts of Roberts confirmation hearing.
He came across as a Boy scout who literally worshiped the Constitution.
What a liar and traitor he is.
Outstanding observation!!!
And we are getting squeezed at all ends. State taxes, local taxes, property taxes, increased Federal taxes (for many of us) through capped or eliminated deductions, sales taxes, gas taxes, Social Security taxes, unemployment taxes, massive health insurance premiums, and on and on.
And, we have about half the country paying little or nothing, and just raking in the benefits.
Or, CNN and the media reminding Roberts that they know things about him, and have sources who tell them.
If I were Roberts, and I read this article, I would be terrified that all of this got out.
The Bush legacy is critical in understanding much of what has kept the GOP in the swamp. This is a deeply guarded cabal of bureaucracies that maintain the interests of global wealth against main street industry and nationalist capital expansion. This is an essential aspect of the war between Trump and the corrupt GOP establishment.
It’s been clear for a long time that the Supreme Court just sticks it’s finger in the air and judges which direction the wind is blowing and makes up law to match. It’s not new, it’s been going on for many years. Dred Scott and Row v Wade being past examples.
Negotiating?
This kind of stuff makes me furious. The law is not “negotiable”. Every one of these judges who “negotiated” should be impeached and removed from office.
This is why the conversation about “universal basic income” puzzles me; I assume we have it already. If you make to much, cough it up; if you don’t make enough (or anything at all), here’s your “pay”. Right now so many things are “means-adjusted” (income taxes, college admissions, government housing, food stamps, etc.) that we have a VERY socialist system in place - and no politicians willing to bite the bullet and stop the growth of it.
While neighboring NYC is considering “congestion pricing” to keep poor people from driving in certain parts of the city at certain times of day, the same city has a “fair fare” program that allows mow-income people to receive heavy subsidies for mass transit. Half a million people in the city live in government housing; school lunch programs operate throughout the summer so taxpayers can provide “free” food all year. This entitlement mentality has spread far and wide, and will be difficult to undo; the only solution I see is an economy where those willing to work can do so and escape the outstretched palms of the covetous gibsmedats. It is absolutely critical that those willing to work enjoy a better standard of living than those who refuse to do so; at this point the only difference is the welfare class tends to have shorter, more violent lives while living in the same areas as people who want to better themselves.
Amazon recently did what many fleeing the high-cost NYC metro area have been doing for decades now: Put its wallet away and go elsewhere. While it is clear that many NYers are having second thoughts about opposing Amazon, what initially drove the opposition still remains: The entitled mindset that anyone doing business here must pay for a bunch of sh!t for residents (forget employees).
It shows Roberts NOT thinking as a jurist - what does the law and the Constitution say - but as a legislator - how can I make this work.
Strangling the Constitution by altering - ipso facto - the pure text of the law, in order to make the legislation work, is what is only to be done DURING THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS, not by the judges.
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.