It’s a ridiculous article. Roberts has a Constitutional role and that’s it.
Gak...
I hadn’t remembered this. Thanks GW. /s
Roberts will rule it a tax, and Trump will be toast.
Okay, okay... was having a flashback there.
Still not a big fan of the guy, and he isn’t someone I would want associated with a Trump Impeachment trial in the Senate.
Even if Trump had never verbally disagreed with the Chief Justice, Roberts would not be an impartial judge. Whatever dirt the Democrats have on him which caused him to switch his vote and save Obamacare would probably motivate him to side with the Democrats as much as he can while still pretending to be impartial.
Roberts, Confess and lose your family, confess and lose your freedom.
The freest nation that can be should not go down to protect your perversions.
I don’t believe in God but I pray there is a Hell.
Any timing that Roberts makes can instantly be overruled by a vote of the Senate. He is nothing more than a glorified moderator.
John Roberts is responsible for us getting Obamacare. Rumors have swirled that he and his wife adopted kids illegally from Ireland and he was blackmailed with the threat of taking his kids away in order to pass Obamacare.
I don’t trust him....
i was hoping that this article was about Roberts getting impeached. shucks
The Supreme Court would not look kindly on being cut out of the impeachment process. They could just rule it unconstitutional.
Dems dont have to worry..they have his neck in the blackmail noose
Mostly a figurehead. Senate is judge and jury.
And we can’t forget that Roberts presides over the FISA judges. He’s probably in this mess as deep as Comey is.
Yes, technically, Roberts only has a Constitutionally limited role in impeachment proceedings, in that he only presides with no dictatorial directive, such as a regular civil or criminal trial would entail.
BUT...we are in post-Constitutional times. What the House is doing is well beyond the constraints of Constitutional authority with regard to impeachment. Since the House doesn’t need any stinkin’ badge, what makes you think that Roberts will follow his Constitutional restraints? Especially if the House votes with NO PUBLIC RELEASE of ANY evidence that would allow the issue to be fairly discussed.
And if the issue WAS discussed fairly, there would be no way that any Deomcrat in a purple district or any Republican at all in the House or the Senate would vote anywhere near a No vote.
Roberts gets a bad rep. I know the Constitution as written but deeper context can be way to much of a mess. I wish Madison and Jefferson would give their opinion. I wish we had more Presidents and Congressmen like them.
This is utter nonsense.
The Chief Justice has only a ceremonial role in presiding over the Senate trial, and doesn’t even have a role in citing or enforcing procedure unless the Senate asks his opinion.
And he most certainly does not get a vote.
Besides, what part of “the Chief Justice will preside” does this dimwit not understand?
If Roberts is a good Justice, he will send the “case” back to the House and say start over with due process for the President. And by the way, there are no impeachable offenses in your referral.
Let Clarence Thomas preside.
Our Founders understood that, a lot times, important public figures strongly disagree with one another on principle, or profoundly dislike one another personally.
They set us up a system that rolls in spite of that.
Maybe Trump seduced Roberts’s wife ... zot only knows ... but the procedures are the procedures. Stop acting like the present situation is special. It isn’t.
Bump