Posted on 02/14/2016 6:32:22 PM PST by Helicondelta
Ted Cruz has claimed a special skill at judging would-be Supreme Court nominees--but his praise of Justice Roberts in 2005 might call his judgment into question as the debate on who will replace Justice Antonin Scalia begins.
At tonight's Republican presidential debate, Ted Cruz tried valiantly to distance himself from his support for John Roberts's confirmation to the Supreme Court. But correspondence with his staff in the Texas solicitor general's office shows Cruz was just as enthusiastic as anyone about Roberts's prospects on the high court.
And though Cruz argued tonight that only he will have the special prescience necessary to pick SCOTUS nominees that will keep conservatives happy, his history of loving Roberts belies that. Roberts, of course, was the deciding vote in a 2012 Supreme Court case that upheld the Affordable Care Act's individual mandate--essentially ending the debate about the constitutionality of Obamacare.
(Excerpt) Read more at thedailybeast.com ...
Cruz replied, after being accused of supporting and promoting Roberts, that he "did not nominate him and would not nominate him." IOW, Cruz doesn't want to admit that he supported Roberts but wants to imply that he opposed him. IOW, Cruz is lying.
Why?
It was good for business.
Trump has a history of choosing personal gain over the best interests of the United States
Anyone who thinks that a president trump would govern against the best interests of his empire is going to be very disappointed.
Get behind me, acolyte.
More importantly, Clinton appointed Trump’s sister to her next position. Think he would’ve done that if she hadn’t been ruling for abortion “rights”?
Anyone that knows how to google could have readily seen that Roberts absolutely didn’t have the time as a judge to be chosen for the Supreme Court. And yes Cruz supported him and thought he was the greatest lawyer in the last 1000 years or so. Read his op-ed.
Trump called him out on his support for Roberts and of course he denied it, the same way he denies ever being for amnesty, which he damn sure was. If is public record that Cruz wanted a permanent green card for illegals. That is amnesty any way you cut it. Greta Vansustren interviewed him about it and she said “sir, I have your amendment and it looks like amnesty to me”. He of course tried to tap dance around it and she was having no part of it and the discussion was over. After Iowa she investigated the lie passed around from team Carson that Carson got out of the race and said it was despicable that Cruz would allow something like that happen. She has no use for Ted Cruz.
Let’s count the people so far that have called him a liar.
Trump
Rubio
Huckabee
Carson
Fiorina
“But conservatives would not have seen it coming.”
I googled him when Bush selected him. He has no paper trail to go on because he had been a judge for two measly years.
I kept on searching and found out that he represented two homosexuals PRO BONO before the US Supreme Court. I knew right then and there he was not a conservative and it should have raised the red flag for anyone that thought he was. Cruz didn’t care because Cruz had many homosexual friends in college and and Cruz will ask anyone for campaign cash and that includes homosexual activists.
Again, Trump was a registered Democrat. Come at Cruz with a candidate who was buddies with Schumer and see who takes you seriously.
The Daily Beast? Seriously?
Where did he admit this? Was it at the debate and I missed it? In the debate, he stated clearly: "I did not nominate him. I would not have nominated him." IOW, he is plainly trying to fool the audience into believing that he never supported Roberts at all.
By the way, as for the whole “would have preferred someone else,” here he is in the article, quoted as calling Roberts one of the best choices ever for the Supreme Court:
Cruz went on to call Roberts “one of the very best advocates ever,†who exemplified “how to try to carry out our craft with the highest level of skill and integrity.â€
In that same message, dated Sept. 13, 2005, Cruz called Roberts “the best Supreme Court litigator in the nation.â€
“I’ve worked with John and seen him argue numerous cases, and, to my mind, there’s not another appellate advocate who’s even close,†he said.
So he was naturally against him because he was a Democrat or because he knew, and given his attack on Scalia over his Affirmative Action dissension I doubt he knows anything about Constitution Law, Roberts was going to be a weak kneed moderate judge?
Completely irrational for Trump supporters to try and hang Roberts on Cruz’ neck. That honor goes to GWB.
Cruz supported him. Fine. Who the hell cares? He wasn't a voting Senator.
Why can you clowns reach back and nail Cruz to wall on Roberts but want no part of talking about Trump's passionate advocacy of partial birth abortion or socialized medicine or eminent domain or progressive taxes or Affirmative Action?
Goldman Sachs, Canadian, stole Iowa, Ted Mean, Goldman Sachs, Sue over being Canadian, all polls anti-Trump unless he leads them, Goldman Sachs, Canadian, Mean Ted, Carson is a pathological liar, like a pedophile, like a violent criminal, Goldman Sachs, Universal Health care for everyone, Mean Ted, Jimmy Carter endorses Me, Goldman Sachs, Mean Ted, McConnell's a good man, Canadian, Goldman Sachs, I agree with Bernie on big bad drug companies, I like Chuck Schumer, Mean Ted, Goldman Sachs, Canadian.
t was good for business.
Trump has a history of choosing personal gain over the best interests of the United States
Anyone who thinks that a president trump would govern against the best interests of his empire is going to be very disappointed.
The trump company will still be operating. Its interests will still come first for trump
Why are you surprised? They also stood by gawking and many times aided and abetted this epic lawless invasion of our country. It's gone on for *decades* to the tune of hundreds of billions which Middle America was forced to subsidize.
I have no doubt about that.
Charles Krauthammer did not seem to trust Roberts: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/21/AR2005072102187.html
Roberts clerked with Cruz. Wouldn't Cruz have knows of this red flag against Roberts before Cruz enthusiastically pushed George W. Bush to nominate him?
“That’s not the only source. Try google. His pro bono work for gay rights groups was well known at the time of the confirnation hearings.”
Try Google yourself. It’s all the same source. “Close to...”
Close Too is a source they use when they are full of shit. Get me a name or his name on a document, then we’ll talk. NO ONE believed it then, and I don’t believe it now. Roberts was solid. This board was jubilant for months. you think he actually did this and NOBODY came forward? Bwahahahaha.
Just like there ain’t a perfect pick for President, there ain’t a perfect pick for SCOTUS - that said, we need to find someone that’s at least 90% conservative even if he has a few opinions (not how he would rule, but what his personal thoughts may be) that someone can nitpick over.
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.