Skip to comments.QUESTION: Is there any real evidence that Justice Roberts was blackmailed? (Obamacare)
Posted on 10/04/2013 9:11:53 PM PDT by MrChips
Is there any evidence that Roberts was blackmailed when he made his Obamacare ruling . . . which required such contorted logic . . . and left us all hanging? I need to know for an argument I am having.
why does a RINO need to be blackmailed to vote like a RINO? I never believed in that crap. The problem is not blackmail - the problem is Roberts.
Google John Roberts, Ireland, adoption to discover the theories
Other than the sheer insanity of the ruling itself I haven’t seen any. Doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist, I just haven’t seen it. Hard pressed to explain the ruling otherwise though.
Then there are the summers spent in the Mediterranean with a long term friend who also looks happy, both now and then.
Roberts was against it before he was for it.
No. The terrible thing is that, thanks to the income tax amendment, a penalty can be assessed as an income tax.
Taxation used to be a much more difficult thing for the federal government. The income tax amendment gave them all sorts of nearly arbitrary taxing power.
In theory a tax could be imposed on people for simply saying things the government doesn’t like. Scarey but true.
There are several possibilities but it seems that by declaring the fee to be a tax he might have opened an avenue because the tax part of it made it a revenue bill which must originate as a revenue bill in the house. If it did not originate there as a taxing bill in its current format then it might not be constitutional.
I have heard from someone who has known Roberts for decades that throughout his career, he has refused even to converse casually among friends about his opinions about anything.
Their impression is that he wanted to be on the Supreme Court, and he wasn’t about to leave a conversational trail, let alone a paper trail.
And Roberts’s own comments around the time of his nomination were bizarre: He was determined to increase the “prestige” of the Court. Nice to know, when you are a plaintiff in a case, that the judge cares more about his own “prestige” than he does about the facts or the law.
A retired judge whom I know well believes that Roberts was gotten to somehow because he switched sides and would not discuss it with his former allies. Roberts simply could face and not explain himself to those colleagues who know him best. This is unusual conduct by a judge because it is a transgression against the principles of collegiality that are intended to govern appellate courts.
If that was his idea, then he should have declared it a tax, then declared it unConstitutional because of the Origination Clause.
No. He just wanted to be popular. He’s a sleaze and a weirdo.
Constitutional. What the heck does that mean today?
Is there any evidence he wasn’t?
Yes, it is. Thanks.
No...other than how twisted and flawed the logic of his decision was. Either someone got to him, or he went rogue. I say he went rogue trying to establish his legacy. It’s a crappy legacy, but he’s got one now.
Roberts is the Chief Justice and did what he was hired to do.
He said at his confirmation that that his job was not to pick sides but be an umpire, to many in this country today confuse the term conservative in the context of the supreme Court with the political term.
A Conservative Justice will find a law passed by the Congress constitutional if at all possible. A conservative justice gives the will of the people expressed through their representatives precedence.
IMO Roberts looked at the dysfunctional Congress and simply said you guys passed this this.. deal with it...
Ah, but he re-wrote it.
He’s a closeted homosexual. Did pro bono work for a homosexual organization. There are photos of him with two of the guys, he looks just like them. His marriage is fake. He did an illegal adoption of two Irish children via Latin America. It’s all very creepy, and Bush was a jerk to appoint him.
Two very good and important points
Let’s not let conspiracy theories blind us about 2 important facts (one of them could be the key of ridding this nation of ObamaCare:
Comment by: RJS1950
“it seems that by declaring the fee to be a tax he might have opened an avenue because the tax part of it made it a revenue bill which must originate as a revenue bill in the house. If it did not originate there as a taxing bill in its current format then it might not be constitutional.”
I’ve wondered if they had something on him like the Corleone family had on the southern Senator in “The Godfather Part II”.
Roberts’ illegal adoption is sufficient evidence. For all we know he might have blackmailed himself over it. Scaredy cat. It’s naive to think that there are explicit blackmail situations in Washington, horses’ heads in beds, like in silly Hollywood fantasies. A word can be passed to third, fourth and fifth persons, to a waiter at Trader Vic’s, valet parking attendant, and that is sufficient. I’ve seen it done in business, where a security guard, who wasn’t even working directly for the company that he guarded, was the ear and the mouth of the CEO. We know about your adoption, pal, it’s Chinatown!
That what appellate court do everyday..
As I say a conservative justice gives the will of the people expressed through their representatives the final say.
Its like the umpire calling strikes, as long as its in the strike zone its constitutional.
The libs want the courts (and have been fairly successful and getting the umpire to pick a side) but a conservative justice defers to the legislature..
Anyone noticed that the first TWO justices President Bush picked were RINOS. It was only after blow back to Bush’s 2nd pick that Bush finally picked someone more Conservative
I do find it more than coincidental that CNN and MSNBC commentators were predicting that Roberts would vote with the liberals on the court and they mentioned it more than a few times in the weeks leading up to the decision. Most conservatives were concerned with Kennedy, but the lame stream media suddenly turned their attention to Roberts and that he would be the swing vote. And sure enough, he was! Coincidence? I think not!
One of the best solution to the deity known as the Supreme Court is to televise every single minute while in session. SCOTUS Tv
Judges are bought all the time. Frank Wilson's impartial judgement of "Not Guilty" on a murder charge, resulting from a Mob hit, cost $10,000.
It's the Chicago Way.
I guess they missed all the protests that surrounded the passage of this bill, the one you say was the will of the people.
I’m following what you are laying out here, but wonder, how in the world does it apply to this grossly unpopular bill?
Of course he was threatened. We’re talking about Obama, a practitioner of take no prisoners Chicago politics schooled by Saul Alinsky. Threatening a Supreme Court justice is all in a day’s work for a thug like Obama. I’m sure he didn’t threaten Roberts directly, but it was handled discreetly by his organized network of reprobates. It is all but certain we will never learn the truth about it.
Evidence is not required. Roberts changed his mind at the last minute and that cannot be explained logically by anyone no matter what is said. SCOTUS spent the first day of oral hearings listening to arguments on the Anti Injunction Act of 1867 and everyone appeared to agree that Obamacare’s penalty was not a tax and therefore the case could continue. Otherwise if it were admitted to be a tax and no one had yet been taxed case should have been thrown out RIGHT ON THE SPOT.
IMHO opinion, your IMO makes no sense.
i saw video posted by joseph Curl of a man in his underwears. At the same time Drudge and Beck were in New York to see who would buy or print a story.They did not want to be left hanging.Is it penis I think people would forgive the Kids.JMO
No evidence of blackmail. What I see is a very weak person in Judge Roberts. Someone not far evolved from the middle school playground. What I mean is that most people want to be liked within their social sphere. That means for Roberts those at the cool cocktail parties in the DC area. He was the nerd wanting to be accepted by the cool kids, the liberal establishment. Just like the nerd who dumps his milk shake on the head of a weaker classmate in order to get the approval of the cool kids, Roberts dumped on us in order to get invited to the latest Tina Brown soiree. If he voted his convictions (not dumping milk shakes on peoples heads) he remains on the outside looking in. Like the child he really is inside, he begs for acceptance from the establishment. However, in the end it never works, they will reject him anyway. It is a rare person who marches to their own drummer. That is why you see a gradual change in most politicians who have been in DC for any length of time. So our lives and our children’s lives are upended because of one immature and stunted person with the psyche of a 13 year old.
very plausible insights, thanks.
His job is to enforce the Constitution of the United States, all of it. If Congress passes a law, any law, that violates the enumerated powers granted to the federal government, then he should do his job and strike it down. That is his job.
Talk on certain internet based radio programs at the time was that the NSA had dirt on him, probably child porn. But at the time is was a silly “Conspiracy Theory” that the NSA spied on Americans much less Supreme Court Justices and hell before that it was a conspiracy theory that the NSA even existed.
Reading “Brainwashing” Psychopolitics.
Marxists have been bribing, killing and getting control over all people in positions of power, since early 1900s. It is their MO—to infiltrate EVERY institution which wields influence and power. They destroy/Blackmail/kill since way before McCarthy. McCarthy was put in their bullseye and it destroyed him. They have controlled the media since early 1900s.
They have been owning Judges-—and controlling their rulings since they stole Tesla’s patents. Sure-—there are some “Good” judges that can’t be bribed-—but they will have an accident or commit suicide.
Two areas which makes Roberts bribable. There are numerous photos of him with homosexuals as if he is a homosexual.....and then his adoption of “Irish” children (which is illegal) is also a problem. Marxists have controlled APA since early 50s-—and get all sorts of data on wealthy “clients”.
It is like Glenn Beck states——if YOU are going to do “Good” and get involved in politics, you had better have NO skeletons in your closet-—NONE. They will still try to ‘Ted Cruz’ everyone since they own media——but it will be much harder-—because lies will not stick as well.
can we prove anything?...no....so what?....we know it took contorted strange logic to say what he said....
“in the Mediterranean with a long term friend who also looks happy,,,”
Why, one might even say he looks gay,,,,
What a lose accusation.Who the hell are you to accuse him of that.Back it up with links or remove the post.
So today the conservative Justice says lets follow the Constitution and give the congress the benefit of the doubt upholding what they pass..
But the liberal Justice says the Constitution is a living document subject to our interpretation and because the Congress critters are a bunch of idiots we will interpret what they say also...
Roberts is saying it not our role to change the will of the legislature..
grossly unpopular ..yeah..
But it still got the required majority to pass..the SC only deals with what is before them ..the legislative record, the briefs submitted, they do not and should not pay attention to the popular sentiment IMO
Again the SC is not designed to rubber stamp the will of the majority. Its function is to prevent the majority from getting outside of the strike zone.
I’m just stating what was said at the time. And those that said this predicted he would rule the way he did when everyone else thought otherwise.
he went beyond umpire, that’s why people are wondering.
1. he changed his position.
2. he wouldn’t explain it to his colleagues he switched on.
3. he unconstitutionally rewrote the law.
this is why many believe he was threatened/blackmailed.
Something will eventually come out about him, probably won't help prove he was blackmailed, but something will come out.
His ruling and logic was pure garbage, he's not that stupid, he was blackmailed.
i don’t want to watch an old lady asleep and a dumb dyke who thinks she’s wise.
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.