Posted on 03/22/2011 11:58:28 AM PDT by Ballygrl
Obama may be in deep trouble… Chief Justice John Roberts, U.S. Supreme Court
By Rebel Rouser from Texas
According to sources who watch the inner workings of the federal government, a smackdown of Barack Obama by the U.S. Supreme Court may be inevitable. Ever since Obama assumed the office of President, critics have hammered him on a number of Constitutional issues.
Critics have complained that much, if not all of Obama’s major initiatives run headlong into Constitutional roadblocks on the power of the federal government. Obama certainly did not help himself in the eyes of the Court when he used the venue of the State of the Union address early in the year to publicly flog the Court over its ruling that the First Amendment grants the right to various organizations to run political ads during the time of an election.
The tongue-lashing clearly did not sit well with the Court, as demonstrated by Justice Sam Alito, who publicly shook his head and stated under his breath, ‘That’s not true,’ when Obama told a flat-out lie concerning the Court’s ruling.
As it has turned out, this was a watershed moment in the relationship between the executive and the judicial branches of the federal government. Obama publicly declared war on the court, even as he blatantly continued to propose legislation that flies in the face of every known Constitutional principle upon which this nation has stood for over 200 years.
Obama has even identified Chief Justice John Roberts as his number one enemy, that is, apart from Fox News and Rush Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity, and so on. And it is no accident that the one swing-vote on the court, Justice Anthony Kennedy, stated recently that he has no intention of retiring until ‘Obama is gone.’ Apparently, the Court has had enough.
The Roberts Court has signaled, in a very subtle manner, of course, that it intends to address the issues about which Obama critics have been screaming to high heaven. A ruling against Obama on any one of these important issues could potentially cripple the Administration. Such a thing would be long overdue.
First, there is ObamaCare, which violates the Constitutional principle barring the federal government from forcing citizens to purchase something. And no, this is not the same thing as states requiring drivers to purchase car insurance, as some of the intellectually-impaired claim.
The Constitution limits FEDERAL government, not state governments, from such things, and further, not everyone has to drive, and thus, a citizen could opt not to purchase car insurance by simply deciding not to drive a vehicle.
In the ObamaCare world, however, no citizen can ‘opt out.’
Second, sources state that the Roberts court has quietly accepted information concerning discrepancies in Obama’s history that raise serious questions about his eligibility for the office of President.
The charge goes far beyond the birth certificate issue. This information involves possible fraudulent use of a Social Security number in Connecticut, while Obama was a high school student in Hawaii.
And that is only the tip of the iceberg. Third, several cases involving possible criminal activity, conflicts of interest, and pay-for-play cronyism could potentially land many Administration officials, if not Obama himself, in hot water with the Court.
Frankly, in the years this writer has observed politics, nothing comes close to comparing with the rampant corruption of this Administration, not even during the Nixon years.
Nixon and the Watergate conspirators look like choirboys compared to the jokers that populate this Administration. In addition, the Court will eventually be forced to rule on the dreadful decision of the Obama DOJ suing the state of Arizona.
That, too, could send the Obama doctrine of open borders to an early grave, given that the Administration refuses to enforce federal law on illegal aliens.
And finally, the biggie that could potentially send the entire house of cards tumbling in a free-fall is the latest revelation concerning the Obama-Holder Department of Justice and its refusal to pursue the New Black Panther Party.
The group was caught on tape committing felonies by attempting to intimidate Caucasian voters into staying away from the polls.
A whistle-blower who resigned from the DOJ is now charging Holder with the deliberate refusal to pursue cases against blacks, particularly those who are involved in radical hate-groups, such as the New Black Panthers, who have been caught on tape calling for the murder of white people and their babies.
This one is a biggie that could send the entire Administration crumbling — that is, if the Justices have the guts to draw a line in the sand at the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
Don’t forget to add declaring war on Libya without congressional approval.
I’d love to get excited over this but the best I can do is, “I’ll believe it when I see it.”
This article is several months old judging from comments at source blog dated October 2010. The court has been in session since that time. Where’s the smackdown?
There are a lot of claims made by the author that I’ve never seen before and are not sourced in the article. I’d love to see this “smack down” myself but I have pretty big doubts about the validity of the authors claims.
Is this a year old? The state of the union speech where he castigated the ccourt was earlyi in 2010, not in 2011.
Thanks go out to Thor from ConservativeCave who found this.
Glad to hear that the SC may not be in a self-induced coma.
Apparently they can, as long as they act through a politically connected union, business, or other organization that donates to the right (or should I say "left") causes.
Please don’t toy with my emotions.
This article is pure speculation and nonsense based on little more than the author’s review of well known current events. Sorry.
For example, the Supreme Court has zero ability to do anything about Holder’s decision not to pursue the Black Panthers’ case.
Wait, someone is gonna stand up to the limp wristed, pansy ass, man-wife having president?!
Color me doubtful!
I never thought about that, but you are right, and it is VERY curious.
I just hope he has finally pushed some of the SC Justices past their point of tolerance. I fervently hope this is true.
“Obama may be in deep trouble… Chief Justice John Roberts, U.S. Supreme Court”
Misleading headline. The article never cites where Roberts said that.
“I didn’t know Justice Kennedy said he wouldn’t retire until Obama was gone. Good for him—now if only he would decide issues via the Constitution every time.”
*********
And that could be why he said he wouldn’t leave until obumbler’s gone; so he can vote FOR the corrupt crap that comes his way, not against.
Isn't the fraudulent use of a Social Security Number a felony? If so, the Fraudster-in-Chief is ineligible to hold ANY federal office for the remainder of his life. I'd also like to see his college and law school records released, as well as his IL Bar application - because I'd bet dollars (real ones, made of silver) to donuts that he lied on student loan and grant applications, as well as the bar application - felonies all.
Frankly, in the years this writer has observed politics, nothing comes close to comparing with the rampant corruption of this Administration, not even during the Nixon years.
Nixon was a piker compared to this guy. Nixon, for all of his faults and policy errors, was a 100% loyal American and loved his country to the point that he wouldn't challenge the 1969 election results (compare and contrast with Algore) and didn't want to put the country through an impeachment (compare and contrast to Billy Jeff). Assuming that there is someone left in a few decades who gives a damn about American history, Nixon will be shown to be not so bad in comparison to a bunch of those on the other side of the aisle - most especially Fauxbama.
One can only hop some Patriots are left in the FBI.
More talk, NO ACTION. Zero is above the law, we’ve seen it over & over, he is funeded my muzzies & their goal is to take over this country. He won’t stop til that is achieved!
I am sure this is written by someone sharing our views, but it I am hopeful that at least some of it is factual, and not wishful thinking. I am sure we won’t see any of our 5 closest allies on the court leave by choice before the term ends. If Obama goes 8 years, though, it is almost inevitable at least one of the five has declining health problems or other reasons to leave in that time frame. I hope to hell these five votes stay intact for the Obamacare hearings.
Second, sources state that the Roberts court has quietly accepted information concerning discrepancies in Obama’s history that raise serious questions about his eligibility for the office of President.
The charge goes far beyond the birth certificate issue. This information involves possible fraudulent use of a Social Security number in Connecticut, while Obama was a high school student in Hawaii.”
I have never heard about this at all.
ping
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.