Skip to comments.Did Justice Roberts Switch his Vote Late in the Game?
Posted on 06/30/2012 2:22:06 AM PDT by Kevmo
NedStark wrote: http://www.volokh.com/2012/06/28/was-scalias-dissent-originally-a-majority-opinion/
"Scalias dissent, at least on first quick perusal, reads like it was originally written as a majority opinion (in particular, he consistently refers to Justice Ginsburgs opinion as The Dissent). Back in May, there were rumors floating around relevant legal circles that a key vote was taking place, and that Roberts was feeling tremendous pressure from unidentified circles to vote to uphold the mandate. Did Roberts originally vote to invalidate the mandate on commerce clause grounds, and to invalidate the Medicaid expansion, and then decide later to accept the tax argument and essentially rewrite the Medicaid expansion (which, as I noted, citing Jonathan Cohn, was the sleeper issue in this case) to preserve it? If so, was he responding to the heat from President Obama and others, preemptively threatening to delegitimize the Court if it invalidated the ACA? The dissent, along with the surprising way that Roberts chose to uphold both the mandate and the Medicaid expansion, will inevitably feed the rumor mill."
I still believe that it is likely that there was insider trading that drove the price of this contract from $7-$9 in the past month. However, in the two days before the decision the price fell on substantial volume.
If the suspicions about Roberts changing his vote at the last minute are true then this only reinforces the intrade's value as a predictive market even though this time the bettors 'got it wrong.'
Edit to add here is an article that makes it clear that Roberts switched sides after the opinions had been written:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/06/29/did-rob...t-was-initially-set-to-strike/ This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at June 29, 2012 19:09:38 UTC
Roberts was blackmailed over the illegal adoption of his kids:
XXXXX DRUDGE REPORT XXXXX THU AUG 04, 2005 11:35:09 ET XXXXX
NY TIMES INVESTIGATES ADOPTION RECORDS OF SUPREME COURT NOMINEE’S CHILDREN
The DRUDGE REPORT has uncovered a plot in the NEW YORK TIMES’ newsroom to look into the adoption of the children of Supreme Court Nominee John G. Roberts.
“The democrats are the party of TAXES and we need to get them out.”
And they are all good with that. Almost 50 percent don’t pay them anyway AND want MORE taxes on the others to put more in their own pockets! They think more taxes are all jolly good since only affects “the rich”.
Kagan shouldn’t have even voted! Someone got to Roberts.
I’ve been booted off sites before for emphasizing this, but we have to recognize the situation: The Dhimmis will always be the party of increasing Government and high taxes.
IS NOW, AND FOREVER WILL BE.
The REAL problem that can destroy the country are the traitors in our midst. They will shaft good bills before a vote, make bad compromises, and snatch defeat from the jaws of Victory.
Roberts is only the LATEST example.
PURGE THE RINOS is the only way to win.
Maybe John has been taking creative writing courses.
Sam, what I'm concerned about is the impact that "now it's OK" obamacare will now have on businesses, citizens and our economy. A lot of Americans are about to be laid off, and others without jobs are about to find it's going to become exponentially more difficult to find one. No one who can avoid it is going to hire someone while the costs associated to that position can't be quantified.
This is a disaster for all Americans.
Roberts could have ended and obama would still be in a position where the electorate would go against him.
It will be 6-9 months before any sign of relief is in sight. On top of this we know that there will be an orchestrated financial crisis or war in October. The script has been played so many times it's routine.
Prayers for our fellow citizens on the brink.
A lot of Americans are about to be laid off, and others without jobs are about to find it's going to become exponentially more difficult to find one. No one who can avoid it is going to hire someone while the costs associated to that position can't be quantified. This is a disaster for all Americans.You are absolutely right. And though I realize you are making a different point than I am about to make, I'm going to use your words anyway, to make my own point:
What's important now is to get Obama out of office. Important now more than ever.
Because really, ObamaCare is just part of the big picture and the big picture is the destruction of freedom and liberty in America, and the destruction of America itself.
Roberts could have -- and should have -- shut down the danger of ObamaCare, that's true. But that would have done nothing to get the Evil One out of office, it may have even bolstered his re-election prospects.
I'm not saying I'm glad Roberts did what he did -- I'm not.
I am saying it's a very sharp two-edged sword and we have to use it to get Obama out of office. Period.
Hear hear! Hopefully that is correct.
Maybe someone threatened his family.
Time to scour this dud’s history for vulnerabilities and black mail potential. I believe he is in a self-protecting societal arrangement i.e., “no standing” protection.
I have a theory that GOP Elites commanded Roberts to switch. This has played right in to Mitt Romneys and Republicans hands (donations, polling and passion are all up). The Holder contempt vote was timed to coincide in an attempt to placate conservatives. Are we being played for suckers?
Did anyone get to the bottom of that death of the coroner, or even find out if he worked on Breitbart’s autopsy? I have trouble believing breitbart’s death was natural as well.
I’m not aware of it, but there is no doubt there are rat goons on payroll since the Clinton years, on call and ready anytime to get their hands dirty.
There is one possible motive for Roberts switching that really makes me hope is reality: that Ginsberg told Roberts that if he voted with the conservatives, she would resign immediately and Obama would get another SCOTUS appointment but she would hang on until January and let whoever is elected get that.
IF that be truth, and by energizing the conservative voters to elect Romney and a more conservative Senate, Ginsberg may not only have assured the ultimate downfall of ZeroCare, but allowed Roberts to have a less liberal Court in the future. In addition, the way he wrote the opinion, I believe he made it clear that overturning it will be able to be done through the budget (non-filibuster) process, he made clear he doesn’t think word games should be played in legislation (tax vs. penalty), and what really made Ginsberg upset is his clearly letting Congress know that invoking the “commerce clause” to justify ZeroCare or any version of it would NOT be acceptable in his view.
Very deep chess game if this is the correct scenario, but I don’t think it is out of the realm of possibility. It is also a very major gambit, but as a Chess Player, I have found that even major gambits can be extremely sound.
I believe that Roberts was signaling to us all along that he was compromised on the issue of Obama’s eligibility. (Ex parte invitation announced to the world on the same day as the Donofrio conference, the botched oath of office and refusal to have any videotape of any lawful oath given, and support for Kagan and Sotomayor’s failure to recuse on cases where their very positions were at issue). I believe these were red flags to say that even though he had to do what he did, he was doing them under duress and made those ethics breaches to highlight that something was wrong.
Soros has allowed Roberts to make some decisions that went against Soros’ ultimate agenda (such as the Citizens United decision) - just like Soros has allowed Fox to continue to have some actual conservative programming, and for the same reason: to make it appear that everything was fine so people would trust the system and then when the CRITICAL point arrived, Soros would insert the poison that would kill us. The initial threats were about eligibility, but as Glenn Beck found out (which ultimately led to him leaving Fox), once Soros knew he could use threats, it was just a matter of time before the threats extended to other issues. For Beck, the threats extended to anything Beck did to expose Soros’ connections to communism and Islamism. And I also have experienced direct interference from what I believe to be DHS when I tried to alert law enforcement to the possibility of Soros’ economic terrorism holding our entire system hostage.
I believe the threat that was made was another run on the bank by Soros’ communist-Islamist alliance. Which I believe was the same threat that got GW Bush, Dick Cheney, Judge David Carter, John Boehner, Roger Ailes, and possibly Condi Rice and Colin Powell to “overlook” Obama’s ineligibility.
Jeff Toobin tweeted (http://www.businessinsider.com/toobin-chief-justice-roberts-was-red-eyed-and-unhappy-when-he-read-the-obamacare-ruling-2012-6 ) that Roberts’ eyes were red and he was visibly unhappy while reading his decision. Sounds sort of like John Boehner, who would have been at the Sept 2008 meeting for the leadership the day after John McCain suspended his campaign and wanted to cancel all the debates, and GW Bush suddenly decided he had to give a speech to the country saying that Armageddon was upon us if we didn’t pass TARP. TARP wasn’t passed for some time and there was no Armageddon; that’s because the Armageddon Bush was afraid of was Soros deliberately making another run, having just demonstrated that he had the power to destroy the US economy/capitalism. This also explains why Congress would never tell us who made the run on the bank. Sources here at FR remember reading an article showing that the run originated in Indonesia, but the article was scrubbed within hours.
Anyway, there’s lots that could be said. I’ve explained a little more at http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2901021/posts?page=152#152 and a little at http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2900336/posts?page=519#519 .
The decision on whether to let Obamacare stand was a strategic one on the part of Soros. It would be better for Obama’s re-election chances if the nation was not galvanized and energized against Obamacare. If Obamacare was overturned perhaps conservatives would go back to sleep and Obama could get re-elected. This is why I wasn’t sure whether Soros was going to threaten Roberts into upholding Obamacare or not. It looks like Soros decided at the last minute that he didn’t fear the awakening of the sleeping giant.
I think Roberts was told to uphold Obamacare; I think he stabbed Soros in the back by doing it through calling it a tax, rather than upholding the Commerce Clause argument. That at least preserved political ammunition to try to undo the damage on this one, and perhaps the hope was that the precedent of allowing ANYTHING to be taxed could be overturned once Soros’ hold on America’s financial jugular was eliminated.
Roberts also allowed the world to see the red flags that THIS decision was under duress - with the red eyes and clearly unhappy demeanor. We know he is able to act a part, because he acted the role on Inauguration Day, even though making sure the oath was never lawfully given. But in this case he refused to even act the part, and Jeff Toobin was at least honest enough to point out Roberts’ unhappiness.
The photos of Roberts smiling, when somebody is talking about this decision, is deceptive. He was NOT smiling. I hadn’t realized that there aren’t photos allowed when the decision is being read, and I thought that the photos were of Roberts when the decision was being given. Those photos are going to hurt us because they imply a lie. The world needs to know the truth, that Roberts HATED the decision he had to read - so the world will ask, “Then why did he have to read that decision? Who made him give a decision he hated?”
The dissent still referring to Ginsburg’s opinion as the dissent could have been the conservative justices’ (and Kennedy’s) red flags to point out that all was not right. Altogether, Roberts, Kennedy, and the 3 conservative justices have created a clear picture of some foul intervention leading to the miscarriage of justice that NONE of them likes. This should have been a 5-4 decision against Obamacare, and the 5 justices who opposed it have all pitched in to the public’s realization of that.
El Dictator Obozo to John the traitor, "Hey Justice John, Nancy is really great in bed isn't she, and her pictures of you in bed with her are ready to go on You Tube if you don't vote for us!"
A question for all of us: "When and how did Pelosi know that her side would win?"
Most everyone was aware that the commies had 4 votes no matter what. That left 3 for the conservative side with kennedy/roberts question marks. After the first vote was taken, it leaked that roberts was the tossup and needed to be the one isolated and attacked, not kennedy. The commies definitely got to the wuss roberts but a lot of credit goes to the 4 conservatives. Simply put, the conservatives need a strong 5 or 7 members vs the commie side and the november election is do or die.
I think all of that is true but the fact remains that Roberts appears to have thrown Obama a curve ball. Yes ObamaCare survived and yes that’s bad, but the fact cannot be dismissed that it survived as a TAX and that fact alone will make it easier to defeat Obama and all democrats in the fall.
***Have you been following the last couple of days? Zer0bama simply said that he doesn’t agree that it’s a tax. He gets to have his tax cake and eat it, too.
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.