Skip to comments.The Ghost and John Roberts: The Plot Thickens on the Obamacare Decision
Posted on 02/05/2014 7:59:17 AM PST by SeekAndFind
The chief justice must have "gone off his meds." No, it was blackmail. No, it was cowardice. He caved. It was a perverse abdication of his fundamental responsibility.
Those are some of the many disputations that came in to American Thinker regarding my exploration of another possible explanation for why Chief Justice John Roberts chose, astonishingly, to keep the "Affordable Care Act" alive and kicking.("The Roberts Trap Is Sprung", American Thinker, Jan. 2)
Of the nearly 680 comments, roughly four out of five were against the thesis I advanced, which is that Roberts ruled as he did because he foresaw that if the Supreme Court were to kill the "Affordable Care Act" in its infancy, the ruling would ultimately backfire on the cause of constitutional governance. Further review, however, has led me to look upon that thesis as even more plausible, not less. Here's why.
Let's look first at the most popular counter-theory among the commenters, because it seems the simplest to dispense with, albeit the most sensational. Here's the gist of it:
John and Jane (nee Sullivan) Roberts were married in 1996 and about four years later they adopted their two children, both infants at the time, a boy and a girl, about four months apart in age. The adoptions were "private," meaning they were arranged through private parties without the involvement of any agencies. The notion of the Obama White House blackmailing Roberts arose with rumors that the adoptions may have been illegal under the laws of Ireland.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
bookmarking for later
VERY interesting theory and possibly very true.
hmmm... i don’t know...
Yes John Roberts, it IS your job to protect us from tyranny even if 51% of America votes for it. That’s the beauty of the design of our system .
If anyone has insiders knowledge of how incompetent and corrupt the current administration really is - you'd figure it to be the SC.
If the authors thesis is accurate, it would kind of be like setting out poison for rats to eat so they die.
He declares the blackmail theory to be the easiest to dispense with, but ultimately just dismisses it as suspicion and rumor. His only argument against it is the idea that the anti-Bush crowd would have dug this up during the nomination process and scuttled it. Yeah, because it would never occur to a Democratic operative that having such blackmail material in their back pocket against a Supreme Court justice would come in handy in the future.
Apart from that, the author doesn’t even attempt to refute the allegation that the adoptions were illegal. Maybe he can’t because the adoptions were private and he wouldn’t have access to any information that would settle the matter one way or the other, but by not even bothering to make that point, he’s not exactly steering anyone away from such speculation.
We will only know the thinking of Roberts when/if he writes a memoir. Right now he’s not talking, which demonstrates a degree of self-control on his part.
In the meantime, it seems a reach of fancy to hope that the collectivist Dems won’t like the dog food they served up in O Care. They are unable to learn from mistakes, and they believe the answer to their dog food is more dog food.
A pity the Slimes never had the same inclination to probe for a certain birth certificate, or college transcript or...
If Roberts had the balls why wouldn't he counter-blackmail Soetoro? There continues to be a mountain of crap available for Roberts to pursue to quash any attempt to neutralize him.
For there to be merit to that theory we have to credit Roberts with wide and forward thinking.
After reading the article, I believe the author is saying that Roberts knew the law was unconstitutional. But Roberts ruled in the law's favor anyway because he feared the backlash that would follow.
And the author seems to be okay with that.
If that theory is correct, then Roberts has violated his oath of office and should be impeached.
disinformation in order to say “experts have discredited.”
NOW what ?
You better believe the press would be all OVER this ... negatively, of course, but it would be super hot stuff.
The public would go wild over the government breaking up a family (those mexi kids didn't do this, their parents did, don't break up a family .. )
Let's go further ... The US deports the kids to ... wherever.
NOW we have some press, yoobetcha' !!
Johnboy ... TELL me ... do you REALLY want to stay in the US with a government that does that to you?
Would you and your wife at least buy a summer home in Ireland or wherever?
See ... Roberts couldn't go to jail for this, but the USGov't could be brought to task
And the author seems to be okay with that.
If that theory is correct, then Roberts has violated his oath of office and should be impeached.”
His dismissal on the blackmail theory is only based on the adoption of his children. I think there is a far more obvious blackmail angle that has been discussed all over the Internet. The author didn't even mention other possibilities.
Roberts is saving his own skin, at least temporarily. There will be another R president, and only then will Roberts dirt be shown the light of day.
As an aside, has anyone noticed you do not hear Rush say that anymore.
However, the thing that I wonder about, that this bad (and it was a BAD decision from a Constitutional perspective, as Justice Scalia so ably documented in his dissent) decision avoided, is the outcry from the LEFT. Just imagine the reaction by the LEFTIST government/media complex to a SCOTUS decision that overturned 0bamacare at its 'infancy'. And within a few months of a POTUS election. It would have made Roe v Wade and Bush v Gore look like pillow fights in comparison.
More than likely, IMO, Roberts has the typical sexual deviant crap in his closet. After all, we have all seen the birthday cake Village People picture floating around the internet.
All of our betters (elites) seem to have these issues. The crap floats to the top.
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.