Posted on 08/04/2005 8:48:41 AM PDT by kennedy
XXXXX DRUDGE REPORT XXXXX THU AUG 04, 2005 11:35:09 ET XXXXX
NY TIMES INVESTIGATES ADOPTION RECORDS OF SUPREME COURT NOMINEE'S CHILDREN
**Exclusive**
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 TIMES has investigative reporter Glen Justice hot on the case to investigate adoption records of Judge Roberts’ two young children, Josie age 5 and Jack age 4, a top source reveals.
Judge Roberts and his wife Jane adopted the children when they each were infants.
Both children were adopted from Latin America.
A TIMES insider claims the look into the adoptions are part of the paper's "standard background check."
Roberts’ young son Jack delighted millions of Americans during his father’s Supreme Court nomination announcement ceremony when he wouldn’t stop dancing while the President and his father spoke to a national television audience.
Previously the WASHINGTON POST Style section had published a story criticizing the outfits Josie’s and Jack’s mother had them wear at the announcement ceremony.
One top Washington official with knowledge of the NEW YORK TIMES’ plans declared: “Trying to pry into the lives of the Roberts’ family like this is despicable. Children’s lives should be off limits. The TIMES is putting politics over fundamental decency.”
One top Republican official when told of the situation was incredulous. “This can’t possibly be true?”
Developing...
NYT will find that:
1) Judge Roberts is the father of the children (illicit love affair)
2) Is prejudiced against US orphans and/or unwanted children
3) Adopted the children for tax benefits and exemptions
4) possible child molester
Sorry I followed that link. Those people over there are dilusional.
I sent an e-mail but will call too!
The N.Y.T. has yet to publish a single word about Air America recieving funds designated for a Childrens group.
But they have THIS on the front burner?
What a mess.
It is possible they went through a Catholic Adoption agency and took first available. The Roman Catholic Church is international and borders are not important.
Good Post.
I spent a little more than five years in a surgery clinic in South America and saw many blond haired patients.
Blond did not seem to me to be that rare.
Your post #357...I see these in the park by my office alot during Lunch hour (Madison Square Park) always a very white baby in it and being pushed by a Jamaican/Latin nanny.....oh well at least the babies were allowed to live!
BTW - Congrats on your engagement! I hope you have a wonderful marriage and get a proper "pram" (and push it yourself!)
I can't wait to hear Neil Cavuto on this one. This is the stuff of his final segment.
True, but NYT has to find something wrong, even if they have to make up a story.
And they just happen to have two blond haired infants from Latin America? Given the high demand both here and there, doubtful.
Neil or Gibson will tee off on this! Several people in my parish have adopted kids from all over the world, they want the kids so bad it does not matter where they come from or what they look like. The kids are cute and should be off limits, I sure hope they know they are adopted or are kept away from the TV for now.
Without a doubt there are many, many fair-skinned blondes in Latin America, nobody would deny it.
But darn few of them in orphanages.
The NYT is playing the odds, hoping there was some irregularity, privilege or payoff, in the Roberts adoptions. Adopting not one but two blond kids overseas, that can't be easy.
Backlash against the Times, though, should be something to tell our grandchildren about. I don't believe the NYT wanted this to leak; nobody's that tone deaf.
>>>What was wrong with the clothes, I thought they were such great outfits.>>>
They didn't have the five year old outfitted with hip hugging pants with the words "Hot Stuff" written across the hiney with a tummy shirt or the boy in pants that drooped so low it showed his underwear and the shoes I refer to as 'lazy shoes' as they have no shoelaces, just puffs air to get them to fit. Don't think I'm joking, I shop for a four year old, eight year and nine year old and they have these clothes and PUSH them. I refuse to let my daughters where anything where attention is emphasized on their prepubscent butt. Other parents are not so caring.
I can't argue with that! You are correct!
Does is matter? I mean really? They couldn't have their own for whatever reason and they adopted two of them so what?
She looks like Hillary on the top half of her face, and Hubbell on the bottom. No denying those lips.
Worth less than half, I bet.
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.