Was Chief Justice John Roberts Blackmailed To Support ObamaCare?

Many of us have questioned what causedRoberts to switch his vote on ObamaCare at the last minute, as repo..., and doing so, so late that the Conservative Justices were forced to rewrite their majority opinion to be minority dissent. These facts may answer that question.

In 2000 Justice Roberts and his wife Jane adopted two children. Initially it was apparent that the adoptions were "from a Latin American country", but over time it has become apparent that the adopted children were not Latin American, but were Irish. Why this matters will become evident.

In 2005 the NY Times began investigating Roberts life as a matter of his nomination to the Supreme Court by George Bush. The Times was shortly accused of trying to unseal the adoption papers and intending to violate the anonymity of the adoption process... however there is more to the story.

Drudge did an article in 2005
http://patterico.com/2005/08/04/drudge-says-new-york-times-is-inves...

The NEW YORK TIMES is looking into the adoption records of the children of Supreme Court Nominee John G. Roberts, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned.

The TIMES has investigative reporter Glen Justice hot on the case to investigate the status of 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 adoption papers are part of the paper’s “standard background check.”

Bill Borders, NYT senior editor, explains: “Our reporters made initial inquiries about the adoptions, as they did about many other aspects of his background. They did so with great care, understanding the sensitivity of the issue.”

Were the Children Adopted from Ireland?

You need to be a member of Tea Party Nation to add comments!

Join Tea Party Nation

Comment by Rich Knoch on February 14, 2013 at 7:37am: Chicago Thugs can be quite persuasive!

Comment by Trip on February 14, 2013 at 1:47am: Kenneth, in this case those "investigators" would only have to go to wikipedia, or have been around in D.C. and paying reasonable attention at the time of Roberts confirmation in 2005, no great expense or effort necessary.

Comment by Kenneth Paul Russell on February 13, 2013 at 11:45pm: You all give Obama too much credit for having some sort of high intelligence! This from someone too stupid to swat flies from his head!

I'm afraid all the sneaky, sleazy, even clever moves that appear to be coming from Obama are in reality coming from the grand puppeteer Soros! The old mentally deranged man, with Billions to buy the best investigators, and lawyers the world has to offer!

Comment by Trip on February 12, 2013 at 7:04pm: For those discussing ACA being "a tax", it is prohibited to Congress as both a tax and a fine. Roberts did not just mysteriously transform the law, but tried to establish a means that it might be legitimate, and came up with a lot of falsehood and nonsense. Why both a "tax" and "fine" are prohibited by the Constitution. Roberts rationalized it because he wanted to, but more importantly he did so at the last minute, flipping his vote, and ended up writing both the majority and minority opinions. Roberts initial impulse was to reject Obamacare, and not just the individual mandate, but rule the entirety unconstitutional, which it is. Something caused him to flip at the last minute.

P.S. in·nu·en·do (ny-nd)n. 1. An indirect or subtle, usually derogatory implication in expression; an insinuation.

Nothing I wrote in that article involves any sort of "innuendo". It is clear that Roberts was acting outside the law to adopt those children, which is not okay for a sitting Chief Justice to do. The only thing missing is an actual smoking gun, as in evidence of the blackmail threat itself.

Comment by Trip on February 12, 2013 at 11:49am: Katie, thank you for reposting the story over here at TPN.

American Infidel, what makes you think it is "rubbish"? There are a few sources indicating that the children were born 4+ months apart in Ireland, and Latin America is is not exactly the direct route to seek Irish adoptions, despite reports of Scandinavian looking children there. When you speak of likelihood, this one seems so obvious it strikes you in the face, once you focus in on the accounts from 2005. Did you take a look at the sources?

Comment by Sylvia M Maresca on February 11, 2013 at 9:29pm: Never mind the last post,I read the whole story. So the Chief Justice has left himself open to blackmail by the likes of Obama.......what an ass! Coservatives continue to underestimate the prez......we deserve whatever follows.

Comment by Sylvia M Maresca on February 11, 2013 at 9:15pm: Can someone explain to me what the article was about? What does it matter if the kids were adopted from Latin America or Ireland? Read the blog twice,and still cannot find what the kerfufle is about

Comment by Pamela Harper on February 11, 2013 at 6:59pm: I am no scholar of any kind but I've always thought that a tax had to be generated in the House. How come Roberts was able to call what was said to be a mandate, a tax?! Something smells to high heaven & I'd really be worried if I didn't know that God is STILL on the throne! We need help from the One that matters & that ain't no one in the DC part of the world. God, please have mercy on the USA & take away the nightmare that our country is living.

Comment by Dennis L. Kolb Sr. on February 11, 2013 at 6:51pm: IF TRUE; A DO-NOTHING CONGRESS WILL.........................................DO NOTHING!

Comment by Tony Denslow on February 11, 2013 at 6:08pm: Tea Party Nation, or at least this blog, is starting to resemble a gossip column. I want truth, not innuendo.

‹ Previous
1
2
3
…
6
Next ›