Shinmen Takezo
Inactive
Was Chief Justice Roberts Blackmailed Into Supporting Obamacare? Maybe.
http://www.mrconservative.com/2013/...-blackmailed-into-supporting-obamacare-maybe/
AUTHOR Bookworm
May 18, 2013 7:23pm PST
In 2012, Chief Justice John Roberts cast the deciding vote for the Supreme Court’s ruling that ObamaCare was a legal tax. Conservatives were beyond stunned. Roberts’ decision was a narrow, weaving, legal mess, unlike the clear, assured opinions he usually wrote. What the heck happened? Some people posited that he had brain damage from a fall he’d taken some years before. Others sourly said that he’d fallen prey to what’s called Greenhouse Syndrome – the Supreme Court justices’ desperate need to feel the love from The New York Times’ former Supreme Court reporter, Linda Greenhouse.
There were also some subterranean murmurings that the Obama administration was blackmailing Chief Justice Roberts. This was a bit far-fetched. We all knew that Obama habitually practiced a Chicago-approach to politics, one that saw him digging up secret dirt on his opponents, releasing it, and forcing them out of the election. For example, when Obama ran for the U.S. Senate in 2004, his opponent was the popular Jack Ryan. As the campaign progressed badly for Obama, secret court filings from Ryan’s divorce “miraculously” appeared with unproven allegations from his former wife about his sexual practices. The scandal hit the fan, Ryan dropped out of the race, and Obama ran essentially unopposed against Ryan’s replacement, Alan Keyes.
But what in the world could Obama have on Chief Justice Roberts? The man is pure as driven snow, for goodness sakes. He has a lovely wife, two picture-perfect little blond children, and universal adulation from anyone who had ever associated with him, either personally or professionally.
But about those picture-perfect little blond children. . . .
Jake Baker, writing at a blog called No Compromise offers an interesting new theory: he thinks that the Obama administration may have threatened to take Roberts’ children away from him. You see, they’re not his biological children. Instead, the Chief Justice and his wife adopted them in 2000. Roberts has never talked about the circumstances of their adoption, which is perfectly understandable, given the privacy such a personal transaction deserves. To the extent it’s mentioned, they’ve been said to have been adopted from a Latin American country – something inconsistent with their Nordic coloring.
Baker now posits that it’s entirely possible that the Obama administration finished what The New York Times started in 2005, when Roberts was nominated to the Supreme Court –unsealing the private adoption papers for Roberts’ children.
The only information currently known about the adoption, says Baker, is that it was a private adoption, meaning that it was done without an agency. Instead, the birth parents and the adoptive parents arrange it on their own. Despite the vague reference to Latin America, given the children’s Nordic appearance, it’s entirely possible, Baker argues, that they came from Ireland.
If Obama’s dirty tricks team was able to use the government’s might and power – just as the IRS is doing – to find out the details of the adoption proceedings for Roberts’ children, that might have given them a tremendous amount of power over Roberts. Baker claims that, if the children came from Ireland, Irish law bars both private adoptions and adoptions that take children out of Ireland. If that is what Roberts and his wife did, Baker has no sympathy for them. They broke the law because they thought they were above the law.
What’s more interesting, if this whole theory is true, is how it affects the American people: There’s absolutely no doubt that Roberts, who truly adores those children, would sacrifice his professional ethics to keep them. Indeed, if the Irish adoption story is true, he already sacrificed his professional ethics to get them. The fact that this could destroy the American economy and turn the IRS from a scary administrative agency into a true fascist, bureaucratic monster, would be of little concern to him.
This is all conjecture, of course, all of which stems from two peculiar things: two blonde little children identified as coming from Latin America and one Chief Justice’s bizarre legal decision.
Normally, we here at Mr. Conservative wouldn’t consider this kind of entirely unsubstantiated conjecture. However, given all the recent stories proving that there is no end to the lies and malevolence flowing from the Obama administration, especially when it comes to advancing the Obama agenda, it seems reasonable to believe that the Obam-ites wouldn’t get squeamish about a little thing like blackmailing an American Supreme Court Chief Justice.
http://www.mrconservative.com/2013/...-blackmailed-into-supporting-obamacare-maybe/
AUTHOR Bookworm
May 18, 2013 7:23pm PST
In 2012, Chief Justice John Roberts cast the deciding vote for the Supreme Court’s ruling that ObamaCare was a legal tax. Conservatives were beyond stunned. Roberts’ decision was a narrow, weaving, legal mess, unlike the clear, assured opinions he usually wrote. What the heck happened? Some people posited that he had brain damage from a fall he’d taken some years before. Others sourly said that he’d fallen prey to what’s called Greenhouse Syndrome – the Supreme Court justices’ desperate need to feel the love from The New York Times’ former Supreme Court reporter, Linda Greenhouse.
There were also some subterranean murmurings that the Obama administration was blackmailing Chief Justice Roberts. This was a bit far-fetched. We all knew that Obama habitually practiced a Chicago-approach to politics, one that saw him digging up secret dirt on his opponents, releasing it, and forcing them out of the election. For example, when Obama ran for the U.S. Senate in 2004, his opponent was the popular Jack Ryan. As the campaign progressed badly for Obama, secret court filings from Ryan’s divorce “miraculously” appeared with unproven allegations from his former wife about his sexual practices. The scandal hit the fan, Ryan dropped out of the race, and Obama ran essentially unopposed against Ryan’s replacement, Alan Keyes.
But what in the world could Obama have on Chief Justice Roberts? The man is pure as driven snow, for goodness sakes. He has a lovely wife, two picture-perfect little blond children, and universal adulation from anyone who had ever associated with him, either personally or professionally.
But about those picture-perfect little blond children. . . .
Jake Baker, writing at a blog called No Compromise offers an interesting new theory: he thinks that the Obama administration may have threatened to take Roberts’ children away from him. You see, they’re not his biological children. Instead, the Chief Justice and his wife adopted them in 2000. Roberts has never talked about the circumstances of their adoption, which is perfectly understandable, given the privacy such a personal transaction deserves. To the extent it’s mentioned, they’ve been said to have been adopted from a Latin American country – something inconsistent with their Nordic coloring.
Baker now posits that it’s entirely possible that the Obama administration finished what The New York Times started in 2005, when Roberts was nominated to the Supreme Court –unsealing the private adoption papers for Roberts’ children.
The only information currently known about the adoption, says Baker, is that it was a private adoption, meaning that it was done without an agency. Instead, the birth parents and the adoptive parents arrange it on their own. Despite the vague reference to Latin America, given the children’s Nordic appearance, it’s entirely possible, Baker argues, that they came from Ireland.
If Obama’s dirty tricks team was able to use the government’s might and power – just as the IRS is doing – to find out the details of the adoption proceedings for Roberts’ children, that might have given them a tremendous amount of power over Roberts. Baker claims that, if the children came from Ireland, Irish law bars both private adoptions and adoptions that take children out of Ireland. If that is what Roberts and his wife did, Baker has no sympathy for them. They broke the law because they thought they were above the law.
What’s more interesting, if this whole theory is true, is how it affects the American people: There’s absolutely no doubt that Roberts, who truly adores those children, would sacrifice his professional ethics to keep them. Indeed, if the Irish adoption story is true, he already sacrificed his professional ethics to get them. The fact that this could destroy the American economy and turn the IRS from a scary administrative agency into a true fascist, bureaucratic monster, would be of little concern to him.
This is all conjecture, of course, all of which stems from two peculiar things: two blonde little children identified as coming from Latin America and one Chief Justice’s bizarre legal decision.
Normally, we here at Mr. Conservative wouldn’t consider this kind of entirely unsubstantiated conjecture. However, given all the recent stories proving that there is no end to the lies and malevolence flowing from the Obama administration, especially when it comes to advancing the Obama agenda, it seems reasonable to believe that the Obam-ites wouldn’t get squeamish about a little thing like blackmailing an American Supreme Court Chief Justice.
