It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

CBS News Confirms: Chief Justice Roberts Pressured to Change Vote on Healthcare

page: 1
19
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 06:46 AM
link   
Yes, that's right! Researched and reported by the Lame Stream Media, but that's another story in itself: (what was their motive?)

In a four page report, a CBS reporter confirms that Chief Justice Roberts was pressured (or threatened) by the media to change his vote. He is reportedly very sensitive to outside opinion about the court and reads the papers regularly, even during a controversial vote, when the other justices usually avoid the media so as not to be influenced.

Justice Kennedy, who started to see that Roberts was waffling, tried to bring him back to the conservative fold:


Roberts then withstood a month-long, desperate campaign to bring him back to his original position, the sources said. Ironically, Justice Anthony Kennedy - believed by many conservatives to be the justice most likely to defect and vote for the law - led the effort to try to bring Roberts back to the fold.



And so the conservatives handed him their own message which, as one justice put it, essentially translated into, "You're on your own.The conservatives refused to join any aspect of his opinion, including sections with which they agreed, such as his analysis imposing limits on Congress' power under the Commerce Clause, the sources said."


So instead, the four joined forces and crafted a highly unusual, unsigned joint dissent. They deliberately ignored Roberts' decision, the sources said, as if they were no longer even willing to engage with him in debate.

What caused Robert's to change his mind, midstream? He had been adamant that the health care law was unconstitutional:


Over the next six weeks, as Roberts began to craft the decision striking down the mandate, the external pressure began to grow. Roberts almost certainly was aware of it.

There were countless news articles in May warning of damage to the Court - and to Roberts' reputation - if the Court were to strike down the mandate. Leading politicians, including the President himself, had expressed confidence the mandate would be upheld.

Some even suggested that if Roberts struck down the mandate, it would prove he had been deceitful during his confirmation hearings, when he explained a philosophy of judicial restraint.


Try to read the entire article before commenting.

This has been confirmed by CBS news. I guess nothing surprises me anymore.

If we can't trust our Supreme Court..... This country is already dead in the water.

www.cbsnews.com...
edit on 2-7-2012 by MRuss because: (no reason given)

edit on 2-7-2012 by MRuss because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 06:49 AM
link   
In my opinion, Roberts had something to hide---something he may have hid during his confirmation hearings. And so, he was threatened in plain sight through the media---in an article that hinted he may have lied during his confirmation hearings.

That is what this article was trying to say, without coming right out and saying it, as reported in this paragraph:

Some even suggested that if Roberts struck down the mandate, it would prove he had been deceitful during his confirmation hearings, when he explained a philosophy of judicial restraint.

It was around this time that it also became clear to the conservative justices that Roberts was, as one put it, "wobbly," the sources said.



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 07:09 AM
link   
People change their minds. Whatever prompted Roberts to change his mind, he did so and it's his choice and responsibility. Blaming the media for Roberts' decision is a cop out, IMO. If he made his decision and held firm against the pressure of his peers for 2 months, then he must have pretty strong convictions about it.

This shows how childish politicians (yes, the Supreme Court is nothing but an extension of the broken and lame Congressional politicians) are when it comes to these matters. Instead of the conservatives voting for what they believed, they got together to "punish" Roberts for straying from the flock.


The conservatives refused to join any aspect of his opinion, including sections with which they agreed, such as his analysis imposing limits on Congress' power under the Commerce Clause, the sources said.

Instead, the four joined forces and crafted a highly unusual, unsigned joint dissent. They deliberately ignored Roberts' decision, the sources said, as if they were no longer even willing to engage with him in debate.


What children!

I tend to believe this from the article:



Some informed observers outside the Court flatly reject the idea that Roberts buckled to liberal pressure, or was stared down by the President. They instead believe that Roberts realized the historical consequences of a ruling striking down the landmark health care law. There was no doctrinal background for the Court to fall back on - nothing in prior Supreme Court cases - to say the individual mandate crossed a constitutional line.


Whatever the reason Roberts decided to uphold the law, he did it himself and is responsible for it.



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 07:16 AM
link   
I agree with previous posters. He has something to hide, which gave those who pressured him leverage.

As for the O.P.'s opinion about the country being dead in the water, you're right, but it's been treading water for quite some time.



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 07:17 AM
link   
I'm just going to toss this out there...

You can see it in his face, in just about every photograph of him that he is always either putting on a show or trying to hold back from being himself. I don't know, maybe it's just me... I kind of have a knack for reading people.

Here's a prophecy...

He will one day, maybe even soon... publicly address his failure in striking down Obamacare. He knows the constitution, there is no doubt about that. Having a conservative philosophy, he undoubtedly should have never voted this way. The mandate alone should have been a red flag.

Those who actually go by the Constitution, and what it means... know this whole thing is a joke.

Here's a fun video, skip to 6 min and watch for 15 minutes, I DARE YOU ALL.


edit on 2-7-2012 by FractalChaos13242017 because: change time marker in video



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 07:17 AM
link   
Must read article for everyone. History will decide what to make of him after the fall election. I think he was either threatened though or decided to make a very risky gamble to enrage the public into action.



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 07:20 AM
link   
Impeach the president>?



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 07:20 AM
link   
Impeach the president>?



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 07:21 AM
link   
Justice Kennedy ? That's a real name ?

I suggest we bring in Freedom Washington to sort this thing out



Sorry for the off topic, sarcastic post.



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 07:30 AM
link   
I troubled on how the conservative judges refused to participate in debate on the subject with Roberts. Hardly behavior one would expect to see out of Supreme court judges. Supreme court judges are suppose to be open to counter arguments, not being activists that refuse to hear anything that challenges their political stances.

edit on 2-7-2012 by Kaploink because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 07:35 AM
link   
He was either blackmailed or he's out of his mind .... A 'TAX'?? Really? :shk:
Either way .. we are stuck with it.

He passed this as a TAX. It wasn't a TAX before .. but now it is.
Obama owns the new tax. Obamacare is now ObamaTAX.



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 07:37 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 07:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Soulhacking
 


Or he is an illumnati tool. Nawww. Not that. Couldn't be.


+1 more 
posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 07:41 AM
link   
Here is a wild idea.
maybe the guy was just doing his job???

maybe???


How is a tax unconstitutional?

Love how everyone on ATS is a constitutional scholar when it comes to things they don't like.

You know what would have been even more constitutional? single payer healthcare...but nooo...republicans wanted =their= plan of capitalism and taxes over actual good ideas and now we are stuck with this plop.

Roberts did what he did because he has a moment of clarity and remembered he isn't running for office, he is being technical on a ruling..and taxes are perfectly within the rights of the government.



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 07:51 AM
link   
reply to post by Kaploink
 


The Justices were reportedly incredulious that Roberts had so mysteriously changed his mind---and believed he caved in to public pressure.

They were beyond upset. Justices are not supposed to give in to public pressure. It wasn't about the vote so much as that Roberts was behaving strangely-----and not acting like a SCJ at all.

Did you NOT read the article?



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 07:53 AM
link   
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


Hey, this isn't about Obama Care. This is about slavery. This about the trouncing of the Constitution. This is about socialism and oliogarchy. This is about the NWO.

THIS IS ABOUT OUR COUNTRY COMPLETELY LOSING IT.

Have you done any reading here at ATS?

Or do you just come here to spout off your liberal views?



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 07:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by SaturnFX
How is a tax unconstitutional?.

Being taxed for not buying a government product. You don't think that's unconstitutional?
And I'm pretty sure that all new taxes have to be approved by congress.
I could be wrong about that ... but I don't think so.



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 08:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by MRuss
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


Hey, this isn't about Obama Care. This is about slavery. This about the trouncing of the Constitution. This is about socialism and oliogarchy. This is about the NWO.

THIS IS ABOUT OUR COUNTRY COMPLETELY LOSING IT.

Have you done any reading here at ATS?

Or do you just come here to spout off your liberal views?


Mostly just come here to spout off my liberal views.

slavery? really? lol
so, your thoughts on forced education that has been in place for a very long, long time now?
Taxes are not slavery. You don't -have- to purchase healthcare..you can just not receive the tax benefit of doing it (or get a tax penalty, depending on how you want to view it).

Did you know, if you buy a really big home, you get a higher tax rate than a person living in a box? Interesting, isn't it..I guess this means the gub-ment is forcing you to live in a box? or..do you simply get a big home anyhow because you can afford it.

nonsense

So, will wait for your answer on mandatory education and how thats totally not slavery.

Liberal views indeed.



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 08:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by SaturnFX
How is a tax unconstitutional?.

Being taxed for not buying a government product. You don't think that's unconstitutional?
And I'm pretty sure that all new taxes have to be approved by congress.
I could be wrong about that ... but I don't think so.


It was approved by congress..do you not remember the whole big debate that went on for ages? Olympia Snow..etc? This was represented, voted on, and passed. Then reviewed by scotus and accepted.

As far as being taxed for not buying a (private) product (insurance is not government run..that would have been the good idea that was shot down). That is perspective completely. I refer you to the house argument I made above.



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 08:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by MRuss
This is about socialism and oliogarchy. This is about the NWO.


Wanted to respond to this also

this is certainly -not- socialism. the evil socialism would have been the single payer universal healthcare..you know..the thing that actually works in keeping costs down while improving actual standards...

This is corporate oligarchy. This is the old world order...its how its always been, and for the states, how it will be for quite a while more.
Do you find it interesting that Roberts, the guy whom decided corporations are people, also sided with big insurance making out like bandits?
No..socialism this is not. This is what happens when capitalism becomes corporatism and purchases politicians and minds of people. But, it is still constitutional.
Perhaps its time to consider amending the constitution again...because soon people will not matter..corporations will destroy the peoples voice and will.

But ok..lets keep pretending its socialism at work here...while we are at it..lets also blame witches.



new topics

top topics



 
19
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join