The Briefing Room
General Category => National/Breaking News => SCOTUS News => Topic started by: mystery-ak on June 28, 2019, 01:19:46 pm
-
By Stephen Dinan and Dave Boyer - The Washington Times - Thursday, June 27, 2019
A high-profile conservative leader called Thursday for the impeachment of Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. after he provided the crucial fifth vote in the Supreme Court decision heading off President Trump’s goal of including a question on citizenship on the 2020 census.
Matt Schlapp, chairman of the American Conservative Union and husband of top Trump White House aide Mercedes Schlapp, said the ruling showed the chief justice was not the conservative-minded jurist he’d been touted to be, noting his previous decision essentially preserving Obamacare.
“I’m for impeaching the chief justice for lying to all of us about his support of the Constitution,†Mr. Schlapp tweeted. “He is responsible for Robertscare and now he is angling for vast numbers of illegal residents to help Dems hold Congress. Enough Deception from GOP judges on the Constitution.â€
more
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/jun/27/matt-schlapp-calls-impeachment-chief-justice-john-/ (https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/jun/27/matt-schlapp-calls-impeachment-chief-justice-john-/)
-
Yeah, good luck on that one.
-
Roberts is compromised somehow. Someone or some group is controlling him either by threat or by blackmail. His decisions are not Liberal or Conservative. They are absurd, and illegal, and always favor the Democrat Ruling structure. Someone has some very big and very damaging information on Roberts.
Impeaching him would be doing him a favor. It would get him out from under whatever coercion it is that is directing him to rule a certain way, without him having to resign which he is likely forbidden to do. I believe Roberts would love to be impeached.
-
Roberts is compromised somehow. Someone or some group is controlling him either by threat or by blackmail. His decisions are not Liberal or Conservative. They are absurd, and illegal, and always favor the Democrat Ruling structure. Someone has some very big and very damaging information on Roberts.
Impeaching him would be doing him a favor. It would get him out from under whatever coercion it is that is directing him to rule a certain way, without him having to resign which he is likely forbidden to do. I believe Roberts would love to be impeached.
Nonsense.
Roberts is the new swing vote. Just like Kennedy.
-
Works for me.
Damn shame there isn't any way to go after the Bush Crime Family for inserting that globalist homosexual tool on the court.
-
Roberts is compromised somehow.
@240B
It is somehow connected to him being a homosexual,and the adoption of those two children. I don't know what kind of dirty illegal deal was pulled to arrange that adoption,but I am certain that is at the core of it.
-
Roberts is compromised somehow. Someone or some group is controlling him either by threat or by blackmail. His decisions are not Liberal or Conservative. They are absurd, and illegal, and always favor the Democrat Ruling structure. Someone has some very big and very damaging information on Roberts.
Impeaching him would be doing him a favor. It would get him out from under whatever coercion it is that is directing him to rule a certain way, without him having to resign which he is likely forbidden to do. I believe Roberts would love to be impeached.
He's a Bush appointee.
Nuff said.
-
Roberts is compromised somehow. Someone or some group is controlling him either by threat or by blackmail. His decisions are not Liberal or Conservative. They are absurd, and illegal, and always favor the Democrat Ruling structure. Someone has some very big and very damaging information on Roberts.
Impeaching him would be doing him a favor. It would get him out from under whatever coercion it is that is directing him to rule a certain way, without him having to resign which he is likely forbidden to do. I believe Roberts would love to be impeached.
Sounds like a win-win.
-
So, if he’s beholden to liberal interests, why did he not vote with the liberals in the gerrymandering case?