Don't fall for it!
Jun 30, 2020 13:19:48 #
RandyBrian
Loc: Texas
TrueAmerican wrote:
'Are you still conversing with an airhead !!!!!!
I know, I know. Seems like I have a tendency towards self punishment. Probably because I once supported Jimmy Carter.
Jun 30, 2020 14:16:10 #
bestpal38
Loc: Cedar City, Utah
Kevyn wrote:
He is interested in maintaining the legitimacy of the court after Obama’s appointment was stolen.
Oh boo hoo whiner.
Jun 30, 2020 14:18:06 #
bestpal38
Loc: Cedar City, Utah
Tiptop789 wrote:
So kevyn has an IQ to steal, you apparently do not.
Liberlism is a mental disorder.
Jun 30, 2020 14:48:37 #
drlarrygino wrote:
I believe Roberts is compromised and a full investigation should be implemented to find the source of this compromise. I have a hunch that with Ovommit's illegal surveillance of all Americans that Roberts was caught up in some illegal activity and if this illegality was revealed, Roberts would have to resign as a judge. The Supreme Court is tainted and the 3 women on that court are extreme bigoted leftists who have never voted for a single conservative issue.
Jun 30, 2020 14:59:25 #
RandyBrian wrote:
I have a theory, unproven, but I think likely to b... (show quote)
I agree and would like Roberts out of there. Why? He's no longer doing SCOTUS's work (interpreting the Constitution) instead he votes opposite what would do good for conservatives no matter the case or question. I have a different reason why he is doing it though. Like Rubio, Graham, Romney, all the dems, songbird while he lived I think he's on Soros' payroll.
Jun 30, 2020 15:00:56 #
Liberty Tree wrote:
I am more cynical. I think the left has gotten to him in some way.
Yes and no, Soros (nwo).
Jun 30, 2020 15:04:28 #
drlarrygino wrote:
I believe Roberts is compromised and a full investigation should be implemented to find the source of this compromise. I have a hunch that with Ovommit's illegal surveillance of all Americans that Roberts was caught up in some illegal activity and if this illegality was revealed, Roberts would have to resign as a judge. The Supreme Court is tainted and the 3 women on that court are extreme bigoted leftists who have never voted for a single conservative issue.
Come to think of it, you're right about the women. Is taking slush money enough of an illegality?
Jun 30, 2020 15:07:04 #
Wonttakeitanymore wrote:
Ya think? Yup
More than just a liberal judge, he's on the take as they used to say.
Jun 30, 2020 15:19:08 #
son of witless wrote:
I believe you are wrong. Justice Roberts began sticking it to Amerika long before Donald J. Trump even thought of running for President. Remember the Obama Care ruling. Even Liberals, while happy about it, could never explain that ruling. I think some Liberal has something on Roberts.
They do. He illegally adopted two foreign children.
Jun 30, 2020 17:49:21 #
RandyBrian wrote:
I have a theory, unproven, but I think likely to b... (show quote)
Interesting read Randy and you may be correct. Most people do not study court decisions. I am a conservative, but what I have seen is that Roberts is not an ideologue as you might judge Thomas and Ginsberg. Another Earl Warren, I sincerely hope not. He is the ”new” swing vote on the court. Today Roberts wrote the 5-4 majority opinion allowing private school families tax breaks. A very “conservative position. My guess is that it never crossed his mind as to whether the decision was liberal or conservative, simply Constitutional. And, I’m sure I will disagree with many of his future decisions.
Larry Joe
Jun 30, 2020 17:51:20 #
Kevyn wrote:
He is interested in maintaining the legitimacy of the court after Obama’s appointment was stolen.
As usual, wrong answer.
Larry Joe
Jun 30, 2020 18:06:18 #
RandyBrian
Loc: Texas
Larry Joe wrote:
Interesting read Randy and you may be correct. Mo... (show quote)
You may be right, buy as I understand it, his position on Louisiana's law was the opposite of the way he voted on the Texas law four years ago, and they were very similar in wording. His stated reason for the reversal was not because Louisiana's law was unconstitutional, but because it needed to follow the president of the Texas ruling. He gave two opposing rulings with two different justifications on two virtually identical laws. Very scary.
Jun 30, 2020 18:09:41 #
RandyBrian wrote:
You may be right, buy as I understand it, his position on Louisiana's law was the opposite of the way he voted on the Texas law four years ago, and they were very similar in wording. His stated reason for the reversal was not because Louisiana's law was unconstitutional, but because it needed to follow the president of the Texas ruling. He gave two opposing rulings with two different justifications on two virtually identical laws. Very scary.
Two sides to his face?
Jun 30, 2020 20:09:34 #
Tug484 wrote:
They do. He illegally adopted two foreign children.
That story is out there.
Jun 30, 2020 21:17:59 #
Kevyn wrote:
He is interested in maintaining the legitimacy of the court after Obama’s appointment was stolen.
No, he's making a sly attempt to legislate from the bench.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.