All the years of following the networks, rulings, relationships and details is starting to surface as important. The notoriously corrupt DC Judge James Boasberg is now in the big ugly spotlight.
President Trump calls for Judge Boasberg to be impeached.
Supreme Court Justice John Roberts immediately jumps into action to defend his friend and colleague. Have you ever seen Justice Roberts respond so quickly? The reason is the relationship between him and Boasberg.
WASHINGTON – “For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision. The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose,” Roberts said Tuesday in a rare and brief statement issued just hours after Trump publicly joined demands by his supporters to remove judges he called “crooked.”
John Roberts appointed Boasberg to be presiding judge of the FISA court after Judge Rosemary Collyer’s term was over. In the aftermath of the DOJ manipulating the FISA court to attack President Trump, Chief Justice Roberts needed Boasberg to protect the FISC. As a result, Boasberg sat at the epicenter of some of the worst DC judicial decisions ever. Including the precedent of forcing VP Mike Pence to testify in a grand jury against the accused, President Donald Trump.
Simultaneously, Boasberg did everything he could to fulfill his commitment to Roberts, even appointing Mary McCord, wife of Roberts’ senior staff Sheldon Snook, to be amicus to the court. {GO DEEP}
Yes, Roberts will protect Boasberg, because Boasberg -who Roberts appointed to be presiding judge of the FISC- has major leverage over Roberts.
Boasberg has assembled his shields over years, and CTH has outlined every step. The brutally obvious began surfacing when Boasberg appointed *Mary McCord as amicus to the FISC.
[*strong probability McCord is active CIA]
McCord’s husband, Sheldon Snook, was the key staff of Roberts and almost certainly the leaker of the Dobbs decision. Chief Justice Roberts had to hide that reality (which he did after the US Marshal investigation) because it put the leak inside his office.
Boasberg knows this (and other stuff) and Roberts reacts to eyes on Boasberg from a defensive posture.
Note how the corporate media and Roberts say nothing about the rulings themselves and whether or not they are lawful, only “disagreement” over said rulings.
WE SEE YOU, BASTARDS!!
This puts Robert’s at the epicenter of the political sedition we have witnessed over the last ten years. His support of this lawless judge who endangers national security makes Roberts lawless himself.
He should not be hearing these cases coming up from the lower courts. The intent of the District Lilliputians is to tie up Gulliver—pure politics. And he has the chutzpa to lecture President Trump about being political.
He lectures about the President having to use The normal appellate review process when the normal appellate review process is corrupt and completely compromised. Impeachment and a forced resignation should be on the table.
Is Roberts so upset over what PDJT said about Boasberg because he knows he (Roberts) is next on the impeachment to-do list?
This all nothing that a bunch of high placed arrests would not begin to solve.
Patel, Bondi, etc… it is now or never.
Were you all true to your word? We are about to find out.
Stop expecting something meaningful from Pam Blondie. She is deeply compromised by her conduct in the George Zimmerman case.
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/blog/2024/11/21/president-trump-nominates-pam-bondi-for-u-s-attorney-general-the-deep-swamp-smiles/
You mean, Scam Bondi?
I want to know what Bondie knew about Cesar Sayoc.
President Trump went out of his way yesterday to express his pleasure in how Bondi has performed to date.
But of course, you know better.
The anti-Bondi campaign is all so tiresome.
agree i voted for Trump not commenters.he will take care of any slackers.think he learned first term.
Wrong.
EXPOSURE and public education comes BEFORE arrests.
Yep.
… But I’m waiting for the arrests.
Don’t mean a thing without arrests.
Agreed
Just. Gets better
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2025/03/breaking-obama-judge-says-doge-likely-violated-constitution/
Judiciary Act of 1802 by Jefferson and his party abolished rogue federal judges. If the Satanists would read God’s word they would know and understand that there is nothing new under the sun. Eccl. 1:9 Go Trump and his wisemen! Sweep it clean from top (Supreme’s) to bottom.
Political violence stems from political weakness. There are two types of political weakness that drives political violence – weakness in popular support and weakness in institutional support.
The minority with weak public support employs political violence to bend the majority to its will. This is the American hard Left’s current modus operandi.
When the majority find they are weak in institutional support they employ political violence to regain their freedom.
Right now the US legal system refuses to apply the law as it has been understood for centuries with respect to the Executive Branch, refuses to protect electoral integrity by hearing cases brought in 2020, refuses to respect the will of the people regarding issues like illegal immigration where the law explicitly gives the President 100% authority to decide who can and can’t come into the country and who can or can’t stay in the country. The majority who is weak in institutional support will eventually resort to violence in exasperation because there is no other remedy to their grievance.
Chief Justice Roberts is acting to set the table for both forms of political violence caused by both types of political weakness which could well lead to civil war. This won’t end well. Roberts would be well advised to restore the judicial norms he claims to want, and do so rapidly. Those judicial norms are not that every action of POTUS has to be litigated to SCOTUS.
Roberts is literally playing with fire here. The national interest would be best served by SCOTUS urgently hearing one of these TRO cases and setting clear limits on the ability of the judicial branch to interfere in the Executive and Legislative Branches exercise of their Constitutional powers.
There’s a user on X, @wendyp4545, who’s been saying we’ve been under a communist Democracy Governance Rule of Law, with liberal judges and prosecutors, which was all over the USAID website and Samantha Power only helped further it when she was there…
Don’t know if it’s true, but I am starting to wonder. Congress does nothing to stop any of it.. and since the Supremes said “no standing” to Texas over the stolen election.. something crazy is going on with the judiciary…
God help us.
If only Clarence Thomas was Chief Justice….
Then Trump should declassify Mary status and then fire her
She’s still on the Partners for Justice website.
https://www.partnersforjustice.org/team-members/katharine-boasberg
Scroll down a bit. It’s a family affair. Judge Boasberg’s wife and sister are also involved in the NGO money train. Boasberg’s brother-in-law is/was employed by Bain Capital; Mitt Romney’s old firm.
Ms. Loomer gives me the fizz.
is that good or bad?
Good! I stole it from Richard Hammond from Top Gear!
Time to arrest members of “Partners for justice” for illegal activities.
Protecting criminals and terrorists from law enforcement is a crime IMO.
And at RICO level, it would appear to be so !
Knowing you monitor the remarks of tree house occupants, I am saying this, not to blow smoke up your kilt, but to thank you sincerely for your singular dedication to detailing this corrupt, self-serving judiciary and its tentacles. A clearer picture has never been published of which I am aware. Because of Jesus Christ, I am never afraid. But I am as enraged as I have ever been but I am equally grateful to you for your efforts. God keep you safe.
Excellent post, ma’am!
Does Epstein list included Roberts?
Mais oui
I’ve got $100 on it.
Silly boy. Pam wouldn’t ever want us to see that.
We’ll know too much if they don’t redact and protect.
“disagreement” Roberts calls it – I would suggest this is more than a ‘disagreement’ – I would suggest this is a conspiracy of low level activist judges to derail the Trump admin and Constitution – time for a serious investigation a la RICO – if Pam and Kash are up to it.
Hmmm, disagreement implies opinion.
Opinion implies I can consider your opinion and then do as I wish.
There, problem solved.
THANK YOU SUNDANCE — for shining a big bright light on what is always kept in the dark for making what is always hidden exposed for giving us the information that is always kept from us . for THIS and so much more THANK YOU
With love and appreciation
Blessings to you and yours
R.D.
Roberts is always on top of things!!! He is the Perfect Man!!!!! Then again that FISA Court with 278,000 illegal and improper inquiries…… that is a lot per staff member of the FBI to have attempted… or is it the same 20 dudes doing it by the thousands??? Remember Comey, when Rooster Head Gowdy had him under oath at a Congressional Panel before he was fired, said that “it is extremely difficult to get a FISA application approved”. Yeah, Sure it is, Beanpolio.
Roberts is not doing what he’s doing because he’s ignorant of what he SHOULD do, Newt…
Get a CLUE here:
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/blog/2025/03/18/president-trump-goes-scorched-earth-on-judge-boasberg-chief-justice-john-roberts-defends-boasberg/
Chip Roy
@chiproytx
Lots of noise about impeachment. We must study every ruling & act accordingly w/ everything on the table (noting: 14 Dem votes required in Senate.). But, more fertile ground… 1) House can pass a resolution stating there is/was an invasion, 2) we can defund radical courts.
1:11 PM · Mar 18, 2025
Cut the budget for the federal courts by 30% in the new federal budget. That will get their attention!
No more long black robes…. just slinky baby-doll black gowns with fuzzy feathered hems.
I can see Boasberg in feathers now…😵💫🤯
Congress should defund and eliminate the federal courts in the D.C. circuit.
Congress has this power in the constitution.
Article III
Section 1
The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.
No one knows this.
No one in congress would seem to know this either.
Powerful pretending.
Actually it’s better than that in Art I:
“To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States”
The existence of a district court in DC is relatively recent.
Chip, you guys (and gals) can’t do a damn thing, and your record proves that. How about putting together a budget on time and passing it?
Ye, Chip you COULD defund radical courts. We know that part.
Curbing Judicial Obstruction with Impeachment
William A. Jacobson
@wajacobson
Dear Chief Justice Roberts – Do Your Job – if you want the normal appellate process to work, you have to make it work. You have to do your job. The Supreme Court needs to do its job, and the appeals courts need to do their jobs. Yes, ideally we wouldn’t even be talking about impeachment. It’s a measure of last resort born of frustration that the appellate process has not been working. So don’t lecture to the public who’s concerned. You need to lecture and you need to take action as the Supreme Court to rein in the district courts who have stepped out of their separation of powers boundaries and who have created this crisis.
Video linked…
3AM Flash Bang grenade wake up call for the Boasberg klan followed by a green laser light show??
Flagged for sheer idiocy
Why? Are we the little people the only ones to fear the wrath of the Federal Door Kickers for peaceable assembly while these jokers destroy our Republic with impunity?
Grannies parading have more to fear than devil worshipping mass murderers and their enablers and facilitators?
We are grasping at sketchy roots on the edge of the cliff pal!
Lee clerked for Alito, and Lee’s father was Solicitor General.
.
He’s publically yakking about cases that might come before him. Does he want to force himself into recusal to protect his friends? What he’s doing might be impeachable itself. Problem is Congress.
Maybe Trump should just declare these judges fired. Problem with that is the Supreme Court is unlikely to uphold. But the judges still would be out of commission for a while. Very interesting take: https://the-quash.captivate.fm/episode/judges-can-just-be-fired-anytime-they-dont-sit-for-life-
Lawyer argues that the PRESIDENT can fire judges.
Alternately, there’s playing dirty…
.
Is it really a surprise to anyone the Judicial branch is usurping the authority of the Executive branch? Between the Judicial and Executive branches they have already taken on all the Legislative authority that was not unconstitutionally delegated to the “administrative branch”.
So legislative authority was delegated by Congress to the extra-constitutional “administrative branch” based on the false promise that Congress would maintain “oversight”. The waste and mismanagement that is being exposed at the administrative agencies clearly makes obvious the total failure of Congressional oversight.
The Executive branch over use of the “executive order” has further eroded the role of the Legislative branch both in legislating and in “administrative branch” oversight.
Judges at all levels of Judicial regularly make rulings not based on what is currently written in law. These Judges legislate by making ruling based on what they believe the law should be. Now those same members of the Judicial branch are attempting to take over Executive branch duties and responsibilities.
Who knows what the Legislative branch is actually doing any more. They seem to hold endless expensive hearings and investigations (mostly about things that no one cares about) that have no objective impact or result. Congress has not actually passed a budget or appropriations bill into law in how long? What was the last piece of legislation that Congress passed that was actually beneficial for all American Citizens?
Excellent comment.
You explained our dilemma perfectly. Congress has abdicated its duties for far too long.
I haven’t seen Roberts opposing Trump’s two impeachments with a dissertation on how for over 200 years political disagreements would never get a President impeached.
Must have missed that.
Impeach Roberts too. Save money, do them both together.
Exactly when/where was Justice Roberts when he allegedly made the statement today? Is there any official documentation showing he actually made the statement?
If John Roberts wasn’t a weak and arrogant man to begin with, he would never have compromised himself and the position he holds.
John Roberts should have rightly been impeached with the Othugo Care legislation he wrote to suit his handlers/owners.
Mike Lee
@BasedMikeLee
Impeachment is a non-justiciable political question assigned by the Constitution to Congress—one of the two political branches of the U.S. government—and not to the courts
Frankly, I’m surprised that Chief Justice Roberts is publicly opining on such matters
Cont…
Rep. Andy Ogles
@RepOgles
Respectfully, Mr. Chief Justice, both James Madison and Thomas Jefferson disagree with you. So does the Constitution.
We are going to keep the impeachments coming.
Cont…
A history of Jeb Boasberg’s inserted judicial supremacy via illegal actions from the bench… one more time, district judges lack the authority to block The President’s moves. They have authority over their jurisdiction, not the entire nation. https://thefederalist.com/2025/03/17/protecting-terrorists-is-just-the-latest-of-judge-boasbergs-partisan-activism/
Newt Gingrich
@newtgingrich
Those upset by the emerging dictatorship of district court justices behaving as though they were president should read the Judiciary Act of 1802. Jefferson and his party completely revised the court system and abolished a series of federalist judges they deemed illegitimate. A warning to the current out of control judiciary.
7:32 AM · Mar 16, 2025
·
Cleta Mitchell
@CletaMitchell
Congress has plenary authority to establish the jurisdiction of Article III judges. For decades, Congress has failed to exercise that power. Unelected judges should not be allowed to make spending decisions. Or to substitute their judgment for that of the President in his rightful exercise of executive authority. Nor should any judge’s authority extend beyond the borders of the district in which he/she serves. Dear Congress: Reclaim to yourselves the constitutional responsibility for establishing the jurisdiction and extent of authority of the federal judicial branch. That is your obligation. The constitutional crisis being manufactured by these leftist trial courts must be addressed. Not impeachment. Exercise your Actual legislative authority to define jurisdiction of the Article III judges. It. Is. Time.
@newtgingrich
10:29 PM · Mar 16, 2025
No, Art III/2 sets out the jurisdiction of the “courts”. Congress can apportion some of that jurisdiction to “inferior courts” but can’t remove it from the USSC.
when we see roberts and boasberg on a plane to el salvador we will know the worm has turned.
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3856843/posts?page=1
James Boasberg went to Yale and was a member of Skull & Bones . . . was that why George W. Bush appointed “Jeb” to the first rung on his judiciary ladder?
Maybe “Jeb” is a compassionate conservative.
We very badly need a comprehensive code of judicial ethics and boundaries.
This code needs be enforceable and enforced.
And we need it now.
Well, you know the left has been hounding Thomas on ethics for a while now. Not sure you want to go there.
Sundance, Why do you suppose Roberts risked doing a coverup rather than just accept a little embarrassment of the leak coming from his office?
Because, as a pedophile on Epstein’s client list, he was ordered to do so by his Deep State masters?
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3856843/posts?page=1
DOJ refuses to answer some questions from the judge who blocked Alien Enemies Act deportations
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/trump-administration/doj-refuses-respond-questions-judge-blocked-alien-enemies-act-deportat-rcna196883
Impeachment of a Federal Judge is not an appropriate response!
I’m sure many of us can think of a response that might be more appropriate.
From the big book of ‘Better Left UnSaid’
Would love to see what the TdA gang would have in store 🙂
Seated on the opposite side of the courtroom in the back row were multiple federal judges who serve on the court. They included Chief District Judge James Boasberg, District Judge Amy Berman Jackson and District Judge Randy Moss. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, who has been assigned to oversee the case, did not attend. Those judges have all presided over Jan. 6 cases previously, and their appearance Thursday was an unusual occurrence.
I would LOVE to see what the NSA has scooped up between these expletive deleted judges.
Roberts will let these arrogant despots seize unconstitutional jurisdiction, because it is something he has done on more than one occaision. THAT is where the constitutional crisis is. Even the SCOTUS doesn’t have jurisdiction in this case, as it involves national security and foreign policy. But, Roberts will seize it. It is a mistake to appeal a decision that is moot due to lack of jurisdiction. It only invites the appelate court and then the SCOTUS to do the same thing.
It will all be exposed. As President Trump says: Let’s see what happens.
I think we need to dig deeper on these judges. They smell dirty to me.
George Bush, son of CIA daddy H. W. Bush, appointed to SCOTUS one John Roberts about which nothing much was known even though the Republican half of the UniParty at that time had a commanding majority in CONgress
Formally nominated for Associate Justice – July 29, 2005
Withdrawn – September 6, 2005
Formally nominated for Chief Justice – September 6, 2005
Confirmed – September 29, 2005
John Roberts was confirmed as chief justice on September 29, 2005, by a commanding majority, 78–22, of the Senate. All 55 Republicans voted “yes”, as did 22 Democrats, and one independent; voting “no” were 22 Democrats.
Senate in 2005: 55 Republican, 44 Democrat, and 1 Indy.
In 2005 Ann Coulter strongly and correctly warned about about Roberts:
“So all we know about him for sure is that he can’t dance and he probably doesn’t know who Jay-Z is. Other than that, he is a blank slate. Tabula rasa. Big zippo. Nada. Oh, yeah … We also know he’s argued cases before the Supreme Court. Big deal; so has Larry Flynt’s attorney.
But unfortunately, other than that that, we don’t know much about John Roberts. Stealth nominees have never turned out to be a pleasant surprise for conservatives. Never. Not ever.
If the Senate were in Democrat hands, Roberts would be perfect. But why on earth would Bush waste a nomination on a person who is a complete blank slate when we have a majority in the Senate? We also have a majority in the House, state legislatures, state governorships, and have won five of the last seven presidential elections — seven of the last 10!”
Coulter on Amy Coney Barrett:
Q: You’re seriously going to claim that ACB is the most qualified Supreme Court nominee?
A: Of course! Much like being a police chief in modern America, apparently the No. 1 qualification for this job is: being a woman. I don’t know when my party signed onto identity politics, but I’m not happy about it either. At least we didn’t end up with America’s leading “Karen,” Kamala Harris.
I’ve been wondering why the Trump administration hasn’t taken this incessant District Court overreach to SCOTUS to forever nip this lawfare in the bud, but now I suspect those two leftists in conservative clothing and their recent ruling related to a District Court’s overreach which “stunned” the dissenting justices is the reason why the Trump administration is not doing so.
They’re probably waiting for this:
“It is highly likely that at least one Supreme Court justice will retire in the next four years, especially considering that three current justices will be over 80 years old by the next election. Political analysts suggest that the upcoming presidential election could influence these retirement decisions, as justices may consider the political landscape when deciding to step down.”
Unfortunately, due to their wanting to block Trump with their usual “insufficient majority” excuse in CONgress with an intentional razor thin majority by not stopping voter fraud which cost them 4 Senate seats and as many as 12 House seats while preserving their phony opposition stance by making sure Trump won the electoral vote states, I doubt they’ll be able to keep their majority in 2026.
They had to get Trump elected, otherwise, as they admit, this would have effectively become a one party country and what they don’t admit is that their “opposition” role would have been nullified.
Due to the inevitable short term downturn that must come from implementing economic changes with long term positive effects (detoxing), the mostly RINO party will probably lose the Senate in 2026, thereby preventing the confirmation of any truly conservative replacements on the SCOTUS. Then we are seriously screwed.
Trump has inherited a “turd of an economy,” and they expect to crash it on Trump (5:56)
Ed Dowd
Nov 2024
Trump has inherited a “turd of an economy,” and when things “roll over,” he’ll be the one blamed for it.
https://rumble.com/v5p1yqe-trump-has-inherited-a-turd-of-an-economy-they-expect-to-crash-it-on-trump.html
The Coming Economic Reset in 2025 with Edward Dowd (32:01)
11 Mar 2025
The Blob sure is clever, no?
Warren Buffett Issues Bizarre Housing Crash Warning? (11:22)
783,413 views – Mar 10, 2025
Is Warren Buffett Predicting a Market Crash?
Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway has stacked a record $334 billion in cash, an unprecedented move that signals extreme caution. For the first time in history, Buffett has been a net seller of stocks for nine straight quarters, and his aggressive sell-off of Apple and other major holdings suggests he sees something big coming.
History tells us that when Buffett stockpiles cash, a market meltdown often follows. Could we be on the verge of another 2008-style crash?
Buffett sold Apple Computer stock and bought California property insurance companies before the LA fires and mud slides.
I wouldn’t reply to much on his investment advice!
Right, he’s such an idiot as evidenced by the majority of his past performance in most other things which are nullified by a single investment. /s
BTW, luck or from insuring homes only in the right (least vulnerable) areas?:
Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway Unscathed by LA Wildfires; Insurers Face Higher Risk
Jan 10, 2025
https://www.ainvest.com/news/warren-buffett-s-berkshire-hathaway-unscathed-by-la-wildfires-insurers-face-higher-risk-2501101099a682f4a7bd5550/
As wildfires continue to ravage Los Angeles, Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway (BRK.A, BRK.B) is expected to remain largely unaffected, while other insurers face significant exposure due to their substantial presence in California’s homeowners insurance market. According to Barron’s, Berkshire Hathaway’s minimal impact can be attributed to its limited presence in the California market, with other insurers like Mercury General Corp. (MCY), Allstate (ALL), Chubb Ltd (CB), and Travelers Companies Inc (TRV) being more vulnerable to wildfire-related losses.
The economy is not headed for a crash. It’s clearly showing signs of positive movement with core prices already falling.
The stock market is phony, disconnected from main street, and not an accurate indicator.
“The stock market is phony, disconnected from main street, and not an accurate indicator.”
Always has been and ESPECIALLY under the Manchurian Candidate! But any crash isn’t just about the stock market.
We’ve had three, massive, consecutive bubbles: dot com, sub prime, and now the everything bubble, everyone one of them PAPERED OVER with money “printing” based upon debt. Eventually, that will burst, too. If we’re LUCKY it won’t be before the mid-terms.
Ann Coulter – The broken clock that’s correct twice a day….
Possibly three times on the first Sunday in November and perhaps only once on the 2nd Sunday of March.
If my memory serves, John Roberts, when nominated, hastily married a woman to whom he was not engaged (hurry-up marriage). Then he quickly adopted 2 children from Ireland, taking them OUT of Ireland, which is against Irish LAW.
Now Roberts looked like a ‘normal married man’, just like Barack Hussein Obama, who was married to Mike Obama and they rented the 2 Nesbitt girls for the duration, so that Barry looked like a normal married man to voters. Seems like the same play for the same reason, to me.
Chief Justice Roberts Should’ve Kept His Mouth Shut
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2025/03/18/chief-justice-roberts-shouldve-kept-his-mouth-shut-n2654018?utm_source=thdailypm&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl&bcid=78b67a1276cb9f731186507b6c9d681363cc4eb647fdcab72e4f6e82c4d42ef3&lctg=29671425&fbclid=IwY2xjawJGzXBleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHQ3cNFOfvx411gDoBnt9S-lpZdSCtPdDVvyT9cTdL8uxUF-2DJoIzIzedw_aem_LoWOLWKKQ8XfPyF6lQ1etA
Better to be silent and considered a fool than speak and remove all doubt.
Best quote:
Know your role; shut your hole, an axiom that should be slapped across Boasberg and Roberts’ faces.
Unfortunately, Roberts confirms our worst fears about him.
Steve Bannon just had Laura Loomer on who reported that Boasberg’s daughter Katherine works for an NGO named Partners for Justice which is financed 76% by government grants that defends these terrorists/gang/cartel members.
Boasberg’s wife founded an abortion clinic.
Chief Justice Robert’s seems to be backing himself in a corner. Is he thinking??
Amy Coney Barrett better rethink to whose robes she is attaching herself.
DOGE needs to look at those grants.
It’s becoming obvious that President Trump is going to have to go full blown rogue. Question is does he have the stomach to do it. I for one am 100% behind him
Roberts and Barrett will protect the Deep State.
roberts is compromised and is this guy’s butt buddy…..appointed him to FISA court which allowed muslim indonesian kenyan man to spy on trump campaign. Big time trump hater and needs to be arrested for trying to overthrow the POTUS….and roberts needs to go as well…..pack the court….
imo PDJT is absolutely right to choose now to take off the gloves and go after these corrupt, fascist tyrant judges. Their lawless actions over the last at least five years, have forfeited their credibility, and forced us to make a binary choice….The House should impeach this b@stard, and force a recorded vote on conviction in the Senate , to prevent any parliamentary tricks and get a head count of the nay votes.
Knowing that Roberts’ staff leaked the Dobbs decision is also a type of leverage.
Didn’t Roberts “adopt” Irish kids which is illegal unless you are an Irish citizen? Also, he went to South America to pick them up…via Epstein’s island? https://beverlytran.blogspot.com/2018/11/scotus-chief-justice-john-roberts-his.html
Well, that page is almost readable. Not much better here, but better:
https://underneaththeirrobes.blogs.com/main/2005/08/the_roberts_ado.html
2. Where are the Roberts children from originally?
According to Time magazine, they were born in Ireland:
Jack McCay, law partner of Roberts’ wife Jane and a friend, speaks of the couple’s adoption of John (Jack) and Josephine, born in Ireland 4 1/2 months apart. “As frequently happens when you go through the adoption process, some of the efforts weren’t successful, and it continued for a time … But when the opportunity came along to have not just one but two kids, they took both babies without blinking.”
3. So were the children adopted from Ireland?
This is not clear — the Associated Press reports that they were “adopted from Latin America.” This seems a bit puzzling, in light of the Time magazine report indicating that the children were born in Ireland. Also, their blonde hair and fair skin do not seem conventionally Latin American. Perhaps the children were born in Ireland, but were in Latin America immediately prior to their adoption.
4. How were the children adopted?
According to The New York Times, based on information from Mrs. Roberts’s sister, Mary Torre, the children were adopted through a private adoption. As explained by Families for Private Adoption, “[p]rivate (or independent) adoption is a legal method of building a family through adoption without using an adoption agency for placement. In private adoption, the birth parents relinquish their parental rights directly to the adoptive parents, instead of to an agency.”
Apparently the process of adopting Jack involved some stress for John Roberts. According to Dan Klaidman of Newsweek, during the contested 2000 election, Roberts “spent a few days in Florida advising lawyers [for George W. Bush] on their legal strategy,” but “he did not play a central role,” because ” at the time, Roberts was preoccupied with the adoption of his son.”
Stressing about an illegal adoption of cute, white, and blonde Irish kids via “trans-shipment” through “Latin America”?
Actually, skipping the Epstein stuff, if this was investigated and it turned out he did something to get around any Irish law on adoption, that could be used to impeach him right now and replace him with an actual constitutional conservative.
Get on it!
https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/Intercountry-Adoption/Intercountry-Adoption-Country-Information/Ireland.html
Are Inter-country Adoptions between this country and the United States possible?
Inter-country adoptions to the United States from Ireland are rare but possible. Inter-country adoptions from the United States to Ireland are possible.
Impeach them both. Or, target them and their family with investigations into any corruption. Follow the money and cases of conflict of interest. Then offer them a chance to resign or face exposure.
Apparently the judiciary branch is now supervising both the executive and legislative branches.
Impeach John Roberts also… Useless tool.
“For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision. The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose…”
note the wiggle words.
roberts says “not appropriate”, as in, not raising your little pinky when drinking tea.
he doesn’t say illegal, unconstitutional, not codified, or any other absolute contraindication for judicial impeachment.
he is basically just clutching his pearls and saying (the royal) “we” just don’t do that.”
not can’t, just bad manners in his view.
how is that binding in any way shape, or form?
also, he references the “normal” appellate review process.
what about extraordinary or NOT normal circumstances?
is he suggesting this administration abide by a clearly erroneous decision and spend the time, money, and manpower,
not to mention the sabotage of the duly elected president’s agenda,
hoping that the court will ultimately see the error of it’s ways?
that IS the judicial branch usurping the executive branch,
crystal clear grounds for impeachment of any judge who rules in support of that.
another poster pointed out, quite correctly in my view,
that roberts said a whole lot of judicial nothing.
he did signal his displeasure at being in the spotlight.
too bad.
if you are so unfit for the bench that you can’t explain your position according to the rule of law you are sworn to uphold,
time to find another line of work.
pdjt might have ag bondi state that due to the obvious corruption every doj prosecutor has stated they will not appear before bosscyberborg. let him howl at the moon.