Did John Roberts change his vote to protect his family secret? This post seems to lay out a very damning chain of events.
Many of us have questioned what caused Roberts to switch his vote on ObamaCare at the last minute, as reported by CBS, and doing so, so late that the Conservative Justices were forced to rewrite their majority opinion to be minority dissent. These facts may answer that question.
In 2000 Justice Roberts and his wife Jane adopted two children. Initially it was apparent that the adoptions were "from a Latin American country", but over time it has become apparent that the adopted children were not Latin American, but were Irish. Why this matters will become evident.
In 2005 the NY Times began investigating Roberts life as a matter of his nomination to the Supreme Court by George Bush. The Times was shortly accused of trying to unseal the adoption papers and intending to violate the anonymity of the adoption process... however there is more to the story.
Drudge did an article in 2005
The NEW YORK TIMES is looking into the adoption records of the children of Supreme Court Nominee John G. Roberts, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned.
The TIMES has investigative reporter Glen Justice hot on the case to investigate the status of adoption records of Judge Roberts’ two young children, Josie age 5 and Jack age 4, a top source reveals.
Judge Roberts and his wife Jane adopted the children when they each were infants.
Both children were adopted from Latin America.
A TIMES insider claims the look into the adoption papers are part of the paper’s “standard background check.”
Bill Borders, NYT senior editor, explains: “Our reporters made initial inquiries about the adoptions, as they did about many other aspects of his background. They did so with great care, understanding the sensitivity of the issue.”
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. 1
TIME had a “web exclusive” on the Roberts's (7/24/05) and quoted a family friend as stating the kids were “born in Ireland 4 1/2 months apart.”
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."2
But was Robert's adoption utilizing "a legal method"?
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."
It is now quite evident that the two Children were from Ireland. Even wikipedia references these adoptions at the time of Roberts' confirmation, and indicates that the children were of Irish birth.
However Irish law 1) prohibits the adoption of Children to non-residents, and 2) also does not permit private adoptions, but rather has all adoptions go through a public agency.
This would explain the children's origin from a "Latin American country", so as to circumvent Irish law.
Evidently Roberts arranged for this adoption through some sort of trafficking agency, that got the children out of Ireland and into that Latin American country, from which they were adopted, thereby circumventing two Irish laws -- entirely illegal, but perhaps quasi-legitimized by the birth mothers (two) transporting the children out of Ireland.
Undoubtedly Roberts and his wife spent a great deal of money for this illegal process, circumventing Irish laws and arranging for the transit of two Irish children from separate birth-mothers to a foreign nation. Come 2012, those two children have been with the Roberts' for roughly 10 years, since they were adopted as "infants".
Some might feel an impulse dismiss this information, mistakenly believing Roberts and his wife were doing a good thing for a children needing a home.
That would be an inaccurate belief. As recognized, such an inter-country adoption would only come about at great cost, and those who utilize this method are creating a for-profit black market in adoptive children, trafficking across international borders, and doing so from mothers who have not yet given up their children except for that profit. Such actions are creating a very unsavory profit-for-children human trafficking market that even necessitates immediate contact with new birth mothers in dire circumstances to offer financial gain. The entire arrangement is thoroughly predatory, turning children into only financial commodity, and even providing motivation for their birth mothers to give them up! That's an important ethical recognition.
Roberts is not deserving of any sort of respect here, and is only the latest example of people in position believing themselves above the law, beyond scrutiny and exempt from repercussion.
It all now makes sense.
The circumstances of these two adoptions explain not only why this would be overlooked by an overall sympathetic media, but also why a sitting Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court would not want this information to become public fodder well into his tenure. Its release and public discussion would discredit Roberts as an impartial judge of the law, and undoubtedly lead to his impeachment.
This also explains why Roberts would have a means to be blackmailed, and why that leverage would still exist even after the institution of ObamaCare.
... And it has led to flipping the swing-vote on ObamaCare, which fundamentally changed the relationship between citizen and government, making us de facto property of the state, with our relative worth in care and maintenance able to be determined by the government. Essentially it was a coup without firing a shot, much less needing even an Amendment to the Constitution.
And it is consistent with Obama's Chicago-style politics, that has previously involved opening other sealed <divorce> records in order to win election.
The post by Trip and discussion generated by it can be found:
If, indeed, Roberts was blackmailed, for whatever reason, it is certain that he will continue to be blackmailed. We do know that his opinion in the Obamacare case, from the standpoint of legal analysis, constitutes the strangest, oddest, most bizarre piece of legal reasoning by a Justice in the whole history of the Supreme Court. There is simply nothing that compares to it. It clearly leads to possible inferences of blackmail or mental instability on the part of Roberts, or some combination of both. Ultimately, he would be called upon again to similarly perform in some current or future significant case before the Court. If Roberts quietly resigns in the next year or two (and don't discount the possibility), that will mean his conscience will have gotten the better of him. But it will also mean that the Leader and his left-wing extremist base will then be able to put one of their very own in as the new Chief Justice, with the Obama nominee getting the full support and adulation of the media, the propaganda wing of the left-wing extremist movement. That would give them a guaranteed majority of a locked-step 5 votes in any case coming before the Court. Then the Constitution indeed will have come to mean whatever the Leader, in his judgment, says it means.
Yes, I agree..too many have sold out America and Americans. I don't put anything past this regime...NOTHING!! What we are ending up with is a Banana Republic!
Given Obama and his minions past --- Your thoughts are highly feasible. Now, if that is the case. What do you suggest for a solution to this problem? It's liken to a nasty game of chess with us as pawns. Let's pray, think then act (sanely). Surrender, from our freedom and sovereignty is not an option.
You are not aware that there is an Obama Eligibility case filed by Dr. Orly Taitz to be discussed this Friday, February 15 by the entire court? This case was reintroduced to the Docket by Chief Justice John Roberts after it was rejected by Justice Kennedy.
National Director Dee, your reporting is missing a very serious matter which is going on in front of your nose.
This case will be discussed to determine if the Court will proceed with the case. THIS IS VERY SIGNIFICANT! LOOK IT UP!
I WILL BE IN FRONT OF THE SUPREME COURT IN WASHINGTON DC ON FRIDAY! See you there!
I had previously heard that Orly Taitz had a hearing of sorts with John Roberts. I didn't know the determination of that event. Are you saying that this issue will be explored by the whole of USSC on the 15th of this month??? If so it's WONDERFULLY hopeful news. Perhaps some progress can be made. Too bad Arpaio won't be there too.
Valerie, That is correct! Look up: www.orlytaitzesq.com for reference to the California Supreme Court case which will be discussed.
Look up: www.SpremeCourt.gov for the Docket schedule.
Come to the Supreme Court, Friday, February 15 at 9AM. We will be on the Plaza at 1 1st Street NE Washington DC across from the Capitol building.
A show of 50,000 people to surround the Supreme Court will support the Justices and have a significant impact. SPREAD THE WORD!!
Thanks Dee: It will be a cold day in hell when I believe anything from the AP, NY Times, Anything coming out of any Latin American country, Europe, DC or anyone in fed govt. So Roberts turned coward & TRAITOR, as well as all of DC. Time to take our country back, its up to us We The People-no one else. Wake the hell up America, The New World Order is taking our land, money, freedom our kids & grandkinds will be slaves to the new world order, & we still sleep & remain chicken. Rise up America & fight-now
FBI Director, J. Edgar Hoover, had a file on everyone he could build one on. No one knew for sure what was in their file, so they all feared him and he could get away with anything. Ovomit no doubt has a file on folks so he can control them and a situation like John Roberts' would be prime info. It doesn't look like there's any bottom to the cesspool we call government.
I, for one, am sending this info and link to both my Senators and Congressman. If a bunch of folks would send the info to their representatives(?), maybe an avalanche can be started.
I say we impeach Roberts for criminal activities on the international scene and Obamass for criminal activities on the national scene ( meaning his gangster operations he imported from Chicago to Washington .
as time goes on it looks like obama and his minions will get what they want either by hook or crook....it seems that a lot goes on under the table and in the shade with obama and his deals...and to keep their power, he has a lot of cohorts going along with him.
We all know obama is in this Country and our WH illegally and it has been proven time and time again yet he like all democrates and liberals are so slimy that nothing sticks to them and it just go's away so unless we stand up and say enough is enough and start taking charge it is only going to get worse to the point we can't take our Great Country back from these lawless people what ever party, they are going to make us all slaves. We have talked for 4 years about this and it has only gotten so mush worse that it really scares me that we are too late to change anything and if they try to take our guns with the help of the un or obama,s personal military we will have to fight and that is going to be very bad.