Will Chief Justice John Roberts be blackmailed (again) to rule in favor of same-sex marriage?

Today is the second day of the Supreme Court’s (SCOTUS) deliberations on the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act and, by implication, of same-sex marriage.
I woke up to a network TV reporter intoning that SCOTUS’s decision will hang on two justices: Anthony Kennedy and John Roberts.
God help us.
Recall that Chief Justice John Roberts was the critical vote that accounted for SCOTUS’s ruling in favor of Obamacare last June, by upholding the most controversial part of the “health care” law — individual mandate. SCOTUS’s “reasoning” was that the Individual Mandate is a tax, and it is within Congress’ power to tax (and spend).
Roberts’ vote on the side of the leftist justices came as a rude surprise to Conservatives. By all accounts, Obamacare was set to be defeated. Five of the conservative justices had even prepared a majority opinion against Obamacare, until one of them — John Roberts — at the 11th hour,  changed his mind, and switched his vote. The formerly majority opinion had to be quickly re-written as a minority dissent.
Roberts’ 11th-hour abrupt switch confounded everyone. Why would an alleged “strict constructionist” who ought to favor limiting governmental power in favor of individual choice, turn into the fifth and deciding vote for Obamacare, which is already changing the United States as we’ve known it. And at the last minute?

Roberts2L to r: John, Jack, Jane, Josie Roberts, Oct. 3, 2005. Do those kids look Latin American to you?

A Huffington Post article in 2012 claimed that “a source close to the Roberts family, who requested anonymity in order to discuss judicial deliberations, told HuffPo that the justice’s wife, Jane, exercises a ‘heavy influence’ over her husband.” Jane Sullivan Roberts is described by Lisa McElroy, author of the biography John Roberts: Chief Justice, as “a very intelligent and high-powered lawyer in her own right.”
Below is an account of what could have led John Roberts to switch betray. (Note: The essay is quite long and should be relegated to the realm of unconfirmed rumors.) Briefly, the contention is that Roberts was blackmailed to switch his vote because he and his wife had illegally adopted two infants from Ireland. The Roberts children are now 12 to 13 years old.
According to a 2009 article in Irish America, John and Jane Roberts are part-owners of a little cottage in Knocklong County Limerick, Ireland, not far from Jane’s mother’s home place in Charleville on the Limerick/Cork border. John Roberts is also of Irish stock, as well as Welsh and Czech.
Since both John and Jane Roberts are practicing Catholics, and the Catholic Church is most decidedly against same-sex marriage (notwithstanding the heretical stance of “liberal” nuns and priests), if Roberts casts his lot in favor of same-sex marriage, it will lend credence to the blackmail rumor.
The following (long) article was first posted on LibertyCaucus.net, and then republished by other sites. (Warning: If you go to the LibertyCaucus.net link, you’ll get a red “Dangerous Site” message from McAfee.)
~Eowyn

Hi 5sRoberts swearing in the POS a second time in 2009

How Roberts Was Blackmailed To Support ObamaCare
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
http://patterico.com/2005/08/04/drudge-says-new-york-times-is-investigating-robertss-adoption-records/

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.

Please follow and like us:
0
 

0 responses to “Will Chief Justice John Roberts be blackmailed (again) to rule in favor of same-sex marriage?

  1. or bribed.
    dear brothers & sisters, this is Holy Week!!
    pray, pray, pray.
    SMITE THE WORKS OF THE DEVIL O LORD
    & DELIVER US FROM ALL EVIL.
    YOUR KINGDOM COME
    YOUR WILL BE DONE ON EARTH
    AS IT IS IN HEAVEN.
    maranâ’ thâ’ !!
    amen, amen.

     
  2. I don’t know how true this is , but on my way home from work this a.m. I was listening to W.S.B. in Atl. and they had Jamie Du Pree on . He made mention of the fact that Robert’s sis swings from the other side of the plate .
    If true he should recuse himself from this decision . Conflict of interest obviously . As far as his 11th hour about-face on idiot-care , somebody must have polaroids on him .

     
  3. If Obama can get into sealed records, why can’t someone hack his?

     
  4. Thank you Dr. Eowyn for this enlightening post. Justice Roberts’ opinion on Obamacare was not only completely perplexing, but it grasped at straws declaring that Obamacare was a “tax”. This leads me to question the integrity of his decision. Frankly, if there are questions in the public forum about the status of the adoption of his children, Justice Roberts should simply clear the air and set forth how the adoptions took place. If he has done nothing illegal or questionable, he should have no problem with this disclosure.

     
    • Excellent point, Joan!
      If I were John Roberts, and my integrity is being questioned, I would not hesitate to clear the air about the adoptions — that is, assuming I have nothing untoward to hide. It is, therefore, perplexing that he hasn’t.
      Also, this rumor of the children being illegally adopted from Ireland has been circulating on the net — in the public domain — for months now. It is incredible that Roberts does not know about this, and yet he’s said nothing to clarify the adoptions. I only decided to publish this when I heard this morning that the Supreme Court’s ruling on same-sex marriage now hinges on him.

       
  5. JOHN ROBERTS,needs to step up to the plate and vote against gay marriage! all these justices know gay marriage is a moral disgrace.it will degrade our country! they should all vote no on gay marriage.

     
  6. So nice to read like minded people on this same sex issue. I can’t tell you how many so-called Christians on my FB and Twitter support this sin! What are we coming to? It’s scary!

     
  7. Leeann Springer

    If, in fact, he and the wife adopted the children illegally; it is the same as human trade. I don’t think the SCOTUS judges should have a lifetime appointment. If they vote for sodomite marriage, there is only one hope left for this world, The Blessed Hope. Sparrow59. Christians who support sodomite unions are not Christians at all; they are frauds. I do not like the word gay used as a substitute for sodomites. We are in the end-times and America is already under the supreme judgment of God. I

     
  8. Breitbart this morning features an article with the headline, “THE WEAKEST LINK: LEFT TARGETS JUSTICE ROBERTS–AGAIN.”
    This supports your concern that Justice Roberts has been compromised. I would say, if this is true, Justice Roberts should consider resignation.

     
    • Good grief. 🙁
      This begs the question why John Roberts is perceived as “the weakest link” and why the Left “targets” him. One is “the weakest link” either because of weakness of character, or because your opponents know you have a vulnerability – a skeleton in the closet.
      Roberts must make a full disclosure about the adoptions. His children are now 13 years old, and can handle knowing they’d been adopted, assuming they don’t already know. The only way to deal with blackmailers is with light.
      John Roberts can continue to hide and evade, but ultimately he (and his wife, Jane) will have to answer before God.

       
  9. Judge Roberts is a brilliant man. I hope and pray he can find the inner strength to meet the threats and challenges of the day with honor.

     
  10. What happens when a Judge gets caught with a lie like this? Covering up a blackmail is wrong. Taking a bribery is not right either. If this was you or I we would be going down for this. He is a Judge for crying out loud. He is suppose to have morals.

     
  11. This is so sad. Dr. Eo, thank you so much for keeping on top of these issues. What is so egregious here are these children caught in the middle of something so huge for our country. God help them all and give them an extra measure of courage and strength.
    BTW, I personally am so reluctant to pass judgment on Mr. and Mrs. Roberts. No good deed goes unpunished – sure looks like that’s the case here!

     
    • Dear pnordman, I must disagree. To quote from the Liberty Caucus article in my post:
      “Some might feel an impulse [to] dismiss this information, mistakenly believing Roberts and his wife were doing a good thing for 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.”

      And if indeed it was blackmail that led to Roberts switching his vote on Obamacare, then he warrants even less sympathy and will have to answer for that before God.

       
  12. It has been claimed that obama’s children are adopted – for a Marriage of Convenience- bc he is a homosexual.
    It is a well known fact that Rev. Wright ran a matchmaking “service” – from his “church” = The Down Low Club – for gay, married men w children.
    Obama was a member of Rev. Wright’s church for over Twenty years, who preached Black Liberation Theology based on Marxist principles = married by him and baptized his two children.
    It is a shame that Obama could be Blackmailing Chief Justice Roberts – to submit to ruling in favor of Obama’s unconstitutional ACTS.

     

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *