How Roberts was blackmailed to support ObamaCare

Roberts was blackmailed to support Obamacare

By T.J. McCann
I originally wrote this article and presented the research on January 28, 2013, on a now defunct forum LibertyCaucus.com, posted under my nickname “Trip”.  The story got serious traction across the blogosphere, and was picked up at such sites as “WhatReallyHappened” and “BeforeItsNews” (Archived).

INTRO: Many of us have questioned what caused Roberts to switch his vote on ObamaCare at the last minute,, and did this so late that the Conservative Justices were forced to rewrite their majority opinion to be minority dissent.

According to some sources, Roberts wrote both the majority and a large portion of minority dissenting opinions. The liberal news outlet Salon.com has a story on July 3, 2012, “Roberts Wrote Both ObamaCare Opinions”, written by law professor Paul Campos, citing “a source within the court with direct knowledge of the drafting process.”

In this Salon article, Campos rejects the claim that the conservative minority wrote the dissenting opinion in response to Roberts’ majority opinion. Instead Campos’ source indicates that Roberts authored as much as the “first 46 pages” of the dissent, a full 70%, originally intended to be the majority opinion entirely rejecting ObamaCare. Only after Roberts switched his vote at the last minute did the remaining four Justices author the final 19 pages of that dissenting opinion. In support of this, Campos points out that it is extraordinary “in the court’s history that a dissent has gone on for 13,000 words before getting around to mentioning that it is, in fact, dissenting”, and yet there are repeated references to dissent from the majority opinion in those last 19 pages.

These facts may answer that question…

Roberts Adoptions:

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-inves…

• 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?

At the time, the adoption terms of the children was uncertain.  The Associated Press reported that they were “adopted from Latin America.” This indication should have been noteworthy, particularly given the Time magazine report indicating that the children were born in Ireland. Also, their blond hair and fair skin do not seem conventionally Latin American. ¹

TIME had a “web exclusive” on the Roberts’s (7/24/05) and therein 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 contacted Irish women, arranged for them to be transported out of Ireland and into compliant Latin American countries, from which they were adopted, thereby circumventing Irish laws — entirely illegal, but perhaps quasi-legitimized by the birth mothers, two in this case, 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. As of 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. This would be a narrow perspective on what occurred. 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. These actions are promoting 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 aonly 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.

Irish Adoption Law
The weak point in this theory, beyond actual proof of blackmail, is the actual terms of Irish Adoption Law. However an overview of the widespread Irish Adoption laws do bear out the assertions. As a result of Irish adoption law being the accumulation of laws over the years, this following synopsis is an accurate representation of that law given no singular code can be directly referenced.

Reference: Overview of Ireland Adoption Law (PDF) The above document makes the following statements:

• “The responsibility for making adoption orders is vested in the Irish Adoption Board, An Bord Uchtala. Before a final adoption order is made, the child usually is placed with the future adopter(s) by one of Ireland’s Registered Adoption Societies.” [page 1]

Who may adopt?

• … “While the Irish acts do not require the applicants have Irish nationality or an Irish domicile, the applicants must be ordinarily resident in Ireland or have resident there during the year ending on the date of the order.“[Page 4]

Adoption Authorities:

• “The adoption process in Ireland is regulated by the Adoption Board — the An Bord Uchtala — which consists of a Chairman and eight members. THe Adoption Board is an independent, quasi-judicial statutory body appointed by the Irish Government. It has the sole right to grant or refuse to grant adoption orders. The Board is also responsible for granting the declarations of eligibility and suitability to prospective adopters in advance of their adopting abroad and for maintaining the Register of Foreign Adoptions in which the details of intercountry adoptions are entered.” [Page 4]
• “Before an adoption agency can accept a child for adoption, the person proposing to give the child up must be furnished with a statement explaining the effect of adoption order upon his or her rights and the provisions of the adoption acts relating to consents. An agreement to place the child with prospective adopters must be signed prior to the signing of consent. The agreement to place must have been made freely, with full knowledge of the consequences, and under circumstances where neither the advice of persons engaged in the transaction nor the surrounding circumstances deprive the mother of the capacity to make a fully informed free decision. In particular an agreement to place is “not valid if motivated by fear, stress or anxiety or dictated by parents or deprivations.“[Page 7]

There are no private adoptions. There are no overseas adoptions.

All adoptions go through the government board, An Bord Uchtala.

John Roberts was not ordinarily resident in Ireland, and was not resident there for the year ending on the date of an order that never passed through the Uchtala Board!

Furthermore, it is doubtful that Robert’s adoption afforded the adopting mothers (two) an environment that fully informed each of them of their rights, and was free of stress, anxiety, coercion and “deprivations”. In fact it is virtually certain that the process involved removing two children and their respective mothers from Ireland, and any support structure they might have had there, not to mention removing them from the purview of Irish law!

This whole exercise was highly illegal and unethical.  Even if John Roberts was not blackmailed, these conditions would undeniably provide leverage for extortion to use against a sitting Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.

Source: Liberty Born

How Roberts was Blackmailed to support ObamacareDownload

President Donald Trump finalizes rule confirming abortion is not a human right

By Micaiah Bilger

America Pro-life President Donald Trump

The Trump administration finalized another pro-life regulation Monday, this one to clarify that the definition of sex discrimination in Obamacare does not include abortions.

The new rule officially ends a 2016 regulation from the Obama administration that could have forced medical workers to help abort unborn babies. It restores the government’s interpretation of sex discrimination to “the plain meaning … as determined by biology,” according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

“HHS respects the dignity of every human being, and as we have shown in our response to the pandemic, we vigorously protect and enforce the civil rights of all to the fullest extent permitted by our laws as passed by Congress,” said Roger Severino, director of the Office for Civil Rights at HHS. “We are unwavering in our commitment to enforcing civil rights in healthcare.”

In 2016, the Obama administration redefined sex discrimination under Obamacare to include “termination of pregnancy.” Federal courts struck down the regulation, but it still was on the books. The Trump administration’s action Monday repeals the unconstitutional regulation.

Pro-life leaders praised President Donald Trump’s continued actions for life.

“President Trump is the most pro-life president our nation has ever seen, and today he delivered another important victory for conscience in America. Abortion is not health care and should never be mandated by the government,” said Susan B. Anthony List President Marjorie Dannenfelser. “We thank President Trump and Secretary Azar for standing firmly on the side of the majority of Americans who reject taxpayer funding of abortion, and for the action taken today to roll back the Obama/Biden-era assault on conscience.”

Catholic Archbishop Joseph F. Naumann, chairman of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ Committee on Pro-Life Activities, also celebrated the news.

“We thank the Department of Health and Human Services for promulgating regulations restoring the long-standing position of the federal government that discrimination on the basis of ‘sex’ means just that and does not refer to ‘termination of pregnancy’ nor ‘gender identity,’” Naumann said in a statement joined by Archbishop Paul S. Coakley of Oklahoma City and Bishop David A. Konderla of Tulsa.

The Catholic leaders said the regulation will restore pro-life health care providers’ rights and protect their religious freedom.

“Catholic health care providers serve everyone who comes to them, regardless of characteristics or background. However, there are ethical considerations when it comes to procedures. We greatly appreciate today’s important action,” the bishops said.

Follow LifeNews on the Parler social media network for the latest pro-life news!

The new rule strengthens religious freedom. The Heritage Foundation’s senior research fellow Ryan T. Anderson, who submitted comments on the HHS rule, explained previously:

“When Congress passed the Affordable Care Act, it prohibited discrimination on the basis of ‘sex.’ Several years later, the Obama administration redefined ‘sex’ to mean … termination of pregnancy. In addition to being an unlawful abuse of agency power, these rules would have caused serious harm.”

“They would have required doctors, hospitals, and health care organizations to act in ways contrary to their best medical judgments, their consciences, and the physical realities of their patients, or face steep fines and become easy targets for unreasonable and costly lawsuits.”

It is just one of many pro-life actions by the Trump administration. In 2019, it also created a new regulation to enforce conscience protections by punishing medical groups that discriminate against pro-life medical workers. Two federal judges invalidated the rule after pro-abortion groups filed suit, but doctors and medical professionals are fighting back.

Last year, the Trump administration also came to the aid of a Vermont nurse after she said her employer, the University of Vermont Medical Center, tricked her into participating in an abortion against her will by telling her it was a miscarriage.

Source: Life News

BLM, Covid-19 and climate change, 3 great international cons

by Ron Ewart, President, NARLO, ©2020

I will defend America against all terrorist foreign and domestic

FROM “IN DEFENSE OF RURAL AMERICA”

(Jul. 11, 2020) — “Hollywood (and government too) is largely about scammers and con men.  It was my main livelihood for about 25 years, and the scams were beautiful and ugly, cheap and expensive, but, wow, were there a lot of scammers.”     Ben Stein, writer, lawyer, actor and comedian

Both Hollywood and government have been designed to rob you of your money in return for questionable entertainment or mostly substandard services.  Government goes one step farther and works diligently to rob you of your freedom.  They have been at it since the ink was dry on the Constitution, as ratified by the Congress in 1788, over two centuries ago.

Within ten years of the ratification, President John Adams convinced Congress to pass the Naturalization Act, later to be known as the Alien and Sedition Acts.  The Act gave broad powers to the president to deport any alien in peacetime.  “The Sedition Act gave President Adams the power to define treasonous activity including any false, scandalous and malicious writing.  The intended targets were newspaper, pamphlet and broadside publishers who printed what he considered to be libelous articles aimed at his administration.”    (source: history.com)

President Woodrow Wilson did virtually the same thing that President Adams did by requesting the Congress to pass the Espionage Act in 1917, which it did.  The Congress followed up with an amendment to the Espionage Act and called it the Sedition Act in 1918.  The Sedition Act was later overturned by the high court in 1921.  The Acts severely restricted freedom of expression, mandating that public criticism of the military or the government be punished by a $10,000 fine and up to 20 years in jail, the First Amendment and civil liberties be damned.  Nevertheless, the Espionage Act is still in effect today and can be used to prosecute individuals who “leak” classified or confidential government information to the press.  Unfortunately, most illegal leaking to the press is seldom if ever prosecuted.

The list of actions by government to relieve Americans of their money and freedom is voluminous and too many to mention here.  Some of the more prominent actions include the 16^th Amendment, which gave us the Federal Reserve and the Internal Revenue Service; FDR’s removal of the gold standard, Social Security and the New Deal; President Johnson’s Great Society and Obama’s ObamaCare.  This doesn’t even include a long list of judicial actions and U.S. Supreme Court decisions that further diminished constitutional freedoms.  Added to this list are the massive regulations to control the environment at the expense of constitutionally protected property rights and direct violations of the 5^th Amendment.

THE FRAUD OF CLIMATE CHANGE:

In spite of the volumes of credible scientific papers taking the air out of the Climate Change (CC) tires, government and environmentalists, national and international, continue to push this fraud down the throats of the masses, forcing them to pay billions and trillions of dollars to reduce the global temperature by 3.6^O F (2^O Celsius), (Paris Climate Agreement) based on the questionable output of computer models that can’t even predict past or current weather conditions, much less future ones.

Climate Change propaganda and the CC con game is endless.  It is in our schools and colleges.  The news media parrots the lie day in and day out.   It’s laced throughout television nature documentaries.  Corporations are even getting on the CC bandwagon and perpetuating the fraud in their advertising.  Amazon is re-naming the revamped Key Arena sports stadium in Seattle.  The new name will read “Climate Pledge Arena.”  Little children are emotionally brainwashed with CC guilt and fear and spout the mantra to their friends and parents.

What is the purpose by government to elevate this con to an international crisis, behavioral control of the planet’s human population?  The net effect is to steal the people’s money and put them in chains based on a fraud.   (See “Climate”)

THE CORONAVIRUS:

Then there is the Coronavirus con.  Governments, all across the world, couldn’t wait to lock people up in their homes and violate two of the most basic human rights, the freedom of movement and free choice.  The U.S. Government literally repealed the 1^st Amendment and replaced it with the alleged absolute right of government to force people to stay in their homes under the super law called “Public Health and Safety” that allegedly takes priority over all other law.  Even though the government put out endless conflicting reports about virus transmission, treatment for the virus, social distancing, protective equipment, masks and other so-called science-driven prognostications and guidelines, being good little compliant robots, the American people complied with the orders almost without a whimper or a question.  Businesses are going bankrupt by the tens of thousands, never to return.  Economic losses are staggering and have never been this bad in modern times.  Whole industries have been wiped out.  The Constitution has been repealed.  Where is the defiance to government corruption?  Where is the rebellion to government tyranny?

BLACK LIVES MATTER:

This is what Black Lives Matter (BLM), protesting against alleged police brutality and racial injustice, has given us, besides the violence, looting and arson.  They have managed to intimidate politicians on both sides of the aisle, the news media, academia, corporations and the people into giving in to most of their demands.  The BLM con has turned the police into villains.  (See: “Let The Cops Do It.  Oops!  The Cops Are Gone.”)

Corporations, in acts of massive pandering to bullies, have handed over millions to BLM organizations, giving them immense political power to protest, recruit and lobby government.  Huge increases in BLM’s war chest and tacit approval of their actions by politicians and others has emboldened them and given them even more power.  House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a Democrat, said when questioned about BLM violence, “People will do what they do” as an off-hand approval of BLM violence.

BLM wants to de-fund the police and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).  They want no new jails built and they want to end cash bail.  This is where you commit a crime and the police let you go without making you pay bail money to make sure you appear for your court date.  BLM wants to decriminalize prostitution.  They want to get rid of the nuclear family.  They want police-free schools.  That will make school shooters happy.  They want all charges against protestors and rioters dropped.  The Mayor of Philadelphia did just that.  They want to stop the policy of “stop and frisk.”  They want to ban the police chokeholds, a necessary offensive maneuver by police to subdue a physically violent suspect.

But worse than all this, they have turned government against white Americans to placate BLM.  Some cities have actually sat their white staff down and told them to be less white.  That is exactly what the City of Seattle did to its white staff in June of 2020.

Can you imagine the outcry if a city government sat the black staff down and told them to be less black?  All h*** would break loose.  The media would go bananas.  Democrats would become apoplectic and call for investigations.  Petitions would pop up calling for the recall of the mayor and city council.  Demands for their resignations would ring out across the land.  ANTIFA and Black Lives Matter rioters would go on a nationwide, shooting, looting and burning rampage.

On June 12, 2020, the same day that protestors took over a section of Seattle’s Capitol Hill, the Seattle Office of Civil Rights called all white staffers to a two-and-one-half-hour training session on how to be less white.  They were told they would have to give up their objectivity, individualism, intellectualization, comfort and perfectionism.  Objectivity is the foundation of logic, reason and science.  Individualism is the cornerstone of freedom.  Perfectionism is the motive to the betterment of our lives and the drive towards worthy achievement.

They were told they would have to give up their land.  They were told that whites are guilty of superior justification, self-righteousness, fear and shame on how they treat other races.

Why do white people put up with this?  (“White People Built America”) Instead of sitting there and taking this socialist, racist drivel (of course it’s racist), the white Seattle staffers should have walked out of the session en masse.  Tarred and feathered would be an appropriate punishment for city supervisors embarrassing and intimidating white city employees because of their skin color.

Don’t you get the irony?  Blacks (14% of America’s population) can terrorize neighborhoods and businesses with violence, looting and arson and get politicians to pass laws just for the black race while demeaning and vilifying the white race (72%).  That’s racist!  But the rest of us sit on our collective behinds and say we can’t do anything about it while sticking our heads in the sand and running for cover from the violence.

Black Lives will Matter only when black lives matter to black lives.  They kill each other at unprecedented rates.  Black-on-Black crime in the black communities is much higher than general crime in other communities.  Chicago is a glaring example.  The family unit in inner cities is in tatters.   Their education level for an advanced nation is an embarrassment.  Young black males under-perform in almost all learning disciplines as compared to all females and other races.  Nevertheless, they want to drag the rest of us down to their level by intimidation through tribal violence.  Their game is an outright, in-your-face con.  Unfathomably, we are bowing to the con and letting them win because of a society and media-driven myth that all whites are racists.

What happened to the Americans who gave birth to freedom, tamed a continent and created the most prosperous, creative, industrious and generous nation on earth?  Did we somehow breed courage out of them and leave them quivering in fear?  Will Americans hide in their houses until the jack-booted thugs and bullies come for them, as the Nazis did to the Jews in Germany?  If they do, it will be too late to take back America from the government socialists and the Black Lives Matter anarchists, and only outright war will vanquish the bullies. Why do you suppose millions of Americans are buying guns?

Man was born with intellect, reason, logic, commons sense and the insatiable drive to be free that has made him the top of the food chain on planet earth.  Nevertheless, his claim of mental superiority in the face of advancing socialist bullies like Black Lives Matter, world pandemics and the fraud of Climate Change is hollow indeed.  One wonders, if man will succumb to these three cons, to what else will he succumb?  The list is long.

Over the last 100 years or more, Americans have succumbed to the Democrat illegal immigration con, the Democrat public school and higher education con, the Democrat health care con, the Democrat judicial con, the Democrat voter fraud con, the Democrat Deep State con, the Democrat DOJ and FBI conspiracy against Trump con, the Democrat extreme regulation con, the Democrat welfare con, the Democrat Planned Parenthood con, the Democrat PBS broadcasting con, the Democrat-controlled news media con and many more lesser cons.  President Trump has tried to expose these cons for what they are and get the American people to realize how they are being manipulated, herded and controlled by the socialist Democrat Party.   Now they are on the verge of succumbing to socialism and the Joe Biden con.  If Trump loses this November, it will be a testament to the failure of the American people to preserve, defend and protect their own freedom and the U.S. Constitution.  That would make the American people very stupid indeed.

Read more powerful conservative articles like this one HERE.

Source: The Post & Email