Is Chief Justice Roberts Compromised ?

1. 88

   RJ Schwartzposted 3 years ago

   In the Senate impeachment trial, Chief Justice Roberts refused to allow a question to be asked by Senator Paul because it included the name of the whistleblower.  He is not authorized to decide what questions can be asked by the Senate, making this an issue.
   
   He's denying the President his 6th Amendment Right and refuses to offer any legal grounds for his actions.  We know that Eric C is a CIA plant, so does the Intelligence Community have some dirt on him?  Do you think he's been compromised?

   replyreport
   1. 90

      GA Andersonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Oh buggers RJ. Really?
      
      GA

      replyreport
   2. 89

      MizBejabbersposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      For not allowing that question, I think he was being judicious, not compromised. Oh, wouldn't you Republicans love to know who the Whistleblower is? I don't recall who asked the question, but that person knew that to reveal the identity would be a violation of the Whistleblower Protection Act of 1989, Pub. L 101-12. That in itself would be a criminal act, which Justice Roberts had an obligation to prevent. The question was a setup, and he was damned if he did and damned if he didn't. As presiding officer, Justice Roberts had an obligation to prevent compromising the Whistleblower's identity, and to have allowed the question would have compromised his alleged neutrality as a Justice of the Supreme Court. I don't think I have to explain that if he'd allowed the question, and if one of the managers, Schiff, Schumer, et al had answered the question, not only would said manager lose his seat and be out the door, but it would have been grounds for removal of the Chief Justice himself from the Supreme Court.
      What the Hell kind of a question is that anyway? To even put such a question to this forum is nearly as bad as the idiot who asked it in the Senate trial. I'm disappointed in you, RJ.

      replyreport
      1. 95

         wildernessposted 3 years agoin reply to this

         "As presiding officer, Justice Roberts had an obligation to prevent compromising the Whistleblower's identity"
         
         Sen. Paul knew that identity. Chief Justice Roberts knew it.  As those questions come from the party, not the individual, other Republicans knew it.  Certainly some Democrats knew it.  Now I see a meme on FB showing a picture of the whistleblower.
         
         The question thus becomes how would saying the name, without mention of "whistleblower", could possibly compromise the whistleblower any more than he already is.
         
         Not that I disagree with you - it was a good call - but let's be real here.  That name is common knowledge already.

         replyreport
         1. 89

            MizBejabbersposted 3 years agoin reply to this

            HUH? I guess I missed it. Regardless of who already knew the name, Justice Roberts couldn't let it out to the TV cameras and the general pubic. If it is out, it has to have come through somebody else. I'll bite. Who is it? I actually haven't heard, and we've been watching this farce for several days.

            replyreport
            1. 61

               Randy Godwinposted 3 years agoin reply to this

               The Trump propaganda machine is in full working over. Isn't it sad when a patriot gets smeared for being one? And a criminal gets rewarded for being one? We're back in the Old World with a tyrant on the throne, Miz! Do not doubt it.

               replyreport
               1. 89

                  MizBejabbersposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                  I don't doubt it, Randy, and it makes me sad. In fact, it scares the hell out of me.

                  replyreport
            2. 95

               wildernessposted 3 years agoin reply to this

               I have no idea where the leak came from, just that it came.  There was another meme on my FB this morning, including considerable "information" about his past.  I have no idea if it's true or not, and if it is I'd have to guess that it's only about 10% true, but it still shows that it has been out there for long enough to do some research.
               

               replyreport
               1. 89

                  MizBejabbersposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                  Thanks, Wilderness, right after I posted the request, I saw some stuff on Facebook. It looks to me like the Russians are at it again. I don't know when Facebook will ever learn.

                  replyreport
         2. 61

            Randy Godwinposted 3 years agoin reply to this

            So what's his/her name, Dan? Has the WB program been sabotaged by the Right? If so, you should be proud. And it seems you are. Way to go in hindering another important facet of oversight on criminals. Now we're really getting something done for the king.....er   I mean the Don!

            replyreport
            1. 95

               wildernessposted 3 years agoin reply to this

               Probably leaked by a disgruntled Democrat in the House, being forced to participate in their disgusting charade or find other work.

               replyreport
               1. 61

                  Randy Godwinposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                  Can you vouch for the veracity of this meme, Dan?
                  
                  It certainly doesn't sound like anyone who works for "Honest Don," Right?
                  
                  We all know how much he admire's his own integrity and truthfulness. 

                  replyreport
               2. 0

                  PrettyPantherposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                  Yeah, because Don and his as$ kisser cohorts never lie, cheat, or do anything underhanded.

                  replyreport
                  1. 61

                     Randy Godwinposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                     The Right ought to be pleased as they've made history with the first Senate trial to have no witnesses. I said they'd be terrified of Bolton and they proved me correct.
                     
                     No big surprise as they don't care if Trump is a criminal or not. But it turns out he's not the only criminal who was exposed in this sham trial. The Senate has 51 in it alone.

                     replyreport
                     1. 89

                        MizBejabbersposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                        True, Randy. As I said, it looks like the Russians are at it again. Why should we believe that this man is the real whistleblower? Since Trump got off scott-free, I know that we'll see more of this kind of propaganda. I just hope it comes back to haunt McConnell and his bunch of Trump a$$kissers. Whatever happens, they will get what they deserve, but I hate to see the rest of us have to put up with their BS.

                        replyreport
                        1. 61

                           Randy Godwinposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                           I agree Miz! I've already told my senator--David Perdue--I'll be backing hisr opponent with my voice and wallet. The only recourse we have is at the ballot box, and there's nothing assured Trump won't try to rig that as well.
                           
                           The oversight in the Senate is apparently gone. The House will continue to do their job, but the Senate will continue to be terrified of the conman's wrath. This is so GD embarrassing for our country and our rule of law.

                           replyreport
                           1. 89

                              MizBejabbersposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                              There isn't a single senator (especially Tom Cotton) or representative in my state that I can support because they are all Trumpers. I've never been one for term limits because as a state legislative employee, I saw what chaos can happen when all the experienced legislators are term-limited out at once. However, if it's the only way we can get these self-serving yahoos out, I'm for term limits.
                              But, if anyone thinks there was chaos in the Senate hearings, wait until a bunch of newbies are running the show. Term limits could backfire.

                              replyreport
                              1. 95

                                 wildernessposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                                 That's a problem, all right.  No one wants their representative gone - they "bring home the bacon", after all, so they are re-elected for 30 years. 
                                 
                                 Sad, though, when a Senator can't be voted for because they support the President of the Unite States.

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 61

                                    Randy Godwinposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                                    It's not the supporting bothering me, it's the covering-up for him. They fooled nobody with ignoring pertinent witnesses and facts for the first time in our history. Be Proud of the scoundrels following Trump intead of the Constitution, Dan.
                                    
                                    A trial is supposed to be a search for truth, not for sticking one's head in the sand.

                                    replyreport
                                 2. 0

                                    PrettyPantherposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                                    LINDSEY GRAHAM'S DEMOCRATIC CHALLENGER NEARLY TIED IN HEAVILY-REPUBLICAN SOUTH CAROLINA, POLL SHOWS

                                    replyreport
                                    1. 61

                                       Randy Godwinposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                                       Going to send him some money as well!

                                       report
                                       1. 0

                                          PrettyPantherposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                                          Spread the word! I have gotten a bunch of people to donate. We need to defeat Trump and as many of his a$s kissers as possible.

                                          report
                                          1. 61

                                             Randy Godwinposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                                             Doug Collins and David Perdue need to go as well. You should have seen the email I received from Perdue after I sent one to him stating I wanted him to vote for witnesses.
                                             
                                             First he sent me the standard "want to do good for our country unlike the wacky Liberals" form letter, but then he sent me one saying Trump was innocent because bla.bla,bla,
                                             
                                             Of course, I sent him a return email saying I hope he loses his next election and I'll be supporting his opponent with great enjoyment. Strange though, he hasn't emailed me back. I doubt he ever sees the emails from the left.

                                             report
                        2. 90

                           GA Andersonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                           Just as a side note; I hadn't seen that meme, but I do recall seeing several references and sources that named Eric as the whistleblower's identity shortly after his identity became a topic.
                           
                           I am not saying they are right, or that he is, but only that I have seen him named as the whistleblower before this meme.
                           
                           GA

                           replyreport
                           1. 61

                              Randy Godwinposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                              And it's a shame for anyone to do this, even if it's true.  I've lost all respect for these people who want to protect a conman at any cost. What's wrong with these people?

                              replyreport
                              1. 90

                                 GA Andersonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                                 It was the media—first through 'Net revelations, and then through media articles about those revelations.
                                 
                                 I am not going to go search for the specifics, but I wouldn't be surprised if the NYT wasn't one of those with articles that wouldn't say this is the whistleblower, but did say that this is who has been identified as the whistleblower. What is the difference?  If I recall correctly, you certainly wouldn't include them as "a conman" supporter, would you?
                                 
                                 GA

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 61

                                    Randy Godwinposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                                    They didn't vouch for him being the WB, just he was identified as such?

                                    replyreport
                                    1. 90

                                       GA Andersonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                                       Is there a difference in reader's minds?
                                       
                                       GA

                                       report
                        3. 0

                           PrettyPantherposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                           Hubby and I are donating money to Democrats running against Moscow Mitch and Baby Lindsay, even though they're not our senators. It's time for the top two a$$ kissers to suffer the consequences of choosing party over country .

                           replyreport
                           1. 61

                              Randy Godwinposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                              I do believe these guys are on the side opposite his a$$, Sandy.

                              replyreport
                           2. 89

                              MizBejabbersposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                              Hooray for you! I guess I should be donating to someone, but I've been trying to send the Democrats the message that I won't donate to their socialist agenda, and any donation to my former party right now doesn't get that message across. I'm still being bombarded with dem. donation requests. However, your type of donations might. If a moderate democrat who has a chance of beating Trump is selected as the party's candidate, I will donate to get that person elected.

                              replyreport
                              1. 0

                                 PrettyPantherposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                                 The DNC's decision to change the rules for Bloomberg have really pissed me off!  All my money is going to individual candidates that I like from now on. They got $300,000 from Bloomberg and rewarded him with a rule change. Unacceptable!

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 89

                                    MizBejabbersposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                                    I agree. The dems don't need Bloomberg. All he is doing is mudding the water and may assure Trump's re-election.

                                    replyreport
                           3. 90

                              GA Andersonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                              Good for you. That is the way it is supposed to work.
                              
                              GA

                              replyreport
                              1. 61

                                 Randy Godwinposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                                 Indeed, no support from Russia either.

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 90

                                    GA Andersonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                                    How do you know?
                                    
                                    GA

                                    replyreport
                                    1. 61

                                       Randy Godwinposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                                       Because I'm psycho......er...I mean...psychic.

                                       report
                                       1. 90

                                          GA Andersonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                                          Well then, I bow to your talents.
                                          
                                          GA

                                          report
2. 77

   Credence2posted 3 years ago

   Hi, guys
   
   I have already donated toward Warren's campaign even in the face of her recently waning fortunes. It is a shame that she has to spend so much time convincing people that a woman can win. She has to climb over the hurtles of misogyny before she can even begin to present the issues. America is so antiquated in its attitudes in so many areas.
   
   I never want to acknowledge that Michael Moore could be right, that Trump will get another term based on the disunity and mixed messages among the Democrats.
   
   The DNC changes its rules to accommodate Bloomberg's recent entry into the race?
   
   Bloomberg told Warren that she was out of line with her proposals. He is running to destroy the progressive wing of the party. As far as I am concerned, a corporate democrat" is no better than a Republican. Corporate Democrats and Republicans have more in common than what it is that separates them. So, in effect, Bloomberg is a "fifth columnist", double agent, actually allied with Trump and his agenda, even though he says otherwise.
   
   The system that allows a man like Trump to spawn and rise to the highest office in the land needs to eradicated, not merely accommodated. Why put Chanel No. 5 on excrement? That is Biden, Bloomberg and to a certain extent, Buttigieg.
   
   I fear that America is not ready for the real change proposed by the progressive candidates, they are more than content with the status quo and the slow downward spiral that we have been on.

   replyreport
   1. 90

      GA Andersonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      "I fear that America is not ready for the real change proposed by the progressive candidates . . . "
      
      Should that say something to you? I think so.
      
      GA

      replyreport
      1. 77

         Credence2posted 3 years agoin reply to this

         Unfortunately, GA, it says that this is their deficit and not mine. So, the downward spiral will continue..., and have only have ourselves to blame for being content with business as usual.

         replyreport
         1. 90

            GA Andersonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

            hmm. . .  I thought it might suggest a difference in opinion of the Progressive platform.
            
            Are you thinking of it as a case of su dinero es mi dinero?
            
            GA

            replyreport
            1. 77

               Credence2posted 3 years agoin reply to this

               It is a matter of priorities as to where our "dinero" is to be allocated, but that is why I am progressive and you, basically conservative..

               replyreport
               1. 95

                  wildernessposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                  No, it is a matter of "my money" being "our money" to liberals, which is the (largest) basic difference between liberals and conservatives.  Or progressives, if you prefer that label.  That's what the quote means, not where to put "our" money.

                  replyreport
                  1. 61

                     Randy Godwinposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                     Do you need a loan, Dan? You always seem to be worried someone wants to take your money. It's getting on my nerves after several years of your complaining about the govt taking your money.
                     
                     Just come right out and ask for a loan if you're in dire straits. I'm sure we all can chip in and help you through the hard times. That's what friends are for, right?

                     replyreport