Reporter explains 'most stunning thing' about John Roberts' rebuke of Trump

[DonViejo]

Martin Cizmar MARTIN CIZMAR
21 NOV 2018 AT 14:01 ET

President Donald Trump received a rare rebuke from the Republican-appointed Chief Justice of the Supreme Court on Wednesday.

John Roberts, who was appointed by George W. Bush, lashed out at Trump’s attacks on “Obama judges.” The U.S. does not have “Obama judges or Trump judges, Bush judges or Clinton judges,” he said to the Associated Press, extolling the virtues of an independent judiciary.

NBC political reporter Alex Seitz-Wald tweeted about the importance of Roberts statements—especially in the context they were given.

“The most stunning thing about this John Roberts statement is that he gave it to the AP, not during public remarks or in a law journal or any of the myriad ways he could have softened its edges. He wanted it out there and now, through the front door,” Seitz-Wald said.

Link to tweet

# # #

https://www.rawstory.com/2018/11/reporter-explains-stunning-thing-john-roberts-rebuke-trump/

[cilla4progress]

1. Well, that's

cool.

[TheBlackAdder]

40. Cool, but bunk. After all, he did sit on those judicial complaints about Kavanaugh until too late.

[Stinky The Clown]

2. That's the SC's swing vote right now.

[TeamPooka]

20. Meet the New Kennedy.

[pangaia]

23. Somehow I don't think so.

[Butterflylady]

26. Oh yeah!

This was his way of letting dotard know he can't be counted on to do his bidding. The court took a lot of. knocks during the kavanaugh thing and Roberts is probably not happy about it.

[Pepsidog]

34. I think you maybe right

[diva77]

41. Yah, I wonder whether he was personally affected by Sheldon Whitehouse's brilliant & devastating

analysis of the Roberts' 5

https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4746984/senator-sheldon-whitehouse-grills-kavanaugh-roberts-5

[Eliot Rosewater]

28. He can go down in history as a patriot who wanted the Constitution to win

and people to have rights or he can go down as just another piece of shit who advocated for horrible crimes to happen to all minorities.

His choice.

[gtar100]

30. Yep. Very good point.

Time will tell.

[Salviati]

36. It's now either the Roberts Court or the Kavanaugh Kourt

and he gets to pick which it is.

[rurallib]

31. I'll believe it when I see it and I do hope we see it

that would be so great.

[canetoad]

3. I wonder if the statement

Was also aimed at the two "Trump" judges.

[Jeffersons Ghost]

13. actually Trump should only been able to appoint 1 judge...

Do you remember when the Obama appointment of a judge to the Supreme Court was delayed with a variety of questionable or illegal maneuvers?

[canetoad]

14. I certainly do

And consider the actions of McConnell and Co. an abomination.

[gratuitous]

4. Close Alex, but no cigar

The most stunning thing about Roberts' statement is that anyone believes it. This is eyewash, intended to make Roberts look ethical and inoculate him from charges that he's nothing but a judicial stooge for the wealthy and well-connected. It's also intended to let Bush and Trump judges off the hook for their egregious rulings that you know are coming.

Prove me wrong, John. Re-visit your catastrophically wrong ruling in Shelby County, whose rationale has been proven to be no more substantial than a will o' the wisp in a Florida swamp.

[Perseus]

9. In my humble opinion...You are correct!

They criticize Hollywood, but they are all actors, and you have to be one to lie and have people believe you. I don't trust any of these judges, they may not like being labeled as republican judges, but that is exactly what they are.

[pangaia]

24. BINGO !!

[oldtime dfl_er]

27. yes

fact.

[FakeNoose]

29. Or ... revisit the SCOTUS' Citizens United ruling and send it to hell where it belongs

[Pepsidog]

35. Yea I think you are on to something. I had faint hope maybe it was a message to Dotard I

[Scruffy1]

39. First rule.

He's a Republican therefore he's trying to fool someone.

[diva77]

42. oh no! now I am deflated; you're probably right

[mountain grammy]

43. Exactly

[mopinko]

46. yeah, lemme see when the next swipe at roe happens.

[renate]

5. I'm glad he spoke up and contradicted Trump, but...

Bullshit.

Mitch McConnell and the Federalist Society would certainly disagree with this statement. Sounds nice, though.

[SoCalDem]

6. Is he changing his name to John Corker Flake Roberts? n/t

[gratuitous]

11. "Collins" should fit in there somewhere, too

But Roberts' statement sure impressed a lot of journalists who should know better.

[Pa-Kid]

17. It doesn't much

to impress journalists these day. After all look at how the treat the idiot in the White House. They seem incapable of calling him or the GOP out for the many lies they tell. What we need is for them to hold both Trump and the Republican Party feet to the fire

[uponit7771]

7. +1

[Perseus]

8. He may think that way, but that is not the reason why republicans nominated him and others

Roberts, Alito, Kavanaugh and the other two were elected to do the GOP's dirty work, which many times they have. If Roberts feels offended then he did not understand the goal of his nomination by a republican.

[Stuart G]

10. k and r...nt

[Hassler]

12. Too late now. Roberts helped delegitimized SCOTUS with Citizens United

[Ponietz]

15. Yeah, I hope he gets that in his bones, now.

[Pobeka]

16. +1 n/t

[oberliner]

18. Raw Story creates entire clickbait article around NBC News reporter's tweet

Without adding any original content or insight.

[SergeStorms]

25. It is on every news site known to humankind right now.

I'm not trying to pick a fight, because I agree with you about Raw Story. No one should cite Raw Story as a source on anything, but you could site The Onion right about now, and they'd be discussing this as well. This is the newest Trump outrage and everyone is talking about it. The dust-up about this will settle in 3.....2.....1.

[old guy]

19. OK,

but he''s still a weasel and not to be trusted very far.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

21. Ouch!

That's going to leave a mark.

[gibraltar72]

22. A paler shade of awful.

[LisaM]

32. The stunning thing to me is that John Roberts doesn't realize the cascading series of events

that led to his appointment. Is he that tone deaf? Does he not understand the make-up of the Bush v. Gore court, and the fact that three judges had outright conflicts and should have recused themselves, and that Sandra Day O'Connor all but signaled on election night 2000 that she would only retire if a Republican could replace her?

I'm actually stunned that Mr. Fox News Law Firm lawyer doesn't see this.

[sharedvalues]

37. No, Roberts is spreading propaganda

Roberts doesn't want criticism of judge's politics, because he knows that would damage Republicans VASTLY more than liberals.

[LisaM]

38. He's a slick one.

I don't trust him

[TwistOneUp]

33. Re: the country does not have political judges

WTF do you think Kavanaugh is? A liberal?

How's 'bout our acting AG, who doesn't trust judges who do not have a biblical world view? Sound like he's a Demmor liberal to you?

The court is a republican court. Mr. Magoo could see that.

[libdem4life]

44. Yeah...now I'm politically depressed. I get up to this this a.m. , as well?????

Who do people on here have to be so learned and smart and intelligent. Here I had a little warm fuzzy and all...pfffft...gone. Must admit, they are rare with The Cretin fouling up the WH.

Still Waiting for Godot, otherwise known as Congressional Representatives being informed by their constituents that The days of the Dinosaur are numbered...so get rid of him before we get rid of you. The Ghost of Nixon, perhaps? That, I fear is a pipe dream, as well. Oh well, I'm sure someone will let me know about that one too.

Half sarcasm...half weariness.

[Texin]

45. Well, seems to me that he's warning tRump that he may not be able to count on him

to save him from a SCOTUS fight to remain in office should it get that far. And let's face it, it's a very likely possibility.

[calimary]

47. He seldom sticks his neck out, especially this far.

[malthaussen]

48. In other words, "I'm still your whore..."

"... but I don't want it on record." The Court can continue to be as partisan as it likes, so long as there is no blatant acknowledgement that it is.

-- Mal

[usaf-vet]

49. I'm praying that this is NOT the last hopeful words we hear from Justice Roberts.

Maybe he realizes that it is his legacy that will be in the history books.
It will be the legacy of the "Roberts' Court" that will be studied by future generations.

It maybe that he is just smart enough to realize that if he allows it to become a rightwing activist
court it will still bear his name. With the other justices mentioned just an asterisk next to his name in the text.

The rightwing extreme presidents that stack the court with Alito, Thomas and Kavanaugh have not IMO helped the Roberts'
Court and it's history.