Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Did Chief Justice John Roberts conceal his medical history?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Alexander Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 05:10 PM
Original message
Did Chief Justice John Roberts conceal his medical history?
He had an "unexplained" seizure in 1993, and now is in the hospital after a fall.

Is there something going on with his health that he didn't tell the US Senate?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
malaise Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 05:11 PM
Response to Original message
1. Heard on CNN that he has not had a medical
since 2001. Seems odd.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bryant69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 05:12 PM
Response to Original message
2. Well he woldn't be a republican if he didn't know how to lie, right?
Still I'd like to see a bit more evidence.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChairmanAgnostic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 05:17 PM
Response to Original message
3. he and Darth share roboticists?
It is one hell of a field, what with nanos and bytes and bits and power units energized by pure evil.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
la la Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 05:21 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. dickie goes in for new batteries-
justice roberts falls.

I'm seeing a correlation here~

:freak:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 05:20 PM
Response to Original message
4. Let him not get REAL sick for a little while yet...
I'd like him to hang in, perhaps unwell and bedridden and unable to attend to his bench duties, but hoping to rally, until a Democratic president is sworn in.

Then he can resign due to ill health!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
texastoast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 05:21 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. Oh please oh please oh please n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
B2G Donating Member (714 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 05:21 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. Nice
Real nice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ian David Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 05:24 PM
Response to Reply #4
8. I'd like to see his family to have to fight to have his feeding tube removed.
Edited on Mon Jul-30-07 05:25 PM by IanDB1
But other than that, I wish no harm upon him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MissB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 05:26 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. .
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DeSwiss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 11:09 PM
Response to Reply #8
67. ROFL!!
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
frogcycle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 05:25 PM
Response to Reply #4
9. well, a whole lot of dems regret approving him
and won't make the same mistake twice

Bork debacle:


http://eightiesclub.tripod.com/id320.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alexander Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 05:34 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. That's what I'm wondering - can they use this to get him out of the SCOTUS?
If he testified under oath that he had no medical problems, and this turns out to be false....that's perjury.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 05:39 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. But DID he so testify? We've let sickos stay on the court for always.
We've had courts of EIGHT because justices were unwell, for protracted periods of time.

I dunno the rules, I'll be honest, but I think getting him out on "You lied about your health" is a bit of a stretch. Health is subjective--if he felt good, and hadn't had a seizure in years, why should he mention it? He certainly wasn't gonna mention that boil on his ass, or that pesky STD he picked up in college....it was a past issue, not a current one.

I will say it would be some seriously profound and karmic justice if he had to retire from public life, say, the day after the new President is sworn in...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alexander Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 05:43 PM
Response to Reply #14
21. But if he suffered from epilepsy or something, that would be a big issue.
Not saying he's epileptic, but anything that can induce seizures would probably be of great interest to the US Senate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 05:55 PM
Response to Reply #21
29. Let's say he is--the unfortunate fact of the matter is "so what?" It's not like
he's driving the school bus or flying that 747...he's deliberating, writing opinions, sitting DOWN while he works. So, if he has the odd seizure, everything stops, they make sure he doesn't bite his tongue off, when he's done, they give him a cool cloth to wipe off his face, he feels exhausted but that's about that, and life goes on.

And he could probably be medicated to stop them entirely. This isn't a show stopper, if it's just epilepsy. He gets a driver, he takes some drugs. Feh...!

If it's a rapidly growing and inoperable BRAIN tumor, though...well, that might be something else entirely.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alexander Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 05:58 PM
Response to Reply #29
32. Lying under oath is perjury - a felony conviction.
If it is shown that he lied or covered up epilepsy, that's very bad news for him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 06:05 PM
Response to Reply #32
41. I watched his hearings. He wasn't ASKED any questions about his health, save
"How are you today, Judge?" The Senate Judiciary Committee wanted to know about his judicial philosophy, not about his bowels or his liver or what have you.

IF the WH says they knew, that's IT. Even if they didn't know, and don't care, that's STILL it. They've already said they knew about his seizure playing golf years back.

They have discretion. There's no 'there' there. That dog just isn't hunting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alexander Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 06:23 PM
Response to Reply #41
48. However Roberts DID fill out a form for the Appeals Court
detailing his medical history.

He omitted any reference or mention of the 1993 seizure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 06:41 PM
Response to Reply #48
57. So? If his doctor told him it was a "one off" why should he include it?
If I had to list every event where I went to a doctor, and was penalized if I missed anything that seemed like no big deal at the time, or had resolved without issue, but later became important, I'd have trouble too.

It's a desperate stretch to try to go after him for that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NV Whino Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 06:18 PM
Response to Reply #32
46. Wow!
Roberts was under oath? I'm impressed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trashcanistanista Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 06:30 PM
Response to Reply #29
52. Well, it is a show stopper in a way,
Epileptic siezures are frightening to witness to someone who has never seen one. It may cause sympathy from one side or another and effect the impartiality of a case. It is a shocking event in a court room, even more shocking to some than a protester or an act of violence. I say he should step down.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 06:43 PM
Response to Reply #52
59. There are no "witnesses" at the Supremes--it's just nine bastards, a couple of lawyers,
a couple of assistants, a bunch of aides, and geeky, interested spectators. And he's JUDGING the cases, one vote of nine, not testifying or advocating. By now, his crew knows him well enough...

:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trashcanistanista Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 06:50 PM
Response to Reply #59
63. Well, if I were presenting my case in front of them
I would not feel at ease if one of the judges suddenly began foaming at the mouth out of the blue. It may throw me off my game! But that's me, and I'm not a lawyer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 06:53 PM
Response to Reply #63
64. You'd have to put your Americans With Disabilities Act knowledge to the fore, I guess... NT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trashcanistanista Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 06:56 PM
Response to Reply #64
65. Yes, you are right..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
progressoid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 05:33 PM
Response to Original message
11. Just heard on ABC that the White House knew about it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lse7581011 Donating Member (948 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 05:35 PM
Response to Reply #11
13. And Investigated It
and saw no problems with future issues. Also said neighbors reported he was foaming at the mouth-what does that mean?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 05:40 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. Maybe he was at one of those Vicks dog fights and got bitten by Rabbie the Rabid pit bull? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MissB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 05:40 PM
Response to Reply #13
16. Grand mal siezure. But I'm not a medical professional.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lse7581011 Donating Member (948 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 05:40 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. Wow!
Wouldn't wish that diagnosis on anyone!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 05:42 PM
Response to Reply #17
19. Well, he might have to have the wife drive him around...or the aide.
And there's medication that can be helpful, depending on what he's up against....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 05:40 PM
Response to Reply #16
18. You might well be right--I've seen 'em, and that's characteristic... nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MissB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 05:42 PM
Response to Reply #18
20. I've seen them plenty of times.
Edited on Mon Jul-30-07 05:42 PM by missb
But only in my dog. Who foamed at the mouth every single damned time. I've heard that grand mals in humans are pretty much the same. They often use the same medication for them in canines that they do in humans. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bitwit1234 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 06:03 PM
Response to Reply #16
37. Yep that's when you foam at the mouth.
Look at the way they concealed the last chief justice drug problem.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stardust Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-31-07 12:44 AM
Response to Reply #37
70. Someone dear to me went into a diabetic coma and foamed at the mouth.
Just sayin...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
japple Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 05:44 PM
Response to Reply #13
22. Sounds like hydrophobia to me, a/k/a rabies. It's why Ole'
Yeller had to be shot to death.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mod mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 05:55 PM
Response to Reply #13
28. My dog has regular idiopatic grand mal seizures and does the same thing. Phenobarbitol
keeps it under control and she is perfectly normal when under medication. I don't see why having a seizure disorder would keep someone from the SCOTUS, while his views should.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
orleans Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 06:03 PM
Response to Reply #11
36. screw the white house. the question is: did the senate know before they confirmed? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alexander Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 06:05 PM
Response to Reply #36
40. Good point.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
malaise Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 06:09 PM
Response to Reply #36
45. The Senate didn't even know Reinquist had mental issues
and was on drugs since 1980. This is very serious.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
orleans Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 06:24 PM
Response to Reply #45
51. it is totally serious. and someone on hardball just said he
never told the senate about this during his confirmation.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 06:49 PM
Response to Reply #51
62. No,,,but it was published in NEWSWEEK a month before he was confirmed. NT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
orleans Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 11:06 PM
Response to Reply #62
66. oh, like the senators have time to READ! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 11:26 PM
Response to Reply #66
68. Point is, it wasn't a SECRET if his fellow judges AND Newsweek knew about it.
I'm quite certain a copy of that article was IN Robert's vetting file at the White House. Every single clipping about the guy was gone over with a fine toothed comb.

And there were no health questions asked by any of the Senators. I listened to the hearing--not one question.

Roberts suffered a seizure while golfing in January 1993, Newsweek magazine reported in August 2005, quoting Justice Department colleague Larry Robbins. "It was stunning and out of the blue and inexplicable," Robbins said, according to the magazine.

Roberts wasn't allowed to drive for several months after the seizure, Newsweek said, adding that doctors never found the reason for it, though stress can be a cause.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/wn_report/2007/07/30/2007-07-30_chief_justice_john_roberts_hospitalized_.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
orleans Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-31-07 01:15 AM
Response to Reply #68
71. as far as i can tell you're right about senators not asking health questions
i just did a word search on all the transcripts (searched for exam, health, physical, doctor, illness) and this is the closest i got:

feingold:
You are obviously very talented and you also look healthy.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/13/AR2005091300693_pf.html

coburn:
And as the only physician on this panel, and one of the few nonlawyers on this panel, I find it somewhat amusing that we can predict that without a history of physical exam or a family history. But we'll let that pass.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/13/AR2005091300693_pf.html


specter:
Senator Leahy has a doctor's appointment this morning, but will be joining us shortly.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/14/AR2005091401445_pf.html

argh.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bravo Zulu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 05:49 PM
Response to Original message
23. Does this warrant a bed side visit from gonzo?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DFW Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 05:50 PM
Response to Original message
24. Watch the timing
If Roberts, the youngest member of the SCOTUS, retires to spend more
time with his family before the election, it's because his health problems
are acute, and Cheney wants him replaced by Cheney.

If he retires to spend more time with his family AFTER the 2008 election,
it's because he fears impeachment for perjury during his confirmation
hearings.

If he doesn't retire at all, then we must assume his joints have been oiled,
his battery pack is fully charged, and that his 30 year warranty is up to date.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mod mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 05:51 PM
Response to Original message
25. Not a Roberts fan, but I don't believe seizures would prevent you from holding
the position.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlooInBloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 05:52 PM
Response to Reply #25
26. The OP is gesturing towards an undisclosed underlying condition....
Edited on Mon Jul-30-07 05:53 PM by BlooInBloo
... not simply the seizures in and of themselves.

And whether or not it "disqualifies" a person is solely up to the Senate confirmation process.

EDIT: Subject typo.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alexander Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 05:53 PM
Response to Reply #26
27. Exactly.
I'm also wondering if he lied under oath about any of this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 06:01 PM
Response to Reply #27
35. I honestly don't think he did. The White House vets the candidate for the usual suspect sins--
is he a drunk, does he have mistresses or boyfriends, any strange practices, affilations in embarrassing organizations, general health, that kind of thing...

The Senate's advise and consent process is usually pretty well grouped around JUDICIAL PHILOSOPHY, since the questions come from the Judiciary Committee. I watched his confirmation hearing, and don't recall any "health" questions coming up, aside from perhaps the polite "How do you do?" or "How are you today?"

I think the "Lied about health" hope is a bridge too far, frankly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dansolo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 06:33 PM
Response to Reply #35
54. Anyone stop to think that Roberts was approved with full knowledge of his health history?
The Dems knew that Bush was going to nominate a young, right wing wacko, with the hope of having him sit on the bench for decades. It wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if they knew about Roberts' history, and felt that it was worth the risk if there was a chance that he might be forced to resign because of health reasons, especially if it were to happen after a Dem got into the White House.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spotbird Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 06:43 PM
Response to Reply #35
58. boyfriends?


Naw.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
malaise Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 06:21 PM
Response to Reply #27
47. According to CNN he filled out a form
for his Federal Appeals Court appointment and said he was in perfect health. That was after his 1993 seizure. Apparently he has not had a medical since 2001. This is very interesting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mod mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 06:01 PM
Response to Reply #26
34. Is it required to list every ailment that would not interfere with the job?
I'm not trying to be an ass but as in "Sicko" there are accounts of folks who lost much for not listing every ailment, whether related to a claim or not. I feel this is ridiculous and don't believe in requiring entire meidical hx when they are not pertinent. However, if Roberts was asked about unusual conditions and he lied, that would be different.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlooInBloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 06:04 PM
Response to Reply #34
39. *That's* what's being discussed - thanks for joining us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 11:29 PM
Response to Reply #25
69. Yep, that old Americans With Disabilities act would apply to him, too
He's not driving a schoolbus or flying a plane, now...!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bravo Zulu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 05:56 PM
Response to Original message
30. Brian Williams just said
It’s a benign seizure and the prick will be out of the hospital tomorrow.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlooInBloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 05:56 PM
Response to Reply #30
31. A benign seizure? LOL!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 05:59 PM
Response to Reply #30
33. Brian Williams called Chief Justice John Roberts a prick?
Edited on Mon Jul-30-07 06:00 PM by seemslikeadream
;)


:rofl:


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
orleans Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 06:05 PM
Response to Reply #33
42. yeah, damn! what a mouth on that fucking brian williams! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 06:07 PM
Response to Reply #30
43. Frank Luntz called Brian Williams the "GOP GO TO GUY" for his NEARLY INDETECTABLE
ideological bias.

Heckuvajob, there, Brian...!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightZone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 06:38 PM
Response to Reply #30
56. Hehe.
Nice one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Malikshah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 06:04 PM
Response to Original message
38. WTF, is Sorkin writing reality these days.... this is right out of the West Wing!
Undisclosed Medical Condition-- Question: Was there testimony that stated anything about this or denied it?

Benign Seizures? Williams, get your head out of your ass.

Benign Seizures are akin to Minor Hurricanes-- it all depends on where the hurricane and or seizure hits.

In the end, it's not about the break-in/condition...it's about the COVER UP.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 06:08 PM
Response to Reply #38
44. If the White House knew, or does not care, there is no issue. Like it or not.
There is no medical quizzing by the Judiciary Committee. They want to know how the guy feels about ROE, not about his headaches.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alexander Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 06:24 PM
Response to Reply #44
50. And his Appeals Court form that he had to fill out?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 06:37 PM
Response to Reply #50
55. What about it? Did he fill it out before or after the golf course seizure? And what did he say? NT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
malaise Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 06:43 PM
Response to Reply #50
60. Newsweek reported his 1993 seizure in 2005
Newsweek magazine reported in August 2005 that Roberts suffered a seizure while golfing in January 1993. ``It was stunning and out of the blue and inexplicable,'' The magazine quoted Justice Department colleague Larry Robbins as saying.

Roberts wasn't allowed to drive for several months after the seizure, Newsweek said, adding that doctors never found the reason for it, though stress can be a cause.

Arberg said that Roberts fell on a dock near his summer home in Port Clyde, Maine. He had just stepped off a boat after running errands, she said. He was taken by ambulance to Penobscot Bay Medical Center in nearby Rockport.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a25L.pd5e3yU&refer=home

Imagine if this happened while he was still on that boat.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 06:48 PM
Response to Reply #60
61. Well, that kinda puts to rest the "Secret Seizure" argument
He was confirmed in September, 2005--a month after that article appeared.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
orleans Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 06:23 PM
Response to Original message
49. someone on spitball said he never revealed this to the senate for his confirmation. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
orleans Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 06:32 PM
Response to Original message
53. THEY X-RAYED HIS HEAD BUT DIDN'T FIND ANYTHING!
Edited on Mon Jul-30-07 06:32 PM by orleans
OH MY GOD!!

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 16th 2024, 09:57 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC