Roberts’ Sudden (and Convenient) Amnesia
Roberts’ Sudden (and Convenient) Amnesia
For the past month, multiple news organizations have been reporting that Supreme Court nominee John Roberts was a member of the Federalist Society, a conservative legal organization. The White House denied the reports last week, and media outlets, including the AP and the Washington Post, were forced to issue retractions.
Now the Washington Post reports that, indeed, Roberts was a member of the Federalist Society according to a published copy of a organization’s 1997-1998 leadership directory. Not only was he a member, but according to the document, he was a member of the steering committee of the organization’s Washington chapter. The White House’s initial response was that Roberts “has no recollection of being a member of the Federalist Society, or its steering committee.” And today, when Roberts was directly “asked by a reporter about the discrepancy,” the nominee “smiled but didn’t reply.” So something like this…
Unfortunately, Roberts’ non-response wasn’t nearly as bad as the White House’s admission that they would have lied about his membership anyway:
Last Wednesday, the day after Bush announced Roberts’s nomination, the officials working on the nomination asked the White House press office to call each news organization that had reported Roberts’s membership to tell them that he did not recall being a member. Asked yesterday if the White House would have done so knowing about the leadership directory, Perino said “Yes.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Well, he smiled. So he may be corrupt but at least he’s friendly.
July 25th, 2005 at 11:30 amIs there any backbone in the Press or Democrat Party to standup shout, “No More Damn Lies!!!”
How arresting the Son a Bitch as soon as he swears on the bible to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth! First lie and arrest him.
Have balls and stand up for our country, our government, our laws, and for our people.
July 25th, 2005 at 11:40 amBushco: A pattern of mendacity
July 25th, 2005 at 11:52 am“He’s a Bills fan” – leading 2008 Dem prez candidate Joe Biden on Roberts.
July 25th, 2005 at 11:52 amThis makes it easy to filibuster this creep. The need to filibuster stems from the need to have Judge Roberts answer all questions posed to him, not the questions he wants to answer. He either answers the questions or he doesn’t get his vote. He can be forthcoming or he can go home. It’s his choice. Let him be responsible for his actions.
July 25th, 2005 at 11:56 amSo Rick Santorum (R-total douchebag), is trying to disassociate Roberts from his wife’s record as doing pro-bono work for anti-abortion groups.
“Pennsylvania’s Rick Santorum tells N-B-C he doesn’t think a wife’s activities would have any impact on what a judge is going to do. Santorum also notes that he and his wife have opinions that differ at times and says he expects most couples are the same way.”
So now we’re supposed to believe that this couple parts ways on the conservative movements most impassioned agenda? Come on Ricky, you can do better than that.
July 25th, 2005 at 12:07 pmThe Bushies are finally at the point where they don’t have to lie anymore. They have cried “Wolf” so many times they have reached the point where the best lie in the world is the truth–disbelieved. They have reached the point of equilibrium of “Cohn’s Law: The more time you spend lying about what you are doing, the less time you have to do anything. Stability is achieved when you are spending all your time lying about why nothing is geting done.”
July 25th, 2005 at 12:20 pmEven Limbaugh would have to admit Roberts not recalling wether he was a member of the Federalist society as a little fishy.
July 25th, 2005 at 12:38 pmGee, Bush nominates a lying, deceptive sack of shit. How unusual.
July 25th, 2005 at 12:40 pmRoberts is a liar — plain and simple.
When the prize of a seat on the SCOTUS is dangled in front of these rightwingers, suddenly they go blank and can’t recall whether they tied their shoes and locked the front door.
Something’s fishy about this guy and I only hope that DINO’s like Joe Lieberman wake up and reconsider voting “Yes” for this nomination.
. . .
July 25th, 2005 at 12:41 pmRoberts is on record as saying that he wants Roe v. Wade overturned. I don’t know whats fishy about it. What I find fishy is the charade that the supposed opposition party is playing. Look, the guy wants to ban abortion and when it comes up for a vote sometime in the near future, O’Connor won’t be there as the swing vote any longer. The Repuglicans are playing cute with this because 2/3’s or more of the citizenry don’t want abortion outlawed and to openly get behind that obvious agenda may damage them politically.
July 25th, 2005 at 12:49 pmDoes anyone out there, including the Jukes and Callicacs, have any ideas about organizing a politcal party that won’t have perform oral sex on the elites of the Bahamian banking system. The Democratic party seems to do too much sucking to take time out to speak for the common welfare. Are they really that easy?
July 25th, 2005 at 1:18 pmAnybody got pictures?
July 25th, 2005 at 1:37 pmSupreme court justices should be elected. It would illiminate all this deception and posturing.
July 25th, 2005 at 1:42 pmOverturning Roe will permanently destroy the Republican party.
July 25th, 2005 at 1:44 pmBeing on the steering committee was apparently an honorary position and didn’t require Federalist Society membership.
July 25th, 2005 at 2:24 pmOverturning Roe will permanently destroy a lot of women, but in a father-knows-best fundamentalist society . . .
July 25th, 2005 at 2:32 pmLet us not forget that Thomas stated, under oath, that he had no oppinion on Roe.
July 25th, 2005 at 2:35 pmNo, he lied. He said he never thought about it. Thomas is pathetic.
July 25th, 2005 at 2:38 pm“Supreme court justices should be elected.” No, they should not. Is there someting about or election process that makes you think this would result in a better quality of judges? And they definitely need to serve without the need to stand for reelection. The judiciary is the only branch that isn’t designed to represent the majority–they represent the law, and ensure that the tyranny of the majority does not run roughshod over the minority.
“Being on the steering committee was apparently an honorary position and didn’t require Federalist Society membership.”
That may well turn out to be true, and there are some pretty good signs that Roberts either really was not a “member” of the society, or that he’s sure there’s no proof that he was.
However, according to the Washington Post, “White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said Roberts ‘has no recollection of being a member of the Federalist Society, or its steering committee.’ He doesn’t remember being on the steering committee. Is it feasible that you could be an the steering committee for a group, and not remember it? When it happened only 6 or 7 years ago? That seems to be the question, to me.
July 25th, 2005 at 2:50 pmLee Russ said:
“The judiciary is the only branch that isn’t designed to represent the majority–they represent the law, and ensure that the tyranny of the majority does not run roughshod over the minority.”
However, there are certainly distinctions between SC justices that have been appointed by Republicans vs. those appointed by Democrats. I’m pretty sure that 7 of the 9 justices (assuming Roberts is confirmed) will have been appointed by Republican Presidents. How is this not evidence that that branch is not representing the Republican “majority”? I would question the autneticity of that majority, but you can’t deny the fact that the right/conservatives now have greater representation on the SC…..designs or intention be damned.
July 25th, 2005 at 3:02 pmThis I read in dear Abby column some time ago. It was auther by Cortland E. Richmond, Rohnert Park Calif. I think are leaders need to hear this. CURRENCY Do not give medals for our deaths; Where we are, we cannot know. Do not raise flags and hold parades; Where we are, flags don’t go. We ask but one thing of our land, Of you who had us fight: “Please be worth the blood we shed, “Be worth the eternal night.” We are the currency you spend For freedom, fear or oil; Our blood, the coin you pay, Dark on some foreign soil.
July 25th, 2005 at 3:19 pmand yet they continue to cry about liberal judges legislating from the bench, even though the supreme court was mostly appointed by republian presidents.
July 25th, 2005 at 3:20 pmHere is some other questions that needs to asked:
To: Senator Reid, July 21, 2005
I think all the Democrats need to be asking all nominees what organizations or institutes they are or have ever been involved with. Require them to identify all such organizations, and provide information on the political slant thereof.
Follow up with requests for membership lists and donors lists, and issues and policies advocated by these organizations.
Of real interest is the Council for National Policy (CNP). Do they know members? Are they a member? What is their relationship to organizations that has had or has members to CNP?
Have they been involved with organizations that have political slants that want to change the direction of America, or influence the moral direction of America?
Thanks,
July 25th, 2005 at 3:23 pmxxxx
Roberts reminds me of the character Frank Burns from MASH.
July 25th, 2005 at 3:43 pmFred that is funny.
July 25th, 2005 at 3:54 pmI knew I would get a civics exam from someone.
July 25th, 2005 at 3:55 pmI feel it is the job description of the SC that defines it’s purpose, not how the members get there.
In the end, all SC members legislate to some degree. And they do this because of the majority.
It depends on what the meaning of ‘membership’ is.
By disavowing membership in the FS, Roberts has disingenously tried to distance himself from an organization with a clear conservative record. Wouldn’t membership in a group’s committee, even as inocuous as the ‘refreshment committee’, suggest that you are a member (dues paying or not) of the organization? It would at the bare minimum suggest that you agree with the group’s tenets (especially if part of your responsibilities are to encourage membership).
This demonstrates a ‘political’ side to him that is absent in the glowing reviews Roberts has largely received in the press (about how professional he is and how he won’t let personal beliefs sway his adherence to the law, etc.)
The WP article, here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/24/AR2005072401201_2.html
July 25th, 2005 at 4:16 pmalso describes his political maneuvering in stating, “John Roberts probably realized pretty quickly he could take part in activities he wanted to” without being current on his dues,” I take this to mean that Roberts could take advantage of the political connections provided by the FS without having to ’stain’ his resume with any official participation.
johnny and his anti-abortion activist wife were successful in harvesting two little blonde children. I guess no mixed race children were available for this over the hill couple. Since when are 45+ year-olds given little children to raise when thousands of younger couples languish on waiting lists.
July 25th, 2005 at 4:37 pmQ: “Since when are 45+ year-olds given little children to raise when thousands of younger couples languish on waiting lists.”?
A: When the 45+ year olds are wealthy.
July 25th, 2005 at 5:14 pmMikey and Patti,
Don’t forget that it is politically a great asset for someone who is being groomed for higher office.
July 25th, 2005 at 5:18 pmEasyrider –
July 25th, 2005 at 5:47 pmyou’re right about needing a wife and kids to be “acceptable”
otherwise people might think he’s gay
I’ll bet Judge Roberts forget he was a member of the Federalist. I forgot I was a member of the Boy Scouts, oops, no I wasn’t. I really don’t remember paying any dues, I just went to a few meetings. I mean I was on the steering committee. I don’t remember getting drunk last night, I just drank about six beers. My tux didn’t come back from the cleaners. My dog ate my homework. I overslept, that’s why I’m late, no, I had a flat tire, no, I got pulled over by the cops, yeah that’s it, I got pulled over. You believe me don’t you? http://www.plainnews.blogspot.com
July 25th, 2005 at 10:41 pmRoberts has also duck hunted for twenty years with a portly man in an oversized red down jacket who people call ‘Dick’ or ‘Mr. Vice President.’
He has, however, never met the current Vice President, his family, or his lesbian daughter, who was NOT his kids’ nanny for five years.
He doesn’t remember either of his wife’s two abortions while he was a law student, ten years ago.
He does recall that the doctor was expensive, but worth it, since his wife was able to go on to have two marvelous tykes, when they were ready, and after Pat Robertson told Roberts that ’sure, kids are a pain in the arse, but you need them for politics.”
Pat Robertson was unavailable to confirm or deny.
July 26th, 2005 at 7:34 amPaul,
Was that last post for entertainment purposes or is it based on facts? I’d love to read the story.
July 26th, 2005 at 9:21 amringtone
ringtone He that eats the market-houses mistess, shall be choked with his rabbit-suckers. The Udolphoish, still satchel-shaped with undis
October 4th, 2005 at 5:00 amJim Crow Laws Employment Law Us Supreme Court
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 16th, 2008 at 10:05 pmSex Gay Sex Anime Sex
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 17th, 2008 at 1:52 amLesbians Black Lesbian Sex Lesbian Girls Licking
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 23rd, 2008 at 4:06 amLesbians Lesbian Girls Lesbian Twins
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 26th, 2008 at 4:42 am