Let there be no doubt: ramming Obamacare upon the hapless American public was going to happen, regardless of the consequences. Obama Inc.’s malignant intent required a “take no prisoners” approach and this crew knew how to get the (hit) job done. This is not hysteria-talk nor hyperbole. It’s reality.
First and foremost, Obamacare has two main targets: the destruction of the economy and gaining absolute control over every citizen’s life – literally. Shades of national socialism and all its permutations. Think about it this way: once the Feds have the ability to determine who lives and dies their power is totally cemented. In other words, by obtaining a stranglehold on America’s health system, the Feds own each and every American life.
In this regard, a decision has been made to rid the health care system of vets, and it makes “sense” to willfully ignore, to neglect, those who are most in need of care. Extrapolating further, now that it has become doable to dispose of those who serve the nation, does anyone imagine that they too are safe from Obama Inc.’s clutches? Of course not.
But how do we go from the above designs to co-opting a Supreme Court Justice, its Chief no less? Easy. Enter: the NSA.
Now it is no secret that the NSA has been violating its mandate for years, even more so under the dictatorial regime of Barack HUSSEIN Obama. Its reach has extended into EVERY sphere of America’s citizens, except for those whose loyalties lie elsewhere – the Muslim ummah. In fact, the Senate recently introduced the USA Freedom Act to curtail mass CIA spying!
Be that as it may, in order to ram through Obamacare, a familial hammer had to be held over the Supreme Court’s head, and some might suggest it was akin to Sophie’s Choice. Hobson’s choice, if you will. How so? Well, since it had to be deemed Constitutionally “kosher” it required potent leverage. The NSA more than likely delivered the goods.
Just imagine what most fathers will do to protect their families and think of the following scenario:
In 2005, when they thought they were doing the Democrats’ bidding, the New York Times dug into apparently easily accessible records and found that the children Roberts and his wife adopted in “South America” started life as Irish citizens. This is a red flag. The laws of Ireland regarding adoptions are very clear: adoptions by non-citizens are prohibited, as are private adoptions.
Apparently, when the Democrats realized they could control a Supreme Court Justice’s vote through blackmail over his having committed a number of international crimes, the Times pulled back and dropped its investigation. The Democrat paper of record pulled back because it didn’t want to “ break the seal of an adoption case” – as if violating laws ever means anything to Democrats in their quest for power. Keep in mind Barack Obama’s violation of his opponents’ “sealed” divorce records propelled him to a US Senate seat.
As is said, by hook or by crook, many will step over anyone who blocks their way. Some [hint: the Criminal-in-Chief] will make sure that those they deem “threats” never live to tell their tales, while others [hint: AG Holder, a radical racialist posing as chief law enforcer] will break this and that law, despite their mandates to uphold the laws of the land! Laws, what’s that? Oh, they are applicable for the unwashed masses.
Now, common sense tells us that the leftist-driven media circled the wagons around “their boy” Roberts – by keeping “faith with the law”, opining that the sealed records of Justice Robert’s children must remain glued shut – but not because it was a legal (and moral) imperative!
In fact, they stayed silent about Obama’s violation of a similar legal stricture, while he climbed to his Senate seat (with many radical, Islamist helping hands), by BREAKING his opponent’s SEALED divorce documents. In effect, legalities are nothing but convenient stepping stones, and herein belies the heart of the leadership’s deception and totalitarian bent.
While the children of the Chief Justice are indeed innocent bystanders, rest assured, their father is NO innocent. Therefore, because the issues at stake enjoin the highest price tag, matters of life and death (except the privileged few, those “exempt” from the monstrosity of Obamacare), it behooves turning the above info into a media circus, whatever way the job gets done.
In this regard, if the only way to get to the bottom of what is more than likely BLACKMAIL of inestimable proportions, then this site implores – especially alternative media and patriotic legal forces – who have the ability to push this issue to the max – break the adoption seal!
U.S. Chief Justice John Roberts may have been blackmailed to approve Obamacare after being spied on by the NSA and CIA, says Larry Klayman, the attorney who has come to be known as “the NSA slayer” for his successful legal battles against the National Security Agency.
During an appearance Sunday night on Aaron Klein’s New York City radio show on 970 The Answer, Klayman suggested the blackmail possibility when asked by a caller if the Supreme Court could be sued for its approval of the Affordable Care Act.
“Unfortunately, there’s no way to sue the Supreme Court for decisions that it makes. There should be, and there should be a way to remove these justices for making decisions like that,” explained Klayman, the founder of Judicial Watch who now heads Freedom Watch.
“But let’s take this possibility: Why did Chief Justice Roberts at the eleventh hour change his decision? He was going to side with the other justices and find that Obamacare was unconstitutional. Is it something that was dug up on him by the NSA or the CIA? Was that used against him to blackmail him?
“These are the kinds of things [the government is doing], and that’s why it’s so scary what’s going on with the NSA and the CIA. It can happen in a democracy. So that may help explain it, and perhaps we can reach these issues through the NSA cases that we brought, the NSA/CIA cases. I intend to get the truth on this.”
Klein himself sounded taken aback by Klayman’s suggestion.
“This is actually a staggering response to believe the government could have spied on a Supreme Court justice … and that information is somehow utilized … against him to pass Obamacare,” Klein said. “This is huge.”
Klayman warned that “every aspect of Americans’ lives is being accessed and monitored by the government.”
“It’s not just telephone metadata that’s being monitored,” he alleged. “They’re also listening to the content, that’s coming out in recent weeks.
“I’m a lawyer. I have an attorney-client privilege, and I can no longer talk to my clients on the telephone and expect that there’s any confidentiality. It changes the whole nature of how you operate.
“We also know that the NSA and CIA – as Communist China, as Russia can do, as any sophisticated country – they can turn your cell phone on anytime and listen to you. And they do.”
Listen to Part 1 of Larry Klayman’s appearance with Aaron Klein:
Klayman said such activity is “simply not acceptable in a democracy.”
“And even if they are not accessing our records directly, the fact that the American people know about it, and it’s been documented what’s been going on, it has a chilling effect on our ability to communicate and our ability to criticize the government or take strong action against the government.
“If the government wants to destroy you, it has to access the information that it can use to do it, and that’s why this is so frightening. [It has] a greater capability than King George III had in 1776. The tyranny is greater today than it was at the time of the American Revolution.”
Regarding the status of the legal cases against government spying, Klayman said, “The bottom line is this: Our so-called government is trying to delay final adjudication of the constitutionality of the CIA and NSA’s programs, and as a ruse, President Obama is claiming he wants to make modifications to those programs. They’re not modifications at all.”
Klayman also said it’s not just the Obama administration citizens should be concerned about.
“Can you imagine Hillary Clinton having the power to use this?” he asked.