isn't Murkowski's "no" to protect Roberts a pretty blatant admission that he's on their side?

[renate]

It's not even tacit--they're saying "he's our guy." So much for a separate branch of government... the GOP is actively covering for the Chief Justice so his bias won't be on full display.

This has probably already been mentioned on TV but I'm not watching--apologies if this has already been discussed in detail, as I hope it would have been.

[rzemanfl]

1. You could argue just as well that they are afraid of him.

All Republicans are slime, so who knows?

[lame54]

2. No, you couldn't

[rzemanfl]

6. Please elaborate. Based on what we know

there are two possible reasons to a avoid a tie:

1) To protect Roberts from having to cast a tiebreaking vote.
2) To avoid a tiebreaking vote by Roberts that went against them.

[lame54]

8. Repugs have a sick loyalty that overrides right and common sense...

You can make an argument but it would not be equal

[rzemanfl]

13. This may be dispositive on what she claims, assuming one can believe a Republican

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100212935229

[jimfields33]

9. A few weeks ago reports were saying that merkowski hated trump

I guess it startled her that it got out and she called trump to say reports are untrue. I swear I read or watched that somewhere. This is a sign to him that she doesn’t hate him. I swear this is my hypothesis.

[rzemanfl]

12. Did you mean to reply to the OP? n/t

[jimfields33]

16. Yes sorry. Still getting a hang of things

[rzemanfl]

17. No problem it's a common mistake, even for old-timers. n/t

[Wellstone ruled]

3. Several Cases the Rethugs want

determined in their favor must be on the docket. I see one is ACA and the other is Presidential Immunity from Due Process.

[renate]

4. please tell me you're kidding about that second one nt

[Wellstone ruled]

10. Presidential Excecutive

Privilege dealing with testimony before house Committees by present of passed Administration personnel that are under Subpoena,which btw holds legal status for some five or so years unless recalled by the Committee or Legal Body that issued those Subpoena's.

[JHB]

5. The other possibility is that they wonder whether he can be counted on...

...to make the "right" choice if it all rides open him.

Roberts can be counted on to be reliable as long as he can just sit there looking judgely, doing effectively nothing. However, if all of a sudden the whole thing hinges on him, they're worried he might get a wild hair up his rear about his "legacy". Can they count on him in that situation? If there's even a thin reed of a chance they can't, they'll think it's best to make it a moot point by keeping the ball out of his court.

If this is the case, it's a version of the trial lawyer's adage "never ask a question you don't already know the answer to."

[rzemanfl]

7. I agree. Some don't. n/t

[rzemanfl]

14. Update-

Here's what she claims-

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100212935229

[JHB]

15. In other words, it's still either a shred of uncertainty or...

...the complete certainty that it would be bad optics for him to blatantly display his partisanship out in the open like that.

[Cosmocat]

11. Not sure what there any need for an admission

its a cult, to get to that level as a republican you have to fully indoctrinated.

If you are an R, it is R above all else, country, whatever ...

Its a given, has been for decades now.