Just what was John Roberts' role in the stolen election of 2000?

[Lefty48197]

Now that it has come to light that President Dipsh*t's nominee for the "Supreme" Court was one of the tools used by Team Bush to steal the 2000 election, it is certainly a fair question to ask, "Just what was Roberts' role in the election theft of 2000"?

I find it interesting that with all the Republicans tripping over each other to tell us how great a nominee Roberts is, that none of them has mentioned his role in their success at preventing a legal, monitored recount. Surely, the Republicans consider his actions to be honorable, and worthy of conservative praise, yet all of them are holding their tongues on this issue. Why?

When the Republicans feared that there would be a legal, monitored recount, they began to pursue other options. The option they considered their "firewall" was to have the Republican controlled legislature in Florida, to simply declare Bush the winner, and hand him their electoral votes, without a legal and monitored recount, in spite of the intent of the voters, and even though the "margin of victory" was one half of 1/100th of one percent.

Usually, an election won by 1/2% or less, is considered to be in need of a proper recount. During those recounts, members of both campaigns are able to monitor the recount, and look for irregularities. One half of one percent. The 2000 election was "won" by 1/200th of one percent. Not 1/2 of one percent, but 1/200th of one percent.

Obviously, the Republicans feared a legitimate recount, so they unleashed their team of lawyers, shreiking propogandists, and various other tools. One of the lawyers that came to Florida to help them steal the election was John Roberts.

WHAT WAS JOHN ROBERTS' ROLE IN THE ELECTION THEFT OF 2000?

In a fit of panic and desperation, the Republicans came up with their plan to have the Florida legislature hand the election to Bush. They knew there would be Constitutional questions surrounding their crimes. Since John Roberts had already argued many cases before the "Supreme" Court, and was very familiar with the "Justices" and their mindsets, he would have been a natural to argue the Republican Party's case against legal democracy.

If Roberts wasn't there to help steal the election, then why was he there? Let's hope one of the Marshmallowcrat Senators asks an important question like this while John is under oath.

[johnaries]

1. Good question!

I'm going to post a link to this thread in the 2000 Election forum.
They've got some excellent researchers!

[imenja]

2. this site says he advised Jeb during the recount

http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/John-G.-Roberts,-Jr.

It lists all the Supreme Court cases he argued while in private practice. Tonight a law professor from George Washington U said that Roberts took cases on behalf of both Democrats and Republicans. He has argued for affirmative action and against it, for environmental conservation and against it. The prof. contrasted him with Ted Olson, who is known for representing movement conservatives.

[autorank]

3. Great post. That one WAS stolen, no doubt. That's why he was there.

:kick: & Recommend