subpoena roberts

[moonshinegnomie]

and if he refuses to testify haul him to jail. since he wont testify voluntarily force him to.

[bucolic_frolic]

1. What good will that do? The congenial coverup artist won't say anything useful.

[Walleye]

2. I think we are now seeing there is no way to enforce rules against crooked Supreme Court justices

We need our senators to be more responsible in vetting them and quit giving them the benefit of the doubt, especially the damn Republicans

[Irish_Dem]

6. The GOP is showing us how corrupt our government is.

And we are finding out there isn't a damn thing we can do about it.

For those who make the rule there are no rules.

[Walleye]

7. It's another tactic to keep us in a constant state of frustration

Republicans love corruption because they love the idea that nobody trusts, anybody

[Irish_Dem]

8. Yes and it allows them to have permanent power.

Destroying government institutions and checks and balances.
Ending a democratic voting system, education, health care, etc.

[C_U_L8R]

3. It's easier to embarrass him than force his appearance

Robert's reputation is circling the drain.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

5. +100. nt

[Irish_Dem]

9. Does he care?

He is set for life and no one can touch him.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

11. Yep.

Unless he's impeached and removed, he's set for life and I seriously doubt that in this political climate, that would ever happen.

[Irish_Dem]

17. No one will touch him.

We can see the DOJ will not go after sitting members of congress who helped with J6.
And they won't go after the SC either.

[Sympthsical]

29. What would the DOJ have to do with the Chief Justice?

There are separation of powers issues involved. But nothing involving Roberts is criminal.

The DOJ has no role to play in this unless he's being accused of a crime I haven't heard of.

People need to think through their desires in the moment to what would happen long term if they prevailed. Even if Congress could get Roberts to show up - which is highly unlikely to ever happen - that just signals to Republicans it's open season.

Is there any doubt a Republican Congress would haul in liberal justices every time they didn't like a decision or opinion?

Once we put into practice the idea that a temporary (and very slight) holding of power by one party can enable a branch of government to declare open season on the other branch, our system will rapidly deteriorate.

This Roberts stuff is a terrible idea in general, and its springing from a place of giving zero thought to the consequences. We can't run a long-term government when we're forever at the mercy of, "I want what I want right now, Constitution be damned."

If that becomes an acceptable mode of operation, we're screwed. And we'll have eagerly participated in the screwing.

[Irish_Dem]

30. Let's face some reality here.

By now it is perfectly clear that a big chunk of our high level appointed and elected federal
officials are corrupt, taking bribes and committing crimes every day with impunity.

It is not credible that Roberts has remained clean as a whistle while everyone else is taking bribes.
Sure.

As the leader he sets the tone, so why did the others think they could commit crimes and get
away with it? Gee I wonder why they got that idea.

At the very least Roberts knew what was going on and did nothing to stop it.
Makes him complicit.

The DOJ is called the DEPT OF JUSTICE.

The mission of the Department of Justice is to uphold the rule of law, and to keep our country safe.

So you are telling me that if a SC justice kills someone in cold blood the police, FBI and DOJ cannot go after him?

Ok.

If the US SC is taking bribes from foreign officials, or committing crimes the DOJ sits on its hands.
Ok

Then for sure we know the DOJ is worthless.

[Sympthsical]

32. It has ever been thus

Do you have specific evidence about the Chief Justice? You're making an assertion that there's probably a crime mainly because you do not like the man. Ok, but what role does the DoJ have here? "Investigate this person, because I don't like them!"

Is that really how you want a government to be run? Because there's a word for that kind of government. It's one that's thrown around here on the daily.

Ethical complaints are exactly that. Congress could pass some laws in that direction.

If an actual crime has been committed by the Chief Justice - for example, murder - then law enforcement would have a role to play.

But you have no evidence. You just have a spidey sense about it. Well, we don't run a legal system on intuition.

It reminds me of the famous axiom of Soviet head of secret police Lavrentiy Beria. He famously said, "Show me the man and I'll show you the crime." Meaning, if you bring enough power and government authority to bear on an individual, you can probably find something (or manufacture enough of something) to get them.

Is this really how things should be run? Because this is the notion you're expressing. And again, Beria.

An American system should investigate crimes - not people. This is what I mean. It's just not thought through outside of immediate desires and goals.

[Irish_Dem]

33. It is called the scientific method, critical thinking skills, and LOGIC.

I was trained as a scientist to look at facts and data and develop hypotheses.

It is also called connecting dots which I was trained to do.

Whether I like someone or not is the basis of the scientific method.
I spent many years training to leave out bias in my scientific thought process.

I am truly insulted by your comments.
I feel insulted and diminished.

My years of training, my PhD, my use of the scientific method count for nothing
and called "spidey sense."

Additionally I have degrees in both political science and psychology.
A doctorate from a large well known public research institution.
And I have been a political junkie since JFK ran against Nixon.

I have been accurately predicting events and making warnings for a long time.
If people were smart, they might pay attention instead of insulting me.

[Irish_Dem]

23. One of the things that makes me mad is the fact that

these high level grifters and criminals view the rest of us with such disdain.

They think we are too stupid to figure out what is going on.
And that we are suckers and losers for going to work each day for what they see as peanuts.

How you dong MCE? Going to any interesting places?

[C_U_L8R]

21. He cares about his legacy

And I'm sure he doesn't want to go down in history as the leader of a corrupted court.

[Irish_Dem]

24. Too late. Nothing he can do about it now.

He has reconciled himself to it.
And will just be content living in the lap of luxury.

Worried about selling out his country, his professional, the US Supreme Ct?

Heck he just drinks another bottle of Chevas and hops aboard a multimillion dollar yacht to
sooth his frazzled nerves.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

4. He can't be forced to testify,

I'm not even sure Congress can enforce a subpoena against a SCJ, even if it could, all he would have to do is show up and not answer any questions under the 5th Amendment against self incrimination.

[Darwins_Retriever]

15. Just like the President

can ignore any Congressional subpoena. Separation of powers of the three equal branches is a bi*ch. There are clear checks and balances between the President and Congress, but not so many between the USC and the other branches.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

16. +100.

[Irish_Dem]

18. Being a current elected/appointed federal official is the best grift in US history.

They can rake in $millions legally or illegally and no one cares.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

20. So true.

One hell of a gig.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

10. Haul him off to jail?

Ha, that's funny.

Wait, you're serious?

[Irish_Dem]

25. I know, some of the fantasy comments here are comedy gold.

Realists have to get their kicks where they can.

[Arazi]

12. More effectively, vote for more Dem senators and expand the court

That has a more realistic chance of reining in the corruption than Roberts ever appearing

(Roberts and the other corrupt 5 are privately laughing and high-fiving each other at Schumer’s impotence)

[Beachnutt]

13. BINGO ! on expanding the court.

I leave Schumer out of it....

[Thomas Hurt]

14. Congress is going to have to pass new legislation for Justice ethics...

otherwise nothing is going to happen here. Wouldn't surprise that if Thomas or Alito were terminal that they would not retire to hold out for a GOP President.

[Irish_Dem]

19. Supreme Court will just ignore the law or overturn it.

I don't think people yet understand the system.

[bluestarone]

22. I agree with everything above. the questions i have is

What is the best way to proceed with changing the rules for the SC justices? (i'm sure it's with elections ONLY) How in the hell did THESE rules get put in place, and when? If anyone IS above the law, it's the SC. JUDGES!

[Irish_Dem]

26. You have to understand that for those who make the rules, there are no rules.

Expanding the SC will just give us more corruption.

[bluestarone]

27. Oh i agree, BUT

If we EVER get full power JUDGES and RULES need BIGTIME changes. PERIOD! I do not know what that would take but DEMOCRACY depends on it!

[Irish_Dem]

28. The biggest change has to start with the American people.

WE THE PEOPLE.

The most powerful and sacred concept in the entirety of human history.

And Americans couldn't care less.

Unless the American people start getting interested in preserving their democracy we are going to lose it.
Unless they start doing their civid duty and electing reputable leaders, we are doomed.

[bluestarone]

31. YEP.

Americans today are willing to let OTHER Americans do the work. I gotta add here that RELIGION has completely been used to DESTROY us. THAT is the number one problem in my eyes. True honest religion is NOT the problem, but RETHUGLICONS (CULTISTS) were SMART to use religion as a DIVIDER of Americans. I just hope these people wake up and smell the coffee.