Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Wednesday, November 21, 2018

Chief Justice John Roberts is pushing back against President Donald Trump's description of a judge who ruled against Trump's new migrant asylum policy as an "Obama judge." It's the first time that the leader of the federal judiciary has offered even a hint of criticism of Trump, who has previously blasted federal judges who ruled against him. Roberts said Wednesday the U.S. doesn't have "Obama judges or Trump judges, Bush judges or Clinton judges." He commented in a statement released by the Supreme Court after a query by The Associated Press. Roberts said on the day before Thanksgiving that an "independent judiciary is something we should all be thankful for."

Advertisement

Advertisement

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

This is for all of you who have been wondering who the new swing vote was going to be after Kennedy's retirement.

#1 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-11-21 01:04 PM | Reply

I'll give him credit, Roberts is at least speaking up against Trump's outrageous comments about the courts.

#2 | Posted by danni at 2018-11-21 01:48 PM | Reply

Now I can't wait to see how Roberts rues on this case when it comes before him.

#3 | Posted by donnerboy at 2018-11-21 02:19 PM | Reply

rules...

#4 | Posted by donnerboy at 2018-11-21 02:19 PM | Reply

Only is a sordid, completely partisan mind, are judges ranked primarily on the basis of who appointed them. Pretty sickening. Congratulation Trumpistas, once again your boy shows his true colors.

#5 | Posted by moder8 at 2018-11-21 03:11 PM | Reply

speaking of swing votes....

imgur.com

#6 | Posted by AuntieSocial at 2018-11-21 03:25 PM | Reply

Trump always manages to rankle the wrong people.

#7 | Posted by Twinpac at 2018-11-21 03:53 PM | Reply

Trump rankles everybody he encounters. Sure, he will offer phony, short-term praise to people he sees as useful to furthering his wealth or stroking his ego, but should they show any sign of resisting their subjugation, he brings his orange schitthammer down upon them.

The good news is that his obsession with grudges and belittling people is his Achilles heel. Many forces are aligning to permanently end his dystopian grip on power, and his denouement will not be pretty.

His supporters will soon be scrubbing their social media accounts in an attempt to hide their incredibly poor judgment.

#8 | Posted by cbob at 2018-11-21 05:01 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

And Trump is now pushing back against Chief Justice Robert claiming that there certainly are such things as "Obama judges" and that "they have a much different point of view than the people who are charged with the safety of our country."

www.huffingtonpost.com

OCU

#9 | Posted by OCUser at 2018-11-21 05:03 PM | Reply

dear trump,

stfu

-everyone sane

#10 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2018-11-21 05:07 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Advertisement

Advertisement

Hell of a thing when the CJ of the US gets headlines for stating what should be obvious to anyone who knows even the bare-bones layout of the government as envisioned by those who wrote the Constitution.

Which means Trump needed some explaining to.

It'll be wasted on him, of course, but Roberts could have a few surprises in store for the Bloat.

#11 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2018-11-21 05:34 PM | Reply

Orange Agent expect judges he appoints to rule on politics, not the law. No surprise that he expects the same of judges appointed by other people. And Rs are now the party of Trump so that should be expected of most R judges.

#12 | Posted by SomebodyElse at 2018-11-21 05:45 PM | Reply

Ya gotta wonder when was the last time the Chief Justice of the SC had to tell a US Pres to STFU.

#13 | Posted by Corky at 2018-11-21 05:48 PM | Reply

I think Trumplethinskin is upset because no one wants to name something meaningful after him. Like "Obamacare" which is more and more popular every day.

#14 | Posted by RightisTrite at 2018-11-21 05:57 PM | Reply

no one wants to name something meaningful after him.

I named my favorite turd after him. Does that count?

I make a new "Trump" every day.

#15 | Posted by donnerboy at 2018-11-21 06:10 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

If judges don't have an ideological bias then why should you care who or how many judges Trump appoints?

#16 | Posted by visitor_ at 2018-11-21 06:20 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

If judges don't have an ideological bias then why should you care who or how many judges Trump appoints?

#16 | POSTED BY VISITOR_ AT 2018-11-21 06:20 PM | REPLY | NEWSWORTHY 1

Because he's such an imbecile he picks alleged rapists because they're partisan tools.

#17 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2018-11-21 06:43 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

If judges don't have an ideological bias then why should you care who or how many judges Trump appoints?

Because Trump believes that judges have ideological biases and he chooses his nominees for precisely that exact reason.

Are you really too dense not to figure that out? Excuse me, of course you are. Nulli gave you a NW flag, the Ignorance Seal of Approval [ISA™].

#18 | Posted by tonyroma at 2018-11-21 06:47 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

--Nulli gave you a NW flag, the Ignorance Seal of Approval [ISA™].

Another WFW player. Who-Flagged-Who is even more popular than posting plonks.

#19 | Posted by nullifidian at 2018-11-21 06:53 PM | Reply

#19

First time I've ever commented on a flag. Ever. 15 years.

The only reason I did is that the answer to the question was so obvious that only an imbecile would bother to ask it.

And another to agree with its idiocy.

#20 | Posted by tonyroma at 2018-11-21 07:02 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 4

"Another WFW player. Who-Flagged-Who is even more popular than posting plonks."
#19 | POSTED BY NULLIFIDIAN

Nulli is so meta.

#21 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2018-11-21 07:08 PM | Reply | Funny: 3

I sometimes like to predict who I think flagged something and then check to see if I guessed right, so sue me.

#22 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-11-21 07:12 PM | Reply

Trump thinks being president implies ownership. In his mind it's his WH, his Justice Dept, his FBI, his SC. He thinks like a narcissistic businessman and not like someone who is serving this country at the will of the people.

#23 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-11-21 07:17 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 7

Tea Pain @TeaPainUSA

Tea Pain Retweeted Donald J. Trump
Only a fool would pick a fight with the guy that will oversee his impeachment.

#24 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-11-21 07:25 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

First time I've ever commented on a flag. Ever. 15 years.
#20 | POSTED BY TONYROMA

Uh huh sure ... I got your back ... ;-)

Trump thinks being president implies ownership. In his mind it's his WH, his Justice Dept, his FBI, his SC. He thinks like a narcissistic businessman and not like someone who is serving this country at the will of the people.
#23 | POSTED BY GAL_TUESDAY

Yeah his predecessor was nothing like that ;-) ...

This is really the beauty of Trump, his ability to have liberals almost to a 'T' enumerate everything Obama did only worse and claim Trump is doing it; Its like projection, and its also like clock work;

Obama transcripts ...

including my Secretary of Homeland Security, Jeh Johnson; my FBI Director, James Comey; and my Attorney General, Loretta Lynch for a regular update on our security posture post-Paris and going into the holiday season.
blogs.wsj.com

This is just too easy ....

#25 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2018-11-21 07:47 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

"I want an Attorney General that will protect me." -- The Dotard

The above should speak for itself, but apparently Trump really wanted the country to know how he thinks the three branches of government should work.

The five year old has taken hold of the country's narrative. No matter how this plays out in the long run, Trump's reaction will be tantamount to and as predictable as a five year olds reaction.

#26 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2018-11-21 07:52 PM | Reply

#25

You're conflating words like "my", with a belief the DOJ should be the President's personal goon squad? And you expect anyone to take you seriously?!?

#27 | Posted by Danforth at 2018-11-21 08:18 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

The reich wing are desperately seeking excuses for cheetolini's antics by grasping at anything to support "but he did it too". SAD!

#28 | Posted by bored at 2018-11-21 08:34 PM | Reply

"no one wants to name something meaningful after him."

I named my favorite turd after him. Does that count?

I make a new "Trump" every day.

#15 | POSTED BY DONNERBOY

POTW

(post of the week)

#29 | Posted by PinchALoaf at 2018-11-21 08:52 PM | Reply

This is just too easy ....
#25 | POSTED BY ANDREAMACKRIS AT 2018-11-21 07:47 PM | FLAG:

It's apparent how easy it is for you to fall back on obama deflections.

#30 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2018-11-21 08:59 PM | Reply

Chief Justice Roberts is valid in his criticism and it's below the dignity of the office of the President to comment on judges the way Trump did.

But as private citizens, how often do we look at judges, particularly Supeeme Court justices, in the light of who appointed them?

#31 | Posted by dylanfan at 2018-11-21 09:25 PM | Reply

"This is just too easy .... "

If you can't see the difference between saying my FBI director and my FBI, or my Attorney General and my DOJ, I can't help you. Hint: the FBI and DOJ are bigger than any given president and any given president's appointed directors.

#32 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-11-21 09:29 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

- Who-Flagged-Who

Self-proclaimed classic liberal "buddhists" who flag knuckle-dragging rwingers as NW every day of the week are worth noting as imbeciles and/or trolls.

#33 | Posted by Corky at 2018-11-21 09:41 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Steve Vladeck @steve_vladeck

Steve Vladeck Retweeted Donald J. Trump
Once again, over the last five Terms, three federal appeals courts have been reversed by #SCOTUS in a higher percentage of cases than the Ninth Circuit:

1) Third Circuit (12/13 = 92%)
2) Sixth Circuit (26/31 = 84%)
3) Eleventh Circuit (18/22 = 82%)
4) Ninth Circuit (48/60 = 80%)

Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump

Sorry Chief Justice John Roberts, but you do indeed have "Obama judges," and they have a much different point of view than the people who are charged with the safety of our country. It would be great if the 9th Circuit was indeed an "independent judiciary," but if it is why... ...

....are so many opposing view (on Border and Safety) cases filed there, and why are a vast number of those cases overturned. Please study the numbers, they are shocking. We need protection and security - these rulings are making our country unsafe! Very dangerous and unwise!

#34 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-11-21 10:39 PM | Reply

See previous post:

Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump

"79% of these decisions have been overturned in the 9th Circuit." @FoxNews A terrible, costly and dangerous disgrace. It has become a dumping ground for certain lawyers looking for easy wins and delays. Much talk over dividing up the 9th Circuit into 2 or 3 Circuits. Too big!

#35 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-11-21 10:40 PM | Reply

Trump's motives are a lot more simple than we might think.

As I see it, Trump just doesn't believe in checks and balances. PERIOD! Not even the Supreme Court.

And anything that get's in his way must be destroyed. At least that's been his m.o. so far. There's a check-off list.

(Petty wannabe dictators often have diseased minds and act out with temper tantrums, threats and extreme cruelty to puff up their own opinion of their power. History is repleat with examples.)

#36 | Posted by Twinpac at 2018-11-22 04:50 AM | Reply

Add childish and irresponsible to the above, Also nepotism, revenge, exaggeration, jealousy, paranoia, bouts of depression and lack of empathy and trust. Add a fascination with big weapons.

#37 | Posted by Twinpac at 2018-11-22 05:15 AM | Reply

Add martyrdom, lying, blame-gaming, deflections, extremism. Add fear mongering, subversion, propaganda and like-minded criminal associates. Add ridiculous denials, coverups and inability to handle pressure.

The person I've just described in posts #36, #37 and #38 is . . . Donald J. Trump.

#38 | Posted by Twinpac at 2018-11-22 06:31 AM | Reply

Roberts wants to hide the fact the best predictor of judges rulings is which party nominated him. Judges can and do rationalize any outcome. For the poor man literal tough interpretation of the law is the rule. For the rich man leniency is acceptable, provided there are no dire political consequences. For Corporations small fines are always the order of the day.

#39 | Posted by bayviking at 2018-11-22 08:32 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Roberts wants to hide the fact the best predictor of judges rulings is which party nominated him." - #39 | Posted by bayviking at 2018-11-22 08:32 AM

That wasn't always the case.

Teddy Roosevelt ended up disappointed with Oliver Wendell Holmes (over his ruling in the United States v. Northern Securities case).

Eisenhower said of Earl Warren, "biggest damn fool mistake I ever made."

And while Bush 1 nominated the consistently-conservative Clarence Thomas, he also appointed the fairly liberal David Souter.

William Rehnquist once said that the court "is an institution far more dominated by centrifugal forces, pushing towards individuality and independence, than it is by centripetal forces pulling for the hierarchical ordering and institutional unity."

#40 | Posted by Hans at 2018-11-22 08:44 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Bayviking rises daily in my estimation of his understanding of reality.

#41 | Posted by danni at 2018-11-22 08:45 AM | Reply | Funny: 2

"79% of these decisions have been overturned in the 9th Circuit." @FoxNews A terrible, costly and dangerous disgrace. It has become a dumping ground for certain lawyers looking for easy wins and delays. Much talk over dividing up the 9th Circuit into 2 or 3 Circuits. Too big!"

Not a Presidential power, actually the House of Representatives has the power to make the rules for the SC and the House ain't going to dance to Trump's tunes.

#42 | Posted by danni at 2018-11-22 08:48 AM | Reply

"79% of these decisions have been overturned in the 9th Circuit."

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

And if President Fat Clemenza ever read he would know that Republican/conservative opponents of Obamacare always brought their cases to the 5th Circuit.

#43 | Posted by Hans at 2018-11-22 08:53 AM | Reply

#40, but you are quite right sir, sometimes Judges transcend party politics and do the right thing.

#43, because duopoly politics...

#44 | Posted by bayviking at 2018-11-22 09:29 AM | Reply

There should only be two major considerations for SCOTUS nominees: 1) Through their opinions they've shown a strong knowledge and respect of the law balanced with an equal understanding that the end goal of jurisprudence is to deliver a just decision, and 2) An actual demonstrated ability to be an open-minded, fair, nominally impartial jurist.

This is why former SCOTUS choices often surprised the Presidents who nominated them. As I've been reading on some issues, Kagan has often been simpatico with the more right leaning justices, yet I've yet to hear a peep from the left about it. Americans should expect their highest court to be comprised of exemplary, wise and learned jurists who are invested in being fair. That's all that should really matter.

#45 | Posted by tonyroma at 2018-11-22 10:50 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Then again Chuck Grassley tweeted a different point of view on this subject:

"Chief Justice Roberts rebuked Trump for a comment he made abt judge's decision on asylum I don't recall the Chief attacking Obama when that Prez rebuked Alito during a State of the Union"
49.9K
5:07 PM - Nov 21, 2018

#46 | Posted by MSgt at 2018-11-22 12:52 PM | Reply

I don't recall the Chief attacking Obama when that Prez rebuked Alito during a State of the Union"
49.9K
5:07 PM - Nov 21, 2018
#46 | POSTED BY MSGT

I remember him responding immediately mouthing "Not True".

It's all right there in the "Historical Documents".

Dang you internets!

Steve Vladeck

@steve_vladeck

President Obama didn't criticize Justice Alito at the State of the Union; Alito mouthed "not true" in response to a passage in which Obama criticized a specific #SCOTUS decision.

Oh, and Chief Justice Roberts _still_ called that episode "very troubling."

How soon we forget...

#47 | Posted by donnerboy at 2018-11-22 01:24 PM | Reply

6 | POSTED BY AUNTIESOCIAL AT 2018-11-21 03:25 PM | FLAG:

What a piece of schitt.

#48 | Posted by jpw at 2018-11-22 02:10 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

"President Obama didn't criticize Justice Alito at the State of the Union; Alito mouthed "not true" in response to a passage in which Obama criticized a specific #SCOTUS decision." - #47 | Posted by donnerboy at 2018-11-22 01:24 PM

That decision was Citizens United, and the President had just said:

"Last week, the Supreme Court reversed a century of law to open the floodgates for special interests -- including foreign corporations -- to spend without limit in our elections. Well I don't think American elections should be bankrolled by America's most powerful interests, or worse, by foreign entities. They should be decided by the American people, and that's why I'm urging Democrats and Republicans to pass a bill that helps to right this wrong."
Obama was right.

Alito, despite his "not true" response, was wrong.

#49 | Posted by Hans at 2018-11-22 04:11 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

A person with a little knowledge of what the court's duty is would know that courts overturning 79% of decisions does not indicate bias on the court. What it indicates is that a lot of unconstitutional partisan laws are being passed which REQUIRE reversal

#50 | Posted by hatter5183 at 2018-11-22 04:16 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

This is Drumpf being strategic. He has already sowed doubt among Cult45 regarding Justice/FBI and Mueller. He knows that the Roberts court will hear cases based on the Mueller investigation and other investigations into his finances, his family and his campaign. Now he's sowing doubt in the courts so that when they make their rulings he can call them crooked and refuse to cooperate which will set up a serious constitutional crisis.

#51 | Posted by _Gunslinger_ at 2018-11-22 06:40 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 4

He's trying to sew doubt, no one with half a brain is being fooled. He can push as hard as he wants but when push comes to shove he will cave because he is a coward and everyone knows it.

#52 | Posted by danni at 2018-11-23 10:18 AM | Reply

"6 | POSTED BY AUNTIESOCIAL AT 2018-11-21 03:25 PM | FLAG: "

I'm surprised RCADE hasn't already sent you on a vacation, what a piece of crap! Grow the hell up you -------!

#53 | Posted by danni at 2018-11-23 10:21 AM | Reply

I've always thought Roberts was a good judge. My former Senator Russ Feingold thought so too, since he voted to confirm him. He voted against Alito.

#54 | Posted by sentinel at 2018-11-23 10:27 AM | Reply

Grow the hell up you -------!

#53 | Posted by danni

Posted by an advocate of a military coup and martial law.

#55 | Posted by nullifidian at 2018-11-23 10:29 AM | Reply

Good thread to read on the topic:

Steve Vladeck @steve_vladeck

Steve Vladeck Retweeted Donald J. Trump
1. With @realDonaldTrump once again going after the Ninth Circuit (Happy Thanksgiving, I guess??), here's a medium-sized #thread on each of the five independent factual inaccuracies, analytical problems, and/or outright lies at the heart of his judicial temper tantrum:

twitter.com

#56 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-11-23 11:22 AM | Reply

Blah, blah, blah, says the Blabbermouth-in-Chief:

Michael Steele @MichaelSteele

Michael Steele Retweeted The Hill
@potus just shut the hell up and get on the helicopter. Give us a rest from your crazy. You don't know the 9th circuit from a circuit breaker. It's thanksgiving for crying out loud. Let us be thankful for your silence. You've said enough this week.

The Hill @thehill

President Trump: "You go to the 9th Circuit and it's a disgrace. And I'm going to put in a major complaint because you cannot win - if you're us - a case in the 9th Circuit."

thehill.com

#57 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-11-23 11:33 AM | Reply

Then why try to move Heaven and Earth to block Kavanaugh? A judge is a judge is a judge, no matter who appoints them, right?

#58 | Posted by jdmeth at 2018-11-23 11:56 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

A judge is not always just a judge. Especially ones selected by Humpy. He is doing everything he can to save his own skin. Even selecting drunken partisan haters like Blind Drunk Kegger.

This one did not even have the temperament to be a judge.

#59 | Posted by donnerboy at 2018-11-23 12:43 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

Besides, the judge Trump is complaining about, Judge Jon S. Tigar, doesn't even sit on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. He's a trial judge in the US District Court for northern California.

OCU

#60 | Posted by OCUser at 2018-11-23 12:50 PM | Reply

But he was silent every time o'bummer slamed the SC. What a guy.

#61 | Posted by Sniper at 2018-11-23 12:57 PM | Reply

Yeah judges appointed by a reality tv show con man are so much more legitimate than judges appointed by a constitutional law scholar.

#62 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2018-11-23 12:59 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 2

"Then why try to move Heaven and Earth to block Kavanaugh?" - #58 | Posted by jdmeth at 2018-11-23 11:56 AM

1. Attempted rape.

2. Alcohol abuse.

You're welcome.

#63 | Posted by Hans at 2018-11-23 02:51 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 2

"Trump's appointments to the Supreme Court and lower federal courts have themselves spurred charges that the courts are becoming more politicized."

Yeah, because the last 30 years of the same fighting over every nominee didn't make the courts more politicized. What a truly ignorant thing to say. There wasn't a lick of difference between Thurgood's nomination and Kava's. The petty party bickering was all the same then and it is today.

#64 | Posted by humtake at 2018-11-23 03:46 PM | Reply

#64

Except for Keg's public meltdown?

#65 | Posted by Zed at 2018-11-23 04:28 PM | Reply

1. Attempted rape.

2. Alcohol abuse.

You're welcome.

#63 | Posted by Hans

With no proof on any charge.

#66 | Posted by Sniper at 2018-11-23 04:32 PM | Reply

#66

Did Keg melt?

#67 | Posted by Zed at 2018-11-23 04:41 PM | Reply

I like Supreme Court Justices who don't melt. I'm just saying.

#68 | Posted by Zed at 2018-11-23 04:41 PM | Reply

You can debate the attempted rape allegations till the cows come home.

Keg wept like a baby on live TV.

#69 | Posted by Zed at 2018-11-23 04:45 PM | Reply

The natural fear, of course, is that if Keg melts one place he'll melt another. How much abuse from Donald until he folds?

#70 | Posted by Zed at 2018-11-23 04:51 PM | Reply

Anyone remember a president of Austria named Shussnig? Gave away his entire country because Hitler was mean to him

I think Hitler gave him beer, too. Shussnig liked beer.

#71 | Posted by Zed at 2018-11-23 04:54 PM | Reply

"With no proof on any charge." - #66 | Posted by Sniper at 2018-11-23 04:32 PM

Testimony is considered proof.

So are self-incriminating comments.

You're welcome.

#72 | Posted by Hans at 2018-11-23 06:13 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

I believe there can be a certain amount of partisanship on the Supreme Court. Maybe not overate when there is clear precedent and justification. But when there is none, such as "can a sitting president be indicted," a decision rests on either 1) a liberal interpretation of the Constitution, or 2) a conservative interpretation of the Constitution.

The Supreme Court does not make new law. But they can certinly set a dangerous precedent. The more out of balance they are, the greater the chance their decision will favor Trump in this case.

It would take a wiser judge than Kavanaugh to apply 'future consequences' to a knee-jerk decision. After all, he has his marching orders.

#73 | Posted by Twinpac at 2018-11-24 05:16 AM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2018 World Readable

Drudge Retort