A Supreme Court clerk reports that shouting and conflict between the nation’s highest court’s justices occurred on Friday, December 11, 2020, as the court was deciding to reject a Texas lawsuit challenging presidential election results in four key swing states.
Charisma Media founder and CEO Stephen Strang spoke with Pastor Rodney Howard-Browne of Tampa, Florida, on a recent episode of the Strang Report podcast. Howard-Browne confirmed that his information came from a reliable Washington insider who heard directly from a Supreme Court clerk. The clerk said, “The justices are normally calm. They meet behind closed doors, and you never hear anything, but it was a screaming match. You could hear it all down the hallway.” Chief Justice John Roberts reported comments are shocking:
“He said they met in person; they didn’t trust the telephonic meeting,” Howard-Browne says. “Chief Justice Roberts was screaming, ‘Are you going to be responsible for the rioting if we hear this case?'” And then Roberts went on to say [to Justice Neil Gorsuch], “Don’t tell me about Bush versus Gore. We weren’t dealing with riots then, and you’re forgetting what your role is.”
“And I don’t want to hear anything from the two junior justices,” Roberts added, the clerk told Howard-Browne’s source. The clerk said Roberts went on to say, “I will tell you how to vote,” and that “Justice Clarence Thomas said, ‘This will end be the end of democracy, John.”
“When they left the room, Roberts and the liberals and Kavanaugh had big smiles; Alito and Thomas [were] visibly upset; ACB and Gorsuch didn’t seem fazed at all,” Howard-Browne says the clerk told his source.
“So obviously, it’s clear that Chief Justice Roberts is intimidated by Antifa, the left-wing rioting,” Howard-Browne said. “And, of course, that’s the problem that we’re dealing with. Apart from the corruption that’s in our courts, and the judges that are legislating from the benches, and all the corruption that we’re dealing with here with the voting fraud and the scandals of what’s taking place. This would be ultimately the scenario that I could just see unfolding in the Supreme Court.”
The Right Wire Report notes that this report is not substantiated. But if true, and we have a Chief Justice making political decisions out of fear of the Leftist mobs, what has this country come to?
The Texas Lawsuit focused on rules and regulations changed at the last minute by four states that circumvented the state legislatures who have sole statutory authority to make said changes. Ironically, one of the states named in the suit happens to be Pennsylvania. The Republican Party petitioned the Roberts court, twice before the election, requesting a hearing to reverse a Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court’s decision allowing mailed ballots to be counted up to three days after Election Day. Justice Ginsburg’s vacancy left a 4-4 court and Roberts aligned with the liberals resulting in the case not being heard. Constitutional Lawyer, Jonathan Turley, points out Roberts’s failure to address the very issue we now face has resulted in election chaos.”
Is Chief Justice John Roberts compromised? Flashback to this article from the American Thinker – The chief justice must have “gone off his meds.” No, it was blackmail. No, it was cowardice. He caved. It was a perverse abdication of his fundamental responsibility. Those are some of the many disputations that came into American Thinker regarding my exploration of another possible explanation for why Chief Justice John Roberts chose, astonishingly, to keep the “Affordable Care Act” alive and kicking. The Federalist highlights seven examples where the “Conservative” Chief Justice acted like a leftist hack.
John and Jane (nee Sullivan) Roberts were married in 1996, and about four years later, they adopted their two children, both infants at the time, a boy and a girl, about four months apart in age. The adoptions were “private,” meaning they were arranged through private parties without any agencies’ involvement. The notion of the Obama White House blackmailing Roberts arose with rumors that the adoptions may have been illegal under Ireland’s laws.
These suspicions about blackmail first surfaced in 2015 when Roberts appeared to abandon his jurisprudence history suddenly. The dramatic U-Turn led many to question if Roberts was compromised and it was easy back then to dismiss those who questioned as trafficking in fantastical conspiracy theories.
But now we know the Obama Administration weaponized institutions against their political enemies such as the IRS, Intelligence apparatus and Justice Dept, FISA Courts, and much more. They spied on a presidential candidate and unmasked the identities of thousands of Americans! Does Roberts being blackmailed seem so absurd?
One can presume that there are three possibilities. Chief Justice Roberts is either:
- Succumbing to the fear from the Leftist mobs,
- Is compromised by either some foreign or domestic entities, or
- Making his decisions based on the actual merits of the cases – the story the mainstream media is giving us.
Which is it? SCOTUS being one-third of our government, owes the American people an answer. Considering what has happened to the American people in 2020, at this point, anything is possible.
Update December 18, 2020: The Right Wire Report notes that Red State makes an assertion that, “the odds of [this story] being anything other than an allegorical treatment of that conference are just about zero.” Their reasons cited were:
- Clerks for Supreme Court justices are notoriously tight-lipped.
- Supreme Court justices have not met in person for a conference since March.
As stated in the original article, “The Right Wire Report notes that this report is not substantiated.” However, the reasons stated by Red State is an opinion. And reading many of the recent stories on Red State, one gets the impression that their editorial staff has already conceded the presidency to Joe Biden. So this opinion would fit their narrative. Given the seriousness of the current election challenges and their potential consequences – tight-lips can get loosened. As far as not meeting in conference since March may officially be true. But, does this mean that SCOTUS members never meet in any other unofficial capacity? This is not to say that Red State is wrong. One can appreciate getting all views of what might have happened.
The Right Wire Report was not the only organization that picked up on this story with an analysis – see here from The Conservative Tree House. They state, “During the Texas presidential electors legislative session there was a debate over an amendment to wording where the Texas House would rebuke the Supreme Court of the United States for “moral cowardice” in not allowing the Texas challenge to be heard. During the amendment debate, Texas Congressman Matt Patrick (CD-32) put into the ¹record a report from a claimed “Supreme Court staffer” about an internal debate taking place within the high court where justices were arguing the reasons for not allowing the Texas election challenge to take place. As outlined by Patrick Chief Justice Roberts was worried about riots in the streets if the court heard the Texas arguments and evidence.”
Perhaps Red State is correct when they say that the story got embellished to a state of being more “allegorical” than truth, but still in essence may be true in principle. You decide.
Update December 19, 2020: Supreme court responds to claims. A spokesperson for the U.S. Supreme Court disputed a report that claimed Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts shouted at the eight other justices in a room in the high court, urging them not to the Texas election lawsuit against four other key states. But of course, they would need to say this – the statement is worded in such way that does lead one to wonder.