You may be on to something there!

Corruption close to home is harder to see than corruption in other countries for some reason.

Quid pro quos are common at the local level, so people learn how to step out of the way or suffer the consequences. People that try to stop them anyway, eventually figure out it's impossible to do because the political networks have neutered the criminal justice system that should step in to remove corruption in politics. And the criminal justice system picks their balls off the floor and tell the victims that they can vote the corrupt official out of office. But how is that possible when the media is owned by corrupt political system as well?

And, don't forget that this elected officials return to neighborhoods where they can continue their greedy overreaches in any number of ways.

Money gained by being 'Smart&Important' (TM) soothes any moral qualms that may pop up, and laws . . . well, yeah, but they don't apply to some.

Disbarring Roberts would create another Court opening for Trump. Leaving him alone tacitly condones corruption in high office. The question becomes whether the latter is more acceptable than the former. My personal feeling is that knowingly leaving corrupt officials in office is worse, and that congressional oversight should constrain Trump's nominations, but with republican senators in full lick-spittle mode it's pretty much a given that they won't do their duties.

Much housecleaning is needed. Much.

The accusations would need to have some serious teeth to them for this to go anywhere other than the round file, but IF they do, the media will be forced to run with it, because the world’s media won’t let it go, if true. But anything this serious would need to be solid. Rumors and conjecture aren’t going to bother him much.

He set up the first code and then flagrantly violated it, acting like it was nothing:

Snip

He architected the Court’s first ethics code and designed it to be unenforceable.

Snip

It’s all there in.black and white, meaning the contracts his wife did.

Appearance of impropriety? Most certainly yes, and as the article states, it’s the lowest bar.

We’ve all known about this. It’s nothing new— but what is new is the context. With trump and his sons so flagrantly on a cash grab from the U.S Treasury, Roberts is now just another sleaze. Trump publicly noted that when he thanked him.

He might as well be swept out the door, too.

The beautiful part is, just like trump, he did his own self in.

George Carlin, paraphrased

I would turn it down.

My good name and legacy would mean more.

His Gospels are my FAV!

Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

That explains the smirk .

K & R

His wife has gotten paid millions to essentially be a head hunter for top law firms. It's insane.

“I told ya so.”



”They come to me.” -- Mrs. Jane Roberts, wife of Chief Justice John Roberts

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=20475159

...with this Congress, I realize that's an exercise in futility.

all good down.

Last edited Fri Apr 24, 2026, 12:15 PM - Edit history (1)

Even if he loses his law license.
Funny enough there is no requirement that SCOTUS judges have a law degree or even have any legal experience at all. The court that rules and is the final arbiter of the supreme law of the land, is not required to know anything about the law at all. In fact if they wanted to make a 18 year old high school drop out a Supreme Court Justice, there is literally nothing in the Constitution that prevents that.

Maybe true but some just don't have to answer to it.