Timeline for How did US Supreme court Justice John Roberts "let it be known" that he did not wish to preside over the 2nd presidential impeachment?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
15 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 26, 2021 at 7:37 | vote | accept | uhoh | ||
| Jan 28, 2021 at 14:01 | answer | added | 264 champagne bottles on ice | timeline score: 2 | |
| Jan 28, 2021 at 12:14 | answer | added | Allure | timeline score: -1 | |
| Jan 27, 2021 at 9:25 | comment | added | uhoh | @JamesK it indicates that your belief that the question will never likely have an answer may be premature. We don't know who told who what, so that kind of speculation seems unproductive and unnecessarily discouraging. | |
| Jan 27, 2021 at 9:00 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackPolitics/status/1354353460544724993 | ||
| Jan 27, 2021 at 7:18 | comment | added | James K | @uhoh I don't see how that answers your question. It doesn't tell me how Thomas let it be known. It's up to Roberts, since "The senate chuses its president" (But if Roberts offered I'm sure the Senate would say yes, so it is up to Roberts. But if you think that answers your question, that's great. The new agency has used a number of code phrases like "let it be know" which mean that a private channel was used, so we don't and still don't know "How". | |
| Jan 27, 2021 at 6:05 | comment | added | Narasimham | @uhoh Should Justice Roberts initiate a suo moto impeachment trial !? | |
| Jan 27, 2021 at 2:16 | comment | added | uhoh | @JamesK faster than I'd thought! Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said in an interview on MSNBC's "The Rachel Maddow Show" on Monday that "it was up to John Roberts whether he wanted to preside with a president who's no longer sitting. ... And he doesn't want to do it." | |
| Jan 27, 2021 at 1:28 | history | became hot network question | |||
| Jan 27, 2021 at 0:16 | comment | added | uhoh | @JamesK since a new agency has gone to lengths to report that the communication has happened, there is a chance that there is some level of documentation. From time to time things that are private become public, no? I'm always amazed when people leave comments of the class "Nobody will ever be able to answer this question." The question is challenging and may not be fully answered instantly, but what's the rush? Is there a rule that Politics SE questions must be instantly fully answerable? Instead, now won't people be able to keep an eye on this as the story inevitably leaks out? | |
| Jan 26, 2021 at 17:59 | comment | added | James K | I doubt that there is going to be a substatiated answer. It seems clear that Roberts used private channels, which could have been as simple as writing a private email. He didn't announce it on twitter! He could have made his views clear by telling a secretary to give a private and off-the-record briefing to a journalist. | |
| Jan 26, 2021 at 17:57 | answer | added | Ted Wrigley | timeline score: 17 | |
| Jan 26, 2021 at 17:56 | comment | added | divibisan | What exactly are you getting at with "How exactly did Justice Roberts "let it be known"? Are you really just asking whether he called or texted or sent an email? Or is there something more I'm missing | |
| Jan 26, 2021 at 17:33 | history | edited | uhoh | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 72 characters in body
|
| Jan 26, 2021 at 17:27 | history | asked | uhoh | CC BY-SA 4.0 |