The case against Justice Roberts: Is he owned by the CIA?

By now, we all know that Justice Roberts and Justice Coney-Barrett aren’t exactly batting for the home team.

We’ve been sounding the alarm on the Amy Coney Barrett disaster from day one—even urging President Trump to steer clear. We knew she wasn’t the right pick for a moment this big, and sadly, we were right.

Revolver:

Amy Coney Barrett strikes again—alongside Justice Roberts. However, by now, Roberts’ betrayals have become pretty much predictable, but many had high hopes for Barrett, given her history as a clerk for Justice Scalia, one of the greatest Supreme Court Justices of our time. In fact, she was once hailed as “Scalia’s heir.”

Sadly, that claim couldn’t be further from the truth.

In what many conservatives are calling an outright slap in the face, Amy Coney Barrett and Chief Justice Roberts dealt a blow to President Trump and the US Constitution. They got political, sided with the progressives, and ruled against Trump in the Trump v. New York case.

Thanks to Roberts and Coney Barrett, Trump was dragged through the lawfare circus in New York City and sentenced by deep state lapdog Judge Merchan.

[…]

As we’ve said before, Roberts is practically a liberal masquerading in a black robe. Many believe there’s something hanging over him, which might explain why he’s always handing the left their key victories. But Amy Coney Barrett was supposed to be different—a powerhouse for the conservative movement, a beacon of hope. Meh. Instead, she’s turned out to be another weak-kneed RINO. It’s like having a “Susan Collins” type on the Supreme Court bench.

A much better choice would’ve been Judge Bridget Shelton Bade. The Revolver piece goes on:

The truth is, here at Revolver, we always had our doubts about Amy Coney Barrett. We never believed she’d truly be the “heir” to Justice Scalia. In fact, we tried to sound the alarm four long years ago. In a piece urging President Trump to nominate Judge Bade over Coney Barrett, we acknowledged Amy’s skills and her conservative roots. But even then, we knew she wasn’t the “shock and awe” powerhouse that this pivotal moment in history needed.

Amy had the credentials, sure, but she lacked the passion our side needed to drive the real change we needed. We saw it four years ago, and now, we’re watching it play out in real time.

Revolver:

Fox News isn’t even including Judge Bridget Shelton Bade’s photograph in their frequent on-air lineups of the supposed frontrunners to replace Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. That’s a terrible oversight, because Judge Bade is not only in the running and rapidly amassing support, she is the best choice President Trump could make.

This pick is about more than simply getting one of the many strong options from President Trump’s shortlist on the Court. There is, notably, a powerful current of conservative enthusiasm behind Judge Amy Coney Barrett. As we’ve written here at Revolver, Judge Barrett is an extraordinary woman and exemplary conservative jurist. She would make a great Supreme Court Justice, but she is simply not the ideal nominee for this political moment. Amy Coney Barrett may appear to promise the shock we all know the system deserves, but her nomination risks reframing the precarious Trump reelection effort from a winning battle over law and order, immigration, and left-wing political violence to a messy and poorly timed slog through well-worn battles that would be better and more effectively fought after Trump wins re-election.

You can read the entire piece below:

We tried to warn you about Amy Coney Barrett…

But when it comes to Roberts specifically, there are plenty of accusations floating around. Many believe he’s compromised. What exactly does that mean? Well, we don’t have hard proof he’s being blackmailed or bought off by the Deep State—but let’s just say some of his actions raise more than a few eyebrows.

One moment in particular, during Trump’s first sham impeachment, has become a glaring red flag—and for many folks, it’s all the proof they need that something’s seriously off with Justice Roberts.

Now, if your head spins every time someone brings up Trump’s first impeachment, whistleblowers, or John Roberts’ name in the same breath—welcome to the club. Just keep in mind that it’s confusing on purpose, because when the Deep State is plotting a coup, they’d rather you stay very confused and in the dark.

But let’s break down what Robert’s did that has many up in arms in very simple terms.

By the way, this is all coming up again, thanks to a flashback video and an X post from The Federalist editor Sean Davis.

Here’s the flashback video, reminding everybody how Roberts actually protected fraudulent whistleblowers.

Never forget…

Here’s a video of Justice Roberts protecting the fraudulent whistleblower in Trump’s scam impeachment.

A whistleblower he claimed not to know the identity of…

A scam coup attempt by Schiff, Vindman and others.

Roberts is a traitor.pic.twitter.com/BcGk27ic6N

— C3 (@C_3C_3) March 19, 2025

So, what’s the back story? Well, during Trump’s first impeachment, the left pulled off a carefully choreographed hoax using a so-called “whistleblower,” who was actually a CIA agent named Eric Ciaramella. This guy, along with Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman and Adam Schiff, cooked up a phony story to paint Trump as some sort of international bully. The media played dumb; politicians pretended not to know who the whistleblower was—even though everyone on the inside 100 percent knew.

Now here’s where Justice John Roberts slithers in. During Trump’s impeachment trial in the Senate, Senator Rand Paul tried to ask a question that would expose the name of the whistleblower, something the American people had every right to know. But Roberts stopped him cold—refusing to read the question aloud. That was a massive break from Senate precedent. Roberts essentially censored a sitting senator to protect a CIA operative running point on a political hit job against a sitting president. And that’s precisely what Sean Davis pointed out in his X post:

Roberts violated Senate rules and precedents to censor an elected Senator, and did so on behalf of a CIA agent running a coup against the elected government of the United States. https://t.co/SSn4hitlcX

— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) March 19, 2025

Also, you have to remember that Roberts claimed he didn’t know who the whistleblower was. But if that’s true, how did he know to block the question? None of it adds up.

So, in short, Roberts, the Supreme Court’s so-called “referee,” took sides in an active coup attempt against a duly elected president. He helped protect the lie, silence the truth, and cover for the swamp. And many believe that ever since that very mysterious phone call he allegedly got before the disastrous Obamacare decision, Roberts has never been the same.

Annual Ad-Free Subscription… Join the Fight and Support Revolver Now…

Check out the new merch! — Donate…

Sign up for our email list… stay on the bleeding edge…

NEWSFEED — FOLLOW ON X — GAB — GETTR — TRUTH SOCIAL — BLUESKY