Ever since it was announced yesterday that the Supreme Court will once again take up Obamacare in the case of King vs Burwell, one figure has remained noticeably absent: Jonathan "Speak-O" Gruber. Since the case revolves around whether Congress intended what the law they wrote clearly states, that Obamacare subsidies can go only to states that established their own health care exchanges, not to federal exchanges, the words of Gruber who along with Ezekiel Emanuel have come back to haunt him.

Despite Gruber's vocifeous denials, it has been discovered that he in fact affirmed that Congress did indeed intend the Obamacare subsidies to go only to state based exchanges. Ever since Gruber's words came back to bite him last July, he has remained out of the spotlight with the aid of the conveniently incurious MSM and now it seems his absence might now be extended to late next June when the Supreme Court rules on the case.
 

Jonathan Gruber absolutely did not mean what he clearly said over and over and over again. That pretty much sums up the left's rationale for "Speak-O" Gruber stating again and again and again that states with federal health care exchanges would not be eligible for subsidies. Of course, Gruber made these quite clear statements before it became obvious that the vast majority of states would refuse to set up their own exchanges and the threat of withholding the subsidies fell flat.

Among the more amusing of those performing desperate damage control is Ezra Klein of General Electric Vox. Unfortunately for poor Ezra there is a large body of Obamacare documents besides the very language of the Obamacare law itself that contradict his assertion that it was intended all along that the federal exchange set up for the states would be eligible for subsidies. First let us allow Ezra to entertain us with his conniption fit over Speak-O:

Jonathan Gruber, along with Ezekiel Emanuel, is considered one of the architects of Obamacare. So when he is caught on video admitting the plaintiff's premise of Halbig vs Burwell which was this week ruled in favor of the plaintiffs it went viral on the Web. The court (and Gruber in 2012) agreed that Congress meant that the states would receive subsidies as an incentive to set up their own Obamacare exchanges. Although, Gruber  vociferously denied this recently by claiming the problem was merely a "typo" in the legislation, he is completely contradicted by his earlier statement in January 2012 which you can see after the jump.

So how does the left and their media enablers explain this away? As of this writing the answer is they haven't...with the notable exception of General Electric Vox. And if the lame Vox excuses are any indication, they sure have their work cut out for them since Vox writer Adrianna McIntyre admits Gruber validates the case against Obamacare.

Leave it to MSNBC weekend anchor Alex Witt to continue marching forward, carrying the flag of ObamaCare as the rollout phase sputters along at a crawl. On Sunday’s Weekends with Alex Witt, the host often came across as a White House publicist, defending both the president and his health care law.

Witt began her show by interviewing Jonathan Gruber, one of the architects of both ObamaCare and Mitt Romney’s Massachusetts health care plan. After playing a brief compilation of President Obama insisting, “If you like your health care plan, you keep your health care plan,” Witt asked Gruber, “When you heard these words, did you know that what the president was saying may not present the whole picture, and does it matter?” [See video below the break.]

The MIT economist behind much of the concepts involved in ObamaCare is making a comic book to try to get Americans to like his idea.

The Boston Herald reported Tuesday (h/t Jules Crittenden):