Supreme Court leak (Page 1/3)
williegoat JAN 19, 03:16 PM
They are lying to us.

Last week the news was that they were zeroing in on the person who leaked the decision on the Dobbs case. Now today, they say they haven't got a clue and are done trying.

Is there any reasonably intelligent adult who believes they can't figure this out? This is a huge truckload of recycled prairie grass.

edit: Well, it looks like Jordan & Co. ain't having it. The House Judiciary Committee is going to look into it.

------------------
Let's go Brandon!

[This message has been edited by williegoat (edited 01-19-2023).]

Zeb JAN 19, 05:26 PM
They were zeroing in on a suspect. Then they found out exactly who it was, and that they were effectively untouchable.

Like, another justice, maybe?

INVESTIGATOR: So, we know it's you, Little Clerk. Confess!

LITTLE CLERK: But, I got the documents from Justice Redacted. They said "The people should know this." I'll testify to that. How long will I go to jail?

INVESTIGATOR: Umm, well, we'll get back to you about that.... Until then, KEEP YOUR MOUTH SHUT!
blackrams JAN 19, 05:59 PM


If, there's a death, disappearance or unusual departure of a SCOTUS employee, you "may" assume it's related. Someone may have gotten some "dip" in their lipstick.

Rams

[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 01-19-2023).]

williegoat JAN 19, 10:04 PM
They have identified hundreds of people who were in DC on Jan. 6th, but even though they have video, they can’t identify who planted the pipe bombs on the 5th.

They can read a license plate from outer space, but they don’t know who the umbrella man was at the Minneapolis riots. Again, they have eye witnesses and video.

They can tell you the age and composition of a star that is thousands of light years away, but they don’t know who leaked the Dobbs opinion draft.

I ain’t buyin’ it.
rinselberg JAN 19, 10:37 PM
It could have been Virginia "Ginni" Thomas. She's my leading suspect. My theory of the case? She knew about the Supreme Court justice's deliberations and leanings about the case, because Clarence told her about it. The Ginni Thomas emails and (or) text messages that were publicized by the Jan 6 committee reveal that she's a very talkative and reactive personality with an activist frame of mind and is someone who thinks in terms of "intervention". Her having leaked about the Dobbs case practically jumps right off the page at anyone, when they consider these circumstances.

Why would she have done it? It's something that in her mind would create a public atmosphere that would weigh on the minds of the justices, and—subconsciously perhaps, in the minds of the justices, if not consciously—make it more difficult for any of the justices who were thinking "Let's overturn Roe v. Wade" to backtrack or move away from that idea.

Ginni Thomas thought that by using the backchannel of a leak to publicize the still ongoing Supreme Court deliberations or draft opinion, she would be "locking in" the ruling that she wanted to emerge from the Supreme Court process.

I believe Lawrence O'Donnell is reporting that there was no questioning or careful consideration of whether it was one of the Supreme Court justices' wives or husbands.

"Prove me wrong."


Edited to add:
Clarence told her that there was a draft version of it, and she figured out how to make it public.

[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 01-19-2023).]

blackrams JAN 20, 06:17 AM

quote
Originally posted by rinselberg:

"Prove me wrong."
Corsair231 JAN 20, 07:06 AM
I know where the draft documents came from.
Joe Biden's garage, next to his Corvette. 🤣
williegoat JAN 20, 09:22 AM

quote
Originally posted by rinselberg:

It could have been Virginia "Ginni" Thomas.


That is a baseless allegation. You just don't like her.

Prove me wrong.
Wichita JAN 20, 02:56 PM
So they tracked down every grandma that took a selfie at the Capital, but they cannot identify the Supreme Court leaker?

[This message has been edited by Wichita (edited 01-20-2023).]

slicknick JAN 20, 04:01 PM
Alito leaked it himself to corner anyone who was waffling on it. Any 180 by a justice after a leak would’ve been seen as pandering to public outcry instead of interpreting the law blindly. It was a slick move.