Welcome home, fellow Gator.

The Gator Nation's oldest and most active insider community
Join today!
  1. Hi there... Can you please quickly check to make sure your email address is up to date here? Just in case we need to reach out to you or you lose your password. Muchero thanks!

Draft Alito opinion leaked overturning Roe

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by tampagtr, May 2, 2022.

  1. tampagtr

    tampagtr VIP Member

    17,614
    2,861
    1,618
    Apr 3, 2007
    OMG. NYT Pitchbot is satirical, mocking the Times' attempts to be "even handed". But this feels like it could happen

     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  2. tampagtr

    tampagtr VIP Member

    17,614
    2,861
    1,618
    Apr 3, 2007
    Now I am back to thinking it was a leak from the Right, given that the investigation appears to be quietly forgotten.

    Shroud of slience on Supreme Court leak - Tampa Bay Times
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  3. tampagtr

    tampagtr VIP Member

    17,614
    2,861
    1,618
    Apr 3, 2007
    The leak investigation is complete and the leaker is ..... unfound



    I totally agree with Elie Mystal. Said so somewhere earlier in this thread

     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Winner Winner x 1
  4. tampagtr

    tampagtr VIP Member

    17,614
    2,861
    1,618
    Apr 3, 2007
    Well said

     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  5. tampagtr

    tampagtr VIP Member

    17,614
    2,861
    1,618
    Apr 3, 2007
    Melissa Murray summarizes (thread)

     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  6. tampagtr

    tampagtr VIP Member

    17,614
    2,861
    1,618
    Apr 3, 2007
    Also relevant. They let the clerk be viciously attacked

     
  7. sierragator

    sierragator GC Hall of Fame

    15,581
    13,303
    1,853
    Apr 8, 2007
    and the court wonders why so many question its legitimacy:rolleyes:
     
  8. mrhansduck

    mrhansduck GC Hall of Fame

    4,867
    1,003
    1,788
    Nov 23, 2021
    Perhaps notable that they don't seem to say they don't have one or more suspects but that they can't prove it by a preponderance of the evidence.
     
  9. sierragator

    sierragator GC Hall of Fame

    15,581
    13,303
    1,853
    Apr 8, 2007
    Last edited: Jan 19, 2023
    • Like Like x 1
  10. demosthenes

    demosthenes Premium Member

    8,912
    1,084
    3,218
    Apr 3, 2007
    Of course they were never going to find out who leaked it because it was one of the conservative justices, likely the author of the opinion.
     
    • Agree Agree x 5
  11. gator_lawyer

    gator_lawyer VIP Member

    18,219
    6,171
    3,213
    Oct 30, 2017
    Republican "justices" . . .
    [​IMG]
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
  12. VAg8r1

    VAg8r1 GC Hall of Fame

    21,451
    1,789
    1,763
    Apr 8, 2007
    • Agree Agree x 1
  13. gator_lawyer

    gator_lawyer VIP Member

    18,219
    6,171
    3,213
    Oct 30, 2017
    Tip of the cap to The Onion:
     
    • Funny Funny x 6
  14. tampagtr

    tampagtr VIP Member

    17,614
    2,861
    1,618
    Apr 3, 2007
    Truly America's Finest News Source. And probably the most accurate story on the issue out there
     
  15. tampagtr

    tampagtr VIP Member

    17,614
    2,861
    1,618
    Apr 3, 2007
    Kind of obvious in full context

     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  16. G8trGr8t

    G8trGr8t Premium Member

    32,480
    12,166
    3,693
    Aug 26, 2008
    So they hired a firm that had been paid over $1M in other consulting fees by the USSC to review the report that said they couldn't identify the leaker to give the non report report some legitimacy. They required everyone except the USSC justices to sign sworn affidavits. Maybe a conflict of interest that the firm would never implicate one of the judges in the majority and risk losing future business? duh...just reaffirms my belief that it was leaked by one of the authors

    Questions raised after Supreme Court hid financial ties to expert who validated leak probe (msn.com)

    Before the release of a report on the investigation into who at the Supreme Court was responsible for leaking the Dobbs draft ruling, that for all intents and appearances gutted Roe v. Wade, an outside expert was brought in to validate its findings and now there are questions about that review.
    .............
    After its release, legal experts raised their eyebrows after it was revealed that Supreme Court clerks and staffers testified under oath but the Justice themselves were subjected to questioning but not asked to sign affidavits that what they stated was true. CNN is now reporting that an outside agency run by former Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, with long-term financial ties to the court, did the appraisal raising questions of conflicts of interest.
    ...............
    According to CNN, "The estimated payments to Chertoff’s risk assessment firm, for consultations that extended over several months and involved a review of the justices’ homes, reached at least $1 million. The exact amount of money paid could not be determined. Supreme Court contracts are not covered by federal public disclosure rules and elude tracking on public databases," adding, "The justices have long cloaked themselves in secrecy to the point of declining to respond to questions about potential conflicts of interest, or to reveal information about some court rules and ethics codes; or to release timely information about the justices’ health and public appearances."

    "The court’s decision to keep secret the prior arrangements with Chertoff, whose professional path has intersected over the years with Chief Justice John Roberts and other court conservatives, as it used him for a seal of approval, adds to controversy over the leak investigation itself," CNN's Joan Biskupic wrote.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  17. gator_lawyer

    gator_lawyer VIP Member

    18,219
    6,171
    3,213
    Oct 30, 2017
    That was my guess too when it happened. She's already shown that the ends justify the means and she doesn't care about potential ethics issues. She's a hard-right political operative.
     
  18. studegator

    studegator GC Legend

    750
    241
    1,918
    Feb 24, 2008
    Beginning to believe the whole federal government is one big cesspool of corruption.
    Anyone not would be a "needle in a haystack".
     
    Last edited: Jan 27, 2023
    • Winner Winner x 1
  19. gator_lawyer

    gator_lawyer VIP Member

    18,219
    6,171
    3,213
    Oct 30, 2017
    Not even remotely.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  20. tampagtr

    tampagtr VIP Member

    17,614
    2,861
    1,618
    Apr 3, 2007
    Deep dive from NYT on the internal workings behind Dobbs. Not paywalled.

    Two obvious takeaways. No more limits on leaking. As in its rulings, the Court is confirming that it is just a straightforward political actor. The supposed breach of decorum of the first leak, the thought that accounts of internal deliberations like those detailed here will not be publicly disclosed for decades, is no more.

    The leak was from the far right wing, to block attempts to turn Kavanaugh or Barrett, both of whom are obvious sources, directly or indirectly, trying to reputation cleanse.

     
    • Fistbump/Thanks! Fistbump/Thanks! x 1