“We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled," Justice Alito writes in an initial majority draft

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have we discussed a right-wing journalist naming a random SCOTUS clerk as the leaker based on nothing but pure speculation (because she has a gender studies degree)? I think the person who leaked should be fired/disbarred but I'm not sure we should be naming random people as the leaker.

NO WAY the Leaker " should be disbarred"

The Leaker is a HERO

Washington is full to the brim with spineless early to mid-career syncophants who betray their morals- even their countries values - to " go along to get along in Washington"

The leaker made a heroic decision to RISK ALL for what was right: Giving EVERY WOMAN in America the HEADS UP that SCOTUS is about to rule that THE STATE Controls Your Body

If they never practice law again, they have done the country such a SOLID that they deserve the Pulitzer AND the Nobel Prize

Can go join what’s his name in Russia forever.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have we discussed a right-wing journalist naming a random SCOTUS clerk as the leaker based on nothing but pure speculation (because she has a gender studies degree)? I think the person who leaked should be fired/disbarred but I'm not sure we should be naming random people as the leaker.

Subpoena the journalist who received and let hackers follow the email and IP addresses.

Can you imagine if pretrial Supreme Court writings were leaked? Besides the federal offense

You’re assuming the draft was transferred electronically. Much safer to give a hard copy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have we discussed a right-wing journalist naming a random SCOTUS clerk as the leaker based on nothing but pure speculation (because she has a gender studies degree)? I think the person who leaked should be fired/disbarred but I'm not sure we should be naming random people as the leaker.

NO WAY the Leaker " should be disbarred"

The Leaker is a HERO

Washington is full to the brim with spineless early to mid-career syncophants who betray their morals- even their countries values - to " go along to get along in Washington"

The leaker made a heroic decision to RISK ALL for what was right: Giving EVERY WOMAN in America the HEADS UP that SCOTUS is about to rule that THE STATE Controls Your Body

If they never practice law again, they have done the country such a SOLID that they deserve the Pulitzer AND the Nobel Prize

Pulitzer? Why not an Oscar too? Maybe the heisman as well. No one knows Jack around here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have we discussed a right-wing journalist naming a random SCOTUS clerk as the leaker based on nothing but pure speculation (because she has a gender studies degree)? I think the person who leaked should be fired/disbarred but I'm not sure we should be naming random people as the leaker.

I think this is one more sign the leaker is from the Thomas/Alito camp rather than one of the liberal justices. This is the second clerk of a liberal justice he has named as the leaker in just two days, and he is clearly trying to deflect attention from the conservative justices.

Which ahole is naming these clerks?

Just assume they all are leakers and send them off to leftist NGOs to work for $50k a year and a $10 signing bonus.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have we discussed a right-wing journalist naming a random SCOTUS clerk as the leaker based on nothing but pure speculation (because she has a gender studies degree)? I think the person who leaked should be fired/disbarred but I'm not sure we should be naming random people as the leaker.

I think this is one more sign the leaker is from the Thomas/Alito camp rather than one of the liberal justices. This is the second clerk of a liberal justice he has named as the leaker in just two days, and he is clearly trying to deflect attention from the conservative justices.

Which ahole is naming these clerks?

Just assume they all are leakers and send them off to leftist NGOs to work for $50k a year and a $10 signing bonus.

Including Ginni?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To These GOP's who want to compel women to have children:

* Day care costs - on average $2,000/mos , which is about half of the salary of the average American - and you pay PER CHILD

THAT is a DIRECT disincentive to have children

* Currently women in America only get 6 weeks maternity leave - don't return after 12 months and YOU'RE FIRED

THAT is s disincentive to have a child

* The average American man with an IQ of 100 earns $7/hr

THAT is a disincentive to women to have their baby

Banning Abortion will just ensure No Woman ever f'cks these sorry sacks again -

And more women will move to the NE and West Coast with their College degrees, Masters and PhD's

It will NOT result in more babies born to uneducated, under employed men with no pension

I think many conservatives (women and men) would view both a decline in casual sex and liberals leaving their state as a positive effective of the new laws rather than a threat.

As they continue to bankrupt themselves as the tax revenue leaves their state and everyone that's left is fighting for the same pennies of welfare.

You get paid for being productive and effective at your job at an economically viable and sustainable employer. We can’t all live off donor funds!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have we discussed a right-wing journalist naming a random SCOTUS clerk as the leaker based on nothing but pure speculation (because she has a gender studies degree)? I think the person who leaked should be fired/disbarred but I'm not sure we should be naming random people as the leaker.

Subpoena the journalist who received and let hackers follow the email and IP addresses.

Can you imagine if pretrial Supreme Court writings were leaked? Besides the federal offense

You’re assuming the draft was transferred electronically. Much safer to give a hard copy.

Great, pull the video feeds all over the city.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To These GOP's who want to compel women to have children:

* Day care costs - on average $2,000/mos , which is about half of the salary of the average American - and you pay PER CHILD

THAT is a DIRECT disincentive to have children

* Currently women in America only get 6 weeks maternity leave - don't return after 12 months and YOU'RE FIRED

THAT is s disincentive to have a child

* The average American man with an IQ of 100 earns $7/hr

THAT is a disincentive to women to have their baby

Banning Abortion will just ensure No Woman ever f'cks these sorry sacks again -

And more women will move to the NE and West Coast with their College degrees, Masters and PhD's

It will NOT result in more babies born to uneducated, under employed men with no pension

I think many conservatives (women and men) would view both a decline in casual sex and liberals leaving their state as a positive effective of the new laws rather than a threat.

As they continue to bankrupt themselves as the tax revenue leaves their state and everyone that's left is fighting for the same pennies of welfare.

You get paid for being productive and effective at your job at an economically viable and sustainable employer. We can’t all live off donor funds!

That’s why red states will fail as Democrats leave.

[Anonymous]

And phone records and gps marks via social media.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have we discussed a right-wing journalist naming a random SCOTUS clerk as the leaker based on nothing but pure speculation (because she has a gender studies degree)? I think the person who leaked should be fired/disbarred but I'm not sure we should be naming random people as the leaker.

Subpoena the journalist who received and let hackers follow the email and IP addresses.

Can you imagine if pretrial Supreme Court writings were leaked? Besides the federal offense

You’re assuming the draft was transferred electronically. Much safer to give a hard copy.

Great, pull the video feeds all over the city.

LOL, go for it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To These GOP's who want to compel women to have children:

* Day care costs - on average $2,000/mos , which is about half of the salary of the average American - and you pay PER CHILD

THAT is a DIRECT disincentive to have children

* Currently women in America only get 6 weeks maternity leave - don't return after 12 months and YOU'RE FIRED

THAT is s disincentive to have a child

* The average American man with an IQ of 100 earns $7/hr

THAT is a disincentive to women to have their baby

Banning Abortion will just ensure No Woman ever f'cks these sorry sacks again -

And more women will move to the NE and West Coast with their College degrees, Masters and PhD's

It will NOT result in more babies born to uneducated, under employed men with no pension

I think many conservatives (women and men) would view both a decline in casual sex and liberals leaving their state as a positive effective of the new laws rather than a threat.

As they continue to bankrupt themselves as the tax revenue leaves their state and everyone that's left is fighting for the same pennies of welfare.

You get paid for being productive and effective at your job at an economically viable and sustainable employer. We can’t all live off donor funds!

That’s why red states will fail as Democrats leave.

But workers and HQs are fleeing blue states. Not for abortion law rules but for a myriad of other valid reasons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have we discussed a right-wing journalist naming a random SCOTUS clerk as the leaker based on nothing but pure speculation (because she has a gender studies degree)? I think the person who leaked should be fired/disbarred but I'm not sure we should be naming random people as the leaker.

I think this is one more sign the leaker is from the Thomas/Alito camp rather than one of the liberal justices. This is the second clerk of a liberal justice he has named as the leaker in just two days, and he is clearly trying to deflect attention from the conservative justices.

Which ahole is naming these clerks?

Just assume they all are leakers and send them off to leftist NGOs to work for $50k a year and a $10 signing bonus.

Including Ginni?

Ginni is leaking scotus pre-trial briefing drafts to the press?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To These GOP's who want to compel women to have children:

* Day care costs - on average $2,000/mos , which is about half of the salary of the average American - and you pay PER CHILD

THAT is a DIRECT disincentive to have children

* Currently women in America only get 6 weeks maternity leave - don't return after 12 months and YOU'RE FIRED

THAT is s disincentive to have a child

* The average American man with an IQ of 100 earns $7/hr

THAT is a disincentive to women to have their baby

Banning Abortion will just ensure No Woman ever f'cks these sorry sacks again -

And more women will move to the NE and West Coast with their College degrees, Masters and PhD's

It will NOT result in more babies born to uneducated, under employed men with no pension

I think many conservatives (women and men) would view both a decline in casual sex and liberals leaving their state as a positive effective of the new laws rather than a threat.

As they continue to bankrupt themselves as the tax revenue leaves their state and everyone that's left is fighting for the same pennies of welfare.

You get paid for being productive and effective at your job at an economically viable and sustainable employer. We can’t all live off donor funds!

That’s why red states will fail as Democrats leave.

But workers and HQs are fleeing blue states. Not for abortion law rules but for a myriad of other valid reasons.

That was last week.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have we discussed a right-wing journalist naming a random SCOTUS clerk as the leaker based on nothing but pure speculation (because she has a gender studies degree)? I think the person who leaked should be fired/disbarred but I'm not sure we should be naming random people as the leaker.

I think this is one more sign the leaker is from the Thomas/Alito camp rather than one of the liberal justices. This is the second clerk of a liberal justice he has named as the leaker in just two days, and he is clearly trying to deflect attention from the conservative justices.

Which ahole is naming these clerks?

Just assume they all are leakers and send them off to leftist NGOs to work for $50k a year and a $10 signing bonus.

Including Ginni?

Ginni is leaking scotus pre-trial briefing drafts to the press?

She's more likely than the random clerks that have been accused so far.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have we discussed a right-wing journalist naming a random SCOTUS clerk as the leaker based on nothing but pure speculation (because she has a gender studies degree)? I think the person who leaked should be fired/disbarred but I'm not sure we should be naming random people as the leaker.

I think this is one more sign the leaker is from the Thomas/Alito camp rather than one of the liberal justices. This is the second clerk of a liberal justice he has named as the leaker in just two days, and he is clearly trying to deflect attention from the conservative justices.

Which ahole is naming these clerks?

Just assume they all are leakers and send them off to leftist NGOs to work for $50k a year and a $10 signing bonus.

Including Ginni?

Ginni is leaking scotus pre-trial briefing drafts to the press?

DP. Very possibly.