Bombshell: NYT story suggests Alito is the leaker of Dobbs decision

[Anonymous]

If our congress were populated with people of integrity who would put country over party, they would impeach both Alito and Thomas. It is a stain on the functioning of a key pillar of our government that one critical branch is so clearly compromised by unethical workings (and don’t even get me started on ACB and Kavanaugh and how they were both awful/ illegitimate additions to the court - but I feel that ship has sailed). The priority to restore trust is that Thomas and Alito must go.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If our congress were populated with people of integrity who would put country over party, they would impeach both Alito and Thomas. It is a stain on the functioning of a key pillar of our government that one critical branch is so clearly compromised by unethical workings (and don’t even get me started on ACB and Kavanaugh and how they were both awful/ illegitimate additions to the court - but I feel that ship has sailed). The priority to restore trust is that Thomas and Alito must go.

And if Roberts had a shed of integrity, he would come out publicly and say that he hasn’t been able to reform/ agree on the ethical lines internally as a SCOTUS and he should call on congress to impeach them both. That’s the only way I see him being able to redeem his legacy and get the court heading in the right direction.

[Anonymous]

Question: Didn’t Roberts task Colonel Gail Curley, the Court Marshal appointed in 2021, to handle the investigation?

It appears that Roberts hasn’t made a public statement about its completion, and, if completed, its outcome.

What is the protocol for handling the findings? Are they just reported to Roberts, and he decides what to do, like the DoJ, or does the Marshal instead publish a report that is entered into the Court record? What happens if the Marshal does not handle the investigation as expected, or a Justice disputes the findings? Can they be removed?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And that he also leaked the Hobby Lobby decision.

Holy heck!

Where does the story suggest Alito is the leaker of Dobbs draft? Where? Please.

It doesn't. The story only says that Alito leaked the Hobby Lobby decision.

No one knows who leaked Dobbs.

They don't have that part yet. The reporters laid out what they could verify.

Interesting the only other leak also involved Alito.

This reporting is meant to shine a spotlight on the less than pristine Supreme Court.

Let us see how the roaches scatter with the light on them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And that he also leaked the Hobby Lobby decision.

Holy heck!

Where does the story suggest Alito is the leaker of Dobbs draft? Where? Please.

It doesn't. The story only says that Alito leaked the Hobby Lobby decision.

No one knows who leaked Dobbs.

They don't have that part yet. The reporters laid out what they could verify.

Interesting the only other leak also involved Alito.

This reporting is meant to shine a spotlight on the less than pristine Supreme Court.

Let us see how the roaches scatter with the light on them.

Right from the start one of the theories that made the most sense was that it was either one of the far right Justices or their senior staffer. The idea being, to put the other Justices on the spot. Alito makes a ton of sense as the leaker.

[Anonymous]

Alito denied the Hobby Lobby leak story but contemporaneous emails show it’s true.

[Anonymous]

It was Alito.

[Anonymous]

OK, I've read all that excellently-written article, and it's clear that in the scenario laid out, that's been corroborated with witnesses and emails, Alito is the only person who could have told the Ohio donors, who then told Schenke. There is no direct evidence that Alito told Mrs. Wright and her husband, but it's the only possible way the thread of info could have been shared.

So yes, Alito is clearly targeted in this article, and with substantive indirect evidence.

Also, Schenke looks completely moronic. He says he now realizes how banning abortion hurts women. What's the real reason he turned his coat?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And that he also leaked the Hobby Lobby decision.

Holy heck!

Where does the story suggest Alito is the leaker of Dobbs draft? Where? Please.

It doesn't. The story only says that Alito leaked the Hobby Lobby decision.

No one knows who leaked Dobbs.

They don't have that part yet. The reporters laid out what they could verify.

Interesting the only other leak also involved Alito.

This reporting is meant to shine a spotlight on the less than pristine Supreme Court.

Let us see how the roaches scatter with the light on them.

It shows he’s done it before so he would do it again. And lie about it.

[Anonymous]

A campaign by a cabal of forced birther evangelicals, who purchased a property immediately behind the Suoreme Court, to influence sitting justices through the auspices of its Historicsl Society, would seem to be the larger story for which the lede was buried. And maybe the organization’s close ties with Pat Robertson’s American Center for Law and Justice, which also owns properties on the same block, and it’s director and soon to be Trump lawyer/advisor Jay Sekulow. Buying access to justices by means of financial donations is itself scandalous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OK, I've read all that excellently-written article, and it's clear that in the scenario laid out, that's been corroborated with witnesses and emails, Alito is the only person who could have told the Ohio donors, who then told Schenke. There is no direct evidence that Alito told Mrs. Wright and her husband, but it's the only possible way the thread of info could have been shared.

So yes, Alito is clearly targeted in this article, and with substantive indirect evidence.

Also, Schenke looks completely moronic. He says he now realizes how banning abortion hurts women. What's the real reason he turned his coat?

Many people change their minds. Many have since June once they saw the reality of who gets abortions and why.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Question: Didn’t Roberts task Colonel Gail Curley, the Court Marshal appointed in 2021, to handle the investigation?

It appears that Roberts hasn’t made a public statement about its completion, and, if completed, its outcome.

What is the protocol for handling the findings? Are they just reported to Roberts, and he decides what to do, like the DoJ, or does the Marshal instead publish a report that is entered into the Court record? What happens if the Marshal does not handle the investigation as expected, or a Justice disputes the findings? Can they be removed?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Question: Didn’t Roberts task Colonel Gail Curley, the Court Marshal appointed in 2021, to handle the investigation?

It appears that Roberts hasn’t made a public statement about its completion, and, if completed, its outcome.

What is the protocol for handling the findings? Are they just reported to Roberts, and he decides what to do, like the DoJ, or does the Marshal instead publish a report that is entered into the Court record? What happens if the Marshal does not handle the investigation as expected, or a Justice disputes the findings? Can they be removed?

Thanks, read that three weeks ago. Do you have any other information to share, or are you just grumpy?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Surprise, surprise! Conservatives have zero respect for the law when it comes to politics.

Surprise, surprise! Liberals once again jump to conclusions that suit their narratives, with zero actual evidence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OK, I've read all that excellently-written article, and it's clear that in the scenario laid out, that's been corroborated with witnesses and emails, Alito is the only person who could have told the Ohio donors, who then told Schenke. There is no direct evidence that Alito told Mrs. Wright and her husband, but it's the only possible way the thread of info could have been shared.

So yes, Alito is clearly targeted in this article, and with substantive indirect evidence.

Also, Schenke looks completely moronic. He says he now realizes how banning abortion hurts women. What's the real reason he turned his coat?