![]() Iraqi Prisoner Claims He Was Raped.JThe Day One of His Political Allies Attempts to Assassinate a Supreme Court Justice, Biden Predicts a "Mini Revolution" If Roe is Overturned: "The People Won't Stand For It" The Ace of Spades HQ Sex-for-Money Skankathon Secret John Kerry Senatorial AccomplishmentsĬhanges Liberal Senator George Michell Will Make at Disney Media-Approved Facts About the Democrat SpyĬhanges to Make Christianity More "Inclusive" Other Judgments Dick Clarke Made About Condi Rice Based on Her Appearance Signs That David Letterman Just Doesn't Care AnymoreĮxamples of Bob Kerrey's Insufferable Racial Jackassery Other Bad Things About the Jews, According to the Koran Signs that Paul Krugman Has Lost His Frickin' MindĪll-Time Best NBA Players, According to Senator Robert Byrd Things People Are More Likely to Say Than "Did You Hear What Al Franken Said Yesterday?" Signs That You, Geroge Michael, Should Probably Just Give It Up Nicknames for Potatoes, By People Who Really Hate Potatoes He might have to work outside of the court to direct pressure within it.ĭid that happen? I don't know, but I do find it very, very interesting that Roberts delivered up an "investigation" that was widely predicted to be ineffectual and, true to that prediction, proved ineffectual.Īlmost as if that was what the guilty party always had in mind from the start. ![]() Nothing threatens that authority more than the Court's overturning of Roe.Īnd Roberts was no longer in a position to stop the decision just by flipping his vote. So keeping the Court's "authority" intact among the liberal professional class has been of paramount concern to Roberts. We also know that he's previously played games with his court decisions to "preserve the appearance of political independence of the Court." He flipped his vote from striking down Obamacare to upholding Obamacare - contriving a bizarre argument that no one, including Barack Obama's lawyers, argued, that "it's a tax" - in order to "maintain the standing of the Supreme Court in the eyes of the public," all because the leftwing media spent a month and a half battering him personally with messaging that they wouldn't like him or his court any more if he struck down Obamacare. We're always discussing the leftwing justices as having a motive to leak the decision - well, Roberts is a left-ish justice, and he too was very opposed to overturning Roe. Which is exactly what Roberts actually dialed up here. ![]() If Roberts is the leaker, obviously he would want the least intrusive, least serious investigation possible. Well, the guilty party himself, would be one answer. Like: Who is it who is most invested in not finding the guilty party? He also apparently agreed to make this "investigation" as non-intrusive as possible - not securing warrants to look at people's personal call logs, for example. He chose to give this job to a non-investigator instead of bringing in the FBI. Roberts decided to leave the investigation to the Marshall of the Supreme Court, a position responsible for mere security over the physical premises of the court. Investigators also cannot eliminate the possibility that the draft opinion was inadvertently or negligently disclosed - for example, by being left in a public space either inside or outside the building," the report stated. "While investigators and the Court's IT experts cannot absolutely rule out a hack, the evidence to date reveals no suggestion of improper outside access. The report found that the COVID-19 pandemic, which allowed more work from home, along with gaps in security policies, increased the risk of inappropriate disclosures of court information. If investigators later find they lied, then the personnel would be subject to prosecution. Investigators interviewed 97 employees, all of whom denied sending the draft opinion to Politico, also according to the marshal's office.Īll of the interviewed employees signed an affidavit under the penalty of perjury stating that they did not share the draft opinion, officials said. "After examining the Court's computer devices, networks, printers, and available call and text logs, investigators have found no forensic evidence indicating who disclosed the draft opinion," the marshal's office wrote in a report on the probe. The Supreme Court marshal investigating the leak "has to date been unable to identify a person responsible by a preponderance of the evidence," the court said. ![]() Jackson Women's Health Org., the landmark case that overturned the constitutional right to an abortion. JanuSurprise! The Supreme Court "Investigation" That Was Designed to Fail to Identify the Dobbs Leaker Has Successfully Failed to Identify the Dobbs Leakerįailure Theater, Supreme Court Edition: The Supreme Court said Thursday it cannot identify who the draft opinion of Dobbs v. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |