Supreme Court investigators have narrowed
leak probe down to a small group of suspects
Hot Air,
by
John Sexton
Original Article
Posted By: Dreadnought,
1/13/2023 10:47:46 PM
I was thinking yesterday that we haven’t heard much about this recently. Today the Wall Street Journal reports there has been some progress in narrowing down the list of suspects but still no definitive conclusion.
A day after the draft opinion was published last year by Politico, Chief Justice John Roberts assigned the Supreme Court’s marshal, Gail Curley, to investigate the leak. The court has released no information regarding the investigation since then. Little has emerged elsewhere, apart from a demand from investigators in June that justices’ law clerks sit for interviews and surrender their cellphones, prompting several of the three-dozen clerks serving in May
Reply 1 - Posted by:
Italiano 1/13/2023 11:36:02 PM (No. 1378200)
Cut the BS. They know who did it.
50 people like this.
Reply 2 - Posted by:
GoodDeal 1/14/2023 12:04:54 AM (No. 1378204)
Maybe they might figure it out in 2-3 years.
13 people like this.
Reply 3 - Posted by:
Venturer 1/14/2023 12:11:27 AM (No. 1378205)
Right now they are deciding who to scapegoat for this. You can bet the name of the real leaker will not come out.
22 people like this.
Reply 4 - Posted by:
Nimby 1/14/2023 12:50:47 AM (No. 1378209)
Keep investing till the next Supreme Court Justice is chosen!! What a freaking farce!!!
11 people like this.
Reply 5 - Posted by:
Miceal 1/14/2023 1:00:48 AM (No. 1378212)
Should have taken one day. Every one gets a polygraph...
19 people like this.
Reply 6 - Posted by:
cThree 1/14/2023 1:05:58 AM (No. 1378215)
#1 is certainly right. They know who did it.
And I doubt if the answer was simply a clerk acting on his or her own, we'd see such stalling seven months in.
26 people like this.
Reply 7 - Posted by:
RWPollock 1/14/2023 2:45:04 AM (No. 1378231)
They have known for a long time who leaked. These leakers need to be tried for treason. Life in prison or the death penalty!
11 people like this.
Reply 8 - Posted by:
Mizz Fixxit 1/14/2023 3:59:00 AM (No. 1378236)
Travesty.
11 people like this.
Reply 9 - Posted by:
mifla 1/14/2023 5:33:12 AM (No. 1378244)
Roberts just wants this to go away.
13 people like this.
Reply 10 - Posted by:
judy 1/14/2023 5:42:41 AM (No. 1378247)
They didn't have any problem tracing every person's phone who attended J6
30 people like this.
Reply 11 - Posted by:
Jethro bo 1/14/2023 7:28:44 AM (No. 1378293)
Jerardo had more success with Al Capone's secret vault that Chief Just-Us Roberts' Clown show.
7 people like this.
Reply 12 - Posted by:
billa57 1/14/2023 7:35:53 AM (No. 1378300)
Are Democrats getting ready to make a sacrifice? Rumor has it they have one in mind. https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2023/01/is_justice_sonia_sotomayor_about_to_be_pushed_off_the_supreme_court.html
4 people like this.
Reply 13 - Posted by:
lakerman1 1/14/2023 8:10:39 AM (No. 1378316)
eshs in investgations, with a few exceptions.
One exception is national security. The leak, it can be argued, represented a national scuity breach.Y
1 person likes this.
As I said at the time, if they haven't found the culprit yet it's because they don't want to.
The judiciary is one of the three branches but certainly the smallest by headcount. The Supreme Court itself is even smaller. It might be 600-800 people? Tiny in terms of DC bureaucracies.
To use Holmesian deduction-by-elimination, if the leak was sent via the Court's own email system then the logs should identify the person immediately. If the internal email was not used then the network logs should show activity to/from third-party email systems/servers eg Gmail. Leaking is a crime unto itself but using unauthorized email services is also a crime.
When the leak occurred one online author (I wish I could recall and give credit) identified the likeliest suspect - a female lawyer with all the usual educational credentials and lefty affiliations involved in radical pro-abortion politics before and during her time on the court. She was/is married to another political hack. The overlap, coincidences, timing, associations etc. are just too numerous to deny.
11 people like this.
Reply 15 - Posted by:
lakerman1 1/14/2023 8:18:16 AM (No. 1378319)
The post above reflects the mess the ads \
are doing to my posts/
Lucianne would never allow this.
The polygraph act allows exceptions, one of whic
is for natinal security.
This case should have been resolved within
one week. Shame on Chief Judas John Roberts
who stands alone as the only CJ unwilling to defend the Court.
4 people like this.
Reply 16 - Posted by:
3XALADY 1/14/2023 8:37:27 AM (No. 1378336)
#15 I learned long ago that if I am to enjoy my time on this site, I must pay the $69 to make the ads go away. I consider it money well spent.
4 people like this.
Reply 17 - Posted by:
BarryNo 1/14/2023 9:07:12 AM (No. 1378358)
My expectation is, that it was either a liberal Justice, or a clerk who is politically connected to an influential liberal politician.
3 people like this.
Reply 18 - Posted by:
Connor 1/14/2023 9:17:19 AM (No. 1378375)
What's with the repulsive ads for diabetes?
0 people like this.
Reply 19 - Posted by:
udanja99 1/14/2023 9:31:57 AM (No. 1378394)
Oh, please. All they have to do is bring in the journalists who broke the story, put them under oath under prison penalty for perjury, and ask them who gave them the info. That is, of course, unless they already know, which is likely.
3 people like this.
Reply 20 - Posted by:
smokincol 1/14/2023 10:45:30 AM (No. 1378448)
so, it took the electing of a repub majority in the house to get the supremes to get off their duffs and finally make some kind of announcement about this, what a disgrace!!
4 people like this.
Reply 21 - Posted by:
Heil Liberals 1/14/2023 10:56:42 AM (No. 1378463)
I suspect that they are using the age old time clock ruse. Keep investigating until everyone dies or forgets about it. Lots of SCOTUS bluster about it, but like everything in DC, no one really cares.
2 people like this.
Reply 22 - Posted by:
Muguy 1/14/2023 11:16:26 AM (No. 1378496)
Is this like the investigation of who CREATED the Russion Collusion Hoax to take down TRUMP that proved to be all FAKE and that NO ONE goes to jail over it???
What about that secret one that the 'bulldog' fr justice was looking into as a special prosector?
Zilch, Nada, nothing will be done.....
0 people like this.
Reply 23 - Posted by:
msjena 1/14/2023 11:46:58 AM (No. 1378520)
Only a small number of people would have had access to the draft decision, right? It would be the clerks, the justices themselves, and maybe a secretary or assistant. Does the Supreme Court format its decisions for printing and realease? If not, they should. Assuming the circulation was all in house, it should be fairly easy to figure out who might have sent the draft to someone else or printed it. Have they hired someone to do a forensic analysis of the computer network?
3 people like this.
Reply 24 - Posted by:
DVC 1/14/2023 12:02:40 PM (No. 1378534)
Well, give us the name and get that person charged with some crimes and started towards a jail cell.
1 person likes this.
Below, you will find ...
Most Recent Articles posted by "Dreadnought"
and
Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)