Sometimes, in weak moments, I find myself thinking that we're never going to find out who the leaker was.

Guess our investigating journalists are too busy working on revealing Epstein's suicide & client list, Hunter's laptop, Paul Pelosi attacker's motivation, Chinese surveillance balloons, election fraud, classified documents in unsecured locations (bathroom servers, garages, etc.), and a hundred other stories that always seem to just fade away unanswered.

Will look for the same gif on the 580 days-since post. Then 870, then 1160, then….





We will never know. By design.

Didn't they announce a few months ago their investigation concluded and they could only tell the public to pound sand, nothing to see here, nothing found (no person identified)?

Seems like it was also noted that no former staff were interviewed? I thought there was some BS loophole along those lines - they didn't dig into anyone who was there during the leak, but had left prior to the start of the investigation

That what my understanding on culmination of investingstuon.

What are you referring to with "no former staff" being interviewed? They talked to everyone that got a copy.

Someone lied, and without any corroborating evidence to catch them with, you only have suspects. It'll never be solved until some limitation runs out and someone brags about it.

Our Supreme Court and rest ofgovernment have lost respect of decent , law abiding Americans. Just like medical community has lost lots of respect because they opted to follow the $$ from Democrats and Soros.

I could very well be misremembering. I thought at the time of announcement there was a glaring "wtf" of omission along the lines of they didn't talk to people or didn't look at any records other than interviews for those no longer employed by the court.

Owlagdad said:

---

Our Supreme Court and rest ofgovernment have lost respect of decent , law abiding Americans. Just like medical community has lost lots of respect because they opted to follow the $$ from Democrats and Soros.

---

Like Rolling Recession, I like to call this Rolling Ethics. Much more convenient to take a stand or moral high ground when it suits you. They don't need to be bothered with the really tough decisions.

Weird how they didn't investigate the supreme court justice and wife who has leaked a previous decision.

Biden is turning out to really be the crook folks were conditioned to think Nixon was in 1974. Right is wrong, evil is good, upside down world we live in currently. So many of our institutions are being exposed as corrupt and incompetent. Sad times.

boboguitar said:

---

Weird how they didn't investigate the supreme court justice and wife who has leaked a previous decision.

---

Evidence? Source?

Supreme Court Justices were all interviewed.

Garrelli 5000 said:

---

I could very well be misremembering. I thought at the time of announcement there was a glaring "wtf" of omission along the lines of they didn't talk to people or didn't look at any records other than interviews for those no longer employed by the court.

---

No outgoing staffers were interviewed under oath. I will try and find the source and update the post.

The Dems finally figured out if they flood the legal system with lawbreaking or unlawful governmental policies that favor themselves and increase their political power, the legal system can't handle it in a time frame that is relevant. They're on to the next corruption and lawlessness ten steps ahead of some plodding federal court case.

BMX Bandit said:

---

That what my understanding on culmination of investingstuon.

What are you referring to with "no former staff" being interviewed? They talked to everyone that got a copy.

---

https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/3360007/replies/64228289#64228289

A talking head with no real knowledge said it. It sounds good, so it must be true, though.

Was it on Twitter? If so, then it's as good as gospel.

In the meantime, no one should have any concerns as the investigation was validated by The Chertoff Group.

Feel like I heard that name before. Oh, and Supreme Court croney contracts are not subject to public disclosures. That needs to change.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/27/politics/supreme-court-chertoff-leak-investigation/index.html

The problem is that ultimately there is no smoking gun to find. The opinion was printed and scanned, so there is an air gap in the trail from access to email that can't be bridged. Many people had printed copies or access to them, and any one of them could have scanned it. Beyond that, the email it was sent from could easily be something anonymous like a proton mail account from a burner phone at a public WiFi location.

There's no hard evidence, and no amount of, 'If they really wanted to catch them, they would," is going to make any.

Pundit show

Great to bring this up.
This is SUCH BS!
Someone needs to lose their law license for life.

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

The problem is that ultimately there is no smoking gun to find. The opinion was printed and scanned, so there is an air gap in the trail from access to email that can't be bridged. Many people had printed copies or access to them, and any one of them could have scanned it. Beyond that, the email it was sent from could easily be something anonymous like a proton mail account from a burner phone at a public WiFi location.

There's no hard evidence, and no amount of, 'If they really wanted to catch them, they would," is going to make any.

---

The problem is the investigators don't want to find the person who did it. If the justices united to declare no recommendations for any clerks until the guilty party comes forward and is identified, it would be known before lunch.

In truth, they almost certainly know exactly who did it, but don't want it to come out.

There's no hard evidence, and no amount of, 'If they really wanted to catch them, they would," is going to make any.

And this:

Quote:

---

If the justices united to declare no recommendations for any clerks until the guilty party comes forward and is identified, it would be known before lunch.

---

Is just stupid fiat thinking. a) Whoever did it probably gives 0 ****s about everyone else's career, and b) the fact that no one gets a recommendation to "punish" the leaker would mean that nowhere they apply would look down on any of them for it. Everyone knows it's not their fault, so why hold it against someone already good enough to be SCOTUS clerk? By "punishing" everyone, you punish no one.

They're not children who can be intimidated into getting giving up the guilty party, especially when there's no expectation that why of them know who it is. Is this supposed to motivate them into getting their pipes, putting in their deer stalker hats, and playing detective until they crack the case? Exactly what are they supposed to do that has not already been done?

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

BMX Bandit said:

---

That what my understanding on culmination of investingstuon.

What are you referring to with "no former staff" being interviewed? They talked to everyone that got a copy.

---

https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/3360007/replies/64228289#64228289

A talking head with no real knowledge said it. It sounds good, so it must be true, though.

---

I started the referenced thread and it appears Arroyo never backed it up.

To be honest, the Chertoff thing is more concerning than what Arroyo spouted.

Government contracts involving former cabinet secretaries should always be public information, or even better, strictly forbidden.

Just pick someone and destroy their future career. This is what democrats would do if the tables were turned.

My take.. They (SCOTUS) judges know who leaked it, they just want to keep the identity secret to save "face"

679 days today