>

Alito. It was Alito.
Please — logic dictates it was one of the Justices put on the bench by a Republican President, with money landing squarely on Clarence Thomas (or his wife by association and knowledge). The point of leaking the draft was to ensure that potential R-appointed Justices that Roberts was discussing with would have no choice but to vote to abolish RoeVWade; otherwise, it would looks like the Justices had cowed against peer pressure. >

Yup. They just done want to “discover” who it was because it’s inconvenient. Im a little baffled why they pretended to look. Did some of them truly not know who it was? >

Of course they did. It was a farce to get the American public off their back. “We tried lol, you can’t be mad” >

I hope it backfired horribly. >

/Alito emerges in a hot dog costume
"We're all trying to find the guy who did this." >

Alito's hair would slick back reaaaalll nice. >

Not slicked back. PUSHED back! He used to be a piece of shit.  But people can change..   Nah, he's still a piece of shit and makes babies cry. >


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 report said.

The article doesn't say whether they interviewed anyone, or looked at any personal devices.  
In any case, this makes me suspect the leak is Alito himself.  There would be nothing suspicious of him printing out his own draft, or copying the file, especially if he did it at home. >

A NY Times article summarizes:

In a 20-page report, the court’s marshal, Col. Gail A. Curley, who oversaw the inquiry, said that investigators had conducted 126 formal interviews of 97 employees, all of whom had denied being the source of the leak. But several employees did acknowledge that they had told their spouses or partners about the draft opinion and the vote count in violation of the court’s confidentiality rules, the report said.

And further down:

The report said that investigators had collected all court-issued laptops and cellphones from people who had access to the draft opinion but “found no relevant information from these devices.”
It also said that it found nothing relevant in call and text logs and billing records from personal cellphones; while the report said that “all employees who were requested to do so voluntarily provided” such logs, it did not say how extensive those requests were.
In particular, in discussing the scrutiny of “employees” of the court, the report did not say whether investigators also looked at the personal communications of the justices themselves — or those of their spouses. >

So it was the court itself, telling people around them, who then told others (where there would be no trace or paper trail)  
Good. Fuck this decision. >

I'd bet it was a conservative that leaked it, they traced it back to them and decided not to release it because it would make them look bad.
When ted cruz was blaming Liberals for being the leak it made me think it was conservatives because they always project >

Oh so they were so close to finding the culprit that they couldn’t identify the culprit? How fascinating. >

Well, if you don't investigate the 5 mostly likely suspects, you probably won't find what your looking for.
​
Alito leaked it to his friends, and Thomas leaked it to the lunatic he calls a wife. >

I assume the opposite - they found exactly who they were looking for, and figured the answers would not look favorable to them, so instead they "couldn't find the perpetuators." >

It’s clearly one of the conservative justices who are free of any ethical constraints or regulations. >

Translation: they didn’t want to throw Alito under the bus. >

If the leaker was someone like Kagan, Alito's ass would be blasting it everywhere. 
Suddenly not finding the leaker and giving up on it after reports a couple weeks back that they were firmly close definitely points to it being leaked from the conservative camp. >

It’s the Conservative playbook: projection, projection, projection… >

It's Alito, confirmed. >

Might also have been Thomas, but definitely one of the two. >

The call is coming from inside the house >

Hint: He wears a black robe and he wrote the opinion. >

Good.
Because that is not the issue.
Your cloak and dagger method of passing laws that affect all Americans does. >


In a 20-page report, the court’s marshal, Col. Gail A. Curley, who oversaw the inquiry, said that investigators had conducted 126 formal interviews of 97 employees, all of whom had denied being the source of the leak. But several employees did acknowledge that they had told their spouses or partners about the draft opinion and the vote count in violation of the court’s confidentiality rules, the report said.

Are justices among the 97 'employees'? Is Ginni Thomas one of the spouses? If the breach truly was 'extraordinary' then maybe we need a special counsel to take a look-see. >

A Special Counsel wouldn’t even be warranted if no law was broken. The leak might result in someone being fired but it’s not clear if it was actually illegal. >

All you have to say. U.S. Supreme Court fails. >

Alito cleared himself? >

No. Alito cleared Thomas. Thomas cleared Alito. Then Alito cleared Thomas' wife. See, all completely above board. Nothing to see here and definitely nothing suspicious. >

He’s now writing a book titled “if I did it”. >

Lol gottem >

it was Kitara >

It's b* the leaker was associated with a conservative Justice because it damn well would have been exposed if it was associated with kagan or Sotomayor. >

This means they know exactly who did it but releasing the information would be too damaging to the perception of the court so they won't. >

Too bad they had that time limit on the investigation, because I know that otherwise they would never stop until they found the leaker
/s >

So, this confirms it was Alito - got it, thanks for the confirmation. >

"fails to disclose publicly" 
ftfy, Reuters >

I’m much more concerned about the actual theft of rights than I am about the one who leaked the fact that our rights were about to be thieved. 
The Supreme Court is illegitimate and compromised. >

Alito was his name o >

The one who smelt it dealt it. >

Oh it's solved.  Good job. >

Because it was (most likely) Alito. >

because it was a justice >

"SCOTUS fails to incriminate itself" >

But did they interview Judge Alito's dinner guests? >

Two options are left. The more likely one that a Conservative leaked it and they are covering. Or they are too inept to properly investigate which must bring into question their competence. Especially that of the one who wrote the leaked decision. >

We did internal investigation and found nothing.. classic >

So it was a conservative justice?