|
Oracle posted:Excuse it? No, feel free to condemn her nutty rear end from the rooftops. Declare it a smoking gun of proof that’s she’s using all her husbands clout for masterminding a coup? Yeah, not so much. Oh, for the love of God. The issue isn't that Ginni Thomas used a mass-email/public pol aggregation service. The issue is that she, the wife of a US Supreme Court Justice, used that service to send a "Hey it suuuuuure would be nice if you'd step up and lead, so maybe something could be done about this issue of Biden winning the election! Yep! Sure would be nice if someone would do something about this!" While it might not be 'masterminding a coup' ( whatever the gently caress that means ), it sure as hell is more than dipping your toe into the water. She is a political operative of the nuttiest loving persuasion, trading on her husband's name for influence, doing so absolutely brazenly, and she did it to influence elected state officials to alter the result of a state election. That being the case, it's not a loving stretch to think that she leaked Alito's Roe draft to either a) galvanize grassroots supporters, b) put pressure on potential squishy votes ( Judge  or possibly Gorsuch ) or c) both. Did she do it? We'll probably never know, most likely, because no-one's gonna subpoena her phone or mail-records, but given what she's gotten up to already, it's well within the realm of plausibility - and the likely - that she's the leak.Because she's an explicit political operative, you see. [e: shameful snipe edit.] TLM3101 fucked around with this message at 06:35 on Jun 12, 2022 |
#
?
Jun 12, 2022 06:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 18:12 |
|
|
TLM3101 posted:Oh, for the love of God. If you are trying to trade on your husbands name for influence you do not avail yourself of a Joe Scmuck level of generic anonymous absolutely lacking in any proof you are who you say you are website to try and influence said politicians. You send them a letter on official letterhead with your name and husbands name on it, your home address as return, and other blatantly obvious proof you are the VIP you claim to be so that that clout cannot be misinterpreted. More realistically, you contact your sources in the party, get said pols personal cellphone numbers, and call them directly from you DC area code number to try and influence them directly because that can’t be FOIA’d like written correspondence. quote:That being the case, it's not a loving stretch to think that she leaked Alito's Roe draft to either a) galvanize grassroots supporters, b) put pressure on potential squishy votes ( Judge
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2022 17:41
|
|
Oracle posted:She is an explicit political operative, which is why this little league bullshit email attempt is pathetic as an attempt to influence an election for dog catcher much less president. If she’s that big of a complete idiot (which hey, she did willingly marry Clarence Thomas) then I don’t know that she could have successfully done it without it being known almost immediately. Logic points to Alexander Ward (https://twitter.com/alexbward) being the reporter who recieved the draft. Why? He shares the byline for the exclusive Politico report but is a "national security reporter". Now looking at his twitter and bio (worked previously for Vox as White House correspondend for the first few month of the Biden admin) he doesn't look like the type of reporter that would be approached by Ginni Thomas or any hardcore Trumpist really. Not saying this is proof or anything, but my working hypothesis is that a liberal clerk leaked the oppinion to someone he knew and not that Ginni Thomas leaked it as part of her greater scheme to topple the US government.
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2022 17:57
|
|
|
Oracle posted:If you are trying to trade on your husbands name for influence you do not avail yourself of a Joe Scmuck level of generic anonymous absolutely lacking in any proof you are who you say you are website to try and influence said politicians. You send them a letter on official letterhead with your name and husbands name on it, your home address as return, and other blatantly obvious proof you are the VIP you claim to be so that that clout cannot be misinterpreted. More realistically, you contact your sources in the party, get said pols personal cellphone numbers, and call them directly from you DC area code number to try and influence them directly because that can’t be FOIA’d like written correspondence. Ginni Thomas has been accused of many things. Being smart or good with technology is not one of them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2022 18:32
|
|
|
Filling out a form letter is *probably* not the only lobbying Ginni Thomas has ever done.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2022 18:49
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:This was the only opinion released today is the news correct in saying that this opinion, Egbert vs Boule, exempts border agents from any claims of violation of constitutional rights within 100 miles of the border, where ~2/3 of America's population lives? https://upnorthlive.com/news/nation-world/cbp-can-make-warrantless-arrests-at-homes-less-than-100-miles-from-border-sc-says https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/us-supreme-court-insulates-federal-agents-accountability-2022-06-10/ Seems...not great.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2022 19:16
|
|
|
Absent new legislation creating such cause.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2022 19:19
|
|
|
Oh no, cops are getting de jure immunity for their misdeeds rather than the usual de facto immunity, nooo...
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2022 20:51
|
|
|
A spouse of a SCOTUS justice going full ham on the Big Lie is a huge drat problem. Have we already forgotten every other indiscretion plus the reins she holds in the DC lobbying industry, this specific instance of HER EMAILS aside?GaussianCopula posted:"she actively was part of a shadow cabal trying to coup the US government" is quite a leap. Dude, it's not a shadow cabal. These people hoot and holler in celebration before mass broadcast audiences every time one of their Big Lie candidates makes it on to a Board of Canvassers or a Secretary of State office Cripes, we just watched a bunch of PB pile into a U-Haul with warfighting dress and equipment with the express purpose of breaking up and possibly Rittenhousing a bunch of innocent civilians. There's nothing shadow or cabal about the extreme right in America. Potato Salad fucked around with this message at 05:36 on Jun 13, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2022 05:29
|
|
|
Ginni Thomas has been a problem for at least a decade, back to when she was running a lot of the anti-Obamacare groups for the GOP and the Supreme Court was taking up that case as to whether Obamacare was constitutional or not
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2022 14:59
|
|
|
It can't be stated enough how out in the open this is when the one dissent in providing documents to an inquisitorial body is the spouse of the person who just somehow keeps being revealed to have been more and more active in what's being investigated.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2022 15:24
|
|
|
At least four decisions today. One of them involves Neil Gorsuch being very rightfully mad about the treatment of native americans.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2022 15:28
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:At least four decisions today. One of them involves Neil Gorsuch being very rightfully mad about the treatment of native americans.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2022 15:32
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:Is that the double jeopardy one Yep. (And at least 5, now.)
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2022 15:33
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:Is that the double jeopardy one Yeah. From the gist of it, an administrative proceeding with racist as gently caress origins substitutes as federal prosecution by incorporating tribal law into certain regulatory charges against someone. Dude was charged with everything under this scheme, some of the charges dropped, and he pleaded to the reduced charge. This is a federal process with federal prosecutors. The prosecutors didn't like that the regulatory charges were dropped, and charged him with federal laws comparable to the charges previously dismissed prior to his plea deal.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2022 15:40
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:At least four decisions today. One of them involves Neil Gorsuch being very rightfully mad about the treatment of native americans. hosed up he was angry in the dissent and not the majority. Breyer was in the majority! Yes it’s dual sovereign doctrine treating the tribe as a “state” but if it’s the feds in both cases that should void it. hobbesmaster fucked around with this message at 15:47 on Jun 13, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2022 15:45
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:hosed up he was angry in the dissent and not the majority. Breyer was in the majority! Yeah, it's a bullshit opinion, and it's really lovely that his is a dissent. This is Neil's broken clock area of law, and his dissent lays out clearly how hosed the situation is.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2022 15:50
|
|
|
A lovely ruling regarding Native Americans? It must be a day ending in Y.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2022 15:56
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:Yeah, it's a bullshit opinion, and it's really lovely that his is a dissent. This is Neil's broken clock area of law, and his dissent lays out clearly how hosed the situation is. If we expand the court, we could just find a whole bunch of judges that are broken clocks about one thing or another, that way we'd have all the bases covered.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2022 13:09
|
|
|
I’d rather have judges that are generally good across the board rather than horrible and occasionally correct.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2022 13:11
|
|
|
Too bad
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2022 13:22
|
|
|
GaussianCopula posted:And going from "she put her name on a form to send pre-written emails to representatives" to "she actively was part of a shadow cabal trying to coup the US government" is quite a leap. A very funny thing to say when her husband was already party to stealing a presidential election.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2022 17:42
|
|
|
GaussianCopula posted:And going from "she put her name on a form to send pre-written emails to representatives" to "she actively was part of a shadow cabal trying to coup the US government" is quite a leap. I'm sorry you must be unfamiliar with who Ginni Thomas is, because otherwise this line is either incredibly ignorant or absolutely bizarre. Look her up, you might be surprised!
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2022 17:54
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:I'm sorry you must be unfamiliar with who Ginni Thomas is, because otherwise this line is either incredibly ignorant or absolutely bizarre. Look her up, you might be surprised! I'm going to go with the guy who has an extensive rap sheet for right wing and racist stuff doesn't care about people like Ginni and Clarence Thomas being openly corrupt when it comes to pushing their party's goals because they agree with it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2022 19:26
|
|
|
Evil Fluffy posted:I'm going to go with the guy who has an extensive rap sheet for right wing and racist stuff doesn't care about people like Ginni and Clarence Thomas being openly corrupt when it comes to pushing their party's goals because they agree with it. This is the type of honest and credulous engagement moderation wants. How am I supposed to know what this person who frequently makes up poo poo to push right wing narratives wants in their heart of hearts?
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2022 19:29
|
|
|
Another day, another Gorsuch decision siding with Native tribes https://twitter.com/scotusblog/status/1537077972611608577?s=21&t=fuFFJOGz8NU1ouH1XKQZ3A
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2022 15:30
|
|
|
https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/abortion-ruling-nears-us-supreme-court-erects-barricades-public-2022-06-17/ Do they usually do this, or only when they expect to make a particularly lovely ruling?
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2022 17:11
|
|
|
Crows Turn Off posted:https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/abortion-ruling-nears-us-supreme-court-erects-barricades-public-2022-06-17/ No.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2022 17:12
|
|
|
Setting up a castle defense around a bastion of the minority party rule in anticipation of going against the will of the majority of the country is definitely not normal.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2022 17:37
|
|
|
Crows Turn Off posted:https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/abortion-ruling-nears-us-supreme-court-erects-barricades-public-2022-06-17/ To be clear, this is reporting about the stuff that was placed after the leak, not new stuff that is going up
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2022 17:41
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure that's not the first time I've seen the SC barricaded before
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2022 17:58
|
|
|
It's a joke that they can do that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2022 18:33
|
|
|
One of the fences went up a few days prior to the leak, after a man self-immolated on the steps of the Supreme Court to protest inaction on the climate crisis. https://www.wusa9.com/amp/article/n...5d-2623bff6e926
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2022 19:22
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/mjs_DC/status/1539254801451606016 Quoting some more of that thread: quote:Carson v. Makin is a major decision with huge consequences for state funding of religion. The conservative majority holds that the First Amendment requires Maine's taxpayers to fund explicitly religious education. That is a breathtakingly radical holding.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2022 15:48
|
|
|
Yeah they’re just going for it now I guess
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2022 15:50
|
|
|
What in the actual gently caress. How do they justify this? This is just patent pulling out of their rear end bullshit. You want to talk about activist judges and legislating from the bench? Why are we even following the Constitution anymore? Its dead, and the Roberts court just killed it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2022 16:03
|
|
|
I haven't looked into the details, but if the state gives vouchers for public or private schools, excluding religious schools that would otherwise be eligible seems like an obvious free exercise violation. They are specifically denying otherwise available funding based solely on a religious test. A state offering vouchers that only applied to religious schools would violate the establishment clause. A state offering vouchers that only denies religious schools violates free exercise.
ilkhan fucked around with this message at 16:15 on Jun 21, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2022 16:10
|
|
|
Oracle posted:What in the actual gently caress. How do they justify this? There are six of them
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2022 16:12
|
|
|
If I create a church of pedestrian safety, does that mean my state has to fund my religious bicycle paths at the same level as secular highways? Signs point to yes these days.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2022 16:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 18:12 |
|
|
ilkhan posted:I haven't looked into the details, but if the state gives vouchers for public or private schools, excluding religious schools that would otherwise be eligible seems like an obvious free exercise violation. They are specifically denying otherwise available funding based solely on a religious test. Based on a what test? The *cleans out ear with pinky finger* what test? (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2022 16:15
|
|