(PO) Read anything interesting today?
Posted: Fri May 13, 2022 3:35 am
Don't walk under any ladders or cross a black cat's path today...lo..but, TGIF, and have a good one.
Welcome to the Neighborhood.
https://awkwardarguments.com/
It is definitely not her. She's not a member of the court yet, and so would not be privy to any of their internal communications yet. I don't know why you would think it was her.Slip Shod wrote: ↑Fri May 13, 2022 12:08 pmWhat if Katanji Brown jackson, our newest Supreme Court Justice were in fact the leaker ? Wouldn't that indeed show a very poor lack of discretion and integrity? And if she were then what was to be done about it. I was reading an article in which that was put forward
What do you think should be done about it, if true. I don't think they can do anything about it, but it speaks volumes about her - I believe unfit
Lessee now. Why would folks on the Right be claiming it is Brown Jackson? What would be their motivation? Even though anyone with knowledge on these things knows that, having not yet been sworn in, she is not yet a member and therefore not yet privy to the Court’s processes… why is this “I’m just asking the question” rampant across the right wing? What is their motivation? I mean, here’s our Buddy Shoddy using this conjecture as a basis to claim, and I quote, “it speaks volumes about her - I believe unfit”. Clearly, the upper echelons of the Right know just how stupid their base is, how easy it is to lead them down a nonexistent path. There are hundreds of thousands of Shoddys out there now, proclaiming that this leak means Jackson is unfit to serve on the court.Tarmaque wrote: ↑Fri May 13, 2022 12:38 pmIt is definitely not her. She's not a member of the court yet, and so would not be privy to any of their internal communications yet. I don't know why you would think it was her.Slip Shod wrote: ↑Fri May 13, 2022 12:08 pmWhat if Katanji Brown jackson, our newest Supreme Court Justice were in fact the leaker ? Wouldn't that indeed show a very poor lack of discretion and integrity? And if she were then what was to be done about it. I was reading an article in which that was put forward
What do you think should be done about it, if true. I don't think they can do anything about it, but it speaks volumes about her - I believe unfit
The word on the street is it was possibly Virginia Thomas, who also shouldn't have access to internal SCOTUS documents, but also very likely does. The logic holds up. The leak is unlikely to have come from any of the sitting justices since they're pretty jealous of their power and process. Their staff of clerks are also very professional and unlikely to damage their career by doing something like this. This leaves a group of people who potentially have access to SCOTUS documents but also have a history of political theatrics and corruption. Hence Virginia Thomas, who's husband has refused to recuse himself from ruling on cases that involve her clients. In theory he shouldn't have shared the document with her to begin with, but in practice it would surprise nobody.
Nice dodge. You’ve already used this leak to take multiple shots at Jackson…. But this is again soooo typical of the right. Now that the damage is done, you feign as if your purpose is somehow higher. Meanwhile, we have United States Senators using this exact ‘reasoning’ as a basis to publicly eviscerate Jackson and undermine her. While Rand Paul claims we cannot have any official attempts to counter this rampant disinformation.Slip Shod wrote: ↑Fri May 13, 2022 1:47 pm@ Mike
If it were to be a radical 'Righty' on the Court I would equally deem them unfit.
Everyone's guessing, but what I want to know is there anything
that can be done about it .
Except for a dismal few, seems no one goes to jail in Washington. This money is there to keep them out . Our system is set up for the little guy to go to jail
Ahhh yes. Of course your diatribe against Jackson was not a smear! And was not even yours!! It was “put forward” in an article! So never mind all that stuff about “Jackson…. In fact the leaker…. a very poor lack of discretion and integrity…. it speaks volumes about her - I believe unfit”. You were just asking the question, right?Slip Shod wrote: ↑Fri May 13, 2022 12:08 pmWhat if Katanji Brown jackson, our newest Supreme Court Justice were in fact the leaker ? Wouldn't that indeed show a very poor lack of discretion and integrity? And if she were then what was to be done about it. I was reading an article in which that was put forward
What do you think should be done about it, if true. I don't think they can do anything about it, but it speaks volumes about her - I believe unfit
Depends on who it is...a clerk would lose their job and law license...but, it isn't a crime, so no criminal stuff..it is bad and against protocol...if it was Justice and this has about a -0 chance it was, they wouldn't jeopardize the court's integrity, or their job...but, impeachment would be one of the ways to handle that and no likely to happenSlip Shod wrote: ↑Fri May 13, 2022 1:47 pm@ Mike
If it were to be a radical 'Righty' on the Court I would equally deem them unfit.
Everyone's guessing, but what I want to know is there anything
that can be done about it .
Except for a dismal few, seems no one goes to jail in Washington. This money is there to keep them out . Our system is set up for the little guy to go to jail
Well Miguel, I see you're going with a video here while the context of the get together by Ms Z was interesting 'reading'.
If any justice leaked court documents I would think they were unfit and would expect congress to impeach. There is no reason to suspect any specific with the information we have. It's a little strange to speculate about an individual in this way.Slip Shod wrote: ↑Fri May 13, 2022 12:08 pmWhat if Katanji Brown jackson, our newest Supreme Court Justice were in fact the leaker ? Wouldn't that indeed show a very poor lack of discretion and integrity? And if she were then what was to be done about it. I was reading an article in which that was put forward
What do you think should be done about it, if true. I don't think they can do anything about it, but it speaks volumes about her - I believe unfit
See my comments to Slip about individuals...Tarmaque wrote: ↑Fri May 13, 2022 12:38 pmThe word on the street is it was possibly Virginia Thomas, who also shouldn't have access to internal SCOTUS documents, but also very likely does. The logic holds up. The leak is unlikely to have come from any of the sitting justices since they're pretty jealous of their power and process. Their staff of clerks are also very professional and unlikely to damage their career by doing something like this. This leaves a group of people who potentially have access to SCOTUS documents but also have a history of political theatrics and corruption. Hence Virginia Thomas, who's husband has refused to recuse himself from ruling on cases that involve her clients. In theory he shouldn't have shared the document with her to begin with, but in practice it would surprise nobody.
Yes, that is a right and it's an important right. The problem with trying to police speech for truth is that whoever decided what "truth" is has the power to shape perception. When considering powers of government I prefer to consider how they can be abused. Could you imagine Trump as the legal arbiter of truth? I can, and I don't like the results
.
I don't see how this helps the pro-life crowd either. Honestly, I fail to see how this leak helps anyone. That's why I tend to think it had more to do with someone being frustrated and reacting.Mike wrote: ↑Fri May 13, 2022 1:14 pmAs for Ginny Thomas, I won’t speculate on a name. But I will again state what I already stated, which is to ponder which ‘team’ benefits from this. Is it the left? They’d have been better off waiting until the decision was actually official, as it would have been closer to Election Day and therefore the protest energy would have been new and fresh. For the Right, then, it would pay to release it early in order to dissipate some of that protest energy. As for any other benefits to the Left for leaking it, I can think of none.
The “bad actor” hypothesis, the lone wolf. Gotta say I think it’s less likely than a calculated action. Again to tarmaque’s point, anyone involved in the Court knows enough to grasp the potentially massive ramifications of undermining the Court’s privacy. Which has me thinking of yet another advantage to the Right: the furor over whodunit functions as a smoke screen while they do such things as try to block aid to Ukraine (see the Greene/Bobert nonsense that got almost no play over the past couple days).GuideToACrazyWorld wrote: ↑Fri May 13, 2022 3:40 pmSee my comments to Slip about individuals...Tarmaque wrote: ↑Fri May 13, 2022 12:38 pmThe word on the street is it was possibly Virginia Thomas, who also shouldn't have access to internal SCOTUS documents, but also very likely does. The logic holds up. The leak is unlikely to have come from any of the sitting justices since they're pretty jealous of their power and process. Their staff of clerks are also very professional and unlikely to damage their career by doing something like this. This leaves a group of people who potentially have access to SCOTUS documents but also have a history of political theatrics and corruption. Hence Virginia Thomas, who's husband has refused to recuse himself from ruling on cases that involve her clients. In theory he shouldn't have shared the document with her to begin with, but in practice it would surprise nobody.
as for Virginia Thomas it's not so much that I don't think she would leak it, it's just that I don't see what advantage she'd think leaking it would bring her. It feels like it has to be someone who disagrees with the decisions, but also as I said to slip, " Although, Donald Trump was president, anything is possible."
It could potentially be. It seems unlikely. Musk is a very busy guy. I would expect that his time is extremely valuable. I have a hard time seeing why he would put this much effort into manipulating Twitter stock to make a few million. It doesn't seem like a good use of his time, even if he wanted more money it seems to me he could have made more a million easier ways. That being said, Musk is a different person, so he may have motivation I'm not considering.
It could be a bit of a false flag event. That does seem a bit conspiracy theory leaning to me to me. If that were the case it would be almost impossible to cover up. Like I said to me this feels more like a frustrated reaction then a plan. If this was a planned event, I'd have to say the people involved are not the brightest, and I'd be concerned that such people have access to SCOTUS documents at all. At this point we know so little. An important point is that the documents were leaked to Political. This is a publication that in general is loved by the left, and by those on the far right is considered extremely biased. In your theory the person from the right would have to first be dumb enough to leak the document, but smart enough to intentionally do it to an outlet they didn't trust.Mike wrote: ↑Fri May 13, 2022 4:19 pmAgain to tarmaque’s point, anyone involved in the Court knows enough to grasp the potentially massive ramifications of undermining the Court’s privacy. Which has me thinking of yet another advantage to the Right: the furor over whodunit functions as a smoke screen while they do such things as try to block aid to Ukraine (see the Greene/Bobert nonsense that got almost no play over the past couple days).
The reality of this leak is it enraged pro-choicer and excited pro-lifers. I'm not sure it accomplished much else. It probably has the effect you described among many pro-choicers, but I don't think it moves the needle at all in general. It's hard to imagine an adult who doesn't already have a fully formed opinion on this topic.Mike wrote: ↑Fri May 13, 2022 4:19 pmHowever, it also brings to mind this possible contextual benefit for the Left: the Right spent decades trying to undermine the legitimacy of SCOTUS. And we’ve seen them, over the past few decades but especially the past five years, actively undermining virtually every institution they can: the Congress, the FBI, the United Nations, NATO, OAS, the plethora of Federal agencies…. Given the ‘reasoning’ deployed by the Right on decisions like this (low supply of adoptable babies? ROFL!), all it takes to undermine the Court’s authority, and therefore do to it what the Right has done to all other institutions, is to show the nation what they are doing.
If you were a maga righties you'd say the same about the left. That statement is true to those who already agree with you, but do people who already agree with you need another reason to not trust the right?Mike wrote: ↑Fri May 13, 2022 4:19 pmBut isn’t that the most amusing thing. The Right has to lie and lie and lie, and go to court for the right to lie and then lie some more, to attempt to undermine the Left. (See the reference to the supposed ‘article’ that attempted to pin this all on Brown Jackson.)
All the Left has to do to undermine confidence in what the Right is doing is to show the world what the Right is actually doing.
Hmmm. This is a $44+ billion transaction. Even to the world’s richest man, that ain’t chump change. In fact, the purchase plan has three components:GuideToACrazyWorld wrote: ↑Fri May 13, 2022 4:21 pmIt could potentially be. It seems unlikely. Musk is a very busy guy. I would expect that his time is extremely valuable. I have a hard time seeing why he would put this much effort into manipulating Twitter stock to make a few million. It doesn't seem like a good use of his time, even if he wanted more money it seems to me he could have made more a million easier ways. That being said, Musk is a different person, so he may have motivation I'm not considering.
I thought you meant he was trying to make money off the stocks, traditional stock manipulation. While the stock dropped today it's still significantly hire then when Musk first bought stock. If this was about reducing purchase price, why'd he so publicly pump the stock up in the first place?Mike wrote: ↑Fri May 13, 2022 4:40 pmIndependent of what I consider the abhorrent practice of leveraging an asset you wish to purchase in order to purchase it, clearly a drop in the purchase price would benefit him enormously. If Twitter suddenly cost $35 billion instead of $44 billion, he could retain much of his personal outlay… or he could expose far less of Tesla. In short, he has enormous potential motivation (there’s that word again).
He didn’t. What pumped the stock was the rumor that a guy capable of buying out the company, a guy with motive to do exactly that, was positioning himself to DO exactly that. He then had to acknowledge it, though he at first did not confirm it (Twitter sorta did likewise).GuideToACrazyWorld wrote: ↑Fri May 13, 2022 4:44 pmI thought you meant he was trying to make money off the stocks, traditional stock manipulation. While the stock dropped today it's still significantly hire then when Musk first bought stock. If this was about reducing purchase price, why'd he so publicly pump the stock up in the first place?Mike wrote: ↑Fri May 13, 2022 4:40 pmIndependent of what I consider the abhorrent practice of leveraging an asset you wish to purchase in order to purchase it, clearly a drop in the purchase price would benefit him enormously. If Twitter suddenly cost $35 billion instead of $44 billion, he could retain much of his personal outlay… or he could expose far less of Tesla. In short, he has enormous potential motivation (there’s that word again).