SCOTUS leaker is Jackson!

[Sunsettommy]

I presented a hypothesis and an explanation for the hypothesis. This isn't a court of law, and it's not a math class. What you're lacking here isn't evidence, it's the ability to think on your own.

SCOTUS leaker is Jackson!​

That is what YOU posted as the headline which is a demonstrable lie since you didn't post any evidence to support it.

 

[Lesh]

It’s probably Gianni Thomas trying to distract from her exposed texts concerning Jan 6 and demands for her husband to recuse

 

[Sunsettommy]

Of course, I'm providing a rational basis for my hypothesis, whereas you're simply making up a fantastical tale.

Bwahahahahahahahahahaha!!!

You don't think what YOU posted isn't a fantastical tale?

What are you drinking this early in the afternoon?

 

[Muhammed]

You have to admit, for an unprecedented thing like this

Which fake news outlet brainwashed you into believing it's an "unprecedented thing"?

Let me guess....CNN?

You're an easily brainwashed idiot.

 

[Calypso Jones]

This is a damn free country and people can speculate and *OFTEN THEY"RE RIGHT. It is as likely that the new gal on the block leaked the info than a clerk. OR maybe it was leaked to the clerk with the permission to leak it to the media. This WAS a dangerous thing to do....because if she did do that...if even a clerk did it....it has the potential to put these justices in peril for their lives or the lives of their families.

One thing we have found out over the past 10 years is that your garden variety citizen is more capable of determining the truth of a matter than the FIB/CYA is capable of.

*Caps for emphasis only.

 

[Stormy Daniels]

You don't think what YOU posted isn't a fantastical tale?

No, not fantastical. I mean, look....if you disagree then that's fine. Let's talk about it.

What do you think happened? Why do you think that? I'd love to hear your thoughts.

This is a discussion board, after all. Let's discuss.

 

[B. Kidd]

No, not fantastical. I mean, look....if you disagree then that's fine. Let's talk about it.

What do you think happened? Why do you think that? I'd love to hear your thoughts.

This is a discussion board, after all. Let's discuss.

So you wanna discuss 'Where's Waldo'.
I'll pass.
You're a cartoon.

 

[Sunsettommy]

No, not fantastical. I mean, look....if you disagree then that's fine. Let's talk about it.

What do you think happened? Why do you think that? I'd love to hear your thoughts.

This is a discussion board, after all. Let's discuss.

I have no idea who did it but unlike you I don't make up things out of thin air that is defamatory in nature as YOU are doing.

SCOTUS leaker is Jackson!​

Stupid

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

You have to admit, for an unprecedented thing like this to happen for the first time in 250 years, you have to think it's the new girl who just started a few weeks ago. The Supreme Court has a long cultural fixation on protecting the integrity of the court, both through formal rules and through customs. This principle reaches across all manners of ideological divide. Who is most likely to be unseeped in that cultural influence? The new girl who just started a few weeks ago.

I dont see any link for this "Conspiracy".....

 

[Stormy Daniels]

I have no idea who did it

Really? Not even a hypothesis? You mean to tell me that you're completely incapable of synthesizing new information out of the available information?

I guess I was right. You completely lack the ability to think for yourself.

 

[mudwhistle]

Funny. She is not yet on SCOTUS and has not even been sworn in yet - so how would she have access to the abortion draft?

I consider Amy Commie Barrett as the most likely suspect. She is an anti-abortion zealot and would want to "lock" in the votes to make it HARD for any of them to change their votes before the final version. Ginni Thomas would be my second guess.

Predictable that you would blame the only female conservative on the court.

Most likely it was a Biden Adm operative. They needed an issue during the primary and are hoping this will help them in the elections in November. They probably had this information weeks ago...but timed the release to effect the election. And yet they claim Trump did something similar with the Russians.

According to Dictionary.com thesaurus:

Democrat syonyms: Hypocrite

• bigot
• charlatan
• crook
• impostor
• phony
• trickster
• actor
• backslider
• bluffer
• casuist
• cheat
• deceiver
• decoy
• dissembler
• dissimulator
• fake
• faker
• four-flusher
• fraud
• humbug
• informer
• malingerer
• masquerader
• mountebank
• pharisee
• poser
• pretender
• quack
• smoothie
• sophist
• swindler
• two-timer
• attitudinizer
• con artist
• lip server
• two-face
• wolf in sheep's clothing

See also synonyms for: hypocritical

 

[Sunsettommy]

Really? Not even a hypothesis? You mean to tell me that you're completely incapable of synthesizing new information out of the available information?

I guess I was right. You completely lack the ability to think for yourself.

What evidence oh YOU didn't post any at all since it doesn't exist and the MSM hasn't posted enough to even credibly speculate.

That is how stupid you are for trying to bake up a wild assed speculation based on NOTHING which you have NOTHING but wild speculations.

 

[Lakhota]

SCOTUS leaker is Jackson!​

Very dishonest thread title - with no proof! When did Jackson start?

 

[Oddball]

It’s probably Gianni Thomas trying to distract from her exposed texts concerning Jan 6 and demands for her husband to recuse

 

[Cecilie1200]

You have to admit, for an unprecedented thing like this to happen for the first time in 250 years, you have to think it's the new girl who just started a few weeks ago. The Supreme Court has a long cultural fixation on protecting the integrity of the court, both through formal rules and through customs. This principle reaches across all manners of ideological divide. Who is most likely to be unseeped in that cultural influence? The new girl who just started a few weeks ago.

You know Judge Jackson isn't actually ON the court yet, right?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Funny. She is not yet on SCOTUS and has not even been sworn in yet - so how would she have access to the abortion draft?

I consider Amy Commie Barrett as the most likely suspect. She is an anti-abortion zealot and would want to "lock" in the votes to make it HARD for any of them to change their votes before the final version. Ginni Thomas would be my second guess.

While you're correct that Judge Jackson isn't on the court yet, all I heard for the rest of this was, "Quick! Point the finger at someone I hate to cover for Democrats! Who cares if it sounds ridiculous, I always do anyway?!?!"

 

[Cecilie1200]

You really think anyone needs facts to prevent them from blaming the black woman for everything that goes wrong?

No, only people who wish to look marginally intelligent need facts. So you're completely good to rant about your "clever" theory.

 

[Cecilie1200]

This is a damn free country and people can speculate and *OFTEN THEY"RE RIGHT. It is as likely that the new gal on the block leaked the info than a clerk. OR maybe it was leaked to the clerk with the permission to leak it to the media. This WAS a dangerous thing to do....because if she did do that...if even a clerk did it....it has the potential to put these justices in peril for their lives or the lives of their families.

One thing we have found out over the past 10 years is that your garden variety citizen is more capable of determining the truth of a matter than the FIB/CYA is capable of.

*Caps for emphasis only.

How "likely" is it that the "new girl on the block" did it if she's not actually ON the block yet?

 

[Cecilie1200]

No, not fantastical. I mean, look....if you disagree then that's fine. Let's talk about it.

What do you think happened? Why do you think that? I'd love to hear your thoughts.

This is a discussion board, after all. Let's discuss.

No, it's fantastical to blame someone who doesn't sit on the Court. And it's fantastical to expect us to "talk about it" as though you're anything but an uninformed loonbag trying to play at being clever. And failing miserably.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Really? Not even a hypothesis? You mean to tell me that you're completely incapable of synthesizing new information out of the available information?

I guess I was right. You completely lack the ability to think for yourself.

As opposed to you, lacking the ability to think at all.