Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSo DUers are the RWs on the court leaking information to the media?
Looks like there are some people who believe this.
Tweety was right last week - ReTHUGs are prepared to destroy America if they don't get their way.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
3 replies, 912 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (0)
ReplyReply to this post
3 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
So DUers are the RWs on the court leaking information to the media? (Original Post)
malaise
Jul 2012
OP
Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)1. Here's a link below for some context ...
Supreme Court Springs A Leak; Leaks To Conservative Pundits May Have Started More Than A Month Ago
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002890721
Shakes head.
rocktivity
(44,576 posts)3. Well aside from their clerks and support staff, who else could have done it?
From Think Progress:
(CBS News.com reporter Jan) Crawford cites two unnamed sources, and there are a very limited universe of people who could have revealed this information...Only the justices and their personal staff would have access to this knowledge, and it is highly unlikely that a clerk or secretary would be willing to risk their entire career by revealing the Courts confidential deliberations to the press. Crawford, moreover, is a very well connected conservative reporter who has, at times, worked closely with the Federalist Society to drive conservative legal narratives. Nothing is certain, but it is likely that one or both of Crawfords sources is a conservative justice.(link)]
From Jan Crawford:
Roberts then withstood a month-long, desperate campaign to bring him back to his original position, the sources said...(A)s Roberts began to craft the decision striking down the mandate, the external pressure began to grow...
There were countless news articles in May warning of damage to the court - and to Roberts' reputation - if the court were to strike down the mandate....Some even suggested that if Roberts struck down the mandate, it would prove he had been deceitful during his confirmation hearings...
There were countless news articles in May warning of damage to the court - and to Roberts' reputation - if the court were to strike down the mandate....Some even suggested that if Roberts struck down the mandate, it would prove he had been deceitful during his confirmation hearings...
The only news article I recall is one about two weeks ago which suggested that the Court might be working out which parts of ACA might be salvageable. The "other" articles, I presume, ended up in conservative media as part of the "external pressure" campaign on Roberts. And given Crawford's lofty status as a conservative reporter, I doubt she stooped to talking with mere court clerks and secretaries.
rocktivity