The Supreme Court's report indicates that they cannot isolate the culprit among the over 80 possible suspects for the Dobbs leak. It is an admission that is almost as chilling as the leak itself...
...It will likely revive concerns over whether the FBI should have been asked to take the lead on the investigation. The Court is only a few blocks from the world's leading forensic investigatory body...
...What is clear is that any hope for a deterrent on such unethical conduct has been dramatically reduced. Thus far, the culprit succeeded in not just leaking the opinion but evading detection...
...The proposed changes in security are unlikely to meaningfully reduce the danger of such leaks. The nature of the Court's work requires a free flow of drafts and memoranda. That is why we hope to achieve through deterrence what was not achieved through ethics...
...In this age of rage, this danger will only grow. Someone felt that they had license to leak. Some others may now feel that they have the impunity to do so. jonathanturley.org/2022/05/06/the…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Jean-Pierre was just asked what the President meant what he says that he has "no regrets." That is clearly not a question for counsel but she refused to answer the question and referred again to the White House counsel... jonathanturley.org/2023/01/20/i-h…
...However, that treats the President like a criminal defendant speaking through counsel even when he has spoken publicly on the case...
...So President Biden declared publicly that he has "no regrets" but when the press has a follow up, the White House says that that is a matter for counsel. Keep in mind, the White House counsel represents the office, not the president as an individual. He has private counsel...
Awaiting Jean-Pierre. The DOJ has confirmed that the White House is not prevented from discussing the underlying facts. That removes the opportunistic use of the investigation as a shield from questions, but not necessarily the stonewalling of the scandal...
...The expectation is that Jean-Pierre will now use the White House Counsel to deflect questions. There should be added pressure to call one of the lawyers to the press room to answer these questions if Jean-Pierre will not do so.
...Thus far, the President's "no regrets" is being matched by Jean-Pierre's no comment with few questions being answered...jonathanturley.org/2023/01/20/i-h…
The start of a House investigation into the Supreme Court leak could produce some interesting options. For example, what if the House gave all of those unwilling to testify immunity. They would have to testify under oath (under penalty of perjury) ...foxnews.com/politics/house…
...The culprit would have to admit guilt or further increase his or her legal jeopardy with perjury before Congress...
...Given the diminishing chances for a criminal charge coming out of the Court's investigation, it might force missing testimony. Fox' Shannon Bream reported that sources said that clerks had "lawyered up" and refused to fully cooperate...
Swalwell just blamed Speaker McCarthy for threats against him and his family. thehill.com/homenews/house… Such threats are outrageous and need to be fully investigated...
...The Capitol Police recently said threats were down, which surprised many of us. cnn.com/2023/01/17/pol…
...Swallwell was criticized previously for downplaying such threats when he responded to reports of threats against Sen. Susan Collins with "Boo hoo hoo" and noted "You're a senator who police will protect." usatoday.com/story/news/pol… He later apologized.
Fox is reporting that DOJ is now saying that Justice officials did go to the residence and remove the discovered material...
...It is still not clear if Justice officials oversaw or witnesses the searches. There is no reason why the DOJ or the White House does not give a more complete and detailed account on these points...
...Clearly what the DOJ said and did in the search would not undermine the investigation. For example, if you were going to the residence, is the DOJ denying the WSJ account that the FBI was told not to conduct the searches? Was this simply to collect the found documents?
The Wall Street Journal is reporting that the DOJ declined to have the FBI conduct searches and instead allowed uncleared private counsel to do so. If true, it is a level of accommodation that would make a Kardashian
blush. wsj.com/articles/justi…
... Why would any investigator not want to conduct a search? The alternative was to allow uncleared, unknown counsel to sort through potential classified material. There is no legal or logical reason why the DOJ would prefer private counsel to do such a search.
...It also undermines the Justice Department's position in both cases. This is the department threatening criminal charges over mishandling of classified material. Yet, WSJ is reporting that it opted for the least secure method of searching for additional documents...