BC CATEGORY PDFMAKERAPP GRAB THIS READWISEIO SAVE READWISEIO SAVE THREAD THREADER COMPILE SUMMARIZE

Seth Abramson
@SethAbramson 1 year, 11 months ago 158 views

Either John Roberts is in the majority on the MS abortion case and passed over Clarence Thomas to assign the opinion to Alito, or Thomas is the senior Justice in the majority and chose not to assign the opinion to himself.

Either way, there’s a story here media must investigate.

My two preliminary thoughts:

(1) Thomas understands there’s heat on him and his wife over January 6, and moreover is in a position to know if that heat is *justified*. That in this context he passed up the chance to write the most important opinion of his life is *very* telling.

(2) There’s reasoned speculation from a Yale prof who was a former SCOTUS clerk—see link in my feed—that this opinion was leaked by a conservative clerk (with Thomas’s clerks the top suspects) to strongarm either Kavanaugh or Gorsuch into joining an opinion they were wavering on.

Remember that “Thomas Clerk World”—the private listserv for Thomas clerks past and present *and* insurrectionist Ginni Thomas—has been under scrutiny over January 6. These are the most radical clerks in America. *If* there was a far-right leak, they would be the leading suspects.

In fact, John Roberts’ investigation might well think to *start* with “Thomas Clerk World,” as it’s the one known digital venue for the sharing of information where Supreme Court clerks interact with insurrectionists who we *know* do not believe in rule of law: like Ginni Thomas.

So in this context, Clarence Thomas inexplicably excusing himself from the scrutiny writing the MS abortion case opinion would’ve drawn on him and his wife—when he had the authority to assign the opinion to himself and normally would have—*is* a suspicious fact for investigators.

This said, so far it looks like Roberts *may* be a “concurring in part, dissenting in part“ vote on the MS abortion case—which would see him writing a solo opinion—and I’m not sure if him being in the majority in this attenuated way keeps him in control of assigning the opinion.

But my understanding is that if Roberts isn’t going to join the majority opinion himself, he *doesn’t* pick who gets to write it, in which case Thomas had that authority and elected *not* to take for himself what would’ve been the most historic piece of writing of his whole life.

This is my way of saying the *strangest* decision made by a judge in this affair appears to have been made by Thomas, even as the chief suspects for a far-right leak of Alito’s opinion would be Thomas’s clerks and Thomas’s wife. I think it’s a thread investigators should pull on.

Even in an “innocuous” scenario—Roberts passing over Thomas to give the opinion to Alito—it’d be a stunning concession by Roberts that Thomas is tainted by scandal. You can’t tell me Thomas wouldn’t have wanted to write this opinion (Roberts couldn’t; he wasn’t going to join it).

In that “innocuous” scenario, Thomas’s clerks—and wife—would’ve been livid over the slight, and even more furious at the loss of *control* it signified.

If Kavanaugh or Gorsuch were wavering on joining Alito’s opinion, a leak would be a way for Thomas’s camp to reassert control.

It’s reasonable for media to write on this, as a) a federal probe is ongoing; b) the leak was to conservatives’ advantage; c) Roberts is not a suspect; d) Thomas and his wife/clerks were *already* facing a scandal over whether they respect US electoral/jurisprudential traditions.

Consider: on February 23, around the time the Alito opinion was written, the NYT came out with a *damning* piece on Clarence and his wife. The Court would’ve been aware this piece was being written *many* weeks earlier, likely November or December of 2021. https://t.co/Ycofb7TeyU

For that matter, the first PROOF article on Ginni Thomas’s insidious role in January 6, 2021—which went viral and was read by many in the federal government (as I know because I know who follows the PROOF project)—was published in late January of 2022. https://t.co/ewu3Feovpv

But the *first* shot over the bow of Clarence Thomas and his wife came a week earlier, on January 21, 2022, which means the Court *definitely* would’ve known it was being written back in November or December 2021, when the MS abortion opinion was assigned. https://t.co/ESwi1DuMka

In fact there’s ample evidence Ginni was on Thomas Clerk World notifying Thomas clerks past and present that—as she saw it—a “hit piece” was coming back in late 2021. It’s at this moment her husband apparently declined to write the most important opinion of his professional life.

To think like the federal criminal investigator I once briefly was, if Thomas felt there was *nothing* to the scrutiny of him and his wife, he takes the abortion opinion himself. If he doesn’t want additional heat on him and his wife, he doesn’t. That’d be a starting presumption.

But I’ve done enough research on Ginni Thomas—and read enough major-media investigation of Ginni Thomas—to know that she would’ve been absolutely *livid* at the idea that media attention on *her* caused her husband to miss out on writing an opinion she’s dreamed of for *decades*.

So now we have a historic leak of the opinion Thomas was passed over for writing—or was forced to excuse himself from writing, *against his will*—that appears to benefit the far right and almost certainly would have had to come from a cadre of clerks. So who are the key suspects?

Federal investigators will be asking *precisely* that question at a time when Thomas, his wife, *and* his *former* clerks at a minimum (e.g., Eastman) are under federal scrutiny for possible ethics violations. I’m sorry, but this does make them *initial* chief suspects, at least.

Another fact worth considering: how quickly the far right used this leak—which secretly may have been a far-right leak—to say, almost with *one voice*, that *this* was the “real insurrection.“How bizarre to think this story should take the heat off the January 6 insurrectionists!

So while it’s a minor point to be sure, that there was such a quick response from the insurrectionist community to tie this leak story to the January 6 insurrection in a way that sought to *exculpate* January 6 insurrectionists like Ginni Thomas and John Eastman is.... *curious*.

Having said this, I’ll underscore that the sharpest instrument federal investigators have is Occam’s Razor—which would here suggest the MS abortion opinion was leaked by a clerk deeply troubled by the opinion’s lawlessness and the congressional perjury by two Justices it implies.

But if federal investigators get even the slightest indication that there was an orchestrated political motive behind the leak *besides* a lone-wolf actor attempting to be a federal whistleblower, I candidly can’t imagine going *anywhere else first* but to Clarence Thomas’s camp.

To pull out to a 10,000-foot view: everyone knows the GOP literally stole two Supreme Court seats (some would say three, but I say two), so if a federal investigation were to lead to the Thomas camp—at a time any impeachment of Thomas will be impossible—it adds to the argument...

...that not only should Biden increase the size of the Court to compensate for Republican theft and malfeasance—with one *additional*.Justice added as a punitive measure—but that the appropriate number of additions would therefore be 4 rather than 3 (if you follow the math here).

I understand that a POTUS not willing to ditch the filibuster is not going to increase the size of the Supreme Court, either, but keep in mind the effect of the stolen seats is this abortion opinion—and we haven’t yet even begun to imagine the destruction this opinion will cause.

Ginni Thomas has been asked to testify to the January 6 committee, confirming—with media reports and federal investigations—a long shadow is being cast over her and Clarence. And we don’t know where the leak probe will go.

My point: pressure to augment SCOTUS will only increase.

As that pressure increases—and particularly with the nationwide destruction this abortion opinion will clearly create—activists will be trying to settle on a number of justices Biden should appoint. This leak investigation could add “1” to that number, and that makes it historic.

PS/ To those speculating Thomas wanted to avoid writing this opinion because of its implications for Loving v. Virginia: those implications exist *whether or not* Thomas writes or just signs the opinion; writing it would’ve given him *greater* control over its downstream effects.

PS2/ A reader notes—cannily—that perhaps Thomas is not writing the majority opinion because he wants to write a concurring one (which is indeed his style). Yet it’s hard to imagine his views diverging from Alito’s, and he’d certainly try to write the majority opinion if he could.

PS3/ That is to say, it’s difficult to read Alito’s draft opinion on abortion and see anything in it that Clarence Thomas would so strongly object to that he would decide he couldn’t write the majority opinion himself—and would need instead to write a separate concurring opinion.

PS4/ I’ll reiterate what I said throughout this thread: this is all speculation. But it’s speculation urging the media to do a thorough investigation and aiming to circumscribe where the federal probe might seek to begin searching. At the start of an investigation, all is theory.

PS5/ Those who haven’t conducted criminal investigations or practiced law don’t realize that all cases begin with limited info giving rise to a “theory of the case”—that then prompts more investigation.

Developing a dynamic theory of the case is *critical*, not a mere amusement.

More from Seth Abramson

Seth Abramson
@SethAbramson

As I know from my many years as a criminal defense attorney, GP, inmates can usually get books if they're sent directly from the publisher. What is your inmate number going to be? I will try to get you a copy of PROOF OF COLLUSION to help you pass the time while you're in prison.

Looking forward to watching @SethAbramson\u2019s world collapse around him when he realizes he has been absolutely wrong about his apparent \u201cinsight\u201d since day 1. I repeat, trust the insiders, not the nuts.
— George Papadopoulos (@GeorgePapa19) October 8, 2018

2/ As GP rails against Mueller to help sell movie rights to his story (or whatever), here's what his attorneys actually said in court: "Our firm would in a second stand up if we saw prosecutorial or governmental misconduct. We have seen no such thing." But they didn't stop there.

3/ George's attorneys added, "We have seen no entrapment. We have seen no set-up by U.S. intelligence people. Everything we saw, they’ve been on the square." So apparently on the same day my world "collapses," George's lawyers will *also* experience a massive temporal distortion.

Seth Abramson
@SethAbramson

MAJOR BREAKING NEWS: Kremlin "Intermediary" George Papadopoulos Alleges President Trump Lied About Never Having Met With Him After March 2016; September 2016 Meeting Occurred After Trump Knew of Russian Attacks

By the time I introduced Donald Trump to the Egyptian president in September 2016, a politically motivated surveillance operation by at least the UK and Australia was targeted at me and the campaign for seven months. Who authorized that? Congress has the answers.
— George Papadopoulos (@GeorgePapa19) October 7, 2018

2/ Trump's legal duty under the federal aiding and abetting statute not to do anything that might induce further Russian attacks was officially triggered on August 17, 2016, at his first classified briefing. Why was he meeting with a "Kremlin intermediary" weeks after this date?

Seth Abramson
@SethAbramson

(MAJOR NOTE) The reason Manafort took over Trump's campaign in just 3 weeks despite being hired as a mere delegate counter is that ROGER STONE initiated a whisper campaign against Corey Lewandowski. That campaign started...days after Manafort returned from meeting with WikiLeaks.

2/ Stone and Manafort are longtime business partners; we'd expect Manafort to tell Stone what Assange told him, and for him to expect Stone to then pressure the campaign not only to hire him but quickly elevate him.

And who was Stone in touch with at the campaign? Trump himself.

3/ I bet you Manafort's late March emails are very interesting and that some of them are to/from his longtime business associate Roger Stone. And I bet Roger Stone's late March phone calls are very interesting and that some of them are to/from his longtime friend Donald Trump.

4/ At the end of March 2016, Trump suddenly convenes a NatSec meeting. At that meeting he directs his NatSec team to change the RNC platform in July to benefit Putin. Who later takes credit for that change?

Paul Manafort's business associate, Kremlin agent Konstantin Kilimnick.

5/ Why did Donald Trump suddenly convene a NatSec meeting 3 days after he finally hired Manafort? Why did he issue a pro-Kremlin directive at that meeting that Manafort's camp would later take credit for? What did Manafort tell Trump in the days leading up to that NatSec meeting?

Seth Abramson
@SethAbramson

I... OMG. I am speechless. This is the *Oscars*. And this just happened. And I do not think it was a bit.

This feels to me like another sign that the world is off its hinges, so I sure hope we are going to find out that—despite there being no evidence of it—this was staged.

MAYHEM BETWEEN CHRIS ROCK AND WILL SMITH AT THE #Oscars pic.twitter.com/265hGbsEDg
— Barstool Sports (@barstoolsports) March 28, 2022

(PS) Either that was the most straight-faced comic bit in major-television history—in fact *so* straight-faced it was a total failure—or mega-Hollywood star Will Smith just straight-up *assaulted* a famous comic during one of the most widely watched annual telecasts in the world.

(PS2) I’m agreeing with those of you saying it wasn’t a bit, I just wanted to leave room because... well, because I just can’t believe what happened. I do know that Jada’s hair is a sensitive subject for her, but between that and a violent assault is a hell of a lot of territory.

(VIDEO) Here is the uncensored version.

Not a bit—an assault.

(PS3) This affected me. I just said to my wife, “If Will Smith can’t keep it together at the *Oscars*, how the hell can any of *us* be expected to keep it together anymore?” I’m not saying that response makes sense, only that it reflected how I was feeling.

These are dark times.

Seth Abramson
@SethAbramson

Hey, fun fact, threatening an elections official with criminal prosecution unless he rigs an election in your favor is not just impeachable but a federal crime

1/ Many federal criminal statutes could come into play here, but here's one: 52 U.S.C § 20511 punishes by up to 5 years in prison "attempting to deprive or defraud the residents of a State of a fair and impartially conducted election process by the procurement or tabulation...

2/ "...of ballots that are known by the person to be materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent under the laws of the State in which the election is held." When the chief elections official of the State of Georgia tells you the votes you want him to "find" would be fictitious...

3/ ...and you persist in not just urging him but threatening him to "find" those "votes" and give them to you, federal law does not allow you to be *willfully ignorant* of the fact that you are urging fictitious votes to be added to the State of Georgia's legally certified tally.

4/ But it's even worse than this for Trump, as he explicitly tells the chief elections official for Georgia that he only "needs" enough votes to win—which is an acknowledgment that he doesn't have a specific actionable complaint but is merely trying to *rig* the election outcome.

Many pentests start from the outside, wanting to see how the perimeter might be breached.

This pentest started from the inside. My client wanted to assume they had already been breached, and, if breached, how far could an attacker go.

Could they stop me once I was inside?

So they snuck me in. Disguised me as a new employee. Gave me a work computer, an ID badge, an account in their system... hell, I even had a cubicle w/my assumed name on it.

The only person who knew who I really was was their CISO. Everyone else thought I was Jeremy in Marketing.

During most of the first morning, I completed onboarding, made introductions, and completed menial tasks.

But I had to act quick. I only had a week onsite. I had to hack their network while not raising suspicion.

So I set about it.

You have to understand... most "Internal Pentests" are straight forward. The hard part is breaching the network, but once you're inside, it's a target rich environment. End of Life computers, default passwords, everyone a Local Administrator...

$MaMaMia \U0001f1ec\U0001f1f7\U0001f1e8\U0001f1fe\U0001f1e6\U0001f1f2 SupportGreekProducts$

MaMaMia 🇬🇷🇨🇾🇦🇲 Support...
@MaMaMia73189983

Following @BAUDEGS I have experienced hateful and propagandist tweets time after time. I have been shocked that an academic community would be so reckless with their publications. So I did some research.
The question is:
Is this an official account for Bahcesehir Uni (Bau)?

Bahcesehir Uni, BAU has an official website https://t.co/ztzX6uj34V which links to their social media, leading to their Twitter account @Bahcesehir

BAU’s official Twitter account

BAU has many departments, which all have separate accounts. Nowhere among them did I find @BAUDEGS
@BAUOrganization @ApplyBAU @adayBAU @BAUAlumniCenter @bahcesehirfbe @baufens @CyprusBau @bauiisbf @bauglobal @bahcesehirebe @BAUintBatumi @BAUiletisim @BAUSaglik @bauebf @TIPBAU

Nowhere among them was @BAUDEGS to find

Gareth Harney
@OptimoPrincipi

1) The Temple of the Divine Claudius was a vast temple complex on Rome's Caelian Hill, overlooking the valley that would later be occupied by the Colosseum. Though almost nothing now remains of the structure, its scale and grandeur once rivalled anything in the city.. #LostRome

2) The 'Claudium' was intended as a sacred complex to revere Claudius and the imperial cult. Construction began soon after the death and deification of the emperor in 54 AD, initiated by his widow Agrippina who was likely responsible for his supposed death by poisoning. #LostRome

3) The sprawling temple complex sat on a gigantic podium that spread across the Caelian Hill, measuring 180 x 200 metres; with towering retaining walls of travertine that raised the structure 20 metres above the valley below. #LostRome

4) The elevated sacred area was likely entered by steps facing the temple on the west side. The temple itself had a projecting hexastyle porch and was surrounded by gardens and a grand portico, probably the 'porticus Claudia' mentioned in Martial's 'On the Spectacles'. #LostRome

5) Statues of both Agrippina and Claudius’ ill-fated young son Britannicus, sculpted in sumptuous dark Egyptian greywacke, were discovered among the ruins on the Caelian Hill in 1651 – and had almost certainly been displayed in the temple precinct. #LostRome

$Sam Dylan Finch \U0001f937\U0001f3fb\u200d\u2642\ufe0f$

Sam Dylan Finch 🤷🏻‍♂️...
@samdylanfinch

I had the most bizarre experience outside of a bar yesterday, which my partner very aptly described as "toxic mask-unlinity." (A Thread.)

I was standing outside, waiting for a lyft to get home, when two cis men came out of the bar to smoke cigarettes. They're discussing the masks that folks are wearing in California at the moment because of the very dangerous air pollution from the fires happening.

I happen to be wearing one of those masks, because I think lungs are important and I like breathing. I dunno. One of the men notices me standing there, and says, "Like this f*cker right here. What is this shit?"

He goes on a homophobic rant about me, the pansy with a mask, and what a Very Manly Man he is because he's not afraid to smoke a pack of cigarettes while California is on fire. He doesn't need a mask, because something-something-heterosexual-something.

And part of me is just... impressed by the fact that this dude thinks he's Owning The Gay Libs by not wearing a mask to protect his lungs from smoke and particles in the air that are literally DANGEROUS... while chain-smoking. Outside of a bar.

Either John Roberts is in the majority on the MS abortion case and passed over Clarence Thomas to assign the opinion to Alito, or Thomas is the senior Justice in the majority and chose not to assign the opinion to himself.

Either way, there’s a story here media must investigate.

More from Seth Abramson

More from Category pdfmakerapp grab this readwiseio save readwiseio save thread threader compile summarize

You May Also Like

Either John Roberts is in the majority on the MS abortion case and passed over Clarence Thomas to assign the opinion to Alito, or Thomas is the senior Justice in the majority and chose not to assign the opinion to himself.Either way, there’s a story here media must investigate.

More from Seth Abramson

More from Category pdfmakerapp grab this readwiseio save readwiseio save thread threader compile summarize

You May Also Like

Either John Roberts is in the majority on the MS abortion case and passed over Clarence Thomas to assign the opinion to Alito, or Thomas is the senior Justice in the majority and chose not to assign the opinion to himself.

Either way, there’s a story here media must investigate.