3 ms·

My money is on Ginny Thomas, seeing the tides shifting and not supporting this, decided to put it out. That news agencies and commentators on the right IMMEDIA

My money is on Ginny Thomas, seeing the tides shifting and not supporting this, decided to put it out. That news agencies and commentators on the right IMMEDIATELY communicated in Lockstep about "this leak is an egregious affront to the court" points to that.

tablespoon 4y ago
> My money is on Ginny Thomas, seeing the tides shifting and not supporting this, decided to put it out. My money is on "no one knows a damn thing," and everyone who says otherwise is just pointing fingers at their partisan hate-objects.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
SamoyedFurFluff 4y ago
I would push against using how quickly commentators commentate as an example of a leaker allied with a certain side. Tweeting takes seconds. A group chat can decide what to do in minutes. It likely takes less than an hour to have an emergency press release ready to go and instantly disseminate on the internet. (Fwiw: I don’t care who leaked or how leaked. I think people should focus more importantly that the legal opinion in the draft uses reasoning applicable to any sense of personal privacy. It’s more than just reproductive rights here, because the reasoning is that any rights logically derived from a right to privacy are illegitimate.)
- philjohn 4y ago
  Disparate news agencies?
  - SamoyedFurFluff 4y ago
    Yes. They each maybe have one, maybe two big editors, and there are only a few major conservative news agencies, then they all can definitely be in a group chat! I doubt that list of contacts would be over two dozen people and I definitely have discord chats bigger than that. News media if you think about it is a really small world. If you’re a conservative reporter on national beats how many companies can you work for, actually? The national review, Fox News, Wall Street journal, OAN? Maybe Cato institute? That’s only a small handful of possible employers.
buerkle 4y ago
I don't think the right communicating in lockstep about the leak instead of the contents of the leak points to any person in particular. If nothing else, the right is extremely good at keeping their stories in lockstep. In any case, when the majority of Americans support upholding roe v wade, it's in the right's best interest to keep the story on the leak.
baking 4y ago
Also, Clarence Thomas's copy would be most likely to not contain any markups.

tablespoon 4y ago

> My money is on Ginny Thomas, seeing the tides shifting and not supporting this, decided to put it out. My money is on "no one knows a damn thing," and everyone who says otherwise is just pointing fingers at their partisan hate-objects.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

SamoyedFurFluff 4y ago

I would push against using how quickly commentators commentate as an example of a leaker allied with a certain side. Tweeting takes seconds. A group chat can decide what to do in minutes. It likely takes less than an hour to have an emergency press release ready to go and instantly disseminate on the internet. (Fwiw: I don’t care who leaked or how leaked. I think people should focus more importantly that the legal opinion in the draft uses reasoning applicable to any sense of personal privacy. It’s more than just reproductive rights here, because the reasoning is that any rights logically derived from a right to privacy are illegitimate.)

philjohn 4y ago
Disparate news agencies?
- SamoyedFurFluff 4y ago
  Yes. They each maybe have one, maybe two big editors, and there are only a few major conservative news agencies, then they all can definitely be in a group chat! I doubt that list of contacts would be over two dozen people and I definitely have discord chats bigger than that. News media if you think about it is a really small world. If you’re a conservative reporter on national beats how many companies can you work for, actually? The national review, Fox News, Wall Street journal, OAN? Maybe Cato institute? That’s only a small handful of possible employers.

buerkle 4y ago

I don't think the right communicating in lockstep about the leak instead of the contents of the leak points to any person in particular. If nothing else, the right is extremely good at keeping their stories in lockstep. In any case, when the majority of Americans support upholding roe v wade, it's in the right's best interest to keep the story on the leak.

baking 4y ago

Also, Clarence Thomas's copy would be most likely to not contain any markups.