“I’m confident that if the truth can be found out here, she’ll find it out and present it in an unbiased manner,” said retired Army Brig. Gen. Patrick Huston, her direct supervisor at the Pentagon in her last military job before the Supreme Court. Huston said he was incredibly impressed by Curley and that she had a tremendous reputation as a leader, but even as her boss of two years he didn't know if she had a spouse or children.(My emphasis,)
Lots of stuff about her, including her notably ambiguous marital status, meaning she's probably single with a good chance of being a lesbian. Not much hope of finding the leaker, especially since there's been no indication an investigation even being started.
Durham II?
First paragraph of the article:
ASHINGTON (AP) — When Gail Curley began her job as Marshal of the U.S. Supreme Court less than a year ago, she would have expected to work mostly behind the scenes: overseeing the court’s police force and the operations of the marble-columned building where the justices work.
Shoulda know it would be a woman who can’t keep her mouth shut.
Are you saying she might sweep it under the carpet?
Nothing will happen, absolutely nothing. Except a waste of millions on a fake investigation.
She should look outside “the marble walls” to the various 3-letter agencies that surround her guardianship.
This "investigation" should be complete already. It ain't that hard.
I’m sure they already know who the leaker is, they are now in the cover-up phase trying to figure out how to not make the Media-Dem Party look bad.
This shoulda already been wrapped up.
Traitor Roberts is not interested in having this resolved in any swift public fashion.
Duck and cover is the order of the day.
Boss of two years doesn’t know such things?
So, if you are NOT engaging in a so-called “alternate” lifestyle, there is a Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy to keep your superiors and colleagues deliberately ignorant of this fact, allowing you to blend in with the rest of your colleagues, fewer and fewer of whom are being found to have opposite-sex spouses, or children?
I simply cannot believe that this would be a difficult investigation. They know. It’s the Mueller Russiagate thing all over again — they will pretend to solve the case and then come up empty. It’s all pretend.
Only about 36-45 or so people to investigate. Probably not conservatives, so hopefully half can be ruled out quickly (assuming so-called conservative Justices don’t have any leftist clerks). Roberts is the problem, since he has handled this crisis like a jellyfish.
IMO the real fireworks will begin when the Suprem’se vote to hand down the abortion to the states.
I’m pretty sure Roberts doesn’t want to reveal who the leaker is because it would require some sort of punishment. He seems extremely averse to confrontation.
The entire thrust of this (MSN) article is that they ‘want’ us to accept the validity of Col. Curley’s investigation. Knowing MSN’s prejudices I would not expect much.
The entire thrust of this (MSN) article is that they ‘want’ us to accept the validity of Col. Curley’s investigation. Knowing MSN’s prejudices I would not expect much.
I’ve said it all along, the investigation is being overseen directly by John Roberts and he chose to use the SCOTUS internal police rather than the FBI and if it turns up no name (which clearly by now it won’t) then it is obvious that Roberts was the leaker all along.
Say what you will about AP, at least they managed to spell “Marshal” correctly for this article.
Sorry, but I'm pretty confident that if she finds out something she'll make sure the truth cannot be found.
Oh, and if she was going to find out, she probably already would've done so.