Page:Dobbs public report.pdf/19

 Investigators carefully evaluated the statements and conduct of personnel who displayed attributes associated with insider-threat behavior – violation of confidentiality rules, disgruntled attitude, claimed stressed, anger at the Court’s decision, etc. – and also weighed behavior and evidence that would tend to mitigate any adverse inferences. Investigators also carefully evaluated whether personnel may have had reason to disclose the Court’s draft decision for strategic reasons.

Investigators looked closely into any connections between employees and reporters. They especially scrutinized any contacts with anyone associated with Politico. Investigators also assessed the wide array of public speculation, mostly on social media, about any individual who may have disclosed the document. Several law clerks were named in various posts. In their inquiries, the investigators found nothing to substantiate any of the social media allegations regarding the disclosure.

E. Outside Assistance.

The investigative team requested outside technical assistance on a number of matters. The investigators obtained a forensic examination of the digital image of the draft opinion that was posted on Politico’s website to compare against exemplars obtained from Court printers and copiers. There was nothing of evidentiary value that could be gleaned from the electronic copy of the draft opinion when compared against the exemplars.