"I rushed out of the courtroom after the opinion announcements, and when I realized that the usual rush of folks after a few minutes had not happened, I asked somebody [what] was going on inside, to which the answer was, ‘retirement announcements.’ I didn’t hear the ‘s’ on ‘announcements,’ and I assumed something no reporter should ever do, that you were retiring."
I don't believe she would report specific news about Alito based on a passing 2-word remark in answer to her question about why people are hanging back. Wasn't it already obvious that there could be a retirement announcement that day and therefore that there was reason to hang back and find out? If someone said "retirement announcements" — or "retirement announcement" — you couldn't assume it meant anything more than that people are waiting to hear if there are going to be any retirement announcements.
“It was the worst professional mistake of my more than 50 years in journalism,” she wrote to Alito. “I could go on, but I don’t know what else to say except that I am so, so sorry.”
Say what really happened,
Posts
102 comments:
Aren’t some people speculating this was a test for SCOTUS leakers?
Say what really happened
Forget it Jake, this is Chinatown.
“I am so, so sorry“
What a sorry apology. When you have to add “so, so” to sorry, you’re not even sorry at all. You’re under pressure to save your own status.
my theory was team nor was watching the scotusblog feed and reported their fantasizing about Alito retiring as fact. The scotusblog feed moves to the bottom anytime there’s a comment so if you’re trying to backtrack to read older comments it’s constantly moving to the latest comment. I suspect the weenies at NPR were both flummoxed by what was being reported and so gleeful about what they desperately wanted to be true… and yes the reasoning for the error smells like fresh poo- It always does with these people…
so so sorry = a so-so apology. Mediocre.
"The scotusblog feed moves to the bottom anytime there’s a comment so if you’re trying to backtrack to read older comments it’s constantly moving to the latest comment."
It's set to work for people who aren't really trying to read it or who are obsessively staring at it reading it constantly. Very annoying for those in the middle, where I would be if I put up with being annoyed.
Meade, did you mean to say “save your own status” or save your own sad ass?
I’m so sorry that I assumed, based on no one mentioning your name that you specifically had announced your retirement, and I made that assumption about you because (dog ate that part of the homework). F
Now it's Nina Totenberg's retirement announcement that is being anticipated.
If Sotomayor was indeed the person responsible for leaking (as it happens, false) information, what can actually be done about it? Impeachment is politically impossible, and might be a dangerous precedent. Censure is a toothless slap on the wrist. I think I read somewhere that you can bar a justice from hearing new cases for a while, but that hardly seems a punishment. More of a vacation. Can Roberts fire any employee whose fingerprints are on this? Reduce the number of Sotomayor's clerks - maybe to zero - to tighten up the ship?
Totenberg had a pipeline to Sotomayor during COVID. Internal complaints about masking and putting her health at risk. Perhaps she was the source of this info?
https://www.npr.org/2022/01/18/1073428376/supreme-court-justices-arent-scorpions-but-not-happy-campers-either
50 years huh. Perhaps the best apology would be to announce her retirement. She has obviously forgotten so much journalism ethics that she is a now a liability to her employer.
Meade: You’re under pressure to save your own status.
Her well entrenched status is as a rabid Democrat partisan. She has that NPR approved fake reasonable voice that belies her hatred of conservative Justices.
Sorry Ann, I haven’t believed a word this lying journalist has printed/ stated in 50 years. She was fired from an earlier position for plagiarism.
The capper for me: “Totenberg disclosed allegations of sexual harassment lodged against Thomas by University of Oklahoma law professor Anita Hill.[16] Totenberg's report about Hill's allegations led the Senate Judiciary Committee to re-open Thomas's Supreme Court confirmation hearings to consider Hill's charges.” (Wiki)
The Supreme Court leaker leaked again...
Time to put Totenberg in an NPR tote bag.
Nina was wish casting!
Wouldn't she have waited to ask someone leaving the chamber what had happened? Yeah, she's hiding a source.
WHY is Nina still working?
does she need money That bad?
does she need fame That bad?
does she think that NPR is real money?
does she think that NPR is real fame?
Worse than plagiarism?
Nina Totenberg is 82. Perhaps she's past it, or isn't as sharp as she used to be. I'm all for superannuated people (whose ranks I will enter in, say, 10 years) remaining active. But the simple fact is that most people will see some decline, and I do believe, as a general rule (of course individuals will vary!!!) that this tends to accelerate when one reaches one's '80s.
There comes a time to retire. Apart from the other issues with Totenberg, at 82 she ought to retire for that reason alone. I'm seeing this reluctance from others as well, and it's understandable, but it doesn't change the basic reality that faces most, though not all, people.
Regards,
Lori (reader_iam)
Like Biden with his face pressed against a window of the Beast as it rolls past an ice cream shop, all Nina cared about was getting one last scoop.
It still smells like somebody was set up. I don't know if it was a leaker, if it was Totenburg, or if the objective was something else besides the court trying to run a tighter ship. Her apology is hollow and self-serving, in keeping with her other reporting.
It doesn't speak well for the court that the Dobbs decision was leaked, and then never explained, remaining unresolved. Transparency is supposed to be one of their strong suits.
Is Ninny Totenberg really the hill on which NPR wants to die? Get it? Totenberg? Death Hill? Bwahaha.
I wouldn't have so much of a problem with "so, so sorry" if she had said something along the lines of "I screwed up and got it wrong. I was too quick to assume and too quick to jump to a conclusion. There's no excuse."
And then maybe consider retiring? Or just assume some sort of emeritus position, if necessary, but not active every day reportage, especially with breaking news?
Regards,
Lori (reader_iam)
P.S. I do wonder about the deliberate leak theory, I must say.
SCOTUS Justices have been leaking to NPR and the NTY's forever. It used to be Breyer and Ginsburg. IRC, Ginzberg was Totenberg's best friend forever. But all the Liberal/leftists justices did it - including Stevens.
We still haven't been told who leaked the Roe v. Wade descision, probably because it was Breyer.
I vote it was leak detection.
Why's this such big deal?
Rumors got exaggerated ... So what .... Nobody was harmed
Its naive to think any leftwing clerk would leak to the media without the approval of the Justice. But if they're found out, the Justice would probably have to fire them, just to save face.
Years ago I read about a leak during the FDR years. Someone leaked info damaging to Owen Roberts the only R justice left on the court. Roberts suspected Douglas and Black. And stopped speaking to them. The two denied it, but William Douglas was a liar and all-round creep and probably did it.
Incredibly FDR wanted Douglas as his VP. And IRC, Truman offered Douglas the VP spot in 48.
Totenberg should have retired 10 years ago. There are plenty of people who could do her job just as well. Give someone under 80 a chance.
Why can't USSC Ensure leak proof supply of Depends?
She’s likely competing to be the last one standing wrt both Alito and Thomas. She can’t retire until they do.
It's Nina. Of course the story is wrong.
Typical Dem. Nina's a liar and a deep partisan.
There's evidence it's an embargo story that she sent out too early, but the people closest to Alito said fake news so quickly, I don't think they're delaying an official announcement.
I will be pretty upset if it was just an embargo because of how vehemently those allies cried fake news. I'll lose a little trust in their reporting.
Platner made it as far as he did because the Dems thought he had a Totenberg tattoo. CC, JSM
This "reporting" was obviously an attempt to generate gossip and speculation in DC in hopes of inducing pressure on Alito.
The media gin up the story to put the idea in people's minds. Tottenberg has never been an honorable journalist. Likely, this was a last hurrah attempt given her age
Totenberg is a woke Democrat operative with a byline who pretends that she is an agenda-free “journalist.” The question in my mind is whether the “retirement” story was a setup designed to catch a SCOTUS leaker.
Well at least she apologized. Still waiting for that lying Jew hating jack-wad Kristoff at the NYT to apologize for his Hamas propaganda.
Mr. Mosby @8:35 — superb š
Nina gets a Yellow Card. But waiting for the video review.
I’d bet Iman could make a good parody out of Brenda Lee’s “I’m Sorry”
No one believes it
Totenberg's entire career was to be a soothing voice for urban, academic, latte-sipping elitists. Stroke their egos daily as "one of us." It's a nice comfy bubble where you get to sleep in late and then chat about your establishment political dreams and wishes for profit (i.e., critical theory professors). Everyone gets an "A" -- equity for all.
Perhaps she should be assigned to Disneyland where wishes and dreams come true.
Appears Ms. Totenberg does not impress the commentariat. As Humperdink said, most of us haven't listened to this "journalist" in decades. Truth be told, I wouldn't have known about this event if I didn't read Althouse.
I will go the anti-conspiracy route and say that her apology was sincere, and she was very embarrassed by her mistake. She mentions her "50 years in journalism" because she's wondering if she is past her prime and ought to retire. She's acknowledging, either consciously or subconsciously, that age has diminished her journalism. And she has retirement on the brain.
Also, the Dobbs leaker did not go to NPR. She leaked to Politico. So if the Supreme Court is on a "mole hunt," they are doing it Elmer Fudd style. The dike has too many leaks!
I continue to suspect the Dobbs leaker was a juvenile clerk, not an old fogey way beyond her reproduction years. Pro-choice advocacy when you're 80 is cosplay, seriously. You can't possibly care that much.
Overturning Roe v. Wade made the youth frantic. The leaker imagined she was a hero. She did not consider that her actions would lead to death threats and a murder attempt on Justice Kavanaugh.
The Dobbs leak was emotional and passionate. The Nina fuck up is a senior moment.
Since we are talking about leaks:
"Once when I was reporting, Lyndon Johnson's top guy gave me the word they were looking for a successor to J. Edgar Hoover. I wrote it and the day it appeared Johnson called a press conference and appointed Hoover head of the FBI for life... And when he was done, he turned to his top guy and the President said, "Call Ben Bradlee and tell him f*** you." I took a lot of static for that--everyone said, "You did it, Bradlee, you screwed up--you stuck us with Hoover forever." I screwed up but I wasn't wrong. You guys haven't been wrong yet, is that why you're scared shitless? You should be."
I don't see the value of doing it for nefarious reasons. It was either just lazy and soppy, or it really was a leak test. Either way it was bad, but only one in a long strings of bads. Not the worst ever, just one of them. Apology was fine. I don't know what you expect.
The report of the retirement was classic confirmation bias and let's face it folks, bias makes you stupid. The co-called "journalist" wasn't properly trained to be a classic journalist but to be an activist journalist and that's a failure of the profession. What's very telling is that NPR allowed this "fake news" to be put to print without ANY level of supporting facts the validity of the story.
The editors at NPR that allowed this and the "journalist" are all morons and should be fired with no chance of working in journalism ever again, but they won't be because NPR is a terribly biased news source and doesn't give a crap about the actual truth.
The Brethren leaker was Potter Stewart. He claimed that all Thurgood Marshall did in the afternoon was watch soap operas. No Marshall clerk has confirmed this story, so I suspect he was just engaging in racist gossip.
Potter Stewart, by the way, said there was no constitutional right to birth control. And there was no constitutional right to live with your grandparent. But there is a constitutional right to kill your unborn baby. The man was 0 for 3 on his unenumerated rights jurisprudence. He's the last guy in the universe you want inventing imaginary rights.
In the movie, Potter Stewart will be in a wheelchair, leaving his leaked draft opinion in a bathroom stall, for Robert Redford, also in a wheelchair, to pick up. Maybe we could have a wheelchair chase scene? Or a bomb strapped to a wheelchair? Just spitballing.
Obviously, we need to add two hot judicial clerks for the kids. Sydney Sweeney stars in, Secret Leaker. No, that's bad. Strike that.
Sidney Sweeney stars in, Secret Opinion. No, that's too metaphysical.
Sidney Sweeney stars in, I Have a Secret Under My Pants.
And Speaking of Fake News: NPR!
https://ethicsalarms.com/2026/07/01/and-speaking-of-fake-news-npr/
Trailer for the movie.
Nina Totenberg ought to be played by Clara Peller.
Questions never asked of Nina Totenberg: "How many times have you said that? And do you ever get tired of saying it?"
Meade, thanks, but it has to be a My Sweet Lord situation. i must have heard it somewhere else. I can't believe no one else thought of it in all these months.
Gutfeld, for one. And he would follow it up by mentioning his own tattoo of Nina - on his inner thigh. You can see it if you come to Larry Kudlow's hot tub party....CC, JSM
She called it a 'rookie mistake', but it's not even that. Plus, the story she tells isn't matching the story that those around her are telling.
If there is one thing that a reporter would never do, it's to admit that they made something up. Totenburg is asking the public to believe precisely that, that the story she put out as 'Exclusive Breaking News !' was something she conjured out of thin air.
Who can believe that? An august journalist saying that she heard a few disjointed words, and then conjured up a very precise story about a particular, named conservative justice announcing his retirement at a particular time. Why, it just popped into her head. Maybe it came from a wet market.
Too late Nina. They already know who it is. Your credibility is beyond shredded, and even if it wasn't, you burned your source. Now, that's a 'rookie mistake'.
Sydney Sweeney wouldn't smuggle the Dobbs opinion out in her pants. She could get an entire volume of US Reports out of the building in her cleavage. CC, JSM
The most likely explanation is that Nina has been the conduit for SCOTUS leaks and someone (Robert’s?) purposely leaked the fake rumor to see how and where it would surface. In this believable scenario it is also not surprising that it surfaced on NPR and got there via Totenkopfburg.
"Say what really happened, "
After 50 years in journalism, why would she start now?
Wishful thinking. JournoListic pride that publishes to influence perception perchance realize a novel reality.
Funny to imagine Roberts whispering “Alito” to Sotomayor and “Thomas” to Kagan and “Gorsuch” to Jackson…
If we defund NPR, how will rural folks get emergency weather reports????
Misinformation makes an appearance again, unexpectedly from the side insisting that they stand firmly against spreading misinformation and disinformation.
But really it’s the coverup not the crime.
Occam's blade says "lazy and sloppy".
As Saint Croix points out, the Dobbs leak went to Politico (and prior to that, IIRC, there was a disclosure regarding the opinion to the WSJ attributed to Roberts). While it is certainly possible a leaker might do so to multiple publications, I don't see that being very likely as it multiplies the chances of being revealed.
I remember Nina Totenberg from her participation on TV “news magazine” shows like “Washington Week” and “Inside Washington” bs k in the day. I hated her. If some conservative panelist offers a perspective based on the real world, her patented response was to giggle and slap a look on her face that said “these conservatives are such silly, unserious people.”
Well, some of us choose to live in a real world, Nina.
My speculation is that Alito orchestrated this specifically to humiliate Sotomayer and Totenberg: He already had Sotomayor pegged as having been involved in the Dobbs leak, and so he decided to set her up by telling her in "confidence" that he was about to release a statement announcing his retirement. Soto took the bait and immediately leaked the information to Totenberg, who ran with it. While this resulted in Totenberg's complete public embarrassment (bonus!), it more importantly serves to humiliate Sotomayor because she now knows that Alito knows (along with anyone else he chooses to tell now or in the future) that she's untrustworthy.
"Say what really happened,"
Alas, no reason why anyone should care at this point. It's like asking Dan Rather what really happened, and no matter what he (or she) might say now, there's no reason to believe any of it.
Whether or not Supreme Court judges should have mandatory retirement at 75 or so, this makes a good case for mandatory retirement for Supreme Court reporters.
NPR can get similar "hallucinations" from AI for a lot less money.
I am a bit surprised at all the criticism. At 82, Nina IS the Supreme Court. She certainly has the full discretion to report whatever she wants; she has been practicing that for 50+ years. If she makes it up, well, it wouldn't be the first time! She dropped out of college; she was also fired from an early job for plagiarism, says Wiki. Better to make up your own quotes than steal someone else's, I say. She is The Woman.
But, if Nina was just the player by which Justice Alito would trap the conscience of the leaker...... the original leaker of the Dobbs ruling.... what a perfect little snare he would have crafted.
“Say what really happened,”
@Althouse, why would you believe anything she said or wrote?
She certainly has the full discretion to report whatever she wants
No wonder you write other nonsense. Libel doesn’t bother you.
"Say what really happened,"
Say my name...
"Heisenberg"
Anyone want to hazard a guess as to who performed the wedding* ceremony for Miss Nina? If you guessed Supreme Court Justice Darth Vader Ginsburg, you would be right!
* Totes second marriage
Oldster long past her prime showing it off for attention.
I had two options on where to post this.
I'm expecting a crotch shot from Nina any day now.
Why did she assume it was Alito?
Layers and layers of fact checkers.
She didn't assume it was Alito, she was told it was Alito by her "reliable source," Associate Justice X. See Dogma and Pony Show at 10:57.
--- No wonder you write other nonsense. Libel doesn’t bother you.
You missed my point, Toro. Again. But I am glad you are thinking about what I wrote in our other discussions. It is bothering you because...... you know why it is bothering you. Some part of you knows it is true and likely.
She says 50 years of reporting as if that's some kind of honor. No. It's someone who is clinging RBG-like to her job because she likes the power and perks.
Retire, old person!
Charlie @ 10:03 AM,
I presume that was a sarcastic rhetorical question. But just because not everybody is aware of this, NOAA operates a network of over 1,000 transmitters for their NOAA weather radio service, reaching over 95% of the population of the US.
And that is of course in addition to weather information provided by commercial stations, and at least some of them are subject to emergency notification requirements even if they don't normally broadcast weather news.
Can we now label USSC Stalinist/esque for this weird trick!!??
“I could go on, but I don’t know what else to say except that I am so, so sorry.
Maybe YOU could retire instead, you partisan hack.
Can Roberts fire any employee whose fingerprints are on this?
If Roberts actually wanted to do anything about it, he already would have.
He doesn't.
Saint Croix :: what makes Sydney Sweeney equal 2 hot chicks?
"Say what really happened."
<>
The explanation is stupid enough to be true. The NPR Public Editor suggests it should be cause for dismissal, but also puts blame on the editor who ran the story:
“As Totenberg said on air later in the day, "It was a rookie mistake." But had a rookie made such a mistake, he or she would have been dismissed. To make such an assumption is inexplainable. Totenberg could have sent the intern back into the court to confirm the announcement. At the very least, when moving fast, the newsroom should require a second editor help the first one confirm information.”
"WHY is Nina still working?
does she need money That bad?"
I doubt she needs the money. Among other things, she and her two sisters pocketed $5-10 million for her violinist father's Stradivarius around 10 years ago. It had been stolen in 1980 and found 35 years later, 3 years after her father had died.
So you are doing gibberish again. Got it,
“I doubt she needs the money. Among other things, she and her two sisters pocketed $5-10 million for her violinist father's Stradivarius”
So if she got 3mm according to the 4% rule that’s $120k per year. That isn’t going to make a dent in a connected dc lifestyle. She needs $ 900kpy to support herself in that environment or $23 million. So she needs to live off the NPR party scene as long as she can. But she is 82. So she does not need to think over a long horizon.
“Saint Croix said...
Sidney Sweeney stars in, I Have a Secret Under My Pants.”
I think that role was made for Dylan Mulvaney.
Saint Croix :: what makes Sydney Sweeney equal 2 hot chicks?
ha ha
I could write out the formula, but I would need a blackboard. And maybe a TV monitor.
C + C = DD
There’s a rumor that Totenberg wore kneepads for Bill Clinton’s entire second term.
“WHY is Nina still working?”
Thank God she isn’t twerking… like a fossilized Madonna.
Doubt without proof does not serve as a basis for disbelief. Trump just throws out unproven statements, and the GOP doesn't care.
But attacking Totenberg is always the right thing to do.
I have a friend who is a SCOTUS reporter, U.S. and International. He's very understandably busy, and we send each other cat pictures on his few breaks (this is his tough season 24/7).
I'll ask him what he thinks happened and he will answer when he can (he appears on international television every day this time of year: pictures of cats sitting in boxes are his one, apparently soothing distraction), but, briefly, apparently, it's a fishy story.
Not the cats in boxes. Nina. A good metaphor possibly in the making.
Rookie mistake? Which rookie? Ancient Totenburg, whose huge salary we pay? Cal Raleigh? What a bitch, not taking responsibility.
Minor point, I suppose , but I don’t believe that we fund NPR anymore. Is this not correct?
Regards,
Lori (reader_iam)
Yes, we fund NPR because virtually all schools, public and private purchase their lesson plans at the state level. Also, in recent years, public colleges have largely taken on the cost of being the location of their stations. Nonprofits need to be eliminated. They're all crooks. Only direct service provision for hospitals, and some directed medical research should be nonprofit.
Post a Comment
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 4 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith. Also: No italics, even briefly. Use asterisks for emphasis. And don't play with the format by changing fonts or using boldface or all caps. Never include more than one extra line break between paragraphs.