3 thoughts on “USA: Christine Niles on the Supreme Court Leak”

  1. Thank you ladies for your always interesting discussion.
    I watched and read the account of the consecration by Pope Francis and although genuinely moved by it and his gentle words to we sinners to place ourselves at the feet of God in reconciliation, it was nevertheless, for me at least, clouded by a crushingly sad reality.

    I have found in these pages, only recently, answers which finally settled many questions that have haunted me concerning the current Papacy. Is it legitimate? If not, why do prelates address Pope Francis as His Holiness? If not legitimate, can we speak against the Pope, etc. etc. All of it, of course, due to the manner in which he was elected.

    I would love to believe that the consecration of Russia does meet all of Our Lady’s requirements, however, if Pope Francis is not our legitimate Pope and Benedict XVI still is, then really it could be said to be a dreadful dog and pony show -worse, I hope not making a mockery of Our Lady’s request. It pains me to write this, as I know it has the capacity to darken, what should be an extremely important and joyous event in the history of the Church and for the people of Russia and Ukraine.

    There is another thing to consider too, however, I shall post it in a follow-up post, given this platform, for some reason, does not provide paragraph breaks, creating an awful wall of text, when a post is longer than average. /Cont. below ….

  2. /Cont …

    The second consideration is the Third Secret of Fatima and the necessity for it to be revealed first, before the consecration of Russia. Rather than my attempting to explain the relevance between the two, I provide a link to a video below, in which Father Gruner makes an observations concerning that connection.


    In relation to whether or not Pope Francis is the legitimate Pope, below is a link to a page on this website, which clarified that question for me, for which I am very grateful.


    It was particularly re-assuring to understand the reason why Pope Benedict cannot speak on this question to re-assure the faithful, his silence often troubling to me, but now I understand.

    Thank you for your time and contributions and God Bless.

  3. On the leaking of Justice Alito’s draft Opinion, your comments are so relevant concerning how it endangers the safety of the five Conservative Supreme Court Justices. Perhaps not so much Chief Justice Roberts who has been known to vacillate at times on Conservative, Constitutional legal interpretations.

    My thoughts were, for what they’re worth, exactly the same as your own regarding the mob outside of the Court, their placards so quickly prepared, the appearance of the political class from the left to make statements so prompt, the barricades going up around the Court before the mob arrived, etc., all in such a short time after the leak and well organised – as you said, indicating it was pre-planned. Obviously that then points to the source of the leak originating from the left side of politics.

    As to the question of why it was leaked – certainly an attempt to intimidate and influence the final Opinion, but possibly too to move the public’s focus away from other very negative news, extremely damning to the Democrat Party. The just released Report on the serious implications of the Pfizer Vaccine is horrific – only 12 to 15% efficacy against Covid with fatalities, coronary risks, blood clotting and other serious complications caused by it, all known to Pfizer before it released the vaccine.

    As well, the Dinesh D’Souza’s film “2,000 Mules” opened in the same week. To create a news distraction is historically a ploy of the Fake News to divert public attention away from news unfavourable to its politic, unashamedly unofficial lobbyists of the Democratic Party.

Comments are closed.