Anonymous wrote:I think the most likely scenario is that Alito did not leak it to the press, but he leaked it to anti-abortion activists so they would pressure Roberts to back off, and one of the anti-abortion groups leaked it to the press.
Same thing, or at least a difference without a distinction. He’s still a sieve.
Anonymous wrote:Just doing my daily check in to see if any actual evidence has emerged as to who the leaker is. No? Didn't think so. I'll check back tomorrow!
Did you do your daily check in? It seems like you might have some opportunities to be fed evidence you will enthusiastically ignore.
I will be waiting eagerly for any hard evidence to be presented. Thanks for the heads up!
I’m curious what evidence would be acceptable to you. There’s probably no recording and probably nothing in writing, so what would be hard proof other than a confession?
DP. There’s nothing at all. The party that chants “lock her up” and believes in Q’a adrenochrome harvesting demands proof and by that they mean that even if emails among Alito, Ginni and Clarence surfaced and they all admitted it under oath, pp would still not believe it.
And for that troubled soul who will get his dander up no, I don’t believe those three conspired. I’m just pointing out how Repos will believe anything their party shovels at them, proof free.
That is true. Look at all that is happening with Trump. Even "proof" will not be good enough. They will just stick their fingers in their ears and go about their way. Proving stuff to randos is to keep non Repubs busy. In reality, they never cared.
I’m the pp who asked. That’s what I feel like too. I was just curious if any of them would answer. I mean, even if they gave an answer I know the goalposts would be moved when the time comes.
Except that at least two people have responded to your question - you seem to be conveniently ignoring those answers while you and your pal concoct bizarre flights of fancy to suit your narrative. Present some actual proof. That’s not too much to ask, and you know it. If an outlandish claim was being made about one of the liberal justices, you’d say exactly the same thing. Talk about moving goalposts.
The two responses between my question and that response were agreeing with me, not saying what’s acceptable proof from a conservative perspective. I quoted one of the responses. I didn’t ignore them. I really don’t understand what you’re trying to say. If there are answers to my question, after I asked it and before my 11:53 post, I don’t see them. Sorry.
22:51 states very clearly that they would be happy to admit they were wrong if it turns out they were. I wasn’t talking about responses to your 11:53 post, just that if you’ve read the whole thread, you’re ignoring that post and others. It’s just one big circle jerk here.
Then they didn’t actually respond to my question, which is what you said. And saying they’ll admit they’re wrong if it’s proved to their satisfaction is different from saying what proof they’ll accept as satisfactory. So basically none of what you said was true, but I’m the circle jerking, truth ignoring poster, but you’re the honest, attention to detail, unbiased poster? 😂
Yes. Yes you are. Continuing to childishly insist someone is guilty, with not a shred of real evidence, makes you "truth ignoring," and more. I'll wait until all the facts and proof come out, one way or the other. Feel free to continue your usual rampage, claiming people are guilty with absolutely no hard evidence.
I never said he was guilty. I asked what would be acceptable proof considering they probably didn’t record their own conversations. You said my question was addressed and it wasn’t. I even apologized if I had overlooked a response, but I hadn’t. You then called me names and said I did some things I didn’t. And now you’re saying I’m insisting Ali to use guilty with no hard evidence. We’ve come full circle. What evidence would you accept, given that absolute proof (a video or audio recording) probably doesn’t exist. Would it take a confession from someone involved? Confessions from all involved? Someone on the inside referencing it in an email and no one denying it until the email is public? All I’ve been asking is what would it take to prove it? You’ve made false accusations and moved the goalposts instead of answering so I assume that either nothing would prove it or whatever standard you set will change if it’s ever met. And honestly, I’d respect you more if you came out and said nothing could prove it to me short of a video, not even confessions from all involved because confessions could be coerced. I’d think you’re nutty, but I’d respect your self awareness and honesty.
Interesting. I've read and re-read all my responses. Not once did I call you a name - how bizarre to make that claim when anyone can read the posts and see that you are wrong. As for proof, I have stated several times that until some hard evidence is presented, you have no way to prove Alito is the leaker. An email, a confession from the parties involved - those would be considered evidence in a court of law. What you have is an accusation - by ONE person - and a whole lock of rabid, partisan speculation (and clearly, wishful thinking).
And speaking of moving goalposts - you seem to be a master at it. Every time someone answers your question, as I have done several times, YOU either ignore it or twist it to suit your narrative. I'm going to bold my answer for you so you can refer back to it the next time you want to pretend it hasn't been answered. You're welcome.
Anonymous wrote:Just doing my daily check in to see if any actual evidence has emerged as to who the leaker is. No? Didn't think so. I'll check back tomorrow!
Did you do your daily check in? It seems like you might have some opportunities to be fed evidence you will enthusiastically ignore.
I will be waiting eagerly for any hard evidence to be presented. Thanks for the heads up!
I’m curious what evidence would be acceptable to you. There’s probably no recording and probably nothing in writing, so what would be hard proof other than a confession?
DP. There’s nothing at all. The party that chants “lock her up” and believes in Q’a adrenochrome harvesting demands proof and by that they mean that even if emails among Alito, Ginni and Clarence surfaced and they all admitted it under oath, pp would still not believe it.
And for that troubled soul who will get his dander up no, I don’t believe those three conspired. I’m just pointing out how Repos will believe anything their party shovels at them, proof free.
That is true. Look at all that is happening with Trump. Even "proof" will not be good enough. They will just stick their fingers in their ears and go about their way. Proving stuff to randos is to keep non Repubs busy. In reality, they never cared.
I’m the pp who asked. That’s what I feel like too. I was just curious if any of them would answer. I mean, even if they gave an answer I know the goalposts would be moved when the time comes.
Except that at least two people have responded to your question - you seem to be conveniently ignoring those answers while you and your pal concoct bizarre flights of fancy to suit your narrative. Present some actual proof. That’s not too much to ask, and you know it. If an outlandish claim was being made about one of the liberal justices, you’d say exactly the same thing. Talk about moving goalposts.
The two responses between my question and that response were agreeing with me, not saying what’s acceptable proof from a conservative perspective. I quoted one of the responses. I didn’t ignore them. I really don’t understand what you’re trying to say. If there are answers to my question, after I asked it and before my 11:53 post, I don’t see them. Sorry.
22:51 states very clearly that they would be happy to admit they were wrong if it turns out they were. I wasn’t talking about responses to your 11:53 post, just that if you’ve read the whole thread, you’re ignoring that post and others. It’s just one big circle jerk here.
Then they didn’t actually respond to my question, which is what you said. And saying they’ll admit they’re wrong if it’s proved to their satisfaction is different from saying what proof they’ll accept as satisfactory. So basically none of what you said was true, but I’m the circle jerking, truth ignoring poster, but you’re the honest, attention to detail, unbiased poster? 😂
Yes. Yes you are. Continuing to childishly insist someone is guilty, with not a shred of real evidence, makes you "truth ignoring," and more. I'll wait until all the facts and proof come out, one way or the other. Feel free to continue your usual rampage, claiming people are guilty with absolutely no hard evidence.
I never said he was guilty. I asked what would be acceptable proof considering they probably didn’t record their own conversations. You said my question was addressed and it wasn’t. I even apologized if I had overlooked a response, but I hadn’t. You then called me names and said I did some things I didn’t. And now you’re saying I’m insisting Ali to use guilty with no hard evidence. We’ve come full circle. What evidence would you accept, given that absolute proof (a video or audio recording) probably doesn’t exist. Would it take a confession from someone involved? Confessions from all involved? Someone on the inside referencing it in an email and no one denying it until the email is public? All I’ve been asking is what would it take to prove it? You’ve made false accusations and moved the goalposts instead of answering so I assume that either nothing would prove it or whatever standard you set will change if it’s ever met. And honestly, I’d respect you more if you came out and said nothing could prove it to me short of a video, not even confessions from all involved because confessions could be coerced. I’d think you’re nutty, but I’d respect your self awareness and honesty.
Interesting. I've read and re-read all my responses. Not once did I call you a name - how bizarre to make that claim when anyone can read the posts and see that you are wrong. As for proof, I have stated several times that until some hard evidence is presented, you have no way to prove Alito is the leaker. An email, a confession from the parties involved - those would be considered evidence in a court of law. What you have is an accusation - by ONE person - and a whole lock of rabid, partisan speculation (and clearly, wishful thinking).
And speaking of moving goalposts - you seem to be a master at it. Every time someone answers your question, as I have done several times, YOU either ignore it or twist it to suit your narrative. I'm going to bold my answer for you so you can refer back to it the next time you want to pretend it hasn't been answered. You're welcome.
I guess I'm starting to understand the mindset of some people who continue to think Trump is innocent, too, because he hasn't tweeted specifically: I AM GUILTY OF EVERYTHING THEY SAY, JUST TO BE CLEAR, YES, I DID IT
Did you listen to The Daily podcast about Alito leaking the Hobby Lobby decision? You should. It's very credible.
Anonymous wrote:Just doing my daily check in to see if any actual evidence has emerged as to who the leaker is. No? Didn't think so. I'll check back tomorrow!
Did you do your daily check in? It seems like you might have some opportunities to be fed evidence you will enthusiastically ignore.
I will be waiting eagerly for any hard evidence to be presented. Thanks for the heads up!
I’m curious what evidence would be acceptable to you. There’s probably no recording and probably nothing in writing, so what would be hard proof other than a confession?
DP. There’s nothing at all. The party that chants “lock her up” and believes in Q’a adrenochrome harvesting demands proof and by that they mean that even if emails among Alito, Ginni and Clarence surfaced and they all admitted it under oath, pp would still not believe it.
And for that troubled soul who will get his dander up no, I don’t believe those three conspired. I’m just pointing out how Repos will believe anything their party shovels at them, proof free.
That is true. Look at all that is happening with Trump. Even "proof" will not be good enough. They will just stick their fingers in their ears and go about their way. Proving stuff to randos is to keep non Repubs busy. In reality, they never cared.
I’m the pp who asked. That’s what I feel like too. I was just curious if any of them would answer. I mean, even if they gave an answer I know the goalposts would be moved when the time comes.
Except that at least two people have responded to your question - you seem to be conveniently ignoring those answers while you and your pal concoct bizarre flights of fancy to suit your narrative. Present some actual proof. That’s not too much to ask, and you know it. If an outlandish claim was being made about one of the liberal justices, you’d say exactly the same thing. Talk about moving goalposts.
The two responses between my question and that response were agreeing with me, not saying what’s acceptable proof from a conservative perspective. I quoted one of the responses. I didn’t ignore them. I really don’t understand what you’re trying to say. If there are answers to my question, after I asked it and before my 11:53 post, I don’t see them. Sorry.
22:51 states very clearly that they would be happy to admit they were wrong if it turns out they were. I wasn’t talking about responses to your 11:53 post, just that if you’ve read the whole thread, you’re ignoring that post and others. It’s just one big circle jerk here.
Then they didn’t actually respond to my question, which is what you said. And saying they’ll admit they’re wrong if it’s proved to their satisfaction is different from saying what proof they’ll accept as satisfactory. So basically none of what you said was true, but I’m the circle jerking, truth ignoring poster, but you’re the honest, attention to detail, unbiased poster? 😂
Yes. Yes you are. Continuing to childishly insist someone is guilty, with not a shred of real evidence, makes you "truth ignoring," and more. I'll wait until all the facts and proof come out, one way or the other. Feel free to continue your usual rampage, claiming people are guilty with absolutely no hard evidence.
I never said he was guilty. I asked what would be acceptable proof considering they probably didn’t record their own conversations. You said my question was addressed and it wasn’t. I even apologized if I had overlooked a response, but I hadn’t. You then called me names and said I did some things I didn’t. And now you’re saying I’m insisting Ali to use guilty with no hard evidence. We’ve come full circle. What evidence would you accept, given that absolute proof (a video or audio recording) probably doesn’t exist. Would it take a confession from someone involved? Confessions from all involved? Someone on the inside referencing it in an email and no one denying it until the email is public? All I’ve been asking is what would it take to prove it? You’ve made false accusations and moved the goalposts instead of answering so I assume that either nothing would prove it or whatever standard you set will change if it’s ever met. And honestly, I’d respect you more if you came out and said nothing could prove it to me short of a video, not even confessions from all involved because confessions could be coerced. I’d think you’re nutty, but I’d respect your self awareness and honesty.
Interesting. I've read and re-read all my responses. Not once did I call you a name - how bizarre to make that claim when anyone can read the posts and see that you are wrong. As for proof, I have stated several times that until some hard evidence is presented, you have no way to prove Alito is the leaker. An email, a confession from the parties involved - those would be considered evidence in a court of law. What you have is an accusation - by ONE person - and a whole lock of rabid, partisan speculation (and clearly, wishful thinking).
And speaking of moving goalposts - you seem to be a master at it. Every time someone answers your question, as I have done several times, YOU either ignore it or twist it to suit your narrative. I'm going to bold my answer for you so you can refer back to it the next time you want to pretend it hasn't been answered. You're welcome.
Those aren’t the only things considered evidence in a court of law.
Anonymous wrote:Just doing my daily check in to see if any actual evidence has emerged as to who the leaker is. No? Didn't think so. I'll check back tomorrow!
Did you do your daily check in? It seems like you might have some opportunities to be fed evidence you will enthusiastically ignore.
I will be waiting eagerly for any hard evidence to be presented. Thanks for the heads up!
I’m curious what evidence would be acceptable to you. There’s probably no recording and probably nothing in writing, so what would be hard proof other than a confession?
DP. There’s nothing at all. The party that chants “lock her up” and believes in Q’a adrenochrome harvesting demands proof and by that they mean that even if emails among Alito, Ginni and Clarence surfaced and they all admitted it under oath, pp would still not believe it.
And for that troubled soul who will get his dander up no, I don’t believe those three conspired. I’m just pointing out how Repos will believe anything their party shovels at them, proof free.
That is true. Look at all that is happening with Trump. Even "proof" will not be good enough. They will just stick their fingers in their ears and go about their way. Proving stuff to randos is to keep non Repubs busy. In reality, they never cared.
I’m the pp who asked. That’s what I feel like too. I was just curious if any of them would answer. I mean, even if they gave an answer I know the goalposts would be moved when the time comes.
Except that at least two people have responded to your question - you seem to be conveniently ignoring those answers while you and your pal concoct bizarre flights of fancy to suit your narrative. Present some actual proof. That’s not too much to ask, and you know it. If an outlandish claim was being made about one of the liberal justices, you’d say exactly the same thing. Talk about moving goalposts.
The two responses between my question and that response were agreeing with me, not saying what’s acceptable proof from a conservative perspective. I quoted one of the responses. I didn’t ignore them. I really don’t understand what you’re trying to say. If there are answers to my question, after I asked it and before my 11:53 post, I don’t see them. Sorry.
22:51 states very clearly that they would be happy to admit they were wrong if it turns out they were. I wasn’t talking about responses to your 11:53 post, just that if you’ve read the whole thread, you’re ignoring that post and others. It’s just one big circle jerk here.
Then they didn’t actually respond to my question, which is what you said. And saying they’ll admit they’re wrong if it’s proved to their satisfaction is different from saying what proof they’ll accept as satisfactory. So basically none of what you said was true, but I’m the circle jerking, truth ignoring poster, but you’re the honest, attention to detail, unbiased poster? 😂
Yes. Yes you are. Continuing to childishly insist someone is guilty, with not a shred of real evidence, makes you "truth ignoring," and more. I'll wait until all the facts and proof come out, one way or the other. Feel free to continue your usual rampage, claiming people are guilty with absolutely no hard evidence.
I never said he was guilty. I asked what would be acceptable proof considering they probably didn’t record their own conversations. You said my question was addressed and it wasn’t. I even apologized if I had overlooked a response, but I hadn’t. You then called me names and said I did some things I didn’t. And now you’re saying I’m insisting Ali to use guilty with no hard evidence. We’ve come full circle. What evidence would you accept, given that absolute proof (a video or audio recording) probably doesn’t exist. Would it take a confession from someone involved? Confessions from all involved? Someone on the inside referencing it in an email and no one denying it until the email is public? All I’ve been asking is what would it take to prove it? You’ve made false accusations and moved the goalposts instead of answering so I assume that either nothing would prove it or whatever standard you set will change if it’s ever met. And honestly, I’d respect you more if you came out and said nothing could prove it to me short of a video, not even confessions from all involved because confessions could be coerced. I’d think you’re nutty, but I’d respect your self awareness and honesty.
Interesting. I've read and re-read all my responses. Not once did I call you a name - how bizarre to make that claim when anyone can read the posts and see that you are wrong. As for proof, I have stated several times that until some hard evidence is presented, you have no way to prove Alito is the leaker. An email, a confession from the parties involved - those would be considered evidence in a court of law. What you have is an accusation - by ONE person - and a whole lock of rabid, partisan speculation (and clearly, wishful thinking).
And speaking of moving goalposts - you seem to be a master at it. Every time someone answers your question, as I have done several times, YOU either ignore it or twist it to suit your narrative. I'm going to bold my answer for you so you can refer back to it the next time you want to pretend it hasn't been answered. You're welcome.
I guess I'm starting to understand the mindset of some people who continue to think Trump is innocent, too, because he hasn't tweeted specifically: I AM GUILTY OF EVERYTHING THEY SAY, JUST TO BE CLEAR, YES, I DID IT
Did you listen to The Daily podcast about Alito leaking the Hobby Lobby decision? You should. It's very credible.
Off topic here but he actually did just post specifically that he’s guilty of stealing the documents. 🫠
Anonymous wrote:Just doing my daily check in to see if any actual evidence has emerged as to who the leaker is. No? Didn't think so. I'll check back tomorrow!
Did you do your daily check in? It seems like you might have some opportunities to be fed evidence you will enthusiastically ignore.
I will be waiting eagerly for any hard evidence to be presented. Thanks for the heads up!
I’m curious what evidence would be acceptable to you. There’s probably no recording and probably nothing in writing, so what would be hard proof other than a confession?
DP. There’s nothing at all. The party that chants “lock her up” and believes in Q’a adrenochrome harvesting demands proof and by that they mean that even if emails among Alito, Ginni and Clarence surfaced and they all admitted it under oath, pp would still not believe it.
And for that troubled soul who will get his dander up no, I don’t believe those three conspired. I’m just pointing out how Repos will believe anything their party shovels at them, proof free.
That is true. Look at all that is happening with Trump. Even "proof" will not be good enough. They will just stick their fingers in their ears and go about their way. Proving stuff to randos is to keep non Repubs busy. In reality, they never cared.
I’m the pp who asked. That’s what I feel like too. I was just curious if any of them would answer. I mean, even if they gave an answer I know the goalposts would be moved when the time comes.
Except that at least two people have responded to your question - you seem to be conveniently ignoring those answers while you and your pal concoct bizarre flights of fancy to suit your narrative. Present some actual proof. That’s not too much to ask, and you know it. If an outlandish claim was being made about one of the liberal justices, you’d say exactly the same thing. Talk about moving goalposts.
The two responses between my question and that response were agreeing with me, not saying what’s acceptable proof from a conservative perspective. I quoted one of the responses. I didn’t ignore them. I really don’t understand what you’re trying to say. If there are answers to my question, after I asked it and before my 11:53 post, I don’t see them. Sorry.
22:51 states very clearly that they would be happy to admit they were wrong if it turns out they were. I wasn’t talking about responses to your 11:53 post, just that if you’ve read the whole thread, you’re ignoring that post and others. It’s just one big circle jerk here.
Then they didn’t actually respond to my question, which is what you said. And saying they’ll admit they’re wrong if it’s proved to their satisfaction is different from saying what proof they’ll accept as satisfactory. So basically none of what you said was true, but I’m the circle jerking, truth ignoring poster, but you’re the honest, attention to detail, unbiased poster? 😂
Yes. Yes you are. Continuing to childishly insist someone is guilty, with not a shred of real evidence, makes you "truth ignoring," and more. I'll wait until all the facts and proof come out, one way or the other. Feel free to continue your usual rampage, claiming people are guilty with absolutely no hard evidence.
I never said he was guilty. I asked what would be acceptable proof considering they probably didn’t record their own conversations. You said my question was addressed and it wasn’t. I even apologized if I had overlooked a response, but I hadn’t. You then called me names and said I did some things I didn’t. And now you’re saying I’m insisting Ali to use guilty with no hard evidence. We’ve come full circle. What evidence would you accept, given that absolute proof (a video or audio recording) probably doesn’t exist. Would it take a confession from someone involved? Confessions from all involved? Someone on the inside referencing it in an email and no one denying it until the email is public? All I’ve been asking is what would it take to prove it? You’ve made false accusations and moved the goalposts instead of answering so I assume that either nothing would prove it or whatever standard you set will change if it’s ever met. And honestly, I’d respect you more if you came out and said nothing could prove it to me short of a video, not even confessions from all involved because confessions could be coerced. I’d think you’re nutty, but I’d respect your self awareness and honesty.
Interesting. I've read and re-read all my responses. Not once did I call you a name - how bizarre to make that claim when anyone can read the posts and see that you are wrong. As for proof, I have stated several times that until some hard evidence is presented, you have no way to prove Alito is the leaker. An email, a confession from the parties involved - those would be considered evidence in a court of law. What you have is an accusation - by ONE person - and a whole lock of rabid, partisan speculation (and clearly, wishful thinking).
And speaking of moving goalposts - you seem to be a master at it. Every time someone answers your question, as I have done several times, YOU either ignore it or twist it to suit your narrative. I'm going to bold my answer for you so you can refer back to it the next time you want to pretend it hasn't been answered. You're welcome.
Those aren’t the only things considered evidence in a court of law.
Correct. And with all the back and forth I don't know who I'm responding to but there is plenty of other evidence, even beside the email. Testimony, including first-hand involvement, would be admissible. And there is PLENTY to indicate that Alito leaked the Hobby Lobby case, as well as likely leaked the Dobbs case.
Again, for the person with their head up their a--, go listen to The Daily podcast.
Anonymous wrote:Still seems like Roberts has the results and hasn’t released them. Right wingers lost their damn minds over the leak back then but now they’re silent. Because they know it’s one of their own.
They calmed down because the decision was released, meaning the leaker failed. They were mad that Roberts held the decision, giving the leaker the chance to succeed in his attempts.
Also that Roberts appeared to give the leaker time to get his story straight, allowing all the clerks to get lawyers.
Anonymous wrote:Just doing my daily check in to see if any actual evidence has emerged as to who the leaker is. No? Didn't think so. I'll check back tomorrow!
Did you do your daily check in? It seems like you might have some opportunities to be fed evidence you will enthusiastically ignore.
I will be waiting eagerly for any hard evidence to be presented. Thanks for the heads up!
I’m curious what evidence would be acceptable to you. There’s probably no recording and probably nothing in writing, so what would be hard proof other than a confession?
DP. There’s nothing at all. The party that chants “lock her up” and believes in Q’a adrenochrome harvesting demands proof and by that they mean that even if emails among Alito, Ginni and Clarence surfaced and they all admitted it under oath, pp would still not believe it.
And for that troubled soul who will get his dander up no, I don’t believe those three conspired. I’m just pointing out how Repos will believe anything their party shovels at them, proof free.
That is true. Look at all that is happening with Trump. Even "proof" will not be good enough. They will just stick their fingers in their ears and go about their way. Proving stuff to randos is to keep non Repubs busy. In reality, they never cared.
I’m the pp who asked. That’s what I feel like too. I was just curious if any of them would answer. I mean, even if they gave an answer I know the goalposts would be moved when the time comes.
Except that at least two people have responded to your question - you seem to be conveniently ignoring those answers while you and your pal concoct bizarre flights of fancy to suit your narrative. Present some actual proof. That’s not too much to ask, and you know it. If an outlandish claim was being made about one of the liberal justices, you’d say exactly the same thing. Talk about moving goalposts.
The two responses between my question and that response were agreeing with me, not saying what’s acceptable proof from a conservative perspective. I quoted one of the responses. I didn’t ignore them. I really don’t understand what you’re trying to say. If there are answers to my question, after I asked it and before my 11:53 post, I don’t see them. Sorry.
22:51 states very clearly that they would be happy to admit they were wrong if it turns out they were. I wasn’t talking about responses to your 11:53 post, just that if you’ve read the whole thread, you’re ignoring that post and others. It’s just one big circle jerk here.
Then they didn’t actually respond to my question, which is what you said. And saying they’ll admit they’re wrong if it’s proved to their satisfaction is different from saying what proof they’ll accept as satisfactory. So basically none of what you said was true, but I’m the circle jerking, truth ignoring poster, but you’re the honest, attention to detail, unbiased poster? 😂
Yes. Yes you are. Continuing to childishly insist someone is guilty, with not a shred of real evidence, makes you "truth ignoring," and more. I'll wait until all the facts and proof come out, one way or the other. Feel free to continue your usual rampage, claiming people are guilty with absolutely no hard evidence.
I never said he was guilty. I asked what would be acceptable proof considering they probably didn’t record their own conversations. You said my question was addressed and it wasn’t. I even apologized if I had overlooked a response, but I hadn’t. You then called me names and said I did some things I didn’t. And now you’re saying I’m insisting Ali to use guilty with no hard evidence. We’ve come full circle. What evidence would you accept, given that absolute proof (a video or audio recording) probably doesn’t exist. Would it take a confession from someone involved? Confessions from all involved? Someone on the inside referencing it in an email and no one denying it until the email is public? All I’ve been asking is what would it take to prove it? You’ve made false accusations and moved the goalposts instead of answering so I assume that either nothing would prove it or whatever standard you set will change if it’s ever met. And honestly, I’d respect you more if you came out and said nothing could prove it to me short of a video, not even confessions from all involved because confessions could be coerced. I’d think you’re nutty, but I’d respect your self awareness and honesty.
Interesting. I've read and re-read all my responses. Not once did I call you a name - how bizarre to make that claim when anyone can read the posts and see that you are wrong. As for proof, I have stated several times that until some hard evidence is presented, you have no way to prove Alito is the leaker. An email, a confession from the parties involved - those would be considered evidence in a court of law. What you have is an accusation - by ONE person - and a whole lock of rabid, partisan speculation (and clearly, wishful thinking).
And speaking of moving goalposts - you seem to be a master at it. Every time someone answers your question, as I have done several times, YOU either ignore it or twist it to suit your narrative. I'm going to bold my answer for you so you can refer back to it the next time you want to pretend it hasn't been answered. You're welcome.
I guess I'm starting to understand the mindset of some people who continue to think Trump is innocent, too, because he hasn't tweeted specifically: I AM GUILTY OF EVERYTHING THEY SAY, JUST TO BE CLEAR, YES, I DID IT
Did you listen to The Daily podcast about Alito leaking the Hobby Lobby decision? You should. It's very credible.
Right - a NYT podcast has no bias. C’mon, man.
So you don’t believe anything that came out of the Harvey Weinstein investigation? Because these are the same reporters.
Someone defending Alito (and who would probably defend overturning Roe) likely thinks Weinstein did nothing wrong. Men good, women bad.
Anonymous wrote:Still seems like Roberts has the results and hasn’t released them. Right wingers lost their damn minds over the leak back then but now they’re silent. Because they know it’s one of their own.
They calmed down because the decision was released, meaning the leaker failed. They were mad that Roberts held the decision, giving the leaker the chance to succeed in his attempts.
Also that Roberts appeared to give the leaker time to get his story straight, allowing all the clerks to get lawyers.
This is nonsense. Everyone knew the decision was coming out in June based on when the oral arguments were.
Anonymous wrote:Just doing my daily check in to see if any actual evidence has emerged as to who the leaker is. No? Didn't think so. I'll check back tomorrow!
Did you do your daily check in? It seems like you might have some opportunities to be fed evidence you will enthusiastically ignore.
I will be waiting eagerly for any hard evidence to be presented. Thanks for the heads up!
I’m curious what evidence would be acceptable to you. There’s probably no recording and probably nothing in writing, so what would be hard proof other than a confession?
DP. There’s nothing at all. The party that chants “lock her up” and believes in Q’a adrenochrome harvesting demands proof and by that they mean that even if emails among Alito, Ginni and Clarence surfaced and they all admitted it under oath, pp would still not believe it.
And for that troubled soul who will get his dander up no, I don’t believe those three conspired. I’m just pointing out how Repos will believe anything their party shovels at them, proof free.
That is true. Look at all that is happening with Trump. Even "proof" will not be good enough. They will just stick their fingers in their ears and go about their way. Proving stuff to randos is to keep non Repubs busy. In reality, they never cared.
I’m the pp who asked. That’s what I feel like too. I was just curious if any of them would answer. I mean, even if they gave an answer I know the goalposts would be moved when the time comes.
Except that at least two people have responded to your question - you seem to be conveniently ignoring those answers while you and your pal concoct bizarre flights of fancy to suit your narrative. Present some actual proof. That’s not too much to ask, and you know it. If an outlandish claim was being made about one of the liberal justices, you’d say exactly the same thing. Talk about moving goalposts.
The two responses between my question and that response were agreeing with me, not saying what’s acceptable proof from a conservative perspective. I quoted one of the responses. I didn’t ignore them. I really don’t understand what you’re trying to say. If there are answers to my question, after I asked it and before my 11:53 post, I don’t see them. Sorry.
22:51 states very clearly that they would be happy to admit they were wrong if it turns out they were. I wasn’t talking about responses to your 11:53 post, just that if you’ve read the whole thread, you’re ignoring that post and others. It’s just one big circle jerk here.
Then they didn’t actually respond to my question, which is what you said. And saying they’ll admit they’re wrong if it’s proved to their satisfaction is different from saying what proof they’ll accept as satisfactory. So basically none of what you said was true, but I’m the circle jerking, truth ignoring poster, but you’re the honest, attention to detail, unbiased poster? 😂
Yes. Yes you are. Continuing to childishly insist someone is guilty, with not a shred of real evidence, makes you "truth ignoring," and more. I'll wait until all the facts and proof come out, one way or the other. Feel free to continue your usual rampage, claiming people are guilty with absolutely no hard evidence.
I never said he was guilty. I asked what would be acceptable proof considering they probably didn’t record their own conversations. You said my question was addressed and it wasn’t. I even apologized if I had overlooked a response, but I hadn’t. You then called me names and said I did some things I didn’t. And now you’re saying I’m insisting Ali to use guilty with no hard evidence. We’ve come full circle. What evidence would you accept, given that absolute proof (a video or audio recording) probably doesn’t exist. Would it take a confession from someone involved? Confessions from all involved? Someone on the inside referencing it in an email and no one denying it until the email is public? All I’ve been asking is what would it take to prove it? You’ve made false accusations and moved the goalposts instead of answering so I assume that either nothing would prove it or whatever standard you set will change if it’s ever met. And honestly, I’d respect you more if you came out and said nothing could prove it to me short of a video, not even confessions from all involved because confessions could be coerced. I’d think you’re nutty, but I’d respect your self awareness and honesty.
Interesting. I've read and re-read all my responses. Not once did I call you a name - how bizarre to make that claim when anyone can read the posts and see that you are wrong. As for proof, I have stated several times that until some hard evidence is presented, you have no way to prove Alito is the leaker. An email, a confession from the parties involved - those would be considered evidence in a court of law. What you have is an accusation - by ONE person - and a whole lock of rabid, partisan speculation (and clearly, wishful thinking).
And speaking of moving goalposts - you seem to be a master at it. Every time someone answers your question, as I have done several times, YOU either ignore it or twist it to suit your narrative. I'm going to bold my answer for you so you can refer back to it the next time you want to pretend it hasn't been answered. You're welcome.
I guess I'm starting to understand the mindset of some people who continue to think Trump is innocent, too, because he hasn't tweeted specifically: I AM GUILTY OF EVERYTHING THEY SAY, JUST TO BE CLEAR, YES, I DID IT
Did you listen to The Daily podcast about Alito leaking the Hobby Lobby decision? You should. It's very credible.
Right - a NYT podcast has no bias. C’mon, man.
Dude. The person on the podcast was an anti-abortion activist who coordinated the infiltration mission - essentially a spy operation - to cultivate friendships with Sup Ct justices. You should really listen to his account.
Anyway - you obviously have your position here. No point in trying to get through.
Just as you have yours. You're right - no point in trying to get through to YOU.
Anonymous wrote:Still seems like Roberts has the results and hasn’t released them. Right wingers lost their damn minds over the leak back then but now they’re silent. Because they know it’s one of their own.
They calmed down because the decision was released, meaning the leaker failed. They were mad that Roberts held the decision, giving the leaker the chance to succeed in his attempts.
Also that Roberts appeared to give the leaker time to get his story straight, allowing all the clerks to get lawyers.
Anonymrous wrote:Alito is an embarrassment. Yesterday he was "joking" about black kids wearing KKK outfits
Hint: that’s called SARCASM. Get a clue.
Joking about Black children wearing KKK outfits is inappropriate from anyone but reprehensible coming from a supreme court justice. I wonder how "high tech lynching" Thomas felt about this "joke' from his good ole buddy.
The other justice asked about a black kid wearing a KKK outfit, and that was his response. It is no big deal, just manufactured 'outrage'.
No. Jackson had asked whether a white mall Santa could refuse to take photos with Black kids. Alito stupidly said what about a Black Santa who refuses to take photos with kids wearing KKK outfits, as if that is anyway the same thing. The response was that wearing a costume is not a protected class, while race is. Jackson added that kids wearing KKK costumes aren’t necessarily white. Then Alito made his dumb joke and guffawed like a racist idiot.
So his analogy was racist and stupid and his joke was racist and stupid. He is racist and stupid.
Everyone knows this case is just all BS? The “website designer” has never designed a website. She just thinks she may want to design websites some time in the future and is scared she will have to design a site for gays.
Standing doesn’t apply when the court has an agenda to ram through
Anonymrous wrote:Alito is an embarrassment. Yesterday he was "joking" about black kids wearing KKK outfits
Hint: that’s called SARCASM. Get a clue.
Joking about Black children wearing KKK outfits is inappropriate from anyone but reprehensible coming from a supreme court justice. I wonder how "high tech lynching" Thomas felt about this "joke' from his good ole buddy.
The other justice asked about a black kid wearing a KKK outfit, and that was his response. It is no big deal, just manufactured 'outrage'.
No. Jackson had asked whether a white mall Santa could refuse to take photos with Black kids. Alito stupidly said what about a Black Santa who refuses to take photos with kids wearing KKK outfits, as if that is anyway the same thing. The response was that wearing a costume is not a protected class, while race is. Jackson added that kids wearing KKK costumes aren’t necessarily white. Then Alito made his dumb joke and guffawed like a racist idiot.
So his analogy was racist and stupid and his joke was racist and stupid. He is racist and stupid.
Everyone knows this case is just all BS? The “website designer” has never designed a website. She just thinks she may want to design websites some time in the future and is scared she will have to design a site for gays.
Anonymous wrote:Still seems like Roberts has the results and hasn’t released them. Right wingers lost their damn minds over the leak back then but now they’re silent. Because they know it’s one of their own.
They calmed down because the decision was released, meaning the leaker failed. They were mad that Roberts held the decision, giving the leaker the chance to succeed in his attempts.
Also that Roberts appeared to give the leaker time to get his story straight, allowing all the clerks to get lawyers.
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
