Wasn't a slight to either person. I think of your politics as considerably more progressive than Monty's politics, but maybe I am confusing you with someone else.

Why is this so hard to understand? If O.A.K. is familiar with both Monteroy and Tooth as posters, then it stands to reason that O.A.K. can make an educated guess about whether they are the same person.

If O.A.K. is familiar with you as a poster, and entirely unfamiliar with Wiki, then it stands to reason that O.A.K. will be unable to make an educated guess about whether you are Wiki.

Im not even familiar with Juice as a poster so of course have no clue if he is Wiki or whatever.

As I tried explaining, I can only call out what I actually know.

He said he knows. No educated guesses anywhere. Why is this so hard to understand?

This really got you worked up, which is ironic as this area was not even the one I did to really try to work both (heh) of you up.

I do not care in the slightest if you think I am also several other posters. You can believe what you like, though you said that as a weird response to my suggestion that you and Wiki are the same poster based on the fact that you both (heh) post in the same way, in the same threads, use the exact same insults (Montyboy for example) and use the same snip/misquote thing that pretty much no other poster uses on this forum.

This account of yours was also created in the Internet Poker riggie thread to mock an arrogant riggie that had Juice in his name and it was created at a time when that poster and Wiki were going at each other. Here is the link, and note the chat that was going on at the time.

https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/s...ostcount=92259

Does that definitively prove both of you are the same? Well, I guess that is always a matter of judgment, and it is a topic that really nobody cares about as gimmicks like your account are allowed here. This gimmick account of yours seems like a more PG-13 type one (cruder insults) to attack the posters you want to get a bit dirty with in terms of personal attacks. The forum here allows it so that's fine as long as you follow the forum rules.

You do realize that your account is clearly a gimmick account, right, or have you lost that realization and believe it is your main? You never answered who your main account was when asked, so perhaps you believe this account of yours, created 2 months ago, that is familiar with a lot of old posters that are long gone is your main account.

If you are not Wiki then just say who your real main account is and it will be obvious from the style of posts that you are telling the truth and I will be the first to say I was wrong on this irrelevant topic. I suggest that knowing it will not happen for some reason, and after you are welcome to say that I am every other poster here as you like, but if you want to continue to post in this thread at least get it back on topic by telling us when the Pope will be arrested as that remains unanswered and some posters here actually are interested in that information!

All the best.

Wow, another 200 word "I assure you that I really really really really don't care at all" essay. The bolivian bingo dust really got you going, eh? Keep on sleuthing (and snorting). Watch your nose.

Since 200 words in a single message is too much for you to process on a politics message forum let's try this for you.

Who is your main account here?

All the best.

Let's move on.

To be fair I did ask several times within the chat for for an update on the Pope's future arrest to try to get the thread back on target, but no information was forthcoming. Guess that will remain a mystery for now.

We've all seen in the movies what happens when they attempt to arrest old men in robes.

A simpleton would not know this was a ruling AGAINST Trump's petition to block documents, including Thomas' wife documents from going to the Jan 6th committee.

Had Thomas got his way and swayed others to vote along with him, he would have protected his wifes documents from the scrutiny it ended up getting.

To not see that as a conflict that should require recusal is the stuff of simpletons. His wife is as a result of that and other actions now also being looked at in the Georgia Criminal investigation and if any matters come before Thomas, that involve her, again he should recuse.



Fact Check: Was Clarence Thomas Lone Dissenter on Trump Jan. 6 Documents?

If Monty is Toothsayer it is the all time best troll job ever.

They fought zealously in the BFI Covid thread, with MOnty tormenting TS, arguably more than any other poster and perhaps part of why TS took a break, as he would react very emotionally to MOnty's trolling.

I don't know for sure, but of all the bets I have offered that is one I would give massive odds on not being the case.

So did Thomas shield his wife with his vote or did he vote to hear a case where he could have shielded his wife but the case was not accepted?

Here let me bold it for you.

Thomas had no business ruling to try and block the conveyance of the documents, of which his wife's documents were intermixed.

He did not make any rulings.

You should learn the meaning of words, and past and future verb tenses, before you post your simpleton beliefs. For a guy so concerned about the republicans fooling the news media, you are certainly gullible.

You're bringing in a fairly minor error in wording here and somehow hoping it makes people misunderstand the politics of the situation.

No, Thomas did not "make a ruling" about the issue in which his wife was involved. No justice could have made such a ruling alone. He voted against the ruling which was supported by the other 8 justices. It seems unlikely to me that his vote was unrelated to the involvement of his wife.

Similarly, I find it very unlikely to be coincidental that "justice" Thomas recently threatened the previous rulings which struck down sodomy laws and upheld the rights to contraceptive use and same-sex marriage, while failing to mention 'Loving vs Virginia', the ruling that upheld interracial marriage. He is clearly the least able and most self-interested member of the supreme court to have been seated in my lifetime. (I have to exclude from judgement those appointed in the last few years, as they don't yet have a long enough track record for me to determine their abilities and self-interest.)

The simpleton is you.

"...On January 19, 2022, the Supreme Court published its ruling showing only Justice Thomas had approved of the former president's request..."

So Thomas, the person, and the Supreme Court, the entity, are the same in your simpleton world?

Thomas, lest you did not know constitutes 1 part of the SC which is constituted by its members.

So again I repeat he should have recused on this issue and not voted. Something you have argued against and been thoroughly owned on.

In your simple world, using your simple logic, you probably are never wrong about anything, especially the amount of ownage you generate here.

Thomas did not make any ruling. But he did participate in the vote on what the ruling would be. If that's the high ground you're claiming here, it's a very low hill.

You're not winning this battle. Regroup and wait for Newsmax to tell you what to think.

What is the supreme court if not a collection of Jurists who are members at the time?

Trying to say 'Thomas is not the supreme court' is just a silly, nonsense attempt to nitpick to win a point which you did not win and ended up looking foolish as everyone is telling you.

While Florida and Texas desperately search for showcase prosecutions of Dem voters and especially POC who may have tried to vote illegally, due to a lack of clarity in laws around when a former convict can and cannot vote, and despite many of the cases being ones were the person was told by a gov't agency they could vote...


... the real voter fraud continues to raise its head with numerous examples of GOP voters, who are in positions of power and abusing it knowingly, doing fraudulent things to vote illegally.




I absolutely believe Trump and Co paranoia about election fraud and cheating is real. They know they are doing everything to cheat and not get caught. They are aware many of their supporters are doing the same. That leads them to believe the Dems must be doing same.

I always say the people I have known who are most paranoid about a spouse or partner cheating were usually the ones out cheating themselves.

Armed Man Arrested After Declaring Trump 'President King' At Dairy Queen

Link (HuffPost)

Shared mostly because I do love a dense headline, and that one has a lot to unpack. If nothing else, the guy made some editor's day.

Said editor even showed moderation. Granted, "Self-professed prophet in safety vest and clown wig wields weapon inside Dairy Queen in attempted coronation of former president" is clunky, but it's still a whopper.