XPost: alt.computer.workshop, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh   
   From: glock@localhost.com   
      
   On 17 Dec 2025 18:13:50 GMT, Roy S. wrote:   
      
   > Brock McNuggets  wrote in   
   > news:6942f073$0$23$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com:   
   >   
   >> On Dec 17, 2025 at 10:32:57 AM MST, ""Roy S."" wrote   
   >> :   
   >>   
   >>> Brock McNuggets  wrote in   
   >>> news:6942b870$1$27$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com:   
   >>>   
   >>>> On Dec 17, 2025 at 1:31:26 AM MST, ""David B."" wrote   
   >>>> :   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> On 10/12/2025 14:44, Brock McNuggets wrote:   
   >>>>>> On Dec 10, 2025 at 6:17:07 AM MST, ""David B."" wrote   
   >>>>>> :   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> On 10/12/2025 01:36, Gremlin wrote:   
   >>>>>>>> "Roy S."    
   >>>>>>>> news:XnsB3AFE0220500A12345678@62.164.182.25 Tue, 09 Dec 2025   
   >>>>>>>> 03:01:59 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> LOL! As I suspected, snit opts to try the 'it's not real; it's   
   >>>>>>>> all fake' routine.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> I've been looking into this too. *The truth WILL out*!   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Please comment, if you will, on this conclusion:-   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> https://i.ibb.co/RGrs1SFS/Screenshot-2025-12-10-at-13-00-58.png   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Seems reasonable.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> I think so.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>>> The link they gave:   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> https://apps.azcourts.gov/publicaccess/caselookup.aspx   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> *IS* a real Arizona Judicial Branch website.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> But anyone can tell you “type this case number in” — and if a   
   case   
   >>>>>>> does or doesn’t appear, they can spin a story.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> The site itself does not confirm that the story told in the post   
   >>>>>>> is true — it only verifies whether such a case number exists.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Wait? It does? What is the case?   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Your divorce.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>>> I was told the lookup and needed a VPN to appear in the USA.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> That is already suspicious — the site normally works worldwide   
   >>>>>>> without a VPN, or so I have been told elsewhere.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> It is odd that it would be location based.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> I don't think that should be the case. Maybe it is a spoof site?   
   >>>>   
   >>>> At this point the whole topic is just to dox me.   
   >>>   
   >>> Actually is most likely to prove you are a fucking liar and a   
   >>> dishonest piece of shit.   
   >>   
   >> If so the lies would be quotable. That is how it works in text. But you   
   >> trolls will never stop. You start with saying that it is to prove I   
   >> lied, but then fail to show it. Carroll lied and said she initiated the   
   >> divorce when proof shows I am the one who first filed.   
   >>   
   >> You then say:   
   >>     -----   
   >>     The dates show you were the one, but a very short time frame, to   
   >>     file   
   >> first.   
   >>     Big deal.   
   >>     ----   
   >> When Carroll lies, and you acknowledge he did, you do not care. But   
   >> then you say I lied in a way you cannot show. Again, ALL of this has   
   >> been beaten to death:   
   >>   
   >> * There is no evidence on the .gov site to back ANY of the accusations.   
   >>   
   >> * For ones where it is claimed there as a dismissal, it is POSSIBLE,   
   >> though very unlikely, that they could be sealed or expunged. Multiple   
   >> lawyer sites say they have never seen this, but it is at least legally   
   >> possible.   
   >>   
   >> * The idea there was a plea bargain (which implies a guilty finding)   
   >> but also no guilty finding is contradictory.   
   >>   
   >> * The idea there was a restraining order and it was broken and then   
   >> removed is essentially impossible -- it would be breaking many laws and   
   >> court rules.   
   >>   
   >> * The idea there was some monitoring program is also equally   
   >> impossible.   
   >>   
   >> * The image shown is clearly false: it claims but Civil and Criminal...   
   >> no single charge is both (at least in my jurisdiction).   
   >>   
   >> These are all facts. But they ignore the bigger one:   
   >>   
   >> * The fact the trolls are obsessing over my life and doxxing me is   
   >> immoral and likely illegal.   
   >>   
   >> Those are the facts, no matter how many times you dox, lie, and attack.   
   >> And you know it... if you REALLY thought I lied you would quote said   
   >> lies. You do not even try. Not even you think I lied.   
   >>   
   >>   
   > So now your story morphs once again.   
   It's classic snit. He goes from the site is fake to the data is fake to   
   everyone is lying to---->>>>>whatever his twisted mind thinks will fool   
   people. snit believes that people are as stupid as he needs them to be but   
   once again snit is wrong. People check his so called proof often and   
   rarely does the proof match the claims by snit.   
      
   > Thank you for unequivocally proving my points.   
      
   Chalk it up to snit not being the brightest bulb on the Christmas tree.   
   I have to wonder if his kids are brain damaged retards like he is? I hope   
   not.   
      
      
   --   
   Glock   
   Locked and Loaded.   
   Bring it on sissy snowflakes.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)