drmevo

BST Users
  • Content count

    432
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

Profile Fields

  • Gender
  • Location
    Seacoast NH
  1. Really? So a picture exists, tagged at the venue and the night of show, and was shared that night and reposted by others, and that's still not good enough for you? What kind of proof would it take? Why do you doubt she was recovering given that she's back at work? I honestly don't understand how people still question this.
  2. I’m totally onboard with healthy skepticism. But I’ll take transparency regarding not being able to validate a photo by the time of publication over the conspiracy sites that post unverified and made up information all day long as though it were fact. The latter is how threads like this get started.
  3. Fair enough. Screenshot instead.
  4. If you'll excuse a .com link for the sake of evidence, how's this? *
  5. The article is also from the same day the photo was posted...not a lot of time to track down whoever took it, and it might've been on a private feed originally. Most people are set to private these days. You know, there's the whole endless trolling/doxxing by anonymous people thing. So you think the photo is actually of her, taken at the same theater, but more likely from an earlier date than the date in question? A fake?
  6. It would but Twitter, Facebook and I assume most social media now remove this type of data to protect people's privacy. How bad would it be if people were unwittingly sharing their exact GPS location, what time they were there, etc.?
  7. Do you think the picture is a fake? That's what you've been asking for to put this to bed, right?
  8. Yes, but how does that show she wasn't there? It's not like they pan to show every audience member...
  9. Here's a picture @eddy posted from the other thread here as proof that people were indeed allowed to take pictures at this theater: And here's a picture from the Heavy link @The Dude posted in this thread, that someone posted to social media: Looks like the same place? I mean, the next post here will be saying the photo is a fake, I'm sure.
  10. That's from November 8th. Ginsburg has been seen, maybe photographed, since this photo was taken. I don't think this line of discussion is going anywhere.
  11. I could be wrong, but I’m pretty sure they’re not photographed even close to daily. They’re not celebrities. Can you find a photo each of them from the past month or two? Or even one of them?
  12. No, but I can't post anything ANY of them have recently hand written or signed. Can you? Does that mean they aren't working? I think that's a thing when it comes to writing their opinions, yes. Scalia supposedly had a signature writing style, I recall reading. I don't think Ginsburg is said to have written an opinion recently, I may have misspoken there, I'm not sure. I'm just saying, if this theory were so likely to be true, wouldn't the Chief Justice be all over it? Calling for an investigation if thought there was merit? Or is he in on it too? Hell. why isn't Trump all over it? He would have everything to gain and nothing to lose.
  13. Yes, let's include the theory that her clerks are making everything up on her behalf. You think someone is copying her writing style, signature, etc.? We're talking about extremely serious crimes. How it could it possibly be worth it? If she's really that far gone there would be no way to keep it a secret for long enough to prevent her replacement from being selected.