truthseeker

Not exactly the "cruise missile in the azz" Alias Guy promised (by the way: what's up with the sudden use of outmoded street slang mixed in with the usual Alias Guy-isms? Weird.) Wow, a rules clarification. Earth shattering. And the Woodward and Bernstein line was an absolute gem of grandiosity ! The best part though, was the subtle sarcasm contained in the headline. One imagines that, being no slouches, they're well aware of the "complainant"'s actual identity. Thanks for the link, B.

My guess is he never even heard of it until it mentioned in connection with the "Officer Magana" posting. Obviously he doesn't understand what the Hatch Act is. Embarassing. As always, I encourage new readers/reporters here to read the IP list at the top of this forum before entertaining any of the weird claims by the constant parade of new posters here.

To the reporters and voters reading the post below. Please note that "Psycho Voter" is posting from an IP address that has been used over 50 times, under the aliases JRR (who previously identified himself as Rees), Nikkidix, Ms. Glover Park, Perry Mason and John Q. Public. Your critics have proven, via commonly recognized conventions of internet posting, who YOU are. You have yet to post a single link, screenshot or other documentation showing that anything you've posted below is true. It's more of the same ugly, empty blather that we've come to expect/dread.

I can only imagine the peels of derisive laughter coming from the US Attorney's office upon receiving a vague assertion that someone is spending their campaign contributions on "rent, food, booze and you name it" - with utterly no proof provided. And that an ANC commissioner is working on a political campaign in violation of.....absolutely nothing. The fact that he's apparently continuing to post where he's prohibited only underscores his willingness to go to any length, break any rule, offend any sensibility to further his own self-interest.

This is entire post is a laff riot. The poster really does imagine himself to be some kind of visionary political mind, doesn't he? ;-) What a hoot. What he's describing isn't brilliant or forward-thinking, it's just slimey. And that's the most old-fashioned kind of politicking of all. It would take a half-hour to properly respond to the post, time I'd sooner spend poking myself in the face repeatedly with a red-hot kebab skewer. However, I find myself with a spare moment with which to point out one of the more obvious inaccuracies: The Washington Times and the In Towner have not "agreed with his logic." I challenge you to post any link that proves otherwise. And finally, no, your critics here and elsewhere are not "going about it the wrong way." They're countering misrepresentation, cruel rumor-mongering and baseless allegation with the application of logic and externally-verifiable sources, in the service of fair play. That's precisely the right way, sir. The evidence has been discovered, Perry Mason, and you've lost the case.

Saying "I believe there have been some negative things written" in no way answers my call for you to post specific links. Everyone here, with the greatest of ease, provides supporting documentation for counter-claims to your posts. You never do. It's also not enough to say "people in the media are saying". This sounds quite like a small child, caught breaking a window, saying "I heard some guy say HE did it." It's just that easy to do and has exactly the same effect on thinking adults: which is to say none at all. These vague "I hear" "People are saying" "Someone told me" statements are especially ineffective when one considers the source - someone whose record of fabrication is posted permanently to the top of this forum for all to see. You'll find out soon enough what "the media" actually think. Bet on it.

FC, check the new topic I've posted ("HOW Many Children?"). There you'll find screenshots of the now-deleted page you referenced.

And here's the rest of the page.

Attached is a screenshot captured before the page was removed. No mention of Gabriella/Antonella, is there? Nor twins. Make of it what you will.

You're a true gentleman Martin. Had I been subject to what he's inflicted on you, I doubt that I could maintain such a reasoned, even-handed demeanor. I've watched his little Bearing False Witness campaign against you with something approaching actual nausea, but also with genuine sympathy for you. No one should have to endure that, particularly when it appears to be completely unprovoked and utterly specious. And yet you've acquitted yourself with remarkable restraint and aplomb. When a new Alias attempts to revive the transparent canards and ridiculous characterizations (and let's face it, it's inevitable) please remember that no one but the Aliases - here, on DCist and elsewhere - has ever given them the slightest bit of credence. PS: I should like to point out "for the record" (as a certain poster/s likes to say), that I have never met Martin, spoken to him or know him at all, nor do I have any affiliation with him or any organization or person that he's affiliated (so far as I know.) I sent him one email once, which didn't require a response and didn't receive one. And no, Rees, I am not him, nor am I in any way connected to any political candidate.

Imagine that. In her own post in a now-infamous DCist comments thread, Ree's own "daughter" said the two girls were different ages, not twins. But whats really fascinating? THIS: That "daughter" was named "Gabriella" not "Antonella". Not a mistake one would expect from someone who (if you're not him) knows him well enough to have access to his marriage license. Just interesting, that's all.

Utterly ridiculous. The recurring syntactical and linguistic idiosyncracies (among other things) point to a common author. But again, the undeniable proof of common authorship is posted at the top of the forum.

My 'point' is, obviously, to ad further, easily confirmed evidence to the mountain of existing proof that Jonathan Rees has been posting (or arranging to have posted) horrible things on internet groups including this one, pretending to be other people. This little strategem was clearly an attempt to avoid being held accountable for the bizarre, mean-spirited, misleading, duplicitous and frequently libelous statements, which would reflect very badly on him should they be traced to him. It's unethical and bespeaks some serious character issues. And this is why it's important. The seeming disappearance of some of those posts only serves to suggest a coverup -- which of course implies that someone recognizes that the posts are so improper as to require expunging. If there was nothing wrong with them, why remove them? Simple, see? Fortunately for the voting public (and anyone who opposes mendacity by politicians, or in general), this is exactly what's happened. The posts under the names NikkiDix, JRR, DCPoll, RayStewart, etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc since August 2005 came from the same poster, and he got caught. It's not a theory, not a smear, not an allegation. Check the proof BFrankDC pinned to the top of the forum. Whether blogs etc are "lousy place to promote a campaign" was not addressed in my post, because I don't care. That's, apparently, your only concern. However, it may surprise you to learn that blogs, craiglist forums and yahoogroups aren't MEANT as promotional vehicles. Get it? And this is why people who use them as such are appropriately held in low regard, as they're willfully violating the terms of use for those vehicles for their own self-interest. This also speaks to one's character. If one will stop at nothing to get elected, including deliberately misleading people, then the electorate has a right and duty to question one's suitability as a representative. Imagine this sort of code of ethics (or lack thereof) being acted upon by an actual sitting legislator, rather than just a primary candidate. It's terrifying to contemplate.

Indeed. The IP the "perry mason" posts came from (64.27.5.168) has been used in the past by JRR, NikkiDix, Miss Glover Park and John Q Public. 54 posts in total.

It hardly needs to be said that this digital photo in no way contradicts the abundant evidence contained under the "Multiple Alias Disorder" posts pinned to the top of this forum. Just to be painfully accurate, in point of fact no one actually said categorically that Rees/you weren't married, though they did raise the question. Good luck providing documents to answer any of their other questions about your background.

First, an update: the group "group.yahoo.com/group/jonathan_rees" has been completely shut down. Now, a new and compelling development concerning the attempt at revisionist history.... Shortly after "they" were made aware through this forum that ALL posts on Yahoogroups always have their IP addresses publicly visible (thus proving that literally ALL the pro-rees posts on Tenleytown, Gloverpark etc were actually from the same computer address as the "candidate" himself) , it appears that some of those posts have vanished! The giveaway: response posts that refer to a now non-existent original post (though many contain the copied text of the original.) Also: look for numbers missing from the sequence of the ongoing post count. One can't help but notice that no new yahoogroup posts have appeared since the identical IPs/authors revelation. There are still plenty of older and incriminating posts up there though. Go to the groups.yahoo.com/group/tenleytown, for one. Search "rees" in the search box. Each time a pro-rees post appears, check out the IP address (there's a tab for this) and - voila! all of them came from the same address! In other words, one person pretending to be various other people, all responding to "each other." Have fun! (If you've just joined us....In the last month or so, the Aliases learned about Proxy IPs to conceal their actual IP address. Still, the Alias posts appear from a rotating but by-now-familiar set of IP addresses which "they" all end up using every few posts. See BFRankDC's "Multiple Alias" posts at the top of this forum. The addys are visible to moderators here, and to anyone on Yahoo....which is probably why "they" have stopped posting on Group pages.)

An overdue but crucial post script. ALL the pro-rees posters on this thread - "Mindy" "Jacob" "DCPoll", "Isadaora" etc - literally all, came from the same IP address. In other words, all from the same computer by someone using different names (and actually answering himself.) This is demonstrably true. Anyone with moderator status on this board can see the IP addresses of EVERY post. This turns out to be the case for EVERY similar thread involving the discussion of Ward Three on this board. Prior, that is, to a certain candidate learning about proxy IPs - which intentionally disguise IP addresses. However, even then, the same handful of addresses keep reappearing.

I for one would like to see actual links to any reporter or columnist or op-ed person in "The Media" who's spoken "very well" of Rees, particularly since word of the Alias scandal got out. Yes, I will grant that one guy in the InTowner did, before a certain person's reputation became well-known, but a close reading will show that the author of the column specifically stated that he wasn't supporting Rees as a candidate, but was (to be completely honest) in favor of the ideas contained in a paragraph he cited about lowering taxes. Of course this post would mean absolutely nothing without a link to a primary source, so here it is. http://www.intowner.com/fr/editorial/January2005.htm Other than that --- bupkes. In fairness, aside from a few pro-brooks mentions (which I won't repeat lest I be accused of actually BEING Brooks) t here's been very little written about ANY ward candidate. Presumably because the primary (not even the election itself) is an entire NINE months away. I expect the first negative article, and there will be one, will be dismissed as being part of some conspiracy or other.

AND let us not forget The Aliases use of words like "fag", "pencildick" etc. Let us not overlook the constant libelling of private citizens (accusing one of paying homeless men for adult activity, another of being a Nazi, and another of molesting clients at a law firm) and public ones (while pretending to be someone affiliated with a sitting councilperson's office, alleging that Sam Brooks had been fired from said councilperson's office, just for starters). To say nothing of the contradictory biographical information. All of this conducted while presuming "they" are protected by the anonymity of their on-line personae. If THAT sounds like your idea of an upstanding, decent and stable political representative, may God help Ward 3.

Someone please contact Charles E. Smith and Co. and follow up on this. It sounds like another fabrication, but if it's not, they've got some explainng to do. Allowing just one candidate to violate the no-solicitation rule is totally NOT okay.

If I neglected to say it before, I'm glad you're here Golden Girl. It's a pleasure to see good critical thinking skills in action. I'm sorry that you have to waste them on this idiocy, but the pursuit of truth is its own reward I guess. Anyway, a belated welcome to you! Thanks for picking up the slack when the rest of us (or me, at least) are growing tired of all this.

This has gone from annoying to infuriating to absurd to utterly pathetic. It's just sad now. He/They really truly believe they're still fooling anyone. I find this tragic more than anything. PS: For those who have been following this story (reporters), note the use of certain specific non-standard phrases in this and his other posts under this new alias. Dead giveaway. I'm not printing them, but you all know what they are by now. Pathetic. GIVE IT UP. The IP addresses posted at the top of this board have definitively revealed, for anyone who knows anything about computers, the massive improprieties that have gone on here. It's over, dude. You're just embarassing yourself now.

I doubt that very much. Life is seldom this kind or just.

Welcome, Nelson! Always appreciate another dose of reality in what sometimes resembles a house of mirrors (or horrors or both.) Be prepared to be accused of being me, BFrankDC, Factchecker, Sam Brooks, Melvin Blecher (sp?) Bill Adler, and who knows who else all rolled into one Borg-like entity. And don't be surprised if more libel comes your way...you might, as one yahoo member found out, be accused of "paying homeless men for sex." It's revolting, but with the recently revealed IP/alias concordance, we now know definitively where that all came from. Nice to have you here! We've (the rest of us anyway) got your back.

Welcome Koolaidsmile. How did you hear about DCMessage Boards? And what do you make of the apparent scandal involving the Ward 3 candidate, since he's made that the main topic here? Again, welcome!