I agree with what Impy says, plus the article could have been paraphrasing Thomas but not using his exact words.
I had a similar gut feeling of “he wouldn’t talk that way” when some UK newspaper quoted Obama (who was out trying to bully the Brits into NOT voting for Brexit after hypocritically getting elected on a campaign pledge to stop America from forcing our will on other countries). Supposedly Obama said the UK would “find themselves in the back of the queue” if they voted for Brexit. Now, that terminology is WAY too British to imagine it coming out of Obama’s mouth. It would like quoting him as supposedly saying “I bet Michelle fifty quid that Donald Trump won’t stand for election at the annual Republican conference” or “Conservatives say this is about religious liberty, I say bollocks! They’re just homophobic wankers” or “Boris Johnson’s a bit of a nutter, isn’t he?”
Most likely, Obama DID make some threat to the British along those lines, and the British newspaper simply quoted him using a paraphrase that the average Brit would understand easier.
And I think that only the “abolish the 17th amendment” crowd and the “we need an article V convention” types are actually offended by the term “democracy” being used in reference to America. They have things backwards, we need MORE democracy in America, not less (and I have no doubt Clarence Thomas agrees with me... if the 2020 election had actually been transparent and democratic, we would not be in this mess). I think its because they associate the word “democracy” with “Democrats”, even though the RAT party is about as anti-democratic as it gets. Democrats are no more for democracy than the People’s Republic of China is for a Republic of the people. In both cases, they just CLAIM they are.
Oh, to have video...audio...aftermath pictures....a receipt...,anything...but we got nuthin'. And nowadays, without pics etc., it didn't happen.
Now, do I believe Hillary had a meltdown? Oh yea. Do I believe she blamed everyone but herself? Definitely. Do I think it went down the way the story was told. Unfortunately, no.
So the question becomes "for what purpose is there, to tell such a tale?" In our 2020 SCOTUS tale, I believe the purpose is for the left, Antifa, etc., to feel/believe/delight in the fantasy that their violence swayed the court. That will embolden them to keep it up, because through mayhem centrists feel fear and demand that society pay these ruffians their ransom.
It also has the unintended benefit of making Deplorables feel even MORE defeated.
Do I believe Thomas and Alito will prove to be the most traditionalist/originalist jurists this term? Yes. Do I believe Roberts is the new Kennedy? Uh huh. Do I foresee the Trump picks proving to be disappointments? Yep. Do I think it went down the way the story was told. Hell no.