Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

Recommended by:

longz

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (1452310)	4/15/2024 3:45:39 PM
From: i-node	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) of 1575864

>> Had Trump gotten away with his fraud, it would have established a precedent, that you can blatantly lie about anything and everything you have, then blame the other party for not doing their "due diligence." Fraud is a legal term, and there was none. Neither was there any evidence of a lie. >> No matter how you slice it, Trump lied. It is one thing to accuse him. But where is the proof of it? No one had any proof. In fact, compelling evidence was produced to the contrary, which the judge contorted and twisted into something it wasn't. I'm sorry, but you are easily misled on this subject matter. But no one has produced anything remotely like proof, even of the low standard of civil fraud. And you can't cite it: You claim merely that you know it happened. Like almost every good Californian. Never mind that the trial, along with half dozen others just like it, is designed for the specific intent of preventing Trump from running in 2024. They knew he was running for four years, yet, only decided in the final months to hold these trials. Pathetic cheap shots aimed at overturning the outcome of the NEXT electin just like they did the last.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next