Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Buy and Sell Signals, and Other Market Perspectives -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: GROUND ZERO™ who wrote (150861)	11/22/2020 8:04:28 AM
From: yard_man	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 218840

I think the guy is savvy on a number of points. 1) there is always fraud in elections 2) fraud in this one likely stole election from Trump 3) because there is a lot of different kinds of evidence -- dems have an interest in getting lawyers to focus on claims that appear most dubious, even though they may be correct 4) socially, politically there is a very high bar for the courts for deciding what has already been reported as a win for Biden was actually a win for Trump (recent poll showing 30% of dems believe it was stolen, not withstanding) 5) I also think the guy is savvy re how dems/MSM use language to brainwash the public ...even repubs they can get to listen All that said, I think the primary and best evidence relates to how observers were blocked from really observing anything and secondly, a hierarchy of claims regarding the time history of the votes recorded in Philly, Detroit, Pittsburgh, Atlanta and one other metro area. While I think the implausibility of the time history of ballots counted is very high and it is obvious that fraud has occurred. Most of this evidence is circumstantial. Hard evidence will be needed that not only were observers denied real observation, but that this resulted in the actual fraud that appears statistically obvious.