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.

Politics : The Trump Presidency -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: i-node who wrote (194645)	2/23/2021 2:07:12 PM
From: bentway	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 355435

>>the Supreme Court is NEVER going to give Trump a fair hearing<< It's got 3 of HIS picks sitting on it! None of whom voted to hear the case. So, why would you say this? Even Thomas, in his dissent, said that Trump wouldn't have won if the decision had gone the other way - he'd still be a LOSER! Did you miss that? Or, just didn't want to see it? Poor Trump and his 'tards - ALWAYS the victims of an unjust reality!

To: i-node who wrote (194645)	2/23/2021 2:10:08 PM
From: CentralParkRanger	1 Recommendation Recommended By bentway Respond to of 355435

But it is clear: They made their decision earlier -- after the justices put their heads together -- that they would not get involved in the election at that point It was Trump's plan - he appoints Justices, and they give him crown. We were lucky that Justices finally decided follow the Constitution not to decide the elections. They did it in 2000, and it was a huge failure of SC duties. So, Trump plan A failed. Then goes plan B - send mob to the Capitol... The story goes on...

To: i-node who wrote (194645)	2/23/2021 2:20:27 PM
From: Lane3	1 Recommendation Recommended By Brumar89 Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 355435

Why do you not answer my questions? In this last post I asked for further information on what has been won in the cases that Trump is said to have won and whether there were any fraud decisions involved. You ignored my question. Instead, you responded by fussing about the SCOTUS decision and then wandered off onto the security of mail-in ballots. In my previous post to you, I asked you about your views on voting, whether everyone who legally can should vote and whether it was appropriate for other parties to encourage or discourage voting. It was an abstract question about your values wrt civic duty. You gave me a terse yes/no response that just raised more questions, then went on a rant about mail-in ballots. Why do you not answer my questions? Are you going to answer that question?