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: Lane3 who wrote (220977)	12/26/2021 11:22:01 AM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 362577

>> We have proof that grants were made and also changes in the law. We have proof that INHERENTLY CORRUPT grants were made and that the entire process was corrupt. By inherently corrupt, I am saying there is not ANYTHING that can be done to make those grants acceptable. Once it was done, the corruption was in place and could not be un-done. I understand these other yokels on the thread not grasping this; however, you have worked in public policy and you understand (or I thought you did) the principles of fraud and corruption and how it must be avoided. The changes in the law were unwarranted, pushed through by Democrats desperate to change an otherwise certain outcome. They violated the operational principles that were put in place to protect the vote from cheating, and you have now seen there was widespread cheating that resulted from these absurd last-minute changes, the only purpose of which was to unseat Trump. >> As for signature requirements, I have only seen you mention Georgia and I have seen that clearly refuted. Refuted? Refuted HOW? Facts are facts. Under the prior requirements the mismatches were over 6 percent and under the new requirements they dropped to 0.3%. You cannot refute that. If you think you can, how about you post it? I know, you are not required to post anything. Well, no you're not. Willful ignorance. See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil. I get it. You're working overtime not to see the truth.

To: Lane3 who wrote (220977)	12/26/2021 11:27:51 AM
From: Sam	Respond to of 362577

>>node: That is willful ignorance, not a lack of proof. Lane: If there's something out there, you have not shown it. No reasonable person would jump to your conclusions without evidence. He is just following his heroes, Trump and Carlson. They don't need evidence, their assertion that a thing is true many times is enough to make the assertion true. So they act, in any case. Textbook case of willful ignorance. Once again demonstrating that Trumpsters blame others for what they themselves do.