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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (1452301)	4/15/2024 2:34:20 PM
From: i-node	1 Recommendation Recommended By longz Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571697

Ten, it doesn't make a difference in the same way the outlawing of Zuckerberg money in the election didn't make a difference. It was cheating. I'm not saying it was illegal, but it is how the election was stolen. One of numerous ways, engineered for that purpose. These trials are obviously -- Stevie Wonder could see it -- designed to change the election outcome in 2024. They have no other purpose, and would NEVER have taken place were it not for the Democrat's desperation in trying to steal the election. I taught my kids about fairness. We must respect legal requirements, obviously. But the important standard in my family is fairness in all dealings and transactions. No cheating allowed. In 2020 there was massive cheating. That no one got caught has no effect on MY view of the election legitimacy. These trials are the first step in stealing the 2024 election. They will not be the last.

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (1452301)	4/15/2024 3:49:18 PM
From: i-node	1 Recommendation Recommended By longz Respond to of 1571697

Just as happened with the Zuckerberg steal, it does mean something when laws are changed after-the-fact. Just as NY changed the statute of limitations to "GET TRUMP", it does suggest that the law might have been manipulated here to give legitimacy to an illegitimate finding. Maybe not. Maybe they just changed the law for no reason at all. That seems unlikely -- someone, somewhere, thought there might be a problem with it or they wouldn't have changed it.