I'm no stock expert, but DJT goin' down, eh?

LOL! More cherry picked statistics from @Zorro to fit the partisan agenda. Why am I not surprised.

Question: Are you already rich from your DJT trades? Or, are you like the other Trump supporters on here, who sweet talk DJT, but who wouldn't touch it with a 10-foot pole in their own investment portfolio? I wonder why they don't put their money where their mouth is?

 

No I'm not. I understand it perfectly. Not all evidence is proof. In this case none of it is. But it is evidence.

True. I have no idea what his goal was however.

 

There are lots of those. There just aren't any that prove it.

 

LOL, what?

 

Posters in "truth social" are convinced the stock situation is a conspiracy to make Trump look bad. Some things never change.

"This is extreme manipulation at best. There isn't a massive sell-off. It's one or a handful of people trying to cause panic"

"They'll do anything to discredit President Trump. God has different plans and will save the nations in HIS Perfect timing."

"DWAC has fallen over 30% over the last few trading days but they don't cease trading. They don't like President @realDonaldTrump and his policies"

"they are trying to destroy his company, DJT"

"I think daddy Trump has some surprises for us, we just have to be patient and wait for it"


"Daddy Trump".... I mean.........seriously......?

 

They have been programmed into believing everyone in their political party, including themselves are ALWAYS the poor victims. LOL

 

I read some of the text of an interview with a guy who said god sent him a message to invest in DJT. This is the sort of thing we are up against.

 

Fake news. YTD is a very common metric widely used when investigating price trends. Even a buy and hold investor like yourself is unlikely ignorant of that. Nice try.

 

LOL. What I said.

 

Can you tell us what date the stock DJT / truth social started trading?

Or are you simply hoping that there are enough uninformed people that you can try and assert an accusation vehicle that was detached from the asset is somehow relevant?

 

Social media is not really a tech company.
Sure they use tech hardware, but it is just social media.
And there's a plethora of social media companies that have millions of users.

 

Provide that evidence. From credible source(s).

 

Those are claims without merit.
Provide the evidence. Heresay is pointless.

 

Which ones do you believe are not true, because they are all well documented?

 

As another poster told you, so well documented you are unable to provide any documents.

 

If it doesn't prove your claim, then my argument stands and yours falls.

To investigate Hunter Biden. Bill Barr, under pressure from Trump, assigned US Attorney Delaware to investigate Hunter Biden. that investigation continued into Biden's presidency.

And you guys holler 'political' when it comes to Trump being indicted by the DOJ.

Hunter Biden is not a member of the government, is not a politician, is a private citizen, and is the president's son. If that isn't political, I don't know what is. And, after six years, no influence peddling, no money laundering, no corruption and the tax and gun charges could have been filed during Trump. So, after failing to find more significant crimes, he knew he could at least file the consolation prize, the tax and gun charges. After six years of using taxpayer dollars to investigate a private citizen, he gives up and files the tax and gun charges, charges of which few people are charged, statistically speaking. But Biden, not trying to influence justice, allowed the investigation of his own son to continue, and the right are accusing him of 'weaponizing the DOJ'.

If that isn't hypocrisy by Republicans, I don't know what is.

 

Yeah, they don't prove it, proving my point.

When I say 'implicate', and I should have qualified it, I meant 'strong enough to indict'. What that means is that the prosecution doesn't believe the evidence is strong enough to convince a jury beyond a reasonable doubt, and that is because the counter arguments by defense council will blow holes in the prosecution's 'evidence' on cross, and in the closing arguments, and do it rather easily.

Your so-called 'evidence' isn't strong enough to indict, of what value is it?

It's worthless. Might be good enough for partisans to be suspicious, but that's about it.

 

Your opinion is that Biden is free of the corruption of influence selling. You say that because the Biden has covered up payments effectively. My opinion is the available evidence says he has been involved in corrupt influence peddling. The difference is opinion not fact. That facts are that there is evidence and no proof. The opinions result from the anaysis of those facts.

Not with any fervor or even visible activity.

Because it is obvious to anyone who can see past leftist partisanship.

The issue for thinking people isn't about Trump or Hunter Biden. It is about political prosecution which is dangerous. Both of these people are facing political prosecutions and it needs to stop. Hunter is not a member of government but his father is and his father is the focus of those investigations and prosecutions. Hunter is the "fall guy." The attack he is experiencing is all political, not judicial. It is a weaponized justice system, something we shouldn 't want to have. Hope that helps you understand a little better.

 

I am surprised. Are you not aware of the number of times that Biden met with Hunters bosses and had teleconferences with them?

Are you not aware of the fact that there are around 20 shell LLC's in the Biden's names?

Are you not aware of the fact that Biden has numerous email addresses?

Are you not aware of the fact that Joe Biden was identified as the person referred to as the Big Guy in Hunter's notebook?

I have a hard time believing that is true, but if it is true, it shows a remarkable ignorance of the news.

 

The argument revolves around evidence vs. proof. There is all kinds of evidence but no proof suitable for use in a court of law. It is just a battle of opinions like everything else in politics.

 

IMO, DJT I still overvalued, but very informed investors send it way up if short sellers get carried away.

1. https://www.forbes.com › sites › joelshulman › 2024 › 04 › 05 › trump-media-djt-stock-is-extremely-overpriced-but-too-risky-to-short
   Trump Stock (DJT) Is Overvalued-But You Might Be Crazy To Short It - Forbes
   Apr 5, 2024The current market capitalization of DJT (based on 4/4/24 closing price) was $6.3 Billion! This is an approximate overvaluation of 125X. Alternatively, the DJT stock could drop by 99% and still be ...
   https://www.forbes.com/sites/joelsh...riced-but-too-risky-to-short/?sh=77db26e52456

 

I have never called it proof. I have said it is enough that they should at least be suspicious. They refuse to acknowledge even that much.

 

That's because all you've provided has, to put it generously, been bull **** excuses. Oh no . . . there are . . . multiple companies . . . and Joe had more than one email address! The horror! The HORROR!

 

That's often not as easy as it sounds.

In order to sell short, someone has to buy now and hold the stock for you, until you buy it back again later.

Right now, everyone knows the company is worthless and the price will keep dropping, so people are charging a big fee for buying the stock and holding it for the shorters.

It's not enough for the stock just to drop. Everyone knows it will drop, and the holding fees are adjusted for that. It's a matter of how much it drops. If it doesn't drop enough, then you can lose money shorting because of the holding fees.

So, be cautious about shorting. All the time, but especially here.

 

IMO, there its strong evidence that Hunter Biden engaged in clandestine activities in Ukraine which is the sort of thing that inevitably excites partisan critics.
But I have seen nothing that proves that HB violated US law. In fact, the known record of his role in Burisma could easily be characterized as exculpatory.