In the grand scheme of things, it is only the rubes getting fleeced here, but even so -- I'll note it for the record.
Some outlets are implying that this is NASDAQ pre-market trading (speculative, in its own right) -- when in fact these are Asian futures changing hands.
And to be certain, that is a "meme on meme" price. [Simply casino gambling -- but rigged for the house.] One such rag puts it thus:
. . .It might also mean looser regulation for hot-button topics ranging from climate change to cryptocurrency, especially if a so-called "Red Wave" materializes. . . .
Trump Media & Technology (NASDAQ:DJT), which is known for its meme qualities and can follow Trump-related developments, also soared 71.5% to $50.95/share. . . .
It may take a week or so for the dust (and ketchup) to settle, but DJT will continue to post vast losses -- when it discloses Q2 in a few weeks, and it will fall back well below $20.
You've been warned: this is. . . a classic pump and dump scheme -- of the most despicably cynical sort. Or should I say "Pump & Drumpf"?! Onward.
नमस्ते
2 comments:
But, what about this: https://scholarship.law.bu.edu/faculty_scholarship/583/
The idea that a BU law prof or two has some. . . ideas. . . is not. . . particularly novel.
My point is slightly more direct:
Only the Supremes ultimately decide what is. . . positive law, in the end.
Justices Roberts and Thomas (and back then, Scalia). . . were silent -- as Ken Starr investigated for six years, and got. . . nowhere. [He was chasing the Clintons.]
Color me utterly shocked. . . that these boys didn't raise a peep, to stop that Special Counsel farce of six long years.
But sure -- anyone can argue. . . anything.
Find me a US Supreme Court opinion holding that the Special Counsel statute (now the books for 30 some years, after Iran-Contra) is unconstitutional.
Hint: There is no such opinion. And there never will be (even from this right-leaning Court).
But it will be entertaining from here, to be sure.
Onward, Anon.
Post a Comment