your complaint, they hear it, they acknowledge you're right, they fix it. It's a few days later. You wish it had been faster but it also comes with a permanent change. So it's not just a decision on this one tweet or company. It's a permanent change. I feel like that's about as good as you can do.

Oh, by the way, I feel I'm remiss for not having done this sooner and there's no bad intention with this. It has simply slipped my mind. I didn't connect these two things. So let me do it now so that I can close that gap. I do have investments in Twitter, meaning that as just a stock purchaser. So several months ago I said to myself, you know, all these people trying to leave Twitter are not having much success because the other services just don't have that network effect. Because it's no fun to be on a service that doesn't have all the people you want to fight with. So I thought, you know, there's just nothing that can compete with Twitter. It's just such a dominant position. So I bought stock in them about, I forget, six months ago or something. Turned out to be tremendously good timing because they've had quite a bit of growth. Even though they went down 20% yesterday, I'm still way in the plus.

So now you know that just for full disclosure. But having said that, I still maintain that if they fix something that needs to be fixed, we should only be happy about it just in general. But there's still big issues that need to be addressed.

Trump did one of the best persuasion plays this week that I've seen. And I always tell you that he's good at picking up free money. There's just something, if there's just money laying on the table and nobody's going to pick it up, he just notices it and says, hey, anybody, anybody, is this free money belong to anybody? All right, I'll take it. And this felt like that.

And when I described this I think you can have the same reaction I did, which is why didn't I think of that? All right, here it is. Trump points out, and I'm going to paraphrase his idea, not his words, but I'll paraphrase his idea. He tweeted that in effect. And again these are my words putting on what I interpret as his notion. That imagine that the Supreme Court is asked to rule on the election. Pretty high likelihood, wouldn't you say? There'll be something about the election outcome that is likely to get to the Supreme Court. We all feel that, right? Not a hundred percent but I feel like, I don't know, 75% chance something will end up in the Supreme Court and it might make the difference between who is president. We're on the same page.

Trump points out the following. And again this is my description of it, not his. Imagine that the justices have this decision and they can go one way which they know will put Trump in office. If they go the other way it puts Biden in office. If they put Trump in office, life goes on. Right? The Supreme Court's the Supreme Court. Yeah, there will be some riots in the street but eventually we'll get over it. Life will go on.

Now suppose they pick Biden. Biden has threatened, he doesn't use the word threatened but he suggested, he's hinted that there's a good chance that he would increase the number of justices on the court. Now given that we know the justices do not favor that, I'm not a mind reader but we know what Ruth Bader Ginsburg said, that nine was the right number. And as soon as you start messing around with that number you delegitimize the Supreme Court because then it just becomes a captive o