>>727478

Sounds like you don't quite understand the definition of a dead cat bounce, even though you highlighted it….

>>727542

Then I'll leave it…

>>727598

I wouldn't even touch the FB graphic. Has no association with "Dead Cat Bounce."

Dead Cat Bounce almost certainly refers to the Deep State taking one last big breath (and apparent win) before being put down for good.

>>727644

Actually I did. The distraction is trying to tie a stock tanking to a dead cat bounce. If FB drops 30% and then makes a 8% gain in a week, then plummets again, THAT would be a dead cat bounce.

You gotta learn your terms before you try to distract the whole board with YOUR nonsense.

>>727668

And that's great, gotta stay open-minded. But don't get caught up with charts/graphics that don't represent the definition of the term tied to it, that's all.

>>727713

I'm fine with delays, but when they are ready and have their case fully pinned down and all evidence is tied up in a nice bow, then they better

bring the rain!!!!

>>727752

Your chart shows it has been fluctuating around its support and resistance, and even with today's big drop it didn't fall below it's support…. so… yeah. Not a dead cat bounce.

>>727813

So you're insinuating that there have been TWO dead cat bounces in the last 2 weeks according to the FB chart? That's just called SUPPORTS and RESISTANCES. You think it's a coincidence that the stock didn't drop below its prior support?

C'mon, Anon… don't be so dense.

Pick up a book on stock fundamentals.