SI
SI
discoversearch

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.
Non-Tech : USAB - USABancShares.com
USAB 75.000.0%Dec 29 4:00 PM EST
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Jgilbert who wrote (1924)8/27/1999 12:33:00 AM
From: michael macchietto  Read Replies (1) of 2419
 
TO Jgilbert & dabadabadoo
Understand this about me.Unlike most investors, I like to take a pro-active approach in anything which I firmly believe in and have committed my finances to. I understand at times the best action to take is no action at all. I feel however, this is not one of them. I too know the workings of the inner circle of a federal judge or for that matter a supreme court justice. Some of the best and brightest minds from the finest law schools are picked each year to act as assistants for these high level judges. They accept these jobs in hopes they will be offered a position at some prestigious lawfirm afterwards. Their jobs, while there, vary from deciding which cases the justices will review (at the supreme court level), to doing the leg work (or DD) and sifting through countless volumes of information pertinent to a particular case. It is in this latter part that I have the utmost confidence that they will not make an 'ass' of themselves by handing irrelevant information to the judge. In a sense, they can be seen as a sort of gatekeeper, to which all information that doesn't pertain to a particular case will be denied entry. I also have cofidence that other investor's who may feel obligated to send information related to this case have the intelligence and mental awareness to understand that judges don't decide cases on opinions but rather facts. Things such as previously decided cases(common law). These are facts! Not " the names don't even look the same." The majority of us know and understand it's about the common person and if they, under normal circumstances, could confuse the two. Many other things also play into the judge's final decision. Was their intent on USAB's part to catch a free ride and so forth. So please save your negativity and instead, focus on all the shorts. These are the ones that need your attention!
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News