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.
Pastimes : The California Energy Crisis - Information & Forum

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: jlallen who wrote (1381)7/2/2002 2:50:53 PM
From: RCMac  Read Replies (1) of 1715
 
These charges relating to Harken were investigated and dropped. End of story.

"Investigated and dropped" doesn't seem a very scrupulous description of the following:

But long before that ruling — though only a few weeks before bad news that could not be concealed caused Harken's shares to tumble — Mr. Bush sold off two-thirds of his stake, for $848,000. Just for the record, that's about four times bigger than the sale that has Martha Stewart in hot water. Oddly, though the law requires prompt disclosure of insider sales, he neglected to inform the S.E.C. about this transaction until 34 weeks had passed. An internal S.E.C. memorandum concluded that he had broken the law, but no charges were filed. This, everyone insists, had nothing to do with the fact that his father was president.

I hope for your clients' sakes that you're more careful with the facts when you go into court on behalf of a client.

I doubt you have any actual and coherent dispute of the facts as stated by Krugman, which do seem closely parallel to the Imclone/Waksmann criminal misbehavior -- at leaset close enough to require some effort by Mr. Bush's defenders to dintinguish the conduct. Do you have any actual argument on the point?
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext