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.
Technology Stocks : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD)
AMD 203.14-0.8%Jan 9 3:59 PM EST
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: fastpathguru who wrote (261881)10/14/2009 2:53:40 AM
From: Elmer PhudRead Replies (2) of 275872
 
Your premise is false. Intel had several opportunities to present a defense.

I see, so in your mind the opportunity to "reply" is an adequate defense. No power to subpoena witnesses, no right to subpoena evidence, no right to cross examine accusers seems necessary in your mind. Just the right to reply.

The cow told us you had unnatural relations with the sheep. You can "reply" to the cow's testimony. You can't cross examine the cow. You can't get the sheep's testimony that would exonerate you because that was withheld. You can't present any evidence at all but you can reply to the cow's hearsay. Isn't that enough?

Personally I believe the cow no matter what the sheep said.

Bbbbbaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News