Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : Qualcomm Incorporated (QCOM) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Art Bechhoefer who wrote (105739)	10/2/2001 7:20:12 AM
From: Robert Scott Diver	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

Do you really think liberal justices would vote not to disbar a lawyer disbarred by a state? There is no precedent for allowing a disbarred lawyer to continue practice before the court. What argument would they make to support their position?

To: Art Bechhoefer who wrote (105739)	10/3/2001 9:30:24 AM
From: Zoltan!	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

>>However, it would be interesting to see how the vote by the Supreme Court justices went on the issue of suspension. Five to four, no doubt. Doubtful. Clinton will be disbarred. 9-0. The Supremes went 9-0 against Clinton on whether he could be sued. They went against him on all his phony privilege claims. Then Clinton slapped them all and the institution by perjuring himself. The Supremes were not amused. They boycotted Clinton's first State of the Union after his impeachment and Senate trial. Never before has the entire Supreme Court boycotted a president's scheduled State of the Union address. Another Clinton milestone. He will be disbarred. 9-0. A matter of institutional integrity.