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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (148103)	7/11/2002 10:24:36 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572911

The fact is only in your head. I refer you to Ann Coulter's excellent, well-researched, recent book on this subject. Some Dems are honest and some are not; some Reps. are honest and some are not. I suspect statistically they probably reflect the general population. Why would you suspect that? There is clear evidence that integrity is lacking amongst many, many Democrats, yet you can point to relatively few bonafide cases of Republicans having integrity lapses. This seems pretty clear cut, and is evidenced by the pathetic attempts now underway to smear Bush. Of course, you DO have to actually THINK about it to draw a conclusion. You failed to respond to my comment about Lieberman. A sickening example of a Democrat without integrity. Yet, many liberals hold him up as an example of liberal values. Similarly, a sorry negative Democrat campaign ad now being run is chock full of lies and misleading statements. It is simply acceptable behavior amongst liberals. When the factual failure of a Democrat was brought to America's attention in the Willie Horton ads, liberals raised hell, even though the material was truthful as an example of Dukakis' liberal failure. But where were they when the absolute LIES of the Byrd ads were running? I don't see how Democrats can live with themselves, actually.

To: tejek who wrote (148103)	7/12/2002 10:11:51 AM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572911

Ted - Bush filed his "intent to sell" paperwork and talked to the company's legal counsel and several other prominent people in the company about selling before he sold. He wasn't trying to hide the fact that he was going to sell. The notice that he actually had sold the shares was filed late but the intent to sell paperwork was filed and made public. There was no attempt to keep the whole thing secret. As for insider trading - 1 - The SEC found that most of the decisions and distribution of timely information about the company where made by the executive committee not the entire board. There is no evidence that Bush had the soon to be released info about greater then expected losses when he sold. 2 - Bush had a loan that he wanted to pay off and witnesses reported that he had talked about selling off the stock to pay off the loan. 3 - At the time of the SEC investigation the stock was at a higher price then the price Bush got when he sold it. 4 - The SEC concluded that there was no evidence that would lead to the conclusion that Bush was guilty of insider trading. Tim