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.

Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Original Mad Dog who wrote (17293)	7/12/2002 2:21:40 PM
From: jlallen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21057

The facts developed by the SEC clear Bush. The SEC's own internal memos establish that Bush was not privy to the financial information which would have made the transaction a problem. The market data developed by the SEC also exonerates Bush. That's a bit different than being unable to indict based on an effective stonewalling a la Clinton.....

To: Original Mad Dog who wrote (17293)	7/12/2002 2:22:17 PM
From: Lane3	Respond to of 21057

He wasn't cleared. The SEC chose not to pursue it because they didn't have enough evidence. My point exactly. The law and regulatory agencies seldom "exonerate" people; they simply choose to move on and fry different fish. They didn't exonerate people when I worked there. I'm trying to remember the SEC disposition codes but it's been too long. They may make those distinctions internally when they move on from a case, but they don't make them public. My memory fails me on the details of how cases are disposed.