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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: FaultLine who wrote (10423)	10/3/2003 10:28:24 AM
From: carranza2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793670

So what's the problem with a Special Prosecutor? Won't he/she be through and fair? Nothing wrong with a Special Prosecutor, particularly since the Dems will cry foul if Ashworth is involved in any aspect of the case. If I were Bush I'd insist on one, not fight it one bit. But let me remind you that recent Special Prosecutors are not what they are cracked up to be. There are few people of the caliber of Archibald Cox and Elliot Richardson around these days. What we get instead are folks like Ken Starr. The expense is not inconsiderable. Plus, SPs these days think they need to investigate every silly thing, dragging the proceedings on interminably. And getting nicely paid while doing so, I might add. I suppose, on balance, that the best thing is to appoint a SP, then hope that he or she will not allow the proceedings to turn into a circus maximus. In my view, though, this is hoping against hope because the media will be on the story like gravy on rice. Be careful what you wish for, you might get it. vbg