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 : Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Oeconomicus who wrote (2380)	12/11/2003 11:59:22 AM
From: mph	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 90947

I'd have to think about/look into that a bit more. The reality is that when the government (whether a state AG or otherwise) comes after you, settlement of the claims/charges can take many forms. Is it legal extortion? In some ways, very much so. Not unlike the tobacco settlements. Whether Spitzer can force his agenda or not is unclear. If the companies don't settle (on whatever terms), the prosecution would continue. The question is what penalties could be levied after a successful prosecution. I doubt that a successful prosecution would yield the lower fees Spitzer is after. That would probably have to be a matter of agreement, which is what he's after now. Just my quick off the cuff analysis.:-)