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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JDN who wrote (714033)	11/19/2005 5:29:51 AM
From: stockman_scott	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

How Much Does It Cost? Fitzgerald v. Starr by Armando dailykos.com Mon Oct 24, 2005 at 09:47:17 AM PDT A comparison worth considering. To date Fitzgerald has spent: In its first 15 months, the investigation cost $723,000, according to the Government Accountability Office. In his "investigation," Ken Starr spent: The figures show that Starr's office, through the end of November 1998, had spent $40,835,000. That includes $27,749,000 in direct expenses from independent counsel appropriations and $13,086,000 in unreimbursed expenses incurred by other government agencies. Those figures do not include costs incurred by Starr's predecessor, Robert Fiske, whose office spent about $6 million before Starr was appointed to lead the investigation. The GAO's most recent report issued last September showed Starr had spent $33.5 million through March 31st, 1998, after taking over for Fiske in 1994. So, to be charitable to Starr, he spent about $10 million a year while, again to be charitable to Starr (counting 15 months as a year), Fitzgerald spent $700,000 a year. Sure, Fitzgerald and his team are paid by the government but my gawd, $13 million in expenses not related to the lawyers' time? How much in fees? Tens of millions? Sheesh, Starr fleeced the Republicans if you think about it. That's a lot of graft with nothing to show for it.