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.

Microcap & Penny Stocks : Naked Shorting-Hedge Fund & Market Maker manipulation? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: rrufff who wrote (4454)	6/3/2009 11:25:28 AM
From: The Ox	2 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 5034

Aguirre claims the breakdown in the proposed $2.1 million settlement was a form of retaliation, possibly for his remarks in a May 15 article about an inquiry by the agency's inspector into whether lawyers at the SEC's enforcement arm were trading stocks while on the job. (See "Watchdog Alleges Insider Trading At SEC.") In the article, Aguirre told Forbes the charges were "not surprising. It would be the next logical step in the SEC's mission reversal: from protecting investors to protecting Wall Street." The settlement was nearing completion that week, with both sides appearing to reach agreement on the amount and details of the payment to Aguirre, according to a series of e-mails between Aguirre and Mark Cahn, the SEC's deputy general counsel. Then it all broke down. "After careful consideration, we cannot agree to your proposed terms," Cahn wrote in an e-mail dated two hours after the news article was published. "Unfortunately, we are unable to reach a settlement on mutually acceptable terms." The SEC wouldn't comment on the timing or reason for its withdrawal. In a statement Monday evening, John Heine, an SEC spokesman said, "We were engaged in negotiations for a period of time in an effort to put this four-year-old matter behind us and focus our resources on our mission of protecting investors. We have been unable to reach agreement on terms that we find acceptable. We continue to believe that the claims are without merit." I'm sick of the double speak coming out of the SEC. How could anyone or any entity even consider a $2.1 million dollar settlement if *"We continue to believe that the claims are without merit."*??? They should be forced to -- by law if necessary -- not be allowed to "settle" without acknowledging guilt or misconduct! Its this simple, you don't pay millions of dollars without some guilt being involved. You don't impose fines on the innocent. Period. You impose fines on people who have done something wrong. This approach of "give us money and we'll look the other way" MUST stop. Tough ACTION must be involved, not tougher fines. jmo TO

To: rrufff who wrote (4454)	6/5/2009 12:24:52 AM
From: makeuwonder	1 Recommendation Respond to of 5034

OT:I sure know how Gary Aguirre feels. I'm going to my 4th pretermination hearing again tomorrow. I did nothing wrong. If you play the game, squeal on people you get along great where I work. I'll probably be filing for unemployment next week. LOL!! It's so frustrating all I can do anymore is laugh. It's been over 9 years since our department has had an audit. The County Board decides who gets audited and my boss is tight with those guys. Life sucks big time. If I had it in me I'd just quit trying and join them. I sure hope their is a God but I wonder why he's making it so hard on good people and easy on bad ones? JMO