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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: combjelly who wrote (573802)	6/26/2010 12:57:09 AM
From: d[-_-]b	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1576972

You mean the judge that is loaded up with oil, especially offshore, stocks? Got a link of what he loaded up on?

To: combjelly who wrote (573802)	6/26/2010 1:29:09 AM
From: i-node	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1576972

You mean the judge that is loaded up with oil, especially offshore, stocks? Yeah, a real unbiased source that is. Actually, the judge owned an immaterial amount of Exxon (about $15K/worth) which was SOLD before the hearing. He apparently had no other interests which might be directly affected by his ruling. He did own shares in Allis Chalmers but the relationship would be at most tangential. Exxon's interest in the Gulf is absolutely immaterial to their financial position, and the fact that he dumped the shares before the hearing insulated him effectively and correctly from any charges of conflict of interests. The bottom line is that he certainly isn't "loaded up" with such stocks and nobody could legitimately allege any conflict based on his holdings as they have been reported. As usual, you are, FOS.

To: combjelly who wrote (573802)	6/26/2010 10:49:56 AM
From: jlallen	1 Recommendation Respond to of 1576972

You are another ignorant dumbass. The Judge was not "loaded up" with oil stocks. Try not to sound like such an ignoramus for a change.