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.

Technology Stocks : Qualcomm Moderated Thread - please read rules before posting -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Azawi who wrote (159729)	8/12/2019 11:26:10 AM
From: Art Bechhoefer	5 Recommendations Recommended By imc101 manning18 Maurice Winn SKIP PAUL windage_ky Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 196472

Recusal is only necessary if the person in question worked on a specific issue that is now before regulators. For example, if the FTC chairman worked on, say, a personnel problem at QCOM or other problem that had nothing to do with the issue of licensing and royalty payments, he would not need to recuse himself at all. When I was a member of a local regulatory agency several years ago, I had to recuse myself because the person whose business was before the regulatory agency happened to be suing me at the time. So the FTC and its chairman should get real. There should be an obvious conflict of interest to justify recusal. Otherwise, just get on with the job you were hired to do. Art