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 : Did Slick Boink Monica? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Janice Shell who wrote (14049)	4/19/1998 10:15:00 AM
From: jlallen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20981

Do you know what a legal conflict is? In most instances, a conflict (in the legal sense) does not arise when you represent multiple clients on the same side of the "v." (as in U.S.v. Bubba). So if Mr. Starr's firm happens to represent some conservative groups and he is also selected as IC in a legal sense (no controlling authority as Gore would say) there is no conflict. I think what Clinton supporters see as a conflict is perhaps some perceived lack of bias. A lawyer however, even a prosecutor, is an advocate, by definition taking a side in a dispute. There is no conflict here only some lame notion that Bubba is somehow being treated unfairly. Its bunk as usual. JLA PS If you want to talk about bias, how about Judge Wright's connection to Bubba. Why did she not recuse herself? (I'll tell you I still don't think much of Ms. Jones case but it is an interesting fact.)