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 : How high will Microsoft fly? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Gerald Walls who wrote (10940)	9/23/1998 8:42:00 AM
From: Daniel Schuh	Respond to of 74651

<OT> Wow, more sanctimonious sermonizing from our new local legal expert and constitutional scholar. Since you have decided that what's in Ken Starr's report is the "TRUTH", and anything about the context of where that truth came from is irrelevant, I'd agree there's no point in arguing. Now should I being quoting Judge Jackson's last ruling on Microsoft's summary judgement motion as the definitive legal document on the case? It has somewhat more standing than Starr's report, you know. Prosecutors don't get the final word. Judges do. Unfortunately in this matter, the judges are a bit partisan too. I don't purport to be a lawyer, though, or put forth definitive legal opinions. As for name calling, I've been called more than a few. I imagine if I went back over your righteous sermonizing I'd find some to add to my list. Politics is a blood sport these days, and as long as the blood is being shed on the right side you like it that way. I don't. Cheers, Dan.