HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Editorials & Other Articles (Forum) » TAIBBI: "The adminis... » Reply #4

Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Jan 27, 2012, 06:57 PM

4. An optimistic answer to Taibbi's question, why appoint men who have had the authority to enforce3

laws but haven't done it?

Because these men might change their minds if legal issues and a legal point of view that is not part of their specific expertise were presented to them?

Or, because there is some broader criminal issue than these men deal with in their specific assignments?

Or, because two of the men think that everything that was done was legal. If the third man can convince them otherwise, then they have a legal case that can be won even against the formidable army of lawyers that the Wall Street crowd will hire.

Just being right does not win a case. Strategy is everything. And think of the variety and scope of issues: garden-variety criminal fraud, securities fraud, securities regulation violations and housing and investment issues. Wow. It cuts across a huge slice of our economy and our law.

Reply to this post

Back to OP Alert abuse Link to post in-thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 10 replies Author Time Post
kpete Jan 2012 OP
Uncle Joe Jan 2012 #1
kpete Jan 2012 #2
tabatha Jan 2012 #3
LineNew Reply An optimistic answer to Taibbi's question, why appoint men who have had the authority to enforce3
JDPriestly Jan 2012 #4
mojowork_n Jan 2012 #5
txlibdem Jan 2012 #6
Festivito Jan 2012 #7
txlibdem Jan 2012 #9
Festivito Jan 2012 #10
bvar22 Jan 2012 #8
Please login to view edit histories.