On CBS MoneyWatch: 5 Money Tips in 60 Seconds
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 9 of 65:
Next »
« Previous
Yes, bribes.
"DOJ knew that they could try to get a settlement or continue to try a case which would have ended up going to the Supreme Court."

The Supreme Court rejected the case. They did not want to hear Microsoft's appeal. You knew it Hayes but you pretend you did not know.

"In the two big anti-trust cases lately, IBM and AT&T, the results were the same. Settlement."

Results were the same but how they got there were different. IBM and ATT settled before the verdict. Microsoft settled (bribed) after the verdict was given. The convict gets to choose how he continues to do business. Martha Stewart did not have that chance. YOu knew it but you pretend you did not know.

"But unless you have some kind of proof that the anti-trust department in DOJ, the appeals court that remanded the case and the judge that reheard the case and later approved the settlement were swayed by or pressured by anyone because of any money that MS gave to either political party, you don't have the right to keep accusing anyone of accepting bribes."

Is Microsoft supposed to disclose to the media and the public that it bribed the DOJ? Is the DOJ supposed to disclose to the media and the public that it receive bribes from Microsoft? If you are the authority and you receive bribes from the affected, will you disclose to the media or the public? You know it but you pretend you don't.

The plaintiff withdraw the suit against the defendant and the case is approved by the lower court. The Appeals Court found Microsoft guilty but said break-up is not the way. And so they send the case back to the loweer court for evaluation. The plaintiff had the choice to pursue. Second, I did not say the lower court and the Appeals Court was bribed. I said the DOJ was bribed. Don't mix words, Hayes.

Come on, Hayes, don't pretend to be stupid. I knew from your talkbacks way back before the guilty verdict was given to Microsoft what your position was with regard to Microsoft. Microsoft was for you very innocent.

Doesn't matter, Hayes, ignore me. Is it too much for you to ignore me?

Yes, justice is for sale.
Posted by: systemcleaner   Posted on: 03/07/04 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use
Reply to Story No further replies to this post will be accepted.

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

To bad the courts cant act this fast in other cases.(nt)  nite_w0lf | 03/05/04
I was thinking same thing  JWatson77 | 03/06/04
except  pschroeder@... | 03/06/04
The PATENT OFFICE is not a court.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 03/06/04
Microsoft is not a court either..  Bobby Sskcat | 03/06/04
Settlement  richhayes | 03/06/04
Simple.  systemcleaner | 03/07/04
Bribes  richhayes | 03/07/04
Yes, bribes.  systemcleaner | 03/07/04
Yes, bribes.  systemcleaner | 03/07/04
Yes, bribes.  systemcleaner | 03/07/04
Any evidence?  BruceWheelock@... | 03/07/04
re: Yes Bribes...  Wolfie2K3 | 03/08/04
arrogance  CO_TechGuy | 03/08/04
this is a welcome step in the right direction  pschroeder@... | 03/05/04
i agree completely  ryusen | 03/05/04
I hope it is a step in the right direction but.......  nite_w0lf | 03/05/04
steps  richhayes | 03/06/04
Don't get your hopes up just yet...  Jose Jimenez | 03/05/04
my hopes haven't changed  pschroeder@... | 03/06/04
It's not 4 million  openMind | 03/08/04
not quite...  ryusen | 03/08/04
apples vs. oranges  pschroeder@... | 03/08/04
whoops, sorry ...  pschroeder@... | 03/08/04
nog (nt)  ryusen | 03/08/04
Yes. As long it is not the last step in the same direction  David Mohring | 03/05/04
invention not discovery??  bjornafreeman@... | 03/06/04
Discovery Vs Invention  David Mohring | 03/08/04
No way ...  Ardian Daka | 03/08/04
Software patents  openMind | 03/08/04
Hardware patents?  dg mh | 03/08/04
Firmware  voska | 03/08/04
I can't agree more  openMind | 03/08/04
software patents  pschroeder@... | 03/08/04
Good  d_jedi | 03/05/04
As long as ....  systemcleaner | 03/05/04
As long as....  seosamh_z | 03/06/04
Corrections needed.  systemcleaner | 03/06/04
Waaayyyy off  d_jedi | 03/06/04
Conflict of Logic  middle of nowhere | 03/07/04
re:  pschroeder@... | 03/06/04
Not surprising.  systemcleaner | 03/06/04
wrong wrong wrong (as usual)  pschroeder@... | 03/06/04
Yes, for MS fans it is always MS is right. Everybody else is wrong.  systemcleaner | 03/06/04
SS, everything is NOT about MS, no matter how you want to paint it  pschroeder@... | 03/06/04
Wow! Schroeder you are higher than the President!  systemcleaner | 03/07/04
Government Offices  richhayes | 03/07/04
Oh please...  Patrick Jones | 03/06/04
re:  ryusen | 03/08/04
Not Not Surprising  dposkie@... | 03/10/04
you know...  ryusen | 03/08/04
You ignore the fact that  jfrankcarr | 03/06/04
Bush, the Republicans & Microsoft  bjornafreeman@... | 03/06/04
So, by your reckoning...  Confused by religion | 03/06/04
OK not all leftist  bjornafreeman@... | 03/06/04
Aids research funding is mostly in Africa...  Confused by religion | 03/07/04
Oh Puhleeeze  Squawkbox | 03/07/04
Message has been deleted.  qwwq | 03/07/04
some common sense  dg mh | 03/08/04
MS was RIGHT to start with Eolas was wrong  idnew2011@... | 03/08/04
not about MS  pschroeder@... | 03/08/04
Ha ha on Eolas  FilledOut | 03/08/04
Eolas was BOGUS to begin with  idnew2025@... | 03/08/04
In defense of Eolas  jlee88 | 03/09/04
You're wrong  eLurker | 03/09/04

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads