[antaresequity]

Setting aside the ImClone info, the Securities Fraud against her seems so bizarre.

The state claims she denied the insider trading charge, and as a result, she defrauded her investors. The denial it turns out was true, in as much as she was never charged with insider trading.

The state wants us to believe, that they are looking out for her investors, or potential investors, by prosecuting her on securities fraud. Yet the the prosecution event itself, has contributed to massive revenue losses and hammered stock prices.

So in a nutshell, they attack her on denying an unproven allegation, under the guise of public service, and in so doing, far more effectively destroy the wealth of innocent individuals than Martha supposedly did by denying the charges.

Who is going to prosecute the state? The state has done more to damage wealth in this case than any other participant.

[CobaltBlue]

I think the case against her is as air-tight as the case against Clinton for lying about sex, and very similar. She lied to make herself look good in public.

It's the timing of the statements that stinks, and the fact that she made the statements to a conference of stock analysts who were analyzing her own stock.