[Texasforever]

You could at least have expected him to get some advice from an accountant right? He could at leats keep his statements consistent as to what types of contracts he is "investigating" right? He first states that Halliburton’s problems were with disputed over runs on "fixed price" contracts and then states on CNN that the problem centers on "cost plus" contracts, which btw became as scarce as Larry Klayman's integrity in the early 80's in the EPC industry.

[Torie]

Well you can't read a bunch of paperwork and be before a camera at the same time unless you are LBJ, who seemed to be able to do both. I'm not sure Klayman understands the import of the difference, and thus he was not sensitive to the issue. His main point is that he wants this all to be sucked dry, and maybe get some positive action for himself in the process. And yes, he might get lucky. Maybe the SEC in hindsight will find the accounting eggegious (particularly with the pressure on), and that the CEO is a responsible party (civilly I might add, not criminally). Is it unfair? Sure. Is life always fair? Er, no.

[Torie]

Not to cause any trouble, but the thought occurs to me about cost overrun charges. Would not the auditors require a legal opinion as to the merits of the cost overrun claim in order to allow it to be booked as income, absent the contract being entirely clear on the merits of the issue? In the abstract, and per common sense, the conservatism principle in accounting would seem to dictate that.