revisionist history
 

OK, just checking - my current deal definitely has me humor impaired these days.

Then again, a lot of people took bizzare positions on Bill's BJ to cope with their political cognitive dissonance - I recall the stunning silence of women's organizations. The Vast Right Wing Conspiracy emerging as the defender of "those poor, poor girls" wouldn't be much of a stretch.

through the looking glass
 

Huh? This is basic "Power and the Penis 101" from ten years of CLE's.

through the looking glass
 

You don't have to go to the adult bookstore to get CLE materials anymore, bilmore. I'm sure your old firm said it was cheaper, but trust me, there's a better way.

through the looking glass
 

You get your credits the way you see fit, and leave me be.

through the looking glass
 

Most companies I represent require executive officers to report intracompany relationships to the board. I have been involved in one such report. Not only is it likely against company policy, but it also shows incredibly bad judgment not to do so. Whether he should be fired for it is another matter.

through the looking glass
 

OK. Sorry. Just to make sure you understand what the rest of us are talking about, though, know that "Boeing" is a big company that makes airplanes, not just a sound effect.

through the looking glass
 

Did anyone else see that news this morning and not think, "I wonder what was really going on." I assumed the board had other reasons to can him, or something, and that this pretext had the advantage of spooking investors less, or something.

through the looking glass
 

Don't do much compliance counseling, do you?

through the looking glass
 

If -- and I really mean if, because your meaning is a little opaque -- you mean to suggest that state or federal law reflects the sort of analysis about consent that you were describing above, then I ask again, so what? That's not why Boeing said it was canning him, so who cares?

through the looking glass
 

More likely is that this allowed them to terminate him for "cause" under his employment agreement.

through the looking glass
 

I was responding to a "why wasn't she fired" comment. I pointed out that the legal evironment currently holds her as a victim, for the reason I set out. You ran with that, as you are wont to do, somewhere else. So, yes, if you took my comment to mean that I believe that Elizabeth Dole invented Zoloft, or some other completely unrelated thing, I hereby acknowledge your merit and correctness.

through the looking glass
 

I guess I wasn't clear what you were talking about, since you appeared to be responding to me, but all I said was that she wasn't his direct report. Perhaps we were both distracted by the outbreak of stupid socks. I thought Burger was asking why she wasn't named, and I assume it's because no one is interested in fucking up her life.

through the looking glass
 

Ships passing in the night.

through the looking glass
 

Given the ambiguity of the reasons for his termination, it's a reasonable question. If the policy is no intra-corporate affairs, why isn't she on the hook? Double standard?

Is the policy "you have to report any affairs if you're in x position" and she either reported it or isn't in x position? Then there's a reason.

Why are they interested in fucking up his life? They'll end up having to settle with him over the inevitable suit over whether the termination was for cause (assuming he hasn't settled already).

Didn't anyone see that terrible movie with michael douglas and demi moore?

through the looking glass
 

What f'ed up is because they are keeping her ID secret, we can't see photos. Did this pass the Victoria Principal principle? We may never know.

through the looking glass
 

Hmmmm.....Victoria Principal.....hmmmmm...

through the looking glass
 

I assume that someone wanted to get medieval on his ass for other reasons, and that this is how it played out. Of course it's a double standard. This is not usually a firing offense, right? Surely they care about the costs of such litigation not at all, assuming that he'll sue and risk the filing of an answer with more allegations in it.

Maybe Michael Douglas has made a good movie, though I rather doubt. Demi Moore has surely made a good movie, though none comes to mind. But any movie with both of them would have to suck, even if it wasn't written by a tendentious, Harvard-educated blowhard like Michael Crichton, who increasingly uses his movies as a platform to foist his ideological and ignorant world view on the rest of us. (Like Michael Moore, only it's fiction.)

through the looking glass
 

Now, now. Haven't you taken the time to read his positions on global warming, where he points out that it is the scientific community's worldviews that are ideological and ignorant?

Look -- any man who's talented enough to tell a story about man-eating dinosaurs is smart enough to be pretty goddamned close to the truth. He's got my proxy on all this scientific stuff.

through the looking glass
 

Are you kidding? The Game? Wall Street?

through the looking glass
 

He was pretty good as the jeep driver in Cast a Giant Shadow.

through the looking glass
 

Sweet thing, given the way this was announced, they've already negotiated his termination/severance package. Check the SEC filings for Boeing for the past week or two and the next three days.

ETA specifically, an 8-K.

Hi, person with 8-K questions!

through the looking glass
 

I don't have time to check the filings, but I would be very surprised if that is the case. Had they settled, they would not have outed him this way. They would have allowed him to resign gracefully.

through the looking glass
 

I bet you that they have come to some kind of decision regarding his parting gifts, or are in serious discussions. He did resign, technically. I checked and they haven't yet filed his resignation (or, it isn't up on Edgar yet) but they have to shortly and I bet it will have something in it about his employment contract or severance or whatever. I would go look up his employment agmt but I have shit to do and can only afford the relatively minor procrastination of this. http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/...r_050307a.html

ETA the CNN story says: "Stonecipher will get the normal retirement package to which he would have been entitled with no additional payments to encourage his resignation, Platt said. But he did not detail the amount of severance or separation pay he will receive."

I'm thinking he has already agreed not to sue. But hey, you go, guy, with your theories.


EA to say, look, Boeing really did not need bad ethics press right this second:

through the looking glass
 

If you read between the lines, this wasn't voluntary. The board asked for his resignation, meaning that if he didn't give it, he was toast.

There are two other things going on here, I think.

First, this was based on an blind tip, and given board sensitivity to suits these days, they may have felt they had no choice. In other words, if they didn't can him, the info would leak, and then they'd have to face investors.

The more likely reason, in my mind, is as Ty said earlier. They wanted him out and this gave them cause.

I would be extremely surprised if this guy's lawyer would agree, as a negotiated settlement, to allow the company to out him like this. My bet is they couldn't reach agreement and this was a shot accross the bow ahead of the litigation that will result. Also, if this was negotiated already, they would (or should) have mentioned that in the release. That way, idiots like me and you wouldn't have to speculate.

through the looking glass
 

Um, whatever.

ETA you do KNOW that this guy KNEW he was brought in to clean stuff up, right? In light of the many ethics problems? Now I really do want to go look up his employment agreement.

through the looking glass
 

Michael Crichton or Michael Moore?
Because I've heard Crichton does a lot of research to make sure the facts underneath his stories are pretty accurate.

through the looking glass
 

What's his employment agreement going to tell you? I'll bet you a doughnut that it says a breach of company policy is terminable for "cause."

through the looking glass
 

And this gives him grounds to sue how? I'm saying I think he's agreed to walk a whole 12 (possibly 14) months earlier than he was planning to for no extra money, given that he was a bad bad boy. He's got a fucking obscene* exec pension entitlement.

You are the one claiming he's planning to sue for extra money.

I looked up his employment agreement (or, what's been filed, but I think there must be something else out there, b/c what's been filed is from 1997) and they neglected to file the exhibit that shows what he gets on termination (oopsie).

*as compared to normal people, not as compared to corp execs.

through the looking glass
 

Kinda like Dan Rather, you mean?

through the looking glass
 

i guess you don't do Federal labor law, because if you did you'd know that Boeing submits to MSPB and 5 CFR by taking the governemnt $$$$$. the guy was toast, but he's better off-

• 5CFR4.2 TITLE 5--ADMINISTRATIVE PERSONNEL
  
  CHAPTER I--OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT
  
  PART 4--PROHIBITED PRACTICES (RULE IV)--Table of Contents
  
  Sec. 4.2 Prohibition against racial, political or religious discrimination.
  
  No person employed in the executive branch of the Federal Government
  who has authority to take or recommend any personnel action with respect
  to any person who is an employee in the competitive service or any
  eligible or applicant for a position in the competitive service shall
  make any inquiry concerning the race, sex, political affiliation, or
  religious beliefs of any such employee, eligible, or applicant. All
  disclosures concerning such matters shall be ignored, except as to such
  membership in political parties or organizations as constitutes by law a
  disqualification for Government employment. No discrimination shall be
  exercised, threatened, or promised by any person in the executive branch
  of the Federal Government against or in favor of any employee in the
  competitive service, or any eligible or applicant for a position in the
  competitive service because of his race, political affiliation, or
  religious beliefs, except as may be authorized or required by law.

but here's what worse Fringe- they have to let blind people run their snack bars

• (x) "Vending facility" means automatic vending machines, cafeterias, snack bars, cart service, shelters, counters, and such other appropriate auxiliary equipment which may be operated by blind licensees and which is necessary for the sale of newspapers, periodicals, confections, tobacco products, foods, beverages, and other articles or services dispensed automatically or manually and prepared on or off the premises in accordance with all applicable health laws, and including the vending or exchange of changes for any lottery authorized by State law and conducted by an agency of a State within such State.

see Section 395.1 (x)

Do you get that? Blind people run their food facility, and make all the decisions- LIKE- its up to a blind guy to decide what kind of donuts to stock- do you think they get anything particularly exciting? They can't tell if the suppliers is giving them a bunch of plain fry cakes- you want angel creams at the caf get your ass out of a government Contracting company. You think the local Krispy Kreme isn't saving the good donuts to sell to the next company- where the buyers are properly equipped to make this decision?
WTTW. The guy's better off- I'm he can find another company with hot execs and less stricture.

whatver happened to......
 

speaking of has-beens who have been relegated to the dustbin of the socialist revolution that never was' history, today's breaking news from Chris Matthews:

[b]The 2008 Presidential campaign will not include Al Gore. I'm reporting tonight that the former Vice President and 2000 Democratic Presidential nominee will not run for President. I've been given this scoop from a perfect source who informed me that the purpose of this disclosure at this time is to end speculation about a campaign that will never occur.[/b/]


Ho hum. And my crystal says that any day now Jimmy Carter, George McGovern, Walter Mondale, Mike Dukakis and Hubert Humphree will be making similar announcements, thrashing the hopes of tens of supporters the blew states over.

http://www.strangecosmos.com/images/content/6001.jpg

through the looking glass
 

No idea, but I'm betting that he neglected to enter into a love contract.

RT, I think we should create one and link to it here on LawTalkers, as a public service.

Regrettably, it can't undo the multiple years of pain for those relationships and sorely needed a love contract, but maybe -- just maybe -- we can save those blossoming relationships to come. God knows, we don't want Shapey to be hurt next time he thinks about taking the plunge.

in the "hope he's not holding his breath" department
 

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Stan Lee Media co-founder Peter Paul said on Monday that he would plead guilty to a federal securities charge.

Paul demanded that Sen. Clinton "take responsibility for her role in what was the largest campaign finance fraud basically that has ever been reported."

"I'm standing up and taking responsibility for an SEC violation. ... She, as a public figure, should do the same for her (Federal Election Commission) violation," he said.

By responsibility is he expecting she is just going to drive him to Ft. Marcy Park or drive and pull the trigger?

through the looking glass
 

While this is an awesome idea in concept, I'm not entirely sure that we can foresee all of the contingencies.

through the looking glass
 

Don't be intimidated by the vagaries of interspecies love. Creative drafting can solve many problems.

Some interesting ideas here about how to fix what ails CBS News.

How about just being straight with the peeps?

Crichton puts A Novel right there on the cover where you can see it

http://images.bestwebbuys.com/muze/b...0679751432.jpg

Handy that you had your copy next to the scanner.

Smelling salts for all Democrats please
 

To paraphrase Rather himself, "CBS needs something on the order of a 95 or 100-yard field goal to win this"

Ha.

If CBS wanted to be number one in 6 months, all they would have to do is hire a real anchor. Like Sean Hannity or tony Snowe or Bill O'Reilly. No spin and fair and balanced. It is what the majority of Americans want.

http://www.conservativemall.com/imag...ducts/849i.jpg

Smelling salts for all Democrats please
 

Say, did they ever put to bed that litigation over who would be the next governor of Washington? I thought the Democrat was sworn into office, but that the state GOP was still planning to sue.