That the White House is controlling the New York Times and Salon from publishing an Enron story?
The same New York Times that published an editorial that called Bush a silly little boy general with delusions of Grandeur?
The same Salon that berates the Bush administration for being stupid?
That the Enron story is being covered up by the media who are secretly being controlled by "The Man". But we can still read the offending article as it's still available via Google and the Salon article talking about pulling the article tells readers where to find it on the net!
The criminal action itself, while still a criminal action, is miniscule to the actual crimes this guy is being actually investigated with. $600 million? Enron is responsible for monetary damages in the hundreds of BILLIONS (if not thousands of billions). Going after the $600 million charge is a waste of lawyers time when they can nail this guy on far greater charges. It'd be like trying to prosecute the beltway sniper for criminal penalties for stealing the rifle (which me may have). We're talking maybe another year in jail on top of the death penalty.
But that isn't even important to this article. If he has criminal PROOF, Leopold should give it to the SEC and let them deal with it in their investigation. As the public, it's nothing more than GOSSIP to us. The story has some salient points, but it's all SPECULATION. I get better "facts" from the National Enquirer. (Heck, I get PHOTOS).
Does this mean the Bush Administration hires "questionable" people? Probably. What political administration hasn't? But here's a spin on that... trying to save the life of a company and keep hundreds of thousands of people employed leads people to take on questionable deals for the "greater good". Enron desperately needed cash to make good, and their energy marketing plan was still a potentially feasible idea. Still is. So what if this guy was trying to save the company by getting $600 million and making it look like pure income on the books.
Is that illegal? Not technically. Hollywood does creative accounting like that all the time.
Is it unethical? Ohhh yeah.
Is it the wrong thing to do? Here's your choices. Blow the whistle. Plunge the company into bankruptcy and watch your friends and you go to jail. Or. Keep up the charade to keep the ball in play... and pray that your team can kick that field goal and keep hundreds of thousands of people employed.
This is not about Enron, this is not about the Bush Administration, and it certainly isn't about justice. This is about political mudslinging between a freelancer who got caught plagiarizing and his boss who was exposed to potentially damaging libel lawsuits. Here's how I call it. Salon probably just wanted to quietly retract the article to lower their libel profile, Leopold swore he wouldn't go down quietly and probably pissed the editor off, so Salon fired the first shot and Leopold returned fire... voila... instant pissing contest.
(And before you start the whole Bush is a puppet of Enron thing again. Enron was THE major employer and cash cow in Texas and Bush was governor of the state. It is impossible for them not to be linked. If you have lunches with "power" people on a weekly basis, and become president, who are you going to choose to lead the departments? Contractors? Monster.com hires? You're going to call up the people with appropriate skills that you *know*. It's irresponsible to do anything else. The same went for Tyson foods and Clinton. The question is whether or not Bush used his power to favor one company over another. Well, Enron sank while its captains screamed to the Bush Administration for a rescue, and he let them sink.)