You may want to look at Baker's denial I sent to Politech today. -Declan
On Sat, Oct 27, 2001 at 10:51:00AM -0700, Anonymous wrote: > Reading the article it looks more like the kind of news that's playing a lot these >days: the story of 'something is not yet being done', nobody is claiming to be doing >it, but it could be done and the majority of people would support it. A kind of "no >news is news" story. > > At the same time, if Baker, attorney with Steptoe (god what a perfect name!), were >aware of this and leaked it to the press based on work he is doing with the FBI, >wouldn't he be subject to imprisonment or at least civil and professional penalties >for violation of attorney-client confidentiality? Unless the FBI wants it leaked. >And why? To gauge reaction perhaps. To tell the frogs the heat's going to be turned >up a notch? > > But it also could be Baker trying to keep warm in the sunshine of publicity by >having something to say. At the same time spouting this information would be a most >egregious violation of at least SOMEthing. > > "Curiouser and curiouser," said Alice!
