SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: LindyBill who wrote (55050)7/19/2004 3:09:18 PM
From: JohnM  Read Replies (2) of 793572
 
"While there was no dispute with the underlying facts, my democratic colleagues refused to allow the following conclusions to appear in the report:"

Let's assume, for the moment, that's Roberts' voice. Perhaps it's a staffer but it gets too complicated if we do. So assumption, Roberts. The problem is that there is, evidently, a dispute as to what "the facts" are. Neither of us know what the actual dispute between Senate Int Committee Reps and Dems was. Here we only have Roberts' cut and, not surprisingly, it makes him look good and his Dem colleagues look bad. Hardly a recommendation for a neutral statement of "the facts."

So, we are now in agreement that the Dems refused to sign the portion of the report having to do with the Wilson stuff. At least we've reached that level of an agreement.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News