Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bald Eagle who wrote (208416)	12/10/2001 12:25:58 PM
From: Thomas A Watson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

You have presented no evidence that any reputable source questions the interpretation of the AG. The dem senators were timid and did not argue. It was reported the Senator Kenendy has introduced a bill to change the law. (which this one obviously can as some lawmakers disagree with him) Name and quote the source that says there is another interpretation. They said and some lawmakers, LOL That is a total crock argument. tom watson tosiwmee

To: Bald Eagle who wrote (208416)	12/10/2001 1:00:11 PM
From: Srexley	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

"(which this one obviously can as some lawmakers disagree with him)" Just because "lawmakers disagree" does not mean that it is cut and dry that it can be interpretted different ways. I would like to see the actual law and make a judgement. The dems have showed regularly that they have a unique ability to interpret laws very broadly, as the election fiasco demonstrated. Ashcroft stated directly and confidently that it would have broken the law to provide the list to the FBI. I heard one pundit say flat out that Ashcroft was protecting the NRA (and was being soft on terrorism) and did not have the law on his side. That is a strong charge, and I would like to see the law so I can make a determination. But Kennedy or Leahy or a news pundit saying it does not make it so. Kennedy did not state that the law could be determined different ways when he was confronted with the issue. He asked if the law should be changed.