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 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Lane3 who wrote (101084)2/18/2005 6:47:38 PM
From: Sully-  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 793572
 
"I don't recall a whole lot of inquiry about evidence in the Eason matter. Yep, Barney Frank asked. But the overwhelming reaction was that the charge was ridiculous on its face--end of inquiry."

What a steaming pile of revisionist history.

The evidence you are wrong is overwhelming. Here's all the
proof you need. And most of this same info was posted right
here on this thread too.

Message 21011141

50 posts on this link....
siliconinvestor.com

51 posts on this link....
siliconinvestor.com

26 posts on this link....
siliconinvestor.com



To: Lane3 who wrote (101084)2/18/2005 7:42:27 PM
From: Nadine Carroll  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 793572
 
I don't recall a whole lot of inquiry about evidence in the Eason matter. Yep, Barney Frank asked

And Sen. Dodd asked, and somebody else in the audience asked, and Barney Frank added that if this was true, it was very disturbing and he would make sure that Congress looked into it - and Eason Jordan provided not a piece of evidence.

And this doesn't make a difference? No evidence doesn't make a difference? Charges of murder with no evidence doesn't make a difference? Charges of murder from the head of an international news division with no evidence doesn't make a differnce?

Whereas suggestions of a hypothesis of gender difference from a university head, with evidence, whoa, there you have a really serious situation.

UFB.