Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: bcsco
I can see your point, but it can be taken either way.

For a professional writer, he sure wasn't clear. That's for sure.

It's just too convenient that Jerome Armstrong doesn't fall into all the categories he earlier mentioned; politicians, organizations, groups, etc

He falls into the "directly or indirectly" part of the statement. Kos's denial of the charge is pretty straight forward. He's not writing "for hire" and he's not getting anything "directly or indirectly" from anyone.

SD

89 posted on 06/21/2006 10:56:35 AM PDT by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies ]


To: SoothingDave
"He falls into the "directly or indirectly" part of the statement."

Of course he does. But that doesn't belie some other quid pro quo from existing. He writes strictly of "source of 'revenue'". Such a phrase can be exclusory of other forms of compensation.

Perhaps I was off the mark when concentrating on the idea of paid compensation. I don't know. I only know that there is something fishy about his endorsements, changes in endorsements, acceptance of paid parties given by political office seekers, and the 'consulting' work of his buddy/co-author.

95 posted on 06/21/2006 11:15:08 AM PDT by bcsco (KOs = KOincidence of KOmmie KOrruption!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson