Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: ravingnutter

Oh, and her 'source' has released her. She just says it was under duress. Thus, the SP knows who her 'source' was. Notwithstanding, he still wants her under oath before the GJ. Hmmmm. Inquiring minds....


69 posted on 07/12/2005 2:51:09 PM PDT by eureka! (It will not be safe to vote Democrat for a long, long, time...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies ]


To: eureka!
Thus, the SP knows who her 'source' was. Notwithstanding, he still wants her under oath before the GJ.

This part you have right. The subpoena refers to what the Appeals Court called a "specified government official" and I got the impression the name was known but not made public.

Incidentally, the New York Times quoted this phrase deceitfully (I think--unless it is phrased this way somewhere else that I'm not aware of) a "specified Executive Branch Official".

86 posted on 07/12/2005 3:29:56 PM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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