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

To: Howlin
Tell me why she's different, because she knew -- or just because she's on that committee?

There is no statutory requirement to inform Reid about anything related to surveillance. Zero. The fact that he heard about it "in the last few months" is irrelevant to anything.

Pelosi, on the other hand, has been on the House Intel Committee for the last 10 years (longest in history) and was thus in a position to be informed as a direct statutory requirement of 50 USC 1802. She would have heard about it in late-2001/early-2002.

Pelosi is revealing/acknowledging classified information she learned in her legal capacity as a member of the House Intel Committee. That's wrong, even if the NYT reported it.

174 posted on 12/18/2005 4:47:15 PM PST by angkor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies ]


To: angkor
"Pelosi is revealing/acknowledging classified information she learned in her legal capacity as a member of the House Intel Committee. That's wrong, even if the NYT reported it."

Nancy Pelosi is just plain wrong!

(Further evidence that cousins shouldn't marry cousins.)

180 posted on 12/18/2005 4:51:07 PM PST by 2111USMC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 174 | 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