[Registered]

Never say ALL when speaking about the law. I am not using MY OPINION on this. I am using the plain reading of the text.

I can understand your interpretation of the law. However, an additional piece of information that works against this interpretation is the GAO Plum Book. Published by the government and reviewed by the US Civil Rights Commission and the Senate Cmte on Governmental Oversight, clearly listed the position as expiring on November 29th, 2001. So, how will Berry explain the fact that she reviewed and accepted the inevitable end to Wilson's time on the board as is listed in the Plum book?? Hmmm? BTW, how do YOU interpret the listing in the GAO Plum Book?

It was clearly printed in the GAO Plum book that Wilson's seat was expiring on November 29,2001. DO THESE FREAKS NEED READING LESSONS?!?!?! WHAT IS GOING ON HERE. GET THE MARSHALS IN THERE TO REMOVE WILSON FROM THE SEAT NOW!!! $123 thousand a year, Wilson should be fined that amount for every day her fat butt sits on that panel!! FREEPERS UNITE!!

[ChaseR]

bttt

[VRWC_minion]

So, how will Berry explain the fact that she reviewed and accepted the inevitable end to Wilson's time on the board as is listed in the Plum book?

While looking things up I found the minutes of the house oversight committee and the report form the GAO was devastating. This Commission was/is very poorly run with no accountability. So your finding of this "typo" is par for this committee.

In other words they will plead it was an administrative oversight.

[deport]

And it appears the letter appointing Ms. Wilson also used Nov. 29, 2001 as her expiration date.

A White House official allowed The Washington Times to see the letter appointing Miss Wilson to the commission. The letter, written by a Clinton administration official, states specifically that her membership on the panel would expire Nov. 29, 2001.

[The Wizard]

bttt