![]() |
€uromeinke, FEJ. and Ghoulish Delight RULE!!! NA abides. |
|
|
#30 | ||||
|
What?
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,635
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Quote:
Quote:
But what do we find if we keep picking at this statement? Quote:
Quote:
Using her name would be identifiying a covert agent, wouldn't it? ... which Novak proceeded to do. Red courtesy phone for Mr. Novak: Your source was trying to keep you out of trouble. I agree this confidential source should be questioned. He did NOT handle this exchange with Novak properly. "No comment" would have been the appropriate response, in my opinion. But, it seems that Mr. Novak disagrees with us about who should be indicted and questioned. In order to question this informant, Novak would have to identify him/her. I just don't see that happening unless Novak is compelled to do so. Of course, it is possible this informant has been called by the Grand Jury and records of any such appearance have not been linked to Novak, at least in the media. Last edited by Scrooge McSam : 07-16-2005 at 07:11 PM. |
||||
|
|
Submit to Quotes
|
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|