He used the word ``threat,'' but then said ``promise.'' The point here is that we had an understanding. Would he not agree we had an understanding?
Patrick Moynihan: “He used the word ``threat,'' but then said ``promise.'' The point here is that we had an understanding. Would he not…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing a previous agreement during a debate.
Share
More from Patrick Moynihan
I rise for the pleasant purpose of noting the decision by the Committee on Rules to add two names to that very special group that is portrayed in our reception room--six of the most distinguished Senators in our history. We have now added…
I say to our chairman, as evidenced by the fact that this measure was reported 19-1 in the Finance Committee. I thank the Chair. We are at a moment of history and the omens are excellent.
May I simply thank my revered friend. We have been together, even across the aisle, for a near quarter century. There is no one whose regard I greater value and whose remarks I could not be more moved by.
If the present report is to serve any large purpose, it is to introduce the public to the thought that secrecy is a mode of regulation. In truth, it is the ultimate mode for the citizen does not even know that he or she is being regulated.





