Campaign Funds and Fraud, And Then There IS…?
When I said we had nothing in the way of actual candidates to vote for I meant it. But I’m wondering what will happen if Obama is called on the carpet for his financial dealings with Muslin extremist groups, McCain for his treasonous actions, and now Hillary because of her fraud charges and other less savory things. Can the Clinton’s make this all just disappear? It is highly possible.
On the other hand, if they don’t make it disappear, who’s going to be left to run? Think we could talk Ron Paul into taking up where he left off? Anyway, just a few of my thoughts for today. See what you think…
Clintons to face fraud trial
Judge setting date, testimony to include ex-president, senator
Posted: February 19, 2008
11:27 pm Eastern
© 2008 WorldNetDaily
Peter Paul and President Clinton
While Hillary Clinton battles Barack Obama on the campaign trail, a judge in Los Angeles is quietly preparing to set a trial date in a $17 million fraud suit that aims to expose an alleged culture of widespread corruption by the Clintons and the Democratic Party.
At the conclusion of a hearing tomorrow morning before California Superior Court Judge Aurelio N. Munoz, lawyers for Hollywood mogul Peter F. Paul will begin seeking sworn testimony from all three Clintons – Bill, Hillary and Chelsea – along with top Democratic Party leaders and A-list celebrities, including Barbra Streisand, John Travolta, Brad Pitt and Cher.
Paul’s team hopes for a trial in October. The Clintons’ longtime lawyer David Kendall, who will attend the hearing, has declined comment on the suit.
The Clintons have tried to dismiss the case, but the California Supreme Court, in 2004, upheld a lower-court decision to deny the motion.
Now, you know Bill didn’t do this alone, but apparently the judge isn’t going to hold Hillary responsible. Just like a politition of Her standing to get the * get out of jail free * card. You just can’t trust anyone these days. Seems like they are all tangled together and thick as thieves should be.
It really sucks that Justice can let some people off so easily. And you know with Hillary’s legal background, she and Bill are always thinking three steps ahead.
against Bill Clinton
Judge dismisses Hillary as defendant,
but she’ll likely testify with ex-president
Posted: April 08, 2006
1:00 am Eastern
By Art Moore
© 2008 WorldNetDaily.comHillary Clinton with Peter and Andrea Paul (Courtesy Hillcap.org)
A judge in Los Angeles yesterday dismissed Sen. Hillary Clinton from a lawsuit by business mogul Peter Franklin Paul that alleges her husband, former President Bill Clinton, reneged on a $17 million business deal.
President Clinton however, remains a defendant and will be subpoenaed early next week to testify in a deposition. A trial date has been set, and Paul plans to depose Sen. Clinton as well.
Represented by the public-interest law firm U.S. Justice Foundation, Paul claims Bill Clinton agreed to promote Paul’s Internet businesses after leaving office in exchange for his financial backing of a Hollywood gala and fund-raiser for Sen. Clinton’s Senate campaign in 2000.
Paul charges President Clinton caused one of his public companies to collapse by diverting his Japanese partner’s investments.
The Clinton’s path is littered with the dead and dying according to some websites. I’m not talking actual bodies, though there are enough of those too. You can check out this website for more of that kind of stuff: HERE
But this article is about Hillary Clinton, not her husband or daughter. Now Hillary can deny she had anything to do with the following, but come on, are you kidding me? She, Hillary, made some phone calls all pissed off, you can bet and got her * gang * going for her:
BY MICHAEL McAULIFF
DAILY NEWS WASHINGTON BUREAU
Thursday, March 27th 2008, 4:00 AM
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi Egan-Chin/News
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi
WASHINGTON – Hillary Clinton’s megabucks donors picked a fight with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi Wednesday, pitting the most famous woman in politics against the most powerful.
Angered that Pelosi wants Democratic insiders to follow the will of voters when they cast their own “superdelegate” votes in the nomination race, 20 of Clinton’s top fund-raisersissued a veiled threat to Pelosi and warned her to change her tune.
“We have been strong supporters of the [Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee],” they wrote, referring to the House fund-raising arm overseen by Pelosi. “We therefore urge you to clarify your position on superdelegates and reflect in your comments a more open view.”
Sources said Pelosi was infuriated by the implied threat the donors would quit giving cash to the committee.
Clinton’s supporters pounced on Pelosi for telling ABC this month that the party would be damaged if “superdelegates overturn what happened in the elections.”
Clinton trails Barack Obama in the “pledged” delegates that have been selected by voters – and almost certainly cannot catch up. But she hopes superdelegates catapult her ahead of Obama.
The House speaker was not backing down, however, and is still insisting that superdelegates respect “the decisions of millions of Americans who have voted,” her aide Brendan Daly said.
The brazen move by Camp Clinton stunned veteran Democrats, particularly because at least eight of the letter’s authors have not donated to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee since Pelosi became speaker.
“[Clinton] looks desperate,” said one. “There is no way they should have threatened to do this. It is terrible. … I am sure Obama is raising money off of it already.”
Maybe all that bad karma is finally kicking in? Maybe the Clinton’s will get their day in court and their big buck buddies won’t be able to do a thing about it. Maybe. We do still have laws in this land though they do seem flexible when it comes to money and politics. Now, if you are poor in this country, there is no such thing as Justice. We all know that too. But this isn’t the worst, oh no, not by a long shot!
I’d also like to know how she justified this to herself? But then, this child is long gone from Hillary’s mind. Who the hell cares about one little girl anyway? Well, I do!
But there is a little-known episode Clinton doesn’t mention in her standard campaign speech in which those two principles collided. In 1975, a 27-year-old Hillary Diane Rodham, acting as a court-appointed attorney, attacked the credibility of a 12-year-old girl in mounting an aggressive defense for an indigent client accused of rape in Arkansas — using her child development background to help the defendant.
The case offers a glimpse into the way Clinton deals with crisis. Her approach, then and now, was to immerse herself in even unpleasant tasks with a will to win, an attitude captured in one of her favorite aphorisms: “Bloom where you’re planted.”
In May 1975, Washington County prosecutor Mahlon Gibson called Rodham, who had taken over the law clinic months earlier, to tell her she’d been appointed to represent a hard-drinking factory worker named Thomas Alfred Taylor, who had requested a female attorney. < snip >
However, that account leaves out a significant aspect of her defense strategy — attempting to impugn the credibility of the victim, according to a Newsday examination of court and investigative files and interviews with witnesses, law enforcement officials and the victim.
Rodham, records show, questioned the sixth grader’s honesty and claimed she had made false accusations in the past. She implied that the girl often fantasized and sought out “older men” like Taylor, according to a July 1975 affidavit signed “Hillary D. Rodham” in compact cursive.
You are kidding me right? A 12 year old girl? And Hillary attacks an already traumatized child on a witness stand? Remember, this is back in 1975! A will to win, ya, I’ll just bet it took a lot to go after a 12 year old girl who was raped!
And you know the guy only wanted a female attorney so he could look this child in the eye and say, “See, I have another woman defending me!” And Clinton used her Child Development background to do this to this child? Damn, she has been a friend to Women and Children all along, hasn’t she? What a Gal! Yes indeed! I’m impressed, aren’t you? NOT!!!
I want to know what the hell is wrong with this country that we ALWAYS blame the victims in this crime? Why isn’t rape up there with other capitol crimes since it changes the victim’s life forever? That child was never the same, guaranteed! And Ms. Clinton made it worse for her for the rest of her life. And Ms. Clinton used her psychological background to do it. How low can you go?
Winning at all costs isn’t winning, it is bulldozing you way through things. We’ve had 8 years of that and look where it has gotten us. Spied on, our rights trampled into the ground, war we don’t want and a gutless Congress. Anyway you read the story, it made me sick.
See these two? They are Hillary’s brothers, Hugh and Tony. Hugh Rodham is on the left and Tony is on the right. Want to know what they have to do with the Cllinton’s and their skeletons? Click on the link for the full story:
Tell A Friend
The two handsome devils you see pictured here are Hillary Rodham Clinton’s brothers, Hugh and Tony Rodham. Hillary would prefer we didn’t talk about Hugh, Tony, or their paid roles in securing presidential pardons and a commutation of sentence from Bill Clinton for some fairly unsavory characters on Bill’s last day in office. As you might have guessed, we’re going to talk about them anyway. We’re also going to talk about what these two handsome devils have to do with why we should all be able immediately to see Bill and Hillary’s White House papers, currently under lock and key at the Clinton Presidential Library in Little Rock, and with why Bill and Hillary don’t want us to see them.
In early 2001 it was discovered that Hugh Rodham, pictured at left, had accepted a total of $400,000 from convicted drug trafficker Carlos Vignali and fraudulent businessman Glenn Braswell for “legal services” which led to a commutation of sentence for Vignali and a pardon for Braswell from Bill Clinton on his last day in office. When the payoffs to Hugh were discovered, Bill and Hillary denied any prior knowledge of them and asked Hugh to return the money. Later, it was learned that Hillary’s other brother Tony, pictured at right, had received $107,000 from Edgar and Vonna Jo Gregory to secure a presidential pardon for a previous bank fraud conviction. The Gregories also received pardons from Bill Clinton on his last day in office. A total of 140 individuals were controversially pardoned by Clinton on his last day in office, including fugitive commodities trader Marc Rich, then wanted on tax evasion charges. Interestingly, Rich’s ex-wife Denise contributed $2,000 in 1999 to Hillary Clinton’s Senate campaign, $5,000 to a related political action committee, and $450,000 to a fund set up to build the Clinton Presidential Library. These are facts, not rumors, and they all point to a Rodham-Clinton White House actively in the business of selling pardons.
Any more questions? I rest my case!