Smoking-Gun Video Implicating Hillary (Political)

[R. Richard]

The article and the link below should be required reading/listening for anyone who intends to vote in the 2008 US election. Comments?

HILLARYGATE EXCLUSIVE: See Smoking-Gun Video Implicating Hillary in Campaign Finance Fraud
Published April 25th, 2007

Hillary breaks bread with Peter Paul at a June 8, 2000 fundraiser. hillcap.org
TheVanguard.org has obtained video footage proving that Hillary raised dirty money in her 2000 Senate race and lied to authorities to conceal it. Her words on the newly-released video prove Hillary’s complicity in a criminal conspiracy to launder campaign funds and defraud the Federal Elections Commission. In theory, at least, Senator Clinton could face several consecutive five-year sentences in federal prison for her actions in this single four-minute video.

http://blog.thevanguard.org/389/hil...mplicating-hillary-in-campaign-finance-fraud/

 

[mikey2much]

RR I can always count on you

The article and the link below should be required reading/listening for anyone who intends to vote in the 2008 US election. Comments?

HILLARYGATE EXCLUSIVE: See Smoking-Gun Video Implicating Hillary in Campaign Finance Fraud
Published April 25th, 2007

Hillary breaks bread with Peter Paul at a June 8, 2000 fundraiser. hillcap.org
TheVanguard.org has obtained video footage proving that Hillary raised dirty money in her 2000 Senate race and lied to authorities to conceal it. Her words on the newly-released video prove Hillary’s complicity in a criminal conspiracy to launder campaign funds and defraud the Federal Elections Commission. In theory, at least, Senator Clinton could face several consecutive five-year sentences in federal prison for her actions in this single four-minute video.

http://blog.thevanguard.org/389/hil...mplicating-hillary-in-campaign-finance-fraud/

R. Richards, I am sure you have heard the expression that you only get out of something what you put in it. Well that also applies to your mind as well as to other things. You should be careful because it seems to me that you are feeding your mind a steady diet of junk food.

I suggest that you take two Nation magazines and get some rest.

mikey

 

[S-Des]

I wouldn't put anything past her. Personally, I don't care if she breaks campaign laws and does smarmy things...just PLEASE stop talking in that horrific, fake southern accent....*gag* You are from the North side of Chicago, you hack!

 

[Edward Teach]

R. Richard : HILLARYGATE EXCLUSIVE: See Smoking-Gun Video Implicating Hillary in Campaign Finance Fraud

You forward emails, don't you.

 

[R. Richard]

I wouldn't put anything past her. Personally, I don't care if she breaks campaign laws and does smarmy things...just PLEASE stop talking in that horrific, fake southern accent....*gag* You are from the North side of Chicago, you hack!

Hey, wait a minute! If ol' Hillary is from the North side of Chicago, how come, "I have always been a Yankee fan!"?

 

[Recidiva]

I'd never vote for Hillary. If only because during a war, she decided that that greatest threat facing our nation was...video games.

You flunk politics.

 

[R. Richard]

I'd never vote for Hillary. If only because during a war, she decided that that greatest threat facing our nation was...video games.

You flunk politics.

Well, Hillary did put together a health care plan that the DEMOCRATS turned and ran from, because the consesus was that it would bankrupt the country.

 

[Recidiva]

Well, Hillary did put together a health care plan that the DEMOCRATS turned and ran from, because the consesus was that it would bankrupt the country.

I happen to think that it wouldn't "bankrupt the country" but it was impossible to deal with the Juggernaut of healthcare corruption that is rampant including drug companies, insurance companies and such.

But that's ancient history.

 

[Jenny_Jackson]

Well, Hillary did put together a health care plan that the DEMOCRATS turned and ran from, because the consesus was that it would bankrupt the country.

That was long before GW got the bright idea of bankrupting the country a lot faster and more efficiently with his little expedition to Iraq.

 

[rgraham666]

Bankrupt? Really? How strange.

In Canada we've managed to have public medical care and budget surpluses for over a decade now.

 

[R. Richard]

Bankrupt? Really? How strange.

In Canada we've managed to have public medical care and budget surpluses for over a decade now.

Well Rob, then you should talk to the Democrats here. It may be that there could be a practical US health care plan, but the Democrats decided that Hillary's plan would bankrupt the country. The Republicans had decided the same thing long before. A matter of history.

 

[Recidiva]

Well Rob, then you should talk to the Democrats here. It may be that there could be a practical US health care plan, but the Democrats decided that Hillary's plan would bankrupt the country. The Republicans had decided the same thing long before. A matter of history.

So...someone come up with a better plan.

It doesn't mean it can't be done, it means it hasn't been done yet.

 

[Guest]

All of the Right and especially Rush Limbaugh seem to have a hard on when it comes to both of the Clintons. I theorize it is that the Clinton's represent all the good looking, popular kids that used to stuff Rush into a locker repeated because he was as likely as annoying at 15 as he is now. Just a theory.

Now, to the educational part of my post.

http://www.cedarcomm.com/~stevelm1/usdebt_files/image002.gif

from :
http://www.cedarcomm.com/~stevelm1/usdebt.htm

Since 1946 the Democratic Presidents increased the national debt an average of only 3.7% per year when they were in office. The Republican Presidents stay at an average increase of 9.3% per year. Over the last 59 years Republican Presidents have out borrowed Democratic Presidents by almost a three to one ratio.

 

[R. Richard]

So...someone come up with a better plan.

It doesn't mean it can't be done, it means it hasn't been done yet.

The fact that one plan failed does not mean that a different plan can't succeed. However, national health plans, including Canada's, have a systemic failing. The demand for health services is unbounded. The ability to provide health services is limited by cost and other considerations.

Canada provides good, cheap health care, if you can wait. Well-to-do Canadians often come to the US for diagnostic work that would require waits of six months or more in Canada. Canada uses the buying power of a whole country to get cheap drugs from the manufacturors, since Canada is a relatively small market and Canadian sales are a marginal item for the drug companies. The same tactic will not work with the huge US market.

Another problem is one I know of because I deal with some Canadians. One of the Cabadian ladies has some sort of medical ciondition that requires her to take a drug. The only version of that drug that Canada will provide her with leaves her with severe side effects [the drug works just fine for most people.] Thus, the lady cones to the US and buy another version [more or less] of the same drug and it works for her. The US shopping works for the lady, because she and her husband can afford it. The same situation would not work for a lot of Canadians, because of the costs.

 

[Recidiva]

The fact that one plan failed does not mean that a different plan can't succeed. However, national health plans, including Canada's, have a systemic failing. The demand for health services is unbounded. The ability to provide health services is limited by cost and other considerations.

Canada provides good, cheap health care, if you can wait. Well-to-do Canadians often come to the US for diagnostic work that would require waits of six months or more in Canada. Canada uses the buying power of a whole country to get cheap drugs from the manufacturors, since Canada is a relatively small market and Canadian sales are a marginal item for the drug companies. The same tactic will not work with the huge US market.

Another problem is one I know of because I deal with some Canadians. One of the Cabadian ladies has some sort of medical ciondition that requires her to take a drug. The only version of that drug that Canada will provide her with leaves her with severe side effects [the drug works just fine for most people.] Thus, the lady cones to the US and buy another version [more or less] of the same drug and it works for her. The US shopping works for the lady, because she and her husband can afford it. The same situation would not work for a lot of Canadians, because of the costs.

So basically the outcome is that sometimes systems work and sometimes they don't.

Yes, America is a capitalist system, meaning money is the final word.

We therefore have tons of money for speculative research. Which as a good side effect means we develop a ton of very nice, useful drugs. However, we have a horrendous system for those who do not have money. It's Darwinian, I get that. It also points out all the corruptive influences and we as humans should be able to compensate for the weak points.

So it would be nice if someone non-corrupted and willing to work hard and go against the capitalist lowest common denominator could work on that. That'd be great.

Maybe some politician could decide it's their job.

 

[R. Richard]

So basically the outcome is that sometimes systems work and sometimes they don't.

Yes, America is a capitalist system, meaning money is the final word.

We therefore have tons of money for speculative research. Which as a good side effect means we develop a ton of very nice, useful drugs. However, we have a horrendous system for those who do not have money. It's Darwinian, I get that. It also points out all the corruptive influences and we as humans should be able to compensate for the weak points.

So it would be nice if someone non-corrupted and willing to work hard and go against the capitalist lowest common denominator could work on that. That'd be great.

Maybe some politician could decide it's their job.

The problem is that the capitalist system at least provides a way for those who can earn a living to cope [those who can't earn a living have a really tough time, but there are charities.] If you have a socialist [or communist] system, you get what central control wants you to have and BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING!

There have been numerous populists who were going to 'fix the system.' Either the populist got fixed or washed away by the system.

 

[Recidiva]

The problem is that the capitalist system at least provides a way for those who can earn a living to cope [those who can't earn a living have a really tough time, but there are charities.] If you have a socialist [or communist] system, you get what central control wants you to have and BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING!

There have been numerous populists who were going to 'fix the system.' Either the populist got fixed or washed away by the system.

Yes, those who can't earn a living have a really tough time. Gosh, if only we were affluent enough to construct a system to care for them. Huh.

I don't think socialism or communism have to result in big brother. I'm sure democracy has provided enough of that. Or are we not the world's lead in surveillance tech and wiretapping?

 

[JamesSD]

We need to keep Hillary in the race as long as possible to serve as a lightning rod to protect our better candidates (Edwards and Obama). If Hillary didn't have name recognition because of her husband, and a huge war chest because of her husband's fundraising connections, she'd be running somewhere between Chris Dodd and Bill Richardson.

It's sad how much misogynistic conservative pundits hate Hillary because she's a woman. I do have legitimate concerns about her, so it's hard to defend her too much.

 

[Recidiva]

We need to keep Hillary in the race as long as possible to serve as a lightning rod to protect our better candidates (Edwards and Obama). If Hillary didn't have name recognition because of her husband, and a huge war chest because of her husband's fundraising connections, she'd be running somewhere between Chris Dodd and Bill Richardson.

It's sad how much misogynistic conservative pundits hate Hillary because she's a woman. I do have legitimate concerns about her, so it's hard to defend her too much.

I'm a woman, and I wouldn't vote for her because of her complete lack of political instinct. My favorite is her giving a speech about how lazy the current generation was until her daughter called and complained about her generalizing and saying "we work very hard."

Go Chelsea.

She is not my ideal candidate, it has nothing to do with her gender.

Obama and Edwards have my vote so far.

 

[Pure]

rr, you need to get out more,

and stop hovering about the 'weakly standard' and 'human events' sites.

the story is quite old, and Paul himself has been convicted in relation to some of the events. in any case, it's a *civil suit*.

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPrint.asp?Page=/Politics/archive/200704/POL20070420d.html

New Tape Raises Questions About What Senator Clinton Knew of Campaign Violation

By Fred Lucas
CNSNews.com Staff Writer
April 20, 2007

(CNSNews.com) - A Hollywood mogul and former associate of former President Bill Clinton and Sen. Hillary Clinton has obtained what he calls a "smoking gun tape" which he said proves that the New York senator and leading Democratic presidential candidate violated campaign finance laws.


Clinton friend-turned-nemesis Peter Paul plans to use the video both as evidence in a lawsuit against the former first couple and in a forthcoming documentary concerning his dealings with the Clintons during the former first lady's first Senate campaign in 2000.

The U.S. attorney's office for the Eastern District of New York gave copies of 90 tapes to Paul on April 11. The office had taken possession of the tapes six years ago during an investigation of a securities case against Paul in 2001.

One of those tapes appears to show comic book icon Stan Lee, Paul's business partner, talking to Hillary Clinton in a teleconference in 2000. Paul said the conversation was about a big fundraising gala Paul sponsored for the Clintons.

Paul put up $1.9 million for the function. At the time, the maximum individual contribution to a political candidate was $2,000.

A portion of the videotape seen by Cybercast News Service captures the closing words of a lengthy conversation in which Paul was present. The voice of Hillary Clinton is heard telling Lee that Paul and her chief campaign aide "talk all the time, so she'll be the person to convey whatever I need."

She is then heard adding, "I wanted to call and personally thank all of you ... [and] tell you how much this means to me. It's going to mean a lot to the president too."

Paul was the majority partner with Lee in a multi-million dollar Internet venture in 2000 before the company collapsed. Paul contends in a lawsuit that President Clinton had agreed to work as a rainmaker for the company after he left the White House in exchange for the massive star-studded fundraising event in Hollywood which Paul produced.

The newly released tape could be significant, because the Federal Elections Commission already ruled that Sen. Clinton's 2000 campaign committee underreported cash it received at the fundraising event Paul sponsored. The FEC slapped the campaign committee with a $35,000 fine.

The fallout from Paul's Hollywood fundraising event also led to the federal indictment of David Rosen, Sen. Clinton's campaign finance director, who was acquitted on charges of lying to the FEC.

Clinton and her supporters have maintained that she had no direct knowledge that the event violated campaign finance rules. In a written declaration for the California court filed on April 7, 2006, Sen. Clinton said only that she didn't remember discussions with Paul about the fundraiser.

"I have no recollection whatsoever of discussing any arrangement with him whereby he would support my campaign for the United States Senate in exchange for anything from me or then-President Clinton," Clinton said in the declaration.

"I do not believe I would make such a statement because I believe I would remember such a discussion if it had occurred," she added.

Neither Clinton's presidential campaign nor her Senate office responded to questions Friday about the forthcoming documentary and the recently released tape.

'Hillary exposed'

Paul's film - set to be released next month to interested cable stations and on DVD - includes other video footage of the Clintons meeting with Paul and Lee, a brunch attended by the Clintons, Barbara Streisand and Paul, as well as the massive concert/fundraiser for Hillary Clinton's first Senate campaign featuring Cher, Whoopi Goldberg, John Travolta, Brad Pitt, Sugar Ray, Queen Latifah and other celebrities.

The Clintons are seen sitting between the Paul family and the Lee family in what Paul claims was the largest private concert in history.

"I had no interest in the political side, it was purely a business decision so my partner, while he's still alive, could witness his company become a global media giant," Paul says in the film.

At one point in the documentary, Lee says to Hillary Clinton, "See why I picked him as a partner?"

Hillary Clinton responds, "Boy Stan, you were one smart guy before, now you're in the stratosphere." She offers thanks and praise to Paul at several points in the film.

In recent years, however, the Clintons have had few pleasant things to say about Paul.

Their attorneys in recent briefs point out that Paul pleaded guilty to manipulating the company's stock price. He has two previous felony convictions, pleading guilty to fraud in the 1970s and to a drug charge in the 1980s.

Paul said the documentary has a rough cut but will be completed in the next 30 days because of some reshooting. The working title is, "Hillary Exposed: The Case of Paul v. Clinton."

"No one has done a documentary on Hillary, ever," Paul told Cybercast News Service. "This has unique footage, home video footage, of meetings I had with the first lady."

The Washington-based conservative group Citizens United is producing its own documentary, "Hillary the Movie," set to be released in the fall in theaters and on DVD. The films will be very different, as the Citizens United movie is expected to be critical of New York senator's entire political life rather than focus on one case.

Trying to stay out of the lawsuit while she ran for reelection to the Senate and laid the groundwork for a presidential campaign, Sen. Clinton used a California statute intended to protect political candidates from frivolous lawsuits.

A California Superior Court judge last fall dismissed her from the lawsuit on those grounds, but Paul " target=_blank a appealed<>in January, contending that the California statute does not protect Sen. Clinton from alleged illegal activity.

His appeal asserts that "false promises of a post-White House business relationship ... paved the way for the Clintons to financially gut the financial insides of Paul's company."

Clinton's attorneys, including David Kendall, who was President Clinton's personal attorney during the 1998 impeachment, filed a brief in response last month.

Oral arguments will likely be made to the three-judge panel this summer on whether to release Sen. Clinton from the lawsuit, with a decision expected soon after. But the entire case could go on for much longer.

While the new videotape is key to the case, it may prove difficult to enter into evidence because appeals courts frequently won't accept new evidence regardless of how relevant it might seem, Paul's attorney, D. Colette Wilson of the United States Justice Foundation, in Ramona, Calif., told Cybercast News Service Friday.

"As you watch the video tape, you're watching a felony take place," Wilson said.

 

[mikey2much]

Is this the new swiftboats for this year

You gotta hand it to the far right, they got no bottom. It just don't matter how low they have to go to smear somebody. They have been chasing the clintons through the courts ever since he decided to run for president.

It is just a way that they can use their biggest weapon, money, to try to control the election process.

The chart posted above pretty much tells the tale as far as I am concerned.

mikey

 

[R. Richard]

You gotta hand it to the far right, they got no bottom. It just don't matter how low they have to go to smear somebody. They have been chasing the clintons through the courts ever since he decided to run for president.

It is just a way that they can use their biggest weapon, money, to try to control the election process.

The chart posted above pretty much tells the tale as far as I am concerned.

mikey

The matter under discussion is the result of Hillary Clinton's dealings with one Peter Paul, during a Democratic fund raiser. It has nothing to do with far right. I might add that Hillary's campaign has already been heavily fined by the FEC for the event. However, Hilary says that she knew nothing of the wrongdoing.

 

[dr_mabeuse]

You gotta hand it to the far right, they got no bottom. It just don't matter how low they have to go to smear somebody. They have been chasing the clintons through the courts ever since he decided to run for president.

It is just a way that they can use their biggest weapon, money, to try to control the election process.

The chart posted above pretty much tells the tale as far as I am concerned.

mikey

\

The Right's entire political strategy consists of ad hominem attacks rather than discussions of issues and has for some time now. Listen to Rush Limbaugh. Read Ann Coulter, the Swift Boat Veterans. It's all name calling and invective and that's all it is. Watch the coming election season.

They like going personal. Character assasination is something they can understand, while issues are too abstract and hard for them to follow. But they can always whip up a good stiffy over a candidate who's a girl, or by something in someone's past, or by making fun of someone's haircut.

Check it out and see if I'm not right. They really like to wallow in it.

 

[SesameStreet]

I would never trust the woman and certainly never vote for her. No matter what she does or doesn't do in the future.

 

[Pure]

some url's

the Federal Elections Letter to Mr. Paul is at

http://www.hillcap.org/images/fec_conciliation_letter.bmp

obviously it disappointed him, since it declined to pursue Hillary.

Here's another account,

a salon story, on the Paul affair.

http://archive.salon.com/politics/red/2001/06/22/blue/

I suspect he'd get further, outside the looney and Anti Clinton right if he weren't a convicted criminal himself.
==
Since many of these events are five years ago, i suspect the result won't go anywhere [or it would have, already, with all those eager Bushie Federal election officers and attorneys], but, for the rightwing persons, as with "Travel gate", the press time and distraction is key.