Ex-Clinton Aide Charged on Fund-Raising

AP via The New York Times ^ | January 8, 2005 | AP

[Sarastro]

WASHINGTON, Jan. 7 (AP) - Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton's former finance director has been indicted on charges of filing fictitious reports that misstated contributions for a Hollywood fund-raising gala for the senator, the Justice Department said Friday.

The indictment, rare for a political campaign, was unsealed in Los Angeles and charged David Rosen with four counts of filing false reports with the Federal Election Commission. The charges focus on a dinner and concert on Aug. 12, 2000, supported by more than $1.1 million in so-called in-kind contributions - goods and services provided free or below cost.

The F.B.I. previously said in court papers that it had evidence that the former first lady's campaign deliberately understated its fund-raising costs so it would have more money to spend on her campaign. While the event allegedly cost more than $1.2 million, the indictment said, Mr. Rosen reported contributions of $400,000.

Mr. Rosen's lawyer, Paul Mark Sandler, did not return a call asking for comment. Mrs. Clinton's lawyer on campaign finance matters, David Kendall, said: "The Senate Campaign Committee has fully cooperated with the investigation. Mr. Rosen worked hard for the campaign, and we trust that when all the facts are in, he will be cleared."

The indictment charged that he provided some documents to a commission compliance officer but withheld the true costs of the event and provided false documents to substantiate the lower figure.

Each of the four counts of making a false statement carries a maximum of up to five years in prison and $250,000 in fines upon conviction.

Federal law governing such joint fund-raisers was intended to prevent joint committees from circumventing restrictions on the contributions given directly to candidates.

[Sarastro]

This appeared on page B3 of The New York Times. My assignment for FReepers: if this referred to a prominent Pubbie, how would the placement and headline have differed? Compare and contrast.

[mtbopfuyn]

Front page with at least 3 pictures including two columns in the editorials.

[andyandval]

Well, since Hillary is a New York State Senator now, this story belongs in the Metro/Region section. Don't you get it? /s

[bayourod]

Won't make no difference to NY voters, but may cost her a lot of initial financial support for a presidential race.

The candidate who can't effectively oversee her own campaign couldn't possibly oversee the U.S. executive branch.

Her only defense is ignorance and that ain't the greatest of campaign slogans.

Start grooming Bill Richardson. He is in the best position to reclaim the Hispanic vote, without which the Democrats can't win.

[TruthWillWin]

Another one associated with the Clintons that will either: claim the 5th, leave the country, be indicted, go to jail, etc..

One more for the long Alamo-Girl list.

[EagleUSA]

This appeared on page B3 of The New York Times. My assignment for FReepers: if this referred to a prominent Pubbie, how would the placement and headline have differed? Compare and contrast.
======
On the front page for three weeks, at least :-) Yes, the poor NYT carries around a huge shovel to BURY THE SLEASE AND SLIME OF THE DEMS. The criminal Dems just cannot seem to be able to DO ANYTHING WITHOUT BEING CRIMINAL...but we certainly would not want to see them upset their long-standing reputation of getting away with crimes. Hmmm, maybe crime does pay, at least when the MSM is complicit in those crimes by doing cover-ups and lying on your behalf, deliberately printing known false information as if were true...

What bothers me is how afraid the Repubs are of the criminal MSM -- they should be ripping them apart and showing what abusers of the First Amendment they really are!!!

[Texas Eagle]

Mrs. Clinton's lawyer on campaign finance matters, David Kendall, said: "The Senate Campaign Committee has fully cooperated with the investigation.

David Kendall? That name sounds familiar. Didn't he have something to do with Whitewater?

[Voltage]

Funny how the campaign laws are written so that only underlings take the fall isn't it?

[calex59]

What I want to know is, why isn't Clinton liable for this? It was her campaign and everything is done with her approval. Doesn't this make her guilty?

[Texas Eagle]

It's a double-standard thing. Only Republicans can be held accountable for the doings of underthings....errrr....underlings.

[OSHA]

Doesn't this make her guilty?

She could have been indicted for any number of crimes by Ken Starr but he knew the futility of empaneling a jury that would convict her.

[Ellesu]

Bush would have been on the front page but this was on page 3 of The Advocate in Baton Rouge.

[rodguy911]

Great minds. Who is taking the fall "this" time?

[ArmyBratproud]

I will post a caption this pic post with this now.

[calcowgirl]

>>My assignment for FReepers: if this referred to a prominent Pubbie, how would the placement and headline have differed?

They certainly would have written their own front page hit piece instead of just republishing the AP version.