LA Times (left coast Slimes) disturbed and dissapointed by Clinton camp, but the cover up is easily explained and just needs a heavier coat of White Water ... Silly me, that would be White Wash.
1 posted on
09/01/2007 7:39:29 AM PDT by
IrishMike
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-37 last
To: nutmeg
42 posted on
09/01/2007 8:41:07 AM PDT by
nutmeg
("We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good." - Hillary Clinton 6/28/04)
To: IrishMike
LOOK... it's TouristSenator!!!
It shows up in more places than TouristGuy,
only with less style and substance...
she's Vaporware, just an empty crusty.
(Please spread me around like the parasite that i am...)
43 posted on
09/01/2007 8:42:05 AM PDT by
Chode
(American Hedonist)
To: IrishMike
“How did Democratic presidential front-runner Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton’s campaign fail to see the red flags in Hsu’s contributions?”
The red flags were probably all lost in the sea of red flags that already surround this group.
44 posted on
09/01/2007 8:42:48 AM PDT by
monkeycard
(There is no such thing as too much ammo.)
To: IrishMike
The Clintonistas claimed that they “missed the vett” with Peter Paul and didn’t know about the Cuban Coffee Caper. That’s interesting. He had already been vetted by the Secret Service about six times for meetings with Nixon, Carter, Ford, Reagan and others.
45 posted on
09/01/2007 8:44:52 AM PDT by
doug from upland
(Stopping Hillary should be a FreeRepublic Manhattan Project)
To: IrishMike
When a campaign has attracted more than 500,000 donors, as Clinton’s has, there is no way a candidate’s staff can check out each contributor.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
You don’t check out guys giving twenty bucks. You do check out big donors.
46 posted on
09/01/2007 8:45:53 AM PDT by
doug from upland
(Stopping Hillary should be a FreeRepublic Manhattan Project)
To: All
Question for any/all...
Like with the Larry Craig PAC monies being unloaded as fast as it can, I see reports that the Hildebeast is ‘giving the (Hsu) contributions to charity’ as though that makes it all better (and makes it just go away).
Do they then get to write off this ‘charitable contribution’?
Shouldn’t they be forced to hand the dirty money back to the contributer (with appropriate paparazzi memorializing the event?!)
49 posted on
09/01/2007 8:52:08 AM PDT by
rockrr
(Global warming is to science what Islam is to religion)
To: IrishMike
How in the world did California allow this guy Hsu to elude justice for 15 frickin’ years? To me, that is a big part of the story.
52 posted on
09/01/2007 8:59:33 AM PDT by
khnyny
(The best minds are not in government. If they were, business would hire them away. Ronald Reagan)
To: IrishMike
When a campaign has attracted more than 500,000 donors, as Clinton's has, there is no way a candidate's staff can check out each contributor.No, but how many of those donors give over $100,000? She should easily be able to check out the top 20. Obviously, she turned a blind eye. Try again, LASlimes.
54 posted on
09/01/2007 9:00:44 AM PDT by
expatpat
To: IrishMike
Goes to show that a Clinton presidency could not be trusted...could be easily infiltrated and influenced by the Communist Chinese.
To: IrishMike
“When a campaign has attracted more than 500,000 donors, as Clinton’s has, there is no way a candidate’s staff can check out each contributor”
And we’re all sure the LA Slimes would give the same pass to any Republican in a similar situation.
62 posted on
09/01/2007 9:50:14 AM PDT by
EDINVA
To: IrishMike
To: IrishMike
65 posted on
09/01/2007 10:05:10 AM PDT by
doug from upland
(Stopping Hillary should be a FreeRepublic Manhattan Project)
To: AdmSmith; Berosus; Convert from ECUSA; dervish; Ernest_at_the_Beach; Fred Nerks; KlueLass; ...
The Lospindoctorangeles Times asks,
How did Democratic presidential front-runner Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign fail to see the red flags in Hsu's contributions?
Our survey said -- Clinton and her campaign
did know.
66 posted on
09/01/2007 10:51:00 AM PDT by
SunkenCiv
(Profile updated Wednesday, August 29, 2007. https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
To: IrishMike
71 posted on
09/01/2007 1:58:18 PM PDT by
Dante3
To: IrishMike
74 posted on
09/01/2007 9:01:46 PM PDT by
skinkinthegrass
(just b/c your paranoid, doesn't mean they're NOT out to get you....run, Fred, run. :^)
To: IrishMike
“Obviously, we were all surprised by this news, and we have a procedure that we follow and upon verifying it, we returned his money,” Clinton said this week.”
—
No different from Bubba’s apology about Monica:
“I’m sorry” (I’m sorry I got caught).
I’ll try to un-do it and we can just go on from there, ok, ya know? Ya know? Ya know? Ya know? Ya know?
75 posted on
09/01/2007 10:00:16 PM PDT by
Rembrandt
(We would have won Viet Nam w/o Dim interference.)
To: IrishMike; doug from upland; MurryMom
How could the senator's campaign have missed the red flags over Hsu?
76 posted on
09/01/2007 10:05:25 PM PDT by
Libloather
(That's just what I need - some two-bit, washed up, loser politician giving me weather forecasts...)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-37 last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson