The Present: Bringing Up Hillary's Past

Bob Parks: Outside The Wire ^ | 11/2/07 | Bob Parks

[bocopar]

When people think they can get away with things, they keep on doing them. That's why when a burgler is caught, it's never assumed that the crime he or she was busted for was their first. They've usually been at it for awhile, but weren't caught until now.

Maybe that's why Hillary Clinton and all the campaign "irregularities" reoccur to this day. She (and Bill) got away with so much before, they must truly believe they're untouchable.

It's up to us to make sure Mrs. Clinton doesn't get yet another pass. If that means "hitting the girl", so be it....

NYC Chinatown Donorgate Under-Covered By Lee Cary, NY Sun Published 11/2/2007

To date, here's how major newspapers have covered the NYC Chinatown Donorgate story:

October 19: The Los Angeles Times reported that the Clinton campaign received $380,000 from poor Chinese living in largely ethnic New York City neighborhoods -- one is heavily populated by "recent immigrants from Fujian Province." One-third of 150 donors could not be located; many gave false addresses. Other donors found and interviewed gave varying motives for their contributions. "Many said they gave to Clinton because they were instructed to do so by local association leaders." Some cited an interest in immigration issues. One donor was proud to have had his picture taken with Mrs. Clinton -- he sent it home to China.

[Suzy Quzy]

Hillary was Bill’s BAGMAN for ILLEGAL fundraising!!!

[ml/nj]

Hillary was Bill’s BAGMAN for ILLEGAL fundraising!!!

I have more in the past than recently referred to her as "Hillary Rodham Ulasewicz Clinton." In fact, I referred to her in this way once on Rush's show, and Rush gagged on his next two sentences. Here's something I wrote many years ago about this:

From time to time I am asked about my use of the Ulasewicz name when I refer to the Commodities Scam Queen. This has happened again this week, and I reply publicly for others who might have the same question.

Anthony Ulasewicz was known to many as the "Bag man of Watergate." He told the Ervin Committee tales of delivering bags of cash to the various providers of "Special Services" that apparently required in the machinations that eventually became known as "Watergate."

It seems to me that Hillary was assigned a similar task in the machinations that have come to be known as "Whitewater."

Shortly after the Dynamic Duo captured the White House I started a thread in another venue which I called, "Bill       or Hillary?" It started off as follows:

Forget "To be or not to be," Bill       or Hillary? THAT is the question!

Which one is more slimy? Which one is more deceitful? We NEED a yardstick. We need some way to quantify this.

I propose a new measure to be known as the Deceit Quotient, or DQ for short. Like the Richter scale, the DQ will be open-ended. ...

Implicit in this was the question of who was leading whom. When I posed the question, I really wasn't sure what I thought myself.

Since then I've developed the opinion that Hillary's entire persona is a fraud. I'm not sure what she has ever done or said that seems even remotely clever or smart. Bill, on the other hand, isn't called "Slick" for nothing. If he were dependent upon her for ideas or guidance, he never would have become Arkansas Attorney General, let alone President.

Hillary has been little more than this guy's bag lady. Does anyone really think the Commodities Scam money was being supplied as a "special fee" for some service Hillary was providing? Does anyone really think that Miss Smartest Woman in the World's meteoric rise at the Rose Law Firm would have occurred without her hubby's "coincidental" political successes? She's no more leading anyone here around by the nose than Tony Ulasewicz was the mastermind of the Watergate cover-up.

Hillary Rodham [Ulasewicz] Clinton almost certainly has the wherewithal to destroy Slick Willie Clinton but she cannot do so without destroying her own self too. SWC and his people know she will not do this and so hold the big trump. They are the ones doing the leading, telling HRUC to dress pretty in pink, to bake cookies, pander to children, or whatever. She may gripe in private, but when it's showtime she's the one doing the jumping.

ML/NJ

[Logical me]

As far as I’m concerned, the Clintoons are corrupt to the core. What bothers me more is the vast group of Americans that believe in them. Guess that supports the claim that ignorance is bliss. One he!! of a percentage of Americans just go on their happy ways and cannot see the destruction the Clintoons have caused and the future doesn’t look too good.