Posted on 04/22/2005 2:34:20 AM PDT by Liz
Sen. Ted Kennedy's brother-in-law is the mystery witness who raised $100,000 for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton and then went undercover and wore a wire to help the feds nab one of her top moneymen on charges of fund-raising-fraud, The Post has learned.
The witness, Ray Reggie, 43, has a sister, Victoria, who married Kennedy in 1992, and prosecutors say Reggie secretly recorded "incriminating" statements made by David Rosen, a top Clinton fund-raiser.
Reggie was close enough to Bill and Hillary Clinton to sleep over at the White House in 2000 and stay up chatting with the first couple into the wee hours.
Sources tell The Post that he is the "cooperating witness" — described but not named in recent court papers — and that he is likely to testify at Rosen's May 3 trial as part of a plea deal struck with federal prosecutors.
The well-connected Reggie stayed undercover for nearly 21/2 years, helping the feds on multiple probes, and was still wearing a wire and making secret tapes as recently as last December, federal documents show.
Reggie hobnobbed at the very top Democratic levels. A month after he'd raised $100,000 for Hillary Clinton's Senate campaign in 2000, Bill Clinton invited him to a state dinner for the king of Morocco — and a sleepover at the White House.
Reggie told The Times-Picayune of New Orleans that he and his wife later got a post-midnight knock on their bedroom door. The Clintons had come to chat.
Yesterday, Reggie, a Democratic campaign consultant who worked for both Clintons and for Al Gore, pleaded guilty in New Orleans to unrelated multimillion-dollar bank-fraud charges.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
It sure is Big News to the Clintons and company (laughs uproariously).
Neat connecting-the-dots post (snicker).
Any Republican who "sides with the Clintons" on this one will be voted out of office. There are limits...
It sure is Big News to the Clintons and company (laughs uproariously).
ROTFLOL!
Were it not so early in the morning, I'd pop a bottle of champagne. This is GOOD stuff.
"Reggie worked on Clinton's campaign alongside Rosen, helping the Democratic candidate raise millions of dollars for her Senate campaign. Clinton is not considered a target of the probe, which is led by the public integrity section of the Justice Department. No conversations between Reggie and Clinton were recorded, the source said.
I want to warn everyone....this probe, investigation, prosecution...whatever you call it........will never hurt either Clinton.
Alamo girl might have it.
You may be right. I'll bet Reggie had Teddy's blessing. Over two years of taping. Too kewl....
From one year ago today:
Please, no more Clinton investigations
According to the Los Angeles Times, the Federal Election Commission (FEC) is looking into a Hollywood fundraiser held for Hillary Clinton in 2000. Moreover, the Justice Department is also investigating the event and examining the actions of Senator Clinton’s former finance executive.
These inquiries bring to mind a profound insight from the noted philosopher Yogi Berra: It’s deja vu all over again.
I wish the FEC and Justice Department would just forget it. Probing the Clintons again will be as unproductive as trying to convert Teddy Kennedy to a teetotaler.
Sure, hearing that one of the Clintons is under investigation initially brings a joy, an exhilarating gladness of heart, to those of us who serve the vast right wing conspiracy.
That elation, however, inevitably turns to melancholy when, as always, the Clintons get away with it.
And get away with it they do. No matter the scandal – Whitewater, Cattlegate, Filegate, Pardongate, Travelgate, Fostergate, fund raising irregularities, Paula Jones, Monica what’s-her name – they constantly manage to slither out of harm’s way.
Once in a while they may get a wrist slapped. Bill Clinton was fined $90,000 for lying under oath and obstructing justice. He had to pay an $850,000 settlement in the Paula Jones lawsuit. He was disbarred in Arkansas and prohibited from practicing law before the U.S. Supreme Court.
That is hardly enough for conservatives. Many of us want nothing less than to see him and his Mz doing the perp walk in orange jump suits with DOC emblazoned on the back. At least that’s what I’d like to see.
Realistically, that’s never going to happen. A principal reason is that the Clintons and their cronies suffer acute amnesia whenever they’re called to testify.
Consider, for example, what happened during one of the scandals. According to the Washington Times: "In the portions of President Clinton’s Jan. 17 (1998) deposition that have been made public in the Paula Jones case, President Clinton’s memory failed him 267 times."
That was quite a performance for a Rhodes scholar, particularly one whose close friend Vernon Jordan claimed has "an extraordinary memory."
Even more surprising, perhaps, is the feeble recall of the world’s smartest woman. Here’s part of Mz Clinton’s written answers concerning the White House Travel Office scandal (italics added):
"At some point during the first part of May 1993, I believe I became aware from Vincent Foster or Harry Thomason of concerns about financial mismanagement in the White House Travel Office. I do not remember precisely what the concerns were . . . I had no personal knowledge of or direct involvement with that office, and, indeed, I do not recall even knowing of the existence of the Travel Office until sometime in the first two weeks of May. I have a vague recollection. . .but I do not recall how or whether these complaints specifically related to the Travel Office. . . . . I cannot recall specific conversations with [Mr. Thomason] regarding the White House Travel Office or its personnel, but as indicated above, it is possible that at some point in May 1993, he may have mentioned to me issues of possible financial mismanagement in the Travel Office. I do not recall what, if anything, I may have said to him on this topic. I do not recall saying to him that I was ‘ready to fire’ the Travel Office employees."
Not all the Clintonites claim poor memories to avoid trouble. Some of them prefer the Fifth Amendment, which includes the right not to testify against oneself.
When Clinton appointee and Democratic National Committee official John Huang was questioned about his role as a possible Chinese agent and what he did at the Commerce Department, he invoked the Fifth Amendment. More than a thousand times. Even when asked merely to identify his former boss in a picture.
What do you do with people like that? We know that the Clintons have long surrounded themselves with slavish bootlickers. All appear fully prepared to get tossed overboard by their hero and/or shero at any time. Their only life preservers are implausible memory lapses and the Fifth Amendment.
The frustrating thing is that, like Lucy holding the football for Charlie Brown to kick, it works time and again. The main difference is that the investigators are the ones who end up falling down.
So let’s just get off the Clintons’ case. There’s no point in looking into anything they do. They are so completely corrupt, so absolutely amoral, that they’ll do or say anything to evade exposure. Their rigid code of silence will protect them.
Why waste any more time, money or effort? Why lift our hopes to simply have them cruelly dashed yet again?
Yep....and it feels so-o-o-o good.
LOL!
I like that other post of your better... the German word the democrats "used to" like to employ!
This is great stuff, huh? Such a pleasant way to start the day.
Major corruption scandal at the top of the Democratic party? Sweet! I relish the possibility!
LOL! TOO FUNNY!
I thought you Californians considered 7:30 am to be late at the end of the night!
Is this the case the Kerry & is trying to hide in that bill???
Scrape a few years off me, and you'd be right.
Don't you know that I get up and tend to the doc in the morning?
Send him off to the office with a smile on his face.
Ping. Not a Cuomo, even better...
OOps ... my mistake .. I was thinking of something else
Dems try to kill Clinton probe
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1388341/posts
Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-N.D.), who introduced the amendment with Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.), said last week that the disgraced HUD secretary paid a $10,000 fine in 1999 for lying to the FBI and that then-President Bill Clinton pardoned Cisneros, so the probe "should have ended years ago."
No, I don't think so. I think that report is separate and has been going on for quite a lot longer.
Delicious stuff, no? Can you imagine the number of DemonRATs who are experiencing bladder control problems this morning? Bwahaha!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.