Posted on 05/02/2005 11:57:24 PM PDT by doug from upland
BTW, has Sean made any announcements about his upcoming Freedom Concert in NJ yet? He's been hinting about it over the past few weeks. I haven't seen anything on hannity.com yet.
I do realize you may not exactly be 'tuned in' to any events going on in NJ... ;-)
Listening to Howie Carr on the radio now... he's yakking about Cuban tree frogs and some guy drowning in liquified manure. Geesh... slow news day?!
I'm a Sean Hannity fan, but even I turned off his show over an hour ago. I absolutely cannot take one more comment about that stupid runaway bride!
If Sean starts going on and on about the runaway bride tonight on H&C instead of Peter Paul and other political news, that just means I watch the entire Red Sox game tonight, not just part of it! ;-)
Ahhhhggahhhhh....
thanks!
Peter will be on.
PVS precedent, no doubt.
Taking lunch with Polonius all............ bump & dig
Let's start with this, Mr. Hernandez. The USJF is not an anti-Clinton group. They have worked on First Amendment and other issues. They have fought in favor of the Pledge of Allegiance. Hernandez's editor needs to apologize for the headline. I will have more to say about this article in another episode of PETER PAUL AND HILLARY.
=================================================================================
Anti-Clinton Group Joins With Former Clinton Donor NY Times ^ | May 3, 2005 | RAYMOND HERNANDEZ
WASHINGTON, May 2 - The man whose claims are behind the recent criminal indictment of Hillary Rodham Clinton's former fund-raising director is collaborating with a conservative group in California on a project to publicize potentially damaging information about the Clintons.
The man, Peter Paul, has enlisted the support of the United States Justice Foundation, a conservative legal advocacy group, to start the Hillary Clinton Accountability Project, a venture meant to focus public attention on a 2000 fund-raiser for Mrs. Clinton that is at the center of the federal government's criminal case.
Once dismissed as yet another anti-Clinton gadfly, Mr. Paul has suddenly become a major source of problems for the Clintons and their political associates.
A well-connected figure with a criminal history that dates back to the 1970's, Mr. Paul says he organized the star-studded fund-raiser for Mrs. Clinton in 2000 to win Mr. Clinton's support on a business venture he was undertaking. But when his relationship with the Clintons soured after the event, he turned on them.
He has accused the Clinton campaign in a civil suit of falsely reporting that the August 2000 gala cost far less than the nearly $2 million he claims to have spent to organize the event. This January, federal authorities produced an indictment charging that David Rosen, the finance director of Mrs. Clinton's 2000 Senate campaign, had underreported the cost of the affair.
Responding to Mr. Paul's latest endeavor, David E. Kendall, a lawyer for the Clintons, called Mr. Paul's character into question. "Peter Paul is a man with an impressive record of felony convictions, currently in federal custody," he said. "Most of his civil suit has already been dismissed and the remainder has no merit."
The anti-Clinton project that is being undertaken by Mr. Paul and his conservative allies in California will make use of documents and other materials that Mr. Paul says stem from his role producing the 2000 event, including bank statements, canceled checks and film of him with the Clintons.
Gary Kreep, the executive director for the justice foundation, said it had established a Web site, www.hillcap.org, that would provide updated information concerning the criminal case against Mr. Rosen, as well as updated information about a civil suit that Mr. Paul has filed against the Clintons. (The site was still under construction on Monday.) He said the foundation planned to use its existing direct-mail operation to both raise money and disseminate information about those cases.
Mr. Kreep also said the foundation planned to cover the legal costs from the civil suit, in which Mr. Paul claims he gave close to $2 million in services and donations to Mrs. Clinton's Senate campaign based on promises that Mr. Clinton would join an Internet venture of his. Mr. Paul claims these promises were never fulfilled.
"We want to get to the truth of all this and make sure the public knows about it," Mr. Kreep said.
In a separate interview, Mr. Paul went even further, predicting that the case could thwart any political aspirations that Mrs. Clinton has beyond New York. "This fund-raiser will ultimately be viewed as her Chappaquiddick and cost her the presidency," he said. "I've already got her campaign finance director indicted."
The timing of all this is troublesome for Mrs. Clinton, the junior senator from New York, who is up for re-election next year. While Mrs. Clinton is apparently not a subject of the investigation, questions about the 2000 fund-raiser have given her political enemies plenty of ammunition.
In fact, Judicial Watch, a conservative legal group that repeatedly sued the Clintons during their White House years, initially championed Mr. Paul's case. But a few months ago, Judicial Watch abruptly severed ties with Mr. Paul, who, in turn, accused the group of merely using his case to raise millions of dollars from people who dislike the former president and first lady.
The attention being given to Mr. Paul's charges underscore the growing concerns within the Clinton camp that Mrs. Clinton will be a primary target of national Republicans in 2006, despite her overwhelming popularity among voters in New York.
Mrs. Clinton's advisers have good reason to harbor such concerns. Republicans in New York and elsewhere around the country are warning their supporters that Mrs. Clinton will be in a position to run for the presidency in 2008 if she is not defeated in New York next year.
But that said, Republicans are having trouble recruiting top-tier candidates like Rudolph W. Giuliani or George E Pataki to run against her. Instead, the list of possible challengers being mentioned include Edward F. Cox, a lawyer who is the son-in-law of Richard M. Nixon, and Dr. Antonia C. Novello, New York's state health commissioner, who was previously United States surgeon general.
AAnd .. like you .. I was suspicious of Hillary from the beginning. What cinched it for me - when Hill and Bill showed up at JFK Jr.'s funeral - UN-INVITED. That act convinced me she was involved somehow in getting rid of him - and only went to the funeral to throw off suspicion.
I think Teddy Kennedy must really hate her- his brother-in-law secretly taping her. Hmmm- makes me wonder. Sit back and enjoy.
"secretly taping her"
According to all the reports I've read .. the recordings are only of Rosen (Hillary's money man). None of Hillary or Bill.
If there are other Clinton goons who might have been mentioned - I don't know. I guess we'll find out during the trial.
You're right, I meant Rosen.
I am quite convinced there is no taping of Hillary.
Okay - thanks - I was pretty sure I had not read that anywhere.
Ping
Is that true Nixon son in law going run
Rack ittt
Nixon is backkkk LOL!
Wow, that's a big pic.
What I can't figure out is why not?
Perhaps she was too smart?
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.