Posted on 05/10/2005 12:51:50 PM PDT by doug from upland
Dick Morris just did an excellent job explaining the David Rosen/Hillary fundraising felony problems. He had also done a good job this morning with Tony Snow.
What was behind the lies to the FEC? Had they told the truth, it would have cost about $800,000 in hard money. Hillary couldn't afford that. Because of her soft money agreement with Rick Lazio, she desperately needed that hard money for the final weeks of the campaign.
Morris believes that because of the Ray Reggie wire and other witnesses, Rosen is probably now realizing he is in great legal jeopardy. He believes there is a "significant chance" that Rosen will flip on Hillary and tell the Feds about her involvement.
Morris will be on Hannity and Colmes later this evening.
Tom Fitton is CEO of Judicial Watch. I don't think he was on Hannity, was he?
Nothing will happen. Morris is blinded by his hatred of Hillary.
I have always been veeery suspicious of "Chester"! 'course I am suspicious of all politicians! But yes, "Chester" Lott has a special place in my "suspicious" cabinet! LOL!
Getting rid of the 17th ammendment and turning senators election back to state legislature would remedy most of this problem.
Hey Dick Morris. Flip this! Hey, Hillary may be lots of things but thing she isn't is stupid. She will be far away from any "fingerprints" on this fundraising fiasco. She is like the OJ Simpson of politics. Everyone knows she did it. You just can't get a jury to convict. Good Lord, if this woman ever gets elected to the Presidency we are in deep doo doo for sure.
correct me if I am wrong but there is no love lost between Hillary and Howard correct
now Howard is none too clever, his fundraising ability to date confirms that but if the moonbat wing of the Dems are determined to commit Democraticide?????
WASHINGTON — Former campaign finance director for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, David Rosen (search), faces the music Tuesday as jury selection in his federal trial begins in Los Angeles.
If convicted of the charge of filing false campaign finance statements related to a large Hollywood fund-raising gala for the New York Democrat in 2000, he could get 15 years in prison and up to $250,000 in fines.
Judicial Watch, the self-described "public interest group that fights government corruption," alleges that Clinton knew of the contribution as well as Rosen and failed to report the true value of the expenditures, despite repeated demands.
It has filed an ethics complaint with a Senate panel, asking it to investigate Clinton for her role in an alleged attempt to defraud the Federal Election Commission (search) and the U.S. Senate.
The case could provide ammunition to Republicans seeking to derail her re-election next year and potential 2008 bid for the White House.
Judicial Watch has a history of monitoring the New York senator and her husband, former President Bill Clinton, and its latest allegation is that Clinton is responsible for omitting from her fund-raising report to the FEC a $1.9 million contribution that funded an August 2000 fund-raiser for her Senate campaign called "Hollywood Tribute to William Jefferson Clinton."
Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton argued that Clinton closely monitored the Hollywood fund-raiser and knew its actual cost was much greater than the $400,000 tab reported in campaign financial filings.
"They're false and she knows them to be false," Fitton said.
Under campaign finance laws then in effect, underreporting the cost of the event would have given the Clinton campaign more money to spend on the race. An FBI agent's 2002 affidavit said Rosen deliberately understated the cost of the gala "to increase the amount of funds available to New York Senate 2000 for federal campaign activities." But Justice Department officials recently said they need not prove a possible motive by Rosen.
The senator has not been charged in the case, but Judicial Watch is demanding that the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Ethics "take all appropriate disciplinary action" based on alleged and knowing misreporting.
The man behind the allegations against the senator and Rosen is Peter Paul. In June 2001, Paul filed a lawsuit against Hillary and others, claiming he bankrolled the gala on the promise that former President Clinton would become a "goodwill ambassador'' for his Internet company.
Paul, however, does have his own legal tangles. In March, Paul, co-founder of Stan Lee Media Inc., pleaded guilty to securities fraud. The charges arose from Paul's leading role in a scheme to manipulate the price of Stan Lee Media common stock; prosecutors said the scheme resulted in approximately $25 million in losses.
Paul was originally indicted in June 2001, but fled to Brazil, where he was arrested by Brazilian authorities in August 2001 and extradited to the United States in July 2003. He could face up to 10 years imprisonment, a maximum fine of $5 million and restitution to be determined by the court.
Judicial Watch took the unusual step of providing legal defense work in his criminal case, but Paul later broke with the group, complaining they were using him to raise money from conservatives opposed to the Clintons.
Fitton said the group had a "good working relationship" with Paul and provided him valuable legal work, but denied the group had used him in any way.
Clinton's campaign has maintained that all contributions were properly reported. Clinton adviser Howard Wolfson called Judicial Watch's complaint "a meritless publicity stunt by a thoroughly discredited right-wing attack group."
Robert Walker, a senior staffer on the ethics panel, declined to comment.
FOX News' Megyn Kendall and Liza Porteus and The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Tip of the iceberg, in my opinion, and well worth being patient and watching this thing play out. Not holding my breath, not getting my knickers in a knot - staying watchful and keeping informed (thanks dfu!). One thing is for certain - if Hillery doesn't take a political 'hit' this time, there will be another opportunity somewhere along the way because Hill and Bill will never clean up their act (drag a dollar through a trailer park .......... and we know those two love dollars!)
So are you suggesting if there is no love lost betwen Hillary and Howard, that furthers the division between the Democratic party on the choice for their presidential nominee?
Howard Wolfson looks like a "made" man if you catch my drift
guy should shave every once in a while
In the past 15 years...I've held my breath a time or 20....waiting for the second shoe to drop on the Clinton's. It won't happen this time....As I've given that up.
The odds are better that Rosen has a coronary or a CVA.....and rendered unable to wipe himself...let alone flip.
FWIW-
You may be right. I usually have Hannity on when I pick up my son from school, and I picked him up late yesterday - probably Rusty Humphries.
and it will be his word against hers. An admitted criminal against the esteemed senator. Good luck
Of course. No tin foil required
well it is a theory, that Howard and the moonbat base of the Dems don't want Hillary leading the party even if we all know her leaning to the centre and right is just fake so perhaps those persons who want to undermine Hillary in the DNC itself will use this issue to try and bury her
though frankly, I don't think Howard can afford to get on the wrong side of Hillary, she and Bill are the biggest fundraisers for the party but I don't Howard is smart enough to play hardball, but I could be wrong - after all the Clintons did not get their man in as DNC chairman....
and yet how just how good is Hillary at fundraising if she had to fudge the numbers on that gala or she'd have bankrupted her Senatorial campaign, hmmmmm, though the problem is that pledge she made to Lazio
now if I were Lazio I'd be pissed off to find out Hillary cheated on her deal with me, maybe the NY Republicans can make some hay out of it
Morris is a moron and almost always wrong.
Web Hubbell In Hot Water Again
By Reed Irvine and Cliff Kincaid
| February 11, 1999
Hubbell confirmed that his silence was bought in a recorded phone conversation with his wife when he was in prison.
Webster Hubbell, the associate attorney general for the first 15 months of the Clinton administration, faces the possibility of being sent to prison a second time. On January 26, the Court of Appeals reinstated a tax fraud case that Independent Counsel Ken Starr had brought against Hubbell. He was indicted last April on charges that he had evaded taxes on income of more than $850,000 from 1994 through 1997.
The case was dismissed last July by Judge James Robertson, a Clinton appointee, who ruled that Starr had exceeded his authority because the tax evasion charges were not related to his Whitewater investigation. Two Appeals Court judges, one appointed by Reagan and one by Carter, have now reversed Robertson. A third judge, appointed by Clinton, dissented. The majority opinion was that Hubbell’s tax evasion could well have been related to the Whitewater investigation because Hubbell may have not reported most of his income because it was hush money paid to buy his silence.
Hubbell was paid over $700,000 by 18 individuals and firms after he resigned from the Justice Department and before he went to prison. The biggest payment, $100,000, came from the Lippo Group after James Riady, the president of this Indonesian company, paid several visits to the White House in June 1994. The next largest payment came from a company with ties to Vernon Jordan. Jordan later used his influence with the same firm to get a job for Monica Lewinsky.
Nearly all the payments were described as consulting fees, but Hubbell did little or no work for the money. The donors were asked to help Hubbell by Clinton administration officials or friends such as Vernon Jordan. The judges that reinstated the indictment found that it was reasonable to assume that these payments may have been made to obstruct justice by insuring that Hubbell did not cooperate with Ken Starr in his Whitewater investigation. Last November, Starr indicted Hubbell on a charge of concealing from Federal regulators the role he and Hillary Clinton played in a fraudulent real estate venture in Arkansas.
Hubbell confirmed that his silence was bought in a recorded phone conversation with his wife when he was in prison. She told him the White House did not want him to go through with his plan to countersue his former law firm and that she might lose her job with the Interior Department if he did. Hubbell replied, "So I need to roll over one more time."
The New York Times revealed in May 1997 that the Clintons both lied when they claimed they knew nothing about Hubbell’s legal troubles when he resigned. They lied to give the president plausible deniability if it was charged that he helped arrange for the payment of hush money to Hubbell. It should be big news when two federal judges say the payments appear to have been made to obstruct justice. That was reported by The New York Times and The Washington Post, but both stopped short of implicating Clinton. No one asked why Starr did not refer this to the House as a possible impeachable offense.
Well....if that's all it takes.... I have two holes in my head...where my eyes should be.
He'd better "roll over" on Hillary or his future aquaintances in prison will be rolling him over at will.
"Of course. No tin foil required."
And all this time I thought was just me. Hats off everyone! ;D!
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.