Replies

Well, according to the judge and DA in the case in California, Hillary has absolutely NO connection to this!!!

Umm, that's because the person on trial there is David Rosen.

Would you expect the prosecutor in United States v Rosen to open his case by telling the jury that somebody else did it?

What the judge said is that "Mrs. Clinton will not be called to testify in the case." That would be because neither the prosecutor nor the defense counsel plans to call her. It is not because the judge has an opinion on whether there might someday be a case called United States v Clinton.

I wish people would stop acting as if they think Hillary Clinton is supposed to be found guilty in David Rosen's trial. That only happens on TV. In the real world, the only person who can be found guilty in David Rosen's trial is David Rosen.

Please await the start of Paul v Clintons, coming soon to a different Los Angeles courtroom, where Hillary Clinton (and Bill too) will be "Defendant."

I am sorry---I was led to believe that the judge said more than just that she wouldn't be called to testify--or maybe I read what DFU has been posting and Hannity has been saying.

Do you know why Bill Clinton could be called as a witness?

"where Hillary Clinton (and Bill too) will be "Defendant.""

Maybe. Mr. and Mrs. Harry Houdini Clinton haven't had to answere for a thing in their whole lives. It's true there is a first for everything. But I doubt this is it. Civil suits are easily settled or dismissed.

"where Hillary Clinton (and Bill too) will be "Defendant.""

Maybe. Mr. and Mrs. Harry Houdini Clinton haven't had to answere for a thing in their whole lives. It's true there is a first for everything. But I doubt this is it. Civil suits are easily settled or dismissed.