| The only thing wrong with this move by Judicial Watch is that they are 0 for 1,434,922 in litigation.
|
Posted on 05/28/2005 5:12:11 AM PDT by pookie18
Judicial Watch Will Pursue Senate Ethics Complaint Against Hillary Clinton
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch Director of Litigation Paul J. Orfanedes, who attended the trial of Hillary Clinton’s National Finance Director, David Rosen, issued the following statement with respect to the Rosen verdict and sentence:
The evidence clearly shows David Rosen defrauded the Federal Election Commission and the U.S. Senate. Obviously, the Justice Department made a political calculation and decided not to pursue the case against Rosen aggressively. Government lawyers presented a watered-down, impotent case and ignored key evidence in order to keep Hillary and Bill Clinton out of the trial. As a result, Rosen is just another in a long line of well-connected criminals let off the hook for political reasons.
Judicial Watch will continue its pursuit of justice in this matter. Numerous individuals have testified that White House officials and officials from Mrs. Clinton’s campaign as well as Hillary and Bill themselves were complicit in the campaign finance scandal. Judicial Watch has filed an official complaint against Hillary Clinton with the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Ethics. We will continue to pressure the Senate to investigate Senator Clinton’s personal role in this scandal and to discipline her for any wrongdoing.
In addition, Judicial Watch will continue to call for the FEC to hold Mrs. Clinton’s campaign accountable for its admitted misreporting.
Secretary General of the UN, Bill Clinton, welcomes his wife, President Hillary Clinton, to speak before the UN General Assembly, to announce that the UN Constitution has finally been adopted by the US, replacing the old, outdated, silly constitution of the united states.
Mark
LOL, and her Secretary of State, Sandy Berger, will be right there with her.
I'll wager that they'd prefer Howard Dean or Bernie Sanders
as Secretary of State.
What about her Attorney General,David Kendall?
The fix was in. Goleeee !
When GWB came to office I had such high hopes that finally those crooks would get their due.
'nuf said.
;-)
| The only thing wrong with this move by Judicial Watch is that they are 0 for 1,434,922 in litigation.
|
Yep.
And, the fix is in for Hillary through election day/2008 with the old lying/liberal/socialist/Dem. media protecting and promoting Satan's Daughter!
|
|
COPYRIGHT MIA T 2005 |
|
CLINTON-KERRY-DEMOCRAT CONTEMPT FOR NATIONAL SECURITY[annotated] (WHY CLINTON (EITHER: 1 FOR THE PRICE OF 2) IS DANGEROUS FOR AMERICA)  (viewing movie requires Flash Player 7, available HERE)
COPYRIGHT MIA T 2005 |
O'Reilly has often stated how the powerful protect each other.
The first time I heard him mention this was when Bush did not pursue prosecution for Clinton pardoning Marc Rich. It seems there have been many other cases that have been similarly ignored over the last few years. And the most recent seems to be that of Sandy Burgler, who got off with a misdemeanor for stealing classified documents).
If only I could believe they botched it.
I can't. It was deliberate.
Probably some flunky started it off and then once it got noticed it got shut down.
Mutually assured destruction is part of it.
It may have started in Mena, but the flow of Chinese money has never even slowed down since the Senatorial treason in 98.
They are all co-conspirators.
All.
US Attorney - white wash! and you can bet that the "word" came from the White House. Just makes me wanta puke.
"Secretary General of the UN, Bill Clinton, welcomes his wife, President Hillary Clinton, to speak before the UN General Assembly..."
The anti-Christ lives. Question is, which one is it?
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.
One of many reasons that they are no longer handling Paul v Clinton. But that won't stop them from trying to raise money with it, even though at one point the judge in the case appointed an independent counsel to advise the Plaintiff, because the judge saw a conflict of interest between the Plaintiff's interests and Judicial Watch, who claimed to be representing him. For sure they were using him as a fund-raising tool. 
