Posted on 10/08/2005 10:34:23 AM PDT by doug from upland
FYI
I'll be reading this piece very slowly today and digesting every word and saving to the Hillary file.
bump
"If the gloves don't fit, you must acquit." bump
Well done. The thought of a clinton in "Camp Cupcake," however, leaves me with a sense of profound cognitive dissonance.
Doug-
The moribund old media, quite simply, are part of the clinton agitprop. We must stay clear of them. Bypass them. Who needs them, anyway?My original response to your announcement of the upcoming Post article:
Careful Doug...
When the Left assesses clintoncorruption (treason, rape, or whatever), a clown-like character of the crime or the criminal is the reliable default mitigating factor, with the magnitude of the mitigation directly proportional to both the intensity of clownlike affect and the seriousness of the crime and inversely proportional to the distance to an election in which a clinton is running.
We used to execute rapists and traitors. Today we elect them president?
|
WHY MISSUS CLINTON IS DANGEROUS FOR THE CHILDREN, FOR AMERICA, FOR THE WORLD madhillary.com (coming soon) hillarytalks.blogspot.com COPYRIGHT MIA T 2005 |
Peter Paul has an unprecedented and historic civil suit proceeding toward a Los Angeles courtroom next year. Discovery should be early in 2006. Hillary will be under oath.
Witt, not surprisingly, didn't level with Peter. It was a total Hillary puff peace and it was apparently sponsored by the poor abused David Rosen. I saw him in that L.A. courtroom lying his butt off.
If we want it to have legs, it is up to us.
So?
Senator Clinton, on or about July 11, 2001, your attorney David Kendall was served on your behalf with a civil lawsuit filed by Peter Paul. Included were documents such as cancelled checks and invoices and the demand that you correct the record on two previous fraudulent FEC filings. How did you allow your campaign treasurer, Andrew Grossman, to file a third and final amended FEC report?
You are quite right. Don't know how much I can do to help though, but I'll send the story to some British bloggers I know. Maybe the story can grow while doing a trans-Atlantic oscillation.
Although, the Swedish MSM have a number of reporters in NY and DC, they are completely useless. I sent them material about the Rathergate story, well before the story broke in the papers. But they were totally uninterested, and only wrote a few small articles when Rather eventually had to resign.
So, not much hope there, but I'll give it a try.
Cheers,
ScaniaBoy
Doug, for years you have been posting about your interviews and your oh so witty parodies, not because of your beliefs but because you love the attention and accolades from other Freepers.
But all of these stories have yet to accomplish anything. Repeatedly we are told that there will be a major expose, broken by you, and when the stories come out, they are flops. You continue to provide your data to sources you know are not going to report in any way that is damaging to the left. It has happened enough that I sincerely believe you do it not for the cause but because you adore the attention.
What has happened yet again is that the only places the truth was reported will be minor internet outlets that are viewed as unreliable and biased. Meanwhile, yet again, the information is in the hands of people who will use it not to shine the light of truth, but to be best prepared to minimize it's impact.
I commend the Post, and you personally, for your efforts to explain this extraordinary story of the campaign finance fraud that elected the first First Lady of the United States to the U.S. Senate while it destroyed her largest contributor turned whistle blower, and those employees, consultants and friends who assisted her. However, unless the key facts regarding the role of then President Clinton and then First Lady Hillary Clinton in effectuating, enabling and covering up the fraud are included, you will be seen as continuing the efforts led by the New York Times in its 2200 word article in March, 2005, to attack and discredit the messenger/donor while protecting the Senator/benficiary from a fair explanation of all the damning facts.
Its not conceivable that I would have that kind of "face" time with both of them, control the President's seating and access to people at the largest Hollywood event ever produced for a President, have hours of time stitting next to him talking 70% of that time, without him knowing everything about me, what I did, how mnuch it cost- because I certainly told him how I was unprepared for the extravagence I underwrote on the strength of his indications that we had a deal. Its not human nature to hide those things from the people you pay millions to assocuite with.
My statement stands. We are all grateful for your tireless work. Don't try to be modest. Thank you.
"WORTH REPEATING:"
Thanks.
http://www.davidicke.com/icke/articles2/clintonhits.html
Awesome site check it out. Clintons hitlist!
5 - Smoking Gun Demand Letter
6 - Gary Smith, the Concert, and Another Smoking Gun
7 - Home, Home at Le Dôme
9 - Hillary Responds Through Official Mouthpiece in WASHINGTON POST
Documents sent to attorney, hand delivered demand letter, news conference for all to see at National Press Club, civil lawsuit, Tonken will testify that he told Hillary everything, Rosen - "the costs won't be the costs", documents I saw in court that had been altered, and Hillary's conversation with Gary Smith in which she convinced him to lowered his concert fee from 850K to 800K.
This time in open court we will at least hear the transcript if not the recording itself of David Rosen with Ray Reggie. Peter has lots of evidence. Let's see what happens in court.
Hillary has made her final desperate appeal to stay out of court based on some bizarre First Amendment claim that, as a candidate with First Amendment speech rights, she cannot be sued for a business fraud. Bill has already been told by the California Supreme Court to get ready for discovery.
The trial of David Rosen was a sham. I counted six jurors asleep on the final day of arguments. They believed that Rosen was not the right one to charge.
The campaign treasurer, Andrew Grossman, cannot simply say, "Oh, I was confused. I didn't know what the expenses really were, so I guess I just won't report any of them." (that is me putting words into his mouth, not an actual quote from him). The treasurer has the affirmative duty to seek out the information and make a factual report. He did not do that, so he certainly has a big problem. Grossman should have been indicted and faced trial in Los Angeles.
The candidate has no legal jeopardy if the candidate does not know a fraud is occuring. There is plenty of evidence that she knew. She had an affirmative duty to see that accurate reporting was given to the FEC. Hillary absolutely knew that $401K was not accurate in the final amended FEC report. Absolutely.
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.