[William Tell]

My point was not that there are no proven facts, but simply the fact that the media can adopt the "mistakes were made" approach and make the claim that many of the facts are the subject of upcoming litigation.

I'm sure that they would point to the unsuccessful prosecution of Rosen, was it?

Here's what a quick search brought up from mediamatters.org:
Though government prosecutors stated affirmatively that Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) was not aware of the alleged campaign finance violations that led to the indictment of David Rosen, former finance director for Clinton's 2000 senatorial campaign, conservative pundits aggressively hyped the indictment as a potential scandal that could threaten Clinton's political career. But many of these same pundits have yet to report that a jury cleared Rosen of all charges on May 27:

The liberal media lies by omission every day. Why would Spencer expect anything different? The media would add to the above something along the lines of: "No similar investigation of Spencer's contributors has been performed as of this date, nor is there any indication that indictments are pending."

[doug from upland]

Since the Rosen trial, we have an admission of underreporting by 721K and absolute proof of a fourth fraudulent FEC report. Those are actually facts. Dave Schippers will comment about the actions of the judge and the prosecutor in the Rosen case.

PS Don't pay attention to George Soros' mediamatters.

[doug from upland]

Mediamatters lied. The convervative pundits have written about Rosen's acquittal. We address it in the film.

Mediamatters has not reported that Hillary lied in the 4th FEC report. She knows that Stan Lee is under oath testifying that he gave no money. When will Soros report that?