Posted on 03/13/2007 9:44:10 PM PDT by doug from upland
March 13, 2007
The Kaplan-Clinton Connection
(AP)Rick Kaplan, the new executive producer of the "Evening News," is a longtime friend of Bill and Hillary Clinton. Newsbusters, which bills itself as "exposing and combating liberal media bias," has seized on the connection. The implication in their coverage is that Kaplan will not be able to cover Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign in a fair way.
Kaplan addressed his Clinton connections with the Philadelphia Inquirer's Gail Shister. "I've got a 38-year track record," Kaplan said. "I find it astounding that this is an issue for anyone since it's never come up in my career. There's no smoke there...You could hoist me up and skewer me if there's any truth to that at all."
Kaplan pointed out that he is also a friend of John McCain. "If you're around long enough, you get to know everybody," he said.
Kaplan slept in the Clinton White House twice. After the second occasion, in April 2000, he told USA Today's Peter Johnson, "I do not feel embarrassed, ashamed or compromised in any way, shape or form."
"Everyone has relationships," he added. "We met each other before either of us knew we'd amount to anything. He doesn't expect anything from me, and I don't expect anything from him."
The question of whether Kaplan can oversee fair coverage of Bill and Hillary Clinton goes to the heart of the debate about media bias. Most journalists today feel they can put both their personal and political feelings aside when the time comes to do their jobs. They may like or dislike a politician or his policies, but they believe they can provide unbiased, objective coverage regardless of their feelings.
Critics, meanwhile, charge that such a separation is impossible. They believe that if you agree with the politics of a certain politician, that's going to be reflected in your coverage, even if you don't want it to be. And that goes double if you're friends with that politician – how can you separate your personal feelings from your professional obligation?
To some extent, casting this as an issue simply having to do with Kaplan is missing the point. As the "Scooter" Libby trial helped illustrate, the media and political elite are intertwined in ways that make those who value an independent press corps uneasy. These connections can help journalists because they give them access and allow them to stay plugged in. But they also stoke fears that such relationships will cause journalists to pull their punches.
For what it's worth, I believe that Kaplan is capable of covering the Clintons fairly, just as I think most reporters can separate their personal and political beliefs from their coverage. Relationships like these do create a perception problem, however, and provide ammunition to partisan critics who are ready to assume the worst about the mainstream media. We don't yet know what Kaplan is going to do on the "Evening News." I think it's only fair to wait to see the journalistic product before coming to any conclusions.
=========================================================================
=========================================================================
This afternoon, I spoke with Candace in the CBS newsroom. She got a few tidbits of Paul v Clinton and I challenged Rick Kaplan to do what he promised -- report the news. She suggested an email to him, so here it goes.
----- Original Message -----
From: DOUGLAS *****
To: evening@cbsnews.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2007 5:20 PM
Subject: attn Rick Kaplan -- do you mean what you said?
Hi, Rick,
I am doing a documentary film on the greatest campaign finance fraud in history. Four false FEC reports and the failure to declare $721,000. It also involves the collapse of a public company, Stan Lee Media. Unfortunately, the Clintons are in the middle of it all. Are you able to be the journalist you claim if it might do damage to Hillary? We shall see.
LOADS OF BACKGROUND: hillcap.org
FROM GAIL SHISTER'S PIECE:
Can a friend of Bill's cover Hillary? Absolutely, says new CBS Evening News chief Rick Kaplan, a pal of both Clintons' since 1974. He slept in the White House twice during Bill Clinton's administration.
"I don't think I've talked to them in a year," says Kaplan, formerly president of MSNBC. "They're definitely my friends, but I'm friends with John McCain, too. If you're around long enough, you get to know everybody.
"I've got a 38-year track record. I find it astounding that this is an issue for anyone since it's never come up in my career. There's no smoke there... . You could hoist me up and skewer me if there's any truth to that at all."
This case involves the business fraud and collapse of Stan Lee Media. There is compelling evidence regarding the Clintons' role in the collapse. This case is going to change everything for 2008.
Brief timeline:
Early 2000 - Peter Paul is induced to support Hillary's 2000 Senate campaign with the promise of access to Bill Clinton to be able to make a proposal to come aboard Stan Lee Media as a rainmaker when he left the WH
June 9, 2000 - Paul pays for fundraisers at Spago and the home of Cynthia Gershman ... the costs are never declared by the campaign (note: a previous fundraiser through Rendell for Al Gore, paid for by Paul, was also never declared; Rendell also never declared a 150K stock pledge) ... at the Spago lunch, Paul spent considerable time with Hillary and discussed his plan for her husband's employment - see the 20/20 report from 2001 - CLICK. Amazingly, in her declaration of 4-7-06, Hillary acts as if she barely knew Peter Paul and claimed she couldn't remember anything they might have said. Besides the email comments, Paul has video of her going on and on about how Stan Lee was a genius for hiring Paul. She is really excited about Paul's idea of a cartoon character of Al Gore, and she wants to talk to Tony Coehlo and Terry McAuliffe about it. Her failure to remember is simply a lie.
CLICK CLICK
Aug. 12, 2000 - Hollywood Gala... it raises a million dollars for Hillary, but it cost over a million dollars...Paul spent several hours with Bill Clinton...here he is further negotiating the deal at the after concert dinner
CLICK Look at all the photos of the gala on this page CLICK Hillary actually said in her declaration of 4-7-06, "I remember Mr. Paul attending the event..." How insulting was that? Actually, she spent hours near him and publicly thanked him from the stage for all he did.
Aug 13 - Paul and his wife Andrea are at the home of Barbra Streisand for Clinton Library donors...when Hillary sees Andrea, she runs over to her, brings her over to Streisand, and introduces her as "the wife of the man who funded last night's event...my new best friend"... Streisand's testimony should be interesting... Chelsea came up to the table with Paul, Andrea, Tendo Oto, Oto's interpreter Jonathon Rogers, Jim Levin, and Haim Saban. Chelsea discussed for at least a half an hour how excited she and her parents were about her dad coming to work for the creator of Spider Man
Aug 15 - Lloyd Grove writes a story in the WASHPOST about Paul's felony past from two decades previous involving the Cuban Coffee Caper and defrauding Fidel Castro of $8.7 million ... Howard Wolfson vows that they would never take any money from Peter Paul CLICK
Aug 17 - Grove writes a second story about $2,000 given by Paul at Spago ... Wolfson says they will return the money, and a check is immediately cut and sent to Paul ... Wolfson actually admits that the gala cost a million dollars but says it was in-kind and not a check CLICK
Aug 18 - behind the scenes, while disavowing him in public, the Clintons write personal notes to Paul, dated Aug 18, espressing their gratitude ... Hillary: "We will remember it always" CLICK CLICK
Aug 24 - while disavowing him in public, Campaign Finance Chairman David Rosen is directed to send a fax to Paul asking for another $100,000 (actually, one of several faxes) ... Hillary had promised the money for the Working Families Party in New York ... Paul will send no more money until he hears it face to face from Bill Clinton that they still have a deal CLICK (second document shows Gordon's acknowledgement that it was "done")
Sept 13 - Japanese business partner makes agreement with Stan Lee Media for Asian partnership and invests $5 million in the company. He promises another $5 million in November for the American joint venture CLICK
Sept. 22, 2000 - Clinton steps off AF-1 in Los Angeles (we have photo) and assures Paul that the deal is still a go ... Paul has Steven Gordon send a stock transfer of $55K to the Working Families Party for Hillary ... we can find no evidence that they ever declared that donation. If the Clintons were disavowing Paul in public, claimed he gave no money, and had no business arrangement with the President as claimed by Hillary, why would the President of the United States be meeting Paul in public as he stepped of AF-1? For what possible purpose? That's not hard to figure out, is it? CLICK
Nov 7 - Hillary is elected
Nov 13 - just six days after Hillary's election, an agreement for Venture Soft USA Inc is recorded in Illinois between Jim Levin, Clinton's business adviser, and Tendo Oto ... Levin was Clinton's "eyes and ears" in dealing with Paul, got proprietary business information, and stole the Japanese partner for their own deal
Dec 2000 - Stan Lee Media collapses ... the additional $5-7 million promised in November from partner Tendo Oto was not received due to the Clinton/Levin interference YOU TUBE PRESENTATION
Early 2001 - Paul discovers that the campaign has filed two fraudulent FEC reports, only reporting 366K for the cost of Event 39 ... he spent over a million dollars on it
June 18, 2001 - Paul files lawsuit against the Clintons and several others for business fraud
July 3 - Treasurer Andrew Grossman is served with the lawsuit that includes documentation for $1.6 million spent by Paul
July 11 - David Kendall accepts service for Hillary along with the $1.6 million documented expenses
July 18 - press conference at National Press Club ... Paul has messenger hand deliver a demand letter to Hillary's senate office CLICK
July 30 - despite Paul's demand and all of the documentation, a third false FEC report is filed ... this time they declare $401K for Event 39 ... still no mention of Paul as the real donor
Jan 2005 - criminal indicted of David Rosen is unsealed
May 2005 - Rosen acquitted in criminal trial in Los Angeles...the perjury in this trial was astounding...the judge and prosecutor going out of their way to condemn Paul and claim that Hillary had nothing to do with it is also astounding... FBI affidavit during the trial documentin $1.2 mil from Paul that was not declared CLICK. The prosecution does not call Paul or Aaron Tonken. The prosecution does not use damaging evidence against Rosen obtained while Ray Reggie (brother in law of Ted Kennedy) was wearing a wire. In Tonken's book, KING OF CONS, he details how he sat in a van with Hillary detailing all of the money that was being spent on her. 
Dec 2005 - FEC determines that the campaign deliberately underreported $721,000, fines the campaign a mere $35,000, and orders a new filing...treasurer Andrew Grossman signs conciliation agreement with the FEC, the equivalent of a nolo contendre plea
Jan 2006 - the fourth fraudulent FEC report is filed ... among the problems are Stan Lee (whom we have on tape in a deposition swearing that he gave no money) is credited with a 225K donation and Paul is still never named personally as the donor as he has demanded CLICK YOU TUBE PRESENTATION
April 7, 2006 - Hillary removed as defendant but judge made clear to Kendall that she would be testifying ... the declaration turned into the court by Kendall for Hillary can only be described as a work of fiction ... no reporters attended the hearing and not one mainstream media source wrote that a trial date had been set for defendant Bill Clinton (trial date postponed until appeal is hear to bring Hillary back in as a defendant) ... Chelsea will be one of the witnesses called ... although her mom claims no knowledge of the business deal, if Chelsea testifies honestly, she will tell how the family stayed up late after the gala playing scrabble and discussing the excitement of daddy going to work for the creator of Spiderman ... from a private fundraiser at Zev Braun's house in early 2000, Paul has home video of Hillary laughing and discussing with him how he had arranged in 1993 for Fabio to chase her around the room and pick her up in a romance pose...the president referenced that event the next year at the Italian-American Foundation Dinner ... her declaration claiming that she met Paul in early 2000 is simply a lie YOU TUBE PRESENTATION
June 2006 - Senate Ethics Committee announces it will not investigate Hillary and simply relies on the flawed FEC procedure ... subsequently, they refuse Paul's offer to appear and testity
Oct. 18, 2006 - new demand letter for return of over a million dollars is delivered to Hillary's DC office with copy delivered to Sen. Voinovich, chair of the Senate Ethics Committee CLICK
Jan. 10, 2007 - Paul counsel files Appellate Brief to bring Hillary back into the case as a defendant CLICK
There's the challenge. Do the story and you may actually be able to boost Katie's ratings. Of course, Katie probably won't want to do anything that could hurt Hillary. You have a dilemma. Journalist or FOB?
...Doug ***** 909.***.**** cell 909.***.****
Ping
From his book ---
Whatever protection her staff had built around her, however much in the dark they had kept her, that was over. Now she knew.
Yes, she knew and allowed her campaign treasurer to continue to file false FEC reports.
Mark Halperin of ABC was at his computer. I sent him the same info, and he got back to me in two minutes.
thanks..we'll take a look
Okay, let's see how long refuse to report. Emails have been sent to ABC - Mark Halperin, NBC - Chuck Todd (new political director), and CBS - Rick Kaplan.
Wait for Paul v Clinton to get to L.A. Superior Court. It will change everything.
If Kaplan weren't the new hiree, the position would go to (a) another Clintonista or (b) another left-leaning Dem who would soon be pressured by the Clintonistas to watch what was put on the show. The ultimate "news" product would be barely distinguishable. That's because the universe of people who were or would be considered by CBS for the job is sharply limited by political ideology. And that in turn is because CBS is what it is.
Best wishes to you and PP on getting this story out to the MSM, but the details of the litigation are complex and it would require a lot of time to explain it to folks who haven't been following it. Might Court TV be a better vehicle from that perspective?
Wait for Paul v Clinton to get to L.A. Superior Court. It will change everything.
From your lips to God's ear. Let's hope.
Thanks for the ping Spirit of Allegiance
Thanks for the ping! I'm always interested in this topic.
BUMP
Thanks for the ping. Thanks Doug. Thanks Peter. Concrete evidence BUMP!
New media vs propagandists BUMP!
Individual vs state BUMP!
Truth vs lie BUMP!
Freedom vs tyranny BUMP!
Maybe those guys need the YouTube treatment.
Wait for Paul v Clinton to get to L.A. Superior Court.
When is this going to happen?
David Kendall had until today (unless they extended it) to reply to the appellate brief from Peter's counsel, USJF. I don't know when the Appellate Court will hear the argument regarding Hillary, but it will be this year. After that, discovery in the case can start right away. I so hope that I can serve Streisand to appear for a deposition and get it on film.
God bless you, doug. Most folks would have thrown in the towel by now, convinced that the media will continue to completely ignore this story.
I admire your determination and wish you the best of luck.
Now that's interesting. We'll see where this goes.
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.
