Posted on 05/09/2007 7:11:37 PM PDT by doug from upland
NOTE: this is No. 4 in a series of letters as I answer children's questions about Hillary Clinton's campaign finance fraud.
No. 1 - HOWARD WOLFSON
No. 2 - JIM LEVIN
No. 3 - CHELSEA CLINTON
=============================================================================
Dear Doug from Upland,
My mom's girlfriend moved in right after she kicked out dad. Her girlfriend Amy is a lawyer and Amy heard that you were saying some stuff about a judge that wasn't very nice. It was the judge in the trial of that Rosen guy in Los Angeles.
Amy says that you shouldn't say bad things about judges. We depend on our judges and they try to be fair. Amy also wanted me to say that she hopes there is a day when a judge can marry people like my mom and her.
I'd like to know why you are saying bad stuff about a judge and I really expect an answer from you.
Sincerely,
Brittney
Age 11 - Santa Monica, CA
==============================================
Dear Brittney,
First, I am sorry that your mom kicked out dad and is living with her girlfriend.
Now, let's talk about judge A. Howard Matz. He was a Bill Clinton appointee, so that is the first strike against him.
You need to tell your, er, what shall we call Amy? How about step-lesbian. You need to tell your step-lesbian attorney Amy that Matz made outrageous statements in the courtroom even before a word of evidence was presented.
Matz called the man who spent almost $2 million bucks on witch Hillary a "thoroughly corrupt individual." He told the jury that Hillary had nothing to do with the case and was completely out of the loop in the campaign finance fraud. That simply wasn't true. Hillary was up to her eyeballs in the fraud from the very beginning. WATCH THE SHORT VIDEO CLIP HERE. By the way, that video clip was withheld by a US attorney so that the evidence was not available during the Rosen trial, the FEC investigation, the FBI investigation, or for the Senate Ethics Committee. No one has yet seen the truthful story about Hillary Clinton's felonies in the case.
From the very beginning, Matz was covering for Hillary and influencing the jury. He should be ashamed and impeached like judge Alcyee Hastings was. If Matz is impeached, however, I would expect the party that has no shame or morality to elect him as a congressman. (Especially if they found 90 grand of bribe money in his freezer.)
Respectfully,
Doug from Upland
PS Regarding the trial of David Rosen, when you have a chance, go Google "1919 Chicago Black Sox."
I’m thinking some of these same players have to be called by Peter Paul (assuming they’re still alive)
Reggie, Frickes and Levin testimony all killed Rosen and in kind, kill Hillary.
It’s gunna be good.
Coming to your local theaters soon ! Unless there are more production delays...
We are now looking at another 60 days for the film. Sorry.
Katz did not prevent the Reggie wire from being used -— the lame prosecution did. Zeidenberg threw this case away but pursued Libby. Just amazing.
Peter is going to present some amazing witnesses, documents, and film in Los Angeles Superior Court. I met a week and a half ago with a major writer from DC. That writer is seriously looking at this story and is still trying to digest it. It is very complicated.
The jury did not understand the case. After all, it was Los Angeles. The foreman of the jury concluded that Rosen could not pull it off alone. He was right.
Rosen may have a very serious problem, even though he can’t be prosecuted for the crime for which he was acquitted. He swore during his trial that he did not know the costs. There was a phone call that Peter recorded that tells a different story.
sorry...you’re right, the prosecution ate the tape...thanks
There is a boatload of evidence that was never seen in the Rosen trial.
I’m curious, where else Rosen might be in jeopardy in this mess ?
sorry to carry on this conversation here, but I remember that I knew in my heart of hearts, everyone was going to get hung in the Rosen trial...and they all escaped and the only ones that were stunned by this was mostly us at FR.
Perjury is difficult to prove, but let’s say I saw him give several answers in court that contradicted the truth.
“The foreman of the jury concluded that Rosen could not pull it off alone.”
And the jury just stops there??? Can we say the word “think”?
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.