Posted on 09/13/2007 11:43:01 PM PDT by doug from upland
For Clinton, 2000 Fund-Raising Controversy Lingers Ex-Supporter Paul Stays on the Attack With Suit, Claims By JOHN R. EMSHWILLER September 14, 2007; Page A7
LOS ANGELES -- As Sen. Hillary Clinton grapples with the burgeoning scandal surrounding disgraced fund-raiser Norman Hsu, she can't quite shake a fund-raising controversy from her 2000 Senate campaign.
Mrs. Clinton's entanglement with a thrice-convicted felon named Peter Paul is proof of how long campaign-finance problems can haunt a public official. Mr. Paul became a problem for Mrs. Clinton when his criminal past became public shortly after he helped organize and finance a gala Hollywood fund-raiser for her in August 2000.
The Issue: A fund-raising scandal from 2000 continues to dog Hillary Clinton. Sound Familiar? The entanglement with Peter Paul foreshadows events involving fund-raiser Norman Hsu. What's Next: A court is to decide if Mrs. Clinton is reinstated as a defendant in the long legal battle with Mr. Paul.Rather than drift away, Mr. Paul has been on the attack against Mrs. Clinton ever since. In a lawsuit in California state court that has been grinding along for years, Mr. Paul accuses Mrs. Clinton and former President Bill Clinton of deceiving him into spending well over $1 million on the fund-raiser for her Senate campaign. Mr. Paul contends the Clintons obtained the money by falsely promising that Mr. Clinton would become Mr. Paul's business associate after leaving the White House in January 2001. Mr. Paul also maintains that Mrs. Clinton and her campaign violated federal election law in connection with the fund-raiser.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
“Those who think they are gaming the system should not be surprised to find that the system is gaming them” - CutePuppy
Like that. What goes around comes around ten times. You can’t change it. It will happen.
CONGRATULATIONS!! WELL DONE!!
It’s a minor miracle.
Deo gratias.
I always want to help out and do things like this but never know where to start. Excellent idea!!!
PING!
WOW !!!!!!! Fantastic !
Thanks for the alert, Spirit.
Thanks for the ping!
I personally don't believe that Obama can win simply because he is a lightweight. This is reflected in the foreign policy gaffes he has made in recent weeks and will become more obvious during a head to head campaign with a Republican.
I don't believe Edwards can win because I firmly believe the American people can clearly see he is a vain empty shell.
Therefore Hillary is the dims best hope.
I know and thanks Doug.
And how might defeatist comments like this--repeated several times for whatever reason--improve that situation?
Yes, we all know the clintons are bulletproof. It's pointless. Nothing will ever happen. Yadda yadda. I'm not picking on you specifically--it's all over the boards, gunking up the threads to where substantive discussion finally grinds to a halt. I am mystified as to why people who feel everything's hopeless even bother with this forum.
Not trying to argue that there's not a seriously stacked deck. Just saying that raining on the parade of someone who is actually doing something strikes me as the last thing FReepers should be doing.
Peter’s felony had to do with something good he did for the country -— ripping off Fidel and exposing how Fidel was cheating the Soviets. He would have never been involved in the stock manipulation had the Clintons not stolen his Japanese business partner and destroyed the company.
I know. And he is fighting to expose those two.
LOADS OF PHOTOS SHOWING THEY BARELY KNEW EACH OTHER
Way to go doug ...this is an example of perserverence in the extreme for all.. All should be congratulated
Gov. Rendell, who isn’t a defendant in the lawsuit, didn’t know about Mr. Paul’s felonies until the Post reported on them and never asked Mr. Paul to lie,
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Hey, Ed, are you ready to get lit up in the press? Rendell never declared to the FEC the over 100K Peter spent on an Al Gore fundraiser. He never reported a 150K stock pledge. He never reported 55K sent to the Working Families Party. Rendell met with Aaron Tonken after Tonken was indicted and while Tonken was wearing an FBI wire. Rendell tried to bribe him with a 100K job offer in Pennsylvania. Get ready, Fast Eddie.
“1) it is a complicated story”
It certainly is... And if there’s a good, detailed website or summary of it I’d love it if someone could link me. Let me preface the following by saying that I’ve TRIED to follow this case, and if I can’t, as an interested party, then how can the average reporter or citizen be convinced?
All the accounts I’ve read of it are somewhat (read: very)vague. Like, I’ve read Clinton was supposed to become a business partner after leaving office in 2001... But then I’ve also read that the company he’s accused of not joining actually went out of business 2 months before that. And if Peter Paul paid for this trying to lure the Clintons into a business deal, can’t this be dismissed by the Clintons as a failed bribery attempt?
I’ve been to a page that supposedly laid the case out in great detail... But all I saw were a bunch of emotional phrases like “Clintons responsible for failure of Stan Lee (creator of Spiderman)!” without a lot of backing info. It seems almost tacked on, and then quotes from Stan Lee that he DIDN’T give a check, then something about EXCHANGING a check... And the details are just never laid out.
It seems like there should be a great story here, but I haven’t found a source yet that connects the dots. Suggestions?
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.