Hillary's alleged abuse of 1st Amendment appealed (Paul v Clinton - Supreme Court of California)

world net daily ^ | 11-26-07 | art moore

[doug from upland]

NOTE - TAKE THE TIME TO READ THE WHOLE ARTICLE

Hillary's alleged abuse of 1st Amendment appealed

Supreme Court of California asked to address evidence she committed crimes

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Posted: November 26, 2007 1:00 a.m. Eastern

By Art Moore © 2007 WorldNetDaily.com

California's Supreme Court has been asked to hear a claim Sen. Hillary Clinton wrongly invoked First Amendment protections to remove herself as a defendant from a multi-million-dollar lawsuit in which she and her husband are accused of defrauding the largest donor to her 2000 Senate campaign.

Business mogul Peter Franklin Paul – who claims former President Bill Clinton destroyed his entertainment company to get out of a $17 million agreement – is petitioning the state high court to rehear a recent appeals court ruling upholding a decision to remove the New York Democrat from the case.

[Doogle]

.."she'll avoid the trail so she won't cross the picket line"

[SeaHawkFan]

There is a US Supreme Court Case that states that judges can be forced to testify about their decisions if corruption is alleged.

[daylilly]

I’m doing a little creative guessing here, from what you said.

So is this appeal going to push things back far enough that Hillary could be nominated before the judgment is announced on the appeal? Or would this appeal be finished before the Democratic convention? They might be stuck with her perhaps.

It is an interesting scenario.

If the Dems end up with Hillary as the nominee that could be a huge disaster for them [not that I’m crying or anything]. They would deserve a huge disaster.

[doug from upland]

I believe she will effectively wrap up the nomination on Feb. 5. Peter’s counsel expects a CA Supr Ct decision on the appeal by the end of January. Discovery will happen sometime after that.