Posted on 02/17/2008 4:22:36 PM PST by doug from upland
LINK TO HILLARY'S SWORN DECLARATION
Hillary's sworn declaration, which was turned in to the court on April 7, 2006, is nothing short of a work of fiction. Besides the lies, one particular part of that declaration has always bothered me.
I do not remember any of the statements I may have made to Mr. Paul during one or perhaps both of these events. However, I have no recollection whatsoever of talking with him about any future business arrangement with him whereby he would support my campaign for the United States Senate in exchange for anything from me or then-President Clinton....
1. Why did she say "during one or perhaps both of these events" instead of "during either of these events."
2. More curiously, why did she say, "However, I have no recollection whatsoever......." It seems to me that, beginning the sentence with "However" was not proper. The however would have qualified or limited an admission of something in the previous sentence. She made no such admission. I believe it should have been, "And I have no recollection..."
What do you think?
perjury is a jailable offense ??? I hope... lol
A Clinton commit perjury....Never Happen. /s
HILLARY lied right after the sentence in which she swore she could and would testify competently. She didn’t meet Peter in 2000. We have home video of her laughing it up and recalling how they met in 1993. Something happened at that meeting she would never forget. No woman would. http://youtube.com/watch?v=ZY2b3Db3dGE
She also makes a startling admission, which was undoubtedly by accident. She admits that the concert was “for my Senate campaign.” All along, her legal team maintained that it was for a joint fundraiser. The legal limit at the time to her campaign was $2,000. Peter has maintained that he contributed to her campaign, not a joint fundraiser. That was never his intent.
I do not recall having made such a statement because if I had made such a statement I would recall making such a statement.
Typical Clinton stuff if you ask me.
Amazing, huh? The smartest woman in the world. On tape, Peter has several hours of their interaction. She said things that would never forget.
It's as though she's saying, "I don't remember the first event; but I don't remember the second event MORE than I don't remember the first."
SO...She recalls less of the second event than she recalls of the first; but she doesn't recall either?
duh!
In case you find recordings...I just don't remember a thing.
Looking through her statements, Doug, it’s all about covering her ass in case there are recordings.
She’s either a liar (snicker!); or too stupid to be president.
1) What was said by Hillary to Paul @ BOTH events? Her phrasing seems to indicate her effort to deny knowledge of saying “it” at the event (she remembers saying it once) or events (she’s not sure about the other event.)
2)See 1. She HAS a recollection of sayi “it” at least once but really has no recollection “whatsoever” of the business relationship agreement.
One of the things they discussed on film at Spago was her blind date in 1967 at Dartmouth Winter Carnival. Peter was a student there at the time and knew the California surfer who was her blind date. The guy got drunk, got his surf board, stipped to his swimming trunks, and tried to surf the snow-covered moguls at the adjacent golf course. Everyone went out to watch, and there were worried that he was going to freeze to death. At the Gershman tea, later that afternoon, Peter is on film introducing her and starting to refer to the Dartmouth story. She gets the biggest laugh of the day when she turns back to him and says, “Don’t tell everything.”
At Spago they talked about Peter’s anti-Castro activities, BCCI, and what he did to expose Bert Lance.
She remembers Peter attending? He didn’t just attend. He hosted and paid for them. He spent several hours with her. By the way, the $27,000 he spent at Spago was never declared.
Yes, I guess she would remember a little. He spent over $1.2 million. He greeted her and spent time with her at the reception. He sat next to her daughter and few seats from her for three hours at the concert. They spent some time together at the dinner afterwards.
That strange, in that context, construction "during one or perhaps both of these events" is simply a repeat of the phrase used in the previous sentence that you did not include in your excerpt: "I remember Mr. Paul attending both events and I remember speaking with him at one or perhaps both of these events." It is probably a lawyer's way of mapping these two sentences together without leaving a seam for somebody to open up.
2. More curiously, why did she say, "However, I have no recollection whatsoever......." It seems to me that, beginning the sentence with "However" was not proper. The however would have qualified or limited an admission of something in the previous sentence. She made no such admission. I believe it should have been, "And I have no recollection..."
I suspect the "however" follows from the chain of thought: "well, I have admitted I was there and talked with him, but I can't remember about what. So you then might speculate that it could have been about XYZ. However, I can tell you that I have no recollection whatsoever of discussing XYZ."
So the however, to me, responds to the unspoken possibility and assumed speculation by recipients of the declaration that she might have talked about XYZ.
Then of course she goes into the totally inane defense that she believes she would remember if they had talked about XYZ, so since she doesn't remember, they must not have talked about XYZ.
Many friends and friends of friends have also seen it. My Dad has had a wonderful time sharing with his friends and friends of friends.
If I recall (The DVD's currently not in my possession.), she also mumbled that she never recalls blind dates; but she wen ton to remember a lot of that one.
Not recalling is her consistent loop hole of choice. I hope she gets her fanny caught in that loop hole before she steals more of our Nation.
whenever a RAT answers like that, "i have no recollection"(a simple ruse to avoid a perjury rap) they should then be ask: So, you are saying, IT COULD HAVE HAPPENED, YOU JUST DON'T REMEMBER IT, RIGHT???
then let them try and wiggle out of that.
make them say on the record: NO IT NEVER HAPPENED!!!
THEN they can be prosecuted for perjury if it's ever proven it did.
Does she have a business agent, or planner who handles all the arrangements after5 she agrees to the conditions?..Are there any planners records that could be subpoenaed ? Any White House records ?...or did Maggie take care of those ?
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.