Replies

When I first posted that I thought Klayman was working in concert with the clintons I did so as a hunch -- IMO it is no longer a hunch. It just made perfect sense as he was all about discovery which allowed the clintons to know exactly what was out there against them while at the same time Klayman was raking in money from conservatives for going after the clintons.

Can anyone tell me just what was discovered by Klayman that wouldn't have come out anyways? Once Klayman sued and information started flowing as part of discovery, the clinton spinmeisters hit the TV circuit blaming a conservative watchdog group and nothing much came of his lawsuits. In fact in his lawsuits, he would allege the wrongdoing so they were able to get out ahead of anything adverse even before discovery. What if the clients had used a reputable law firm and sued the clintons -- maybe the cases would have gone to trial instead of being dropped after discovery and all the paperwork flowing back and forth.

I find it odd that this is about Cheney and Halliburton right down where little big ears Perot lives and works. Don't know if it is fact, but I was informed by another Freeper that Klayman was part of Perot's 1992 failed campaign. If that is so, then he would be part of the "Hate Bush Family" of the Perot folks! Although Perot did mellow after clinton was in office.

Believe if anyone really tracked Klayman and what he has been up to they will find that trail somehow leading right to the clintons and the DemocRATS.

Note: His list of donors is classified since he obviously is not going to release them. Why doesn't he want folks to know who is donating?

His list of donors is classified since he obviously is not going to release them. Why doesn't he want folks to know who is donating?

Good post. It is in order to evade a disclosure of this information that Judicial Watch has been resisting an IRS audit for three years. More recently, Judicial Watch has taken to pleading the Fifth Amendment.

He won't release his donor list, but if I'm not mistaken he will SELL them; wasn't one of his lawsuits involved with suing a firm that said he "owed" some names?

When I first posted that I thought Klayman was working in concert with the clintons I did so as a hunch -- IMO it is no longer a hunch. It just made perfect sense as he was all about discovery which allowed the clintons to know exactly what was out there against them while at the same time Klayman was raking in money from conservatives for going after the clintons.

Woohoo! I bet you will be the 2nd freeper Larry brings suit against! Go Mom! I am on your side!

Hey Larry! Up yours!

Okay, RBA, I read it. I have the following comments about post #133:

(1) IMO, this is not an unreasonable theory, PKM. These criminals operate in a tangled web of these kinds of simple conspiracies, simply because they like it - they're in a habit of operating that way. I strongly suspect Kenneth Starr, but won't attempt to elaborate now.

(2) PKM, you asked: Can anyone tell me just what was discovered by Klayman that wouldn't have come out anyways?

I was able to dig out my old files, and am dying to answer, but how do I write a book for no money 4 hours befor a long road trip? This is what is frustrating about this forum! The answer I will have to give you tonight is, A BUNCH!

(3) Given the nature and the sources of the information forced out by Klayman, it is impossible in my mind that he was working incognito for Bill Clinton.

(4)If you can show me that Larry Klayman was involved in the Perot campaign, I will personally work to expose Klayman as an inside job. In my days in Arkansas, I was told by a good friend of Clinton's (who is now dead from a shot to the head, like so many others) who also knew Perot, and had some mutual friends with Perot. He told me that perot was working to get Clinton elected. Perot was ahead at the time, and he hadn't done his weird in-and-out-of-the-race routine, and I didn't believe him. But as time went on, I saw that he really did know Perot about as well as he knew Slick, and that he was telling thetruth. So, if Klayman worked for Perot, Klayman is no good in my book.

(4)But I don't know that Klayman worked for Perot, and as I see it right now there were only two good guys, that I know of, in the battle against the Clinton Crime Machine. ONe is Larry Klayman, and his organization. The other one is Donald Smaltz, the IC that was in charge of the investigation of Mike Espy et al. There were possibly some congressmen who were also true good guys, and there was one man I know of who quit Starr's team, because he said Starr was compormised and throwing many of the leads.

Sorry we can't talk all night. At tmies like these I'm inspired to collate it all and write it all down, but then I remember how little most Americans even give a damn about what is really true. As soon as you step on their favorite team, or hurt their petty pride, they cover their ears and close their eyes.

I'm relatively sure you won't believe or give credence to a word I have written, but I had to write it.

Stay well, and think.