OUT!! DONATE TODAY
SUPPORT FREE REPUBLIC
FreeRepublic , LLC
PO BOX 9771
FRESNO, CA 93794
Posted on 10/01/2002 8:13:55 AM PDT by Tumbleweed_Connection
Of all the Senate Democrats watching Robert Torricelli end his reelection bid in disgrace yesterday, none could have been more concerned than the "Torch's" New York colleague, Sen. Hillary Clinton.
And it's not just because she, like all Democrats, fears losing control of the Senate in this fall's election.
No, Torricelli's political demise likely sent shivers through Mrs. Clinton for an entirely different reason. After all, she has her own David Chang to worry about.
Though the Democratic Party's Torricelli cover-up nearly worked, with former U.S. Attorney Mary Jo White declining to indict earlier this year despite mountains of incriminating evidence, White didn't count on the persistence of Mr. Chang, the government's key witness aginst the powerful Democrat.
Party insiders were hoping that the Torch would be able to finesse the routine Senate Ethics Committee probe that White recommended. But it didn't turn out that way.
Speaking through his lawyer, and more recently in-person in jailhouse interviews, Chang kept insisting that the Torch was "a criminal." And when a videotape surfaced last week that seemed to corroborate his claim that the New Jersey Democrat had dispatched a local leg-breaker to intimidate him, it may have been the last straw.
Like hero-whistleblower Chang, one-time Hollywood mogul Peter Paul has seen better days since he came forward with an ugly tale implicating Democratic Party royalty in campaign fraud. But the similarity doesn't end there.
Indicted by Justice Department Clintonistas on stock fraud charges two years ago, Paul continues to insist that the Clintons illegally accepted nearly $2 million in cash and in-kind contributions for Hillary's 2000 Senate campaign.
If the Bush Justice Department comes to believe Paul's charges - and he has reams of evidence to back his story up - it may not matter that ex-prosecutor White's office tried to do for Mrs. Clinton what she did for Torricelli, by deep-sixing Pardongate charges against the former first lady this summer.
Does that mean Hillary is likely to get torched as well? That seems like a long shot right now.
But the last word on Mr. Paul is that higher-ups in at Justice are starting to warm to the overwhelming evidence he and his lawyers at Judicial Watch have amassed.
And like hero-whistleblower Chang, the Clinton accuser shows no indication he's ready to fall silent anytime soon.
Is, was and has been a criminal.
I don't get it. The people who "give" money to the Democrats are in jail, while those who "receive" the money go scot-free. In my mind, the receiver committed the greater crime.
This is the ultimate slap in the face from Democrats: Give us money, we keep it; we get elected, and you go to jail.
The commie mommies need her... for the chilrun!
In 2008, the name Clinton will be just associated with rape/bastard. She has to go in 2004. It's her only shot!
This(woman?)will not be stopped unless defeated at the voting booth.
If 911 happened on her watch, I am sure marshall law would have been proclaimed.
Remember Jim McDougal, Clinton's "Brutus."
This Justice Department better get a clue real fast, get off their bureaucratic rear-ends and get some witness protection for this guy.
Sounds like it might be Mounds of trouble for Hillary. Almond Joying every minute of it.
Sounds like it might be Mounds of trouble for Hillary. Almond Joying every minute of it.
Sounds like she risked a lot for a large Payday.
I wait patiently and with baited breath for things like this to occur in my Lifetime.
Avarice and Arrogance know no fear.
Pray for GW and the Elections
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.