The Hillary Clinton Accountability Project or Hillcap seems very oily for all sorts of reasons. See what you think. It’s going to be a long road to 2008.
History was made in Paul v Clinton when this smoking gun video of Hillary Clinton’s phone call to Peter Paul on July 17, 2000 was introduced June 21, 2007 as evidence of Hillary’s illegal misconduct, for the California Appeals’ Court review of Hillary’s First Amendment protection for her illegal fundraising solicitations in 2000. This tape was withheld by the U.S. Attorney in New York from 2001 until April 11, 2007, when it was released to Paul’s attorneys at the US Justice Foundation, depriving three federal investigations of this evidence of Hillary Clinton’s role in the campaign finance frauds for which her finance director David Rosen was indicted in 2005.
Oily might not fully capture what these guys seem to be; maybe “slimy” would be a better adjective.
I guess we know who some of the Swiftboaters of ’08 are going to be. Yuck.
Stan Lee’s new series: Who Wants To Be President
????
J/P=?
I am not much of a Hillary fan, however, this is not going to fly. She might not get elected or for that matter win her party nomination, but tactics like this will do little to stop her.
God let them spend their money heading her off, and let the other Dems use theirs to get elected. It’s always hard for me to remember that there are people who hate her as much as I hate Bush. And that rabid group probably makes her unelectable.
Ah well, 1.20.09 *
*BLD
Having just learned that she is the #1 recipient of campaign contributions from credit card companies and banks, I don’t think I care any more what who says about her; I’d sooner vote for Lyndon LaRouche. The field needs to be cleared, so get the hook.
Jay Rockefeller won’t run, Kucinich is too inexperienced, so who’s realistically left but Edwards? YMMV, as is to be expected…
What makes Edwards such a prime candidate? His only “experience” was his one term in the Senate – which was squandered by his being mostly absent during his last unsuccessful run for the White House. The Democrats can do better (I hope).
I cant stand the woman but I didn’t hear any thing other than some really bad jokes
what about the phone conversation is and or was illegal?
Isn’t it the truth that (both) Clintons are pretty amoral? These slimy politcal tactics are what is needed–by everybody, against everybody until the entire house is cleaned out.
Never has been a proper investigation (then prosecution) for Clinton taking that Chinese bribe money.
Vote all encumbents out of office. Break the revolving door from legislater to lobbyist. Stop the insanity. ((My spring just unwound.!!))
I heard the Edwards camp is also having some ethical money issues himself.
My problem with Hillary is that she is a Clinton. We do not need another dynasty presidency. Even worse is that Bush-Clinton-Bush years have all been about expanding globalization. We need a President who will at least stop globalization, maybe even reverse it.
#7 – Once again, I fully agree with the question asked by my good friend and colleague, Pmitchell.
I don’t know what specifically is illegal about the conversation in the video, but the allegation is that Paul donated hundreds of thousands of dollars illegally to the campaign, in exchange for favors for his company. If she knows that he is paying for the fundraiser out of his pocket, or one of her staffers knows, that’s illegal coordination.
Politics is filled with corruption. Politicians have to deal with it. That is the reality. Do you really have a choice with who you have to deal with in your professional career? Your life and livelihood is dependent on your coleagues and affiliates. Politicians have to deal with powerful influences which is why America is now ready for a new type of politician, namely the billionaire with an honest head on his shoulders. After thousands of years, Plato’s vision of a philosopher-king may come true in the election of Michael Bloomberg.
http://tinyurl.com/24jbv7
“Clinton’s participation in the planning of the event would make Paul’s substantial contributions a direct donation to her Senate campaign rather than her joint fundraising committee, violating federal statutes that limit “hard money” contributions to a candidate to $2,000 per person. Knowingly accepting or soliciting $25,000 or more in a calendar year is a felony carrying a prison sentence of up to five years.”
I find it more interesting that the video was withheld by the U.S. attorney in New York. A bit of a cover-up, perhaps?
>>I find it more interesting that the video was withheld by the U.S. attorney
Personally, I don’t find anything in WorldNet Daily interesting. That thing is like the National Enquirer, but with a neocon axe to grind. That snakepit of yellow journalism makes Fox “news” look like the oracle of Delphi.
Watch for continuing coverage of this “issue” from Ann Coulter, Michelle Malkin, and other pundits of the hate press.
So no interest in their reports of a NAFTA superhighway? Or their reports on know your customer regulations for banks(Their reporting shut those down when Clinton was President, but after 9/11 they passed)?
http://tinyurl.com/2gwfx9
You’re probably not too interested in WND’s defeat of Al Gore in Tennessee, allowing Bush to be president. This is not the subject of a free speech/libel lawsuit, where the court won’t give them protections as journalists.
I was going to post a smart-ass comment about how my puppy would be a better Pres that Hillary but then i started thinking about it.
– When the pup wants something she wags her tail and licks you.
– She sits in the backyard and barks and howls a lot
– She just poops anywhere she wants to
– Whenever I put something new in the yard, the pup pees on it to make it hers.
I came to the conclusion that my pup is Hillary. (I’d still vote for the puppy first.)
>>So no interest in their reports of a NAFTA superhighway?
No interest in anything published by that hate rag. If it’s a valid story, I can find out about it in the WSJ or the NYT or the local paper. I’d be more likely to look for accurate reporting of news stories in the John Birch Society newsletter.
NOBODY except neocon nut jobs takes anything written in WND as anything other than Ann Coulter-ish screaming about how anybody to the left of Benito Mussolini is a treat trying to subvert democracy.
Facie it, MikeN. WND is yellow journalism brought to depths that not even yellow journists dared to think about.
>>You’re probably not too interested in WND’s defeat of
>>Al Gore in Tennessee, allowing Bush to be president.
Hey, you’re batting 1000!!! Nope, not interested in that. I read the link, and it’s just more of the same-old same-old by the Swiftboaters at a sensationalist right-wing lunatic hate rag. They can’t even answer the question “Why did Gore lose in 2000?” correctly. I think it’s clear to anyone with an IQ that exceeds single digits that he lost in 2000 because of the election fraud perpetrated by Dumbya, Cheney, Herr Rove, Dumbya’s slimy brother, and the rest of the neocon scoundrels acting on the Purloining “President’s” behalf.
Give it up, dude. That “publication” is a sham, and an embarrassment to journalism. Stick to the John Birch Society newsletter. You’ll have more credibility.
#7, #10,
I agree. I heard a lot of laughter and joking, mostly bad jokes, but if telling bad jokes is illegal, I’m certainly guilty. I didn’t hear any agreements being made, any money changing hands, or anything even remotely slimy. What’d I miss?
#19 – Gore lost because of the direct intervention of God. He didn’t want the human race to go extinct yet.
#20 – Unfortunately I have to agree. Nothing here. Too bad – I wouldn’t put anything past Hillary including cannibalism.
Why is D.org watching the Hill so i don’t have to?
Please J, keep your baiting to apple/tech, you shine best there!
#21 – TheGlobalWarmer,
Don’t put cannibalism past any of us. It’s quite common during civilizational collapse.
The fact is this is one of those crimes that is done by both parties. It looks like they have some evidence against Hillary. The campaign finance laws are messed up, and makes criminals out of so many, and creates jobs for election lawyers.
>>Gore lost because of the direct intervention of God.
Haw! God intervened and put the Spawn of Satan, the anti-Christ, in his own fiefdom??
Geez. Everybody’s been thinking it was Daddy and Herr Karl that worked that black magick.
Everyone who says there is nothing in the tape, keep in mind that Paul can prove that he paid for the fundraiser out of his pocket. THis is a felony for him. If Hillary knew about it, then it’s a felony for her.
Mister Mustard – Whoa, dude! I was just trying to answer the earlier question about how Hillary may have committed a crime. Then comes the WND rant.
Hey, don’t shoot the messenger. Why not debate whether or not Hillary may have committed a felony instead of deflecting the question into an unrelated rant about your hatred for free press and WND in particular?
Or are you afraid that the charges against Hillary possibly committing a campaign finance felony may be true?
#26 – MikeN,
Perhaps true. The topic is about this tape, however. And, the tape really says nothing at all.
>>Or are you afraid that the charges against Hillary possibly
>>committing a campaign finance felony may be true?
Nope. I have no vested interest in Hillary, and probably won’t vote for her in the primary. If she committed a felony, she can do some hard time with Scooter.
My only point was that anything published in World Hate Daily is about five degrees south of Marvel Comic Books on the credibility scale.
The freaking nutjob wants to attack Iran. That’s enough reason not to support her. She’s another freaking George W. Bush. She’s a NEOCON people. Don’t any of you people look at VOTING RECORDS?