Mrs. Clinton Not at Fault, Prosecutor Tells Jury (Rosen)

http://www.nytimes.com ^ | 5/12/05 | LESLIE EATON

[bitt]

LOS ANGELES, May 11 - Before Hillary Rodham Clinton's former chief fund-raiser went on trial here for underreporting donations to her Senate campaign, political speculation has revolved around what if anything Mrs. Clinton knew about his alleged transgressions, as well as what if anything the trial would do to her presidential aspirations (assuming she has them).

A federal prosecutor tried to answer at least one of those questions in his opening statement on Wednesday in Federal District Court, when he told the jury, "You will hear no evidence that Hillary Clinton was involved in any way, shape or form."

Indeed, the prosecutor, Peter R. Zeidenberg, said that the fund-raiser, David F. Rosen, tried to keep Mrs. Clinton's campaign from discovering how much money was donated to cover the costs of the star-studded event at the heart of this criminal case. The reason, Mr. Zeidenberg said, is that Mr. Rosen was afraid he would be fired if the campaign found out how much money he had spent on the August 2000 event, the Hollywood Gala Salute to President William Jefferson Clinton.

Mr. Rosen, 40, is facing three counts of causing false statements to be filed to the Federal Election Commission, all involving the costs of the gala, a concert and dinner with President and Mrs. Clinton. The government says Mr. Rosen reported that the event cost at most about $400,000; prosecutors contend the real cost was $1.1 million. ..snip ...

Mrs. Clinton will not be called to testify in the case, the judge said. But in a brief exchange this morning, Mr. Sandler asked the judge not to tell the jury that Bill Clinton would not testify, either. "I do not know who my witnesses are," Mr. Sandler said, aside from ruling out Mrs. Clinton.

[doug from upland]

You might enjoy this --- CLICK.

[Reactionary]

Ah. So the prosecutor agrees with the defense on the crucial matter of whether or not dear Hillary was involved. That's interesting, considering that the trial has just started and no evidence has been presented.

[NormsRevenge]

I like how the prosecutor is ratcheting up the pressure on Rosen, right off the bat.

They're gonna have to put him in a Hannibal facemask before this trial is thru, he'll be singing so loud about Hitlary's 'non-involvement'. ;-)

[concerned about politics]

what if anything Mrs. Clinton knew

"I don't recall.....I don't recall....I don't recall....."

The "smartest woman in the world" can't remember a damn thing when she's in court.

Hillary is a lawyer. She gets everyone else to do the dirty work for her. When they go to prison, she walks away squeaky clean. The evidence lands on her door step, but stalls there.

[garyhope]

Yeah, and she was just lucky in cattle futures and had no idea Bubba was boinking what's her name('s).

[concerned about politics]

They're gonna have to put him in a Hannibal facemask before this trial is thru, he'll be singing so loud about Hitlary's 'non-involvement'. ;-)

Let's hope so. I think the American people would like that even better than Michael Jackson (ugh!) trial!

[Lancey Howard]

So, from what I am reading in Leslie's story, the federal prosecutor is giving Hillary a complete pass....? Basically saying that she is innocent, completely innocent....? I expected to read next that the prosecutor had proclaimed Hillary as pure as the driven snow.

So much for this trial tainting Hillary.

[sgtbono2002]

Unbelieveable that the Judge and the Prosecutor believe Hillary innocent before the trial starts and they state that they believe this .

[doug from upland]

I wonder if the prosecutor is going for a full-court press on Rosen and then expecting Rosen to finally rat out Hillary when it looks bleak. The defense should be calling Hillary if they were really interested in protecting him. We all know that Hillary told him what to do.

[concerned about politics]

So, from what I am reading in Leslie's story, the federal prosecutor is giving Hillary a complete pass....?

It sounds like it, but the trial hasn't even started yet!
Maybe after the trial starts and the facts come out they can charge her separately. That would be nice. It would definitely be earned. She's got allot of bad Karma to pay off.

[GOPJ]

Ah. So the prosecutor agrees with the defense on the crucial matter of whether or not dear Hillary was involved. That's interesting, considering that the trial has just started and no evidence has been presented.

They've prejudged her as innocent. Prejudged. How insulting. Why bother with a court system when we all know liberal elites are always innocent? The Mullahs in Iran are always innocent. According to the powerful in Iran. So were the killers under Stalin, according to the killers in power during that time. Power has a way, and until now it wasn't our way...

[Imaverygooddriver]

...as well as what if anything the trial would do to her presidential aspirations (assuming she has them).

She doesn`t. Presidents are elected. With Hitlery there is always a backdoor.

[concerned about politics]

She doesn`t. Presidents are elected. With Hitlery there is always a backdoor.

If she were Hillary Bin Laden, NYC - the home of every unclean bird of the earth - would still give her a job.

[bitt]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1401151/posts

Clinton Judge Blasts Hillary's Accuser
NewsMax ^ | 5/11/05 | Carl Limbacher


Posted on 05/11/2005 2:51:01 PM EDT by wagglebee

[Lancey Howard]

It will come down to Rosen's lawyer. You know the drill - - a Clinton crony gets into trouble with the law, the Clintons provide a lawyer that they can control (and whose real job is to protect the Clintons), and the patsy takes the fall. How many times have we seen this?

So, what do we know about Rosen's lawyer?

[Lancey Howard]

(From the thread linked in post #17)

....by Rosen's legal team, headed by the Clintons' scandal lawyer, David Kendall.

Nevermind.
Rosen is going to jail, and Hillary is walking on sunshine.

[Reagan is King]

"You will hear no evidence that Hillary Clinton was involved in any way, shape or form."

That's certainly not what Peter Paul said in regards to his conversations with Hitlery.

It's really nice of the prosecutor to try to clear her name on the first day. I guess she must have a thick file on him.

[longtermmemmory]

seems like the prosecutor already lost, just does not know it.

[Mo1]

He's not ruling out Bill huh??

Hmmmm ..

[Mo1]

So, from what I am reading in Leslie's story, the federal prosecutor is giving Hillary a complete pass....?

Not really

My guess there isn't enough hard evidence to go after Hillary

Unless Rosen starts singing up a storm

Rosen .. if found guilty, could be put away up to like 20 years

Interesting that he hasn't ruled in or out calling Bill though

[Nick Danger]

Unbelieveable that the Judge and the Prosecutor believe Hillary innocent before the trial starts and they state that they believe this .

They didn't state that. The New York Times said that, in the headline. It is the job of the New York Times to defend Democrats, and that's what they are doing.

What did the prosecutor actually say?

"You will hear no evidence that Hillary Clinton was involved in any way, shape or form."

No surprise there; she's not on trial. This trial is about David Rosen, and this prosecutor's job is to put David Rosen in jail. The last thing he's going to do is tell the jury that somebody else did it.

What else did he say?

...the prosecutor, Peter R. Zeidenberg, said that the fund-raiser, David F. Rosen, tried to keep Mrs. Clinton's campaign from discovering how much money was donated to cover the costs of the star-studded event at the heart of this criminal case.

Note that the answer to the question "Did Rosen ever tell Hillary?" is not also the answer to the question of whether Hillary knew. The New York Times is encouraging you to make that leap, but there is no reason to. Such questions as, "Did Peter Paul tell Hillary in writing?" and "Did Aaron Tonken ever tell Hillary?" and "Did Hillary negotiate the price with the producer?" also bear on the question of whether Hillary knew.

None of the actual statements attributed to the prosecutor in this story support the headline "Mrs. Clinton Not at Fault, Prosecutor Tells Jury." That is pure NYT spin.

[Lancey Howard]

Unless Rosen starts singing up a storm

Rosen's legal team is headed up by Clinton scandal lawyer, David Kendall. Rosen won't sing - - he is just the next patsy to go to jail to protect the Clintons. Kendall will make sure of that.

[Bonaparte]

Notice the grossly distorted headline --

Mrs. Clinton Not At Fault, Prosecutor Tells Jury

Contrast it with what the prosecutor actually told the jury --

"You will hear no evidence that Hillary Clinton was involved in any way, shape or form."

The prosecutor did not exonerate Clinton, he only said that no evidence would be introduced concerning her involvement.

The shameless NYT trumpets this as vindication.

[REDWOOD99]

This is a prosecutor trying to gain a conviction. He has to remove Hillary from this trial. He has to take that outlet for acquittal away from the jury. This is NOT the trial of Hillary Clinton. What this prosecutor and this judge say to this jury is unimportant. Evidence against Hillary will come out for use in further proceedings. This trial, however CANNOT be about Hillary.

[fooman]

She ended the article on an upbeat note for Fitton.


Of course, doug the KEY fact is that Clinton appointed Matz and why hasn't he recused himself, given his prejudicial statements and his obvious conflict of interest.

[Mo1]

Well .. if that is the case

Rosen will be going to jail for a very long time .. remember he's on tape talking with Kennedy's brother in law

[SFConservative]

Rollin', rollin', rollin' ...

[doug from upland]

Matz has even given money to Clinton and Boxer.

[dr_who_2]

Yeah, this isn't about HRC Inc. This is about justice being done. This is about the will of the electorate. This is about real change. Yep. Oh, and by the way, there's no scandal here. HRC has nothing to do with any of this. Move along.

[fooman]

Do you think Leslie will drop the dime on rosen?

[doug from upland]

We hope she will write the truth. You can't ask for more than that.

[jonrick46]

This is Whitewater all over again. Hitlary has no knowledge of anything and everyone around her are taking the hit and going to prison. I am waiting for someone to turn up dead in the park.

[I still care]

Amazing, isn't it? I have been reading articles lately to see if the headline agrees with the story. Amazing how often they don't.

The prosecutor said they would hear no evidence about Hillary. From what I can see, he never said Hillary was innocent.

[Imaverygooddriver]

The thing to watch out for Hitlery is to realize that she is a grifter. Her and Bill are the Sante and Kenneth Kimes of politics. They truly are, that is the best comparison I ever heard someone say of those two. And like the Kimes constantly scheming to look for weak points in security and people, so too do Hitlery and Bill look for weak points in the democracy. The Clinton grifters have already shown that they have no qualms whatsoever about putting the lives of an entire state of people at risk to win an election by Bubbas pardoning of the FALN. What we must realize is nothing is too far fetched for them at this point when it comes to Hitlerys quest for absolute power in 2008. If they find a way for Al-Qaeda to attack the USA and kill 40,000 people solely to make Republicans look bad, I would not be suprised in the least. They are two sociopaths to the Nth degree and nothing is beyond them.

[Cowboy Bob]

Indeed, the prosecutor, Peter R. Zeidenberg,

Does he happen to be a holdover from the Clinton Administration?

[Imaverygooddriver]

"There will be hell to pay!"

[PeskyOne]

I believe she was the driving force behind Travelgate, and for corrupting the investigation of Vince Foster's death. It was her goons who invaded his office, and someone placed a torn up note in his briefcase. She also was responsible for hiring Craig Livingstone, a bouncer, and allowed him to handle FBI files. And those missing files didn't just accidentally appear in the WH living quarters with her fingerprints on them. I understand the judge in this case is a Clintonista and has already said Hillary would not be called to testify. Do you suppose the 'fix' is in?

[nopardons]

For a newbie, you've got the facts down pat!

They may think that the "fix" is in, but this might be far more than the Clintons can handle, NOT being in the White House anymore.

[devolve]

Ken Starr
My Way
Common Good

[Windcatcher]

My take on it is that the prosecutor is trying to improve his chances of getting a conviction by trying to take her out of the equation. Otherwise all it would take is one Dem on the jury to decide that he's not convicting, no matter what, because it might endanger Hillary.

[jammer]

So the prosecutor agrees with the defense on the crucial matter of whether or not dear Hillary was involved.

Actually, we don't know that, because the headline is a lie. I went to the article and found nothing more than posted above:

"You will hear no evidence that Hillary Clinton was involved in any way, shape or form."

That's not the same thing as saying she was not involved. She's not the one on trial--yet.

[Reactionary]

"That's not the same thing as saying she was not involved."

Thanks for the correction.

[eureka!]

Re#44 Bingo.

[Libertarian444]

I may be in the minority on this one, but the prosecutor is doing the right thing. Hillary is not a trial in this case. Yet.

IMO, you don't aim for the top first; you build a case from the bottom up. If you go for the top (at first) and miss, you're screwed. At it's essence, this is a racketeering case. Start "small", work your way up.

[Bonaparte]

"...improve his chances of getting a conviction by trying to take her out of the equation."

That's exactly what I think too. He believes he can make his case without dragging her into it. In fact, it won't surprise me if his summation includes something like, "the defendant, by his reckless actions, has embarassed the very people he sought to help."