(Part 3) Breaking on FR - "House of Cards" WASHINGTON POST Whitewash on Peter Paul and Hillary Story

WASHINGTON COMPOST ^ | 10-9-05 | April Witt

[doug from upland]

EXCERPT FROM --- HOUSE OF CARDS

House Of Cards
What do Cher, a Hollywood con man, a political rising star and an audacious felon have in common? Together they gave Bill and Hillary Clinton a night they'll never forget -- no matter how hard they may try

By April Witt Sunday, October 9, 2005; Page W10

The caller lied easily. He'd had practice. It was Raymond Reggie, a New Orleans businessman and Democratic activist who happened to be Sen. Edward Kennedy's brother-in-law. He also happened to be in a lot of trouble.

[hoosiermama]

FYI

[Peach]

I'll be reading this piece very slowly today and digesting every word and saving to the Hillary file.

[Oldeconomybuyer]

bump

[Mia T]

Congressman Billybob:

"If the gloves don't fit, you must acquit." bump

Well done. The thought of a clinton in "Camp Cupcake," however, leaves me with a sense of profound cognitive dissonance.

Doug-

The moribund old media, quite simply, are part of the clinton agitprop. We must stay clear of them. Bypass them. Who needs them, anyway?

My original response to your announcement of the upcoming Post article:

Careful Doug...

When the Left assesses clintoncorruption (treason, rape, or whatever), a clown-like character of the crime or the criminal is the reliable default mitigating factor, with the magnitude of the mitigation directly proportional to both the intensity of clownlike affect and the seriousness of the crime and inversely proportional to the distance to an election in which a clinton is running.

We used to execute rapists and traitors. Today we elect them president?

sandy berger haberdashery feint
(the specs, not the pants or the socks)


by Mia T, 8.23.05


(viewing movie requires Flash Player 7, available HERE)

 

the MAD hillary series
WHY MISSUS CLINTON IS DANGEROUS
FOR THE CHILDREN,
FOR AMERICA,
FOR THE WORLD


madhillary.com (coming soon)
hillarytalks.blogspot.com
_{COPYRIGHT MIA T 2005}

MAD hillary series #1 ALFRED E."What, me worry?" CLINTON + CRAZY HIL MAD COVER STORY THE THREAT OF TERRORISM AS CLOSE AS A CLINTON TO OVAL OFFICE	MAD hillary series #2 HILLARY'S MIDDLE-FINGER MINDSET Do you really want THAT finger on the button?
MAD hillary series #3 "What, me worry?" THE THREAT OF TERRORISM AS CLOSE AS A CLINTON TO OVAL OFFICE	MAD hillary series #4 NANO-PRESIDENT the danger of the unrelenting smallness of bill + hillary clinton
MAD hillary series #5 SCHEMA PINOCCHIO how the clintons are handling the hillary dud factor

[doug from upland]

Under normal conditions, someone would go to jail. But this is the Clintons. Hillary failed to declare about $1.9 million in her campaign in 2000 against Rick Lazio. She allowed three fraudulent FEC filings by her campaign treasurer, Andrew Grossman. She, of course, is claiming she knew nothing about it. That is B.S.

Peter Paul has an unprecedented and historic civil suit proceeding toward a Los Angeles courtroom next year. Discovery should be early in 2006. Hillary will be under oath.

[doug from upland]

Witt, not surprisingly, didn't level with Peter. It was a total Hillary puff peace and it was apparently sponsored by the poor abused David Rosen. I saw him in that L.A. courtroom lying his butt off.

[doug from upland]

If we want it to have legs, it is up to us.

[GreenHornet]

Hillary will be under oath.

So?

[doug from upland]

How would you explain this?

Senator Clinton, on or about July 11, 2001, your attorney David Kendall was served on your behalf with a civil lawsuit filed by Peter Paul. Included were documents such as cancelled checks and invoices and the demand that you correct the record on two previous fraudulent FEC filings. How did you allow your campaign treasurer, Andrew Grossman, to file a third and final amended FEC report?

[ScaniaBoy]

If we want it to have legs, it is up to us.

You are quite right. Don't know how much I can do to help though, but I'll send the story to some British bloggers I know. Maybe the story can grow while doing a trans-Atlantic oscillation.

Although, the Swedish MSM have a number of reporters in NY and DC, they are completely useless. I sent them material about the Rathergate story, well before the story broke in the papers. But they were totally uninterested, and only wrote a few small articles when Rather eventually had to resign.

So, not much hope there, but I'll give it a try.

Cheers,

ScaniaBoy

[sharktrager]

Doug, for years you have been posting about your interviews and your oh so witty parodies, not because of your beliefs but because you love the attention and accolades from other Freepers.

But all of these stories have yet to accomplish anything. Repeatedly we are told that there will be a major expose, broken by you, and when the stories come out, they are flops. You continue to provide your data to sources you know are not going to report in any way that is damaging to the left. It has happened enough that I sincerely believe you do it not for the cause but because you adore the attention.

What has happened yet again is that the only places the truth was reported will be minor internet outlets that are viewed as unreliable and biased. Meanwhile, yet again, the information is in the hands of people who will use it not to shine the light of truth, but to be best prepared to minimize it's impact.

[doug from upland]

FROM PETER'S LETTER TO APRIL WITT ---

I commend the Post, and you personally, for your efforts to explain this extraordinary story of the campaign finance fraud that elected the first First Lady of the United States to the U.S. Senate while it destroyed her largest contributor turned whistle blower, and those employees, consultants and friends who assisted her. However, unless the key facts regarding the role of then President Clinton and then First Lady Hillary Clinton in effectuating, enabling and covering up the fraud are included, you will be seen as continuing the efforts led by the New York Times in its 2200 word article in March, 2005, to attack and discredit the messenger/donor while protecting the Senator/benficiary from a fair explanation of all the damning facts.

[doug from upland]

PETER TO WITT ---

Its not conceivable that I would have that kind of "face" time with both of them, control the President's seating and access to people at the largest Hollywood event ever produced for a President, have hours of time stitting next to him talking 70% of that time, without him knowing everything about me, what I did, how mnuch it cost- because I certainly told him how I was unprepared for the extravagence I underwrote on the strength of his indications that we had a deal. Its not human nature to hide those things from the people you pay millions to assocuite with.

[doug from upland]

My statement stands. We are all grateful for your tireless work. Don't try to be modest. Thank you.

[The Spirit Of Allegiance]

Doug, for years you have been posting about your interviews and your oh so witty parodies, not because of your beliefs but because you love the attention and accolades from other Freepers.

But all of these stories have yet to accomplish anything.

READ POST 134. FreeRepublic is giving truth and hope. Someone on this very thread overseas knows the TRUTH (and no doubt will tell two friends who then tell two friends) because worthy Citizen Doug, impassioned in the fight against evil, is investing his personal time and talents in this site, using political-activism-as-parodies, in photojournalism (for example, the Arianna SUV expose' which got thousands of views here and on eBay and cost him a lot of time and probably a little net cash too).

Doug is on the phone calling talk shows, writing letters and emails and making Conservatives proud.

Sharktrager, have YOU contacted Eliot Spitzer and urged him to prosecute this? Did YOU help to quash the anti-American 9-11 memorial with your calls, letters or prayers? Have you done anything politically active in your life--other than cowardly keyword spamming--the moral equivalent of defacing your opponents' political campaign signs? Are you with us--or against us?

Now that you've been outed by the Mods, you owe Doug a public apology.

Friendly Fire--ISN'T

[The Spirit Of Allegiance]

WORTH REPEATING: There is a toll free congressional switchboard that will forward your call to any member of House or Senate-- (800) 648-3516 -- call someone that represents you personally. --

Be nice.

[strategofr]

"WORTH REPEATING:"

Thanks.

[Thumbellina]

http://www.davidicke.com/icke/articles2/clintonhits.html

Awesome site check it out. Clintons hitlist!

[Bob J]

Doug, I've read the report and posts and this is my question.

The Hillary campaign was made aware (in a way they cannot deny) of the "alleged" actual cost of the event with the serving of Paul's lawsuit papers. Their FEC report was filed after receiving that information.

I assume the original numbers they received were from Cohen, who was found not guilty of FEC violations in his criminal trial. I assume because the jury bought the assertion that he was fed those numbers by Paul and Tonken and further that he was duped by them.

Won't the Hillary campaign say;

1. The information they received was in relation to a civil lawsuit being filed against them and therefore might be prejudicial

2. Until those numbers are verified and proven (they would have to get each and every celebrity who received a "gift" to testify in court) that it would be irresponsible to take them at face value, and therefore would have to rely on the original numbers presented by Cohen.

I think the problem here is that Cohen was found not guilty. It seems that breaks the link flowing back to the Hillary campaign and the Clintons.

Is there any other evidence the campaign or the Clintons knew about the real numbers other than "he said, she said"?

Don't get me wrong, I believe they all knew and just played the campaign finance shuffle of funds, but it's about what you can prove in court.

[doug from upland]

Great questions, Bob.

5 - Smoking Gun Demand Letter
6 - Gary Smith, the Concert, and Another Smoking Gun
7 - Home, Home at Le Dôme
9 - Hillary Responds Through Official Mouthpiece in WASHINGTON POST

Documents sent to attorney, hand delivered demand letter, news conference for all to see at National Press Club, civil lawsuit, Tonken will testify that he told Hillary everything, Rosen - "the costs won't be the costs", documents I saw in court that had been altered, and Hillary's conversation with Gary Smith in which she convinced him to lowered his concert fee from 850K to 800K.

This time in open court we will at least hear the transcript if not the recording itself of David Rosen with Ray Reggie. Peter has lots of evidence. Let's see what happens in court.

Hillary has made her final desperate appeal to stay out of court based on some bizarre First Amendment claim that, as a candidate with First Amendment speech rights, she cannot be sued for a business fraud. Bill has already been told by the California Supreme Court to get ready for discovery.

The trial of David Rosen was a sham. I counted six jurors asleep on the final day of arguments. They believed that Rosen was not the right one to charge.

The campaign treasurer, Andrew Grossman, cannot simply say, "Oh, I was confused. I didn't know what the expenses really were, so I guess I just won't report any of them." (that is me putting words into his mouth, not an actual quote from him). The treasurer has the affirmative duty to seek out the information and make a factual report. He did not do that, so he certainly has a big problem. Grossman should have been indicted and faced trial in Los Angeles.

The candidate has no legal jeopardy if the candidate does not know a fraud is occuring. There is plenty of evidence that she knew. She had an affirmative duty to see that accurate reporting was given to the FEC. Hillary absolutely knew that $401K was not accurate in the final amended FEC report. Absolutely.