[Red_Devil 232]

Peter was induced to spend money on her campaign with the promise that Clinton would work for SLM for one year as a rainmaker when he left the WH. He was to get 15-17 mil in stock and cash.

I assume that this inducement (campaign donations in kind or otherwise) would have to be brought out in detail in the civil case. And in doing so the illegality of the contributions will be part of the testimony?

[doug from upland]

Yes, it will all be brought out in testimony.

I would like Howard Wolfson to answer under oath why he told the Washington Post that the campaign would take no money from Peter Paul. Behind the scenes, the campaign was even asking for more. Peter has the fax from Rosen asking for another 100K that Hillary had promised the Working Families Party in New York. Yes, I can’t wait to hear from Wolfson.