Posted on 01/05/2008 9:23:34 AM PST by Clint Williams
SAN FRANCISCO — Norman Hsu, the shamed political powerbroker and Democratic donor, was sentenced Friday to...
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Holy cow...the NY Times actually used the word ‘Democrat’...
....to a three-year prison term by a California judge in connection with a 1992 plea in a fraud case in which investors lost millions of dollars in an elaborate Ponzi scheme.
You beat me to it! I can’t believe this is an actual NYT headline! My heart be still!
You're right - however, this story gets nowhere near the volume of coverage that Jack Abramoff received. And - we'll never hear about the recipients of his largesse, comparatively speaking.
Hsu's lawyers had asked Judge Stephen Hall to dismiss his 1992 no contest plea, arguing that Hsu's right to a speedy trial was violated because authorities were not actively pursuing him during his years as a fugitive.
Talk about chutzpa!
'I didn't get a speedy trial because you did not look hard enough for me!' Only Bill Clinton could top that on the BS meter.
FReepers are going way overboard with unnecessary excerpting.— even excerpting articles that don’t require it.
Is Hillary being thrown overboard by the lamestream media to make room at the top for the black Wonderboy?
The first Collateral Orange Jump Suit of Hillary’s “solo” political career! Or is it the tenth?
You’re right. It’s brazen, but hardly in the same league with “I was an active-duty member of the Armed Forces while I was Commander-in-Chief.”
Clinton said that? I do not recall that whopper.
whatever happened and where did the $850,000 the piaps states was given back???
why won’t the press comment on that???
That was in one of his motions to the USSC (?). He argued that the Paul Jones suit should be delayed until he left office, because until then, he was on “active duty.” He cited a statute which was, of course, intended for sailors and soldiers away at war.
That was in one of his motions to the USSC (?). He argued that the Paula Jones suit should be delayed until he left office, because until then, he was on “active duty.” He cited a statute which was, of course, intended for sailors and soldiers away at war.
That was in one of his motions to the USSC (?). He argued that the Paula Jones suit should be delayed until he left office, because until then, he was on “active duty.” He cited a statute which was, of course, intended for sailors and soldiers away at war.
Yeah, three whole years. Whoopie do.
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.