James Levin (Convicted Clinton fundraiser and Strip Club Owner) Meets with the Clintons as Guests of Peter Paul at Hollywood Gala Posted on 12/11/2008 7:40:27 AM PST by doug from upland
Bill Clinton Dismissed in Multi Million $$ Fraud Suit Due To Lawyer’s Bad Grammar
James Levin (Convicted Clinton fundraiser and Strip Club Owner) Meets with the Clintons as Guests of Peter Paul at Hollywood Gala
On December 4, 2008, a California Superior Court ruled that a comma in a sentence drafted in a landmark fraud complaint filed in 2003 against Bill and Hillary Clinton was definitive in proving that the plaintiff in the case, Peter Paul, Hillary’s largest 2000 donor, admitted he knew he was defrauded by the President in November of 2000 rather than October, 2003, as Paul maintained, thereby allowing the court to dismiss the President from the case because the statute of limitations barred further prosecution.
President Bill Clinton and Senator Hillary Clinton have been battling since 2001 to be dismissed as defendants and witnesses in the landmark civil fraud suit brought against them in California, Paul v Clinton et al. The suit details actions taken by Clinton as President, in concert with his wife, then First Lady and Senate candidate Hillary Clinton, to defraud Hollywood producer Peter Paul, an erstwhile business associate Bill Clinton’s.
$1.9 million in contributions to Hillary’s Senate campaign that were illegally solicited from Paul by the Clintons personally were a small part of the damages claimed by Paul. The Clintons’ illegal use of the trappings of the White House to seduce a key Japanese business partner, Tendo Oto, away from Paul and his dot com public company Stan Lee Media, contributing to the collapse of the company in December 2000. This interference with Paul’s business was the cause of the majority of more than $50 million in damages claimed by Paul in lost stock and global business activities.
The liaison appointed by the Clintons to coordinate their involvement with Paul, Chicago convicted felon/Clinton fundraiser and strip club owner Jim Levin, secretly convinced Mr Oto to incorporate a business in the US with them instead of Paul days after Hillary’s election to the Senate was confirmed.
After the first couple invited Mr Oto, at Paul’s request, to the last State dinner held in the Clinton White House, where Oto was given special VIP treatment at a table next to the President, Levin used White House staff Kelly Craighead and Patti Solis Doyleand a private tour of the Oval Office to confirm Bill Clinton’s personal interest in working with Oto paving the way for Levin to secretly visit Japan and convince Oto to jettison Paul and his company emntirely in favor of a company supported by President Clinton.
For seven years the Clintons’ powerhouse Washington legal counsel, including David Kendall, battled Paul and the two different public interest legal foundations that enlisted the support of more than half a million concerned Americans to financially support Paul’s singular efforts to hold the Clintons accountable for various illegalities documented by Paul and captured on hom,e videos Paul made with Hillary Clinton.
Paul and the public interest groups who supported him endeavored to use his court claims to expose the outrageous corruption and obstructions of justice engaged in by Clinton directed appointees and sycophants in the Federal judiciary, the Justice Department, the Federal Election Commission public interest groups and the media.
After the California Supreme Court upheld Paul’s original complaint in October, 2004 against appeals by the Clintons to dismiss it, the Clintons embarked on a legal strategy in California Superior Court in Los Angeles to abuse the First Amendment protections afforded by Califormnia’s Anti-SLAPP law to delay and thwart Paul’s efforts to use discovery and depositions to force the Clintons to admit their various illegalities.
After two separate attempts to dismiss Hillary Clinton from the case because it violated her rights under the First Amendment to engage in protected campaign fraud to fund her campaign, the California Court of Appeals finally ruled that any illegality Hillary might have engaged in while fundraising did not disqualify her from First Amendment protection because it had no bearing on the thrust of the business fraud on which Paul brought the case!
After Hillary succeeded in having two Appellate Court judges appointed by Clinton protege Grey Davis turn California’s SLAPP law into a legal pretzel in order to justify dismissing her, Bill Clinton asserted in 2008, for the first time, his First Amendment rights to engage in a business fraud because it benefited his wife’s Senate campaign. Without ruling on that Motion, the Court decided it could use the Statute of Limitations to save the former President from liability based on the interpretation of an ambiguous sentence in the body of the complaint against Clinton.
After dismissing Clinton and Levin as Defendants, the Court set for July, 2009 trial the remaining Defendant, Hollywood Grammy’s producer Gary Smith, whose effort to use the same First Amendment argument finally failed.
As the case proceeds to trial, Hillary Clinton has been recognized by the Court as an indispensable witness who will be called to testify regarding her role in convincing Paul to hire her friend Smith to produce the biggest fundraiser of all time for a federal candidate, and to allow Smith to use his relationship with Hillary to coerce Paul to pay tens of thousands of dollars more than he bargained for.
See the article below:
Judge Lets Bill Clinton Out on Technicality, Leaving Producer Gary Smith to Stand Trial Alone
After five years of litigation against the Clintons for defrauding Hillary’s largest, 2000 Senate campaign donor — a case notable for the Clintons’ endless legal maneuvering to avoid testifying under oath — plaintiff Peter Paul has again been denied his day in court. On December 4, Judge Aurelio Munoz ruled that Bill Clinton and his agent Jim Levin will be jointly dismissed on a legal technicality. The case will, however, proceed to trial against Grammys producer Gary Smith, the Clintons’ family friend who produced the concert for Hillary’s 2000 campaign.
The dismissal as to Bill Clinton is based on the most technical of technicalities — a poorly drafted sentence in the original complaint filed in 2003 (when Judicial Watch had the case). The sentence in the 2003 complaint, which begins with the words “In late November 2000,” was intended to tell when President Clinton acted through Jim Levin to purposely interfere with Peter’s business relationship with key investor Tendo Oto. However, Judge Munoz took the position that the words “in late November 2000″ also applied to when Peter Paul discovered this had happened. On that ground, Judge Munoz decided that our revised complaint against Bill Clinton and his agent Jim Levin (filed August 8, 2008) was barred by the statute of limitations.
The interpretation of that sentence was pivotal because the clock doesn’t start ticking on a legal claim until a plaintiff learns he has the claim. In fact, Peter did not learn of the existence of his claim against Clinton for wrongful interference with a business relationship until at least 2002. We argued that the case against Clinton shouldn’t be kicked out based merely on prior counsel’s drafting error, but Judge Munoz wouldn’t budge.
Did Munoz really buy the other side’s argument, or was he just happy for an excuse not to ever have Bill Clinton on trial in his courtroom? You be the judge. But by getting out on the ultimate technicality, Bill Clinton will keep the considerable merits of this case from ever reaching a jury.
There is a silver lining to this disappointing outcome, however. Peter Paul’s fraud charges were allowed to stand against Gary Smith, the Clintons’ friend and Emmy-Award-winning producer whom Hillary insisted Peter hire to produce the concert portion of her fundraising gala. Peter was induced to hire Smith based on Hillary’s specific and insistent request and only because Hillary’s direct involvement in the negotiations caused Smith to lower his fee by $50,000. On the eve of the gala, Smith threatened to resign as producer if he wasn’t paid an additional $75,000 “personal fee,” while Hillary stood by and did nothing to enforce the fee reduction she negotiated. Thus, we still have a reason and a need to depose Hillary in this case, and we’re going to fight to make sure we’re allowed to do so.
Trial against Gary Smith is set for July 14, 2009.
MIDI SITE for JOLLY OLD SAINT NICHOLAS
Jolly Judge Aurelio, you had thrown the case
You were glad to put a smile on Bill Clinton's face
Peter Paul had evidence, you know what Bill did
How much did you benefit to do what you did
You were schooled with somebody there in Kendall's firm
Conflicts, I guess we surmise, do not make you squirm
Did the Clintons threaten you...had there been a bribe
Is there something we should know you'd care to describe
Jolly Judge Aurelio, are you just a hack
How'd it feel when you stabbed the plaintiff in the back
Pontius Pilate washed his hands just as you have done
If there's justice, your own fall will have just begun
You've made rulings without a pretense to be fair
You make a good salary, so why should you care
Jolly Judge Aurelio, where do we begin
Jurisprudence you have mocked 'cause the fix was in
Misapplying what the law meant by "anti-SLAPP"
Shows a tyrant in black robe who is full of crap
Judge Aurelio Munoz found his excuse to end it. It is noteworthy that in chambers Munoz, who went to law school with an associate in Kendall's firm, went out of his way to be friendly to David Kendall. "Say hi to Bill" was typical of what Peter's counsel had to face in chambers.
Yep, it appears that the fix was in all along.
If nothing else, however, over 9 million people saw the clip of HILLARY! UNCENSORED. It made an impact. In retrospect, we should have made two movies. Who would have thought the Chicago thug Muslim apostate who refuses to provide a real birth certificate would be able to stage a successful coup?
Hillary is an important witness in the Gary Smith matter that is set for trial in July. We hope to still have her under oath.
I have been contacting the offices of several senators as well as the minority counsel of the Senate Foreign Relations committee. They need to hear testimony regarding the Marc Rich pardon bribe, which might have been worth up to 250 mil.
Judicial Watch screwed up the original complaint and took in millions and millions of dollars for Peter's case that they put into their pocket. Gary Kreep will be in court, hopefully soon, regarding the money he ran away with from Peter's case.
An action is planned shortly in federal court for the return of the money Peter spent on Hillary's campaign. There is no statute of limitations problem there because it was in 2006 when she filed her 4th false report. She has never named him as the donor of the money. That illegal money is required to be returned to the donor.
This has been an amazing battle. I have been asked to work on another film, this one about whistleleblowers. You are going to see a remarkable story about a border agent and what was done to her and her husband for blowing the whistle on Mexican border crossings by those from terrorist sponsoring countries. She is a hero, and they tried to destroy her life.
Our Justice System is BROKEN...our entire govt. system is broken. Sorry Doug...you did great work for the country.
In the courtroom, Munoz said that Peter had fled to Brazil. That is not true. He went there with his family to run his remaining business -— the largest translation CD company in South America. He was indicted while he was there on the stock charges. He offered proffers and volunteered to come back. Munoz found his excuse and took it.
We are not yet done with Hillary. She may well be confirmed, but I’m going to cause her as much trouble as possible.
99. In late November 2000, Plaintiff learned that, contrary to Levin’s promises and representations in
late July 2000 about respecting the proprietary nature of Plaintiff’s business relationship with Oto, Levin
had set up a U.S. subsidiary of Venture Soft Co., Ltd., called Venture Soft USA, Inc., on Oto’s behalf. On
information and belief, Levin received a fee of at least $100,000 from Oto for his services and for
introducing Oto to the President.
Peter Paul’s Declaration to Support the Amended Complaint Dismissed Because of the comma after November 2000
5 Through the new amended complaint I could more accurately be characterized as a “disgruntled business associate” complaining of the breach of various fiduciary duties purportedly created between the First Family and me in connection with promises they convinced me they had made to work together after Bill Clinton left the White House. President Clinton’s malicious interference in the funding of my company (in the midst of the dot-com meltdown in 2000) by hijacking my Japanese partner and largest investor in my company —Tendo Oto — and going into business with him, himself, is the real gravamen of my claim.
6 Over my objection, Judicial Watch ignored these claims relating to President Clinton’s role in the collapse of my company, resulting in damages of more than $30 million to me, in addition to the out-of-pocket $1.9 million Judicial Watch recited in the complaint. Judicial Watch drafted their pleadings to highlight exclusively my underwriting and producing of three campaign fundraising events for Hillary Clinton (which I did at the request and direction of President Clinton) thereby infecting my tort claims with Judicial Watch’s political agenda, not my own.
8.The proposed Second Amended Complaint more accurately presents the gravamen of my grievance against the defendants. In summary, my claims emanate from the deliberate actions of President Clinton and his agents to falsely convince me that he had agreed to a post-White House business arrangement, which enabled President Clinton to secretly usurp my relationship with Tendo Oto, thereby depriving my company, Stan Lee Media, of Oto’s promised, and critically needed, operating funds. This malicious interference began the “domino effect” that collapsed my company. My monetary damages exceeded $30 million in stock and option losses, exclusive of consequential damages that ensued. That injury — much more devastating to me than being duped and coerced into spending close to $1.9 million to benefit Hillary Clinton’s Senate campaign — was buried in the pleadings drafted by Judicial Watch.
Well, as a self-annointed representative of the grammar police, I fail to see why the comma makes any difference at all. It is still absolutely clear what the sentence means. If he didn’t “learn” in late November, then what does the judge think “Late November” refers to? Or is it somehow just dangling out there referring to nothing?
As you say, however, the fix was in. If not for the comma, he would have found some other lame excuse to dismiss.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Our culture is being destroyed by the Left as we speak. In the 1960’s the law schools were penetrated by the Left as part of the old Soviet plan to topple the United States. These people have been in charge for a generation and virtually ALL law schools are dominated by the left. They are forcing the “Crit” movement through modification of the classic case law method.
The Crit movement is based on leftist philosophy expounded by Alynski and others who argue that the law, at any time, is what the buffoon in the black robe says it is at the moment. Law becomes relative to the facts and convenient to the circumstances at hand. Stare Decisis is dead and the left now used the court system to advance agendas that the Congress can't pass because of residual resistance from the knuckle dragging right wing.
In the old days, the courts were the stabilizing force that kept the Republic together. Today, they are destroying the constitutional republic as we watch.
Thank you Doug. This country is full of crooks. Someday at least one, hopefully more will be rotting in jail.
I thought this would happen when Hillary accepted the position of SOS. She was a sitting duck in the Senate.
GO DOUG GO!!! God bless you.
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.