FEC Sued Over Alleged Hillary Campaign Fraud

NewsMax ^ | December 11, 2001 | Carl Limbacher and NewsMax.com Staff

[MeekOneGOP]

NewsMax.com: Article Archives

NewsMax.com

 

Tuesday Dec. 11, 2001; 3:01 p.m. EST

FEC Sued Over Alleged Hillary Campaign Fraud

It's been five months since Hollywood producer Peter Paul filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission against New York Senator Hillary Clinton alleging that she failed to report most of the $2 million he donated to the "Hillary 2000" Senate campaign.

Paul has cancelled checks and other records to back up his claims, including thank you notes from the former first family. Yet the FEC has so far failed to act.

On Friday lawyers for Judicial Watch, which represents Mr. Paul in the case, filed suit against the supposed watchdog agency, pointing out that Paul's complaint is now well past the 120-day statutory deadline within which the FEC is supposed to act.

Meanwhile the Bush Justice Department has instead indicted Paul for alleged stock fraud, underscoring the double standard that continues to allow the Clinton family to escape Justice while most others are held accountable.

"The FEC has abundant evidence that Hillary Clinton and her campaign for Senate engaged in massive election fraud, yet it has not taken any action," said Judicial Watch chairman Larry Klayman. "It is time for the FEC to stop protecting politicians and hold them accountable when they violate the campaign finance laws."

The case has been assigned to Judge Royce Lamberth, who's developed a reputation over the years as one of the few judges in Washington, D.C. interested in enforcing the law for everyone.

Read more on this subject in related Hot Topics:

Sen. Hillary Clinton

[MeekOneGOP]

Oops! Forgot the pics!

[bayourod]

This whole lawsuit is frivilous. The in kind contributions were made on behalf of the Democratic Party Senate campaign committee and were reported as Peter Paul reported them to the committee.

Klayman is defending Peter Paul (a twice conficted ex-con) on stock fraud charges. Klayman is attempting to use these allegations against Clinton for leverage in the criminal case.

What other criminal defense attorney would accuse his own client of committing campaign contribution law violations?

[NC Conservative]

This whole lawsuit is frivilous

Isn't that the standard for Judicial Watch?

[Rob45and2]

Dosen't sound frivolous to me. Sounds kinda simple. He has the canceled checks from the donations that are not listed with the FEC. Clinton only needs to show the reason why they wern't claimed on her report to the FEC. She now has had 120 days to do that. She should give her explanation and that takes it off the table.. Providing she has an explanation..... If she dosen't then it gets kinda complicated.....

[staytrue]

Hillary's campaign also listed a 50K contribution from the American Muslim association as a contribution from the American Museum association. After the "error" was discovered, the campaign "returned" (or at least they said they were going to return the money) the money due to pressure from some jewish groups.

[Digger]

Whether or not your assumptions are correct there will be NO adverse action against the Clintons. Also the Pubbies will NOT do anything to oppose them because they are ALL part of the "Two-party Cartel". They protect each other & knowingly will be reelected in the charade called voting. Have ya heard anymore about Torricelli? Will Condit be reelected & Hillary be the next president? They all are above the law. Too bad Klayman can't see this.

[UCANSEE2]

Both Bill and Hillary have had 'campaign' funds that they 'reportedly' returned and property of the WHITE HOUSE they supposedly returned.

I have never seen any proof the returned any of the items or money mentioned.

HAS ANYONE ELSE ?????? EVER ????

[UCANSEE2]

I have never seen any proof the returned any of the items or money mentioned. proof THEY....

My mistake.

[deport]

.......Clinton only needs to show the reason why they wern't claimed on her report to the FEC. She now has had 120 days to do that. .......

The action isn't against Clinton but rather the FEC and their failure to persue within 120 days..... The real question is what reciepts/statements did Paul issue to the campaign and the Democrat party senate campaign fund regarding whom the donations in kind were far. It could get interesting if he has some other documentation

[Patrick]

Amen to #7.

[bayourod]

"He has the canceled checks from the donations that are not listed with the FEC. "

Have you seen any cancelled checks? Do you even know what an in-kind contribution is? What you should ask to see is the report of in-kind expenditures that Peter Paul filed with the Hillary Campaign. But you will never see that because it doesn't exist.

If Peter Paul produces a cancelled check for $500 for carpet cleaning in his house is that proof that Hillary committed a crime??? Klayman is a fraud and so is this lawsuit. Grow up.

[timestax]

bttt

[timestax]

BTTT

[timestax]

bump

[timestax]

bttt

[timestax]

bump

[timestax]

bump

[timestax]

bump

[timestax]

bttt