http://www.hillaryproject.com/index.php?/en/story-details/what_hillary_clinton_and_the_media_are_
hiding_from_the_voters/
By Kathy Miller | The Hillary Project
Posted 1 week ago email to friend tool nameclose
tool goes here
While Senator Clinton is on the campaign trail telling re****ters that the
use of her opponents'
'bitter' remarks could damage Senator Obama's chances to win the general
election if he should
win the nomination, a California superior judge will soon be setting a
trial
date for the
historic civil landmark case in Paul vs. Clinton.
Apparently the Clintons believe that the word 'bitter' is far more
damaging
than testify under
oath in a civil fraud trial.
For some reason, the media doesn't think that a historic trial to haul a
former President and a
Presidential candidate to court for fraud is newsworthy.
A status conference hearing is scheduled for April 25, 2008, just three
days
after the
Pennsylvania primary. California Superior Judge Aurelio N. Munoz is
expected to finally set a
trial date after delayment back in February.
Judge Munoz ruled back in February that Paul's legal team can begin
seeking
depositions from a
host of big names – including Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton – that
allegedly were witnesses
to an effort by the Clintons and top Democratic leaders to extract
millions
of dollars from Paul
in illegal donations and then cover it up. Discovery is expected to begin
in May.
The Clintons have tried to dismiss the case, but the California Supreme
Court, in 2004, upheld a
lower-court decision to deny the motion.
The complaint says Bill Clinton promised to promote Paul's Internet
entertainment company, Stan
Lee Media, in exchange for stock, cash options and massive contributions
to
his wife's 2000
Senate campaign. Paul contends he was directed by the Clintons and
Democratic Party leaders to
produce, pay for and then join them in lying about footing the bill for an
August 2000 Hollywood
gala and fundraiser.
The Clintons' legal counsel has denied the former president made any deal
with Paul. But Paul's
attorney Colette Wilson has stated there are witnesses who say it was
common
knowledge at Stan
Lee Media that Bill Clinton was preparing to be a rainmaker for the
company
after he left office.
Paul claims former Vice President Al Gore, former Democratic Party
chairman
Ed Rendell and
Clinton presidential campaign chairman Terry McAuliffe also are among the
people who can confirm
Paul engaged in the deal.
The complaint also asserts that Senator Clinton filed four false re****ts
to
the FEC of Paul's
donations in an attempt to distance herself from him after a Wa****ngton
Post
story days after the
August 2000 fundraiser re****ted his past felony convictions. Clinton then
returned a check for
$2,000, insisting it was the only money she had taken from Paul. But one
month later, she
demanded another $100,000, to be hidden in a state committee using
untraceable securities.
Senator Clinton was dismissed from the case as a defendant, but Munoz
already has made it clear
he won't accept any attempts to block Senator Clinton from serving as a
material witness. The
judge told Clinton's lawyer David Kendall: "Well, any opposition is
probably
going to be dead on
arrival, if that will – if you understand what I'm saying, Mr. Kendall."
Paul has outlined the entire case in a one hour do***entary entitled,
Hillary Uncensored, Banned
by the Media. Paul believes the Clintons have thwarted the media from
exposing this story, and
he has set up a website called PaulvClinton to expose and inform the
public
of the latest news
and information himself in the trial.
Perhaps voters should be 'bitter' that this story is not being re****ted by
the mainstream media.
You can sign up on the website PaulvClinton to receive e-mails of the news
in the trial as it
happens.
Note: Peter Paul has passed a lie detector's test to prove he is not lying
about hiring Bill
Clinton to be a rainmaker for his company. Do you think Hillary or Bill
Clinton would pass a lie
dectector's test?
THE MORE YOU CAN GET CAUCASOIDS TO READ, THE SOONER THEY FIND OUT THAT
THEY
ARE JUST CONSPICUOUSLY EXPLOITED CAUCASOIDS WHICH ARE WHITE NIGGERS.
What Is a "White Nigger" ?
By Andrew D. Todd
http://hnn.us/articles/1220.html
|
