FUND-RAISER 'FLUBBED' HILLARY DATA

s1m0n · Post by **s1m0n** » Mon May 09, 2005 1:24 am

He says that he couldn't find the story with a Fox News search thereby suggesting it isn't a right-wing attack piece. He suggests a "vast left-wing conspiracy" mocking Hillary's claim about the right-wing conspiracy.

I read that post as irony. A previous poster suggested that it was a "left-wing" bias which kept the story from CNN; so the poster you're responding to noted that it wasn't on Fox, either, so according to the same logic, Fox must also be part of the vast left-wing conspiracy.

jGilder · Post by **jGilder** » Mon May 09, 2005 1:34 am

s1m0n wrote:
He says that he couldn't find the story with a Fox News search thereby suggesting it isn't a right-wing attack piece. He suggests a "vast left-wing conspiracy" mocking Hillary's claim about the right-wing conspiracy.
I read that post as irony. A previous poster suggested that it was a "left-wing" bias which kept the story from CNN; so the poster you're responding to noted that it wasn't on Fox, either, so according to the same logic, Fox must also be part of the vast left-wing conspiracy.

Oh... nevermind.

anniemcu · Post by **anniemcu** » Mon May 09, 2005 6:02 am

Was it actually Hillary who did that or some unknown volunteer?

*If* it's true, then of course it needs to be dealt with, but I seriously doubt it engendered largescale slaghter like Bush's lies have.

Wanderer · Post by **Wanderer** » Mon May 09, 2005 7:24 am

This was in today's Houston Chronicle:
http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/nation/3172982

WASHINGTON - It is a cast worthy of a political thriller: a former convict whose claims about a former president and first lady spurred a criminal investigation; a prominent senator's brother-in-law, who worked undercover for federal agents looking into the case; sworn enemies of the former first family trying to dig up fresh dirt; and Hollywood stars.

All these characters will share the spotlight Tuesday in a Los Angeles courtroom, where David Rosen, the former fund-raising director for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, will go on trial on charges that he illegally underreported the cost of a fund-raiser held for Clinton's 2000 Senate campaign.

The case is being closely watched because of its political implications for Clinton, who is not only running for re-election next year but is also considered a leading Democratic candidate for the presidency in 2008. While she has not been accused of any wrongdoing and is not expected to testify, the trial represents another potentially embarrassing chapter for the senator and her husband, former President Bill Clinton.

susnfx · Post by **susnfx** » Mon May 09, 2005 7:46 am

So he underreported a fundraiser and is now being tried for it, right? I mean, he's going to have to pay a price? Good. He should.

Sorry, but I go along with those who've said I'm more concerned about Bush's lies and a war that is costing thousands of lives. What do you suppose is going to happen to him? Will he be tried? Will he have to pay a price?

Shall we weigh which is more important in the long run - an aide lying about how much was spent on a fundraiser or the President of the United States lying to get us into a war?

Susan

Jerry Freeman · Post by **Jerry Freeman** » Mon May 09, 2005 7:51 am

While she has not been accused of any wrongdoing and is not expected to testify, the trial represents another potentially embarrassing chapter for the senator and her husband, former President Bill Clinton.

I don't think this rises to anything close to the level of importance of something like Tom DeLay's illegally funded project to stack the Texas legislature so they could redistrict the state and add enough Republicans to the US House of Representatives to artifically alter the national balance of power.

Best wishes,
Jerry

Wanderer · Post by **Wanderer** » Mon May 09, 2005 8:00 am

For what it's worth, I agree with Jerry and Susan.

I just posted the news article, since there was some question about this story's reporting (or lack thereof), and possibly some question about who did what and what price they would pay.

emmline · Post by **emmline** » Mon May 09, 2005 8:18 am

Walden wrote:
OnTheMoor wrote:Funny, the same search on FOXNews doesn't turn up much either. The vast left-wing conspiracy grows.
This may be something bigger. Right wing... Left wing... I'm thinking the whole turkey may be involved!

Walden: Winner of the C&F award for Best able to hold his ideological ground while being funny and non-obnoxious.

IRTradRU? · Post by **IRTradRU?** » Mon May 09, 2005 10:39 am

susnfx wrote:Shall we weigh which is more important in the long run - an aide lying about how much was spent on a fundraiser or the President of the United States lying to get us into a war?

Some examples, then:

"Saddam (Hussein) must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons."

"Along with Prime Minister (Tony) Blair of Great Britain, I made it equally clear that if Saddam failed to cooperate fully we would be prepared to act without delay, diplomacy or warning."

"In halting our airstrikes in November, I gave Saddam a chance -- not a license. If we turn our backs on his defiance, the credibility of U.S. power as a check against Saddam will be destroyed."

"The best way to end that threat once and for all is with a new Iraqi government -- a government ready to live in peace with its neighbors, a government that respects the rights of its people."

"Saddam Hussein and the other enemies of peace may have thought that the serious debate currently before the House of Representatives would distract Americans or weaken our resolve to face him down."

"But once more, the United States has proven that although we are never eager to use force, when we must act in America's vital interests, we will do so."

jGilder · Post by **jGilder** » Mon May 09, 2005 11:06 am

IRTradRU? wrote: "But once more, the United States has proven that although we are never eager to use force, when we must act in America's vital interests, we will do so."

The US has proven that it will lie, fabricate intelligence and do whatever it damn well pleases to illegally invade and occupy another country no matter what the cost in human lives may be.

IRTradRU? · Post by **IRTradRU?** » Mon May 09, 2005 11:12 am

jGilder wrote:
IRTradRU? wrote: "But once more, the United States has proven that although we are never eager to use force, when we must act in America's vital interests, we will do so."
The US has proven that it will lie, fabricate intelligence and do whatever it damn well pleases to illegally invade and occupy another country no matter what the cost in human lives may be.

Gosh, I'm sorry - some attribution should be in order for those quotes I posted, above.

They're all quotes by Pres. Bill Clinton, from a speech given on December 16, 1998.

IRTradRU? · Post by **IRTradRU?** » Mon May 09, 2005 11:13 am

And getting back to the topic, I think the jig (this is a forum for music, is it not?)

"Hag With the Money"

would be appropriate title for this thread.

The Weekenders · Post by **The Weekenders** » Mon May 09, 2005 11:21 am

Nice. But you should have waited for more deconstruction.

IRTradRU? · Post by **IRTradRU?** » Mon May 09, 2005 11:26 am

I would have, but the stench was overpowering.

jGilder · Post by **jGilder** » Mon May 09, 2005 11:34 am

IRTradRU? wrote:
jGilder wrote:
IRTradRU? wrote: "But once more, the United States has proven that although we are never eager to use force, when we must act in America's vital interests, we will do so."
The US has proven that it will lie, fabricate intelligence and do whatever it damn well pleases to illegally invade and occupy another country no matter what the cost in human lives may be.

Gosh, I'm sorry - some attribution should be in order for those quotes I posted, above.

They're all quotes by Pres. Bill Clinton, from a speech given on December 16, 1998.

At least Clinton lived up to his word on the last point and wasn't the one to actually lie and fabricate intelligence. The Clinton White House wasn't perfect by a long shot, but the Bush Administration proved capable of the worse kind of deadly deceit.