Bill Clinton Defends Hillary…Sort of
July 31, 2007
Bill Clinton was on Good Morning America in a somewhat embarassing appearance to defend his wife Hillary, and didn't quite pull it off. Now he's out there having to defend his wife against what Obama said about her. The MSM wants you to believe that Bill sides with Hillary, but seems like Bill gives a lukewarm defense of Hillary in this article in USA Today. Here is what Bill said in 'defense' of Hillary:

BILL CLINTON: I don't want to get in the middle of that little spat Hillary and Senator Obama had, but there's more than one way to practice diplomacy. You can make up your own mind about that. The point I want to make is that they and all of our other Democrats had a vigorous agreement on the big question, which is, should we have more diplomacy. The answer is yes. Then you can parse your answers to the specific questions and decide who you think is right.
It's being written that Bill Clinton rode to his wife's rescue in that interview. It doesn't sound like that to me.
I should be a Hillary supporter. But I can’t possibly vote for Hillary
July 31, 2007
There are a lot of women who cannot bring themselves to support Hillary Clinton, for one reason or another. Below is an article written by blogger Halley Suitt that sums up exactly why some female Democrats cannot even consider voting for Hillary Clinton in 2008:
I’m a Democrat. I’m a woman. I went to an all-woman’s college in New England. I’m a feminist. I should be a Hillary supporter. But I can’t possibly vote for Hillary and I really don’t think she can win.
I just don’t trust her. Let me say it again. I just don’t trust her. And it’s all about sex and gender.
From the moment that she allegedly “forgave” her husband Bill Clinton’s sexual transgressions with Monica Lewinski, I stopped trusting her. I could not help but think that her “forgiveness” program had nothing to do with repairing a marriage gone bad, and everything to do with a voracious hunger to be in control, to wield power. It made me very nervous. I was left with a very bad taste in my mouth, as well as a suspicion that she had an aspect of steely ruthlessness to her character that allowed her to put up with anything. Normal human females don’t put up with cheating like that and humiliation like that and get over things so swiftly. So from that time, I stopped seeing her as human. Even Bill was a better person to my mind. The poor S.O.B. just wanted sex — a fraility many humans suffer. It reminded me he was real and she was not.
And the idea of electing Hillary, a veritable man in sheep’s clothing, or whatever you want to call Hillary, is disturbing. She outplays men by 10X. When I see her, I think, well, that’s not a woman’s heart that beats under there. That’s not a woman any more. So maybe one of these days, I will vote for a woman for president, but unfortunately, there isn’t one running in 2008.
Hillary and Barack Obama Stop Playing Nice
July 31, 2007
No more playing nice.
Senators Clinton and Obama now are going for each other's throats, and in doing so, they both expose why neither might not be "ready for primetime" in a post-September11 world.
In last week's CNN/YouTube debate, a questioner asked if the candidates would promise as president to meet — without conditions — with the brutal leaders of Iran, North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela, and Syria. Mr. Obama hastened to say he would, and Mrs. Clinton proceeded to blast him, saying that such meetings have to be done under the right conditions or the meeting could become a propaganda tool that strengthens the dictator and make matters worse.
Most experts were quick to agree that Mr. Obama's answer was absolutely wrong. When the president of America meets face to face with the leader of another nation, it has effects on international relations on a host of matters, both immediate and longterm. An American president cannot promise to go blindly into a meeting with a tyrannical dictator, as that meeting could facilitate or enable a calamity.
While any experienced foreign policy leader understands this, Mr. Obama apparently does not, or even worse, has decided to throw caution to the wind. No matter how bright he was in law school, this blind foolishness exposed a dangerous naivety.
So the next day, Mrs. Clinton said that his answer to that question was "irresponsible, and frankly naïve." But instead of admitting he was wrong, Mr. Obama counterattacked, alleging her worldview was “Bush-Cheney Lite.” Those are fighting words among Democrats.
It's now gone to the next level, as both campaigns have cast their surrogates into the ring against each other on television. One battleground for these fights was Chris Matthew’s “Hardball” on MSNBC, where two congressmen squared off: Hillary's Steve Israel versus Barack's Adam Smith. The second was Thursday, where Hillary's Howard Wolfson got into an increasingly sharp and angry exchange with Obama's David Axelrod.
Truth Boating Hillary Clinton Part 2
July 31, 2007
Corrupt Hillary Clinton must be exposed for what she is: A fraud who is unfit to be dog catcher, let a lone President of the United States.
Below is a timeline with corrections from previous post (here).
TIMELINE:
Feb. 2000 - Peter Paul is induced to support Hillary's 2000 Senate campaign with the promise of access to Bill Clinton to be able to make a proposal to come aboard Stan Lee Media as a rainmaker when he left the WH
June 9, 2000 - Paul pays for two Hillary Clinton fundraisers at Spago and the home of Cynthia Gershman … the costs are never declared by the campaign (note: a previous fundraiser through Rendell for Al Gore, paid for by Paul, was also never declared; Rendell also never declared a 150K stock pledge) … at the Spago lunch, Paul spent considerable time with Hillary and discussed his plan for her husband's employment… see the 20/20 report from 2001…Amazingly, in her declaration of 4-7-06, Hillary acts as if she barely knew Peter Paul and claimed she couldn't remember anything they might have said. Besides the email comments, Paul has video of her going on and on about how Stan Lee was a genius for hiring Paul. She is really excited about Paul's idea of a cartoon character of Al Gore, and she wants to talk to Tony Coehlo and Terry McAuliffe about it. Her failure to remember is simply a lie.
June 23, 2000 - Kelly Craighead (a White House employee, not part of any joint funraising committee), Jim Levin, David Rosen (all agents of Hillary and Bill) meet with Aaron Tonken (agent of Paul and fundraiser for Ed Rendell) to originate the idea for a major fundraising event for Hillary as part of the Aug. 14-20 DNC Convention in L.A.
July 11, 2000 - conference call between Peter Paul, Tonken, Craighead, Wolfson, Levin, and Rosen in which Paul is solicited to pay for the Hollywood Gala….he is asked to pay $525K, and it is expected that Cynthia Gershman will pay a like amount….it was acknowledged by all that the fundraiser would cost over a million dollars
July 17, 2000 - Paul films the SMOKING GUN VIDEO. This video was withheld by an assistant US ATTY while investigations were proceeding. Hillary is shown soliciting and coordination the $1.6 mil in-kind, hard money donation. Kelly Craighead kept her completely briefed and she offered any help she could. David Kendall">SMOKING GUN VIDEO. This video was withheld by an assistant US ATTY while investigations were proceeding. Hillary is shown soliciting and coordination the $1.6 mil in-kind, hard money donation. Kelly Craighead kept her completely briefed and she offered any help she could. David Kendall" />#39;s claim that this was a joint fundraiser, and thus hard money, won't fly. Craighead was a White House employee who solicited the money on July 11. Hillary was part of closing the deal on July 17.
Aug. 12, 2000 - Hollywood Gala… it raises a million dollars for Hillary, but it cost over a million dollars…Paul spent several hours with Bill Clinton… here they are putting the final touches on the deal at the after concert dinner… Look at all the photos of the gala… Hillary actually said in her declaration of 4-7-06, "I remember Mr. Paul attending the event…" How insulting was that? Actually, she spent hours near him and publicly thanked him from the stage for all he did.
Aug 13 - Paul and his wife Andrea are at the home of Barbra Streisand for Clinton Library donors…when Hillary sees Andrea, she runs over to her, brings her over to Streisand, and introduces her as "the wife of the man who funded last night's event…my new best friend"… Streisand's testimony should be interesting… Chelsea came up to the table with Paul, Andrea, Tendo Oto, Oto's interpreter Jonathon Rogers, Jim Levin, and Haim Saban. Chelsea discussed for at least a half an hour how excited she and her parents were about her dad coming to work for the creator of Spider Man… Hillary sets up her daughter for perjury
Aug. 13 - Tendo Oto and SLM make their deal for Asian partnership - Oto gives $5 mil and promises another $5-7 mil in November for the American joint venture">Hillary sets up her daughter for perjury
Aug. 13 - Tendo Oto and SLM make their deal for Asian partnership - Oto gives $5 mil and promises another $5-7 mil in November for the American joint venture" />#8230;On Aug. 12 he had paid $27K to attend the federal fundraiser gala. Giving money was illegal. Attending was illegal. Since Oto had no social security number to check out when he showed up at the event with his camera crew, the Secret Service said no way. Clinton had the Secret Service stand down, and Oto sat directly behind the president and first lady.
Aug 14 - Ed Rendell calls Peter Paul in a panic. Lloyd Grove is preparing a story for the WASHPOST about Paul's felony record for "The Cuban Coffee Caper" two decades previous when he was an international attorney in Miami. Rendell tells Paul to deny he gave any money and just play along. Shortly after the warning call, Grove called. Here is the callsheet from SLM, certified by the government as evidence.
Aug 15 - Lloyd Grove writes the story in the WASHPOST about Paul's felony past from two decades previous involving the Cuban Coffee Caper and defrauding Fidel Castro of $8.7 million … Howard Wolfson vows that they would never take any money from Peter Paul
Aug 17 - Grove writes a second story about $2,000 given by Paul at Spago … Wolfson says they will return the money, and a check is immediately cut and sent to Paul … Wolfson actually admits that the gala cost a million dollars but says it was in-kind and not a check. (Ummm, in-kind is hard money, Howard)
Aug 18 - behind the scenes, while disavowing him in public, the Clintons write personal notes to Paul, dated Aug 18, espressing their gratitude … Hillary: "We will remember it always"… Bill's note… Even Chelsea got into the act.
Aug 24 - Campaign Finance Chairman David Rosen is directed to send a fax to Paul asking for another $100,000 (actually, one of several faxes) … Hillary had promised the money for the Working Families Party in New York … Paul will send no more money until he hears it face to face from Bill Clinton that they still have a deal (second document shows Gordon's acknowledgement that it was "done")
Sept. 22, 2000 - Clinton steps off AF-1 in Los Angeles (we have photo) and assures Paul that the deal is still a go … Paul has Steven Gordon send a stock transfer of $55K to the Working Families Party for Hillary… we can find no evidence that they ever declared that donation. If the Clintons were disavowing Paul in public, claimed he gave no money, and had no business arrangement with the President as claimed by Hillary, why would the President of the United States be meeting Paul in public as he stepped off AF-1? For what possible purpose? That's not hard to figure out, is it?
Nov 7 - Hillary is elected
Nov 13 - just six days after Hillary's election, an agreement for Venture Soft USA Inc is recorded in Illinois between Jim Levin, Clinton's business adviser, and Tendo Oto … Levin was Clinton's "eyes and ears" in dealing with Paul, got proprietary business information, and stole the Japanese partner for their own deal
Dec 2000 - Stan Lee Media collapses … the additional $5-7 million promised in November from partner Tendo Oto was not received due to the Clinton/Levin interference In Paul v Clinton, it will be proven that Oto's money would have kept the company solvent until Clinton came aboard as he had promised Peter Paul.
Early 2001 - Paul discovers that the campaign has filed two fraudulent FEC reports, only reporting 366K for the cost of Event 39 … he spent over a million dollars on it
June 18, 2001 - Paul files initial lawsuit against the Clintons and several others for business fraud
July 3 - Treasurer Andrew Grossman is served with the lawsuit that includes documentation for $1.6 million spent by Paul
July 11 - David Kendall accepts service for Hillary along with the $1.6 million documented expenses
July 18 - press conference at National Press Club . Paul has messenger hand deliver a demand letter to Hillary's senate office
July 30 - despite Paul's demand and all of the documentation, a third false FEC report is filed … this time they declare $401K for Event 39 … still no mention of Paul as the real donor
Jan 2005 - criminal indictment of David Rosen is unsealed
May 2005 - Rosen acquitted in criminal trial in Los Angeles…the perjury in this trial was astounding…the judge and prosecutor went out of their way to condemn Paul and claim that Hillary had nothing to do with it is also astounding… FBI affidavit during the trial documenting $1.2 mil from Paul that was not declared. The prosecution does not call Paul, Aaron Tonken, or key witness Kelly Craighead (Craighead was also never called by the FEC - she will be a key witness in Paul v Clinton)…. The prosecution does not use damaging evidence against Rosen obtained while Ray Reggie (brother in law of Ted Kennedy) was wearing a wire. In Tonken's book, KING OF CONS, he tells how he sat in a van with Hillary detailing all of the money that was being spent on her.

Dec 2005 - FEC determines that the campaign deliberately underreported $721,000, fines the campaign a mere $35,000, and orders a new filing…treasurer Andrew Grossman signs conciliation agreement with the FEC, the equivalent of a nolo contendre plea
Jan 2006 - the fourth fraudulent FEC report is filed … among the problems are Stan Lee (whom we have on tape in a deposition swearing that he gave no money) is credited with a 225K donation and Paul is still never named personally as the donor as he has demanded
April 7, 2006 - Hillary removed as defendant but judge made clear to Kendall that she would be testifying ">deposition swearing that he gave no money) is credited with a 225K donation and Paul is still never named personally as the donor as he has demanded
April 7, 2006 - Hillary removed as defendant but judge made clear to Kendall that she would be testifying " />#8230; the declaration turned into the court by Kendall for Hillary can only be described as a work of fiction … no reporters attended the hearing and not one mainstream media source wrote that a trial date had been set for defendant Bill Clinton (trial date postponed until appeal is hear to bring Hillary back in as a defendant) … Chelsea will be one of the witnesses called … although her mom claims no knowledge of the business deal, if Chelsea testifies honestly, she will tell how the family stayed up late after the gala playing scrabble and discussing the excitement of daddy going to work for the creator of Spiderman … from a private fundraiser at Zev Braun's house in early 2000, Paul has home video of Hillary laughing and discussing with him how he had arranged in 1993 for Fabio to chase her around the room and pick her up in a romance pose">home video of Hillary laughing and discussing with him how he had arranged in 1993 for Fabio to chase her around the room and pick her up in a romance pose" />#8230;the president referenced that event the next year at the Italian-American Foundation Dinner…. her declaration claiming that she met Paul in early 2000 is simply a lie
June 2006 - Senate Ethics Committee announces it will not investigate Hillary and simply relies on the flawed FEC procedure … subsequently, they refuse Paul's offer to appear and testity
Oct. 18, 2006 - new demand letter for return of over a million dollars is delivered to Hillary's DC office with copy delivered to Sen. Voinovich, chair of the Senate Ethics Committee
Jan. 10, 2007 - Paul counsel files Appellate Brief to bring Hillary back into the case as a defendant (that delays the trial date for Bill, set for March 27, 2007…it also delays depositions)….no mainstream media source had reported that defendant Bill Clinton had a trial date in a case involving the collapse of Spiderman Stan Lee's company)
April 2007 - after a two-year battle for the return of evidence, including home videos, an assistant US atty provides Paul with a list of items they will return to him…..included was the "smoking gun video": July 17, 5-minute conference call, Hillary Clinton….. when the numerous pieces of evidence were finally sent, the shipment did not include that video…..Paul's counsel argues vehemently for that to be sent….Paul believes that a low-level functionary screwed up by putting that piece of evidence on the manifest — Hillary never thought it would see the light of day…that video was finally sent because they could not deny its possession
June 20, 2007 - look at this page under "Latest Filings" for June 20 briefs and declarations
July 27, 2007 - court notification that oral arguments are set for Sept. 7 before the California Court of Appeals…. a decision on whether Hillary is brought back in as a defendant is expected within 10 days thereafter…. then, it is time for depositions…. if David Kendall loses, he may appeal to the California Supreme Court…..that court had earlier refused to hear the argument about removal of Bill Clinton from the case…. Kendall may be able to delay it for a short time, but depositions are expected to begin this year
ADDITIONAL INFO: THE FRAUDULENT SENATOR SERIES
Source: Free Republic
Hillary, Barack and The artificial dust-up
July 31, 2007
By David Limbaugh
The artificial dust-up between John Edwards, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama over the actual dust-up between Hillary and Barack is both amusing and annoying. Probably due to their laziness, the mainstream media conspired to allow Edwards to inject himself into the story, which — originally — had nothing to do with him.
The story began when Clinton called Obama "irresponsible" and "naive" for saying that, as president, he would be willing to meet with leaders of Iran, Cuba, North Korea, Venezuela and Syria without preconditions.
Clinton said she wouldn't risk allowing these dictators to use her as a propaganda dupe. (One wonders where Hillary was when House Majority Leader Nancy Pelosi served as propaganda dupe for Syrian President Bashar Assad — not to mention grossly undermined the commander in chief.)
The media ooh'ed and ah'ed as if it was daring for Hillary even to take issue with Obama. Obama, who has made a big deal of holding himself out as a uniter, not a divider, lashed back with an impressively divisive rejoinder, tagging Hillary as "Bush-Cheney lite."
The great conciliator, Obama, held his ground in a conference call with reporters, insisting Clinton should explain how attaching conditions to meetings with foreign leaders would differ from Bush's approach to diplomacy.
Clinton shot back, through a spokesman, that an experienced president doesn't set out those kinds of hypotheticals, by which Hillary presumably meant to reinforce her point that she, not young Barack, was seasoned and presidential. (It will be interesting to see how Hillary explains away these comments if and when she chooses the charismatic, but young, inexperienced, irresponsible and nave Obama as her running mate.)
Excuse the aside, but have you ever noticed how often, when Hillary gets cornered with a tough question, she refuses to answer on the grounds that she doesn't do hypotheticals, which is monumentally absurd, since everything she would consider doing, as president, is hypothetical, by definition? Then again, "hypothetical" has five syllables, and her frequent use of the word definitely contributes to her image as the smartest woman in the world.
