|
sander
learning

Registered: 10/04/04
Posts: 394
Loc: MA and IA
Last seen: 13 years, 8 months
|
|
Quote:
gettinjiggywithit said: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7007109937779036019
Story of how some guy helped Hillary raise millions for her Senate race, to get close to Bill to partner up for bussiness deal, Bill screws him, guy turns on hillary for FEC fraud, Hillary has guy sent to Brazilian prison. Hillary also uses judges in pocket and media to cover up her involvement in the FEC fraud that could've earned her 5 years in the slammer. Hillarys Fundraising manager gets nailed, instead of her, for the crime.
Do you guys even know who peter paul is? There is no need to regurgitate the neo-con theo-con rumor mill, peter paul later had hillary dropped from the accusation list because there was no case against her in any way shape or form. peter paul is the classic money grubbing, moral-less guy that makes up these crazy allegations that are quagmiring the political process in america. if we didn't have these people making up stories and distracting the american public from real issues then we wouldn't have half the messes we have right now. when the new-cons knew that there was no nuclear material in Niger, they still leaked that shit just because it would get picked up by the rumor mill and it would be believed for, what was it... like 2 weeks. but thats all they needs to get it planted in a few people's minds and then they distract by giving up the identity of a fucking CIA agent. thats insanity. if you leak that info to another country its what heavy treason, punishable by the death penalty. but if you leak it to the american media its somehow different? the republican machine has been co-opted by sensationalist meddlers and we would do better to not repeated it here. okay tangent aside. peter paul is not a credible person at all, and that civil suit he is bringing is the same disgusting shit that is suing mcdonalds for millions because you spilled your coffee on your lap and it was hot. seriously, no need to believe the rumor mill boys.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_F._Paul
|
Seuss
Error: divide byzero



Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 2 months, 20 days
|
Re: what's wrong with hillary clinton? [Re: sander]
#7523037 - 10/16/07 12:52 PM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
> peter paul is not a credible person at all
Nor is Hillary Clinton. Funny how slime tend to hang together.
> and that civil suit he is bringing is the same disgusting shit that is suing mcdonalds for millions because you spilled your coffee on your lap and it was hot. seriously, no need to believe the rumor mill boys
No rumor mill.. the lady with the hot coffee had burns and won the lawsuit. Not a very good analogy to use if you are supportive of Hillary as you pretty much made your opponents point.
-------------------- Just another spore in the wind.
|
gettinjiggywithit
jiggy


Registered: 07/20/04
Posts: 7,469
Loc: Heart of Laughter
|
Re: what's wrong with hillary clinton? [Re: sander]
#7523100 - 10/16/07 01:07 PM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
No one said Peter Paul wasn't a slime. He helped Hillary illegally raise millions for her Senate race so he could get close to Bill and partner up with him in a business venture.
FEC Fraud was committed. Her Campaign Fund raising Manager was charged guilty with FEC Fraud and sentenced.
She only got out of it because she claimed, she had no knowledge of the details of the fund raiser Peter held for her.
That was shown to be a BIG FAT LIE, the paid off judge overlooked, as we all can hear in the video that she did and was kept on top of it, in that recorded conference call.
Peter Paul is not running for President and I do not care about his personal ethics or corrupt deeds and actions.
Hillary is and thats who this is about.
If you want to believe Hillary was innocent in the FEC fraud then fine.
If you want to believe she had nothing to do with getting Paul sent to a Brazilian Prison to discredit him and get him out of her way to the top, fine.
If you want to believe that it's okay to do that to a friend who helped you raise a million bucks to get elected, and see her campaign fund raising manager take full responsibility for the crime then fine.
I'm curious to hear how you explain away her innocence in the White Water Scandal.
-------------------- Ahuwale ka nane huna.
|
sander
learning

Registered: 10/04/04
Posts: 394
Loc: MA and IA
Last seen: 13 years, 8 months
|
Re: what's wrong with hillary clinton? [Re: Seuss]
#7523711 - 10/16/07 03:06 PM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Seuss said: > and that civil suit he is bringing is the same disgusting shit that is suing mcdonalds for millions because you spilled your coffee on your lap and it was hot. seriously, no need to believe the rumor mill boys
No rumor mill.. the lady with the hot coffee had burns and won the lawsuit. Not a very good analogy to use if you are supportive of Hillary as you pretty much made your opponents point.
I'm bring up the fact [opinion] that the availability of money through lawsuits and slander is undermining personal responsibility. Yes boiling water will give you burns, if that hot water was supplied through employee negligence, then this person should bring a civil suit to get the corporation to pay medical costs, and get the negligent employee fired so that this does not happen in the future, but instead she goes for a multi-million dollar settlement out of greed. I'm just trying to bring up an issue of personal ethics. although I do see how there is an argument for getting every penny we can out of large profitable companies, I have trouble stomaching a person who will illegally inflate his company's stock prices with speculative stock bidding (which will obviously result in a bankruptcy when the bubble pops) only to drive up his personal assets. This is corporate fraud on a massive level, and then he can turn around and slander a politician he wanted to use as a tool just because he didn't get his way? "The Clinton campaign was ultimately asked to pay $35,000 in fines for having underreported the cost of the gala.[32] Paul's suit against the FEC was thrown out; his attempt to bring ethics charges against Clinton were rejected,[33] and his fraud charges against Senator Clinton were tossed out in April 2006.[34] As of April 2007[35], Paul's civil charges against Senator Clinton and former President Clinton for "looting"[36] his business remained outstanding."
I realize that wasn't the most eloquent writing but I'm rushed and will look at this after dinner when i have time, please give me some feedback to respond to, I love this shit.
On a personal note, I am not trying to advocate that the Clintons are pure human beings that should be upheld as pillars for the rest of us to emulate, I am merely trying to say that these are politicians that are trying to solve problems in the domestic and international arenas, and that the current state of politics in the United States is to focus on non-policy issues that allow for populist charismatic demagogues to maintain control and dictate our desires through media distraction.
Later today I will post on the ideological issues between contemporary american liberals and the neoconservative/theoconservatives that run the republican party with their new american century platform. aka: Universal Healthcare and the Middle East.
|
|