Appellate court date set for Sept. 7 in Paul vs. Clinton case

[nomoreclintons]

On Sept. 7, 2007, the California Appellate Court will hear arguments regarding bringing Hillary back into the Paul vs Clinton case as a defendant.

For the first time, a 3-judge panel will be looking at evidence of her criminal activity in the illegal fundraising from her 2000 Senate campaign.

A brief was filed on July 19th by the United States Justice Foundation (USAF), submitting as evidence of a videotape purportedly showing leading Democrat presidential contender Hillary Clinton speaking with Hollywood mogul Peter Paul about a massive fundraising event for her 2000 Senate race.

About $2 million of Paul's own money produced the event, despite a legal contribution limit to a candidate then set at $2,000. USJF said the evidence has been held since May 2001 by the New York Eastern District U.S. Attorney and released only on April 12 of this year.

"The evidence is of that rare type that captures the very commission of a crime, namely, that of knowingly soliciting, coordinating and accepting federal campaign contributions far in excess of the legal limit of $2,000," according to a case brief.

Hillary may soon be forced to testify under oath for her involvement in this case.

[LINK POSTED BY MEMBER] Only Members Can View This No Hillary For President Forum Link.

[WiseOne]

WOW, I have heard NOTHING from the media on this! Great find, NoMoreClintons! Thanks for posting that! I HOPE she does have to testify. I still am baffled why I haven't heard a peep from the media on this!

[nomoreclintons]

Originally Posted by WiseOne

WOW, I have heard NOTHING from the media on this! Great find, NoMoreClintons! Thanks for posting that! I HOPE she does have to testify. I still am baffled why I haven't heard a peep from the media on this!

Watch this video, and it will explain a lot! [LINK POSTED BY MEMBER] Only Members Can View This No Hillary For President Forum Link.

[otbdoug]

Power hungry democrats, feeding on the Clinton charisma will overlook everything. Getting Hillary on minor criminal offenses does not dissuade the deceived voters. Women are suckered by a presidential campaign that offers all men and Bill Clinton's wife. Hillary Clinton is nonessential to the goals of women activists. Now the democrats are heavily favored to win the next election so the defeat of the Clintonistas must happen by derailing her nomination, not after.
Insufficient attention is being given to the glaring documented snake bites of the Clinton gangster liberals.

1) We must broadcast their involvement in assisting the Iran Contra cocaine smuggling through the Mena, Arkansas airport when they received a no pay back 'loan' from the bank that laundered the coke money to buy arms.
2) A number of homicides occured around the Mena perioid and later during the Clinton years. Many died of murder or suspicious accident/suicides who could testify against the Clintons. Although some homicides may be coincidental or internet hyped, the weight of all the homicides creates a circumstantial web that ensnares either the Clintons or a group of criminals involved in protecting them.
3) The nation currently has a number of unsolved problems that are highlyvisible but an invisible problem is the present day laundering of cocaine and heroin funds through financial vehicles such as privately financed second or third trust deeds, offshore banks and margined stock accounts. The return of the Clintons to Washington assures this criminal element of free reign.
4) Bill Clinton's misbehavior in the White House includes refusing the drug test and using cocaine. He was once called 'Big Nose Billy' by his convicted cocaine smuggling brother Roger. Acts of adultery also included approaching and harassing women who wanted no part of his plans. He also commited perjury and was derelict in his duty of examing national security materials and CIA recommendations.
5) Had Bill Clinton been jusifiably impeached and Al Gore taken over, we might not have seen either the 911 attack of the war in Iraq. Remember that as Bill Clinton appeared to the world in a window of his frivolous, self centered life, al Qaeda observers were able to discern that they could boldly prepare an attack on our country while we had a blind Commander In Chief.
6) In spite of the bad George Bush Jr. and the Cheney conspiracy, accounatbility for 911 falls also on the Clinton presidency which left materials indicating that CIA recommendations for al Quada strikes were ignored.
7) The defeat of the Clinton family is not just about popular disgust with this family, but the need to dig out of a dynasty of corruption and incompetence. Threads need to lead to a network of patriotic effort in our American Revolution 2 as we move past the price fixing politicians into direct democracy and a professional service government.
Fight as hard as possible so that our nightmares will be confined to these times and not released in the administration of 2009.

[WiseOne]

Another video on Hillary scraping together funds.

Hillary Clinton's Campaign Funds

[Herb Schaffler]

otbdoug, all this information is out in books. The main stream media won't dare report on it. Anybody who does report it gets branded as a conspiracy theorist. Even conservatives like Rush Limbaugh won't report it. I once heard his program where somebody called in taking Rush to task for not reporting these matters. Rush hung up on him and then chewed Snurdly out for not doing a better job of screening. Genefer Flowers first approached Rush to give him the scoop on her phone calls with Bill Clinton, but Rush wasn't interested. She couldn't understand that, because she said this was a golden opportunity to put him away.

All this scandal really upsets me because justice is not being served. I admit I cheered for Bill Clinton to win in 1992 because I didn't like Bush Sr. over Desert Storm. I predicted at the time that it would lead to terrorist activity on American soil that would kill thousands of people. Don't get me wrong, I was never fooled by Bill Clinton. I could tell he was a slick, phony politician just like I can tell the same about John Edwards now. But when I started hearing about the Clintons corruption and started reading about it, I have become a bitter opponent of them. This is probably the biggest reason that I don't want to see Hillary win. She doesn't deserve the White House, she deserves the big house, but is it possible that all this information can get out to the public on the internet? The liberals will just write it off as conspiracy theory. Even when you finally convince some of these people of Hillary's guilt on some of these lesser things, they say "So what! She's a politician, so what else is new?" as if all politicians a crooks anyway. These are the people we need to reach at this point because they're the ones who are going to be nominating her. If she wins the nomination, she may very well become president with the unpopularity of the Repuplican Party at this time and also, the Clintons are clever politicians. They'll figure some way to win the election. Hopefully, they won't be able to find another Ross Perot to run as I suspect they did in 1992 and 1996. You can read one of my earlier posts on how Perot and Clinton had alot of phone conversations just prior to Perot's announcement of his candidacy according to one of Clinton's troopers.

Hillary must be stopped in the primaries, someway.