'Smoking Gun' Clinton Tape Released to Public

[JaJae]

There's a few different articles out there about this. To no surprise, the media is keeping a tight lid on it so far. This article does a pretty good job of explaining what happened and the laws surrounding it.

Basically Hollywood mogul Peter Paul spent $2 million on a fund-raising party for Hillary's 2000 Senatorial compaign. The Federal Elections Commission has already ruled that Clinton lied about the amount of money she made during that campaign and fined her $35,000.
Compliance Cases Made Public

Hillary's campaign finance director, David Rosen, was indicted on charges of lying to the FEC, but was later acquitted.

Peter Paul's relationship with the Clinton's has gone bad and so now he's out for blood. He has a tape which he has brought public that is now considered the smoking gun. In that tape Hillary basically shoots herself in the foot and condemns herself of knowing she has received a $2 million donation to her campaign when the limit is $2000. It would be a felony.

In order to keep the case from going public and being heard she used a California statute which protects political candidates from frivolous lawsuits.

John Armor, an election law expert who has tried election laws since the 1960s says that's where this tape is key.

"The tape shows her committing several crimes," said Armor, who is not a party to the case but will appear on camera for a documentary Paul is producing on the case. "The court either should accept it on appeal, or bump it back to the trial court."

As of now Hillary and her lawyers/campaign are not commenting on this issue other than saying Hillary doesn't remember it and if it were true she would remember.

If this case goes public and Hillary is found guilty, she could face jail time of up to 5 years in prison. That might put a bit of a dampener on her campaign...
'Smoking Gun' Clinton Tape Released to Public -- 06/22/2007

[JaJae]

Peter Paul has a website with more details:
Peter Paul

Here's the video:

YouTube Video

[Simius]

Originally Posted by JaJae

If this case goes public and Hillary is found guilty, she could face jail time of up to 5 years in prison. That might put a bit of a dampener on her campaign...

Nah, she'll still win and just pardon herself.

Seriously though, If she is corrupt I hope they nail her.

[Nonphixion]

Is that famed comic book writer Stan Lee they keep zooming in on during the video?

edit: Indeed it is.

And back on topic, NOTHING in that video is incriminating. On the other hand I would say that this event sounds like it's going to be quite popular. With all of those stars they named. Brad Pitt etc...

And plus this video only gives them even MORE publicity! I don't think the media is keeping any kind of lid on this at all -- it's just a nonsensical story, and no one is reporting on it because it means nothing other than a reason for right-wingers to get their panties in a bunch

[motivez]

Why was Rosen acquitted?

I really don't hear anything on that video that would seem like it's illegal, but maybe I missed it. It seems like nothing more than a very conversation between them.. laughing and joking about sorts of stuff

Can you post the quotes that show her committing "4 or 5 felonies"...

[Nonphixion]

I think the top referrer on that page says it all "WorldNetDaily"

Peter Paul

I bet you felt good posting this thread JaJae, but I will have to say; this is not a news story. Your lid -- or tight lid as it were, is purely imaginary.

From the first link;

The conversation appears to show Clinton actively helping to plan the event. The suit alleges that she violated federal campaign finance laws by directly soliciting a contribution from Paul.

So the conjecture is that if she helped plan the event, then it is illegal, which this video clearly shows she did not (canons to europe, 10k citizens migrating across the midwest, comic book superheroes instead of missile defense) it's ALL just a bunch of jokes... she had no hand in the planning.

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by Nonphixion

I think the top referrer on that page says it all "WorldNetDaily"

Peter Paul

What do the referrers of Peter Paul's homepage have to do with the story? The video has been posted.

I bet you felt good posting this thread JaJae

What do your perceptions of my feelings have to do with the thread?

From the first link;
So the conjecture is that if she helped plan the event, then it is illegal

Actually that's not at all what it said.

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by motivez

Can you post the quotes that show her committing "4 or 5 felonies"...

Not sure. Arnold is expected to testify on it. However, from the articles I've read Hillary's knowledge and acceptance of the $2 million campaign donation that was this party is what's illegal. The claim is that she knew these people were going to be spending their money on it.

Washington Post ran a story after the incident, I'll see if I can find it that described Hillary's reaction well. First she pretended she didn't know Paul. Then they admitted she had a $2k donation from him (maximum donation), but didn't know him and once it was found he donated after the controversy she quickly returned the money. Then they changed their story to admitting they knew he paid in excess of $1 million for the party, but it wasn't a cash donation. However Arnold and Paul are saying that the laws on the books at the time doesn't make that distinction.

The event was a fund-raising event for Hillary and there's video of her thanking Paul at the event. And there's video of her talking to him on the phone like they're friends about the event. She didn't report all the revenue she made from the event. Basically Paul spent the money and in return Bill was supposed to be a spokesperson on the board of his business in a sense to make him money and for a presidential pardon. Clinton backed down and so now Paul is exposing that he paid for the event of question in full and he alleges that Hillary knew about it.

Hillary has been lying about her connections to Paul for 7 years and has corrected her statements over and over again. The phone conversation includes her thanking them for the fund-raising party and all that it means for her. Paul thanks her for phone call and Hillary returns by calling him her friend. Then she starts talking about getting votes and the party getting people on board for her campaign.

They're going to use this video as well as whatever other evidence they have to try to prove that Hillary knew they funded the event well in excess of the minimum $2,000 donation and that she's been lying about it and essentially obstructing justice.

Here's some old reports on the case as well:
Salon.com Politics | Peter Paul and Chelsea

There's apparently some notes that involve Chelsea Clinton describing late nights of staying up playing Scrabble and Bill discussing the event Paul was putting on for them.

This was the largest fund-raising event in history for a federal candidate bringing about many celebrities. It was paid for in full by Peter Paul. Hillary's knowledge and acceptance would make it a felony.

Paul is trying to prove that Hillary knew and the arrangement was he would do it if Bill took a seat on his board and gave him a presidential pardon. Paul went public with this and Hillary's response was that she didn't even know him. Chelsea Clinton knew of him! And, Hillary thanked him in a speech at the event (also freely available on google video). Hillary Clinton Thanks Her Largest (Secret) Contributor Peter Paul at Gala There's also video of her thanking Paul over the phone.(above).

There's a note from Chelsea Clinton acknowledging the family's knowledge and business deals with Paul. Hillary didn't report all the money she made from the event and was fined by the government. And now there's evidence that was released publicly (since she has lied to prevent the case from being heard), that clearly shows Hillary has not been honest with the Paul case. Whether Paul is telling the truth or not is one thing. But it's completely clear that Hillary was involved in a huge illegal fund-raiser and she has been lying to cover it up and prevent any legal action against her.

Now she's on the ride of backtracking and if this story gets more publicity it has the chance of seeing action in a court room.

[motivez]

Sorry I gotta agree with Nonphixion, sounds like she was thanking them for planning it and joking around with them, I don't see anything that resembles a smoking gun..

[Nonphixion]

Originally Posted by JaJae

What do your perceptions of my feelings have to do with the thread?

It follows from the fact that you were simply trying to expose some dirt on the Dems, yet there is no story to be had.

And thus it becomes a moot point -- your erroneous feelings as well as the non-issue that this story embodies.

No personal offense intended, of course.

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by Nonphixion

It follows from the fact that you were simply trying to expose some dirt on the Dems, yet there is no story to be had.

Not the Dems, Hillary.

And thus it becomes a moot point -- your erroneous feelings as well as the non-issue that this story embodies.

My feelings?

[The Real Sporer]

Sadly there are no such things as smoking guns with the Clintons. The MSM are so utterly enamored of the Clintons that a video of the Clintons snorting coke while taking Chinese bribes and ordering political assassinations would be represented as political genius necessary to protect the world from Republicans.

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by The Real Sporer

Sadly there are no such things as smoking guns with the Clintons. The MSM are so utterly enamored of the Clintons that a video of the Clintons snorting coke while taking Chinese bribes and ordering political assassinations would be represented as political genius necessary to protect the world from Republicans.

This particular video doesn't seem too incriminating. But based on the Clinton's past statements it does seem to have enough in it to bring the case to a judge.

[DosEquis]

IBsome more mysterious clinton business related deaths

[JaJae]

Just found out a little more about their argument. It's illegal for a candidate to be a part of the fundraising of this size in the manner she was. She says in the recording she solicited entertainers, etc whose contribution of services was over the legal limit.. and thus a felony.

“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,” the motion filed with the court says.

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by motivez

Why was Rosen acquitted?

FOXNews.com - Clinton Finance Director Acquitted of Fundraising Charges - Politics | Republican Party | Democratic Party | Political Spectrum
Sympathetic jury it seems. They said her campaign finance director wasn't an accountant and therefore wasn't responsible for directing the finances of her campaign or following the law.

Prosecutors said Rosen, 38, panicked over the mounting costs for the fundraiser and lied to conceal its true cost from both the Clinton campaign and the government. They said Clinton was unaware of any wrongdoing.

...

Prosecutors said he filed a federal campaign finance report to claim "in-kind" contributions of about $400,000, when he knew that actual contributions for the event exceeded $1.1 million.

...

Jury foreman Michael Johnson, 40, said Rosen did not have the "means or clout" to carry out what the government alleged.

"I truly believe that Rosen's role was as a fundraiser," Johnson said. "He said he wasn't an accountant."

[motivez]

So can you post the exact lines they're talking about?

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by motivez

So can you post the exact lines they're talking about?

I don't think they've specified. But this is the line that gets repeated as suspect in articles.

“And you know, Aaron, I’m so grateful because I know how hard you’ve worked on it because it’s your constant effort and outreach,” Clinton is heard to say over a speaker phone. “You know, I talked with Cher and she was just great. Said she was really so excited. And I hadn’t talked to her so you must have done a really good job selling it to her.”

She claims she talked to Cher (about the event) and said she was already excited about the event even though Hillary hadn't talked to her about it yet. So they did a good job selling it [her appearance for the fundraiser] for her.

Now Paul is claiming she had helped in some way with the fundraiser. Her initial defense was that she didn't know who Peter Paul was and didn't know he was behind the event [there's video of her thanking him at the event now too]. She later retracted that statement. Now it seems clear she knew who he was, and knew he was doing the planning and organizing, in fact she was calling the major celebrities who were going to appear.

If anything I think there's enough evidence here for Paul to go to trial. There's nothing concrete, and this is far from a 'smoking gun' as the reports are calling it. But it definitely shows she has something to hide. She lied about the revenue from the event and she lied about knowing Paul. Her campaign finance manager was indicted on charges of lying to the FEC over this event. The whole thing is fishy, and there does seem to be some 100% proof that she's at least lying about the event and hiding something. Peter Paul claims he can prove it. I say let him try. This is what happens when politicians do dirty things with dirty people.

Basically this is what they have to prove:

If she helped to plan the event, it could legally constitute a direct hard money donation to Clinton's Senate campaign, rather than to her joint fundraising committee called New York Senate 2000. If that is the case, the donation from Paul would be a thousand times the legal limit of $2,000. Knowingly soliciting a contribution of $25,000 or more is a felony punishable by up to five years in
prison.

This tape doesn't prove that, but it does prove that Hillary has been lying about the event to prevent it from going to trial in the past. The reason she has gotten out of this being heard is because of her previous lies. This tape expunges all of them. The event was marketed as being for Bill, but the secret was that it was a fundraiser for her campaign. And this tape kinda exposes the shady awareness that Clinton had and her acceptance of it.