The Clinton's being sued for Fraud

[Skinzaholic]

Here is the actual complaint file itself.

http://www.judicialwatch.org/cases/70/2ndcomplaint.htm



Basically, the President, through an intermediary, agreed to work for Mr. Peter F. Paul’s companies after leaving office in exchange for a compensation package worth over $15 million, including Mr. Paul’s funding of the Hollywood Tribute. No post-White House business relationship ever materialized.

Also, Mrs. Clinton, through campaign officials, repeatedly promised Mr. Paul that the monies he spent on the event would be allocated and reported to federal election authorities in a lawful and proper way, but, to date, the campaign has failed to do so.

After denying to The Washington Post that Mrs. Clinton did not and would not accept any contributions from Mr. Paul, Mrs. Clinton’s campaign coerced Mr. Paul into making an additional $55,000 contribution (also never reported) to a political party in New York on Mrs. Clinton’s behalf.

The President and Mrs. Clinton, through intermediaries, coerced Mr. Paul into remaining silent about his contributions by threatening that the post-White House business relationship with the President would not materialize if Mr. Paul contradicted the public denials issued by the campaign.


This is just more documentation of the sleeze that once occupied the White House. Ad yet the supporters of this slime ball willstand up in arms over President Bush's supposed "cover up" of WMD.

What a joke.

[Spence]

Two points, Kevin.

1. This is yet another lawsuit by Larry Klayman against Mr and Senator Clinton. He's filed dozens of these. He never laid a glove on the Clintons. This will be no different.

2. You should know a bit more about this Peter F. Paul fellow, who is making the accusations against Mr and Senator Clinton. Firstly, the guy is a felon who served three years in prison and had his license to practice law suspended after he was convicted of cocaine possession and attempting to defraud the Cuban government of almost $9 million. Furthermore, Mr Paul was fired from his job at Stan Lee Media, Inc. "for cause." Under the terms of his employment contract with Stan Lee Media, Inc., "for cause" means "(a) willful and repeated failure to comply with the lawful directions of the Board of Directors; (b) gross negligence or willful misconduct in the performance of Consultant's duties to the Company; or (c) conviction of any act of fraud against, or misappropriation of material property belonging to the Company, conviction of any criminal statute constituting a misdemeanor involving moral turpitude or conviction of a felony, chronic alcoholism or drug addiction."

In other words, Mr Paul was fired for illegally defying the Board of Directors or gross negligence or misconduct or fraud, theft, or conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude or substance abuse. Or all of them.

This is just another Larry Klayman joke, Kevin. There is no evidence for any of this nonsense and Mr Paul is a convicted felon whose own employers are only too eager to testify to the fact that he's a liar and a thief. This case, like the Paula Jones case, will be dismissed before trial. Except this one won't get all the attention from the media, who have finally learned to ignore Mr Klayman and his silly rants. The only people paying attention to nonsense like this are the fanatical group of right-wingers obsessed with Bill and Hillary Clinton.

[Spence]

There is quite a bit of publicly-documented dirt on Mr Paul, but for starters, you can look here. (http://www.awn.com/mag/issue5.11/5.11pages/rogersslee.php3)

[lakewinola]

"This is just more documentation of the sleeze that once occupied the White House. Ad yet the supporters of this slime ball willstand up in arms over President Bush's supposed "cover up" of WMD.

What a joke."



You are the joke!!! You were up in arms over Clinton, but now look the other way on the WMD situation.

[IowaSkinsFan]

Originally posted by Spence
Two points, Kevin.

1. This is yet another lawsuit by Larry Klayman against Mr and Senator Clinton. He's filed dozens of these. He never laid a glove on the Clintons. This will be no different.

2. You should know a bit more about this Peter F. Paul fellow, who is making the accusations against Mr and Senator Clinton. Firstly, the guy is a felon who served three years in prison and had his license to practice law suspended after he was convicted of cocaine possession and attempting to defraud the Cuban government of almost $9 million. Furthermore, Mr Paul was fired from his job at Stan Lee Media, Inc. "for cause." Under the terms of his employment contract with Stan Lee Media, Inc., "for cause" means "(a) willful and repeated failure to comply with the lawful directions of the Board of Directors; (b) gross negligence or willful misconduct in the performance of Consultant's duties to the Company; or (c) conviction of any act of fraud against, or misappropriation of material property belonging to the Company, conviction of any criminal statute constituting a misdemeanor involving moral turpitude or conviction of a felony, chronic alcoholism or drug addiction."

In other words, Mr Paul was fired for illegally defying the Board of Directors or gross negligence or misconduct or fraud, theft, or conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude or substance abuse. Or all of them.

This is just another Larry Klayman joke, Kevin. There is no evidence for any of this nonsense and Mr Paul is a convicted felon whose own employers are only too eager to testify to the fact that he's a liar and a thief. This case, like the Paula Jones case, will be dismissed before trial. Except this one won't get all the attention from the media, who have finally learned to ignore Mr Klayman and his silly rants. The only people paying attention to nonsense like this are the fanatical group of right-wingers obsessed with Bill and Hillary Clinton.

I suppose Bill's buddy Marc Rich was completely innocent too. Guess we will never know now, will we? BTW, has Mr. Rich returned to the states yet since he is so blatantly innocent?

[lakewinola]

I also remember Bush Sr. trashing Clinton in the campain. Accusing him of be a morally currupt pot head when he was in college.

And I remember Bush Sr and wife, defending their cokehead son from the same attacks with the line, that was 30 years ago and has nothing to do with this election.

Bottom line, your argument about clinton and democrats being a joke to so call flip postitions is a joke in itself, because everyone does it. Right is right, wrong is wrong, doesn't matter what party you belong to. Intentially decieving the american public and revealing CIA agents for political purposes is a serious crime to this country. I hate it when people defend the president simply because they are of the same party.

[lakewinola]

Originally posted by robert11273
I suppose Bill's buddy Marc Rich was completely innocent too. Guess we will never know now, will we? BTW, has Mr. Rich returned to the states yet since he is so blatantly innocent?

I suppose that you were equally up in arms at the very first pardon granted by the elder President Bush that went to Armand Hammer, the late chairman of Occidental Petroleum Corporation, who pleaded guilty in 1975 to making illegal contributions to Richard Nixon's reelection campaign. Not long before he received his pardon, Hammer gave over $100,000 to the Republican party and another $100,000 to the Bush-Quayle Inaugural Committee.

Or to the pakistani heroine dealer.

[IowaSkinsFan]

I'll be up in arms when the radical left wing shows some reciprocity towards their leaders and stop acting like they do no wrong.

I have been far more critical of my Republican leadership than any Democratic backer who posts here. It's amazing that so many Americans can be so wrong when the pictures painted here of Democrats (Liberals) are all so rosey. Weird!

[Spence]

Robert, I thought the Marc Rich pardon was awful. Lots of those pardons are awful. I was far more angry about that than I was that consensual affair between two adults. Even worse was George H.W. Bush's pardon of Caspar Weinberger because he knew if Weinberger went to trial, Bush himself would have to face a prosecutor asking what he knew about Iran/Contra. Just to reiterate, though, pardoning Marc Rich was terrible. Letting some rich guy get off just because he's rich. That's what Republicans do, not Democrats. Ask any Democrat [who is aware of the case] and you'll get an outraged reaction. I guarantee it.

Just for the record, I've never read you criticizing any Republican. Ever.

Everyone knows Bill Clinton was hugely controversial. But he did get elected twice. Legally. Not everyone in the White House can say that.

[lakewinola]

Originally posted by robert11273
I'll be up in arms when the radical left wing shows some reciprocity towards their leaders and stop acting like they do no wrong.

I have been far more critical of my Republican leadership than any Democratic backer who posts here. It's amazing that so many Americans can be so wrong when the pictures painted here of Democrats (Liberals) are all so rosey. Weird!

What are you talking about? This makes no sense and you are saying two things, one that you do critic your republican leaders, and two that you won't critic them until the "radical left wing shows some reciprocity towards their leaders"

[IowaSkinsFan]

The first part was sarcasm.

[lakewinola]

Originally posted by robert11273
The first part was sarcasm.

Thanks for the clear up. I see things as right and wrong and consider myself a moderate, I get pulled to both sides of the isle at times. Saying that, I believe we'd be in a much better position today if either Gore or McCain were in the office. I was fooled into voting this dope in.

[IowaSkinsFan]

I like McCain.

[Spence]

Originally posted by robert11273
I like McCain. Well, we can certainly agree on that. To most Republicans these days, Robert, that makes you close to being a traitor. ;)

[Skinzaholic]

Originally posted by lakewinola

You are the joke!!! You were up in arms over Clinton, but now look the other way on the WMD situation.



Let me make this very clear and out in the open for everyone. It is this sort of posting that will NOT be tolerated at this website (as Spence so eloquently states at the top of this forum). We are only interested in intelligent debate where people are secure and mature enough to bring facts and discuss them. There are many people here who I disagree with.. and yet I never crawl in the gutter shown above. Usually this sort of personal attack is based soley on the frustration of a poster with no factual evidence to back their position... being confronted by an opposing viewpoint.

Lakewinola.... I normally allow these sort of juvenile comments to roll of my back. But, this time I am not. If any Adminisrator or fellow Moderator has any problem with my position and comments here then they will contact me personally... otherwise, consider yourself warned for the final time.

Either comment with factual evidence or bring your personal opinion... but keep the name calling confined to the loser websites.


Thank you.

Skinzaholic

[IowaSkinsFan]

Originally posted by Spence
Well, we can certainly agree on that. To most Republicans these days, Robert, that makes you close to being a traitor. ;)

As I have said before, I cannot be held in or down by boundaries and labels. I rise above that. I am an intellectual opportunist and steal shamelessly in that regard. I like who I like.

Spence, I can see a warm spot opening up in your heart for me.

[IowaSkinsFan]

Ooopps, forgot to add my smilies, don't want anyone to get the wrong idea, so here they are, please insert at the end of that last sentence.

;) :D

[Skins57]

Originally posted by Skinzaholic
Let me make this very clear and out in the open for everyone. It is this sort of posting that will NOT be tolerated at this website (as Spence so eloquently states at the top of this forum). We are only interested in intelligent debate where people are secure and mature enough to bring facts and discuss them. There are many people here who I disagree with.. and yet I never crawl in the gutter shown above. Usually this sort of personal attack is based soley on the frustration of a poster with no factual evidence to back their position... being confronted by an opposing viewpoint.

Lakewinola.... I normally allow these sort of juvenile comments to roll of my back. But, this time I am not. If any Adminisrator or fellow Moderator has any problem with my position and comments here then they will contact me personally... otherwise, consider yourself warned for the final time.

Either comment with factual evidence or bring your personal opinion... but keep the name calling confined to the loser websites.


Thank you.

Skinzaholic

I also agree 100 percent with Skinzaholic on this. Name calling will no longer be tolerated at all. Lets try to keep these discussions civil.
Thanks

[Skins57]

Originally posted by robert11273
Ooopps, forgot to add my smilies, don't want anyone to get the wrong idea, so here they are, please insert at the end of that last sentence.

;) :D

Oh come on Robert , its ok to let the love shine...:D:D... just to make sure everyone notices I DID use Smiliies with mine....:D:D

[IowaSkinsFan]

Can you feel the love?