Letters posted here are associated with the following article:

557
Letters
Wednesday, March 5, 2008 12:00 AM

Should Florida and Michigan vote again?

Sure it would be expensive, but the cost to the Democratic Party if superdelegates end up choosing the nominee would also be high.

The letters thread is now closed.

View:
Wednesday, March 5, 2008 07:55 PM

I think they should.

Although the race has been exciting, without a clear frontrunner so far and with the following states likely to go tit for tat...I don't actually see how they can do anything else.

And here's a juicy little bit for you political writer's to chew on.

The Case Management Conference hearing in Paul v Clinton et al on February 21, in Los Angeles Superior Court will finally set a trial date in the long delayed civil fraud case and it will set a schedule for discovery that will include the sworn depositions of the entire Clinton family and the Clinton hierarchy of the Democratic Party.

A trial was set for March 2007, but it was delayed due to an appeal of a lower-court's decision to dismiss Sen. Clinton as a defendant. The California Supreme Court upheld the decision, but Sen. Clinton, nevertheless, will be required to testify under oath along with her husband as material witnesses.

Seven years ago Peter Paul began whistleblowing to the government and alerting the media of numerous illegalities committed by Hillary and Bill Clinton in order to win Hillary’s first election to public office.

The multi-million dollar donor to Hillary’s Senate campaign that caused Hillary’s finance director to be indicted and tried in May, 2005, for hiding his contributions, and whose complaint to the FEC resulted in a finding that Hillary’s campaign broke the law resulting in the only FEC fine imposed against Hillary’s campaign, will begin the discovery process leading to a trial in Los Angeles later this year of the Clintons and others for destroying Paul’s public company.

The lawsuit claims that Peter Paul was fraundulenty induced to make a 1.2 million in-kind contribution to Senator Hillary Clinton's 2000 senate campaign in exchange for former President Bill Clinton to be a rainmaker for this company once he left the White House. Paul claims that former President Clinton backed out of the $17 million deal, and his company collapsed.

Paul contends Clinton has filed four false FEC reports, in an attempt to distance herself from him after a Washington Post story days after the August 2000 fundraiser reported his past felony convictions. Clinton then returned a check for $2,000, insisting it was the only money she had taken from Paul. Clinton, Paul asserts, continues to hide from the public false statements about his contributions and her relationship with him, made to the Post through her spokesman Howard Wolfson. Clinton vowed publicly she would not take any more money from Paul, but one month later, she demanded another $100,000, to be hidden in a state committee using untraceable securities.

Paul’s allegations that his $1.2 million in donations were hidden by Hillary’s campaign have been corroborated by the Justice Department, FBI and FEC General Counsel- while the lying has been done by the Clinton appointed Judge in the Rosen trial, Hillary’s lawyer David Kendall has maintained Hillary’s campaign filed accurate reports until the campaign admitted hiding more than $720,000, and her lawyer Lyn Utrecht in false statements made to the FEC General Counsel denying Paul’s contribution of $1.

In May 2005, Sen. Clinton's former finance director, David Rosen, was acquitted for filing false campaign reports that later were charged by the FEC to treasurer Andrew Grossman, who accepted responsibility in the conciliation agreement. Paul points out the Rosen trial established his contention that he personally gave more than $1.2 million to Clinton's campaign for the fundraiser that his contributions intentionally were hidden from the public and the FEC.

The cover-up of the largest campaign finance fraud in U.S. history will soon be exposed.

The complete corrobation of the records can be viewed at Hillcap.org

Wednesday, March 5, 2008 07:56 PM

The tricky math

Yes I do agree that FL and MI should count 1 way or another.

MI a re-vote. FL should go as is.

Regardless, we all have lost the forest for the tree.

The election of the highest job in the land boils down to math and technicality?

Read this on youtube.com ... /watch?v=4o166Eb_puo"

Let's all get a grip

Wednesday, March 5, 2008 08:00 PM

In the name of democracy....

Of course Florida and Michigan should be allowed to redo their primary and caucus. It was not the voters who broke the rules, it was the party leaders and government officials who did. It's wrong to punish the innocent citizens who came out in huge numbers to be part of this historic election. It's Republicans who deny people the right to vote. For Democrats to do the same is shameful.

Wednesday, March 5, 2008 08:01 PM

@Thevail

Thanks for that post. Would you know why this is not a mainstream media story beaten to death like Obama and Rezko or Obama's religion, etc? Just curious why this is not on the radar if the Clintons indeed are key witnesses.

Wednesday, March 5, 2008 08:05 PM

Sandy

With all respect, each state sets its own rules, and the DNC adjudges if the state is in compliance with the party rules. You remember what a political party is, I presume? There were no rights violated, and no one was disenfranchised. If anyone's to be hung about this, it's the state officials, not Obama. He played by the rules as expressed. Now, poor misunderstood Hillary wants a rerun. Sod off, Rodham. If we continue toward a fratricidal convention, we will ensure at lest four more years of middle eastern bloodbath, trillions more pissed away in empire building while the country rots, the students continue their slide to math and science mediocrity (at best), and bridges can continue to fall into rivers. If that's your desired end, keep pressing on with trivial pursuit. If Ms. Clinton wins by the rules, overtaking Obama in pledged delegates and popular vote, then good on her. I'll vote for her without hesitation. I have a deeply uneasy feeling that President McLame will the the byproduct of Hillaryism. love heywood

Wednesday, March 5, 2008 08:18 PM

Rezko is nothing compared to Peter Paul

Thevail, thanks for the info. I've heard some mention of the name, but knew nothing about it. Why isn't this in the news? Obama admitted to taking Rezko's money and then gave it to charity. Hillary has refused to give back the money. Now that the NAFTA issue has been debunked and the Rezko issue nothing compared to Hillary's illegal campaign donations. Here's a link on NAFTA being debunked:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/3/5/112926/0842/300/469572

Most Active Letters Threads

683

Obama's exceedingly familiar justifications for escalation

The "new" approach to Afghanistan touted by White House officials seems quite old
543

The crazy, irrational beliefs of Muslims

Tom Friedman explains the real problem: stupid Muslims think the U.S. is about war and aggression.
506

The commendably missing element from Obama's speech

There was no pretense that human rights is our goal, or the likely outcome, in escalating the war
440

The face of rotted Washington

Evan Bayh demands more debt-financed war - fought by others - while boasting that he's a stern "deficit hawk."
303

Yes, it's Obama's war now

An uninspiring speech sells a dubious policy, but progressives who feel betrayed have only themselves to blame

View all »

Letters Help

Currently in Salon