Obama Rezko Grilling Proves Media Double Standard Covering Up Hillary Clinton’s Galagate
Have the media’s demands that Obama personally explain his relationship with Tony Rezko been orchestrated by Clinton forces confident that Hillary will never be questioned about Peter Paul? How can the media demand Obama personally meet with the editorial board of the Chicago Tribune to be grilled for hours about his Rezko relationship while they have and continue to refuse to ask Hillary Clinton ANY questions about her relationship with her top 2000 donor, Peter Paul? Hillary has refused to personally admit she took any of the $1.2 million plus the Department of Justice prosecuted her finance director for hiding in 2005. The media continue to hide a political scandal- dwarfing anything Obama has been linked to with Rezko- that is on a par with Watergate!! The cover-up of the illegalities Hillary directed to win her Senate seat and the obstructions of justice she orchestrated to keep it and avoid accountability have been intentionally hidden from the public by the media and the government. The media has imposed a blackout on any assessments of Hillary’s relationship with Peter Paul that led to the indictment and trial of her finance director and the only fine levied against her Senate campaign by the FEC. No mention has been made of the quid pro quo arranged by Bill Clinton to induce Paul’s becoming Hillary’s top donor, or of the reported deceptions quoted from her in the Washington Post about not taking money from Peter Paul after Hillary had just taken more than $1.2 million from him, and days BEFORE Hillary faxed a demand for another $100,000 in untraceable securities to be wired to a state committee in NY that could hide the contribution from the FEC According to the Department of Justice’s Office of Public Integrity in statements by prosecutors in May, 2005 - it is a felony to “deny the public the right to know Peter Paul personally contributed more than $1.2 million to Hillary Clinton’s Senate campaign” (Pp 52,55,74,79 Dan Schwager’s Jury Summation, USA v Rosen) Commencing on August 14, 2000, through the present day- Hillary has denied accepting any money at all from Hollywood Dot com Millionaire Peter Paul through two deceptive articles in the Washington Post, false statements by Hillary’s attorney David Kendall, four false FEC reports, false statements to FEC investigators and General Counsel and a false sworn declaration in the civil fraud case that included Hillary as a co-defendant- Paul v Clinton. Hillary has refused to correct her January 30, 2006 FEC report (Pages 34-35 re:Event 39-The Gala Hollywood salute to President Clinton, which itself is a crime. This report misstates that a payment of $839,000 was made by Hillary’s campaign to two of Peter Paul’s dummy companies, Excelsior and Paraversal, (instead reporting the in kind donation of $1.2 million as explained by the FBI and DOJ in the Rosen case) The false FEC report also states that $225,000 was a personal contribution from Stan Lee - even though Lee has sworn he made no such donation, as he confirmed under oath in a videotape deposition. While Hillary Clinton has repeatedly chastised Barak Obama for his relationship with, and contributions from Illinois political fixer Tony Rezko- even though Obama always admitted receiving Rezkp’s contributions and then refunded them- Hillary refuses to admit soiciting and coordinating $1.2 million plus from Peter Paul and the relationship she and Bill established with him that caused him to become her biggest donor to her Senate race by a magnitude of 3 ! The media has never demanded Hillary personally respond to any question about Hillary and Bill Clinton’s connection with Paul. Paul caused the indictment and trial of Hillary’s finance director for defrauding the FEC and the only fine to be imposed by the FEC on Hillary’s Senate campaign- for knowingly filing 3 false reports that hid more than $720,000 donated by Paul. 
Wednesday ~ March 03, 2008 by Intermeddler Posted in "Ed Rendell", "Norman Hsu", "hillary uncensored", Al Gore, Barack, Chelsea Clinton, DNC, Hillary, Rezko, bill clinton, current affairs, david rosen, democrats, election, entertainment, hollywood, hsu, jim levin, nbc, obama, peter paul, politics, race, stan lee, tony rezko, washington| 2 Comments
Is Hillary Helping To Hide Felon Fundraiser Friend Jim Levin From Bill Clinton Fraud Trial?
Paul v Clinton et al, the California civil fraud suit pending against Bill Clinton (and Grammys producer Gary Smith) brought by the Hollywood dot com millionaire who Bill enlisted as Hillary’s top 2000 donor and then defrauded and destroyed his public company, will be set for trial as soon as co-defendant and Clinton intimate Jim Levin is served a new Summons and complaint. (See You Tube that explains the story) Jim Levin was a key government witness against his former mentor and friend, Hillary Clinton national finance director David Rosen, in a criminal election law fraud trial in Los Angeles in May, 2005. Rosen was indicted by the Justice Department for hiding the $1.2 million plus cost of the Hillary fundraising Gala, paid for by Paul personally, from Hillary’s campaign, causing Hillary to file 3 false FEC reports. Levin was convicted in December of 2006 of various frauds on Chicago schools and was sentenced to probation because of his cooperation with the government as a witness in the Rosen trial and alleged other cooperation he is still engaging in. Levin has been evading service of the Summons in the Paul v Clinton case since 2004. Now that the California court ruled on February 21 that a trial date for Bill Clinton will be set as soon as Levin is served with his copy of the complaint, the race is on to find Levin. A member of Paul’s legal team attempted to enlist the aid of the US Probation Office in Chicago to assure that Levin could not obstruct justice while on probation by evading service of a lawful summons. It is the duty of every convicted felon on probation to faithfully comply with all laws and regulations. Since it is the duty of the Probation Office to monitor the actions of probationers to ensure they comply with the law- it is surprising when the Probation Office advises an officer of the Court that they will not intercede to require their probationer to desist from obstructing a court process by hiding his location. When it comes to those who the Clintons have a reason to protect for their own well being, they have a facility to turn the judicial system on its head. Rosen’s case was tried before a Clinton appointed Federal Judge Matz. Matz abused his ethical requirements for judicial impartiality when he began the trial by declaring to the jury and the media that Hillary had no involvement whatsoever in the illegal fundraising charges. ( A statement contradicted by a video tape of Hillary talking to underwriter Paul the day he began paying for the event). The judge also said that the government’s key witness, Peter Paul, was a con man. the judge knew that Rosen’s defense was going to be that he was conned by Paul who hid the price of the gala from him. Judge Matz’ prejudicial remarks to the jury about the key witness that the Defendant Rosen built his case on discrediting, the ensured the jury could not possibly convict Rosen beyond a reasonable doubt. This egregious violation of ethics by the Judge - knowingly throwing the trial- was never objected to by the DOJ Prosecutors (the same two who tried the Lewis Libby case), who joined with the Judge in opening remarks to the jury that made it clear Hillary had nothing whatever to do with the case. The trial became a Soviet style show trial with Levin paraded by the government as their star witness. The reality was that the same Chief of Public Integrity who masterminded the Rosen indictment and trial, Noel Hillman, also masterminded the “non” prosecution of National Security document thief and destroyer Sandy Berger. Hillman worked closely from 2002-2005 with Paul’s attorneys to completely understand the Clintons’ role in the felony solicitation and coordination of Paul’s $1.2 million plus contributions, and the hiding of that contribution from voters and the FEC. Yet he misrepresented their role in the affair to the jury in the Rosen case to exculpate the Clintons. Since Mr Hillman was promoted to the lifetime position of Federal Judge in New Jersey before Rep Tom Davis, Chairman of the Govt Reform Cmtee in the House accused him of obstructing the 9-11 Commission investigation, Hillman was never challenged on his actions in obstructing justice in both the Berger and Rosen prosecutions- all apparently designed to protect the Clintons.
Friday ~ March 03, 2008 by Intermeddler Posted in "Ed Rendell", "Norman Hsu", "hillary uncensored", Barack, Chelsea Clinton, DNC, Hillary, Rezko, bill clinton, bush, current affairs, david rosen, democrats, election, entertainment, hollywood, jim levin, obama, peter paul, politics, race, ron paul, stan lee, tony rezko, washington| 1 Comment
