Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Hillary's Mystery Money Men

By Russ Baker and Adam Federman, The Nation. Posted October 22, 2007.


The man who helped make Bush's first fortune now wants to claim the Clinton campaign. Is someone cooking the books at Hillary Inc.?

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

In Special Coverage

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace:
Jim Hightower, Raising Hell
Jonathan Rowe

Democracy and Elections:
Are Feds Trying to Aid Republican Candidate's Election?
Tim Kalich

DrugReporter:
A Cultural History of the Magic Mushroom
Lux

Election 2008:
The Real Elitist: Video of McCain's Collection of Mansions Reveal He's Not Your Average Joe
Steven Greenhouse

Environment:
Republicans Have Handed Democrats a Winning Election Issue
David Morris

ForeignPolicy:
Blocking a Gazan's Path to an Education
Fidaa Abed

Health and Wellness:
The Misshapen Mind: How the Brain's Haphazard Evolution Left Us with Self-Destructive Instincts
Sasha Abramsky

Hurricane Katrina:
From the Bayou to Baghdad: Mission Not Accomplished
Amy Goodman

Immigration:
Medical Neglect in Immigrant Prisons Reveals America at Its Worst
Kyle Hussein de Beausset

Media and Technology:
What's Going on with the Media's Ballooning Coverage of Celebrity Babies?
Meredith Blake

Movie Mix:
Protest over Use of the Word 'Retard' in Stiller's 'Tropic Thunder' Misses the Target
Annabelle Gurwitch

Reproductive Justice and Gender:
Why Obama Should Pick Hillary
Lanny Davis

Rights and Liberties:
Stop the Execution: Jeff Wood Faces Death Tomorrow for a Murder He Didn't Commit
Liliana Segura

Sex and Relationships:
Catching the Wrong John: When Are the Media Going to Talk about John McCain's Infidelity?
Drew Westen

War on Iraq:
How Many More Iraqis Can You Throw Behind Bars Without Trial?
Fatih Abdulsalam

Water:
What If Your Tap Water Is Not Safe To Drink?
Elizabeth Royte

More stories by Russ Baker Adam Federman

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

In the Clintons' pursuit of power, there is no such thing as a strange bedfellow. One recently exposed inamorata was Norman Hsu, the mysterious businessman from Hong Kong who brought in $850,000 to Hillary Clinton's campaign before being unmasked as a fugitive. Her campaign dismissed Hsu as someone who'd slipped through the cracks of an otherwise unimpeachable system for vetting donors, and perhaps he was. The same cannot be said for the notorious financier Alan Quasha, whose involvement with Clinton is at least as substantial -- and still under wraps.

Political junkies will recall Quasha as the controversial figure who bailed out George W. Bush's failing oil company in 1986, folding Bush into his company, Harken Energy, thus setting him on the path to a lucrative and high-profile position as an owner of the Texas Rangers baseball team, and the presidency. The persistently unprofitable Harken -- many of whose board members, connected to powerful foreign interests and the intelligence community, nevertheless profited enormously -- faced intense scrutiny in the early 1990s and again during Bush's first term.

Now Quasha is back -- on the other side of the aisle. Operating below the radar, he entered Hillary Clinton's circle even before she declared her candidacy by quietly hiring Clinton confidant and longtime Democratic Party money man Terry McAuliffe at one of his companies. During the interregnum between McAuliffe's chairmanship of the Democratic Party and the time he officially joined Clinton's campaign, Quasha set McAuliffe up with a salary and opened a Washington office for him.

Just a few years earlier, McAuliffe had publicly criticized Bush for his financial dealings with Harken, disparaging the company's Enron-like accounting. Yet in 2005 McAuliffe accepted this cushy perch with Quasha's newly acquired investment firm, Carret Asset Management, and even brought along former Clinton White House business liaison Peter O'Keefe, who had been his senior aide at the Democratic National Committee. McAuliffe remained with the company until he became national chair of Hillary's presidential bid, and O'Keefe never left. McAuliffe's connection to Quasha has, until now, never been noted.

Another strong link between Quasha and Clinton is Quasha's business partner, Hassan Nemazee, a top Hillary fundraiser who was trotted out to defend her during the Hsu episode -- in which the clothing manufacturer was unmasked as a swindler who seemingly funneled illegal contributions through "donors" of modest means.

In June, by liquidating a blind trust, the Clintons sought to distance themselves from any financial entanglements that might embarrass the campaign. Clinton spokesman Howard Wolfson argued that the couple had gone "above and beyond" what was legally required "in order to avoid even the hint of a conflict of interest." But throughout their political careers, Bill and Hillary Clinton have repeatedly associated with people whose objectives seemed a million miles from "a place called Hope." Among these Alan Quasha and his menagerie -- including Saudi frontmen, a foreign dictator, figures with intelligence ties and a maze of companies and offshore funds -- stand out.

"That Hillary Clinton's campaign is involved with this particular cast of characters should give people pause," says John Moscow, a former Manhattan prosecutor. In the late 1980s and early '90s he led the investigation of the corrupt Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI) global financial empire -- a bank whose prominent shareholders included members of the Harken board. "Too many of the same names from earlier troubling circumstances suggests a lack of control over who she is dealing with," says Moscow, "or a policy of dealing with anyone who can pay."

Ideology does not seem to be the principal issue driving either Quasha or Nemazee. Nemazee backed the likes of archconservative Republican senators Jesse Helms, Sam Brownback and Al D'Amato before moving aggressively into the Democratic camp. Quasha, frequently identified as a Republican fundraiser, gave to both Bush and Al Gore in 2000 and so far in the 2008 race has given to Republicans Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani as well as Democrats Barack Obama and Chris Dodd, in addition to Hillary Clinton. But Quasha's concerted efforts to get into Clinton's inner circle are reminiscent of his relationship with a pre-Governor Bush.

A student at Harvard's business school at the same time as Bush, Quasha was a little-known New York lawyer when he took over the small Abilene-based Harken Oil in 1983, using millions from offshore accounts held in the name of family members. Quasha's now-deceased father, Manila-based attorney William Quasha, was known for his close friendship with Philippine dictator Ferdinand Marcos and his ties to US intelligence; he was also a member of the "Eagles Club" of major GOP contributors.

In 1986 Alan Quasha embraced a struggling George W. Bush, rescuing his failing Spectrum 7 oil company, folding it into Harken Energy and providing Bush with a directorship, more than $600,000 in stock and options and a consulting contract initially valued at $80,000 a year (which was raised in 1989 to $120,000). The financial setup allowed Bush to devote most of his time to the presidential campaign of his father, a former CIA director who as Vice President was the Reagan Administration's overseer of a massive outsourcing of covert intelligence operations, and who had his own warm relationship with Marcos.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: money and politics, campaign, fundraising, election 2008, hillary clinton

Russ Baker is the founder of the Real News Project. Adam Federman is the research associate of the Real News Project. They may be reached at contact@realnews.org.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Message to the Democrats:
Posted by: Tom Degan on Oct 22, 2007 5:44 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hey Democrats! Do you want to know why I left your party almost a decade ago? You people are just dumb enough to give the nomination to Hillary Clinton.

Prove me wrong, Dems! Please prove me wrong!

I will be voting for the party of FDR next year come hell or Black Water. But if Ms. Clinton is the nominee I'm forced to vote for - trust me on this one, campers - I'll be holding my nose. You need a nominee who is going to inspire your base and Hillary Clinton is not the candidate who will do that. How do I know? BECAUSE I AM YOUR BLOODY BASE!!!! Or at least, I was. Hillary Clinton is one of the many reasons I am no longer in the fold, so to speak. I desperately want to see a woman elected to the presidency in my lifetime - BUT PLEASE! - not the Queen on the focus groups! Not that woman!

Let's be clear, Dems: If Hillary Rodham Clinton get's the nomination at your convention next summer, you will almost certainly produce another third-party uprising at the polls in 2008. That's a chance you can't afford to take again. You remember what happened in 2008, don't you? Of course you do.

Tom Degan
Goshen, NY
And now a few words about Clarence Thomas....

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Message to the Democrats: Posted by: rocketman
» RE: Message to the Democrats: Posted by: Tom Degan
Vote for Dennis.
Posted by: douglashoyt on Oct 22, 2007 6:41 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Link:
http://www.dennis4president.com/

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Alternet is a part of the 'vast, right-wing conspiracy'. How dare you question
Posted by: albrechtkrausse on Oct 22, 2007 7:35 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hillary's finances (or Bill's for that matter)? The only reason to question them is if you are anti-women or some rightwing wacko. Don't dare investigate cattle futures, Whitewater, Mr.Wu, Charile Trie, Mr.Hsu, the Chinese takeout thousands, the Chinese communist money, etc. You bigoted, anti-women internet site. Stop now!! Don't you understand that she will be the next President? Who are you to question the selection of the bankers and ruling Bush/Clinton dynastys?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Cooking Frogs
Posted by: Axiom69 on Oct 22, 2007 8:15 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Once she is President disparaging articles like this one will not be allowed lest you be investigated as an enemy of the state. She will take the Patriot Act to depths that the republicans only dreamed of. Regardless, the sheople will elect her and we will get exactly what we deserve. For too long we have taken our rights for granted and while we were watching American Idol the fox has been raiding the hen house. We are not losing our rights at a wholesale rate. If that were to happen even the most politically blind would rebel. No, we are losing them at such a slow pace that most are too busy too notice, until it's too late.
I've never done this so PETA members please hold your outrage: I have HEARD that if you put a fog in hot water it will jump out but if you put it in cold water and heat it up slowly it will stay until it dies. That's what we are in this country right now, cooked frogs.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Cooking Frogs Posted by: jbur816
» RE: Cooking Frogs Posted by: Axiom69
jonni rae
Posted by: jonnie rae on Oct 22, 2007 8:21 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
More frightening than this, I think, is the support she is receiving from Blackwater. I watched Bill Moyers last night and he had the author of the book on Blackwater on; I as well as Moyers, I think, was shocked to realize that Clinton used Blackwater in Bosnia, that there are more paid mercenaries in Iraq than US soldiers, that they are basically answerable to no one and that they are giving money to the Clinton campaign. So America has a separate, private army funded by taxpapers. They are also recruiting contracts from Fortune 500 companies to provide "security" for them. Bill Clinton wanted NAFTA. He got it; lots of corporations made billions of dollars. Millions of American workers lost their jobs. HIlary, like her husband, is beholden to these corporations, she will do nothing to stop job exportation or to change conditions for workers. She is talking about UNPAID family leave extension. Who can afford to be UNPAID? Not the poor, not the working stiff who got screwed by the corruption and shortsightedness of the Clintons. Where you get your money is THE key. Follow the money and you will know what that candidate will do.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: jonni rae Posted by: jbur816
The writers of the Constitution knew well that power corrupts.
Posted by: Sojourner on Oct 22, 2007 9:00 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So their answer was a system of checks and balances. Looking at it from today's perspective, it seems their solution required that power be dispersed so that corruption would be diluted. And if an honest politician managed somehow to get into the mix, all the better.

That solution now seems unable to handle to vast increases in power of our time. For the consequence is vast increases in corruption.

This article brings back recollection of the rental of the White House bedrooms to generous contributors and accusations of campaign fund raising on White House telephones.

Is it that the *reforms* in campaign fund raising and the new rules that restrict officeholders from taking lobbying jobs immediately upon leaving office don't work? Or is it that journalists have lost interest in those attempts at reform, because they are working and there's no drama and sensationalism in laws that work?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We are being lied to, to death.
Posted by: monkeywrench on Oct 22, 2007 9:23 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It has been said in the dark hub of corporate circles that they own all of one party and half of the other one. With Hillary in the White House, that secondary ownership will increase exponentially. As much as I HATE the Bush administration, and as long as I have been a Democrat (all my adult life), I am now, after hopeful first blush at Hillary's running, sickeningly depressed at what we will likely get if Hillary actually becomes president.

I fear that it will be more of the same, with an important difference: this time the purveyors of self-enriching dictatorship will be smarter, and thus more clandestinely devious.

This is just what we, America and the world, do NOT need at a time when humanity's survival on Earth is seriously threatened, and could come to an end in our childrens' lifetimes. We are all on our own; while our environment falls apart, and who we laughingly call "leaders" do nothing more than play power games and line their pockets, we are played for suckers.

Lao Tsu was right: divide and conquer. This is the ONLY function of the two political parties today.

If some future (and, I hope, wiser) species writes an epitaph for the late, not-so-great human race, it will probably read: "They were too clever (and greedy) for their own good."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

All the polls show Hil leading
Posted by: Chloe2005 on Oct 22, 2007 10:05 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
and I just don't understand it. I read Alternet and other Liberal blogs (and not so liberal blogs) and no one seems to like Hillary. None of my Dem friends like her. I have not liked her since I started watching where she gets her money. Her phony health care plan is an INSURANCE program only. Real health CARE does not seem to be an issue. Insurance companies love her! Banks, credit card companies and all financial institutions love her. I lost all respect for her when she voted for the damn bankruptcy law. I take that back. I first lost respect for her when she voted for the Iraq war.
Back to my main point, who is supporting her in the general electorate?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Republicans Posted by: jbur816
» RE: epublicans Posted by: jbur816
Top 10 Reasons Not to Vote for Hillary
Posted by: rjgwood on Oct 22, 2007 10:07 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
10. Questionable financial dealings and ties.
9. On the board of Walmart during their heinous anti-labor sweat shopping inciting climax.
8. Health care reform she likes is a big give away to big insurance.
7. Husband orchestrated NAFTA & Welfare reform & she approved (Husband also first president to hire Blackwater).
6. Voted with Bush declaring Iran's army a terrorist organization opening the door for military action w/out congressional consent.
5. Takes money from Hedge Funders and from big Republican donors.
4. Strong financial ties to big oil and other big corporations through campaign contributions.
3. Big AIPAC supporter and sides with zionist/conservatives on unwaivering support for Isreal's aggressions.
2. Uses the same K street firm as Erik Prince.
1. Voted for the Iraq War.

Her and her husband are corporate whores who do NOT represent the people. If we elect this group, we may not be pleasing the social conservatives, but the big money, influence peddlers will be quite pleased with another Clinton Whitehouse. Reason enough to tell all your friends:

"Hillary? Like Hell!"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» 11. The Bankruptcy Bill Posted by: rjgwood
Take a look at the other side
Posted by: ReallyBearish on Oct 22, 2007 10:41 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It means that the rats are jumping off the sinking ship, the the good ship Republican. If the money people are giving to Dems, it means that they expect them to be governing for a good while to come.

Of course as the old saying goes, he that pays the piper calls the tune. Just what are they buying? Hillary is at least a whole lot smarter than our present Idiot-in-Chief, so possibly they're trying to get some competence in Washington-- competence that they can control.

Problem is that smart people may not be as easy to control as dumb people. Teddy Roosevelt wasn't as sympathetic to the trusts as JP Mrgan would have liked, nor was Truman to organized labor when national security trumped their interests. These money people may end up with a loose cannon on their hands.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Party changes, policies stay the same.
Posted by: Doggycuny on Oct 22, 2007 12:41 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
H. Clinton already has one foot in the Whitehouse and no American has even cast a vote yet. Doesn't it make you wonder why we bother to vote. It's all rigged. Has been for generations. Money determines the presidency, not voters. It goes back to the elitists. They didn't (and still don't) believe the average citizen had the intelligence to vote responsibly. Maybe that's true. True because our media and society has turned us ignorant. We are not citizens anymore, we are consumers. And that' the word!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Will people wake up in time?
Posted by: Susan Kipping on Oct 22, 2007 12:41 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hillary supports Codex alimentarius. This is backed by the NWO

Here is the latest update on Codex alimentarius. Watch the video if you can.
http://www.healthfreedomusa.org/index.php
Here is Hillary Clinton's public statement on Codex alimentarius
http://www.aapsonline.org/newsletters/aug05.htm
Additional codex info from the Clinton era.
http://www.converge.org.nz/pma/aptent.htm

Hillary Clinton publicly supports the Codex alimentarius plan and has gotten together with none other than Bill Frist to draft The Frist/Clinton bill (S. 1262), the Health Technology to Enhance Quality Act in support of Codex. Codex is being quietly advanced by GLOBALISTS (WTO, Monsanto).


Also the following Book was very interesting:
Ron Brown's Body: How One Man's Death Saved the Clinton Presidency and Hillary's Future by Jack Cashill

You can purchase it at amazon.com

Also, I do not like the idea that Hillary wanted to put ID chips in the health cards she was proposing.
http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/3/5/220402

She is pro war, in bed with pharmaceutical companies, met with the Bilderbergs in 1997 and this is just a start. She is bad news. I will never vote for her. People are must wake up to the propaganda. This is all planned for the New World Order.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Any Dem can beat the GOP candidate
Posted by: Chloe2005 on Oct 22, 2007 2:21 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
All we need is a really good Democratic congress. Get rid of all the "old' corporate thinkers and then, only then, we may get the people's business done; Real health care (not insurance), bankruptcy laws for people not corporations, ending Iraq war, reform medicare perscriptions, and on and on. Lets forget who the media wants and vote for someone who will work for middle America. Hillary, more than anyone, will only be beholding to the large corporations. Do we need more of that? Haven't we had enough with the bush administration and their corporate friends?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

JOHN POLIFRONIO
Posted by: johnp on Oct 22, 2007 2:59 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thank you folks, for making my vote for Hillary more certain, each time I read the posts from you Hillary-haters.
It isn't just Bush we're fighting; it's people like you: selfish and stupid, like your president.
GO HILLARY!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: JOHN POLIFRONIO Posted by: VZEQICVA
How many times?
Posted by: Lincoln fan on Oct 22, 2007 3:29 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How many more elections must we have before the voters wake up to the fact that elections are a charade? Can anyone with a grain of sense believe that we can have two parties financed by the same corporate establishment? The corporatocracy is in control of both parties. We can vote the Republicans out and we can vote the Democrats out but we can't vote the establishment out.

We must take the control of both parties out of the hands of the establishment and put that control in the hands of the people, where it Constitutionally belongs. It can be done but it must be done before the election. Look into The Lincoln Initiative now. It's a radical but sound strategy.
Bob Reichenbach,
Director,The Lincoln Initiative.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: How many times? Posted by: VZEQICVA
NAFTA Shrugged! (Jesus vs. Ayn Rabinowitz)
Posted by: SweetEarth on Oct 22, 2007 5:22 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
C’mon Guys, Quit Posturing, whining you can’t help yourself –you hate to go there but you will, dutifully vote for her. You must be Market fundamentalists–you endorse the guy who gave us NAFTA (which Bush Sr. tried & failed to get through congress), concentrated media (controlled now by the Friends of Bill who owe him, big! for crippling the formerly free press), who first hooked us on WMDs –bombing/starving peoples for resisting Mc-Burger-King –you gotta love all this because these were the things institutionalized by Bill Clinton in the 90s, eagerly endorsed by the W and followed through by Hillary. Quit alibing you’re “social” liberals. You’re not liberal anything– The only thing distinguishes you from the f-a-r right mean, stingy, heartless bastards in the companion (not alternate) party is you bristle at the word “Jesus” and ridicule Christians. I’m no Christian but your mean Ayn Rabinowitz– author of “Atlas Shrugged” and the celebration of greed vs. Jesus’ philosophy and way of life — I mean, give! me! a! break!

In the parade of extinguished life forms inextricably connected to our own, we can ill afford this current Global-Shrug. Trashing the perfect *living! gifts of creation for hyper-indulgence & frivilous consumption isn’t simply cruel & uncivilized its uniquely unforgivable. We’re stripping our own children! of a sustainable home on THEIR! Planet, Earth.

The egregious loss of the sacrosanct bound up with us, the tragic loss that foreshadows the end of Earth was the loss of our Respect For Life.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Welcome, HRC supporters.
Posted by: gradioc on Oct 22, 2007 6:09 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Glad to see some Clinton people here, because, to be honest, I was beginning to wonder if the whole polling thing was being made up. I don't personally know anyone that wants her to be President.I cannot support her for the nomination. I think she has the firmly held beliefs of an alley cat. Her vote for the Iraq war I can forgive her. Like most sane people she had no idea the Bushies would ignore international law and invade a soveriegn state without the sanction of the UN security council.(I knew that they would but I pay more attention than most Senators.)I cannot, however, forgive her her vote on the bankrupcy bill, a vote that goes against the interests of the working people of this country in order to protect the banks from their own predatory lending practices.But, at the most disturbing end of all her votes in the Senate, the reason I will never pull a lever with her name beside it, is her vote for a Flag Protection Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.She proved with that vote that she is either, a) willing to do anything to get elected President, b) completely unaware of what this whole American experiment in Liberty is all about, or, c) both. I think the answer is c.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Welcome, HRC supporters. Posted by: jbur816
Hillary supporters
Posted by: Chloe2005 on Oct 22, 2007 9:42 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sound like Repubs! Come on Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, please vote for anyone but Hillary. Since our nominees are decided by Jan, the rest of us only hope that you see through all the advertising BS.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Hillary supporters Posted by: jbur816
Hillary!
Posted by: mcthorogood on Oct 23, 2007 12:42 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hillary Rodham Clinton, the leading Democratic candidate for U.S. President, may be called as a material witness in the State of California, in what may be the largest election fraud in U.S. history. All news of this case has been effectively censored in the U.S. mainstream media. Read the full story in The Wall Street Journal, "For Clinton, 2000 Fund-Raising Controversy Lingers".

Hillary may have violated the law by not reporting large contributions to her successful 2000 campaign for U.S. Senator. Mr. Peter F. Paul claims that his contributions were omitted from the public reports filed with the Federal Election Commission, and Hillary denies all knowledge of these contributions. Read the latest ruling in Case B191066, Paul v. Clinton.

Hillary even denies knowing Mr. Paul, a three time convicted felon, who made the contributions to her 2000 Senate campaign. A video, "Hillary Exposed", produced by the Equal Justice Foundation has been viewed more than 862,000 times. A case such as this normally ends any aspirations that a politician may have for public office, and raises more questions about possible illicit fund-raising practices in the Clinton camp.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Corporate candidates
Posted by: frank69 on Oct 24, 2007 2:46 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's the Money party vs. the People party. Which party do you think will "win?" I'm not voting for MONEY! Are you?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]