Why isn't the media asking Hillary about the Clintons' Hearing which occurred today, 04/25/2008, just three days after the Pennsylvania Democratic primary? Why didn't they ask Hillary about this during the recent debates?
From TPM (Warning, TPM links to WorldNetDaily):
Judge delays setting trial in Clinton fraud case
But accuser begins seeking sworn testimony from high-profile
Peter Paul says this photo shows him, and his wife, Andrea, celebrating his business deal with President Clinton(Courtesy Hillcap.org)
A judge in Los Angeles yesterday allowed Hollywood mogul Peter F. Paul to begin taking sworn testimony in his $17 million fraud suit against former President Bill Clinton, but a technicality delayed establishment of a trial date...
http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com...
More below the fold...
Cont'd from the TPM link:
...The complaint says Bill Clinton promised to promote Paul's Internet entertainment company, Stan Lee Media, in exchange for stock, cash options and massive contributions to his wife's 2000 Senate campaign. Paul contends he was directed by the Clintons and Democratic Party leaders to produce, pay for and then join them in lying about footing the bill for an August 2000 Hollywood gala and fundraiser.
~snip~
Sen. Clinton was dismissed from the case as a defendant, but Munoz already has made it clear he won't accept any attempts to block Sen. Clinton from serving as a material witness.
In court April 7, 2006, a Paul attorney told Munoz he "anticipated opposition to taking the deposition of Senator Clinton. I assume we'll be back to court on motions of that."
The judge replied: "Well, any opposition is probably going to be dead on arrival, if that will – if you understand what I'm saying, Mr. Kendall."
Paul claims former Vice President Al Gore, former Democratic Party chairman Ed Rendell and Clinton presidential campaign chairman Terry McAuliffe also are among the people who can confirm Paul engaged in a deal with the president.
Paul contends his case will expose "the institutional culture of corruption embraced by the Clinton leadership of the Democratic Party," which seeks to attain "unaccountable power for the Clintons at the expense of the rule of law and respect for the constitutional processes of government."
http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com...
It very well could have been asked about at the ABC 'debate' two weeks ago, since ABC's 20/20 had already done a story on it:
Brian Ross' exclusive interview with Hillary's largest (unreported) donor, Peter Paul (www.hillcap.org) showing his home videos that prove Hillary knew him well and solicited illegal contributions from him she has hidden from voters and the FEC for seven years
Part 1
http://www.youtube.com/...
Part2
http://www.youtube.com/...
Fox News' "Wright/Ayers/Bittergate/Flag Pin" thing gets regurgitated into ABC's 'debate', spread like a virus, and yet, an open case involving the Clintons gets a pass.
I am not advocating that the debate should have been any worse than it was with any more petty distractions. But, why ask Obama about every tenuous 'association' he has, and yet not ask Hillary about a hearing she and Bill have? I just don't get it.
It seems pretty substantial as far as the 'vetting' process is concerned, no? Whether this Paul guy is a sleazebag or not, or whether this is even a credible case or not, if the case goes to trial, Hillary will be called as a witness. I think the electorate has a right to know what kinds of suits their presidential nominees are involved with, and what kind of characters they have dealings with.
"Future Hearings 04/25/2008 at 08:31 am in department 47 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90"
If you follow this link, reference the following for details: Case Number: BC304174
http://www.lasuperiorcourt.org/...
Case Summary
Please make a note of the Case Number.
Click here to access document images for this case.
If this link fails, you may go to the Case Document Images site and search using the case number displayed on this page.
Case Number: BC304174
PETER F PAUL VS WILLIAM JEFFERSON CLINTON
Filing Date: 10/14/2003
Case Type: Fraud (no contract) (General Jurisdiction)
Status: Pending
----------------------------------------------------------------
Future Hearings
04/25/2008 at 08:31 am in department 47 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012
Further Status Conference
Parties
CLINTON HILLARY RODHAM - Defendant/Respondent
CLINTON WILLIAM JEFFERSON - Defendant/Respondent
D. COLETTE WILSON ATTORNEY AT LAW - Attorney for Plaintiff/Petitioner
DOYEN MICHAEL R. - Attorney for Defendant/Respondent
HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON FOR U.S. SENATE - Defendant/Respondent
KREEP GARY G. - Former Attorney for Pltf/Petn
LEVIN JAMES - Defendant/Respondent
MACHTINGER LEONARD A. - Attorney for Defendant/Respondent
NORMAN JAN B. - Associated Counsel
NORRIS STERLING E. ESQ. - Attorney for Plaintiff/Petitioner
PAUL PETER F. - Plaintiff/Petitioner
ROSEN DAVID - Defendant/Respondent
SMITH GARY - Defendant/Respondent
TONKEN AARON - Defendant/Respondent
WILLAMS & CONNOLLY - Attorney for Defendant/Respondent
This is Peter Paul's Video:
Hillary! Uncensored - the Documentary.
Part1
http://www.youtube.com/...
Part 2
http://www.youtube.com/...