Hillary Clinton's campaign appears to be in possible legal jeopardy with the introduction of a "smoking gun" video in a court case that has somehow escaped the attention of the mainstream media.
Investor's Business Daily explains that the "scandal involves allegations by movie producer Peter Paul that a 2000 senatorial fundraiser for Clinton in Hollywood violated campaign laws. Paul claims he spent $2 million to produce the fundraising event — a de facto campaign expenditure. Under campaign law then in effect, campaign gifts were limited to $2,000."
John Armor, Election Law Expert at Equal Justice Foundation, says Hillary is involved in the "largest election law fraud in US history."
The significance of the "smoking gun" video
Peter Paul's "whistleblower" site explains the timeline and the significance of the "smoking gun" video.
|After [Paul] began to blow the whistle in March, 2001, to four US prosecutors on Hillary’s role in the false FEC reports filed by her campaign that hid more than $1.2 million in his expenditures, the Attorney General['s office...] launched a four year investigation leading to the indictment and trial of Hillary’s finance director, David Rosen, in May 2005, for election law fraud.|
...Rosen was solely indicted for providing information that only he knew was false, to Hillary’s treasurer for reporting to the FEC...
The Federal Judge, Howard Matz, (appointed by the Clintons in 1998) who officiated over the subsequent trial of Rosen in Los Angeles, made ethically questionable statements to the jury, prior to the commencement of the trial, stating unequivocally that Hillary Clinton was not involved in any direct way whatsoever in the illegal fundraiser...
On Fox News in 2005, Doug Schoen, a former Clinton adviser, said that, "The prosecutors and defense attorneys said she is not involved... Prosecutors made the decision that Mr. Rosen should be tried, it's a fact-based case. It has nothing to do with Senator Clinton."
The video appears to directly counter these assertions and instead links Hillary and her aide to the planning of the fundraiser.
"Hillary Clinton is not a part of this case"
A background video from the "United States Justice Foundation" explains that "...In a series of events to benefit Hillary Clinton's campaign... Peter Paul spent approximately $1.6 million... That money has never been declared by the Hillary for Senate campaign."
Gateway Pundit explains that "in this video, David Schippers, Chief [Counsel,] Clinton Impeachment, explains what Hillary's lawyers said (6:20 mark)":
Indeed, the video appears to confirm that Hillary was intimately aware of all aspects of Paul's fundraising activities.
The "smoking gun" video was submitted June 21st, 2007 as evidence to a California appeals court in a civil fraud suit against Hillary and Bill Clinton. The USJF relates that "the tape indicates Clinton – despite denials throughout six years of investigation – was directly involved with business mogul Peter Franklin Paul in producing a lavish Hollywood fundraiser in August 2000 that eventually cost Paul nearly $2 million."
Earlier this week, CNS reported that:
In fact, if Clinton participated in the planning of the fundraising event, it:
The "Hillary Clinton Felony Video"
The video itself is fascinating. The preface to the tape states that it "shows Hillary Clinton in the process of committing at least four or five felonies under federal election law":
On YouTube, the video is captioned: "The first ever video of a Presidential candidate caught in the act of committing two felony violations of the Federal Election Law, (www.hillcap.org) and proving her felony obstruction of three federal investigations and a criminal trial of her finance director, was filed in Paul [vs.] Clinton [et. al.] for judicial review in a California Appellate Brief on June 21, 2007, by US Justice Foundation lawyers."
In the video Hillary (or someone who sounds exactly like her) is heard exclaiming:
"...What ever it is you're doing, is it okay that I thank you?"
"...I'm very appreciative... it sounds fabulous, I got a full report from Kelly... uh... today, when she got back, and told me everything that... uh... you're doing and it just sounds like it's gonna be a great event..."
So why has the video only recently come to light?
In Paul's Motion to admit documentary evidence in Paul vs. Clinton case, the recent release of the video is explained.
|As described in detail in the accompanying declarations of Peter Paul and D. Colette Wilson, the five-minute videoclip contained on the July 17 DVD just came into Paul’s hands two months ago. Although Paul participated in and personally filmed the telephone conversation captured by this videoclip, Paul has not had possession of the original or any copy of the VHS tape containing it since December 2000. That VHS tape, along with 81 other original videotapes Paul filmed during and prior to 2000, has been in the possession of the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of New York pursuant to a search warrant served on Stan Lee Media, Inc. After years of trying to obtain copies of these videotapes, Paul was finally able to get the necessary authorization on April 11, 2007. This motion is therefore the earliest Paul could have presented this evidence to any court...|
And just why was the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of New York sitting on evidence that could corroborate Hillary's involvement in Paul's fundraising? That's another interesting question. As the motion suggests:
|[The video] evinces seven key facts, all showing conclusively that [Hillary Rodham Clinton or] HRC was directly and personally involved in soliciting Paul’s contributions and coordinating his expenditures for the concert portion of the Tribute, which was that portion of the event designed to generate federal (“hard”-money) contributions for her campaign.|
* First, the July 17 DVD records a candidate (HRC) talking directly with a donor (Paul) on the subject of preparations being made for a large campaign fundraiser.
* Second, HRC includes herself as among those who are working on organizing the Tribute.
* Third, HRC admits to having intimate knowledge about what Paul and Tonken are doing for her, based on reports being made to her by Kelly Craighead, HRC’s senior staff official (4CT790:9).
* Fourth, HRC implies that because Kelly, her highest staff member, has been and will continue to be involved with the organization of this event, she herself will continuously be keeping tabs on the preparations.
* Fifth, HRC promises to make herself available to assist them.
* Sixth, HRC admits that she “closed the sale” in calling and convincing Cher to perform at the event, after Tonken had apparently paved the way. Obtaining a commitment from a big name like Cher had a direct bearing on potential guests’ willingness to pay $1,000 to attend HRC’s private concert, especially given the short notice for such a major event.
* Seventh, HRC effusively thanks all three -- Paul, Stan Lee and Tonken -- and encourages them to keep up their efforts. This constituted both an acceptance of Paul’s contributions thus far and a solicitation for Paul’s future expenditures.
A letter from Bill
The Peter Paul vs. the Clintons Blog describes this letter from Bill Clinton:
|On August 18, 2000, the same day that Hillary sends a special thank you to Paul, Bill sends a handwritten letter thanking Paul for the "boost" the "wonderful event gave Hillary's campaign". This note was intended to induce Paul not to dispute the false statements made by Hillary's campaign to the Washington Post on August 14 and August 16 regarding Paul's role with Hillary's Senate campaign.|
This new evidence is summarized concisely by Gateway Pundit:
"Hillary Clinton has denied that she worked on this fundraiser with Paul. She has acted like she barely knows Peter Paul. The video released yesterday clearly shows the truth. It does not look good for Hillary."
Others covering Hillarygate:
AHC, Blogmeister USA, Chicago Ray, Hillary Project, New Media Journal, Indian Pad, Peter Paul, POE.com, Power Line Forums, Wake Up America, Right Wing Champ, WNY Media, WND, Yid with Lid