From the Huffington Post:
'In a story that could likely go under the radar, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton will be in court tomorrow (Sept. 7)...well, in a manner of speaking. More precisely, a California appeals court is being asked to reinstate her as a defendant in a suit. Paul v. Clinton features Mr. Peter Paul, a Hollywood-businessman-turned-bitter-campaign-contributor  against the Senator, Mr. Clinton and several members of the Senator's campaign. Mr. Paul is being represented in his suit by the United States Justice Foundation.

The bare-bone facts surrounding the case have to do with Mr. Paul's agreement to help raise money for Clinton's Senate campaign in 2000 (see his amended legal complaint for all the details here). Mr. Paul was the executive producer of the "Hollywood Tribute," a star-studded farewell dinner and concert tribute for Mr. Clinton that raised funds for Senator Clinton's campaign in 2000. Paul claims to have contributed at least $1.9 million to underwrite event expenses (which is considered "soft money" and provides a way candidates can get around the $2,000 "hard money" or direct contribution limit). In exchange for his donation, Mr. Clinton was apparently going to work for Mr. Paul and his companies as a rainmaker for one year. Mr. Paul's suit claims that Mr. Clinton committed fraud by agreeing to work but never really intending to do so, and that Senator Clinton was aware of this arrangement (and thus should be liable as a "conspirator").'

Crooked Hillary !!
She's at it again !!
How Presidential

Clinton equals change like turning your underwear inside out equals change.

Dave:
'Clinton equals change like turning your underwear inside out equals change.'

Dave, usually my underwear is cleaner than that.

Sierra..can't wait to hear Van, HP and carrie's spin on this....This Woman will be a non stop drip drip drip.  I hope that enough of it is revealed so that democrats come to their senses in time.

Clinton another campaign scandal......no surprises there.

The United States Justice Foundation?  How interesting.  From their website:  "USJF has contributed directly and indirectly to legal defense efforts in many celebrated cases involving fundamental conservative principles."  And it makes mention of the action against Clinton - right before it asks for a donation.  

Kind of odd that a non-profit organization has taken up the cause of someone who can afford to spend $1.9 million on a political gala.  

A shot across the bow by Dodd...to I wonder who:

DODD ANNOUNCES CAMPAIGN POLICY ON MONEY RAISED BY FUGITIVES FROM JUSTICE

WASHINGTON — Today, presidential candidate Chris Dodd released the following statement on his campaign's policy not to accept money raised by fugitives from justice:

"I understand that it is simply impossible for a presidential campaign to know everything about its donors and raisers; however, once criminal activity of this sort — being a fugitive from justice — comes to the candidate's attention they certainly should not keep the money linked to those criminals. Indeed, all money raised by a fugitive from justice is irreparably tainted.

"It is the policy of my campaign to refuse to accept or possess campaign contributions raised, solicited, or delivered by fugitives from justice."

Sierra:  Good piece.
As a fellow San Franciscan, I commend you on your fortitude.  The Hillary-lovers have been attacking you like rabid dogs.  Apparently, if one doesn't support their Gal they're not real Democrats.
I'm sure the Hillo-philes will dismiss this as another "right wing conspiracy" against poor Hillary. Why are Hillary and Bill the only ones dogged by these allegations?  It boils down to lack of good judgment.

Oh brother... now everyone is fighting over two words.  Experience & Change.  However, Obama's latest ad did not use any of those words, but instead showed his accomplishments that demonstrated both without having to say them.  I guess he'll have to coin a few more phrases, since his "turn the page" and "fired up" has been copied from him.  Lets see if "take our country back" will show you in someone else's stump speech or ad.

Can someone just list what experience Senator Clinton has?  What bills has she passed in senate?

It's just like a surgeon's wife claiming to know how to perform a surgery.

Someone please .....

Can someone just tell the bitch to go away..Slick Willy needs some LOVIN!!

Hillary is not the original in the change game.  she lacks forsight, judgment and original thinking.
She picked up her change and experience from Richardson.  

To the poster above asking about what bills she's done.  From what i've heard, she really has not done much of anything to recommend her.  light on legislation.
that is why I keep bitching about her getting a free pass and not being vetted.  if these things were looked into, many may have to rethink their support of her.

"Ch Ch Ch Changes" - David Bowie

If we are going based on experience, Clinton is not the number one person, obviously.  That would fall either to Biden or Richardson, depending on what sort of experience you want.  It still isn't Obama.  It will never be Obama because, let's face it, he doesn't have the experience that the others have.  

Change is well and good, but I'm not sure that change is the best thing in all situations.  Bush had no experience either, and look where that got us.  But I guess because Obama is a Democrat we don't have to worry about that, right?  

I would have to hold my nose to vote for Obama.
He has very little experience to be President.
Bush has been a freaking failure for  over 6 years, piss poor at on the job training.  We do not need any more of the same.

I would have to hold my nose to vote for Obama.
He has very little experience to be President.
Bush has been a freaking failure for  over 6 years, piss poor at on the job training.  We do not need any more of the same.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):