Hillary Exposed? Not quite....

I took the time to watch the trailer of Peter Paul's Hillary Exposed trailer again this morning, took a few notes, and did a little internet research.  It is my conclusion that this is mostly fabrication with a stab at Hillary because he is angry that his investment/ideas didn't go as he had planned.

The 2000 Hollywood Gala was a farewell for Bill to garner his favor in supporting him on a business venture, with the added benefit as a fundraiser for Hillary.  Paul also gave fundraisers for others.  For whatever reason, this didn't go as he had planned.  Paul specifically stated that he only gave the fundraiser for Hillary to get to Bill.  There is no evidence suggesting that Clinton told Levin to seduce Oto to oust Paul to destroy him and SLM. 

The phone call to SLM from Hillary says nothing other than that she is pleased with what they are doing for her and thanking them.  I do not believe that she helped plan the gala whatsoever nor knew the full details. 

Is being a fundraiser the same as campaign contributor?  If you are shelling out money for the affair, is that considered a campaign contribution?  I didn't have time to dig into that this morning.

As David Rosen was Hillary's finance director, if he falsified documents, whether on his own or told by someone else to do it, he is the one culpable.

Digging into Peter F. Paul's past doesn't lend much to his credibility.  I am loath to believe anything from such a person.  I think he is just trying to save his own butt and trying to get back at Bill through Hillary. His stint in Brazil and being put in jail was of his own doing.

In essence, there is just not much substance here when you start digging.  This is the first of many attacks that are just beginning for Hillary as well as the other presidential candidates and should not be taken at face value.  

• Hillary Exposed? Not quite.... - piglet
  • We shall see...what goes around comes around...nm - Observer

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu

The Protect Marriage Coalition, which led the fight to pass an anti-gay marriage initiative in California, is now suing to shield its financial records from public scrutiny.

The lawsuit claims that donors to Protect Marriage and a second group involved in the suit have received threatening phone calls and emails. It asks for existing donation lists to be removed from the California secretary of state's website and also seeks to have both plaintiffs and all similar groups be exempted in the future from ever having to file donation disclosure reports on this or any similar campaigns.

Although public access advocates believe this sweeping demand for donor anonymity has little chance of success, it does point up the secretive and even conspiratorial nature of much right-wing political activity in California.

Howard Ahmanson and Wayne C. Johnson

The man who more than any other has been associated with this kind of semi-covert activity over the past 25 years is reclusive billionaire Howard Ahmanson.

Ahmanson is a Christian Reconstructionist, a devout follower of the late R.J. Rushdoony, who advocated the replacement of the U.S. Constitution with the most extreme precepts of the Old Testament, including the execution -- preferably by stoning -- of homosexuals, adulterers, witches, blasphemers, and disobedient children.

Ahmanson himself has stated, "My goal is the total integration of biblical law into our lives."

As absurd as this Reconstructionist agenda may seem, the success of Proposition 8 demonstrates the ability of what is sometimes called the "Christian Taliban" to pursue its covert objectives behind the screen of seemingly mainstream initiatives and candidates.

Ahmanson's role in promoting Proposition 8 has drawn a lot of attention, but he appears to serve primarily as the money man, leaving his associates to carry out the practical details. One name in particular stands out as Ahmanson's chief lieutenant: political consultant Wayne C. Johnson, whose Johnson Clark Associates (formerly Johnson & Associates) coordinated the Proposition 8 campaign.

Johnson has spent many years working for Ahmanson-funded causes -- such as the battle against a 2004 initiative to promote stem cell research -- and organizations, like the anti-spending California Taxpayer Protection Committee.

Johnson Clark has also operated PACs for many candidates supported by Ahmanson. It ran Rep. John Doolittle's leadership PAC, which became notorious for sending a 15% commission to Doolittle's wife out of every donation received. It currently runs the PAC for Rep. Tom McClintock, a strong Proposition 8 supporter who was narrowly elected last fall to succeed the scandal-plagued Doolittle.
Proposition 8

The series of events leading to the approval of Proposition 8 began in 2000 with the passage of Proposition 22, which defined marriage in California as being solely between one man and one woman -- but did so only as a matter of law and not as a constitutional amendment.

Proposition 22 was quickly challenged in court, leading to the creation by its supporters of the the Proposition 22 Legal Defense Fund. In 2003, Johnson Clark Associates registered the domain ProtectMarriage.com on behalf of that fund.

ProtectMarriage.com began campaigning in early 2005 for an initiative that would add its restrictive definition of marriage to the California constitution, but it failed to gather sufficient signatures and was terminated in September 2006.

In 2008, however, a reborn ProtectMarriage.com, flush with nearly a million dollars in funding from Howard Ahmanson and tens of millions from other doners, succeeding in getting Proposition 8 placed on the ballot and approved by 52% of the voters.

Proposition 8 is now California law -- at least for the moment, pending challenges to its constitutionality -- and ProtectMarriage.com has turned its attention to demanding that all 18,000 existing same-sex marriages be declared invalid.
The Ahmanson-Johnson Strategy

The partnership between Ahmanson and Johnson, however, did not begin in 2003 or even in 2000. It goes back to at least 1983, if not earlier, and has been a continuing factor in California politics for the last 25 years.

In a 1994 article on Christian Reconstructionism, Public Eye described Johnson's central role in an Ahmanson-financed attempt by the Christian Right to take control of the California state legislation. The strategy involved first pushing through a term limits initiative, which was accomplished in 1990, and then promoting its own candidates for the seats this opened up:

"The practical impact of term limits is to remove the advantage of incumbency ... which the extreme Christian Right is prepared to exploit. ... At a Reconstructionist conference in 1983, Johnson outlined an early version of the strategy we see operating in California today. ... The key for the Christian Right was to be able to: 1) remove or minimize the advantage of incumbency, and 2) create a disciplined voting bloc from which to run candidates in Republican primaries, where voter turn out was low and scarce resources could be put to maximum effect. ...

"Since the mid-1970s, the extreme Christian Right, under the tutelage of then-State Senator H. L Richardson, targeted open seats and would finance only challengers, not incumbents. By 1983, they were able to increase the number of what Johnson called 'reasonably decent guys' in the legislature from four to 27. At the Third Annual Northwest Conference for Reconstruction in 1983, Johnson stated that he believed they may achieve 'political hegemony. . .in this generation.'"

The mention of H. L. "Bill" Richardson as the originator of the Johnson-Ahmanson strategy is both eye-catching and significant. Richardson, a former John Birch Society member, was considered to be one of the most extreme right-wing politicians of his time. In 1975, he co-founded Gun Owners of America (GOA), an organization which is widely regarded as being well to the right of the National Rife Association.

Wayne Johnson began his political career in 1976 by working for Richardson -- and Johnson Clark Associates still operates a PAC for GOA's state affiliate, the Gun Owners of California Campaign Committee.

In 1992, Johnson and Ahmanson managed to help send a batch of conservative Republicans to Congress. Foremost among these was Richard Pombo, one of whose first acts after taking office was to introduce a resolution of commendation for the Reconstructionist Chalcedon Foundation.

In 2004, Johnson told an interviewer that Pombo's election was a high point of his political career. "There have been a lot of great moments, but Richard Pombo's 1992 upset victory in his first congressional primary has got to be near the top. The television stations didn't even have his name listed on their pre-programmed screens election night. Today, he's chairman of the House Resources Committee."

Two years after Johnson's enthusiastic declaration, Pombo was defeated by a Democratic challenger, following wide-ranging allegation of corruption, including being named as the Congressman who had received more donations from Jack Abramoff than any other.
The Anti-Homosexual Agenda

Although the Christian Right never achieved its original goal of taking over California state government -- which may be why Ahmanson and Johnson have turned their attention to passing socially conservative initiatives instead -- it has been far more successful in establishing dominance over that state's Republican Party.

In 1998, Mother Jones reported:

"First they packed the then-moderate California Republican Assembly (CRA), a mainstream caucus with a heavy hand in the state party's nominating process, with their Bible-minded colleagues. By 1990 they controlled the CRA, and since then the CRA's clout has helped the religious conservatives nominate and elect local candidates and—crucially—catapult true believers into state party leadership slots. ...

"From radical fringe to kingmakers in a decade — how did they do it? 'Basically, there's two places you have influence: one is in the nominating process in the primaries, where you can elect people in ideological agreement with your views, and the other is in the party structure,' says former CRA vice president John Stoos, a former gun lobbyist, member of the fundamentalist Christian Reconstructionist movement, and senior consultant to the State Assembly."

Stoos appears to come out of precisely the same background as Johnson and Ahmanson. He served as the executive director of Gun Owners of California and was also the chief of staff and a legislative advisor to Tom McClintock from 1998 until 2003, when he got into trouble for his over-the-top Reconstructionist sentiments.

In the Mother Jones interview, Stoos referred to Christian politicians as God's "vice-regents ... those who believe in the Lordship of Christ and the dominion mandate" and pointed to the repeal in the 1970's of laws against homosexual acts as an example of the need for rule by "biblical justice."

"The proof is in the pudding," Stoos told Mother Jones. "Since we lifted those laws, we've had the biggest epidemic in history."

To many who voted for it, Proposition 8 may have been no more than a nostalgic attempt to keep a changing world more like the way it used to be. But for Reconstructionists like Ahmanson, Johnson, and Stoos, it clearly represents something else -- a dramatic first step towards "the total integration of biblical law into our lives."

I've actually been thinking of voting for her if she runs.  A year ago, I couldn't stand her.  I don't know if she's changed or if I've changed, but what I mostly think it is, is that the further right the neocons go, the further toward center she seems to wind up.

As far as respect, let's see... She has the ability to articulately and intelligent form SENTENCES using the English language.  That in and of itself is worthy of much more respect than what we've currently got.

She seems to have enormous strength without being a bully.  I can't recall her telling the rest of the world to "Bring it on." 

I'm somewhere between being a Democrat and Republican.  I tend to vote for someone because of issues, not because of party affiliation.  I've registered as an Independent because of that, and I'm glad I did because these days of Republicans and skyrocketing deficits, increasing intrusion of government into the personal lives of American citizens, etc. leaves me wondering just what Republican and Democrat means any more.

Republican seems to now mean a particular, narrow brand of Christianity (rather than a brand of politics), lying as a regular and customary part of doing business with the American people and the world, destroying the lives of people who disagree with them, completely stalling and bringing science to a screeching halt, forcing regime change on weaker countries through war, while showing weakness and backing down from true threats, such as North Korea.

And Democrats -- well, I just don't know any more what they stand for.

Again, as far as Hillary is concerned, she left a bad taste in my mouth when she seemed to put down stay-at-home moms with her comment about choosing her career over staying home and "having teas."  I feel being a mother is probably the most important job there is, and I didn't appreciate that comment.  However, recently she's looking a lot better to me.

I also would like to see more from Giuliani.  I think he demonstrated excellent leadership during the 9/11 tragedy, and he seems to be more moderate when it comes to the personal lives of people.

My DREAM President would have been Colin Powell.  I can't recall seeing such grace, dignity and intelligence in a politician.  He also has firsthand combat experience in foreign lands and might not be so hasty to jeopardize soldiers' lives as someone who didn't have the guts to put his own life on the line yet seems to find the lives of our young people readily disposable for nation building, rather than defending America.

I truly don't think we can do any WORSE than what we have now.  If we can just all hold our breath and tread lightly, we just might be able to survive the next three years, not because of this president but IN SPITE of him. 

Hillary just might be someone who would actually put Americans' safety and America, in general, FIRST.  Wouldn't that be a nice change?

Personally, I don't care what Laura did when she was 17, even if she was driving drunk. But, republicans are relentless and we can't let this go without mentioning the certain media frenzy if this had been Hillary who killed her first fiance.

If it had been Hillary:

Barbara Olson would have a best seller on it.
Ann Coulter would have a best seller on it.
Peggy Noonan would have a best seller on it.
Laura Ingraham would have a best seller on it.
Laura Schlessinger would have a best seller on it.
David Limbaugh would have a best seller on it.
Christopher Hitchens would have a best seller on it.
Dick Morris would have a best seller on it.
Bob Woodward would have a best seller on it.
Christopher Ruddy would have a best seller on it.
Ben Stein would have a best seller on it.
Gail Sheehy would have a best seller on it
Neal Boortz would have a best seller on it.
David P. Schippers would have a best seller on it.
David Maraniss would have a best seller on it.
Mike Barnacle would claim he was in the car with Hillary.
Joe Klein would write a best seller on it, but swear he didn't
Judas Stephanopolous Maximus would have a best seller on it.
Joe Eszterhas would fabricate quotes from Hillary's vagina.
Michael Isikoff would swear the conversation was "off the record"
but then turn around and print every word (plus some he made up.)
Kenneth Starr would write an impeachment referral over it.
Susan McDougal would still have to do time in prison,
and Julie Hiatt Steele would still lose her house.

The vulgar Pigboy would pound on her 15 hours a week until 2009.
O'Reilly would pound on Hillary for months and years.
Hannity would pound on Hillary for months and years.
(and Colmes would remain silent while he did...)
Paula Zahn would pound on Hillary for months and years.
Brit Hume would have weekly "Special reports" called "Accident? You Decide!"
Juan Willaims and Mara Liason would agree Hillary belongs in prison.

CNN would create a spin off network to cover it 24/7.
Tim would mention it every Sunday until he died.
Chris would pound on Hillary for months and years,
but no guest would ever get to answer any questions about it.
Cokie Roberts would mention it every week, then giggle.
Henry Hyde would scream, "The flag is falling."

Richard Mellon Scaife would pay David Brock $80,000 to talk to the cops who were paid $80,000 to say "We thought we smelled liquor, but everyone in Arkansas knows there'd be hell to pay if we wrote this up as a drunk driving accident."
The American Spectator would then run a front page story on it, and somehow Paula Jones would run into the spotlight screaming, "Hillary was trying to kill me - and missed," then the 
mainstream media would've made Paula a star on this story instead of the other one.
Then every night, Larry King and his "panel of experts" would search for the connection between Hillary's accident and Clinton's penis - as he always does.

...but since it was Bush's wife, Karl Rove gave orders not to bring it up.

she really got a major hatchet job sent her way....

http://www.lynettelong.com/my_weblog/2008/07/are-superdelega.html#more

No wonder a bunch of Hillary supporters are ... shall we say...angry?

Campaigning in Lansing, MI for Obama Sat morning.

http://www.democrats-against-obama.org/sept2008.html

GOP Challenger to Sen. Clinton Quits Race

I remember several years ago hearing some pundits speculate about political royalty and how the Bushes and Clintons would be basically the only *families* in the White House from here on out.

Given Bill's sudden closeness to and *adoption* by Bush, Sr. and Hillary's refusal to take a stand, as you said, it kind of makes me wonder if maybe they didn't hit the nail on the head.

Hillary is wonderful so is every other democrat running..ANYONE is better than the tired old men running as republicans.  I would vote for my dog before I would vote for a republican.  We need four years of peace and prosperity and building our reputation in the world and healing this country and fixing all the destructive things this administration has done here and abroad.  Hillary, when she worked as a lawyer, was one of the top five lawyers in America.  Her IQ is higher than Bill and that has to be quite high as Bill is quite an intelligent man.  Contrast that to the person in the WH now.  I think his IQ must be around 75 to 90.

So Bill is now coming out saying people are picking on Hillary. 

Oh the poor baby.  Wasn't she the one who said "If you can't stand the heat....."

Whether I like her or not is besides the point.  This is an election and Bill & Hillary need to realize if you want to win you have to work towards it.  It's not going to be handed to you. 

Yes, I realize she is working hard, but so is Barack Obama.  Do you hear him crying when she makes a racial statement about him about how nobody "white" is going to vote for him?

Grow up Bill & Hillary!

to vomit.  So I guess she does inspire some woman.  LOL.