Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Liberalism: Do You Agree We've Had Enough of It? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (15410)	9/21/2007 3:11:52 PM
From: JakeStraw	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 224744

Rendell Fundraising Questions Might Not End With Hsu Norman Hsu has provoked an abundance of unflattering questions about the fundraising scruples of Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell, New York Sen. Hillary Clinton, Pennsylvania Sen. Bob Casey and a host of other high-profile Democrats. And, at least for Rendell and Clinton, questions about another may lie ahead. Hsu's past hasn't exactly enhanced his beneficiaries' reputations. In 1991, Hsu fled California as authorities prepared to jail him for soliciting money from investors while maintaining no legitimate business operation. Likewise, Peter F. Paul's background didn't make him the kind of man with whom a national political figure would normally want to associate. He had been convicted of a cocaine possession charge in the 1970s and a securities fraud charge in 2005, among other guilty verdicts. Paul filed a lawsuit in February 2004 alleging that Sen. Clinton and husband, former President Bill Clinton, gave Paul assurances that if he helped to bankroll a Hollywood fundraiser the Clintons held in August 2000, Bill would act as a "global goodwill ambassador" for his effort to market the brand-name products of comic-book maagnate Stan Lee. The Clintons, Paul's complain states, did not deliver on their alleged promise. In the complaint, Paul claims to have amassed a net worth of $60 million, in part due to his business partnership with Lee. His considerable wealth came in handy for the Clintons as they received $1.9 million from him for the fundraiser. His court complaint bristles with anger that not a dime accrued to him as a result. "Plaintiff reasonably relied on the false promises and representations made by defendants Hillary Rodham Clinton and Hillary Rodham Clinton for U.S. Senate Committee, Inc., acting by and through their agent, defendant David Rosen, by expending in excess of $1.9 million to underwrite and serve as executive producer of the Hollywood tribute and my making substantial additional contributions to defendant Hillary Rodham Clinton's U.S. Senate campaign," the complain asserted. "Had [the defendants] not made these false promises and representations to Plaintiff, Plaintiff would not have expended any funds to underwrite and serve as executive producer of the event, nor would he have made substantial additional contributions to [Clinton's] U.S. Senate campaign." The Clintons have dismissed any charges of deal making. The allegations Paul makes in his case before the California Superior Court against the Clintons include a claim that Rendell asked Paul to lie about his criminal record. Rendell has categorically insisted he did not know of Paul's earlier criminal charges until they had appeared in the press. "He never told Mr. Paul to lie or to take any other specific action," said Rendell spokesman Chuck Ardo. "The governor has no idea why Mr. Paul would make such an outrageous accusation." Paul is currently seeking an order from the court forcing Rendell to testify in the case. As to the $23,000 the governor has received from Hsu, he has identified a number of charities to whom the felon's donations will go. Clinton and Casey have done the same with the funds they have received. Democratic Rep. Patrick Murphy, who represents Bucks County and parts of Montgomery County and Philadelphia in Congress, also received $3,000 from Hsu and his associates and has donated those funds to charity. Bradley Vasoli can be reached at bvasoli@thebulletin.us.

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (15410)	9/21/2007 3:37:48 PM
From: Hope Praytochange	Respond to of 224744

losing demoRATs: Iraq Bill Backed by Democrats Blocked in Senate By DAVID M. HERSZENHORN and DAVID STOUT Published: September 21, 2007 WASHINGTON, Sept. 21 — A proposal to bring most American combat troops home from Iraq in nine months died in the Senate today, marking the latest frustration for Demorats trying to change President Bush’s policies. The vote on the measure, an amendment to the defense authorization bill offered by Senators Carl Levin of Michigan and Jack Reed of Rhode Island, was 47 to 47, meaning that the proposal was 13 votes short of the 60 needed to cut off debate. Mr. Levin is chairman of the Armed Services Committee, and Mr. Reed is a member of the panel. The outcome had been expected, and it probably signaled the end of legislative skirmishing over Iraq, at least for now. But the broader political battle shows no sign of subsiding, especially as attention shifts to the 2008 presidential and Congressional campaigns. Just before this morning’s vote, Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the Demoratic majority leader, made a last-ditch plea. “It is morning here in Washington, but dusk in Baghdad,” he said. “As we debate this war yet again here at home, another day draws to a close for our troops in Iraq. Tonight they will sleep on foreign sand. Tomorrow they will draw yet again from an endless well of courage to face another day of war. Some will likely die. Many will surely be wounded. They will face hatred they did not create and violence they cannot resolve.” But Republicans argued that the Levin-Reed amendment would take control of the war away from the people who should have it: the seasoned military leaders in Iraq, commanded by Gen. David H. Petraeus. “It would be a very overt rejection of General Petraeus’s leadership,” said Senator Lindsey O. Graham, Republican of South Carolina and a member of the armed services panel. The ranking Republican on the committee, Senator John McCain of Arizona, urged defeat of the amendment. “If we leave, we will be back, in Iraq and elsewhere,” he said. Only three Republican senators voted for the Levin-Reed amendment: Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, Gordon Smith of Oregon and Olympia J. Snowe of Maine. Three Democrats voted against it: Ben Nelson of Nebraska, Mark Pryor of Arkansas and Christopher J. Dodd of Connecticut. Mr. Nelson and Mr. Pryor have said they are reluctant to set a schedule for troop withdrawals, and Mr. Dodd has called for an immediate withdrawal. (Senator Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut, who calls himself an independent Democrat, also voted against the amendment.) Senator Russ Feingold, a Democrat of Wisconsin who sponsored the proposal that failed Thursday, issued a statement criticizing the Republicans even though 20 of his fellow Democrats also voted against him.

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (15410)	9/21/2007 3:43:14 PM
From: Hope Praytochange	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 224744

Fund-Raiser Is Held Without Bail But the authorities confirmed that one of the candidates was Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, Democrat of New York, whose presidential campaign has already said that it intends to return $850,000 to more than 200 people whose donations were bundled by Mr. Hsu. At a news conference Thursday, Michael J. Garcia, the United States attorney in Manhattan, said the Clinton campaign was cooperating in the investigation that led to the new complaint.