By Peter

February 17, 2008 8:19 PM | Link to this

The Clintons’ Multi-Million Dollar Dubai Conflict-of-Interest By Tom Fitton FrontPageMagazine.co Wednesday, January 30, 2008 In the most recent Democratic presidential debate in South Carolina, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama threw off their gloves and attacked each other for their suspicious and scandalous ties. And you know what? They were both right! Here’s a story this week that makes my point with respect to Hillary: According to the Wall Street Journal: “Former President Clinton stands to reap around $20 million —and will sever a politically sensitive partnership tie to Dubai — by ending his high-profile business relationship with the investment firm of billionaire friend Ron Burkle. Mr. Clinton is negotiating to end his relationship with Mr. Burkle’s Yucaipa Cos. as part of a broader effort to protect the presidential campaign of his wife, Sen. Hillary Clinton, from potential conflicts of interest.” It’s a little late to worry about conflicts of interest, don’t you think? Hillary has served in the Senate during Bill Clinton’s tenure with Yucaipa, which began in 2002, all the while in a position to vote on issues that could impact Burkle’s (and, through Bill, Hillary’s) empire. Bill Clinton voiced no concern about a potential conflict of interest when he was handed a large stake in Yucaipa with no risk and very little work required. Now he can just collect the checks. Moreover, this $20 million payoff does nothing to eliminate the conflict of interest. In fact, it makes it worse. Presumably, since Hillary Clinton shares a bank account with former President Clinton, they can use the money to fund her candidacy for president, if she so chooses. Overall, Burkle has contributed large amounts of cash to the Clintons’ campaigns, their legal defense fund, and to the Clinton Presidential Library in Little Rock, Arkansas. The question is, and has always been, what will Ron Burkle get in return for his generosity to the Clintons? Especially if Hillary wins the presidency. Now Obama, for his part, was slammed for ties to indicted political fundraiser Antoin “Tony” Rezko, or as Hillary called him, “a slumlord.” (By the way, a photo surfaced recently that suggests Hillary may have her own Rezko scandal to worry about. Check it out here.) http://www.drudgereport.com/flash1.htm So the Clintons reap millions as a result of partnering with a foreign government These are troubling times for those of us concerned about pubic corruption. Gov. Ted Strickland continued his push for Sen. Hillary Clinton in the presidential race — WHY not check this out. Ohio voter’s will be also wondering if, there is an interio motive = as to WHY?

By Peter

February 17, 2008 8:01 PM | Link to this

HILLARY CLINTON GOOFS AGAIN! By DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN Published on FOXNews.com on February 15, 2008. Hillary’s claim to be the solution-person won’t work either for the same simple reason: She hasn’t passed any. If she were McCain, she could tout a long history of legislative success on key issues and herald her ability to pass bills and engineer progress. But she hasn’t done that. She hasn’t walked the walk so now she cannot talk the talk. As a first lady, Hillary’s sole important legislative involvement came during the first two years of her husband’s presidency when she sought to pass her ill-conceived health care reform, an effort that failed so miserably that it cost her party control of the House of Representatives for the first time in 40 years. Between 1995 to 1997, she was largely absent from the White House, traveling the world, promoting her best selling book and helping to raise funds. She never attended strategy meetings and her only intervention in the singular legislative achievements of Bill’s administration — welfare reform and the balanced budget deal — was privately to urge a veto of the former and to oppose the latter because it provided for a cut in the capital gains tax. Hillary returned to the White House in 1998 to oversee the defense to the Lewinsky scandal and the impeachment attempt , but the Clinton administration essentially folded its legislative efforts during those years and hung on for dear life. No portfolio of accomplishments there. In the Senate, she has largely spent her time raising funds for herself and other Democrats (in hopes of attracting the votes of super delegates) and promoting her best selling memoir Living History Her legislative accomplishments in her first term in the Senate were almost entirely symbolic. She renamed a courthouse after Justice Thurgood Marshall. She passed a resolution honoring Alexander Hamilton and another celebrating the win of a Syracuse University lacrosse team. She renamed post offices, founded a national park in Puerto Rico and expressed the sense of the Senate that Harriet Tubman should have gotten a federal pension 150 years ago. Her only actual legislation included one bill to increase nurse recruitment, another to aid respite time for Alzheimer’s care givers and another to expand veterans’ health benefits, a paltry output for six years’ service. In her second term, she has spent full-time campaigning for president and has the worst attendance record of the three senators now still in the presidential race. So who is she kidding? If she wants to hit Obama with a negative based on his inexperience and limited legislative record, she should go right ahead. But to pretend that she is the “solutions” and “answers” person while he gives speeches is absurd. PLEASE FORWARD THIS E-MAIL TO FRIENDS AND FAMILY AND TELL THEM THEY CAN GET THESE COLUMNS E-MAILED TO THEM FOR FREE BY SUBSCRIBING AT DICKMORRIS.COM! THANK YOU!

By David Esrati

February 17, 2008 7:44 PM | Link to this

I doubt that Barack Obama would ask Strickland to be his VP- and since he’s going to win the popular delegate count - the only thing that could change it is if the SuperDelegates (like Strickland) go against the will of the people.