digg

Join DiggAbout

The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.

Hillary is ALSO on videotape committing fraud!

usjf.net — Hillary's Senate campaign was convicted of fundraising fraud and fined $35,000. She was let off the hook personally because she claimed she had no knowledge of the fundraising event in question. As evidence in a lawsuit against her, a video has been submitted of her planning that fundraiser she claims not to know about -- which is a felony...

show profanity settings
expand all
  • diggeradoo, on 03/27/2008, -7/+242"At no point on the tape did Clinton suggest that the event and the Paul donation were NOT going directly to her campaign, and the other three in the conversation referenced it repeatedly.

    [On the tape] Clinton replied, "I'm just thrilled. I'll check in with you from time to time because I know that putting something like this together is challenging even when people are enthusiastic and looking forward to doing it.""

    ... and Hillary's take on this?

    "I do not believe I would make such a statement because I believe I would remember such a discussion if it had occurred," she added."

    Too bad there's an actual taped conversation, Hillary. Guess you misspoke again?
    • ThndrShk2k, on 03/27/2008, -2/+34"I do not recall"
    • Mootabolife, on 03/27/2008, -5/+84Go directly to Jail. Do not pass GO. Do no collect $35,000.
      • norman619, on 03/27/2008, -1/+26We all know nothing will happen to her. Not everyone is subject to the laws the normal US citizen is. The Clintons have gotten away with much worse. This is nothing.
      • B3N3, on 03/27/2008, -1/+24So Obama gets the nomination, Hillary gets...jail time? I could live with that...
      • Tetraca, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1Unfortunately she has a "Slither out of jail free" card.
    • knobtwiddler, on 03/27/2008, -13/+12glad people are finally understanding what the clintons are about... but this kind of petty fraud is just the tip of the iceberg. lets talk about the cocaine trafficking and murder.
      • hierophantus, on 03/27/2008, -4/+9Let's not, lest we realize we have taken it too far and strayed from muckraking to flat-out crazy-talk.
        • Gratefuldead, on 03/27/2008, -3/+2vince foster
        • RazDakarn, on 03/27/2008, -3/+1"we have taken it too far and strayed from muckraking to flat-out crazy-talk."

          Rich people have never had anybody killed.
        • keishax, on 03/28/2008, -2/+1The Clintons have a body count a mile long... just a few highlights
          RON BROWN - Commerce secretary who plane crash but with a bullet to the brain
          ED WILLEY- husband of wife who accused clinton of groping her
          BARBARA WISE - found dead in her locked office beaten and nude from the waist up
          KEVIN IVES and DON HENRY - stumbled on drug deal at the Mena Airport, corner said the teenage boys fell asleep on the train tracks.
          PAUL WILCHER - attorney investigating Mena Airport corruption died on the toilet 3 weeks after deliver report to Janet Reno
      • franklymister, on 03/27/2008, -0/+1I've been waiting for the right-wing loonies to come out of the woodwork.

        I'm guessing that you're one of the people who thinks Rev. Wright is anti-American for believing the gov't invented AIDS, but you're willing to believe that the President of the United States was a drug-running murderer?
        • knobtwiddler, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1no actually i also think our government invented AIDS.
          and i don't care about that reverend wright. obama is a gun grabbing globalist who's foreign policy advisor created al qaeda. and i'm not only willing to believe the clintons are involved in coke trafficking, i can flat out prove beyond any doubt that our CIA has been running drugs for over 30 years- clintons, bushes, nixon, reagan, they're all been involved.

          ron paul, dennis kucinich, mike gravel. those are the only decent candidates.
      • keishax, on 03/28/2008, -3/+0Actually what knobtwiddler's comment is accurate. The Clintons have a lot of dead bodies associated with them from Arkansas to the White House. Ron Brown commerce secretary died in that plane crash right before he was to strike a deal with the special prosecutor. One of his employees was found naked from the waist up beaten and LOCKED INSIDE her office. There were two boys who witnessed drug trafficking in Arkansas, the boys died weeks after. The coroner said that the boys FELL ASLEEP on the train tracks. There are bodies all over the place! all you have to do is google!
        • chokeaduck, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1I like the tin-foil hat look. It looks good on you!
    • noahhoward, on 03/27/2008, -1/+7Could you define statement?
    • digduggler, on 03/27/2008, -1/+9Okay, I'm dumb. If this story has been around since last June, why is it getting traction now? I don't see any new evidence....
      • Burrito, on 03/27/2008, -0/+17Cause Anna Nicole died and as a nation, we're finally getting over it.
      • CoolWind, on 03/27/2008, -2/+2Because the muckrakers are looking for any crumbs they can find so they can put another hate-Hillary article on Digg. It's become the easiest way to get a story on the front page.
      • queotic, on 03/28/2008, -0/+3That's exactly the problem. The media hasn't been covering this story. Imagine if Obama or McCain were part of a trial like this - you know HRC & the media would be alll over it with daily attacks. She's been stalling releasing her tax returns, she's being investigated for campaign fraud, she overexagerated (completely lied about?) her role in creating peace in Northern Ireland, "misspoke" about landing under sniper fire in Bosnia... how many lies before people just say "enough!"?
    • IPublius, on 03/27/2008, -1/+15It's hard to remember exactly what you were saying to Paul on the phone about the fundraiser when there were snipers firing at you.
    • EarlOfLade, on 03/27/2008, -1/+18She was "sleep deprived" during that conversation!
    • jabberwolf, on 03/27/2008, -7/+1"At no point on the tape did Clinton suggest that the event and the Paul donation were NOT going directly to her campaign " Which part of English do you NOT understand?

      If Paul decided that he would at that point donate directly to Hillary's campaign rather then the the Democratic party, then what would not be her fault. She does not directly keep track of fundraiser checks that come in 2 months afterwards ( sorry thats about how long it takes at least, there is no credit directly to he account going on)

      Good god how much crap can you guys make up ?!?!
    • tas08, on 03/27/2008, -0/+2Yeah, she did a hell of a good job remember the sniper fire in Bosnia.
    • iainc, on 03/27/2008, -1/+3For the sake of the Democratic Party, it's time for the remaining super delegates to end this farce. This campaign needs to end and HRC needs to be jettisoned from the party asap, so that everyone can focus on the fall election.
    • oscenester, on 03/27/2008, -1/+2It's hard to remember much of anything you say when your under so much pressure, are sleep deprived, and under constant sniper fire.
      I'm just waiting for her to do like Shaggy "It wasn't me"
    • mrASSMAN, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1Too bad this is from July 2007, so I guess this isn't going to be making the news.
  • motivatedmama, on 03/27/2008, -6/+132She's not just digging a hole, she's shoveling ***** by the ton! How much longer will the super delegates be willing to hold their noses?
    • theaceoffire, on 03/27/2008, -2/+20Don't worry, she is trying to convert the regular delegates as well....
      (GOD DAMN IT, why is she doing this? It is hurting her name, reputation, and any chances in the future of running. She is making all the democrats resentful and dividing our nation.)
      • whereiseljefe, on 03/27/2008, -4/+5Think of it this way: McCain is looking better and better as the days go by to some people... Your why has been answered.
        • Rahodeb, on 03/27/2008, -4/+2Somehow I doubt the plan was for her to ruin her reputation and career for the sake of McCain's presidency.
      • keraneuology, on 03/27/2008, -7/+4She was known from the start to be a turd. The democrats pushed her and bill into the white house anyway, and only *now* are they surprised? Oh, wait, the republicans framed her. This video was faked in Photoshop or Powerpoint, right? GOP conspiracy.
        If you vote democrat then you are responsible for the corruption of our government. Period. Can you find a -single- democrat on the national stage with a shred of integrity? Now we find that yet another democrat (this time from Michigan) is as nasty as you can get, accepting money from Saddam to take a tour of Iraq. Gee... another GOP conspiracy, right?
        • MacEnvy, on 03/27/2008, -0/+9"If you vote democrat then you are responsible for the corruption of our government."

          Now THAT'S some crazy, right there. Take a look at any of the biggest sources of actual corruption in the federal government right now, and I guarantee the cause will be a Republican.
        • neognostic, on 03/27/2008, -0/+3You need to do further research @karaneuology, the Justice Department says that none of the 3 Democrats had any knowledge of the funding and that none of them are being investigated any further.
        • OUberLord, on 03/27/2008, -0/+3If you say that you can't find "a -single- democrat on the national stage with a shred of integrity", I would say that there isn't a single Republican in the running right now that can boast any integrity either. The only Rep. candidate left is John "100 more years of Iraq" McCain. That's real integrity there; pledge to continue a war that has never had any integrity in it beyond from those that fill the boots on the ground. Yeah, plenty of integrity with his "Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran" bit, way to represent yourself and your country on the world stage.
      • stonewaljacksn, on 03/27/2008, -11/+3She's not dividing our nation at all. She's just pissing you off because you are being bitches and want your man Obama to lock it up as soon as possible. Get real people this is politics. Dividing our nation? I'll tell you what's dividing our nation...it's blind partisans like the people on digg who look at every republican with an automatic bias.
        Mike Gravel became my hero yesterday...he left the scumbag Democrats and didn't leave them for the scumbag Republicans. I refuse to play into the divisive politics of either party by voting for either a democrat or a republican in november. You bitches can cry about me throwing a vote for the Democrats away, but it's time to stop settling.
        • nihilite, on 03/27/2008, -1/+5you do not understand democracy if you think you will not need to compromise. it is absolutely impossible that 51% of all americans will want the exact same things, so you will need to get comfortable with the fact that candidates will hold positions you will not agree with. Hopefully you find ones that are acceptable to you and a majority of others... that is how democracy works.
          • stonewaljacksn, on 03/27/2008, -2/+1For someone who talks like they are so smart you were sure bad at understanding what I was talking about. I'm talking from an individual standpoint about my OWN principles. The most important thing in my opinion is to stay true to yourself, and I don't care what the ***** you or anyone else does, I am not settling for ***** politicians. Sure, my preferred candidates may lose, but I will sleep well at night knowing that I followed my own principles and didn't sell out and vote for the scumbag democratic party just because I thought I had to. I'm voting for who I truly believe in.
            You just wanted to be a typical pretentious digger prick and try to show off how smart you are, and in doing so went on a completely irrelevant tangent from what I was talking about. Good job. You are brilliant though, seriously.

            or at least you fake it well...
          • nihilite, on 03/27/2008, -0/+1Stonewal: I felt the same way when i was 15. Someday you'll realize noone really cares about your "principles"... all that talk is masturbation. What matters is the cause and the effect. You throw away your vote, the effect is everyone else has a disproportionately greater say in the election process. The effect is we get 8 years of George Bush. You think there is no difference between Al Gore and GW? Grow the ***** up.

            I hope you are a Ron Paul supporter robbing McCain of a vote.
        • rilus, on 03/27/2008, -0/+3This is politics? Wow... thank you, Captain Obvious. What you're failing to understand that as much of a hero you think that Gravel is, by leaving the two main parties in the nation, he has --for all intents and purposes-- gone into the void.
          The reason most people here on Digg will have an "automatic bias" toward Republicans is because they are also blindly partisan and will vote Republican no matter what.
          So, hopefully, now we're back on the real world here. The reality is that two parties currently control our government. Now, if you want to make a difference, you have know how to play the game and be willing to do so. If not, you're more than welcome to be a kamikaze and think you're actually making a difference by being the courageous hero.
      • mydigga, on 03/27/2008, -0/+1Eventually we have to start asking what is she going to gain w/ McCain in office?
      • celkin, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1THE WORLD IS COMING TO AN END!!!

        /overly dramatic
    • aliengoods, on 03/27/2008, -1/+14She's helping the American people realize she would lie to suit her ends just as easily as Bush does.
    • junkwheel, on 03/27/2008, -0/+8Too long already. The superdelegates need to swing the right way now and shut the door on Hillary's 'campaign'.
    • corneliusJones, on 03/27/2008, -1/+6Not only that, she is making the Democratic party as a whole look bad. I guess her plan is if she can't be president, no Democrat can. It's becoming clear she wants McCain to win 2008 so she can run in 2012. The sleazy ***** bitch, this is why I have come to despise her.
  • Bobombom, on 03/27/2008, -32/+6Did anyone else notice that the date the article was posted was July 2, 2007?
    • saska, on 03/27/2008, -2/+22And the trial date for Peter F. Paul is not until November 2009. So I'd say this is relevant.
    • aikimann, on 03/27/2008, -5/+4Yeah but all of the leftist diggers loved Hillary then. Now that they're infatuated with Obama, Hillary is now an enemy. All the diggers who would have buried this a year ago will digg it up today.

      (independent libertarian if people are wondering)
      • soulkitchen, on 03/27/2008, -0/+2I wouldn't classify all of Digg as leftist but I absolutely agree that public opinion likes to give a pass to the side that currently possesses the momentum. Giving a pass to the Clintons (Bill included) isn't excusable just because the neocons are so bad. I say we should hold everyone to the same high standard lest we be called hypocrites, and rightfully so.
      • rilus, on 03/27/2008, -0/+3I agree to a degree. I think people looked as Hillary as not being as bad Bush, so they let some of her stuff go. Now, that we see an even better option, most people have gone to that side.

        It seems like people changing their minds based on current events and circumstances somehow baffle you.
    • FutureGuy, on 03/27/2008, -1/+1And during that time she evolved from being a biatche to a rattle snake.
  • davidcg, on 03/27/2008, -3/+56It would be nice to know if this was ever followed up on.

    Craig Bannister
    Communications Director
    CNSNews.com
    Office: (703) 683-1626, ext. 126
    E-mail: Cbannister@cnsnews.com

    The person that wrote the article in 07 is Fred Lucas. I'd call, but it's 1 am.
    • rmxz, on 03/27/2008, -1/+20I love it when people post relevant contact info in Digg comments. I'm too lazy to look them up myself; but occasionally respond when someone makes it this easy. (just hoping enough other people verify the information before voting up/down)

      This kind of info makes the difference between a bunch of us all whining amongst ourselves vs digg really being able to make a difference in the world.
  • EugineMW, on 03/27/2008, -72/+8Don't worry, Hillary will get through this campaign polished like gold, and still win the presidency polished like gold despite the constant bashing here (which hardly has any real influence in the general population anyway). Digg me down, but we shall see who is the final victor =)
    • InfamousAtheist, on 03/27/2008, -6/+40You're delusional - and maliciously contributing to the destruction of Democrat's chances of fixing the disgraceful state of affairs in America. If Hillary somehow steals the nomination, it will divide the party and the Repugnicans will win. Thanks for your help.
      • keraneuology, on 03/27/2008, -16/+4Hillary is going to win. And it ain't the republicans who will be responsible.
        • forgiste, on 03/27/2008, -1/+2No no no, if Hillary wins the Democratic Nomination then John McCain will win the presidency.
    • ProfessorSYM, on 03/27/2008, -1/+3Please explain.
    • LoveYouSomeEric, on 03/27/2008, -7/+2sadly I think you are right. the fix is in
      • forgiste, on 03/27/2008, -0/+1That's a good song, but I'd have to disagree with you.
    • wrongonce, on 03/27/2008, -0/+11polished like gold?
      • theaceoffire, on 03/27/2008, -1/+11The most beautiful Gold Turd in the land.
    • invalidnot4long, on 03/27/2008, -0/+9and the clouds will open up and everything will be ok.....C:
    • Vlatro, on 03/27/2008, -0/+7Ouch... The final score
      Bumpersticker voters: 1
      Truth : 0
    • pianomahnn, on 03/27/2008, -1/+10THREE CHEERS FOR SUPPORTING CORRUPTION!! HIP HIP HOORAY!!!
      You suck. I hate you.
    • Arramol, on 03/27/2008, -1/+14Contrary to what you seem to believe, you can't make allegations against your candidate of choice magically disappear by calling them "bashing." Evidence has been presented against her honesty in several cases now. If you want us to believe that she is somehow worthy of the presidency, the burden of proof is on you.
    • noahhoward, on 03/27/2008, -1/+9What the ***** is wrong with you?

      You're being given evidence beforehand of her corruption, something, in retrospect, we'd have killed to have for Bush and STILL you support her?
    • tivicus, on 03/27/2008, -1/+1Dan Rather: This just in...Hillary Clinton has lost her bid for the nomination. She was seen running to her car across the street from her campaign headquarters under "sniper fire".
  • lys3rgic, on 03/27/2008, -4/+30So, where's the video?
  • oceanrain, on 03/27/2008, -2/+28If the MSM carried this story and showed the video, she never would have made it to Iowa.
  • wild, on 03/27/2008, -0/+153Here is the video in question:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rlN3LMvyWwo

    And yes, that is the real link. Its not a Rick Roll. But this is:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBGIQ7ZuuiU
    • Viti, on 03/27/2008, -0/+9Dugg for the RR.
    • elhaf, on 03/27/2008, -0/+32Wow, that girl in the second video is hot. And Rick is never gonna let you down, unlike Hillary.
    • usafdave, on 03/27/2008, -1/+12You're doing it wrong
      • TheRascalKing, on 03/27/2008, -0/+1Or is he doing it SO right that is seems wrong?
        Nope.
    • BaronVonTito, on 03/27/2008, -0/+3Dammit, I clicked on the wrong one.
      • Deadpixel1221, on 03/27/2008, -0/+2The right one is the bottom link.
    • Ricochet1269, on 03/27/2008, -1/+17Is it wrong that I purposely clicked the RR link?
    • drjekelmrhyde, on 03/27/2008, -0/+2Holy ***** is that Stan Lee
      • phort99, on 03/27/2008, -0/+1Which video? Oh-- right. Yeah, that's him.
    • RainNIU, on 03/27/2008, -0/+1God, I love Rick Rolling people
  • invalidnot4long, on 03/27/2008, -11/+3ooh she lied...
    she gonna get in trouble....oooh i'm tellin......C:
    • noahhoward, on 03/27/2008, -2/+3It's a felony, *****, you know the kind of ***** a Presidential candidate shouldn't be doing.
  • mrshickadance9, on 03/27/2008, -1/+54I don't understand why more of this stuff she is doing isn't on the popular news sources. I guess it proves that the elite really do control the media in this country. More people need to know this kind of stuff.
    • saska, on 03/27/2008, -1/+13After George W. banned reporters from his press conferences who wrote unflattering things about him, and given all that has gone on with the Clintons in the past, I'm willing to bet money that most of the media is sitting around afraid that if she *does* overturn the popular vote, everybody who had anything bad to say about her during the campaign will be banned from the White House in the unlikely event she then goes on to beat McCain. They're not just thinking about the next four years, they're thinking about their careers.
      • Vlatro, on 03/27/2008, -3/+2I agree, she has on many occasions used here political power against private citizens who got in her way. She is a cut-throat bitch who will stop at nothing to silence any in opposition to her. The sad thing is, we have the choice between McCain, Obamma, or Clinton. This could well be the most important election of our lives and I find my self between a rock and a hard place. Clinton is a bitch of unfathomable proportions, (Satan with a vagina as we call her). Obama takes no stance on anything, expecting a smile a the promise of "Change", however undefined he may leave it, will be enough to win over idiots. An McCain is a pussy, disguised as a hard ass. He bends to popular opinion and then swings back when the political winds change, apparently having no principal of his own. It's a lose / lose situation.
        I say we all pencil in Ted Nugent.
      • noahhoward, on 03/27/2008, -0/+2They should maybe do something about that then. Push this ***** like Chinese knockoffs. Make sure everyone knows, make sure it is everywhere, then they won't have to cower and cover their asses. If they do all that and she still gets elected, it will be one of the biggest uprisings in US history.
        • idreamwideyed, on 03/27/2008, -0/+1dugg for "Push this ***** like Chinese knockoffs"
    • snotrokit, on 03/27/2008, -0/+2because the battle between Hillary and Obama is great for revenue. If they weren't going at it, the media would have nothing to talk about until after the conventions.
      • noahhoward, on 03/27/2008, -0/+1Why can't some pretty white girl go missing?
    • keraneuology, on 03/27/2008, -1/+3According to the people on Air America this stuff isn't making it into the media because the republicans control it all.
    • incredibilistic, on 03/27/2008, -0/+1The only two media outlets that would be willing to put their balls on the line to get this story in primetime would be CNN. Fox News is such a joke in the news world that I don't think anyone will take them seriously if they posted it but at least it would get the other credible networks to investigate and get to the bottom of this.

      Either way, if this story DOES get into national media she's done. There's nothing left to say and whatever she does say against Obama won't hold water against all of her "misspeaking".
      • saska, on 03/27/2008, -0/+1Fox News would be happy to put this on an endless loop if Hillary got the nomination.
    • OpenIntro, on 03/27/2008, -1/+1The reason why more of this stuff isn't on the popular news sources (or MSM as most of you trendy morons like to say since you think it makes you sound credible) is it's a bunch of BS that no one in the long run gives a ***** about. It's the typical political BS that always occurs in all races and no sane person/voter actually cares....and that isn't even getting to the point of whether the "internet diggers" that come up with this stuff are blogging valid points.

      I wonder if a day will go by on Digg when someone doesn't say, "I wonder why MSM isn't picking up on this." Probably never.
    • lamiaconfitor, on 03/27/2008, -0/+1if by elite you mean money, then yes.
  • Nerve55, on 03/27/2008, -18/+12Obama.
    • theaceoffire, on 03/27/2008, -13/+9Obama bama bo bama! Banana Fanna fo famba! Fe Fi mo bama!
      Obama!
      • keraneuology, on 03/27/2008, -13/+2Hussein Hussein, bo Hussein, banana fanna fo Fussein, fee fi fo Fussein, Hussein
        • elhaf, on 03/27/2008, -4/+1Muhammad Ali, fo fee, be by bo bee, Aliiii!
        • tas08, on 03/27/2008, -0/+1It isn't even lyrical, the syllables are all wrong.
          :(
      • rex84, on 03/27/2008, -2/+4Let's do Chuck!
    • fluxion, on 03/27/2008, -3/+208
  • bmorlok, on 03/27/2008, -0/+12Here is a more in depth explanation: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bIf84llCRPc
  • ams876, on 03/27/2008, -9/+2Wow, usjf.net what a credible source.
    • ams876, on 03/27/2008, -7/+0No seriously, United States Justice Force: Your Conservative Voice in the Courts is a completely nonbiased news source. The reason this article hasn't been seen yet in the MSM is because of their liberal bias. BTW, I'm not a fan of Hillary but if you believe this tripe may god have mercy on your soul.
    • MixMastaKooz, on 03/27/2008, -0/+2I agree. This article needs to be verified by multiple, non-partisan sources. Even if there is video, does that mean that the law was actually broken or is it just an insinuation? Additionally, the legal experts, a Sacred Heart University poli sci prof and the president of the Equal Justice Foundation of America (EJFA), aren't exactly top notch or the right people to seek a quotes from.

      On the other hand, if this is the voice of a Republican propaganda website, then why would they be digging up dirt on Hillary when it's Obama they need to worry about? Several things to consider...
  • jlee2081, on 03/27/2008, -4/+13when it rains it pours and this bitch is getting wet
  • screechinglily, on 03/27/2008, -12/+2old news
  • xlar54, on 03/27/2008, -10/+14Dear God please let Hillary drop out of the race soon. Its bad enough that we have to see constant Obamaspam... but this HillaryHunt is getting just as obnoxious.
    • wendelgee2, on 03/27/2008, -1/+5I'd agree. But I don't.
      Until this is over, this is the biggest threat to our nation because her behavior is ensuring a McCain presidency. Which means more wars, more lies, more economic woes...more more more.
    • elhaf, on 03/27/2008, -1/+6Well, the paulbots had to find something to do.
    • nomadxx7, on 03/27/2008, -0/+1Wasn't that Nader's claim to fame (may be getting the candidate wrong). The one that for the last several elections waits until the end to claim his candidancy and then takes votes away from the other delegates (helping ensure Gore lost and Kerry also)
    • hierophantus, on 03/27/2008, -0/+4xlar54 has correctly discerned that shallowly conceived, compactly expressed framings of political phenomena are not correctly labeled for mass consumption until they are distilled into two words jammed together: e.g. Obamaspam, HillaryHunt (the disparity in capitalization is puzzling, but will surely be ironed out upon repetition of the labels as memes).

      Gold star for xlar54.

      Now anyone who wishes to defeat xlar54 in verbal combat is obliged to concoct more compelling two-word labels. Sorry, folks, those are the rules. Serious debate has proven to be too time-consuming.

      Now digg me down because I used too many big words and you don't think it works as humor.
      • xlar54, on 03/29/2008, -0/+1Did you spend hours on that response? lol... I dugg you up simply for the time and effort you put into being a simple ass. Gold star back at ya.
  • yingjai, on 03/27/2008, -0/+16she's still an eligible candidate?
  • WoundedCow, on 03/27/2008, -1/+22son of a bitch...a dishonest politician...I'd never thought I'd see the day.
    • noahhoward, on 03/27/2008, -3/+1And you're completely okay with this dishonest politician running for the office of president? Were you asleep the last 8 years?
      • maximize, on 03/27/2008, -0/+4You ***** idiot. I know he didn't put a /s tag, but come the ***** on.
      • celkin, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1Yor doin it wrong!!
  • chrissku, on 03/27/2008, -1/+35I know I don't want a President who fabricates stories because she's tired. I want my President to be fully alert when he or she lies to the face of the American people!
    • incredibilistic, on 03/27/2008, -1/+8Okay, so she was "sleep deprived" when she told the Michael Bay version of her Bosnia story... all three times. Let's assume that was the case. So what happens when she gets the dreaded 3am call?

      "Ahh...whaa...no, no, no tell...tell...YAWN...tell them to, to take the cookies out when they're golden brown...and, and then...YAWN...tell 'em to put the, put the oven out of second gear before they park the....ice...cream...truck...in...ZZZZZZZZ"
    • nomadxx7, on 03/27/2008, -0/+12There's an old saying in Tennessee - I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee - that says, fool me once, shame on - shame on you. Fool me - you can't get fooled again
    • CrackyJSquirrel, on 03/27/2008, -0/+5Lay off of her, she is tired from all those late night "red phone" calls she is getting..
  • jcastillo81, on 03/27/2008, -3/+9Give her a break guys, she was probably sleep deprived!
    • kenbomc, on 03/27/2008, -0/+1...I wonder how far 'I miss spoke' will get her in court.
  • knobbers, on 03/27/2008, -0/+6let's see..habitual liar..fraud..GO Hillary...and take your sleazy husband with ya!!!
  • Yoweigh, on 03/27/2008, -0/+10FTA: "'When it comes to the Clintons, they are generally immune to public condemnation regarding ethical lapses and violations of the law,' Rose told Cybercast News Service."

    WTF? Why??? *grumble grumble*
  • JasonHears, on 03/27/2008, -0/+6ah jeez... here we go again. Can somebody please retire the Clinton's to some solitary farm in Arkansas so we don't have to hear about their dirty political dealings anymore?
  • plhearn, on 03/27/2008, -25/+3Obama's campaign doesn't want to discuss its candidate's record and prefers personal attacks instead.

    Sen. Obama knows that if he focused on his experience, he'd get questions about the shortcomings in his record and the efforts he has made to embellish it.
    • Aitese, on 03/27/2008, -0/+17I'm sorry...what on Earth has this got to do with the Obama campaign?
    • fluxion, on 03/27/2008, -0/+7and since when was OBAMA the one pushing personal attacks? Hillary drew him into this *****, but this video was on digg a year ago and has nothing to do with Obama in the first place.
    • noahhoward, on 03/27/2008, -0/+5Obama actually has experience to ***** push! Hillary has fabricated ALL of the ***** she is peddling as her experience! What the hell is your problem?
    • hierophantus, on 03/27/2008, -0/+2plhearn: Hillary HQ asked me to pass along this message, as recent emails to the address you gave our coordinators have been bouncing back (suggestion: check whether too many cute cat pix are clogging your inbox; apparently, this has been the usual problem with our supporters not getting our communiques).

      Anyway, we're not going with that whole "experience" thing anymore. It's not working out that well.

      Now we're asking everybody to use just four words: "Jeremiah," "Wright," "preacher," and "problem." In a pinch, just shout "Rezko, Rezko, Rezko" as you run away.

      Stand by for further instructions. And delete some of those cat pictures, please--you know, so we can has communikashun???
    • twertyto, on 03/27/2008, -0/+3Sad just sad.
  • gthogan, on 03/27/2008, -1/+26I'm sure she doesn't remember the details with all the sniper fire going off all over the place.
  • ncc74656m, on 03/27/2008, -5/+5A self-described conservative site with little more credibility than the average blog? Screw that *****, I'll just watch Fox News. At least there I know what to expect.
    • JointVenture, on 03/27/2008, -3/+3is the HuffingtonPost any different?
      • ncc74656m, on 03/27/2008, -5/+2Yes, it is. More often than not, they are not just rants about Republicans based on shaky evidence at best with loose interpretations of laws.

        Having read enough of the posts from Republican sites before on Digg, often the stories are misstated, blown out of proportion, misreported, or flat out wrong. When they do try to point to something as their "research," it is often completely irrelevant to the topic at hand or just BS. Try referencing Anne Coulter's so called "references" in some of her books for an example.
      • falstaff, on 03/27/2008, -2/+4Or Kos, or Crooksandliars, or Rawstory, or any other spam that reaches the front page here every day?
  • rynTAU, on 03/27/2008, -0/+2Yawn.. not surprised.. is that sad?
  • elhaf, on 03/27/2008, -0/+4" Paul v. Clinton: Experts Question Whether Clinton Campaign Finance Case Will Impact '08 Race
    Posted by: Admin on Monday, July 02, 2007 - 07:25 AM PST"

    I think we have our answer.
  • bshock, on 03/27/2008, -3/+11When is the U.S. public going to realize that Hillary Rodham Clinton is a lying, thieving, self-involved criminal, in the same mold as Traitor Bush?
    • yohnstoppable, on 03/27/2008, -2/+2Why does everyone feel the need to always use her middle name? Are we going to confuse here with another hillary?
  • rex84, on 03/27/2008, -0/+19When this story was on digg last year, everyone just claimed it was a right-wing smear job.
    • haylel, on 03/27/2008, -0/+10We've learned a lot in a year.
    • Louis11, on 03/27/2008, -1/+2The fads on Digg, in most cases, are just as bad as the fads on any other social network.
    • active1x0, on 03/28/2008, -2/+1That was before they joined the Church of Barack Obama Slash Cult.
  • Viti, on 03/27/2008, -9/+1Just goes to show why we shouldn't have a woman as a president. They lie about everything, not just relationship crap. EVERYTHING. Even political campaigns, just to get what they want. Next thing you know she'll get pregnant by some white house employee and then leave him and put him on child support. Typical.
    • techeric, on 03/27/2008, -0/+1Your progressive ideology is AMAZING.
    • idreamwideyed, on 03/27/2008, -0/+1because men arent perfectly capable of lying? have you been living under a rock for the past eight years?
  • SnyderMan32x33, on 03/27/2008, -1/+11this is old news but it was overlooked. dugg for getting pwned on video and getting what you deserve.
    • kenbomc, on 03/27/2008, -0/+1The Clinton's tried delaying this trial as much as they could -hoping these charges would somehow where off. They want people to think it's 'old news'.
  • astrotrain, on 03/27/2008, -1/+7** clears throat and beings Don LaFontaine voice **

    New from Democratic Pictures....(No)Sex...(Lots of)Lies... And (Hillary On)Videotape...

    A story of a corrupt woman, and her attempts to become President... she'll do anything
    she can to get there.

    ** big flashy car chase to the white house and a few explosions **

    Sharon Stone as "Hilary"....."now what about those votes?" ** basic instinct crotch shot and panel ewws and nearly vommits **

    Ted Danson as "Bill Clinton".... "Aw... Now Come On.... ** looks at woman walk by** Hello there...do you like cigars... I bet you look good in a blue dress..."

    .... And Jimmy Walker as "Barack Obama"..."What I got some votes!? *claps* DYNOMITE!!"

    Attempting to play at a voting poll near you!
    • usafdave, on 03/27/2008, -0/+1Jimmy Walker DY-NO-MITE!!.. hilarious. Sharpton's going to digg you down, but I appreciate your sense of humor, sir.

      I bet Barak's got a sense of humor... maybe once he's elected the race-tension-profiteers will stfu.
    • oscenester, on 03/27/2008, -0/+1Your forgot the scenes of her manically ducking sniper fire.
    • caramba420, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1Dugg for the LaFontaine reference.
  • EndersGame21, on 03/27/2008, -0/+7So is her "no knowledge" kind of like Alberto Gonzales' "inability to remember?"
    • noahhoward, on 03/27/2008, -0/+2That and her husbands "could you define"
  • digitalagent, on 03/27/2008, -3/+1Look at the date on this article. Then look at the history of the submitter. And please note that the US Attorney's office had the tape and didn't prosecute this supposed "crime." Why do you think the submitter submitted this article and why do you think that the government couldn't give a crap about the info passed to them from a convicted con man?
    • noahhoward, on 03/27/2008, -0/+1Why do I think they didn't prosecute? For the same uncertain reasons I'm beggining to believe they allow her to continue running.

      I'm not a conspiracy theorist but think for a minute, what have we got now. Republican president, complicit democrat congress. Who stands to win if Hillary continues to polarize dems and or wins the nomination? I don't know what our government stands to gain from 8 more years of the same old *****, but too many apparent indicators are popping up.

      I really hope I'm wrong, but before all this started I stated the opinion that an Obama presidency would end in assasination. There seems to be a determined effort to make sure he doesn't make it.
    • wxman2001, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1The trial for fraud is scheduled for October in California....read that two months ago. The MSM will just not bring it up.
  • Vash3001, on 03/27/2008, -10/+3At least she does not hate America like another presidential hopeful i know.
    • techeric, on 03/27/2008, -1/+5Dissent is the highest form of patriotism.
    • hierophantus, on 03/27/2008, -0/+3There should be a new Godwin's Law for anyone who uses the phrase "hate America" to describe anyone they disagree with. Few, if any, pollutants of public discourse over the last six years have been more pathetic and offensive than that one.
  • usafdave, on 03/27/2008, -1/+8"As evidence in a lawsuit against her, a video has been submitted of her planning that fundraiser she claims not to know about -- which is a felony..."

    No worries, Hill-dawg... everyone knows there's a precedent for the Clintons to get away with felonious lying.
  • chas7926, on 03/27/2008, -6/+1I am loving this. It is so nice to the the Left Spin Machine® turning back on itself.
  • liv4innout, on 03/27/2008, -0/+3I agree with the sentiment of the article, but the syntax of the digg headline is... special.
  • Adwt0125, on 03/27/2008, -0/+1Why doesn't this surprise me?
  • tuxerware, on 03/27/2008, -7/+1Another "hate Hillary post" on Digg? I guess i would vote for Obama if i could, but this mud slinging at Hillary is pathetic. No wonder the political climate in the US is so heated, everyone treats their political opponent as their mortal enemy. I'm from Sweden and we expect more of our politicians and their campaigns than this.
    • kameonr, on 03/27/2008, -1/+3Mud slinging.....I dont really understand your logic. Digg is behind a candidate as a majority, so they suppor their candidate the best way they can by trying to expose the other candidates flaws....how is that not right. If we were posting nothing but lies I could understand that logic but if you have someone running your country they need to have their history checked. If someone is against Obama they are more than welcome to post their findings on him, but attacking petty things like what his hand is doing during a flag ceremony, or judging his actions based on another persons view is not going to cut it.

      I think since Obama is taking the high road on most occasions and not attacking more until recent speaks volumes on his character and yet The Clintons have since day one or even before attacked attacked attacked and when they get caught its all "I dont remember now, it wasnt like that, etc.

      May not seem right when you see the amount of bad postings against her but that "is how the cookie crumbles"
    • noahhoward, on 03/27/2008, -0/+4This isn't mud-slinging, it's the cry of a nation that's sick of being ***** by its leaders. If Hillary is elected you can expect it to be as bad or worse than the Bush years.
    • queotic, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1How is the truth mudslinging? This is not a lie or half-truth or "vast ring wing conspiracy." It's a video showing her doing something which she claimed she didn't do. That's also known as "lying," or in some cases, "perjury." We've had enough lies.
  • MaceSoul, on 03/27/2008, -2/+3The thing that amazes me most is that people are acting surprised that the Clinton family are congenital liars and crooks. What the hell took you so long to realize it?
    Maybe some day they'll wake up and realize Bill is a rapist.
  • Xanthan, on 03/27/2008, -0/+7It's like how she "mispoke" because she was tired. What's gonna happen if you wake her up at 3am with a phone call dealing with homeland security?
    • maximize, on 03/27/2008, -0/+1Hillary: I was sleep deprived so I accidentally started a war with Iran and hired Wal-Mart as a privately contracted company to supply all the food.
  • sobenofear, on 03/27/2008, -7/+2This is no surpise for the clintons. No charges will ever come about against either one of them for any of their "shady" dealings in the past. What really gets me is how the same people that stood up for the clintons all these years and are now Barack "Milhouse" Obama supporters. What is the old Casear saying? "Et Tu, Brutus?"

    How can you all of a sudden want to go after her for these things when you defended and supported her (and HIM) when it was shown how guilty they were? Reminds me of certain insane, oblivious, fundamentalist "islam-o-facists" muslims, and Christians. YEAH! I threw that one in so your backup retort is nullified.

    Obama has shady dealings of his own and basically is getting a free pass the same way the Clintons did in the 90's all the way up until late last year. How can you have it both ways?

    Regardless of the party, bureucrat, ***** artist, or whatever common denominator, they should all be held to the same exact standards as their opposites. Bush, Clinton, left, right. It's all the same.

    Wouldn't it be interesting to see all the jerks in DC held accountable and tried for the crimes they committed? No political agendas, no BS, just the way it should be.

    I have a really good solution. AKA, "Shay's Rebellion". As Thomas Jefferson said:
    "I hold it that a little rebellion, now and then, is a good thing, and as
    necessary in the political
    world as storms are in the physical. Unsuccessful rebellions, indeed,
    generally establish the
    encroachments on the rights of the people, which have produced them. An
    observation of this
    truth should render honest republican governors so mild in their
    punishment of rebellions, as not
    to discourage them too much. It is medicine necessary for the sound
    health of government." --
    Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, Jan. 30, 1787.
    • itchie, on 03/27/2008, -0/+1That would require effort which people seem to lack nowadays.

      We must make our fore fathers sicker everyday with our actions.

      We turned into a bunch of pussies.
    • nbyn, on 03/27/2008, -1/+1You forgot the "Bush is evil!" retort. Good for all occasions on Digg.
    • turiya04, on 03/27/2008, -0/+2Your tangential thinking interferes with the readability of your post.

      Picking and changing sides between Obama and Clinton has more to do with values and tactics. It's really unreasonable to judge them so harshly based on who supports them or who their supporters used to support. So some former Clinton supporters now endorse Obama? If that just means that Obama is the same or more similar to Clinton, then there would've been no need to change their endorsement -- they already had a candidate. It doesn't create any rational guilt by association because people with the ability to choose their candidate have selected Obama.

      Perhaps Obama and Clinton share similar values in many areas, perhaps enough for them to share affiliation within the same party. But their tactics differ, and Obama appears to be more of a high-road individual. Clinton has more of a "by any means necessary" attitude. Both approaches are valid in different contexts, but Obama's attitude seems to have resonated with a lot of people who want to see a change in our national politics.
      • sobenofear, on 03/27/2008, -0/+0The clinton's "by any means necessary" approach has always been that. How many people did they destroy in their wake during their early days in Arkansas till now? You can also see a similar "by any means necessary" closet approach by Obama. He's just much more suave and subtle about how he does things.

        What I am trying to point out about the band wagon hoppers is their hypocrisy. They ferverishly attacked anyone who dared point out the same things that the clintons did, as they are now attacking her for. People wanna switch their choice for their "messiah" is their perogative.
        • turiya04, on 03/27/2008, -0/+1No, I cannot see a similar "by any means necessary" closet approach by Obama. I'd like to see you back that assertion with facts, quotes, research, or other relevant details. Or do you just "know" it, but can't provide details due to have suave and subtle he is?
  • designer, on 03/27/2008, -6/+2Don't hit Hillary too hard. She's going to be the Democrat nominee.
  • lhurst, on 03/27/2008, -1/+1Here is the video link that explains it all: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7007109937 ...
  • misterteenwolf, on 03/27/2008, -1/+1is that stan lee in the video?
  • TheArticulator, on 03/27/2008, -6/+4Why do we the people have to think we should settle for presidential front-runners that are dishonest and fraudulent?
    At the last election, i was dumbfounded when i saw two people unfit for presidency being aired on the news (apparently the common American's source on who they can vote for. WTF?) as the two people we had to pick the least bad of. THEY BOTH SUCKED.

    THESE TWO SUCK TOO.

    Bring back Ron Paul, imbeciles.
    • itchie, on 03/27/2008, -0/+2As seen on TV.... It's clear the media and key players can manipulate the people into who they should vote for. Any suprise that Ron Paul was barely mentioned in the news during these elections? While we don't know if hes what we need right now he should none the less have the same amount of time and coverage as the others. Also i'm more troubled that this has become the race to have either a woman or black man as the president where it should be about who would do the better job which has become blurred. Its ashame we live in a society that much rather vote for the next American Idol, then the president of the United States.
    • jjmelch, on 03/27/2008, -0/+0Well here we are again, These THREE suck!
    • hierophantus, on 03/27/2008, -1/+1Oh, he's still around. But for some reason he's just not winning. Must be because all the imbeciles are also sheeple.

      I'm guessing, because there certainly are no objective reasons why any reasonable person could ever consider supporting any candidate besides Paul. None at all. Period.
      • SeekerDarksteel, on 03/27/2008, -0/+0The fact that some reasonable people _may_ choose not to support Ron Paul were they fully informed of his positions does not necessarily mean that everyone who doesn't support Ron Paul is both fully informed and reasonable. In fact it's quite likely that most voters are neither reasonable nor fully informed.
    • caramba420, on 03/28/2008, -0/+0That's why we need instant run-offs. Google it.
    • queotic, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1I support Obama, but have great respect for Dr. Ron Paul and regret that the media disregarded what would have been a great candidate. In several of the primaries, he came in ahead of Guilani, but the media wouldn't even mention Paul and would have all these pieces about Guilani. They also didn't report how he was the candidate with the most contributions from all branches of the military. But I guess there was no way the Republicans would let an anti-war candidate get nominated.
  • WhatInThe42o, on 03/27/2008, -2/+6Buried immediately for referring to Hillary Clinton as the frontrunner in the first sentence. Based on what metrics?
    • radiopayola, on 03/27/2008, -2/+5July of 2007 metrics, smart guy... Really, how could you be bothered by that sentence and not immediately start scanning the page for a date? Seems like a pretty basic thinking skill, to me. Seems like you just like being bitter, burying *****, and talking ***** in comments, to me. All of my favorite things about digg.

      So, yea back to the point, the story is possibly worth burying for being such an old article, but really...this shouldn't be old and buried news, and that's one of the things Digg excels at...uncovering old and neglected news that should have received more attention. Thanks for trying to ruin it with stupidity.
      • WhatInThe42o, on 03/27/2008, -1/+4My pleasure. And, I would also like to extend my thanks to you for sarcastically pointing out my mistake, instead of just saying that it was old. I give you your favorite parts of Digg, and you give me mine: replies from people being assholes, instead of just answering a question posed.
        • radiopayola, on 03/28/2008, -0/+4...just mirroring what I saw in your comment history. You won't find much of that in mine.
  • Neo829, on 03/27/2008, -0/+6The best quote from the article:
    "I'm not anti-Hillary," he added. "I'm just anti-not following the law."
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 84 of 84 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.