Peter Paul v. Clinton - Hillary To Be Called As Witness If Process Servers Can Catch Her

Peter Paul v. Clinton - Hillary To Be Called As Witness If Process Servers Can Catch Her

I got a call from a person heavily involved in the case of Peter Paul v. Hillary Clinton . The latest twist in this case came Thursday, as Judge Aurelio Munoz allowed Peter Paul's attorneys to commence discovery (sworn depositions of witnesses) after a three year hiatus, while agreeing to set a trial date at a hearing to be held in April, 2008, according to Paul's website

According to the site:

The business fraud suit being prosecuted by Hillary’s largest donor Peter Paul is finally proceeding to trial after years of delays in the appellate court fight to keep Hillary in the case as a defendant rather than a material witness. Judge Munoz allowed Paul to commence discovery (sworn depositions of witnesses) after a three year hiatus, while agreeing to set a trial date at a hearing to be held in April, 2008.

In response, Hillary Clinton’s attorney David Kendall declared that none of Hillary Clinton’s lawyers would accept a deposition subpoena on Hillary’s behalf.

Hillary is declaring that she would rather dodge process servers while she is campaigning for President of the United States around the nation than honorably accept a notice of her mandatory deposition through her lawyers!!

Hillary Clinton was dismissed as a co-defendant in the case at a hearing in April, 2007 because of democrat Appellate Court Judges’ support of her belated effort to obtain the protection of California’s Anti-SLAPP law from tort fraud conspiracy charges in raising money for her Senate campaign.

At that hearing, after dismissing Hillary as a defendant, trial court Judge Aurelio Munoz admonished David Kendall by telling him unequivocally that any effort to deny Senator Clinton’s testimony as a witness in the case would be “Dead on Arrival”. To emphasize his point, the Judge followed his statement by saying “Did you hear that Mr Kendall?”

In typical Clintonian hubris and contempt for the judicial process, Hillary had her diminutive counsel with the over inflated ego state to Paul’s lawyer, Colette Wilson, that none of the three lawyers of record representing Hillary in the case would accept a witness subpoena for her deposition on her behalf, and that there would be no cooperation in the process the judge stated should include Hillary’s testimony.

In other words, Clinton's lawyer have no interest in following the judge's orders.

I directly called Peter Paul, the plaintiff (person who filed the fraud lawsuit against Bill Clinton, and to which Senator Hillary Clinton is considered a part of) to get more background on this story. In response to the remarks of Clinton's attorney, Paul said "It denegrates her office as a server of the public. After abusing the First Amendment to be dismissed (from testifying as a witness in the fraud trial), now she's challenging a judge's order. Telling the plaintiff's lawyer that she will not cooperate without being served (a subpoena ) by a process server."

Paul reports that his team will have a process server in Texas and Ohio, where Clinton is campaiging. According to Paul, It's now a race against a 70-day clock: "They're (Clinton's legal team) hoping to 'run the clock," Paul said, "and hope that they get a summary judgement." (That means a decision where the judge is convinced there's not enough evidence to warrant a trial-by-jury). If Senator Clinton's served by a process server, she has to testify, which would then give enough evidence to have a jury trial.

All of this means that Hillary Clinton will be chased by process-servers as she's campaigning in Texas and Ohio. This is a race to watch. Stay tuned.

Cogan's View of The Court

Doug Cogan, who made the movie "Hillary Uncensored", was outside the court on Thursday and gave me his take on the matter. "It really is remarkable that the candidate (Clinton) who wants to be the chief law enforcement officer for the nation continues to scoff at the law" Cogan says the Clintons never expected Peter Paul to come back from Brazil (where he was imprisoned several years ago) alive.

"I would love for some reporter to ask Hillary if she's going to obey the court's order," Cogan remarked.

Cogan explains that there is compelling evidence that Dave Kendall submitted false declarations to the court, from assertions that Hillary Clinton met Paul in 2000, when this video shows Clinton and Peter Paul talking about when they met in 1993.

As a note, this is my video on the FEC side of Peter Paul's battle against the Clinton's: