| To set the record straight, Peter Paul does have a criminal record and is guilty of fraud on different accounts. He's guilty of defrauding the Cuban government of $8.75 million dollars by selling nonexistent coffee. He is also guilty of a securities fraud which (for manipulating Stan Lee's stock; this was what he was arrested for in Brazil, to which he recently plead guilty) cost "losses to the investing public and financial institutions of approximately $25 million".
Perhaps they were correct in saying that Peter Paul cannot be trusted, and the fact that this video only shows his side of the case is disconcerting to say the least.
Also, to suggest that the Clinton's are guilty of capsizing Stan Lee by "stealing" one of it's top investors is an absurd insinuation. The Clinton's can't "steal" the investor; the investor in his own prerogative decided not to invest. To me it seems like Paul has something against the Clinton's for this reason, which further sheds some doubts into his accounts of the case.
I'm not really sure how the video of the phone call truly implicated Hillary. It was allegedly five minutes long but the youtube video only showed a few seconds of it. I don't think the documentary adequately explained how it tied Clinton to fraud of the event. If anything, Paul is more guilty of fraud in the event for paying for most of the $2 million cost by fraudulently borrowing the funds from Merrill Lynch (which lost about $5 million in lending to Paul).
All of the video's apparent bias (and half-truths) aside, if more adequate evidence is provided, Clinton should obviously be brought to justice. But I don't think we've seen such adequate substantiation, just bias and seemingly empty (of substance) allegations.
__________________ Political Compass:
Economic Left/Right: -9.50
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.72
Last edited by Katczinsky; 10-27-2007 at 11:00 AM.
| 
Linear Mode
