On Sept. 7, 2007, the California Appellate Court will hear arguments regarding bringing Senator Hillary Clinton back into court as a defendant in the Paul vs. Clinton case.

An appeal was filed by Clinton donor Peter Paul’s attorneys in March, 2007 seeking reversal of an order granting Senator Clinton first amendment protection for her illegal campaign solicitations under California’s anti-SLAPP law that stems from her 2000 U.S. Senate campaign. Her Finance Chief David Rosen, was indicted and tried for causing false FEC reports to be filed by Senator Clinton’s campaign.

U.S. Justice Foundation, submitted to the California Court of Appeal a five minute videotape (which can be viewed at http://www.hillcap.org/), of a July 2000 phone call it claims shows Sen. Clinton – despite denials throughout six years of investigation – taking an active role with Paul in the production of the largest fundraiser of her 2000 Senate campaign.

Paul contends Sen. Clinton’s participation directly and through her designated White House staff assistant Kelly Craighead in directing expenditures, soliciting contributions of performer’s services, and planning the event would make his more than $1.2 million in contributions a direct donation to her Senate campaign as a matter of law rather than being attributable by Senator Clinton to a joint fundraising committee, violating federal statutes that limit "hard money" contributions to a candidate to $2,000 per person. Knowingly accepting or soliciting $25,000 or more in a calendar year is a felony carrying a prison sentence of up to five years.

The videotape was held since May 2001 by the New York Eastern District U.S. Attorney and released only on April 12 of this year after 2 years of requests made by Paul’s attorneys.

"The evidence is of that rare type that captures the very commission of a crime, namely, that of knowingly soliciting, coordinating and accepting federal campaign contributions far in excess of the legal limit of $2,000," according to a case brief filed back in July.

Sen. Clinton was dismissed from the case April 7, 2006, by Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Aurelio Munoz on the basis of the state’s anti-SLAPP law, which, under the First Amendment, protects politicians from frivolous lawsuits during their election campaigns, even though the statute was invoked by Clinton six months after the statutory cut off date and four years after she ended her election campaign.

Paul’s attorney, Colette Wilson of the U.S. Justice Foundation, has argued that because Sen. Clinton violated the federal election law in engaging in her protected activity of soliciting contributions and, therefore, according to the law, would not be covered by the anti-SLAPP statute.

Wilson claims that Senator Clinton directly solicited the funds and applied some control over them, in violation of section 441 of the Federal Election Commission code.

The code says, "Expenditures made by any person in cooperation, consultation or concert with, or at the request or suggestion of a candidate or their agents shall be considered to be a contribution to such candidate," and, therefore, subject to limits.

Wilson argues that while joint campaign committees such as New York Senate 2000 have helped candidates get around the $2,000 limit on contributions directly to their campaigns, the FEC regulation considers any donation specifically requested by a candidate to be the same as a direct contribution to the candidate.

Among the issues the California Court of Appeal is being asked to decide is whether Senator Clinton’s role in soliciting campaign contributions from Peter Paul in excess of $1.2 Million amounted to a felony.

If the three panel of judges rule that Senator Clinton is protected under the anti-SLAPP law, she will still have to testify as a material witness in the case of the collapse of Stan Lee Media, which is expected to begin discovery with depositions of the Clintons, Al Gore, and Ed Rendell at the end of this year, with a trial date in 2008. Former president William Jefferson Clinton, Chelsea Clinton, and Kelly Craighead are expected to be called as witnesses in this case.

A ruling is expected by September 17, 2007 whether to bring Senator Clinton back as a defendant in this case.

The oral arguments are scheduled at the Ronald Reagan State Building in Los Angeles at 10:00 a.m.

Source: Hillary Project