A 20-year veteran of the Dallas police force was killed Friday while escorting Hillary Clinton’s motorcade.

Dallas police identified the officer as senior Cpl. Victor Lozada-Tirado and said he lost control of his motorcycle when he struck a curb shortly after 9 a.m. He was married with four children.

The officer had been accompanying the Democratic presidential candidate to a campaign rally when the accident happened on the Houston Street viaduct. He was taken to Methodist Central Hospital where he was pronounced dead.

Clinton later canceled the rally in Fort Worth, saying it would not be appropriate to hold the event.

“We are just heartsick over this loss of life in the line of duty, and I have asked that my condolences be conveyed to the family,” Clinton told reporters soon after learning of the death. “This reminds us once again what our men and women in law enforcement do every single day. And it’s important that we respect and appreciate their service.”

Dallas Police Chief David Kunkle said Friday afternoon that Clinton visited the family of the officer at the hospital to personally extend her sympathies.

After the accident, the officer could be seen lying face down in what appeared to be a large pool of blood, while another officer rubbed his back. The motorcycle was badly damaged, and the officer’s helmet and debris were strew across the street, near a long set of skid marks.

Source: Fox News

I will say a prayer for this officers family

By Karen Tumulty

For all the expectations of high-stakes combat at Thursday’s Democratic presidential debate in Austin, Texas, the most riveting engagement of the night came at the very end—when Hillary Clinton turned to her opponent and shook his hand. "I am honored to be here with Barack Obama. I am absolutely honored," she said. "Whatever happens, we’re going to be fine. You know, we have strong support from our families and our friends. I just hope that we’ll be able to say the same thing about the American people, and that’s what this election should be about." The Democratic crowd leapt to its feet and cheered.

The moment was Clinton’s most heartfelt since she got teary at a voter’s question in New Hampshire, but it had a valedictory, almost elegiac feel to it. Going into the debate, the burden had been on Clinton to change a dynamic that has turned against her, as Barack Obama has racked up 11 victories in a row in the two weeks since Super Tuesday, grabbing the lead in pledged delegates, and momentum. An ABC News-Washington Post poll released shortly before the debate showed Clinton in a statistical dead heat against Obama in Texas, and hanging onto only a slender lead in Ohio. Her own husband had conceded a day earlier that both states are crucial to her survival. "You probably like it that it has come down to Texas," Bill Clinton said while campaigning for her in Beaumont, Tex. "If she wins Texas and Ohio, I think she will be the nominee. If you don’t deliver for her then I don’t think she can be. It’s all on you."

Clinton has shone in most of the debates thus far, while Obama has been weaker in this forum. But the sedate affair on Thursday night is not likely to have much of an impact on the race. There were some slight differences between the two of them here and there on policy. They rehashed the main difference in their health care plans. Though both would make health care more affordable, Clinton would insist upon a requirement that every American have coverage; Obama would not, though he contends that lowering the cost would make nearly everyone decide to do it. Clinton said she would not sit down with Raul Castro until he had shown clear signs of political reform in Cuba; Obama said he would insist upon preparations, not preconditions. That distinction is hardly likely to sway many people in either Texas or Ohio.

Read the rest of this entry »

Hillary Rodham Clinton’s free-spending campaign blew a whopping $95,000 at a low-end supermarket-deli chain last month in Iowa - a telling sign of why she can no longer cut the mustard financially against Barack Obama in critical states.

Clinton’s latest campaign filings reveal how a sprawling, top-heavy campaign organization splurged on posh hotels and pricey consultants but still struggles to define its message against Obama, a charismatic opponent whom Clinton’s camp now calls the front-runner.

The $95,000 charge came at the Hy-Vee store in West Des Moines, a grocery and deli chain that is a fixture in the state, on Jan. 1, just two days before Obama stunned Clinton by beating her in the Iowa caucuses.

The campaign didn’t confirm what the charges were for, but it bragged just a few days before the new year about a plan to provide deli sandwich platters at caucus sites across the state in order to get Clinton’s supporters to come early.

At the time, the idea seemed like evidence of Clinton’s massive turnout operation, but in hindsight it indicates Clinton’s support was soft compared to Obama’s hungry army of first-time voters.

The heavy spending helps explain why Clinton’s camp ended the year $7.6 million in debt, not including her $5 million loan to her campaign.

The campaign team has plowed through $116 million so far.

Source:  New York Post

This article was reported by Michael Luo, Jo Becker and Patrick Healy and was written by Mr. Healy.

Nearly $100,000 went for party platters and groceries before the Iowa caucuses, even though the partying mood evaporated quickly. Rooms at the Bellagio luxury hotel in Las Vegas consumed more than $25,000; the Four Seasons, another $5,000. And top consultants collected about $5 million in January, a month of crucial expenses and tough fund-raising.

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton’s latest campaign finance report, published Wednesday night, appeared even to her most stalwart supporters and donors to be a road map of her political and management failings. Several of them, echoing political analysts, expressed concerns that Mrs. Clinton’s spending priorities amounted to costly errors in judgment that have hamstrung her competitiveness against Senator Barack Obama of Illinois.

“We didn’t raise all of this money to keep paying consultants who have pursued basically the wrong strategy for a year now,” said a prominent New York donor. “So much about her campaign needs to change — but it may be too late.”

The high-priced senior consultants to Mrs. Clinton, of New York, have emerged as particular targets of complaints, given that they conceived and executed a political strategy that has thus far proved unsuccessful.

The firm that includes Mark Penn, Mrs. Clinton’s chief strategist and pollster, and his team collected $3.8 million for fees and expenses in January; in total, including what the campaign still owes, the firm has billed more than $10 million for consulting, direct mail and other services, an amount other Democratic strategists who are not affiliated with either campaign called stunning.

Howard Wolfson, the communications director and a senior member of the advertising team, earned nearly $267,000 in January. His total, including the campaign’s debt to him, tops $730,000.

The advertising firm owned by Mandy Grunwald, the longtime media strategist for both Mrs. Clinton and Bill Clinton, the former president, has collected $2.3 million in fees and expenses, and is still owed another $240,000.

“Fees and payments are in line with industry standards,” Mr. Wolfson said. “Spending priorities have been consistent with overall strategic goals.”

Read the rest of this entry »

She had everything going for her. The most famous name in politics. A solid lead in the polls. A war chest of at least $133 million.

Yet Hillary Clinton now finds herself struggling for political survival, her once-firm grasp of the Democratic presidential nomination seemingly slipping away.

What happened?

Barack Obama, for one thing, a uniquely gifted speaker with a face that appeals deeply to the Democratic Party. He also had a better-organized campaign.

But Democrats say that Clinton, whose central theme is her readiness to be president, also made blunder after blunder. She chose an inexperienced campaign manager, crafted a message that didn’t match the moment, fielded poor organizations in key states and built a budget that ran dry just when she needed money most.

"She got outmaneuvered," said Mark Mellman, a Democratic strategist who isn’t aligned with any of this year’s candidates. "Her campaign allowed her to be outmaneuvered on several fronts."

"To think that someone named Clinton with $130 million could end up here is amazing," another neutral Democratic strategist said. He spoke only on the condition of anonymity to permit more candor, as did many party insiders quoted here who dare not offend the still-powerful Clintons.

Clinton isn’t out of it yet. Aides this week dismissed talk of mismanagement and mistakes and said that she can fight back in Ohio and Texas on March 4 and in Pennsylvania on April 22, and win the nomination at the Democratic National Convention in August.

"People have made the mistake of writing off Senator Clinton before," campaign spokesman Phil Singer said.

Yet it’s undeniable that the New York senator has fallen awfully far awfully fast.

One factor is Obama, an Illinois senator.

"You’ve got to give credit to Barack Obama. He is a once-in-a-generation politician," Mellman said.

Read the rest of this entry »

But accuser begins seeking sworn testimony from high-profile witnesses

A judge in Los Angeles yesterday allowed Hollywood mogul Peter F. Paul to begin taking sworn testimony in his $17 million fraud suit against former President Bill Clinton, but a technicality delayed establishment of a trial date.

California Superior Court Judge Aurelio N. Munoz ruled Paul’s legal team can begin seeking depositions from a host of big names – including Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton – that allegedly were witnesses to an effort by the Clintons and top Democratic leaders to extract millions of dollars from Paul in illegal donations and then cover it up.

Munoz is expected to set the trial date at an April 25 hearing. He said yesterday in court he could not set the date, because defendant Jim Levin, an aide to President Clinton, must be served notice again. Levin did not respond to the original complaint, and Paul’s legal counsel at the time – the Washington watchdog Judicial Watch – did not file a notice of default to verify that fact before filing an amended complaint.

The complaint says Bill Clinton promised to promote Paul’s Internet entertainment company, Stan Lee Media, in exchange for stock, cash options and massive contributions to his wife’s 2000 Senate campaign. Paul contends he was directed by the Clintons and Democratic Party leaders to produce, pay for and then join them in lying about footing the bill for an August 2000 Hollywood gala and fundraiser.

Paul attorney Colette Wilson told WND she has 30 days to service notice to Levin, and he will have 30 days to respond.

Levin is a key figure in the case, Wilson said, because he helped conceive the Hollywood event then contacted Paul to underwrite the costs. Paul claims Levin later was directed by President Clinton to sabotage Stan Lee Media by convincing Paul’s Japanese partner – in violation of a confidentiality agreement – to incorporate a new company instead of investing another $5 million with Paul. The loss of that badly needed capital ultimately caused Stan Lee Media to fold, Paul maintains.

Read the rest of this entry »

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton needed to do more than hold her own in Thursday’s debate with rival Sen. Barack Obama. She needed a U-turn heading into the Ohio and Texas primaries, just 12 days away. Anything short of a 5- to 7-point win in both states, and even her most ardent backers say her hopes for the presidency will vanish.

It might take more than that, and Thursday did not seem to get her any closer.

All the earlier debates happened before Super Tuesday, Feb. 5, when the rivals split delegates. Back then, Clinton needed only to stay even in a debate; it was Obama who needed to prove himself.

But after Obama’s recent 11-contest victory streak, it was Clinton who needed to show why she should have the nomination by convincingly dominating him Thursday night. She left with a draw.

Rumblings are growing among superdelegates in both camps that Democrats must rally around one candidate long before the Democratic convention in Denver in late August. The Clinton campaign’s talk of clinching the nomination after Puerto Rico votes June 7 is winning few converts among the 796 elected officials and party insiders who make up 40 percent of the 2,025 delegates needed to win the nomination. The last thing any of these Democrats wants is a civil war in Denver nine weeks before the November election.

The problem is that neither candidate is likely to reach 2,025 with pledged delegates alone, the kind elected by voters. Though Obama has won the last 11 contests, on Feb. 5 Clinton won four of the biggest states, including California, depriving Obama of the delegates he needs to win a clear majority. If Clinton takes Ohio and Texas on March 4, she will argue that she is winning the big states that count the most.

Party leaders are worried about this scenario.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-San Francisco, a kind of super-superdelegate whose stature could pull other superdelegates in line, said in Palo Alto on Wednesday that a candidate could take the nomination with fewer than 2,025 delegates.

"I believe this will be resolved before we get to the convention, and whether somebody has the 2,025 or not, they’ll be in range, and something will - it will take shape," Pelosi said. "Somebody will be ahead. Whether they have the 2,025 or not, someone will be ahead, and then the decision will have to be made."

Read the rest of this entry »

She demands that a processor must "catch" her and serve her in person! 

There was an extraordinary development at a hearing today in Los Angeles Superior Court in the Paul v Clinton et al civil fraud case against Bill and Hillary Clinton, prosecuted by Hillary’s largest donor Peter Paul. When Judge Munoz finally allowed Paul to commence discovery after a three year “appellate” hiatus, Hillary Clinton’s attorney declared that none of Hillary Clinton’s lawyers would accept a deposition subpoena on Hillary’s behalf.

Hillary will be dodging process servers while she is campaigning for President of the United States around the nation!!

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 seek the protection of California’s Anti-SLAPP law. At that hearing, 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.

The sworn testimony Paul is entitled to take from Hillary as a former defendant and material witness that the Judge specifically stated he will not allow to be denied, is now being officially thwarted by Senator Hillary R Clinton!

Hillary has now made history again in her contempt for the Rule of Law. She has become the first US Senator and candidate for president of the United States on record to declare she will be effectively dodging process servers to avoid testifying truthfully about fraudulent actions that she has never personally denied in the sworn declaration she filed in the case!

What remains to be seen is whether the process server that Hillary will be ducking will be assaulted by Hillary’s Secret Service protectors in the course of serving a legal process on her.

Due to the failure of Paul’s former counsel at Judicial Watch to re-serve Clinton agent Jim Levin with the amended complaint before the anti-SLAPP appeals by Rosen and Clinton divested the court of jurisdiction, a trial date for the case was postponed thirty days until Levin is served as a defendant.

Levin, who testified as a key witness in the government’s prosecution of Hillary finance director David Rosen that he was designated by Bill Clinton as his “eyes and ears” to deal with Paul, is currently serving three years probation in Chicago for felony fraud on a local school board and others.

SOURCE: Peter F. Paul

Before the Iowa caucuses, senior aides to Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton fell into a heated argument during a 7:30 a.m. conference call about the basic message their candidate was delivering to voters.

Mark Penn, chief strategist and pollster, liked Clinton’s emphasis on her "strength and experience," and he defended the idea of her running as a quasi-incumbent best suited for the presidency. Harold Ickes and other advisors said that message was not working. A more promising strategy, they argued, would be to focus on the historic prospect of electing the first woman president.

Today, as Clinton tries to revive her campaign after losing 10 straight primary contests to Sen. Barack Obama, some insiders look back and wish that argument had produced a different outcome. Penn won the debate, say two people aware of the conversation, and Clinton went on to present herself to voters as a steely figure so familiar with the workings of government that she could lead from Day One.

The Clinton campaign now seems in peril, its precarious situation acknowledged on Wednesday even by former President Bill Clinton, who suggested that his wife could not survive a loss in either of the next two major contests, in Texas and Ohio on March 4.

"If she wins Texas and Ohio, I think she will be the nominee," the former president told an audience in Beaumont, Texas. "If you don’t deliver for her, I don’t think she can be."

Still, the campaign seems to be doubling its bet on the message that caused so much division among top aides before the first caucuses in Iowa.

Even as results rolled in from Wisconsin on Tuesday night, eventually yielding a 17-point loss, Clinton said she alone was best prepared to be commander in chief.

And at an evening rally in Brownsville, Texas, on Wednesday, she continued: "When you begin to talk to your friends, ask them: Who do they want to be in the White House when the phone rings at 3 in the morning with some problem or some crisis? We need a commander in chief who’s ready from Day One to be in charge of our country."

The internal friction over Clinton’s message was never fully resolved. A schism persists to this day. Some people close to the campaign’s inner circle believe Clinton should make more of an effort to show a warmer, softer side before the March 4 primaries. Her next opportunity to present herself to a national audience comes today with a debate against Obama in Austin, to be carried by CNN and Univision.

As they look for where the campaign went wrong, some people knowledgeable about it said that Hillary Clinton bore responsibility because she did not heed calls to limit the overarching power Penn wielded within the brain trust as both its pollster and message- maker.

Read the rest of this entry »

As Democratic Sens. Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton rushed from presidential contest to contest in January, that was how quickly they burned through their money.

On the Republican side, Sen. John McCain and Mitt Romney were spending a third as much. To see the difference, all a voter in Iowa or New Hampshire or South Carolina had to do was turn on the television.

Of the $30.5 million Obama spent in January, more than $18 million was to place and produce television and radio ads, according to his January report to the Federal Election Commission. For Clinton, who spent a total of $28.5 million in January, $11 million was for ads.

Clinton relied more heavily on direct mail than Obama, spending $3.5 million on mail expenses, compared to Obama who spent less than half of that.

Both campaigns also choose vendors differently. Clinton tends to stay in-house, using her strategists’ firms for major campaign operations. The firm operated by Mark Penn, her senior strategist, received the $3.5 million for direct mail and was also paid more than $315,000 for polling in January. Overall, his firm, Penn, Schoen & Berland, has been paid about $7.5 million so far in the campaign. The campaign also reported that it still owed Penn’s firm $2.1 million

Clinton media strategist Mandy Grunwald’s firm has been paid more than $2 million for producing ads for the campaign.

Obama relies on a number of strategists and consultants for major campaign functions. His polling has been handled by Harstad Strategic Research from Boulder, Colo., David Binder Research from San Francisco, the Benenson Strategy Group from New York and Brilliant Corners of Washington, D.C. The campaign has paid the four pollsters a total of $2.7 million over the length of the campaign.

Obama has paid about $1.2 million for media consulting and media production to the firm run by his senior strategist, David Axelrod. But he has also used other outside consultants for media productions.

The different emphasis offers a glimpse into the two campaign’s strategic decisions.

Obama, the freshman senator from Illinois, needed television to introduce himself to an electorate that did not know him well. Clinton, on the other hand, was a known quantity and used extensive direct mail to reach voters whom Penn had identified as being a part of her voting coalition.

"I bet they felt they could more effectively communicate with people they had identified though a long-term process, which would lead you to making resource decisions about mail,’ said Tad Devine, a Democratic strategist who advised John Kerry’s 2004 presidential campaign.

Read the rest of this entry »