Hillary Clinton Presidential Odds Rest in Hands of Three Judges?

Call it a well orchestrated smear campaign or a case with its own merit, we'll call it an important political betting strategy.  Hillary Clinton currently sits as the favorite to be elected next US President in 2008.  With even odds at Sportsbook.com (see website here), she'd probably be a bigger favorite if not for the fact that there is stiff competition breathing down her throat (specifically, Barrack Obama and a few dark horses that could gain steam down the road.

But those opposed to Clinton cite a possible wrench thrown in her campaign hopes.

"There is an unprecedented situation of a Presidential candidate's campaign being placed in the hands of a three judge panel reviewing evidence of ******* conduct," claim those opposed to Clinton's Presidential run.

The opposition is strong and - regardless of what transpires - could dramatically affect odds of Mrs. Clinton becoming the next US President.

Peter Paul - who in 2000, produced the largest fundraising event of Hillary Clinton's senate campaign, The Gala Hollywood Farewell Salute to President Clinton, with Cher, Diana Ross, Patti LaBelle among others performing- reportedly caused the indictment and trial of Hillary's finance director David Rosen in 2005 for false reports to the FEC that allegedly hid more than $800,000 of Paul's contributions to Hillary's campaign.

Paul filed a landmark suit in 2003 against Hillary and Bill Clinton and their friends Grammys producer Gary Smith and strip club owner James Levin for fraud and causing the collapse of his $100 million dollar public company with Spider Man creator Stan Lee in 2000.

After the California Supreme Court ruled in 2004 that the Clintons would have to go to trial, Hillary invoked the California law that protects candidates during campaigns . Any "illegal" conduct by any candidate while campaigning is not protected. After Hillary was later dismissed as a defendant under that law, Paul appealed presenting detailed evidence of Hillary's violation of ciminal statutes during her campaign.

The three judge review that Paul engineered is something Special Prosecutors Ken Starr and Robert Ray were unable to accomplish after millions spent and years of investigations of Hillary and Bill. If the judges rule Hillary engaged in illegal conduct to deny her protection of the Anti-SLAPP law, there is a potential this could ruin Clinton's Presidential ambitions.  What are the odds?

Carrie Stroup has been covering the 2008 Presidential Betting Odds picture for Gambling911.com Odds Found Here

Paul's attorney, Colette Wilson of the U.S. Justice Foundation, argues in the brief filed with the California Court of Appeal that Sen. Clinton's actions violated Title 2 section 437 of the U.S. federal code, which states: "Any person who knowingly and willfully commits a violation of any provision of this act which involves the making, receiving, or reporting of any contribution, donation, or expenditure aggregating $25,000 or more during a calendar year shall be fined under Title 18, or imprisoned for not more than 5 years, or both."

"This is the first time a court of competent jurisdiction – not a grand jury or prosecutor – will be reviewing a charge of criminal conduct against Hillary Clinton," Paul said.

Paul acknowledged to WorldNetDaily, however, that the appeals court could rule in his favor without a finding on the alleged criminal violation.

Wilson said that if the court does find Sen. Clinton engaged in criminal conduct, the finding would not compel the FEC to take action.

But it would be "very persuasive," she said, and the FEC could refer the case to the attorney general for a criminal indictment.

The Clintons' longtime attorney, David Kendall, referring to the charge that Senator Clinton violated the criminal statute said "Any such allegation is totally false and totally unsupported."

(top photo taken from www.hillcap.org )

---

Christopher Costigan, Gambling911.com

Originally published February 8, 2007 1:56 pm ET