I notice that you don't even attempt to defend the behavior; only indicate that you don't care about her unethical actions.

Typical

You are wrong - this didn't come out three months ago.  Bill's involvement with the organization came out three months ago.  What DIDN'T come out was the fact that Clinton sold her donor list to the organization -

"All Things Considered, February 13, 2008 ·  Political campaigns spend thousands, even millions of dollars to acquire good mailing lists.

Last year, New York Sen. Hillary Clinton took the unusual step of renting out some of her lists. The transaction once again highlights the Clintons' connections to a businessman who now faces questions from the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Reports from Clinton's campaign show that on Dec. 3, it collected payment for renting out three mailing lists, the sale of which netted them $8,225.

It was an unusual transaction, according to Roger Craver, a liberal guru of the political direct-mail industry.

"As a general rule, a campaign will not let its donor list out into the markets until the campaign is over," he said. "This is the mother's milk of small-gift fundraising, and they use these lists frequently."

There are no records that any other presidential candidates rented out mailing lists last year.

Several sources who work in political consulting and in direct mail, who would not speak for attribution, said they were surprised by the deal, as well as its low price.

According to one direct-mail professional, $800,000 would have seemed like a more plausible price for a quality list. A political consultant suggested that the list broker's unidentified client could have rented the list as a sample one -- to do a test-run mailing."

So, she sells the info - at a bargain rate - to a company that Bill is involved in, which is under investigation for scams and junk mail?  Who happens to fly her around the country free of charge?

Nice

Actually --

same players.  different scandal.

Or at least - new wrinkle to an ongoing scandal.

But don't feel bad - I have trouble keeping up myself.

Actually a lot of the the Vinny Gupta stuff is at least 1 year old.  I'm also disappointed to see yet another diary with nothing substantially new.  

But on the other hand, I'm disturbed by how many of our politicians get into these types of relationships with big money.  I think they get farther from understanding real life for ordinary people and it is part of our political disfunction that leads to money undermining the will of voters.

I for one continue to watch this story.  I think it is hung up in the legal process now with the shareholders' lawsuit.

 You may need to register, but these are interesting:

Motley Fool:
http://www.fool.com/investing/general/20 07/06/14/disinformation-usa.aspx

http://www.fool.com/investing/general/20 05/09/07/coup-du-jour-at-infousa.aspx

New York Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/20/busine ss/20tele.html?ex=1337313600&en=38f9 ae54aac348d4&ei=5090

Washington Post:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con tent/article/2007/05/25/AR2007052502332. html

I just don't want to see you guys get overly excited like you did over the Kazakhstan thing, which I'm sure is going to grab the public interest any day now.  Just wait until the public realizes that Bill Clinton's charitable foundation is fighting worldwide AIDS with money that originally came from a brutal dictator!!!

I'm certainly not trying to stop you guys from talking amongst yourself about how all of this stuff is horrible, simply horrible.

hahah, thanks for the catch!

Sorry, but as I said in the other thread, it isn't stale - it is a new story.

Here's a fixed link, though.

See above. The author's link was somehow broken, the story's still there.