My reading is as follows: Rodham got the loans from United Shows. The owners of United Shows got the pardon (not sure why or why they needed it) Rodham didn't repay the loans and now the trustee wants the money back. That possibly makes him a deadbeat. I don't know hillary's involvement. And this is news in the NYT and WSJ? Are you suggesting Hillary 'sold' the pardon in exchange for the loans? I would expect Rodham's still on the hook for the loans? At least the trustee seems to think so. As an aside....I'm going to try the Iraq excuse next time i'm pulled over. "What!!! GWB is spending billions on an illegal war and you're chasing me down for going 15 over the limit!" As another aside -- the S&L thing was much bigger than most of us realize...but as it seems polititians of all stripes had their hands in the pot...nobody wanted to make hay from it.
my bad, I need reading comprehension 101. its still a non story unless the hillary got the money. the problem is this now that I understand, we know that someone who would be pardoned is someone whom clinton knows, therefore its not that outlandish that they would be in business with someone close to him. now that can be considered questionable, but it is logical. its no different from defending halliburton on war contracts.
I think United Shows got the pardon before they gave out the loans, but otherwise, you're right. Rodham's apparently in default, and it's a trustee in bankruptcy doing his job and trying to augment his pie. There doesn't seem to be any allegation of quid pro quo at all.
Except the loans did start two months after the pardon. Seems the little regional npo boards i work with have much more stringent conflict of interest guidlelines than the office of the president.
