Amidst the huge stories involving local (Philadelphia) corruption, it's a wonder the LA Times report on the Rosen trial ever made its way into today's Philadelphia Inquirer:

LOS ANGELES - A former finance director for Hillary Rodham Clinton's Senate campaign will go on trial in federal court today on charges of lying about the cost of putting on a star-studded fund-raiser for the senator's 2000 campaign, a case being seized upon by some of Clinton's political enemies.

The New York Democrat has not been charged and is not expected to testify, but the trial is sure to be scrutinized for revelations that might provide ammunition for those who oppose her 2006 bid for re-election or a possible run for president in 2008.

Charged with three counts of making false statements to the Federal Election Commission is David Rosen, 40, a Chicago consultant who served as Clinton's finance director in 2000.

He contends he was scammed by two convicted con artists, men the government investigators allegedly relied on to develop their case. Rosen could face 15 years in prison and $750,000 fine if convicted.

The allegations involve a lavish party held Aug. 12, 2000, at a Los Angeles estate two days before the start of the Democratic National Convention in Los Angeles. Aside from Hillary and Bill Clinton, the event was attended by an array of stars, including Brad Pitt, Jennifer Aniston, Cher, Diana Ross and Muhammad Ali.

The indictment against Rosen contends that he falsely reported spending about $400,000 to put on the extravaganza while it actually cost more than $1.2 million, including $1.1 million worth of in-kind contributions of goods and services.

Persons familiar with campaign finance law have suggested that such a maneuver might have freed up more unrestricted campaign funds for Clinton's successful 2000 Senate bid.

So far, federal prosecutors have offered no motive for the alleged underreporting, and Justice Department officials have declined to comment about the prosecution.

The source of the unreported contributions has been identified as Peter Paul, a three-time convicted felon who says he helped bankroll the affair in hopes of securing former President Clinton's participation in an Internet venture he had launched with Stan Lee, creator of "Spider-Man."

Paul has filed a lawsuit against the Clintons in Los Angeles County Superior Court, claiming they turned against him in the venture after learning about his criminal past.

Peter Paul claims that he poured money into this event to help get Hillary elected to the Senate, and that he was later he was promised a presidential pardon. If this is true (does anyone still remember Pardongate?), the assertion that "they turned against him in the venture after learning about his criminal past" would seem a bit disingenuous. According to this account, the Clintons turned against Paul only after the Washington Post had prepared a story about his criminal past:

Mr. Paul personally put up $2 million to finance the California gala at Stan Lee's ranch, Verney said. As part of the deal, Clinton was promised an additional $15 million in Stan Lee stock.

Mr. Paul got the idea to recruit Clinton after meeting another key Pardongate witness, Denise Rich.

"Peter Paul, through a person who used to work for him, became acquainted with Denise Rich and many of the Clinton fund-raisers around the country. ... The idea kept snowballing. Peter Paul wanted Bill Clinton on his team," he said.

"So eventually Peter Paul said, 'In order to get Bill Clinton I'm willing to help get Hillary Rodham Clinton elected U.S. senator. And I'll put up money to help elect her."

But the night of the gala fund-raiser, Paul's deal with the Clintons began to unravel, as the Washington Post readied a report on his criminal record, Verney said.

The report prompted the Clintons to immediately distance themselves from the media mogul. It was at that point that Paul decided to seek a presidential pardon.

After making the pardon request, Paul was contacted by then-Democratic National Committee chairman Ed Rendell, who allegedly suggested it would be "nice" if he made a $150,000 contribution to the DNC.

"Here's a guy who just gave $2 million and the Clintons disavowed him the day after the event because of some news stories that came up in the Washington Post," the Judicial Watch official said. "And then after that, Rendell asks for another $150,000."

Paul never got his pardon and the deal for Clinton to join Stan Lee Media's board collapsed.

The Justice Department is trying to secure the cooperation of an indicted businessman as it pursues Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's 2000 Senate campaign for possible fundraising violations, according to interviews and documents.

The FBI told a U.S. magistrate in Los Angeles two years ago that it has evidence Clinton's campaign deliberately understated its fundraising costs so it would have more money to spend on elections. Prosecutors contend that businessman Peter Paul made donations because he wanted a pardon from President Bill Clinton.

Paul has denied he raised money for Mrs. Clinton to boost his chance for a pardon, and he asserted that campaign officials told him the contributions would be disclosed as required by law, his defense team said. He did not receive a pardon.

Noel L. Hillman, the Justice Department's top public corruption attorney, has met three times -- most recently in May -- with lawyers for Paul to discuss a plea deal. The investigation has continued for more than three years. The department wants to interview Paul to determine whether he can substantiate allegations of wrongdoing, his defense lawyers said.

I'd love to know all the facts, because the more I look into this case, the more fascinating it gets. For example, here's noted conservative spokesman Paul Weyrich on Peter Paul:

I have considerable interest in this case because I know Peter Paul. I met him through the children of Clifford Heinz, a former Director of the Free Congress Foundation. Paul subsequently was in touch with me on a number of occasions. He seemed to indicate he wanted to help conservatives, but later he got close to the Clintons.

Mrs. Clinton needed lots of money to run for the Senate in New York. She and the president turned to Paul to help with a major fundraiser. He ended up putting over $2 million into a "Hollywood Tribute to Bill Clinton" on August 12, 2000. The problem is that Hillary never reported this contribution to the Federal Election Commission.

That is a federal crime.

According to Klayman, this payment of $2 million was part of a $17 million offer to Bill Clinton to work with Peter Paul's companies after Clinton left office. Paul has disclosed this, revealing that Hillary Clinton lied to the media when she said she had taken no contributions from Paul and would not do so.

That would be significant because the only commandment left with the liberal media is "thou shalt not lie to the liberal media."

Did Hillary know? Paul and Tonken say she did, and it seems obvious that she must have: Hillary followed every dime in her campaign, personally calling donors for most of it. How could she possibly not have known of a decision that saved her $800,000?

But the person who knows if she knew is David Rosen. If found guilty, he faces a potential sentence of 15 years. If the feds threaten him with jail — and it's hard to see how they wouldn't —Rosen faces a choice: Tell the truth or go to prison.

Rosen is no long-term Clinton loyalist like Webb Hubbell, nor did he have an affair with a Clinton (as Bill implied to me that Susan McDougal did). And there is no Clinton in the White House to pardon him if he goes to prison.

David Rosen is a young man in his late 30s, with a life ahead of him. He would be a fool to go to jail to protect Hillary.

If he did, she wouldn't even visit him.

UPDATE: Writing in today's New York Post, Dick Morris has much more:

The New Orleans Times-Picayune has reported on a transcript of a Sept. 4, 2002, audiotape of a dinner between Rosen and Ted Kennedy in-law Raymond Reggie, who was wearing a wire. Most news accounts have left out the fact that Rosen implicated himself with each bite of steak.

On tape, the paper reported, Rosen "acknowledges that the gala probably cost far more to produce than he reported on federal campaign forms." Rosen says of the fund-raiser, "We woulda never done it if the guy [Peter Paul] said he spent $2 million. So now he's [Paul] saying he spent $2 million on an event that raised $1.4." Rosen goes on to agree that "he may have" spent the $2 million.

Reggie, whose sister is Ted Kennedy's wife, will get no more than five years in prison on bank-fraud convictions in return for cooperation and testimony at Rosen's trial.

In the conversation, David Rosen calls himself a "guinea pig" for Clinton's lawyers, noting that "the former Clinton White House wanted to hire, or to argue the [Rosen's] case in a certain way." The indicted former finance director said, "And I did it for them. Like, I bit the bullet and went in as a guinea pig and argued their argument for me. Instead of freeing' and runnin' and coverin' my ass, I was a good soldier."

Then Rosen adds, ominously, "So far it's worked out, but I coulda done it a lot different."

As the net tightens around him now, Rosen may indeed "do it a lot different" and begin cooperating with the feds in building a case that Hillary knew about the under-reporting.

And while you're at it, read Redstate.org. Here's the conclusion:

Bob! Get on the phone and hold that order for 500 Hillary '08 stickers! Do it quick!