Shadowy Money Trail of a Fugitive Fund-Raiser

The New York Times ^ | September 8, 2007 | MIKE McINTIRE

[alice_in_bubbaland]

You have a point there. But,why haven’t the GOP spoken out on this? Do what Chuckie Schumer does, hold a press conference showing their outrage & disappointment, whether it be contrived or genuine.

[Eroteme]

You have a point there. But,why haven’t the GOP spoken out on this? Do what Chuckie Schumer does, hold a press conference showing their outrage & disappointment, whether it be contrived or genuine.

My guess is they're making damn sure no one has any Hsus in their closet before coming out and waxing indignant. Otherwise this gets turned into an "everyone does it" scandal--which the media would love, even if the infraction were miniscule and isolated compared to this huge money laundering, systemic DNC op. Then watch the network frenzy to cover it. Until it magically disappears altogether.

For now, all the headlines and stories say Democrat. Democrat democrat democrat--and the democrats can't whine it's a republican smear (By the LA Times and SF Chronicle?) I think the republican leadership may actually have thought this one out. They'd only muck it up and give dems and the media cover to use their CunninghamAbramhoffHalliburtonWarrenGHardingYoMama macro.

[yazd]

But, why haven’t the GOP spoken out on this? ...

When your enemy is making a very serious mistake, don't be impolite and disturb him. — Napoleon Bonaparte (allegedly)

[alice_in_bubbaland]

Why not seize the opportunity? The dims never miss a chance.

[Eroteme]

When your enemy is making a very serious mistake, don't be impolite and disturb him. — Napoleon Bonaparte (allegedly)

Well that says it a lot more succinctly than I did.

[neverdem]

Great! You linked the printer friendly version. Folks with only dialup service appreciate that. Stories like this need to be checked for the frontpage, please. That the NY Times is following this story on its front page is heavy duty politics.

[Grampa Dave]

During the 1980/90's, the Clintoons got by with murder, rape, campaign finance abuse, Arkancide, treason and other crimes due to their buds controlling the MSM. Welcome to the new century, Clintoon criminals. You can't hide your criminal activities anymore.

"LIFE AIN'T EASY FOR A BOY NAMED HSU!"

HSU $ORRY NOW? ANOTHER HILLARY $CANDAL!

HSU, YOUR SUGAR DADDY NOW, HILL?

Hill's memories of HSU will be fading quickly to "I Don't Recall!"

New Hilliarily Clinton Ad

HSU'S HSU re getting illegal money from you know, HSU!

Disgraced political fund-raiser Norman Hsu - a major donor for Hillary Rodham Clinton and other Democrats - was a wanted man again after he failed to show up for court yesterday, and a judge issued a new warrant for his arrest.

Hsu, whose criminal past has roiled the campaigns of presidential candidates, was scheduled to ask a judge to cut in half the $2 million bail he posted last week when he turned himself in after spending 15 years on the lam from a felony theft conviction.

Instead, San Mateo Superior Court Judge Robert Foiles ordered Hsu's bail forfeited to the county and issued a new arrest warrant.

(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com

The Democrats' Foreign Funny Money (NY sucks it up)
yahoo news ^ | Wed Sep 5, 3:00 AM ET | Michelle Malkin

Posted on 09/06/2007 4:49:22 PM PDT by xcamel

(excerpt)

According to investigative blogger Flip Pidot (suitablyflip.com), who delved into public records and crunched the numbers, Clinton took the lion's share of political cash ($174,000) from Hsu and his network of suspected donor-bundlers whose campaign checks dwarfed their income. New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo and New York Governor (and former Attorney General) Eliot Spitzer accepted the largest sums of direct cash from Hsu. ($60,100 each)

Reports Pidot: "Among state parties, campaign committees, and advocacy groups, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee topped the list, with $122,000, though three state Democratic parties or committees (Tennessee, New York, and New Jersey) took more from Hsu directly. Of the 32 organizations that took money from Hsu and his associates, 10 were state Democratic parties and several others were Democratic campaign committees. The 84 individuals who received money from Hsu and his associates included 17 Gubernatorial candidates, 17 Congressional candidates, 27 Senatorial candidates, and a variety of statewide and local candidates. All were Democrats, with the exception of Tom Gallagher, Florida's former CFO and an unsuccessful primary challenger to Charlie Crist in the 2006 Governor race. Including candidate-specific PACs, these individuals have taken just over $1 million from Hsu's group since the 2004 cycle. . . . Another 22 organizations received support from Hsu's network since 2004, primarily Democratic campaign committees and state Democratic parties."

(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...

[Red_Devil 232]

Didn't the ChiComs "steal" a lot of secret technology from our government during the Clinton's previous "administration"??

Actually they did not have to "Steal" it, Clinton just gave it to them ... for BIG $$$$!

[Freee-dame]

The NYT article is dated 9/09, so it could be in print tomorrow.

It is, even on the front page, although below the fold. No references to the Clinton's past relationships to chicom campaign finance stuff like they would have for a Republican, of course. At least it's in print.

the whole donating-to-charity is garbage. That's just another way for a politician to have constituents beholden to them. They should have to give it to the opposing party. They have almost always already used it to win a previous election.

[Suzy Quzy]

The laughingly pathetic, incompetent, FLACCID FEC will FINE Hsu $1000.00 in about 4 years!

[Suzy Quzy]

MITCH McCONNELL better start an investigation ....NOW! Better be ON THE FLOOR talking about the CORRUPTION!

[Suzy Quzy]

Will the IRS look into the DEDUCTION that HILLARY and others will be taking for giving the DIRTY MONEY to a CHARITY? Or DID they ACTUALLY NOT give that money to a real charity??? SHOW ME THE CHECKS!!

[Suzy Quzy]

Fred was WEAK on that investigation...sadly.

[Suzy Quzy]

Mr. Hsu DIDN”T provide the money...the COMMUNIST CHINESE did!!

[skinkinthegrass]

Fred was WEAK on that investigation...sadly.

....true
FWIW.....the "Limp-wristed" (GOP) Senate and the 'Toon 'Rats ("stonewalled") the (and all the others) investigations....all the witnesses were not held/"disappeared" by Burn'em Reno.

[Congressman Billybob]

Back in 1992, Congress finally closed a nasty loophole. Until then, when Senator Snort retired from Congress, he could simply pocket all the remaining money in his campaign account as a personal "bonus." When that slimy door was finally closed, two other options were made available. (The closing of that loophole was known years in advance, which is why a significant number of Members decided to "take the money and run." LOL.)

Those were, 1) give excess money to any other qualified political committee, or 2) give excess money to any qualified charity. Newt Gingrich being a smart guy, recognized a major opportunity here. Since the long-term, well-funded Republicans could no longer count on pocketing the wealth personally, he could "threaten" the Committee Chairs that if they wanted to keep their jobs, they would "volunteer" to donate their unneeded cash (most were certain to retain their seats) to those Republicans with the best chance of defeating their Democrat opponents.

This one change in the money flow led to the "revolution" in which the Republicans gained 53 IIRC seats in the House, while getting the first clean sweep in American political history. It was the only election in which one major party had NONE of its incumbents defeated, while taking incumbent seats from the other major party.

As for the charitable transfers that are occasionally made, these are not personal donations by the candidate, so there is no charitable deduction. But with the FEC law change in 1992, this became a legal way to dump politically dangerous dollars without mailing the refund check to China, or to a jail house somewhere, which would add to the original embarrassment.

Does that clear things up?

John / Billybob

[snowrip]

Didn't the ChiComs "steal" a lot of secret technology from our government during the Clinton's previous "administration"??

They stole some of it... but the Clinton admin GAVE them plenty. Chicom campaign contributions bought access to supercomputers, missile technology, satellite technology, high-tech machine tools, and a host of other things. The Clinton legacy is a China capable of offensive thermonuclear strikes against the United States, and Cold War II.