Posted on 09/12/2007 8:29:21 AM PDT by jdm
The Wall Street Journal has partially solved the riddle of where Norman Hsu got the money he used to donate substantial sums to Hillary Clinton’s Senatorial and Presidential campaigns as well as numerous other Democratic candidates.
Joel Rosenman, the producer of the Woodstock rock concerts in 1969 and 1994 gave Hsu’s company an astonishing $40 million “investment” with which Mr. Hsu has apparently absconded: (WSJ Subscription required):
New documents reviewed by The Wall Street Journal may help point to an answer: A company controlled by Mr. Hsu recently received $40 million from a Madison Avenue investment fund run by Joel Rosenman, who was one of the creators of the Woodstock rock festival in 1969. That money, Mr. Rosenman told investors this week, is missing.
In a letter this Monday, Mr. Rosenman told investors that the 37 outstanding deals with Components Ltd. are set to mature “over the next four months.” But he indicated that was not likely. He said he had deposited two checks from Components that “matured Sept. 7.” He was informed by the banks that there were insufficient funds.
“This development, coupled with recent revelations,” he wrote, “led us to believe that payments due on our recent transactions with Components and Hsu may not be made.”
Forty million dollars? This fellow Hsu must have a golden tongue with an uncanny knack of separating people from their money. And I think it is obvious we underestimated his abilities. Norman Hsu is not some run of the mill grifter. He is a superstar in the world of con men; a first class, top of the line, first team all American crook.
No word on exactly when Rosenman invested this money with Hsu but the Journal article mentioned it was “recently.” If so, that hardly explains the great bulk of donations Hsu has made to Democrats going back at least 3 years. How many others has Hsu bilked? And is his entire life one big Ponzi scheme where he scams mark after mark, using the proceeds from his most recent victims to pay off some of the past investors?
There is nothing “common” about this criminal. Which brings up several troubling questions that few seem to be asking at the moment:
Hillary Clinton’s campaign couldn’t explain yesterday why it blew off warnings about felon-turned-fund-raiser Norman Hsu – and the Daily News learned FBI agents are collecting e-mail evidence in the widening scandal.Clinton was forced Monday to give back a whopping $850,000 raised by convicted scam artist Hsu after learning his investment ventures were being probed by the FBI as a potential Ponzi scheme.
She earlier gave to charity $23,000 Hsu donated himself after reports revealed he fled sentencing for a $1 million scam in California in 1992.
Yesterday, the campaign insisted it did all it should to vet Hsu after California businessman Jack Cassidy warned in June that Hsu’s investment operation was fishy. Cassidy e-mailed his tips to the California Democratic Party, which forwarded them to the Clinton campaign.
We should also be asking questions about Mrs. Clinton’s security. How could the Secret Service let someone like Hsu within 50 yards of Hillary? Or were their objections overridden?
But the question the Justice Department is going to want answered is who in Mrs. Clinton’s campaign knew about the Cassidy warning and then failed to adequately vet Hsu’s shady dealings? Or, more troubling, discovered Hsu’s history and still took the money anyway.
Meanwhile, See Dubya at Hot Air has dug into Clinton’s donor list and pulled out several contributions from Rosenman’s family as well as others connected with his investment company:
Source Financing, Mr. Rosenman’s company, has asked the beneficiaries of Mr. Hsu’s largesse to quit giving it away to charity in order to recover it for their investors.
No word on whether Mr. Rosenman wants his own contributions to Hillary back, nor those of a Ned Rosenman who also works for Source Financing, nor those of a Molly Rosenman, also of Source Financing–each of whom gave her $4600 back in March.
Mr. Rosenman’s partner, a Mr. Yau Cheng also donated $4600 to Hillary. See Dubya asks whether all of these checks were part of a bundle delivered by Hsu to the Clinton campaign. In fact, there were 260 individual donors whose checks were bundled by Mr. Hsu. Malkin rightly calls on Hillary to come clean and cough up the list. She’s already returned $850,000. Why not make the names public?
Timing will be critical in this case. When did Hsu receive the $40 million? All the donations from Source Financing were made in March of this year. Was there some kind of understanding between Rosenman and Hsu about part of that $40 million when repaid offered as reimbursement to donors scared up by Source Financing? Was more of that $40 million earmarked for political donations to Democrats? How many operations like this exist to get around FEC regulations?
This could be the biggest election financing fraud in history, even surpassing the Nixon crimes committed during the 1972 election.
Some of the questions about the source of Norman Hsu’s largess spread around the country to Democratic candidates have been answered. But as in all scandals, each question answered raises additional problems. This is a very serious scandal for the Clinton campaign, one that could even sink her candidacy even if it doesn’t touch Hillary directly. And depending on how extensive the lawbreaking was, it may pull down the Democratic party a notch or two nationally.
Aging-hippie-entrepreneur for Hillary! bump. Read this article this AM - it was quite good. I still think that there is PLA money somewhere if someone can peel back enough layers of the onion.
If you were Rosenthal, wouldn’t you have your lawyer send a letter to Mrs. Bill that she may have received stolen money and demand your money back?
Norman Hsu is not some run of the mill grifter. He is a superstar in the world of con men; a first class, top of the line, first team all American crook.
............................................................Does anyone wonder how the Clintons and HSU got together. The Clintons are the ULTIMATE backwoods Arkansas grifters, con men of epic proportions. Those of the same persuasion tend to hang together. Hsu and Clinton are ‘birds of a feather’, I only hope they go down together.
We can only hope that this gets big enough where the MSM cannot ignore it. I know, wishful thinking...
Hillary Clinton is like a lead-painted toy: toxic, bad for children, and made in China.
Nope. The investors are just dumb. A friend of mine knows Hsu. Says he's a very little man, not very smart, not especially dynamic, and obviously a beard for someone else. He thinks Chinese intelligence is as good a guess as any.
The plot thickens. Popcorn anyone?
BTTT
Hsu and Clinton are ‘birds of a feather’, I only hope they go down together.
Did you know it? You’re a poet!
I think this guy has it right. If bloggers can connect the dots this easily, surely the FBI and FEC can too.
Hsu knows that if Hillary is elected, he would go to the top of the pardons list. Unless Hillary has to give all the money back. Then his future might not be so bright. Might not have to wear shades.
The obvious question is what did Hsu get for his contributions? We have seen the MSM go after Jack Abramoff hammer and tong trying to connect the dots in terms of influence peddling, but I have yet to see any reports as to why Hsu was giving such large amounts of money. It is the elephant in the room.
Evita does not want to talk about it because there certainly has been some quid pro quo that I am sure she feels in NOT in the public interest.
Oh no. I know real 'backwoods Arkansas grifters' and the Clintons are not 'backwoods Arkansas grifters'.
The Clintons are Yale Law School/Oxford grifters. Much, much farther to the left on the integrity scale.
With apologies to real 'backwoods Arkansas grifters'. ;-)
Norman Hsu is not a superstar con man. If a mere visit to those companies’ Manhatten addresses (as was done by one conservative blogger) is all it took to prove them 100% fake, no one of any capabilities would actually invest 40 million in them. Hsu is the designated bag man for the Clintons et al. operation and not much more. He carted around money as he was told.
and he was clearly protected. Otherwise, he does not show his face all over Manhatten, etc. serving on Bob Kerry’s board of trustees where easily confronted by Rosenman or other major creditors. Rosenman only wants his (or is it really Hillary’s) intended money now that it is all coming apart.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Her 2000 Senate campaign admitted a false filing concerning $1.2 million, paid a ridiculously small fine, and filed a new statement on that gift. It so happens that the new statement is also false. It misstates the source of that money.
So far, Hillary has evaded the truth that that contribution came from Peter Paul. If she ever told the truth about that, under FEC law her Senate campaign could be ordered to return that $1.2 million to Mr. Paul.
The other error is that this article claims that the $850,000 "has been returned." Latest information is that Hillary is still trying to keep some of that money, depending on whose bank account it came from. I would not trust a statement that the "money had been repaid" until I both saw a canceled check AND confirmed that it had cleared through the banking system. Remember Hillary's brothers, the Rodham Rascals? They claimed to have returned some of their ill-gotten gains, but when the press looked into it, it turned out thay were liars.
Congressman Billybob
Latest article, "Support the National Party of the United Race?"
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.