Skip to comments.
Investors, prosecutors seek piece of disgraced fundraiser Hsu
AP on Bakersfield Californian ^
| 9/26/07
| Paul Elias - ap
Posted on 09/26/2007 4:44:04 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-35 next last
This Hsu affair could be going on a long time.. a real long time..
Good.
2
posted on
09/26/2007 4:46:01 PM PDT
by
NormsRevenge
(Semper Fi ... Godspeed ... ICE’s toll-free tip hotline—1-866-DHS-2-ICE ... 9/11 .. Never FoRget!!!)
To: NormsRevenge
What’s with the lockstep repetition of the phrase “disgraced fundraser Hsu.”
3
posted on
09/26/2007 4:48:34 PM PDT
by
Steely Tom
(I wasn't able to vote against Hitler, but I can vote NO on Hillary!)
To: NormsRevenge
I’m sure it’s being done, but investors and their corporations need to aggressive push the fact that a lot of STOLEN MONEY went to the Democrats and they want the money back. Those who accepted any funds from HSU need to be put on notice that they have received money derived from criminal activity!
4
posted on
09/26/2007 4:50:38 PM PDT
by
Enterprise
(Those who "betray us" also "Betray U.S." They're called DEMOCRATS!)
To: NormsRevenge
"We have the body," Jim, he's not dead....yet.
This so going to be good.......
5
posted on
09/26/2007 4:55:27 PM PDT
by
LasVegasMac
(Islam: Bringing the world death and destruction for 1400 years!)
To: NormsRevenge
Re#2 Yep. A long time. I liked the Boston Globe linkage article today showing that a lot of the money went to Democrats that have, surprise, surprise, come out to endorse Hillary. I also like this from this article:"On Wednesday, a state judge in Manhattan refused to freeze the contributions Hsu made to several New York politicians, including Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, Gov. Eliot Spitzer and Attorney General Andrew Cuomo because their lawyers were not in court. "
6
posted on
09/26/2007 4:58:52 PM PDT
by
eureka!
(Is power so important to the Democrats that they are willing to betray our country? Sadly, yes.)
To: All
So maybe there really were investors and not just Chi-Coms. Do the investors’ claims add up. I wonder.
7
posted on
09/26/2007 5:00:59 PM PDT
by
WilliamofCarmichael
(If modern America's Man on Horseback is out there, Get on the damn horse already!)
To: LasVegasMac
"We have the body," I believe that phrase was carefully chosen. It's pretty much the English translation of the legal expression habeas corpus.
8
posted on
09/26/2007 5:02:50 PM PDT
by
Steely Tom
(I wasn't able to vote against Hitler, but I can vote NO on Hillary!)
To: Steely Tom
This disgraced fundraiser Hsu is beginning to gain my sympathy. He's beginning to remind me of a declawed cat being attacked by a pack of wild dogs.
These particular wild dogs are as guity as the cat.
9
posted on
09/26/2007 5:03:53 PM PDT
by
BARLF
(Who is Huma?)
To: eureka!
Yup! They’re (politicians) trying to set themselves up as “victims” here. Couldnt see that coming! /sarc
The point is that this is stolen money from the investors or it is not! What makes this any different than if Hsu had been embezzling this money from a bank? Are they really saying that it makes a difference as to WHO receives the stolen money? Yikes!
10
posted on
09/26/2007 5:21:03 PM PDT
by
tiger640
To: NormsRevenge
RUSH: Of all places, by the way, this is in the Boston Globe today: "Disgraced fund-raiser Norman Hsu did a lot more than just pump $850,000 into Hillary Clinton's campaign bank account: He also raised hundreds of thousands of dollars for local, state, and federal candidates who have endorsed Clinton or whose support she courted." She had a nice little operation going here. It's just not conceivable that she's telling the truth when she said she really had no idea who Hsu was because "we can't vet all of our bundlers, we simply don't have the records." Terry McAuliffe went out there, "Yeah, we can't do that, there's too many of them. We ran Hsu through the computer, nothing showed up." Hardy-har-har -- not believable! "Hsu has been a major fund-raiser for Democrats since 2003, Hsu became one of Clinton's biggest bundlers -- gathering scores of individual checks and sending them to her campaign. But since revelations last month that Hsu was a fugitive in a 15-year-old California fraud case, Clinton has said she would return the $850,000 she has taken from him and his associates."
Yeah, we never get proof that this happens. All we hear is that they say they're going to do it. "In at least some cases, Clinton or her aides directly channeled contributions from Hsu and his network to other politicians supportive of her presidential campaign, according to interviews and campaign finance records. There is nothing illegal about one politician steering wealthy contributors to another, but the New York senator's close ties to Hsu have become an embarrassment for her and her campaign," because she's denying that there have been any close ties. "In February, when former Iowa governor Tom Vilsack ended his own White House bid, he was about $450,000 in the red. A month after dropping out, Vilsack endorsed Clinton, and Clinton agreed to help him retire his debts. (Both insisted there was no quid pro quo.)" Why would anybody think that? No, of course not!
"Over the next few months, some of Clinton's biggest fund-raisers gave Vilsack checks, including Hsu, who kicked in the maximum allowable contribution, $2,300. On May 3 after attending an event organized by Clinton's campaign, Newsweek reported this month. An associate of Hsu's, Paul Su, chipped in $1,000 on the same day. In other cases, Clinton helped direct Hsu's money to influential politicians who have yet to endorse her but hail from key presidential primary states. Clinton raised at least $6,000 from Hsu and his network last year for Governor John Lynch of New Hampshire, according to Lynch aides. Lynch has no plans to endorse anyone before the state's crucial January primary, aides said. Clinton said in a National Public Radio interview last week that Hsu's past was 'a rude awakening to all of us - I mean, not only in my campaign, but the dozens of campaigns going back to, I guess, 2003 and '04 who, you know, took contributions. None of us caught this and we all ran searches.'" Oh, yeah: "We really tried to find out who this guy was, we just had no idea!"
I mean, two outstanding federal warrants and they couldn't find out who he was. I guess you guys all had a rude awakening with Congressman William Jefferson (Democrat-Louisiana), too, when the 90 grand in cold cash was found in his freezer. So it stinks to high heaven and I just love this. The ethics the government crowd has out there on the left... They don't want voter ID; they don't want George Soros investigated or exposed for what he's doing, and, of course, they're running for the tall grass now from Norman Hsu. This is a lot of smoke, and with this much smoke there has to be some fire.
11
posted on
09/26/2007 5:25:05 PM PDT
by
Miss Didi
("Good heavens, woman, this is a war not a garden party!" Dr. Meade, Gone with the Wind)
To: NormsRevenge
Is this a case of whos’ on Hsu first?
12
posted on
09/26/2007 6:09:37 PM PDT
by
Timocrat
(I Emanate on your Auras and Penumbras Mr Blackmun)
To: Steely Tom
Whats with the lockstep repetition of the phrase disgraced fundraser Hsu.I noticed that a couple of weeks ago - it's the MSM's way of helping out the Dem's. Hsu was labeled a "disgraced fundraiser" practically before there was any hard evidence that he was guilty of anything - pretty amazing. Jack Abramhoff was always referred to as a "top Republican fundraiser" - never as a "disgraced fundraiser".
To: NormsRevenge
What do you bet Hillary is putting pressure on old Jerry Brown not to hand Hsu over to the Feds? The last thing she wants is a federal trial in New York City. She is hoping this whole things blows over in California, far away from the glare of the Eastern media.
14
posted on
09/26/2007 6:48:09 PM PDT
by
Dems_R_Losers
(Remember the Pentagon - - www.pentagonmemorial.net)
To: ghost of nixon
The Funny thing about that was Abramoff gave hundreds of thousands of dollars do Democrats, Hsu has only gave a total of $1,000 of his tainted money to one Republican.
15
posted on
09/26/2007 7:22:38 PM PDT
by
RatsDawg
(Hsu out the Democrats in 2008!, Go Hsu-less vote GOP)
To: tiger640
re#10 If Hsu was raising money for the GOP, the presstitutes would have a little bit difference in their take. /severe understatement mode and *sigh* with head shaking sadly due to continued dashed hopes for an honest 4th Estate
16
posted on
09/26/2007 8:42:16 PM PDT
by
eureka!
(Is power so important to the Democrats that they are willing to betray our country? Sadly, yes.)
To: tiger640
The point is that this is stolen money from the investors or it is not! What makes this any different than if Hsu had been embezzling this money from a bank? Are they really saying that it makes a difference as to WHO receives the stolen money? Yikes!This is a key point. The lack of aggressiveness on that angle by the investors' attorneys is puzzling. Rosenman's attorney rattles the Breshnahan retainer cage for what--$100k maybe?--while making ineffectual noises at the funds that went to politicians. I would think that going after the Breshnahan retainer has shakier legal basis than going after the donations. Defendant does have a right to counsel, So the argument is an esoteric one about fees, i.e.how much is too much.
From what's been reported, it looks to me that the lawsuits are more indignant theater than anything else, designed to protect Rosenman and Waters from individual investors in the funds--who, I believe, continue to be duped by Rosenman and Waters' singular focus on Hsu.
17
posted on
09/27/2007 5:38:43 AM PDT
by
Eroteme
To: Eroteme
Man! You got that right!!
It’s not going to hurt their case by asking for the moon, because they knew going in that it was all a show and they weren’t getting anywhere with it...didn’t they?
This is definately a case that the feds should be all over. The question is...WHY AREN’T THEY??
18
posted on
09/27/2007 6:03:25 AM PDT
by
tiger640
To: NormsRevenge
I thought Hsu had 6 MILLION in his checking account...and now they say he had $8000???? What the hell gives?
19
posted on
09/27/2007 6:05:01 AM PDT
by
Suzy Quzy
(Hillary '08...Her PHONINESS is REAL!!!)
To: Miss Didi
That "Ethics in Government" group is a DEMOCRAT FRONT GROUP that ONLY wants Republicans investigated!
ANY and ALL people associated with the Clintons are DIRTY!!! ALL.
20
posted on
09/27/2007 6:07:58 AM PDT
by
Suzy Quzy
(Hillary '08...Her PHONINESS is REAL!!!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-35 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson