The Curious Norman Hsu
November 13th, 2007 at 09:35am Mark Noonan
While the FEC against Hillary Clinton works its way through the bureaucracy, an interesting news story about Norman Hsu has come out in the Wall Street Journal. Interesting because of this:
The man went bankrupt in the United States in 1990, bankrupt in Hong Kong in 1997 and made his first federal political donation in 2003. Huh? Yeah, you read that right - a double-bankrupt starts gathering large donation amounts six years after his second bankruptcy. You might want to recall what happened in 2003 - campaign finance reform went into effect, and politicians were in desperate need of people who could raise large sums of money from a large number of donors. Hsu gave his first $2,000 to John Kerry in 2003, and became such a success as a money raiser that Democrats embraced him far and wide. How? How does a bankrupt convince people to give very large amounts of money to politicians?
There is something mighty fishy here - and now that we have the substance of our FEC complaint (ie, illegal donations via Chinese connections), it becomes vital that we get to the bottom of all this. Hsu’s money came from somewhere, and people don’t give to politicians without some expectation of return on their investment. Don’t think that its just Hillary involved - she’s the biggest hog at the trough of illegal and questionable money, but Obama and Edwards and the entire Democratic party are right there with her, only outpaced because of Clinton’s uncanny ability to attract money, legal or otherwise.
My opinion? Someone or some group is purchasing the Democratic party - I don’t know who it is or what their ultimate motivation is, but the fact of all this illegal money shows that someone out there wants very much to have a very large say in what Democrats do in office. For the safety of our democratic institutions, we must demand that this be investigated fully.
Entry Filed under: Campaign 2008, Corruption, Democrats
15 Comments
1. InDaVa | November 13th, 2007 at 10:49 am
“My opinion? Someone or some group is purchasing the Democratic party - I don’t know who it is or what their ultimate motivation is, but the fact of all this illegal money shows that someone out there wants very much to have a very large say in what Democrats do in office.”
I thought the kook left were the conspiracy theorists?
2. sleepygene | November 13th, 2007 at 11:23 am
Mark-
It’s obviously George Soros is teaming up with Chinese Communists in order to bring utopian communism to America. Bill O’Reilly already cracked this case. Has the Clinton campaign responded to your double hearsay FEC complaint yet?
3. Christopher Estep | November 13th, 2007 at 11:24 am
Don’t be so paranoid, Mark. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar and sometimes a corrupt party that will do anything for power is just a corrupt party that will do anything for power.
The “something fishy” lies in the substance of what they did and not the motivations. You run the risk of falling into the liberal trap of “we need to find out why!” instead of dealing with the “what”.
What they have done is enough. Stopping what they are doing and enforcing the laws we have will halt whatever conspiracy may or may not be afoot.
My opinion? The Clintons are classic liberals that are hungry for power. How is this any different than Joe Kennedy?
4. TiredofLibBullshit | November 13th, 2007 at 12:12 pm
Well, individuals from the MoveOn.org crowd (another Soros funded collective) have stated that they owned the Democratic Party because of their support both financial and membership.
We have had dishwashers and lower give several hundred dollars to Hillary and also MONKS gave money to Bill for his campaigns.
It is just all circumstantial - these people really do want change and are that desperate to give up their hard earned money rather than use it to feed themselves.
Who have said that people MIGHT have to choose between food and medicine (and that was bad)? While now we have those who ARE choosing politicians over food (and that is good!) - they expect us to believe this!
Obviously it is not their money. It worked once right?
5. David M | November 13th, 2007 at 12:27 pm
The Thunder Run has linked to this post in the - Web Reconnaissance for 11/13/2007 A short recon of what’s out there that might draw your attention, updated throughout the day…so check back often.
6. Mark Noonan | November 13th, 2007 at 2:45 pm
Gene,
Someone or some group is buying influence here - and a double-bankrupt on the lam doesn’t have the sort of money and connections he had UNLESS someone is using him as a front man.
This is larger than just illegal donations - this is an attempted subversion of our democractic processes and we need to know who is doing it, and why.
7. Mark Noonan | November 13th, 2007 at 2:47 pm
InDaVA,
We’re waaay past more than a million dollars in llegal donations just to the Hillary campaign. There’s something very big going on here, and your lack of curiosity is amazing at this point.
8. InDaVa | November 13th, 2007 at 3:51 pm
You realize how crazy you sound right?
“Someone is buying the Democrat Party! Someone is buying the Democrat Party! Conspiracy , Conspiracy to undermine our democratic institutions!”
What if I said “The religious right already own the Republican party.” See how crazy that sounds?
9. Christopher Estep | November 13th, 2007 at 6:07 pm
Mark, put down the Kool-Aid and step away from window.
Yeah, someone’s trying to buy the Democratic party and it’s the wacky fringe left. It’s not that tough to figure out.
10. Almiranta | November 13th, 2007 at 8:48 pm
InDaVa is trying way too hard to paint a connect-the-dots exercise as a foray into wild-eyed conspiracy theories. Nice try, Da.
We saw the Chinese influence during the first Clinton reign, when Johnny Huang was given top secret clearance at the demand of the Co-Pres, over the objections of every security agency in the country, and then was invited not only to stay at the White House but to sit in on top secret conferences including military briefings. Kinda funny actions for a president of the United States regarding a man who had been repeatedly identified by U.S security agencies as an agent of the Chinese Communists, wouldn’t you think?
InDaVa would want us to think that there was absolutely no connection between Huang’s ready access to every secret the country had and the millions upon millions in illegal contributions from, gee, the country which employed Huang.
Paranoid? Well, I guess I am also paranoid when I sense a connection between Haung and a host of other Chinese contributors and the sudden dismissal of long-standing regulations banning the sale of certain technologies to certain countries. OK, so the guy who made the billions selling this technology was an Arkansas buddy and campaign contributor to Clinton–maybe it WAS just a good ol’ boy quid pro quo, with no official notice of which quid was pro which quo. I guess it would just be more of that hateful unfounded Clinton-bashing to wonder if Bill made any money off this deal, wouldn’t it?
Just as it would be, according to Da, hysterical paranoia to wonder if Huang’s influence had anything to do with it, or the millions Huang and his Chinese buddies poured into Clinton and Democrat Party coffers.
Nope, InDaVa, there is not only a history of the Clintons raking in illegal contributions from and through Chinese contributors, but there is also a documented and parallel history of China reaping benefits, many of which are or could be to the detriment of the United States and its national security.
What cracks me up is the well-orchestrated Dem hysteria about the Chinese owning so much American debt, when it was their own adored Clintons who opened the door, invited them in, collected the cover charge, and sold them the country.
BTW, we do need to remember that the infamous “wall” established by Hillary appointee Jamie Gorelick, that wall which prevented the FBI from sharing info with the CIA which prevented either one from talking with the NSA, that wall which interfered with the sharing and collation of vital information regarding the likes of Mohammed Atta and other pilots-in-training, was originally established specifically to keep these agencies from comparing notes on the Chinese contributions and the Chinese purchases and the Chinese access to national security “secrets” and so on,. Yep, this “wall” was set up to protect the Clintons when people started to wonder—or, as InDaVa would have it, become “paranoid”—about the Chinese Connection.
We have already paid a high price for the venality of the Clintons and their eagerness to get money from anyone who will make it available. We may very well pay an even higher price in the future—or is it “paranoid” to realize that the so-called air traffic control systems bought by the Chinese under Clinton relaxation of the rules also, evidently coincidentally, happens to allow them to target American cities with their rockets?
But you just keep telling us that WE are crazy to be worried about any Clinton taking money from China. You spend way too much time with your nose up Clinton knickers, InDaVa—maybe if you pulled your head out you could see the nose in front of your face.
11. Ricorun | November 13th, 2007 at 11:59 pm
Damn Almiranta, if I was ever inclined to vote for Hillary (I’m speaking hypothetically, because I never was), I wouldn’t be after that tome!
12. JUDGE NAUGHT | November 14th, 2007 at 7:05 pm
Dang- I’m soooo scared! (Rest of comment deleted as off topic)
13. JUDGE NAUGHT | November 15th, 2007 at 4:49 pm
Comment deleted as too on point? BE BRAVE MAN, STOP SCARING YOURSELF!
14. Aitch | November 20th, 2007 at 5:07 pm
Umm wasn’t it the President of the United States who invited the leader of China over for dinner?
15. kcgcbxpg&hellip | November 21st, 2007 at 6:44 am
kcgcbxpg
kcgcbxpg