The Hsu fundraising scandal is sticking to Hillary Clinton's campaign, although the scam artist also gave considerable sums to other Democratic candidates and the DNC as well. [Paul posted a related story earlier]. Hillary's campaign was warned months ago and did . . . nothing, apparently. James Gordon Meek and Michael McAuliff report for the Daily News:
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.* * * * *
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.
Cassidy did not want to talk about the case, saying he doesn't want to jeopardize the FBI's efforts. But he wants Hsu prosecuted. He told The News that Hsu was a reverse Robin Hood - "a hood robbin' the poor to give to the rich."
His warning "prompted a search of publicly available information, which did not reveal Mr. Hsu's decade-plus-old warrant," said Clinton adviser Howard Wolfson. He would not say why the campaign didn't follow up on specifics Cassidy included to explain his suspicions.
"They knew [about Hsu], and they knew back in June," a source told The News.
Read the whole story at the above link. This isn't going away anytime soon, especially not with non-answers like the Clinton team has thus far provided.
Thanks to Captain's Quarters for pointing to this story. Hillary is even suggesting the people to whom she's returning Hsu-bundled donations return the refunded money to her campaign, Ed Morrisey also notes:
For her first remarks after more than a week of silence, Hillary didn't prepare very well. The exposure of Hsu's machinations make it very likely that the money didn't originate with the contributors. Rosenman's missing $40 million he gave to Hsu. Why would she ask people who could have participated in a fraud to continue associating with her campaign?She obviously still doesn't realize all of the implications of the scandal. Those donors may need the money for legal retainers. Someone had better start explaining it to her. Is it possible that no one at the Clinton campaign understands that this might be stolen money?
Read it all at the preceding link, including Ed's suggestion for a name for the scandal.



Comments (8)
Of course they realize it's... (Below threshold)1. Posted by Brett | September 13, 2007 1:23 AM | Score: 3 (3 votes cast)
Of course they realize it's funny money. They *don't care*. They assume, almost certainly correctly, that they will get away with it with no significant coverage or any consequences
1. Posted by Brett | September 13, 2007 1:23 AM |
Score: 3 (3 votes cast)
Posted on September 13, 2007 01:23
2. Posted by pudge | September 13, 2007 2:08 AM | Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
Wow! This is as big as the Abramoff scandal. What a relief that the facts are finally coming to light and just like Sandy Burglar was treated as evenly as Louis Libby, once all the facts were in, I'm sure we will now see all of those hard journalists investigating and exposing the ugly truth of all this. I can't wait to see "60 Minutes" do their usual hour long commercial for the publishing company they own, as Bob Woodward unviels his big book about the whole truth of this corruption.
Gee, dontcha just love our great American tradition of objective journalism ? Where would we be w/o it ?
2. Posted by pudge | September 13, 2007 2:08 AM |
Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
Posted on September 13, 2007 02:08
3. Posted by HughS | September 13, 2007 7:02 AM | Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
The Hsu affair will be bigger than Abramoff, if Hsu lives.
At the intersection of this matter we've got lots of Democratic heavyweights, a fugitive scam artist running a $40,000,000 Ponzi scheme.
On one side of the Ponzi scheme is a liberal investment guru friend of Hillary, in the middle the fugitive perp, and on the other side how many(?)...hundreds of bundled contributions from unknown persons...well unknown to us (the Clintons and other Dems know).
As Paul mentioned yesterday, the FBI has hundreds of suspects/witnesses to work with.
Some thoughts on the magnitude of the matter: will it come in the AG confirmation hearings? Do you appoint a Special Prosecutor? Hmmmm? Wonder what Scooter Libby would suggest? Can we get a Rove soundbite?
3. Posted by HughS | September 13, 2007 7:02 AM |
Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
Posted on September 13, 2007 07:02
4. Posted by David | September 13, 2007 10:51 AM | Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
Hillary needs some Hsufly pie.
4. Posted by David | September 13, 2007 10:51 AM |
Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
Posted on September 13, 2007 10:51
5. Posted by spurwing plover | September 13, 2007 2:57 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Not surprising since the clintons surrounded themselves with crinimals hoods thugs and shady persons a virtiual rouges gallery
5. Posted by spurwing plover | September 13, 2007 2:57 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on September 13, 2007 14:57
6. Posted by LAB | September 13, 2007 9:17 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
"Hillary Clinton's campaign couldn't explain yesterday why it blew off warnings about felon-turned-fund-raiser Norman Hsu-"
Well, of course they knew about it. I suspect as this tale unfolds, how much they knew (were involved) will be the prime target of scrutiny. They had a great system going. No need to change things by acknowledging a "warning".
6. Posted by LAB | September 13, 2007 9:17 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on September 13, 2007 21:17
7. Posted by Jim Addison | September 13, 2007 9:27 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
LAB ~ Well, anyway, the guy with the warning didn't bring any money with him. He needed at least $850K to be heeded - although for $100K, they would have looked deeply concerned, nodded gravely as he told his tale, and promised him solemnly to look into it right away . . .
7. Posted by Jim Addison | September 13, 2007 9:27 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on September 13, 2007 21:27
8. Posted by LAB | September 13, 2007 10:36 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Wow, a grave nod is only 100g's? That's a bargain! :D
8. Posted by LAB | September 13, 2007 10:36 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on September 13, 2007 22:36