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.