( The Paws, who live in this Daly City, Calif., bungalow, donated $45,000 to Hillary Clinton. )This house was also once listed as the home address of Norman Hsu, according to public records.
Six members of the Paw family, each listing the house at 41 Shelbourne Ave. in Daly City, Calif., as their residence, have donated a combined $45,000 to the Democratic senator from New York since 2005, for her presidential campaign, her Senate re-election last year and her political action committee. In all, the six Paws have donated a total of $200,000 to Democratic candidates since 2005, election records show. Their donations closely follow contributions made by a wealthy New York businessman.(See Donation record via WSJ here)
It isn't obvious how the Paw family is able to afford such political largess. Records show they own a gift shop and live in a 1,280-square-foot house that they recently refinanced for $270,000. William Paw, the 64-year-old head of the household, is a mail carrier with the U.S. Postal Service who earns about $49,000 a year, according to a union representative. Alice Paw, also 64, is a homemaker. The couple's grown children have jobs ranging from account manager at a software company to "attendance liaison" at a local public high school. One is listed on campaign records as an executive at a mutual fund. (Source)
So far what we have is a family of limited means donating an extraordinary amount of money (considering their income) to Hillary Clinton and in smaller part to other Democrats, that lives in a house that was once listed as Mr. Hsu's home address, which makes that connection very obvious.
Now lets take a look at Norman Hsu.
Norman Hsu is one of the leading political fund-raisers in the country this year. In fact, many fund-raisers say he is one of a small handful of people capable of raising more than $1 million -- a major feat considering the maximum donation allowed by an individual for 2008 races is $4,600 per candidate.
[...]
Until three years ago, Mr. Hsu never made a campaign contribution to a presidential candidate, according to federal election records. Now, though, several people involved in raising money for White House candidates say Mr. Hsu is a major player.
Many "HillRaisers" -- people who rustle up at least $100,000 for Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign -- are dwarfed beside Mr. Hsu (pronounced "Shu"). Several people involved in Democratic presidential fund-raising say Mr. Hsu, an apparel executive, has raised well over $1 million for the New York senator's presidential campaign, making him one of the top 20 Democratic fund-raisers in the country. The Clinton campaign doesn't disclose such details and declined to comment for this story.
So, where are we, we have a very rich man that since 2003 has started donating to presidential campaigns, and once lived or listed his address as the same one that a modest family of limited means live in and that family has also donated to the same woman, Hillary Clinton far more than their income should allow.
So far so good right?
More about Norman Hsu from the LA Times and this is where things start to unravel because Mr. Hsu is a fugitive from the law.
WASHINGTON -- For the last 15 years, California authorities have been trying to figure out what happened to a businessman named Norman Hsu, who pleaded no contest to grand theft, agreed to serve up to three years in prison and then seemed to vanish.
"He is a fugitive," Ronald Smetana, who handled the case for the state attorney general, said in an interview. "Do you know where he is?"
Hsu, it seems, has been hiding in plain sight, at least for the last three years.
Since 2004, one Norman Hsu has been carving out a prominent place of honor among Democratic fundraisers. He has funneled hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions into party coffers, much of it earmarked for presidential hopeful Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York.
In addition to making his own contributions, Hsu has honed the practice of assembling packets of checks from contributors who bear little resemblance to the usual Democratic deep pockets: A self-described apparel executive with a variety of business interests, Hsu has focused on delivering hefty contributions from citizens who live modest lives and are neophytes in the world of campaign giving.
On Tuesday, E. Lawrence Barcella Jr. -- a Washington lawyer who represents the Democratic fundraiser -- confirmed that Hsu was the same man who was involved in the California case. Barcella said his client did not remember pleading to a criminal charge and facing the prospect of jail time. Hsu remembers the episode as part of a settlement with creditors when he also went through bankruptcy, Barcella said.
Now, despite Mr. Hsu's fugitive status, Hillary Clinton's campaign says there is no reason to return any donations made by Mr. Hsu.
The Clinton campaign said today that it saw no reason to return donations from two major campaign contributors whose donations, according to the Wall Street Journal, closely track one another.
Mr. Hsu is also slated to host a campaign fund raiser for Hillary Clinton, in Northern California on September 30, 2007.
Hsu is slated to host a Sept. 30 fund-raiser in Northern California for Clinton.
Clinton spokesman Howard Wolfson said that there are no plans to return cash donated either by the Paws or by Hsu, and that the fund-raiser will go on as planned.
Is it usual for fugitives of justice to be hosting campaign fund raising events for candidates?
Is it usual for so many legal questions to surrounding a candidates contributions?
It is if you are Hillary Clinton. (Click link to see the whole time line of events)
In the following timeline, we will see apparent evidence of Hillary Clinton’s Senate campaign understating over $750,000 in contributions to her 2000 Senate campaign, from one Peter Paul.
Evidently, Hillary’s campaign initially denied even knowing Peter Paul, and then later, admitted meeting him but never had a conversation regarding his contribution to her campaign.
Hillary Clinton will finally be under oath in the historic civil suit, Paul v Clinton in Los Angeles Superior Court. Voters are going to see the details of the greatest campaign finance fraud in history and the Clinton role in the collapse of Stan Lee Media.
TIMELINE.
Let us not forget the crime statistics associated with the last Clinton administration:
Crime Stats:
- Number of individuals and businesses associated with the Clinton machine who have been convicted of or pleaded guilty to crimes: 47
- Number of these convictions during Clinton's presidency: 33
- Number of indictments/misdemeanor charges: 61
- Number of congressional witnesses who have pleaded the Fifth Amendment, fled the country to avoid testifying, or (in the case of foreign witnesses) refused to be interviewed: 122
Forgetful Clinton "friends":
Number of times that Clinton figures who testified in court or before Congress said that they didn't remember, didn't know, or something similar.
Hillary Clinton 250.
Bill Kennedy 116
Harold Ickes 148
Ricki Seidman 160
Bruce Lindsey 161
Bill Burton 191
Mark Gearan 221
Mack McLarty 233
Neil Egglseston 250
John Podesta 264
Jennifer O'Connor 343
Dwight Holton
348 Patsy Thomasson 420
Jeff Eller 697
Folks, this is a the prefect example of the old adage, if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and looks like a duck, chances are, it is, indeed, a duck.
Follow all the links above and ask yourself one final question.
Will Americans vote for a person that has such close associations with fraud and crime and fugitives?
Hillary can claim all she wants that there is some vast right wing conspiracy against her, but if her actions didn't warrant such close scrutiny then what would this vast conspiracy have to use against her?
She believes the statement alone, the words "vast right wing conspiracy" is a get out of jail free card for her to accept questionable donations, be associated with fugitives and criminals, have a fugitive host her campaign fund raisers and to claim under oath 250 times that she couldn't remember, didn't know or something along those lines.
I repeat what I said on a previous post, linked above, if the Democrats are foolish enough to make Hillary the nominated candidate for presidency, that is the best news the GOP could ever get.
[Update]
More from Liberty Pundit.
You have a strong case beginning to build that the Clintons will violate every fundraising law if it helps them get elected. Bill used the Lincoln bedroom as a pay-for-stay bed and breakfast, accepted donations from foreign sources, and a litany of other shady deals.Hillary was caught on video (audio, actually) possibly violating some federal election laws. So it’s not a huge stretch of the imagination to believe that they’re engaged in some of the same old corrupt bargains to gain power.
Go read the rest of Brian's piece.
[Update] Looks like Hillary sees how bad her association with Hsu looks and has decided to give part of her contributions from him to charity..I wonder if that also includes the Paw's contributions also.
Others discussing this:
A Blog For All, Flopping Aces, Wizbang, Don Surber, Captain's Quarters, Gateway Pundit, Hot Air.
Tracked back by:
The Right Doesn't Make Scandals Like the Old Hat L from DeMediacratic Nation...
.
