Captain's Quarters -

It's probably just "Johnny Cash," from a boy named "Hsu!"

It would not only simplify matters, it would remove the incentives for hiding the source of campaign cash in such clumsy vehicles as a modest Daly City house.

Yes and now. It would simplify things, and that has considerable merit. It would remove some incentives for these kinds of shenanigans, such as donation limits -- already an excellent idea for other reasons. (See: First Amendment.)

But money from questionable sources will still want laundering. And there will still be an incentive to pretend that the money comes from a larger number of smaller donors than it really does.

It's probably just "Johnny Cash," from a boy named "Hsu!"

It just wouldn't be a Clinton campaign without a suspicious money trail involving people of Asian ancestry.

Agree that this story is interesting and has some merit. The Clinton's were pretty good at doing this during their campaigns in the '90s.

However, if the Paws just refinanced their home for $270,000, their modest 1300-square-foot house is not mortgaged to the hilt.

Anywhere in Daly City it would be worth at least twice that amount.

http://www.zillow.com/search/Search.htm?addrstrthood=John+Daly&citystatezip=Daly+City+CA&GOButton=%3CSPAN%3EGO%3C%2FSPAN%3E

That's the way real estate is here in the Bay Area.

I see the actual address is in the WSJ article, although not on Zillow. But houses on the street (Shelbourne) run @ $700,000.

http://www.zillow.com/search/Search.htm?addrstrthood=41+Shelbourne&citystatezip=Daly+City+CA&GOButton=%3CSPAN%3EGO%3C%2FSPAN%3E

My humble prediction:

No media coverage = no heat on Hillary and friends.

Business as usual for the Clinton's and the MSM.

ken

My question is do the Paw's have a freezer and when did they get it?

Oh, Rick Baxter, now that's funny!

As to politics, it should come as no surprise that it's "about the money."

I cannot forget the $3-million Nixon had in his safe, for petty cash.

And, when it comes to Hillary, it's obvious that she knows how to raise money! So does Algore! (Which means?) IF Hillary doesn't get the nod, Algore "could" materialize on the Bonkey stage, for a "re-run." Or not?

SOmebody's gonna be selected by the Bonkeys to run, so why not her?

What I'd much prefer, to all these investigations, is spending the time to find ways for the states to deliver HONEST COUNTS. Where in places like, OHIO, good luck.

How can we over-ride the tendency to steal elections, that's what I'd prefer knowing.

While over on the right-bar, the Captain has an article about George Soros buying Romania. Which is not hard to do. He has hard cash. And, they have crappy currency. So, the gambler who gambles on this, usually rules. The other option? To go broke and die, first. Don't bother to pray for this. That's a waste of time.

At least all the "Sue" money gets spent. That's GOOD for the economy. Heck, if that money wasn't around now, for the marketeers? They'd be floating belly up. And, I'd never investigate anything where you'd cause a recession, by drying up the pool of funds.

Will someone address the corresponding events surrounding the Peter Paul (not Ron) lawsuit against Hillary? It appears there's more meat on the bones from what I've read. Why is no one covering this?

The DailyKos nation is having a hissy fit about this WSJ article and the China connection! Have we stumbled upon another Clinton/China political fund raising scheme? Follow the money all the way from China........

A Clinton doing end runs around campaign finance laws with Chinese donors? You don't say!
Well this is another thing the Republicans had best never do; it is only dhimmies who get to break campaign finance laws.

Strange. I seem to remember some questionable Chinese-origin donations to another politician named Clinton.

Very strange. Probably just coincidence. Or it's the Berger defense: Sloppiness. Just sloppy.

Yeah.

Did it ever occur to anyone to ask the family about their donations? Gesh, enough already. Either go directly to the family and see what the story might be or shut the heck up. Sure am getting tired of this polical process. Give me the old politicos like Truman and Johnson and even Regan. We knew where they were coming from and they did not start their campaigns so gosh darn early that it cost billions to keep them running til November 08....God help save us from politicians no matter what the party we see they minute they get in office all their promises turn to dust and blow away and they set their agenda...like Bush whose government is no longer of the people by the people or for the people but only for a few people who seem to own America (what part the Chinese don't own.).

The Postman Always Blings Twice

Pat, the WSJ did ask the family. Only one member answered, "I have been fortunate in my investments and all of my contributions have been my money."

Did it ever occur to anyone to ask the family about their donations? Gesh, enough already.

If you the read the WSJ article you will see they did ask family members about the money.

I know several families of similar background and composition who could comfortably afford to donate $45K if they wanted to.

If the guy's 64 they've lived in that house since it was worth $25K. As noted above, it's now worth $700K-ish, which is about dead center middle class in the Bay Area. Sounds to me like a couple of the kids are pulling down six figures, and it'd be typical in that sort of family for them to have taken $270K out of the house as the down payment on rental property or a house for one of the children.

That said, the connection to Mr Hsu is quite funky, and while I know families of that background who could afford to donate $45K, I know of none who would do so.

We gotta find the first Pawprint, that's the first clue

Put it in our notebook 'cause they're who's clues?

Unless, and until, a positive link can be found that indicates some type of laundering is taking place, I'm not going to be concerned at how much a family gives to any candidate or campaign. The new finance laws should be scrapped, all they do is shift people's scrutiny to ordinary American citizens and away from the campaigns funds themselves. Let's go back to when no one cared how much a single person or family donates, most of those donations are going to be wasted anyways as their candidate of choice is not guaranteed to win. If they were, people wouldn't need to donate their campaigns. It how the donations are spend that should be scrutinized. That's how you keep the candidates honest, as much as possible anyways.

This story, like so many dirty money Clinton stories, goes nowhere unless the MSM has changed horses. They have not the last time I looked. How confident is Hillary--she already said she was keeping the money. This story is already over.

Rather than have all of the foolish caps on contributions and distinctions between different kinds of the same cash, we should eliminate all of the nonsense and simply insist on immediate and full disclosure for all cash donations.

That would hand even more political power to the wealthy and the left. As if they were different people. Let's not do that. As long as political power is tied to how much money you can give to politicians, there need to be limits on bribes. I mean, "donations".

Judge Crater came back from the dead and said:

"I see the actual address is in the WSJ article, although not on Zillow."

Caveat: Zillow's values should be taken with a grain of salt, as they are not the "final authority" on what a particular property is worth. They rely partly on AVMs, which have their flaws. FYI: AVM is automated valuation, for you Al Gore voters.

They also use municipal tax data which may be way off.

In many cases these days, a computer program, not a real person, determines what your real estate-the biggest investment you will ever make in your lifetime, unles you're Bill Gates-is worth.

Give me a real person every time.

Just Curious -- "Hsu once owned the house." When, exactly, and who did he sell it to? And for how much? These facts are a matter of public record. How long have the Paws lived in this house? Did they take out a mortgage to buy the house? Was Hsu a lender or guarantor for that loan? All of which comes back to the basic question: like a Bhuddist Monk, Mr Pau doesn't make much money, but he's willing to give a substantial portion of his pre-tax income to the Clintons. Or, is it someone else's money?

Just Curious -- "Hsu once owned the house." When, exactly, and who did he sell it to? And for how much? These facts are a matter of public record. How long have the Paws lived in this house? Did they take out a mortgage to buy the house? Was Hsu a lender or guarantor for that loan? All of which comes back to the basic question: like a Buddhist Monk, Mr Pau doesn't make much money, but he's willing to give a substantial portion of his pre-tax income to the Clintons. Or, is it someone else's money?

The Clintons doin' the the Hsu-step around campaign finance laws? Say it ain't so (again). If Pelosi doesn't bring the hammer down, Cindy's gonna have more ammo.

Is this what we call culture of corruption at it's finest? Some one should keep a sharp eye on the recipients of Soro's purchases over the past few years.

Rather than have all of the foolish caps on contributions and distinctions between different kinds of the same cash, we should eliminate all of the nonsense and simply insist on immediate and full disclosure for all cash donations. It would not only simplify matters, it would remove the incentives for hiding the source of campaign cash in such clumsy vehicles as a modest Daly City house.

In the meantime, Hsu should be investigated for breaking the laws we have now -- and we should find out where the cash really originated.

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

But...but...but...Capt. Ed, wouldn't that violate McCain's, Feingold's, and Kennedy's sense of ethical proportions???

OH, and I forgot, Fred Thomspon's TOO!????????

Found this interesting from the INVESTIGATION OF ILLEGAL OR IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN CONNECTION WITH 1996 FEDERAL ELECTION CAMPAIGNS FINAL REPORT of the COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS SENATE Rept. 105-167 - 105th Congress 2d Session - March 10, 1998 (Ted Sioeng, His Family, and His Business Interests"

"Ted Sioeng, his family, and his business interests gave $400,000 to the DNC during the 1996 election cycle. Through extensive analysis of bank records, the Committee has determined that at least half of this figure, or $200,000, was made with money wired into the U.S. from accounts in Hong Kong."

"Norman Hsu--a $7,500 check was written on Sioeng
San Wong's account to Friends of Norman Hsu on March 11, 1995.90 Hsu is a former president of the Chinese-American Association."

It would appear that this is not the first time Mr Hsu has provided money to the DNC/Clintons.

I don't have a lot of time to do the research, but I thought this might be important to the thread: No body is covering this topic.

Paul v. Clinton:

Appellate Court sets arguments in Paul v. Clinton appeal Posted by: Admin on Tuesday, August 14, 2007 - 08:38 AM PST

The UNITED STATES JUSTICE FOUNDATION (USJF) today announced that the Court of Appeal for the Second Appellate District, Division 7, has set oral argument for the appeal in Paul v. Clinton on September 7, 2007, in the Ronald Reagan State Building, 300 S. Spring Street, 2nd Floor, North Tower, Los Angeles, California 90013.

The appeal is derived from the dismissal of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton from the Paul v. Clinton litigation. The remaining defendants in the business fraud case, which involves the largest known campaign fraud in history, include former President William Jefferson Clinton.

According to Colette Wilson, USJF Staff Attorney, and Lead Attorney on this case, “Among the issues the California Court of Appeal is being asked to decide is whether Senator Clinton’s role in soliciting campaign contributions from Peter Paul in excess of $1.2 Million amounted to a felony. In support, USJF has submitted a 5-minute video clip (viewable at www.hillcap.org) that captures Mrs. Clinton in the very act of violating campaign finance laws.”

According to Gary G. Kreep, Executive Director of USJF, “Senator Clinton was dismissed from this civil case on the claim that her campaign finance fraud related activities were constitutionally protected actions in furtherance of her freedom of speech, and, therefore, she should not be held accountable for them. Our client, Paul, disagrees, as we do, and we are hopeful that the Court of Appeal will agree with our position and re instate Senator Clinton as a Defendant herein, instead of just as a witness.

USJF is a nonprofit, conservative, legal action, foundation, headquartered in Ramona, California. Since its founding in 1979, USJF has been involved in the protection of the constitutional rights of United States citizens and in the protection of the public from governmental corruption and government enforced political correctness. For more information, please contact USJF at 760-788-6624, or access our Website at www.usjf.net.

Tom Deley, call your office!

Tom Deley, call your office!