Bundlemania! WSJ finds another possibly shady “HillRaiser”; Update: HillRaisers include several shady donors to Bill, too; Update: Why hasn’t Hillary refunded Hsu’s bundles yet?

posted at 10:00 am on September 20, 2007 by Allahpundit

No phony businesses or great train escapes in this one, alas, but on the upside it’s much easier to follow the money. One HillRaiser suspected of laundering contributions through frontmen is a fluke; two is a pattern.

When Hillary Rodham Clinton held an intimate fund-raising event at her Washington home in late March, Pamela Layton donated $4,600, the maximum allowed by law, to Mrs. Clinton’s presidential campaign.

But the 37-year-old Ms. Layton says she and her husband were reimbursed by her husband’s boss for the donations. “It wasn’t personal money. It was all corporate money,” Mrs. Layton said outside her home here. “I don’t even like Hillary. I’m a Republican.”

The boss is William Danielczyk, founder of a Washington-area private-equity firm and a major fund-raising “bundler” for Mrs. Clinton. Mrs. Layton’s gift was one of more than a dozen donations that night from people with Republican ties or no history of political giving. Mr. Danielczyk and his family, employees and friends donated a total of $120,000 to Mrs. Clinton in the days around the fund-raiser…

One person at the event was a Washington-area investor who was considering putting some money in one of Mr. Danielczyk’s ventures. The investor, a registered Republican, said he was invited by Mr. Danielczyk and a colleague who were wooing him to invest at least $125,000 in one of their companies.

The investor, who spoke on condition of anonymity, says he didn’t donate any money to Mrs. Clinton. Campaign-finance records show that the investor contributed $4,600 on March 30 to Mrs. Clinton. The reason for the discrepancy isn’t clear…

Other Republican voters who contributed the maximum amount to Mrs. Clinton at this event included Mr. Danielczyk’s mother, sister, personal assistant and a half-dozen employees or their spouses. Most of the donors had never made a political donation before contributing $4,600 to Mrs. Clinton, according to fund-raising records.

Danielczyk naturally denies having reimbursed anyone, but it’s the fortunate PA who’s paid so handsomely that they can afford to drop four digits on the Glacier. As for the investor, that’s probably not illegal but it does offer a glimpse of how slimy the business of campaign fundraising is. Of the $120,000 donated by Danielczyk’s circle, how much of that came from people who’ll actually pull the lever for Clinton when the time comes?

Now, I want you to read this article about Hsu, paying special attention to the end. It deals with the question that’s loomed over Hsugate since the story first broke — namely, how a guy with seemingly no actual businesses to his name amassed a fortune so vast that he could pour millions of dollars down the Democrats’ gullet. The leading theory is that he’s a con man with a knack for running Ponzi schemes but that doesn’t quite work when you consider that legitimate businessmen like Joel Rosenman were confident enough in Hsu’s operations to lend him $40 mil. See-Dub speculated the other day that there must be a “real” business somewhere, or at least enough of one to satisfy Rosenman’s due diligence, and the likeliest candidate is China. But which Chinese entity would be willing to manufacture clothing for Hsu at bargain prices, perhaps in the knowledge that the huge profits he pocketed in the U.S. would be going straight into the Democrats’ coffers? Hmmmm.

As I say, read his post — but only if you read that second WSJ article, too. See-Dub’s theory doesn’t explain why Hsu was ultimately unable to pay back Rosenman’s investment. If he had a money machine, that money machine should have kept paying out. It also doesn’t explain the mysterious “factor” mentioned in the Journal piece, which sounds like something more typical of a Ponzi scheme than of See-Dub’s nefarious plot. And finally, it doesn’t answer the other looming question in all this: if Hsu was trying to buy influence among American politicans for himself or whoever it is that’s bankrolling him, why did he limit his donations to Democrats and the lion’s share to Hillary? Why not spread it around? Flip Pidot e-mails to say he may have an answer to that one soon. Stay tuned.

Update: As someone said in the comments, one is a fluke, two is a pattern, and three or more is a par-tay.

A list of the donors who have “bundled” large sums from dozens of individuals to give to Hillary Rodham Clinton’s presidential campaign includes several figures who were involved in the 1990s Democratic Party fundraising scandal that tarnished her husband’s record…

Clinton includes on her list of “Hillraisers” — those who have committed to raising more than $100,000 for her White House bid — several financiers linked to past troubles. They include Marvin Rosen, the former Democratic National Committee finance chairman whose efforts to reward six-figure party donors with attendance at White House coffees and overnight stays in the Lincoln Bedroom became the focal point of Senate hearings into fundraising abuses. Rosen did not return messages left at his offices in Florida and New York.

William Stuart Price, the Oklahoma oilman also on the “Hillraiser” list, stunned a courtroom in 1995 when he detailed how his former gas company had tried to “gain influence” with the Clinton administration by providing $160,000 in money and membership in a ritzy Washington golf club to the son of a Cabinet secretary. Price, who was never accused of wrongdoing, did not return calls seeking comment.

Price’s testimony became the focal point of a criminal investigation of Ron Brown, then commerce secretary and a former chairman of the Democratic Party. The inquiry ended with the conviction of Price’s former bosses, Nora and Gene Lum, for making illegal donations.

Also on the list is former senator Robert G. Torricelli (D-N.J.), who withdrew from a 2002 reelection campaign after being “severely admonished” by the Senate for taking lavish gifts from a businessman and contributor, David Chang. Torricelli did not return messages left at his office yesterday.

Update: As part of his general ownage of this story, Flip’s gotten an e-mail from who he says is one of the donors bundled for Hillary by Norman Hsu. Quote:

I thought you might be interested in learning that contrary to a statement by Howard Wolfson on September 10th 2007 “an estimated 260 donors this week will receive refunds totaling approximately $850,000 from the campaign” this money still has not been returned – at least not to me. I know this because I was a donor who had my arm twisted to make a contribution to Hillary Clinton’s campaign on behalf of Norman Hsu and I haven’t seen a dime returned…

After three calls to the Hillary Campaign (703 469 2008) no one knew who was responsible for returning these donations.

Remember, she’s planning to ask them to re-donate the money to her once she gives it back. Maybe she just decided to cut out the middle step.

Federal criminal charges pertaining to his Ponzi schemes are coming against Stormin’ Norman in Manhattan today, incidentally. Sometime this afternoon, says CBS.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

The investor, who spoke on condition of anonymity, says he didn’t donate any money to Mrs. Clinton. Campaign-finance records show that the investor contributed $4,600 on March 30 to Mrs. Clinton. The reason for the discrepancy isn’t clear…

Either he’s not telling the truth, or somebody did it in his name, without his consent. Would that be identity theft?

Big S on September 20, 2007 at 10:08 AM

One HillRaiser suspected of laundering contributions through frontmen is a fluke; two is a pattern

And three is a PAR-T!!!!

Dread Pirate Roberts VI on September 20, 2007 at 10:10 AM

Really….anyone shocked that Hillary may have taken money for more than one alleged campaign finance violator? Hmmmmmmm……

I think it’s time it should be said: REPEAL MCCAIN-FEINGOLD!

Dr.Cwac.Cwac on September 20, 2007 at 10:11 AM

This is all very innocent, I’m sure.

Harpoon on September 20, 2007 at 10:20 AM

Hitlary, driving finger into podium: “I have never had financial relations with that man, Mr. Hsu.”

Alden Pyle on September 20, 2007 at 10:24 AM

AP, do you think she should resign from the senate and withdraw her candidacy for POTUS?

JWS on September 20, 2007 at 10:30 AM

Hillary is as slick as a greased eel . . . when you think you got her she’ll slip away and slither off into the darkness.

rplat on September 20, 2007 at 10:34 AM

The factoring companies I have worked with are much more diligent then this group. Factoring is not unusual, what is unusual is factoring without any apparent equity to lien. A real factoring company would have much better financial control over Hsu’s inventory, recievables, payables, etc.

Sounds like Rosenman knew exactly where this money was going.

right2bright on September 20, 2007 at 10:34 AM

I will bet this ain’t the end of it.

But if only the WSJ picks up on it, about 95% of the population will never hear of it.

right2bright on September 20, 2007 at 10:36 AM

Regarding the update. It is amazing how many phones are not being answered today…

right2bright on September 20, 2007 at 10:38 AM

If a scheme to fund massive amounts of money into Hellary’s campaign is filled with front companies, roadblocks and imaginary finance companies in order to make following the money extremely difficult, then by all means we should FOLLOW THE MONEY.

Unfortunately, the MSM has committed all of it’s resources to matters more important than having our political system bought and paid for by the Chinese, or whoever is at the controls. We all know the trials and tribulations of OJ and a prankster college student getting tazered is far more important than investigating a ponzi scheme that could affect the outcome of our presidentail election.

Of course it’s a difficult undertaking, following money traveling at light speed through a maze. Then again, we all know it’s not the degree of difficulty that is stopping the MSM from doing it’s job. It’s their degree of shameful bias.

We’ll just have to rely on the WSJ, See-Dub and AP to stoke the fires of this investigation.

fogw on September 20, 2007 at 10:45 AM

Well, knock me over with a straw!

kcluva on September 20, 2007 at 10:49 AM

Why do seemingly rational people support this perp?
Do they want to be on the elite overlord panel that Chairman Glacier will install?

bbz123 on September 20, 2007 at 10:51 AM

This post is a perfect example why this won’t go anywhere. Post something about Rosie, or some actress or actor and you get dozens or hundreds of posts.

Mention a word like “factoring”, and lights out. This has a bigger impact on us then Sally mouthing off, but 95% of the people have no idea what it means.

And when it all comes out, it will be so convoluted and complex (Rose law firm ring a bell, or any of the Clinton “gates”?) that the average voter won’t have any idea what went wrong.

right2bright on September 20, 2007 at 10:51 AM

Makes me wish for an administration with the will and the Malkins to actually enforce the laws that they put into place.

bbz123 on September 20, 2007 at 10:57 AM

The leading theory is that he’s a con man with a knack for running Ponzi schemes but that doesn’t quite work when you consider that legitimate businessmen like Joel Rosenman were confident enough in Hsu’s operations to lend him $40 mil.

Seems like the obvious answer is that Roseman and his associates knew where their money would end up.

I know there’s no proof of that yet, but would it be the least bit suprising?

MamaAJ on September 20, 2007 at 11:08 AM

The boss is William Danielczyk, founder of a Washington-area private-equity firm and a major fund-raising “bundler” for Mrs. Clinton.

So why is this guy taking chances and breaking laws to get in good with Clinton? He runs Galen Capital Corp that invests and partners with a host of different companies. So we can assume he needs influence in a particular area…or he is just a true believer.

Probably just a coincidence, but an investment in Assistmed recently seems to pair up nicely with some of Hillary’s health care goals. Specifically from her plan: Modernize Health Care Delivery System to Promote Value and Quality (At least
$35 billion[saved])

Funny how this company specializes in info tech for healthcare. They have other stuff which I’m sure could use gov’t assistance, but this is the simple result of using open secrets and google.

sunny on September 20, 2007 at 11:15 AM

This post is a perfect example why this won’t go anywhere. Post something about Rosie, or some actress or actor and you get dozens or hundreds of posts.

Mention a word like “factoring”, and lights out. This has a bigger impact on us then Sally mouthing off, but 95% of the people have no idea what it means.

And when it all comes out, it will be so convoluted and complex (Rose law firm ring a bell, or any of the Clinton “gates”?) that the average voter won’t have any idea what went wrong.

right2bright on September 20, 2007 at 10:51 AM

Someone, then, will have to simplify things for them. I know little about the details, but I can translate things into layman’s terms.

Let’s offer our services…interested? ;)

Miss_Anthrope on September 20, 2007 at 11:30 AM

I don’t have a lot of time this morning, but I saw part of a scroll on FOX that I think said all 4 NYS candidates who received $ from Hsu have decided not to return the money? Does anyone know?

Connie on September 20, 2007 at 11:40 AM

Clintons and shading fundraising…

OJ awaiting trial…

The Spice Girls are back together…

It’s like we’re in a time machine…

brak on September 20, 2007 at 11:43 AM

A bizzaro time machine, when you think about Dan Rather wanting to revist the issue that made him look soooo bad.

MamaAJ on September 20, 2007 at 11:56 AM

Miss_Anthrope on September 20, 2007 at 11:30 AM

I think I missed my point. The Clintons machine will make it so complex that it will become boring and redundant. That is the way they handle these things, by making it so complex that the MSM can’t dilute it down to a few sentences or a bumper sticker.

They already started with laying out the layers of people between Hillary and Hsu. Throwing in China, factoring, “I’ll give the money to a non-profit if they give it back to me, or I will give the money back to individuals if they give it back to me”.

They will make it so burdensom (sp) that the average, or even above average won’t have the time or patience to understand.
We will understand, but her supporters will say, “It is so confusing, they must be trying to trick me”.

Since it is in the news, rehash the OJ trial, with DNA

Instead of just saying “She took dirty money”, which is what it amounts to, it is run through all of these obsure relationships.

right2bright on September 20, 2007 at 12:28 PM

Let me see. Businesses that essentially deal with money transactions. Gee, that’s what investment companies do.

So many businesses seeming to deal in a few different industries. Last time I saw an investment company with industry based “businesses” it was described as a family of sector mutual funds.

Let me guess. Hsu appeared to be a laid back guy, without a worry in the world ’til now, so I’ll scratch the Somalian Futures Market with emphasis on cattle (no matter how much is was asked about it), so I’ll guess he’s been dabbling for years in the Chinese Stock Market with his “friends”. I suspect management fees are not the lowest in the industry even now, but they’ve come down considerably since 1992 — there’s a helluva lot more competition out there now.

A word to NYC investors: “Toy companies” are having an especially hard time recently so if you have money in a Children’s Toy Fund don’t expect to receive any “mature” dividend checks for a while. I know, I know, you did your due diligence but who knew the rosy hue of that outlook had lead in the paint.

Dusty on September 20, 2007 at 12:32 PM

Not quite following you there, Dusty.

see-dubya on September 20, 2007 at 12:47 PM

Why hasn’t she refunded the money yet:

a) the money is spent?
b) she’s waiting until she gets enough donations to replace the money?
c) she’s hoping no one will notice that she hasn’t given it back yet?
d) it’s invested in cattle futures or some other scheme to increase the amount it’s worth?
e) all of the above

Canadian Imperialist Running Dog on September 20, 2007 at 1:04 PM

Fox News reproting:

Feds are indicting Hsu for $60 million dollar fraud scheme.

Finally.

WOW!!

fogw on September 20, 2007 at 1:04 PM

Dont forget there is more than one “Hsu” ready to fall out there

john edwards

Edwards divests money from lawyer By JIM KUHNHENN, Associated Press Writer
Wed Sep 19, 8:19 PM ET

WASHINGTON – John Edwards’ presidential campaign has donated to charity $4,600 in contributions from William Lerach, a top fundraiser and a well-known trial lawyer who pleaded guilty this week to a federal conspiracy charge.

Lerach and members of his law firm, Lerach Coughlin of San Diego, contributed about $81,000 to Edwards’ campaign during the first six months of the year, according to Federal Election commission records. Lerach raised money for Edwards while the lawyer was under indictment on charges that his former firm, Milberg Weiss, paid kickbacks to plaintiffs in class action lawsuits.

Earlier this year, Edwards sided with unions and consumer groups in pressing the Securities and Exchange Commission to intervene in a suit against Wall Street banks on behalf of shareholders represented by Lerach Coughlin.

William Amos on September 20, 2007 at 1:08 PM

Hopefully the .pdfs of the indictment will go up and we can figure out more about this. It might put my theory to rest; I’d be fine with that.

see-dubya on September 20, 2007 at 1:09 PM

I remember reading that one of the things that convinced investors to buy into Hsu was that he had all the legal documents lettered and crossed to the “T”. He had tax papers and all sorts of good legal documents.

Which is interesting if he got them from sources inside the government

William Amos on September 20, 2007 at 1:12 PM

I hope and think this will finally hit the big news. $60 million is just sexy enough to get the MSM interested.

Bloomberg is reporting that 5 of Hsu’s money accounts have been seized. Dont think he can write million dollar checks anymore

William Amos on September 20, 2007 at 1:19 PM

Connie on September 20, 2007 at 11:40 AM

Here’s your answer from one of the links above:

“Judge Kornreich is ordering four campaigns to hang onto Mr. Hsu’s money. They include those of Sen. Hillary Clinton, which received $23,000; New York State Gov. Eliot Spitzer, with $62,000; New York State Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, who received $50,000; and Rep. Kirsten Gillibrand, who got $25,000. The order is set to be delivered to the candidates by today.”

Waiting for the other Hsu to drop……..!

dbdiva on September 20, 2007 at 1:21 PM

OK Someone explain this AP News story to me

ap New

AP kills fundraiser story

NEW YORK – Kill AP-Democratic Fundraiser. Federal prosecutors plan to unseal a criminal complaint, not an indictment, against Democratic fundraiser Norman Hsu, according to a law enforcement official.

The AP

William Amos on September 20, 2007 at 1:25 PM

It’s mind boggling–the amount of “shade” in deals surrounding the Clintons. Wasn’t she involved in some questionable Arkansas land deal even while/before Bill became prez? Then all the things since, with both of them. To the Clintons this is a way of life. They see nothing wrong with it and never will. With them, the end always justifies the means. She MUST not be allowed in the White House. The positon requires some semblance of honor and integrity and both Clintons fall far short.

jeanie on September 20, 2007 at 1:26 PM

right2bright on September 20, 2007 at 12:28 PM

I caught your drift…I wasn’t clear at what I was trying to convey…sorry ’bout that. :)

I would just like to see an effort at re-simplifying the issue for the masses by someone, anyone. That was kinda my point…I think someone could turn the lights back on, and thought half-jokingly of making you that offer!

I was totally not clear…my bad!

Miss_Anthrope on September 20, 2007 at 1:51 PM

jeanie on September 20, 2007 at 1:26 PM

Your speaking of whitewater? Once again, so complex that it boggled the mind of CPA’s and attorneys, let alone dumb guys like me. If it can’t be told in a paragraph, it won’t be reported. The Clintons know that.

Bush lied-people died vs. Rosen was involved in a factoring company that was tied to Chinese manufacturing. Hsu factored his receivables, and bundled the money through friends and…There isn’t a bumber that big for the sticker.

right2bright on September 20, 2007 at 1:51 PM

Bawwaah yeah right the so called “Unnamed” politicians and their unknow political affliations

http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=agMC9GTTbecA

Federal Election Crime

Hsu also violated federal election laws by making more than $20,000 in political contributions to two unnamed federal candidates in the names of others, prosecutors said.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation seized thousands of dollars in cash from Hsu, along with checkbooks related to the alleged scheme, hundreds of thousands of dollars of checks from his victims and bank receipts for millions of dollars of transactions linked to Hsu, Garcia said in the statement.

William Amos on September 20, 2007 at 1:54 PM

OK can we add the charges of “extortion” to mr hsu ?

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/09/clinton-fund-ra.html

Clinton Fund-Raiser Faces New Charges
Email
Share September 20, 2007 1:20 PM

ABC News’ Rick Klein and Aaron Katersky Report: The bad news is getting worse for Sen. Hillary Clinton’s fund-raising operation.

Norman Hsu, the disgraced former Clinton fund-raiser, now stands accused of defrauding investors out of more than $60 million, with a new criminal complaint unsealed against him in Manhattan on Thursday. Hsu faces up to 45 years in prison under the latest charges.

US Attorney Michael Garcia said Hsu linked his business transactions with his support for political candidates.

“Hsu made victims believe that failure to make political contributions to candidates he supported would jeopardize their investment relationship with him and put their money at risk,” reads the criminal complaint unsealed Thursday.

Garcia said he has been in touch with the Clinton campaign, and that officials there have been cooperative.

Speaking on CNN on Thursday, Clinton said she was unconcerned about the impact on her campaign.

“This happened to a lot of campaigns, a lot of investors who made investments that unfortunately don’t look like they were treated appropriately,” she said. “The system of justice will work its course and I think that’s appropriate.”

William Amos on September 20, 2007 at 1:59 PM

The investor, who spoke on condition of anonymity, says he didn’t donate any money to Mrs. Clinton. Campaign-finance records show that the investor contributed $4,600 on March 30 to Mrs. Clinton. The reason for the discrepancy isn’t clear…

Clearly people are working for these bundlers, type type typing away FEC forms and sending in checks.

I would imagine it is possible to send one in without your knowledge.

For example, there were donations from Paul Su and from Paul Hsu both at almost the same address in Dix Hills, NY. Or, gosh, is it Dex Hills?

Clearly these forms were filled out by someone other than the donor himself, and whoever the typist is got confused between Norman Hsu and Paul Su and couldn’t get the address straight.

Here are the discrepancies:

HSU, PAUL P
DIX HILLS, NY 11746
DILINI GROUP LLC/PRESIDENT
CASEY, ROBERT P JR
VIA BOB CASEY FOR PENNSYLVANIA COMMITTEE

07/18/2006 500.00 26021001966

Address on FEC form: 293 Candlewood Place, Dix Hills NY 11746

SU, PAUL
DEX HILLS, NY 11746
CEO/DILIN MANAGEMENT GROUP
WEBB, JAMES H
VIA JAMES WEBB FOR US SENATE

09/14/2006 250.00 27020223112

Address on Form: 293 Crowdwood, Dex Hill, NY 11746

SU, PAUL
DIX HILLS, NY 11746
AOPEN AMERICA INC./PRESIDENT
UNITE OUR STATES

11/17/2006 5000.00 26940853212

Address on form: 293 Candlewood Path, Dix Hills, NY 11746-8003

How many of you can’t get your own address or last name straight???

Buy Danish on September 20, 2007 at 2:06 PM

Nnnnnnnice, BD. “Dex Hills”. “Crowdwood”.

Also notice DILIN management group v. DILINI GROUP.

I’m not sure that Paul Su/Hsu and Norman are the same dude, though.

see-dubya on September 20, 2007 at 2:15 PM

If Hillary becomes President, there are are two questions to answer:

1. Can she take the oath of office while in federal prison?

2. Can she pardon herself?

georgej on September 20, 2007 at 2:20 PM

Rove you magnificent bastard ! I question the timing !

http://tv.yahoo.com/show/41220/castcrew

Survivor: China

Fifteenth installment of the reality/adventure series where a group of contestants are stranded in a remote region of the world. They must fend for themselves, compete in challenges, avoid elimination and win a $1 million prize

(no word yet if Hillary and other dem donars are voted off the Island)

William Amos on September 20, 2007 at 2:23 PM

But the 37-year-old Ms. Layton says she and her husband were reimbursed by her husband’s boss for the donations. “It wasn’t personal money. It was all corporate money,” Mrs. Layton said outside her home here. “I don’t even like Hillary. I’m a Republican.”

This part of the story, I thought, was a bit odd… So, if she and her husband didn’t funnel the money for the boss, what, would Mr. Layton lose his job at the law firm, be punished in some way…? If it were me, the clue phone would be ringing; Hello? Time to look for another job!

4shoes on September 20, 2007 at 2:34 PM

See-Dub,

Paul Su is married to Lelawattie Su, and Paul Su supposedly worked for Norman Hsu at “Dilini” Mangement.

I don’t think that Paul Hsu exists at all, and this was a mistake by the bundler’s typist, who made a sort of Freudian illegal donor’s slip.

Maybe they are taking info over the phone and if English is not their native language “Crowdwood” and “Candlewood” could be confused?

Buy Danish on September 20, 2007 at 2:34 PM

This part of the story, I thought, was a bit odd

4shoes on September 20, 2007 at 2:34 PM

Agreed.

Buy Danish on September 20, 2007 at 2:38 PM

I don’t know whether to run out and buy Bill’s book, Giving, or hold out for the box set with Hillary’s Taking.

saint kansas on September 20, 2007 at 2:40 PM

This could go VERY fast

http://www.9news.com/rss/article.aspx?storyid=77660

Democratic fundraiser released to Calif. officials

posted by: Sara Gandy , Web Producer created: 9/20/2007 12:19:57 PM
Last updated: 9/20/2007 12:24:37 PM

Set 9NEWS as your homepage

Click to enlarge

Attorney: Hsu thought he was getting on train
Report: dispatchers identified fugitive Democratic fundraiser
Fundraiser waives extradition; suicide note mailed to Innocence Project
Disgraced fundraiser Norman Hsu in jail
Clinton to return $850,000 raised by Hsu
Disgraced Demo fundraiser may head to jail from hospital
Disgraced Democratic donor arrested in Colorado

——————————————————————————–
9NEWS is not responsible for content on any 3rd party website

GRAND JUNCTION – Mesa County sheriff’s officials say former Democratic fundraiser Norman Hsu has been released into the custody of officials from California.

Hsu faces a 15-year-old felony theft conviction in California revolving around a grand theft case.

At the end of a 16-page criminal complaint filed Thursday against Hsu are lines indicating that Hsu admitted his guilt to the FBI.

FBI Special Agent Patricia O’Connor writes that on Sept. 14 Hsu was interviewed by two FBI agents in Colorado.


“HSU then waived his Miranda rights and admitted to the FBI agents that he used Components Ltd. and Next Components Ltd. for “phony” deals. Hsu also admitted that the phony deals involved investments in the sale and distribution of items that did not actually exist, and that he used money he obtained from newer investors to pay initial investors.”

She adds, “Hsu also admitted that he made implied threats to his investors to pressure them to contribute to political candidates he supported.”

William Amos on September 20, 2007 at 2:47 PM

I don’t know whether to run out and buy Bill’s book, Giving, or hold out for the box set with Hillary’s Taking.

saint kansas on September 20, 2007 at 2:40 PM

LMFAO!!!

4shoes on September 20, 2007 at 2:58 PM

There is an WSJ article from 9/6 that talks about Paul Su abd Norman Hsu, but I don’t have a subscription so I can’t access it.

Google link to WSJ article:

Arrest Warrant Is Issued for Hsu – WSJ.com
Paul Su, the head of the household, says he is the president of Dilini Management Group LLC, according to campaign finance reports. Mr. Hsu once said he was …
online.wsj.com/article/SB118901034603118201.html – Similar pages

I did find an excerpt from the article at a blog:

Data show that Mr. Hsu often made donations to the same candidates on the same dates as did several occupants of a home in Dix Hills, N.Y., just outside of New York City. Paul Su, the head of the household, says he is the president of Dilini Management Group LLC, according to campaign finance reports. Mr. Hsu once said he was president of that company. Mr. Hsu also once listed Mr. Su’s house as his address. Mr. Su couldn’t be reached for comment.

Still, nothing seems to mention the Paul Hsu and Paul Su mixup.

FEC reports for Paul Hsu also list a “DILINI OLANA GZUZWI”. I have no idea what “Olana Gzuzwi” means.

This is so complicated, I’d hate to be one of the government agents trying to unravel this crazy scheme.

Buy Danish on September 20, 2007 at 2:58 PM

And dont forget that this still hasnt gone away…Perhaps a knight in shining armor is going to come to our rescue and slay the Hildabeast after all.

doriangrey on September 20, 2007 at 2:59 PM

She adds, “Hsu also admitted that he made implied threats to his investors to pressure them to contribute to political candidates he supported.”

William Amos on September 20, 2007 at 2:47 PM

Hmmmm. I wonder what the nature of those threats were. Something like, Have you ever been to Ft. Marcy Park?

Buy Danish on September 20, 2007 at 3:03 PM

dbdiva on September 20, 2007 at 1:21 PM

Thanks for the info. My local upstate NY paper refuses to publish any of this.

Connie on September 20, 2007 at 5:39 PM

I don’t know whether to run out and buy Bill’s book, Giving, or hold out for the box set with Hillary’s Taking.

saint kansas on September 20, 2007 at 2:40 PM

I’m saving that one.

Connie on September 20, 2007 at 5:48 PM

Miss_Anthrope on September 20, 2007 at 1:51 PM

No, that was my mistake for not being clear.

A factoring company takes your receivables and loans you money on those receivables, sometimes 80% or as high as 90% (very rare). They then collect the receivables when the receivables are due, and keep the difference which would be 20% on the 80% loan (often if your accounts pay late, a penalty fee is imposed, you can imagine the different variabls in setting this up). You get the money immediately, but you are paying 20% for that service. But you get immiediate operating capital, or immediate money to give to your favorite senator.

Factoring companies always make sure you ship the product, they look at your beginning inventories and your ending inventories to make sure you are manufactuiring what you say. They look at the shipping records, and receive the copies of the signed bills of lading. They in essence become a business partner. More often all bills are paid to a collection agency. The factoring company becomes your accounts receivables division. However, non-collection falls on you. If your sales drops off, then they will loan only 80% of the outstanding bills. And without going into details, that puts you in a tailspin if you are the manufacturer looking to buy inventory.

There is a little more to it than this, but this is close. As a ponzi scheme he may have just continually increased his receivables, more than likely they were in cahoots.

right2bright on September 20, 2007 at 9:07 PM

Why hasn’t Hillary refunded Hsu’s bundles yet?

… Cause it’ll look bad if the screeching crow’s fund raising income goes negative before he primaries …

desertdweller on September 20, 2007 at 10:29 PM

The only news about Hillary( and it would be BIG news} that deserves attention would be if she were ever caught in an act of DECENCY and HONESTY. Don’t hold your breath.

MaiDee on September 21, 2007 at 9:13 AM

Yes, China is the player that cheats on trade, has been very instrumental in making our dollar worth crap and is one of the biggest players in the Security and Prosperity Agreement, (which, for those of us who are willing to see the truth, is the formation of the NAU, or whatever you want to call it.)

Check out Duncan Hunter’s speech sponsored by Townhall.com: http://www.gohunter08.com

Christine on September 21, 2007 at 12:04 PM

Starting a pool on which will happen first:

Hillary returning the Hsu money

Kerry releasing his military records

Malkin appearing in a Girls Gone Wild video.

My money’s on Malkin at 300,000,000,000:1 odds. No way those other things will ever happen.

Wingo on September 21, 2007 at 7:17 PM

This whole Clinton illegal campaign financing plan stinks to high heaven – again.

It’s another example of this communists plan for ‘redistribution of the wealth’ – steal it from somebody else and give it to me!

When will at least one of these sleazy Clintons be indicted, prosecuted and put in prison?

OBX Pete on September 22, 2007 at 3:35 AM

Since the money was illegally obtained, isn’t the money now evidence that she should handover to the Feds? Then they can disburse it to the proper people who can prove they actually gave it? Most of the money given came from Hsu via reimbursements.

roninacreage on September 22, 2007 at 10:59 PM

The 8itch won’t return it until she can figure out how to get it back.

leanright on September 23, 2007 at 3:20 PM

I’m just hanging onto my cached copies of the many, many media articles that declared a few days after HU’s story became public, that “Hillary donates HU money to charity” and “Clinton campaign gives money to charity” and the like. Specifically, there are a large number of media articles with headlines such as those, all declaring the money was returned/donated/long gone in only days after the initial bad news about HU. All based upon Clinton campaign Press Releases…

More lies, obviously.

S on September 24, 2007 at 4:30 AM

Is Soros still funneling the Clintons money thru China? How stupid.

Buzzy on September 24, 2007 at 7:00 PM