Power Line

Yesterday’s New York Times reported that the Clinton campaign returned $7,000 of the $380,000 in Chinatown money that we noted yesterday. Sweetness and Light comments here; Hot AIr comments here.

In an update Hot Air links to the New…

flipflop on October 20, 2007 at 1:44 PM

I realize this is a long time after the original comment, and I haven’t taken the time to read all that followed, but this idea of federal financing of campaigns has been discredited for a looooong time. The solution is also well-known, but anathema to the Dems – full and instant disclosure of all contributions on the internet. If John Shoe wants to give $45k to Candidate Socks, fine. But the world will know all about it right away, and if Shoe is a lowlife of some sort, the word will get out.

Expecting an impartial investigation of Hillary’s illegal campaign contributions by the New York Times is about the same as expecting OJ to find the REAL killer of his ex-wife. It ain’t gonna’ happen.

Brilliant and correct.

This makes me sick. Not just that it happened, but that, like Hsu, Her Highness is going to get a complete pass on this from the conventional media who will dig no deeper than what’s already out there and, if so, gloss over it in terms that deflect any wrongdoing on Her Worshipfulness’s part. We need to start showing up at her rallies like 9/11 Truthers do at, um, everybody’s with signs that say things like, “I washed dishes for a Chinese restaurant and Hillary got my pay,” or something to that effect.

This is preposterous.

I’ll bet Hsiao got a letter from the campaign asking her to confirm that she donated $1,000 and I’ll bet she answered that letter, completely honestly, by saying that she had. Which, per the campaign’s very scrupulous “investigation,” makes it a perfectly legitimate donation. When is the Wall Street Journal going to take the baton here and descend on this pool of donors in earnest? They can start by telling us a little more about the Fujian American Cuisine Council. Is that one of those nice “neighborhood associations” that’s been so helpful in drumming up cash for Hillary?

I can’t wait to hear KP come out in defense of the “dishwashers” again… anything to protect the queen, eh Kirsten!?

On the Big Story (guest hosted by Bill Hemmer) yesterday, she flipped out over the obvious questions, raising her voice to insist:

“Dishwashers are people too, Bill!”

Ignoring the point that minimum wage dishwashers can’t possibly afford the donations they supposedly made.

Kirsten added:

“They are allowed to give money, it doesn’t matter how much they make”.

Lol, isn’t she cute?

Then she really thought she threw a knockout punch when in response to the fact that many of these people don’t seem to exist she said:

“Go to my apartment right now and try to find me. That doesn’t mean I’m nefarious”.

Later on H&C she continued to her crusade to defend the good name of dishwashers, proclaiming them to be doing “honorable” jobs.

Now look, no one is attacking their jobs (just like we weren’t attacking that kid of SCHIP)… We’re questioning some shady activity. They can be dishwashers, no one cares. But when that’s normally not even enough to live on, it looks odd when they’re writing fat checks to Hillary’s campaign, no? Especially on the heels of Hsu! These people are all acting like the Hsu thing never happened. I also heard Roginsky debating this somewhere saying that the Clinton campaign has the best vetting process… really? Is that what the (still unfolding) Hsu scandal taught us? WTF is wrong with these people?

Anyway, KP’s comment that the dishwashers are doing “honorable” jobs was one of the funniest things I’ve ever heard! I’m not saying they’re “dishonorable”, but is “honorable” really the correct adjective to use? I worked at McDonald’s when I was 16 (as did quite a few people in town, it was one of the only options until you had your own car), but I never considered my job to be “honorable”.

Further, isn’t it funny that it’s a struggle to get a Dem to speak about the military with this type of language (unless they’re trying to defend their own patriotism after having said something questionable), but they’re trigger happy with calling dishwasher’s “honorable”? Lol, classic!

BTW, why is KP so quick to defend Hillary? I know, it’s her hero or whatever, but isn’t KP pro-life? Why is she so desperate to defend the Queen of Abortion? For the record, she’s against the Iraq war, but isn’t concerned about 1.3 million Americans killed by abortion every year, despite claiming to be pro-life?

Do you think she is with child?

bloggless on October 20, 2007 at 10:51 PM

I think she’s with Dunkin Donuts.

This is the issue that could take the Pants Suit Ponzi Queen down for good.
Buzzy on October 20, 2007 at 2:04 PM

After so much Chinese money poured into their campaigns in the 90’s and nothing happening, providing missile guidance technology to the Chinese for donations and nothing happening, Algore turning the INS into a defeatocrat voter registration project for the 96 election and nothing happening, and the Seahag on VIDEO proving she was aware of Peter Paul and those illegal donations, there won’t be a damn thing happening to her.

Yeah the FCC might get around to levying a fine of a few thousand…after about 3 years of investigations, but some lower level flunky will take the hit. Nothing would matter by then, particularly if she manages to slither into the WH.

Hillary’s rivals have an incentive, of course, but there must be fundraising skeletons in Obama’s and Edwards’s closets too, just as there must be plenty on the GOP side.

Yeah, remember what happened when more and more information became known about Hsu? There were quite a few others caught taking cash from him, so I bet her rivals would hesitate a bit before saying anything.

In seven cases, with donations totaling $7,000, questions were raised, and those donors did not respond to requests to confirm their contributions. That money was then returned.

So if they didn’t respond to their thorough check of whether they were proper, who did they return them to? I mean, you send a letter out and it’s returned, where do you send the refund?

We do not ethnically profile donors,” growled Howard Wolfson. “Asian-Americans in Chinatown and Flushing have the same right to contribute as every other American.”

Apparently Hillary is a equal opportunist.

Couple this with what Feinstein did with her husbands Chinese connections and the bids that he “won”, and you are looking at some serious money.
And I like how Wolfson suggests that the donors are “Asian-Americans” only…as if they are not what they really are…Chinese with American business interests.

Deflect, distract, and deny….as fundamental to the big D playbook as the Wishbone once was to College Football.

Wind Rider on October 20, 2007 at 6:37 PM

You’ve hit the nail on the head, my friend.

csdeven on October 20, 2007 at 9:34 PM

Geez, your hatred for Fred Thompson knows no bounds. You are too transparent.

Since Fred’s focus is always on what’s best for him, as was evident when he helped terrorists avoid justice for an extra 11 years, is it likely that Fred gave advice to these Chinese campaign finance cheaters instead of investigating them? Did he help push through CFR in order to help them continue to cheat the system? What changes in McCain/Feingold were made that might be helping Hillary get away with this? Is it more likely to be the case since we already know that Fred “What’s a dollar?” Thompson funneled campaign funds to his son that were supposed to help him get elected?

Inquiring minds want to know!

Do the Clintons own any 3Com stock, btw?

C