Home ND News Mobile Forum Contact Reader Blogs Register Login

Monday, September 03, 2007


Did Hillary Commit Hsu-icide?

hillaryhsu.jpg
Hillary Clinton with some guy.

Via Gateway Pundit we find that generous Democratic contributor and 'hillraiser' Norman Hsu may have been a close associate of China missile trader Bernard Schwartz. Oh, this is getting bad for Her Annointed Highness. This is dredging up all the unpleasant things people wanted to forget about Hillary, and puts the Clinton sleaze factor back into play. Norman Hsu may not have committed (another) crime with his byzantine donation practices, but it does go to prove that the Clintons have never fixed their faulty scumbag detectors. The receiving line of sleazoids greeting the Clintons seems to have no end.

For what it's worth, this is what WorldNetDaily has to say about this:

Last November, Schwartz and Hsu chaired a New School banquet at the Mandarin Oriental in New York which featured Sen. Clinton as keynote speaker. Clinton steered a $1 million federal grant to the college.

More recently, Schwartz and Hsu (pronounced shoo) appeared together at the New York Yacht Club for Democratic Rep. Patrick Kennedy's 40th birthday bash...

WND reporting often seems hysterical (not in a funny ha ha way) but they do offer this screen shot:

newschool.jpg

Is there more than just this? Stay tuned as this story goes drip, drip, drip along.

Update: Drip, drip indeed. There are now two more very questionable donors to the Hillary campaign being investigated: Sant S. Chantwal and Tendo Oto. Why, it is turning into a veritable United Nations of corruption over at Camp Hillary.

Question: When is the mainstream media going to step up and fulfill its duty to defend Hillary against these scurrilous rightwing charges? Just when are we going to see the interlocking charts of donors contributing to those making these accusations? When are the criminal backgrounds of these alleged donors going to be debunked and placed in their proper context? We aren't going to let Hillary get swiftboated on this, are we?

Just where the hell are Rahm Emmanuel and James Carville??!??!1??

Answer: Are you kidding? As Jay Tea points out, these scandals have not even penetrated the thick forehead cocoon armor plating of the left wing yet.

Crossposted from WILLisms.com

Does this tick you off? Click here to email your elected representatives right here on Say Anything, or comment below.

Comments

Proof
Proof
17263 comments
Send a private message

So, does this mean that Hillary is no longer a Hsu in?


Shrugging off the mindless, baseless attacks of Liberal hyenas and jackals since 2007

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

”(Proof) You’re, as we say in Hawaii, No Ka Oi!”

-unsolicited testimonial

Proof on September 3, 2007 at 02:27 pm
Proof
Proof
17263 comments
Send a private message

Compare this picture with the one above. Maybe Hill pays for botox the way Edwards pays for haircuts?
hillaryza0.jpg


Shrugging off the mindless, baseless attacks of Liberal hyenas and jackals since 2007

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

”(Proof) You’re, as we say in Hawaii, No Ka Oi!”

-unsolicited testimonial

Proof on September 3, 2007 at 02:32 pm

Her lips look very interesting!

Zsa Zsa on September 3, 2007 at 03:38 pm

Zsa,Zsa, I’ll bet there are a few unflattering photos of you out and about, eh?

Puzzlefeet on September 3, 2007 at 04:20 pm

Heh, no one takes a worse picture than Hillary, Puzzle:

Zsa Zsa, you have your work cut out for you.

Ken McCracken on September 3, 2007 at 04:40 pm
Proof
Proof
17263 comments
Send a private message

I’ll bet there are a few unflattering photos of you out and about…

A few?
hillary2sx0.jpg

boredhillarymk2.jpg

hillaryvaderyf0.jpg


Shrugging off the mindless, baseless attacks of Liberal hyenas and jackals since 2007

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

”(Proof) You’re, as we say in Hawaii, No Ka Oi!”

-unsolicited testimonial

Proof on September 3, 2007 at 05:41 pm

I must say though, this is a very good photo of Hillary:

Of course, the fact that she is standing next to one of her scumbucket friends kinda ruins it.

Ken McCracken on September 3, 2007 at 06:35 pm

I just hope my lips never look like that one picture!...

Zsa Zsa on September 4, 2007 at 07:46 am

LOL, which pic are you meaning Zsa Zsa?


flag002.gif washC.gif Image and video hosting by TinyPic

Anna on September 4, 2007 at 09:24 am

Anna, Look at the picture Proof has up on his comment. Those lips are scary! My mother told me not to make faces because the Ice Age could come along and freeze it. Yikes!

Zsa Zsa on September 4, 2007 at 11:04 am

Rather than speculate further on Hillary’s capacity to instill fright (a given), I’d like to know where Mr Hsu got all the money he has collected and donated to Democrats, including Hillary.

By all accounts his donation total is over $1 million, and the businesses he was purported to have owned appear to have all been bogus.  So where DID all that money come from?  Certainly not from Hsu himself.  Despite what his lawyers say, he has yet to pay off the various liens and judgments from the early 1990’s, never mind the investors in his bogus latex glove venture.

Hillary makes much of her experience during her husband’s administration.  But even an Alpha Democrat like Hillary can’t seriously think she can trumpet her experience during Clinton presidency while ignoring the scandals and corruption that made her husband’s presidency the most disreputable in our country’s history.

The tsunami of overseas Chinese money that flooded Clinton/Gore ‘96 was a far more serious scandal than Watergate.  If they could buy one Clinton why wouldn’t they try to buy another?


“Capitalism is optimism monetized.”

Bat One on September 4, 2007 at 11:34 am

I think the clear indication here is that Mr. Hsu is some kind of conduit for the Chinese government. A lot of the money that found its way to the Clintons before came from the People’s Liberation Army. Kinda like getting funding from the KGB almost. But I read somewhere that the PLA is divesting from private entreprises and such forms of ‘financing’.

Ken McCracken on September 4, 2007 at 11:49 am

Ken,

Aside from this, the second attempt to subvert the American electoral process by the communist Chinese government, I can think of two more interesting questions that ought to be examined:

1.  What did the Chinese hope to gain in return for their illegal generosity?

2.  Who actually blew the whistle on this?  I have a difficult time imagining that a couple WSJ reporters came up with this story all on their own, and the unusually quick responses of both NYT and LAT suggests that they too had been working on the story for a while when the Journal first broke their story.  To me, this suggests that someone, somewhere had leaked this on deep background.  Who?  And that may prove to be the most intriguing question of all.


“Capitalism is optimism monetized.”

Bat One on September 4, 2007 at 12:13 pm

Mike: Your consistent use of juvenile personal attack and namecalling, along with your consistent mischaracterization of what I write identifies you as a bigot.
You can’t stand my opinions(another indication of bigotry), and ask me for “proof”.  I regard appeal to authority as unmanly, but you are free to offer anything indicating the benefits to society which would result from allowing so-called “gay marriage”.  I have asked you for anything on this subject, from facts to logical argument, and you remain silent.  Instead you resort to personal attacks and namecalling.  Not very impressive.


If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

robert108 on September 4, 2007 at 12:28 pm

Well if it was oppo research that uncovered this, a lot of top Dems besides Hillary (and including Obama) were stung by Hsu as well.

What do the chinese hope to gain from this?

Anyone but a Republican, is my guess.

Ken McCracken on September 4, 2007 at 12:29 pm

Ken,

I noticed too, that several of the Dems, Hillary included, first announced that they would donate the money to charity.  That struck me as odd.  After all, giving it away rather than returning it carries an implicit acceptance of the original illicit donation.  What sort of liberal moron would even think that a donation to charity would make all okay?


“Capitalism is optimism monetized.”

Bat One on September 4, 2007 at 12:57 pm

After all, giving it away rather than returning it carries an implicit acceptance of the original illicit donation.

It is also an implicit admission that taking it was wrong in the first place, and now that you’ve been found out, CYA is the appropriate tactic.  Unfortunately, the Dem Ministry of Propaganda will promote that line.
While we persecute a guy for disorderly conduct, the felon who is violating the principle of not accepting foreign donations goes free.  Justice?  I think not.


If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

robert108 on September 4, 2007 at 01:07 pm

None of the other Democrat candidates is burdened with the chinese Albatross of Clinton/Gore ‘96.  But if you prefer a Democrat source for the leak, my money would be on AlGore, who has the money, the organization, and the animus toward Hillary.

On the other hand, staunch Democrats might want to check the visitors log at the FEC for Karl Rove’s recent signature.


“Capitalism is optimism monetized.”

Bat One on September 4, 2007 at 01:23 pm

Well, Rove does have a lot more free time on his hands these days . . . this stuff is like a hobby for him, I am sure.

But . . . wouldn’t these disclosures help the Republicans more, say, next August or September?

Ken McCracken on September 4, 2007 at 06:45 pm

...wouldn’t these disclosures help the Republicans more, say, next August or September?

Ken,

Actually, that’s one more reason to look to the most likely Democrat as the culprit.  A Republican would have enough sense to sit on this.  But a rival for the Democrats’ nomination, or in Gore’s case, a petulant wannabe…  The release of this at the start of the campaign for the nomination fairly screams “Democrat”!!!

And, of course, Mr. “No controlling legal authority” would certainly know all about illicitly funneled Chinese campaign contributions to begin with.


“Capitalism is optimism monetized.”

Bat One on September 4, 2007 at 07:35 pm
Proof
Proof
17263 comments
Send a private message

Michelle Malkin is reporting:

Patrick Kennedy is keeping Hsu’s money.

Breeding shows!


Shrugging off the mindless, baseless attacks of Liberal hyenas and jackals since 2007

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

”(Proof) You’re, as we say in Hawaii, No Ka Oi!”

-unsolicited testimonial

Proof on September 4, 2007 at 08:20 pm

Breeding shows!

Proof,

Rutting would be more like it, I think.


“Capitalism is optimism monetized.”

Bat One on September 4, 2007 at 08:44 pm
Page 1 of 1        

Post a Comment


Before commenting, please recite:

Grant me the serenity to ignore the trolls,
the courage to debate with honest opponents,
and the wisdom to know the difference.

If you want to ignore a fellow commenter, download this.

Name   
Email   
URL   
Human?
  
 

Upload Image    

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Note: Notifications will only be sent to confirmed email addresses.

    

By submitting your comment you agree to our terms of service.