A Republican Plant?

Immanuel

Immanuel

Junior Member
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070921/ap_on_el_pr/democratic_fundraiser

NEW YORK - Norman Hsu, one of the top fundraisers for big-name Democrats, was charged Thursday with swindling at least $60 million from investors and using some of his profits to make illegal donations to political campaigns.

Hsu, who was already facing a fifteen-year-old fraud case in California, was charged in New York with what prosecutors called a "massive" Ponzi scheme that ensnared investors across the country.

********************************************************

This guy had to be a Republican Plant. Everyone knows Democrats don't do this kind of thing.

Right?

Immie
 
Immanuel said:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070921/ap_on_el_pr/democratic_fundraiser

NEW YORK - Norman Hsu, one of the top fundraisers for big-name Democrats, was charged Thursday with swindling at least $60 million from investors and using some of his profits to make illegal donations to political campaigns.

Hsu, who was already facing a fifteen-year-old fraud case in California, was charged in New York with what prosecutors called a "massive" Ponzi scheme that ensnared investors across the country.

********************************************************

This guy had to be a Republican Plant. Everyone knows Democrats don't do this kind of thing.

Right?

Immie
Click to expand...

That is definitely one way to try and spin it.
 
Immanuel said:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070921/ap_on_el_pr/democratic_fundraiser

NEW YORK - Norman Hsu, one of the top fundraisers for big-name Democrats, was charged Thursday with swindling at least $60 million from investors and using some of his profits to make illegal donations to political campaigns.

Hsu, who was already facing a fifteen-year-old fraud case in California, was charged in New York with what prosecutors called a "massive" Ponzi scheme that ensnared investors across the country.

********************************************************

This guy had to be a Republican Plant. Everyone knows Democrats don't do this kind of thing.

Right?

Immie
Click to expand...



Yeah, let's talk about some guy that spends money and has zero power rather than the fact that someone admitted in open court to bribing a sitting U.S. senator or the more recent revelation that the F.B.I. had a tap on the phones of said senator and recorded his conversations with said briber.

This is the problem with false equivalences. They're false.
 
Immanuel said:
This guy had to be a Republican Plant. Everyone knows Democrats don't do this kind of thing.

Right?

Immie
Click to expand...

Of course not, especially those associated with the Clintons. There has never been a scandal about funding ever associated with them.
 
Damocles said:
Of course not, especially those associated with the Clintons. There has never been a scandal about funding ever associated with them.
Click to expand...


This guy is about as "associated with the Clintons" as I am with PBS. We both donate money to out respective "associates."
 
Warren said:
Please save yourself the embrassment of trying to tapdance out of this.
Click to expand...


What are you talking about? There is nothing to tapdance out of. There is no this here.

Do you have any evidence that the Clintons were even aware of this guy's existence let alone his criminal history when they accepted the money? If you do, please share it with the world because no one else has it.
 
Dungheap said:
What are you talking about? There is nothing to tapdance out of. There is no this here.

Do you have any evidence that the Clintons were even aware of this guy's existence let alone his criminal history when they accepted the money? If you do, please share it with the world because no one else has it.
Click to expand...


"""On August 28, 2007, The Wall Street Journal reported that Hsu may have engaged in improper actions during the collection of "bundled" campaign contribution.[27] The Clinton campaign rose to Hsu's defense, saying "Norman Hsu is a longtime and generous supporter of the Democratic party and its candidates, including Senator Clinton. During Mr. Hsu's many years of active participation in the political process, there has been no question about his integrity or his commitment to playing by the rules, and we have absolutely no reason to call his contributions into question."[27]"""

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Rodham_Clinton_presidential_campaign,_2008
 
cawacko said:
Dungheap said:
What are you talking about? There is nothing to tapdance out of. There is no this here.

Do you have any evidence that the Clintons were even aware of this guy's existence let alone his criminal history when they accepted the money? If you do, please share it with the world because no one else has it.
Click to expand...


"""On August 28, 2007, The Wall Street Journal reported that Hsu may have engaged in improper actions during the collection of "bundled" campaign contribution.[27] The Clinton campaign rose to Hsu's defense, saying "Norman Hsu is a longtime and generous supporter of the Democratic party and its candidates, including Senator Clinton.[/B] During Mr. Hsu's many years of active participation in the political process, there has been no question about his integrity or his commitment to playing by the rules, and we have absolutely no reason to call his contributions into question."[27]"""

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Rodham_Clinton_presidential_campaign,_2008
Click to expand...



You merely proved my point. There is no evidence that, at the time they accepted the money, they were aware of Hsu or his criminal background.
 
Dungheap said:
You merely proved my point. There is no evidence that, at the time they accepted the money, they were aware of Hsu or his criminal background.
Click to expand...

Proved your point? You wrote above is there any evidence that the Clinton's were even aware of this guys existence. I just showed you they were.
 
Dungheap said:
After questions about his contributions surfaced.

Do I need to make a timeline for you?
Click to expand...

They knew who this guy was before he made the donations. As the quote said he has been a long time contributer.

If you would like to make a timeline be my guest.
 
cawacko said:
They knew who this guy was before he made the donations. As the quote said he has been a long time contributer.

If you would like to make a timeline be my guest.
Click to expand...


OK. Not that I think you're right, but for the sake of argument, I'll concede that they knew that Hsu existed and gave money. So what?
 
Please do...........

cawacko said:
They knew who this guy was before he made the donations. As the quote said he has been a long time contributer.

If you would like to make a timeline be my guest.
Click to expand...



and bring up Al Gore also...he also knew Hsu..and a few other 'illegal Chinese' donators during the Clinton re-:corn: election campaign...gotta love the liberals when they try to spin...
 
Dungheap said:
OK. Not that I think you're right, but for the sake of argument, I'll concede that they knew that Hsu existed and gave money. So what?
Click to expand...

I showed you the quote from the Clinton campaign themselves that said Norman Hsu has been a long time supporter of the Clinton's. Unless you are saying the Clinton's are lying about their relationship with Hsu I'm not sure how you deny it.

First off, I haven't said anything about the money itself. To me its a part of politics. I've only commented because you said the Clinton's didn't know Hsu which is wrong.

As far as politics what does it mean? Well, the Clinton's had problems with donors during the '90's and this opens those old wounds if you will for Hillary. This has been reported as such from left leaning commentators as well not just right wing partisans.
 
cawacko said:
I showed you the quote from the Clinton campaign themselves that said Norman Hsu has been a long time supporter of the Clinton's. Unless you are saying the Clinton's are lying about their relationship with Hsu I'm not sure how you deny it.

First off, I haven't said anything about the money itself. To me its a part of politics. I've only commented because you said the Clinton's didn't know Hsu which is wrong.

As far as politics what does it mean? Well, the Clinton's had problems with donors during the '90's and this opens those old wounds if you will for Hillary. This has been reported as such from left leaning commentators as well not just right wing partisans.
Click to expand...


Saying someone is a long-time supporter is akin to saying "this guy gave lots of money over the years." It doesn't mean that there is any "relationship" between the contributor and the candidate. It's not that hard to understand. The guy gave money. They accepted it. That's all we know. Now, all of a sudden it's branded a scandal!

By contrast, Mitt Romney's national finance committee co-chairman, Alan B. Fabian was charged in a 23-count indictment with mail fraud, money laundering, bankruptcy fraud, perjury and obstruction of justice for allegedly running a scheme to make $32 million in false purchases of computer equipment, spending the money instead on beach real estate and private jets. You probably never heard of that guy.

So, in the first instance, some guy with no formal connection to the campaign who turns out to be a scumbag contributes lots of money to the campaign. In the second instance, a guy with a formal position as the campaign's national finance committee co-chairman turns out to be a scumbag. For some reason, scenario A gets the scandal! treatment while scenario B is ignored.

Hillary is held to this ridiculous standard even where there is absolutely no indication of wrong-doing on her part or on the part of her campaign while others with actual members of the campaign team being indicted get no scrutiny whatsoever.

It's nonsense.
 
Dungheap said:
Saying someone is a long-time supporter is akin to saying "this guy gave lots of money over the years." It doesn't mean that there is any "relationship" between the contributor and the candidate. It's not that hard to understand. The guy gave money. They accepted it. That's all we know. Now, all of a sudden it's branded a scandal!

By contrast, Mitt Romney's national finance committee co-chairman, Alan B. Fabian was charged in a 23-count indictment with mail fraud, money laundering, bankruptcy fraud, perjury and obstruction of justice for allegedly running a scheme to make $32 million in false purchases of computer equipment, spending the money instead on beach real estate and private jets. You probably never heard of that guy.

So, in the first instance, some guy with no formal connection to the campaign who turns out to be a scumbag contributes lots of money to the campaign. In the second instance, a guy with a formal position as the campaign's national finance committee co-chairman turns out to be a scumbag. For some reason, scenario A gets the scandal! treatment while scenario B is ignored.

Hillary is held to this ridiculous standard even where there is absolutely no indication of wrong-doing on her part or on the part of her campaign while others with actual members of the campaign team being indicted get no scrutiny whatsoever.

It's nonsense.
Click to expand...

You know what? I never did hear of Romney's guy.
 
Dungheap said:
Saying someone is a long-time supporter is akin to saying "this guy gave lots of money over the years." It doesn't mean that there is any "relationship" between the contributor and the candidate. It's not that hard to understand. The guy gave money. They accepted it. That's all we know. Now, all of a sudden it's branded a scandal!

By contrast, Mitt Romney's national finance committee co-chairman, Alan B. Fabian was charged in a 23-count indictment with mail fraud, money laundering, bankruptcy fraud, perjury and obstruction of justice for allegedly running a scheme to make $32 million in false purchases of computer equipment, spending the money instead on beach real estate and private jets. You probably never heard of that guy.

So, in the first instance, some guy with no formal connection to the campaign who turns out to be a scumbag contributes lots of money to the campaign. In the second instance, a guy with a formal position as the campaign's national finance committee co-chairman turns out to be a scumbag. For some reason, scenario A gets the scandal! treatment while scenario B is ignored.

Hillary is held to this ridiculous standard even where there is absolutely no indication of wrong-doing on her part or on the part of her campaign while others with actual members of the campaign team being indicted get no scrutiny whatsoever.

It's nonsense.
Click to expand...

First off you've seen almost no right or libertarian leaning posters on this board reference this story. There have been almost no threads on this issue.

I don't think Hillary's being treated unfairly at all in this situation. When you are the leading candidate to be the next President and you have a major campaign donor turn out to be a fugitive its going to make news. I don't know how it doesn't.

Like I said campaign donations were an issue for the Clinton's during their Presidency. This opens the "old wounds" so to speak.

Like most others things in the news this will pass and we'll be discussing other topics.
 
Oh my! I didn't mean to start a fight.

Also, Dung, I said nothing about the Clintons. Personally, they never even entered my mind. I don't believe any politician should be help responsible if it turns out later that someone who donated to them was a crook. I didn't blame the Republicans for the Abramoff Scandal either.

I was pointing my finger directly at Hsu. It appears that he is a crook but the fact is that there are some **looks for Desh** in our midst who would claim that a Democrat(ic) supporter would never do such a thing.

Immie
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top