Is Hillary Clinton's campaign not only bought by George Soros, but by the Chinese Communist government as well? I don't think this is too much of a question to ask, considering her scandal with bundler Norman Hzu, as well as the new allegations by the LA Times detailing a fundraiser in Chinatown where people who now cannot be found gave thousands, many of whom had menial occupations. I don't think it is unfair to ask the question considering her husband's dealing with Chinese Communist donors, as well as his cozy relationship in giving China nuclear and defense technology that we now know was passed along to North Korea.From the LA Times:
All three locations, along with scores of others scattered throughout some of the poorest Chinese neighborhoods in Queens, Brooklyn and the Bronx, have been swept by an extraordinary impulse to shower money on one particular presidential candidate -- Democratic front-runner Hillary Rodham Clinton.
Dishwashers, waiters and others whose jobs and dilapidated home addresses seem to make them unpromising targets for political fundraisers are pouring $1,000 and $2,000 contributions into Clinton's campaign treasury. In April, a single fundraiser in an area long known for its gritty urban poverty yielded a whopping $380,000. When Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) ran for president in 2004, he received $24,000 from Chinatown.
Many of Clinton's Chinatown donors said they had contributed because leaders in neighborhood associations told them to. In some cases, donors said they felt pressure to give.
At least one reported donor denies making a contribution. Another admitted to lacking the legal-resident status required for giving campaign money.
The Times examined the cases of more than 150 donors who provided checks to Clinton after fundraising events geared to the Chinese community. One-third of those donors could not be found using property, telephone or business records. Most have not registered to vote, according to public records.
And several dozen were described in financial reports as holding jobs -- including dishwasher, server or chef -- that would normally make it difficult to donate amounts ranging from $500 to the legal maximum of $2,300 per election.
Of 74 residents of New York's Chinatown, Flushing, the Bronx or Brooklyn that The Times called or visited, only 24 could be reached for comment.
Many said they gave to Clinton because they were instructed to do so by local association leaders.
Smells a little fishy, don't you think? I mean, last time I looked, a dishwasher wasn't pulling down enough bank to give 5 bucks, much less 500. Sounds like more bundling, and it involves the Chinese community, which could be tied to either the ChiComms or just as bad, Triads. Hmmmm.....what is the liberal reaction?
Why, let's get groups and Sad Sacks of Media blowhards like Keith Olbermann to call people investigating racists and anti-Asian. But wait, isn't Michelle Malkin Asian-American? Oh snap, there goes that excuse! She must have group psychotic disorder or something else the Left just made up.
Other news sources rightly focus not on the etnicity, but on the spurious nature of the donations and the implications:
Did officials in Chinatown invent the names and identities of campaign donors? If so, why? How involved was Chung Seto, Clinton's liaison to the Asian community and a former executive director of the New York State Democratic Party? How did the Clinton campaign verify the source of these donations? How many potentially illegal donations were eventually returned?
Here is a possible solution--profile campaign donors:
"Ethnic profiling" is the rhetorical bugaboo the Clintons hope will stave off more investigations and invocations of Asian-American donor scandals past. Learning well from their far-left minority counterparts, these Asian-American groups have tried to turn the debate away from candidate and donor responsibility to the collective "rights" of the entire "Asian American and Pacific Islander community."
The identity politics tribe can call it "ethnic profiling." I call it learning from history. We've been here so many times before. With convicted DNC fundraiser John Huang and Charlie Trie and Pauline Kanchanalak and Maria Hsia. With the Chinese Buddhist monks and nuns who helped engineer a Gore campaign reimbursement scheme and shredded documents related to their temple fundraiser. With former Chinese-American Democrat governor of Washington, Gary Locke, who also took money from Chinese temple donors who couldn't speak English, couldn't remember when they donated or couldn't be located.
Democrats apparently believe that only Americans should be saddled by Byzantine campaign finance regulations while foreign donors get a pass. Asian-American lobbyists apparently believe minority groups should get less scrutiny from the media than everyone else — lest "their right to participate in the civic process" be undermined.
If it's "ethnic profiling" to be extra-careful of Chinatown donors who can't speak English, live in dilapidated buildings, have never voted, can't tell Hillary Clinton from Hunan Chicken or simply can't be found, then "ethnic profiling" should be the standard procedure of every responsible campaign.
Discrimination is not a dirty word when it comes to keeping dirty money out of American politics.
To paraphrase Tom Blumer, new Clinton, same as the old Clinton....just with more wrinkles and sags and less charm.
