« There's a new sheriff in town... | Main | Carrots And Sticks »

Hillary shortchanging Hsu-donor refunds?

UPDATE: The Clinton Campaign is NOT returning Senate campaign money from the questionable donors. (They say they can't tell which are Hsu-related because "bundler" records weren't kept).


When the Hillary Clinton campaign announced, after their leading fundraiser Norman Hsu was found to be a scam artist, they would return all donations to Hsu-related donors, I had my doubts. One of the raps against Hsu was that he bilked investors out of millions, some of which he funneled through straw donors to favored political candidates, especially Mrs. Clinton. But if so many of the donors listed weren't actually the source of the money, just WHO would she be refunding the money TO? The bilked investors? How? Pro-rata? "Curiouser and curiouser," as Alice observed.

It turns out many of the listed donors are only getting partial refunds. Many others have addresses which do not match their listed states. Perhaps we should turn to a Certified Fraud Examiner - who has been looking at the reports at Suitably Flip:


In my last post, I noted that 24 of the 26 Clinton-supporting donors we already knew about appear to have received only partial or no refunds this quarter (an aggregate discrepancy of roughly $125,000). It's not too surprising then that the new names on the list also appear to be frequently under-refunded.

Assuming the discrepancies represent donations made to Hillary's Senate campaign (rather than her Presidential campaign), it's still not clear whether she has already or intends to refund those contributions (since those paper filings are not yet available for review). Either way though, whether she's refunding them from the other committee or whether she's decided to keep those funds, the total Hsu-connected contributions to Hillary the candidate will wind up being far higher than the $850,000 figure she disclosed last month.

Neglecting to refund the Senate-side contributions from Hsu-related donors (if that's the explanation for the discrepancy) could be the product either of heroic brazenness or extreme sloppiness. And while I won't accuse Clinton of not being brazen, the more I look at the 3rd quarter filing, the more I'm leaning toward extreme sloppiness.


Check the link above to read the full post and access related info and official reports.

Even if the numbers added up - which they don't - the question of whether "straw donors" were getting refunds of money they didn't personally contribute would remain. It seems, though, there are no shortage of questions.


TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/24870.

Comments (8)

Give the money back?... (Below threshold)
Proof:

Give the money back???
Jim, are you nuts?
What do you expect Lady Hillary to do? Run her campaign on a Hsu string???

Maybe we should give Hillar... (Below threshold)
Mike:

Maybe we should give Hillary the benefit of the doubt here, and use this as a lesson to those who funnel or launder campaign contributions in order to get around those pesky finance laws. If your own name and real address aren't on the contribution form, you shouldn't expect a candidate to jump through hoops in order to give you your money back. After all, which is more important, winning or refunding money?

Of course this could all be a trick disguised as a clerical error, so the "refunds" still remain in Hillary's bank.

Another thing -- has anyone requested a list of the "charities" that were supposed to be the beneficiaries of all that tainted Hsu cash? Has anyone followed up to see if said charities have received those pledges?

Maybe Hillary thinks they s... (Below threshold)

Maybe Hillary thinks they should consider the shortages to be the cost of managing their money.

I hope this is all being do... (Below threshold)
Zelsdorf Ragshaft III:

I hope this is all being documented for use during the general election. The Clintons have a way of evading the truth.

Where is the ethic's invest... (Below threshold)
914:

Where is the ethic's investigation of this willful criminal conduct?

So they refuse to return th... (Below threshold)

So they refuse to return the money Hsu stole to "give" to the Hillary(D) campaign because of incompetence.

And gee whiz, believe it or... (Below threshold)
OLDPUPPYMAX:

And gee whiz, believe it or not the MSM is totally silent about the whole thing.

has anyone requested a l... (Below threshold)
Veeshir:

has anyone requested a list of the "charities" that were supposed to be the beneficiaries of all that tainted Hsu cash?

I'll bet $1 that the charity is the "Bill Clinton Presidential Library Foundation".
I've watched the Clintons too long to think they would let any of that money stray too far away.




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy