A search of Chinatown donors yesterday by the [New York] Post found several bogus addresses and some contributions that raised eyebrows.No "Shin K. Cheng"? How about "One Hung Lo"?
Shin K. Cheng is listed twice in federal records for giving $1,000 donations to Clinton's campaign on April 17.
But the address recorded on campaign reports is a clinic for sexually transmitted diseases, hemorrhoids and skin disease.
No one at the address knew of a Shin K. Cheng.
Sorry, couldn't resist. But an STD clinic as a Clinton fundraising front? Could YOU resist that?
Another donation came from a Shih Kan Chang on Canal Street. But the address listed is a shop that sells knock-off watches and other pirated goods. The sales clerk there did not know the donor.But then, of course, Hillary Clinton is above federal law.
Hsiao Yen Wang, a cook in Chinatown, is listed as giving Clinton $1,000 on April 13. Contacted yesterday, she told the Post she had written a check.
But it was on behalf of a man named David Guo, president of the Fujian American
Cuisine Council, and Wang told the Post that Guo had repaid her for the $1,000 contribution.
Such "straw donations" are strictly prohibited by federal law.
Alright, Rupert Murdoch's newspaper doesn't count as Enemy Media, I'll give you that. But the Los Angeles Times certainly does:
Admiral Ed gives us a hilarious recapitulation of the obvious:
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 Senator John F. Kerry (D-MA) ran for president in 2004, he received $24,000 from Chinatown. . . .
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....Like many who traveled this path, most of the Chinese reported as contributing to Clinton's campaign have never voted. Many speak little or no English. Some seem to lead such ephemeral lives that neighbors say they've never heard of them.
What does that say about the Hillary Clinton campaign? Once could have been a mistake. Twice looks like a pattern. Taking into account 1996 and the same kinds of criminal activity in her husband's re-election effort, three times is a bad habit and not a mistake at all.It doesn't tell me anything about the Hillary Clinton campaign that I didn't already know. The Clinton Machine is a corrupt, ruthless, mercenary, traitorous criminal racket driven by a single imperative: the will to conquer, by any means necessary. It's been in or around the national stage since 1991, and it's no less filthy now than it was then. Hey, I don't call them La Clinton Nostra for nothing.
Nominating Clintons to the White House three times doesn't qualify as a mistake for Democrats, either. This demonstrates a lack of ethical oversight on the part of their party that reflects the kind of governance they represent. If Hillary wins the nomination after having her campaign conduct these kinds of criminal and ethical violations, then that tells Americans quite a bit about their threshold for corruption in pursuit of power.
And will any of it get investigated by the Bush FBI? Nope. Will the voters care any more than they did eleven years ago? Nope. Her Nib knows this, and isn't even taking the trouble to conceal it; hell, she's proud of it. She's raised more dough than any other presidential campaign in American history, and the primaries are still three months away. She may as well steal the Capital One catch-phrase as her campaign slogan and produce a series of ads with Asian dishwashers and bellhops exclaiming, in stereotypical Charlie Chan accents, "What's in YOUR wallet?!?"
To all those on this side of the aisle who still think that Hillary is "unelectable" or in any other fashion "just another presidential candidate," are you beginning to understand why she is, indeed, inevitable? And that it has nothing to do with persuasion?
My political cynicism is part of the Clinton legacy, after all. I can't imagine how hard-boiled I'll be nine years from now.
You know, when Chelsea is busy shaking down Chinatowns all over the country....