baldilocks

"Hillraiser" is Fugitive (UPDATED)

A bit more serious than Senator Larry Craig’s public bathroom habits—but far more entertaining--is the fact that one of Senator Hillary Clinton’s major fundraisers for her 2008 presidential campaign turns out to be a fugitive from justice.

For the last 15 years, California authorities have been trying to figure out what happened to a businessman named Norman Hsu, who pleaded no contest to grand theft, agreed to serve up to three years in prison and then seemed to vanish. [SNIP]

Hsu, it seems, has been hiding in plain sight, at least for the last three years.

Since 2004, one Norman Hsu has been carving out a prominent place of honor among Democratic fundraisers. He has funneled hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions into party coffers, much of it earmarked for presidential hopeful Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York.

Apparently, California authorities weren’t looking too hard for a man who is, admittedly, not public enemy number one, but sheesh! During his time as a “desperado,” Mr. Hsu has been making himself useful to Democrat candidates nationwide.

In addition to making his own contributions, Hsu has honed the practice of assembling packets of checks from contributors who bear little resemblance to the usual Democratic deep pockets: A self-described apparel executive with a variety of business interests, Hsu has focused on delivering hefty contributions from citizens who live modest lives and are neophytes in the world of campaign giving. [SNIP]

As a Democratic rainmaker, Hsu -- who graduated from UC Berkeley and the Wharton School of Business -- is credited with donating nearly $500,000 to national and local party candidates and their political committees in the last three years. He earned a place in the Clinton campaign's "HillRaiser" group by pledging to raise more than $100,000 for her presidential bid.

Records show that Hsu helped raise an additional $500,000 from other sources for Clinton and other Democrats. [SNIP]

Records show that Hsu has emerged as one of the Democrats' most successful "bundlers," rounding up groups of contributors and packaging their checks together before delivering the funds to campaign officials. Individuals can give a total of $4,600 to a single candidate during an election cycle, $2,300 for the primaries and $2,300 for the general election.

One example of the kind of first-time donors Hsu has worked with is the Paw family of Daly City, Calif., which is headed by William Paw, a mail carrier, and his wife, Alice, who is listed as a homemaker.

The Paws -- seven adults, most of whom live together in a small house near San Francisco International Airport -- apparently had never donated to national candidates until 2004. Over a three-year period, they gave $213,000, including $55,000 to Clinton and $14,000 to candidates for state-level offices in New York [W$J].

The W$J link contains the individual Paw family contributors, along with amounts, dates and the very many local and national recipients. "Suffice it to say, the list is extensive."

The family includes a son, Winkle Paw, who Barcella said was in business with Hsu. Another son works for a Bay Area school board, while one daughter works for a hospital and another for a computer company. [SNIP]

Over the [three] years, Hsu and his associates have given to Democratic Sens. Dianne Feinstein of California, Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts, Barack Obama of Illinois and Joseph R. Biden Jr. of Delaware. Obama and Biden, like Clinton, are seeking the presidential nomination.

Hsu's legal troubles date back almost 20 years.

Beginning in 1989, court records show, he began raising what added up to more than $1 million from investors, purportedly to buy latex gloves; investors were told Hsu had a contract to resell the gloves to a major American business.

In 1991, Hsu was charged with grand theft. Prosecutors said there were no latex gloves and no contract to sell them.

(Emphasis mine.)

When I first heard a detailed report about Mr. Hsu's "bundler" role (this morning), my first response was that the Democrats had nearly perfected a way to avoid the soft money restrictions of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 aka McCain-Feingold--by making it appear that the many small donations came from this family. If this is so, the Democrats may have picked the perfect man to get around this--arguably unconstitutional--law. (Isn't this part of the reason that that there was so much bipartisan opposition to BCRA in the first place?)

One wonders whether Mr. Hsu has been protected from arrest over these few years of his making rain.

Our “betters”—Republican and Democrat—are no better than us. But we knew that.

(Thanks to Sweetness and Light, who is astonished that this story appeared in the Los Angeles Times)

UPDATE: Some Democrat candidates intend to away the tainted monies:

Al Franken, a Senate candidate in Minnesota, Rep. Michael Honda of California and Rep. Joe Sestak of Pennsylvania said they would divest their campaigns of donations from Norman Hsu, whose legal encounters and links to other Democratic donors have drawn public scrutiny in the past two days. Franken's campaign received $2,300 from Hsu and Sestak and Honda each received $1,000 for their re-election efforts.

The bigger boys and girls are less quick on the draw.

The Clinton campaign did not immediately comment on Hsu's legal situation. But in a statement issued Tuesday, the campaign defended Hsu in response to the Journal report about a San Francisco family whose contribution patterns tracked Hsu's.

"Norman Hsu is a longtime and generous supporter of the Democratic Party and its candidates, including Senator Clinton," Clinton spokesman Howard Wolfson said in a statement Tuesday. "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 or to return them."

(Thanks to Lucianne)

UPDATE: Clinton follows suit.

WASHINGTON - Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton will give to charity the $23,000 in donations that she has received from a fundraiser who is wanted in California for failing to appear for sentencing on a 1991 grand theft charge.

I bet that hurt.

Now, where is Mr. Hsu again?

(Thanks to Hot Air)

UPDATE: Hsu turns himself in.

REDWOOD CITY, Calif. -- Democratic fundraiser Norman Hsu, who had been a fugitive from a 1992 grand larceny case, was briefly jailed today [August 31] before posting bail.

Superior Court Judge H. James Ellis this morning ordered Hsu held and ordered bail set at $2 million. [SNIP]

Hsu appeared at the San Mateo County courthouse before 8 a.m., more than 45 minutes early. Having suddenly found himself front-page news, he has retained attorney James Brosnahan of the blue-chip San Francisco law firm Morrison & Foerster and the Los Angeles-based public relations firm headed by Michael Sitrick.

As Hsu waited in the hallway for the hearing to begin, he huddled with an attorney and spokesman Jason Booth. They declined to comment. Hsu spoke on his cellphone and chewed his fingernails.

Looking For Reasons to Complain

As a result of my Larry Craig post receiving links from Balloon Juice and from Salon, I’m receiving flak for allegedly equating homosexuals with child predators. :::shrug::: I took special care to specify that the two groups aren’t the same and even mentioned (in the comments) that it seems to me that more little girls are being violated by men than are little boys. None of those who are up in arms about my “equation” seem aware of a recent post of mine about James P. Finn--a former Air Force colleague and a deserter—who was recently arrested for downloading child pornography, who is an online “pedophile advocate” and who has a preference for young boys. In the post, I stated that, in the eighties, we pretty much knew that Finn was a homosexual, but that some of us were beating ourselves up for not knowing that he was a pedophile.

However, when some people see the words ‘homosexual/gay’ and the phrase ‘child predator’ in the same sentence, knees will automatically jerk, apparently. I guess I’m not really surprised, since La Shawn Barber received the same reaction last year when discussing the demeanor of John Mark Karr.

Jeff Goldstein has written several posts about the concept of intentionalism: the way in which we all assign meaning to the words of a given speaker/writer and to the concepts which the speaker/writer attempts to convey. My critics choose to ignore the objective definitions of words and concepts used and choose to assign their own definitions, naturally to my detriment. Therefore, I can be accused of saying that all homosexuals are child predators even after having composed this paragraph

Perhaps men so inclined [to prey on little boys] wouldn't take the chance on grabbing a boy in such an enclosed space--one from which such a predator would not have an easy avenue of escape--but is that a chance which you would take with your son? And even if there are no child predators present, seeing/hearing two men boinking in the restroom is not something which I would want my [hypothetical] son to have to experience.

Two hypothetical men are having relations in a restroom but no child predators are present. Gee, how could I formulate such a situation if I thought that all homosexuals were child predators? Could it be that some of my critics cannot find legitimate reasons to complain about my Craig post and are, therefore, inclined to make sh*t up?

(One critic assigns meaning that may be accurate: overprotective parent. Though I’m not a parent, I can imagine that I would be a bit overprotective toward my children of either gender, considering the prevalence of predators of all stripes these days. There’s a reason that, in the seventies, I and my little girl friends were able to stay gone all day, but my sister wouldn’t dream of allowing her oldest daughter—a nine-year-old—to have the same freedom.)

In fairness, I realize that there are quite a few stereotypes which homosexuals have to oppose (and, by the way, I do know a few things about combating a couple of other sets of stereotypes). I would advise my critics, however, to reconnoiter the target a bit more closely and, before lashing out, to make sure that said target is really an enemy.

Restrooms Not For "Rest" Anymore

The hoopla surrounding the recently publicized fact that Senator Larry Craig (R-ID) pleaded guilty two months ago to disorderly/lewd conduct has many takes. The three-term senator was busted in a Minnesota Airport men's room for soliciting sex with another man--an undercover cop--who was located in an adjacent stall. You can find several of the takes here, here, here and here and most, of course, have a political bent. Craig held a press conference a couple of hours ago during which he claims not to be a homosexual, refuses to resign and says that he will decide later whether to stand for re-election next year. Cue senate ethics probe.

With all of the (admittedly fun) scandal-mongering going on, what I really want to know about is this: when did airport men's rooms become the sex spot for male homosexuals? Perhaps I'm a bit sheltered, but if I had a son between the ages of six and eleven--too old to go into the ladies' room with me but not yet large enough to defend himself against an aggressive adult--I probably wouldn't be.

Perhaps men so inclined wouldn't take the chance on grabbing a boy in such an enclosed space--one from which such a predator would not have an easy avenue of escape--but is that a chance which you would take with your son? And even if there are no child predators present, seeing/hearing two men boinking in the restroom is not something which I would want my son to have to experience.

When did it become dangerous to send older boys into airport bathrooms by themselves? And why isn't something being...never mind. Our airports aren't totally secure from terrorists. Why should the state of affairs be any different with regard to perverts? (And, yes, people who have any kind of sex in public restrooms are perverts.)

Both Democrats and Republicans are calling on Craig to resign. I agree that he should. He pleaded guilty to possibly exposing somebody's child to his very adult sexuality. Would you want someone like this in DC representing your interests?*

*If you live in Barney Frank's (D-MA) district, forget I asked.

UPDATE: Welcome Balloon Juice readers! It's nice to know that John and I still agree on some things. :-)

UPDATE: Looking for Reasons to Complain

Gonzales Resigns

For those of you who slept late, embattled Attorney General Alberto Gonzales has announced that he will resign from his post effective September 17.

Republicans and Democrats alike had demanded his departure over the botched handling of FBI terror investigations and the firings of U.S. attorneys, but President Bush had defiantly stood by his Texas friend for months until accepting his resignation last Friday.

"After months of unfair treatment that has created a harmful distraction at the Justice Department, Judge Gonzales decided to resign his position and I accept his decision," Bush said from Texas, where he is vacationing.

Solicitor General Paul Clement will be acting attorney general until a replacement is found and confirmed by the Senate, Bush said.

When I saw the report on the news early this morning, I had the quirky thought that if president isn't tired of annoying the Republican base, he could nominate Harriet Miers for the post. It turns out that I might have had the right idea in mind, if the wrong person.

Homeland Security chief Michael Chertoff was among those mentioned as possible successors, though a senior administration official said the matter had not been raised with Chertoff.

Yes, the same Michael Chertoff who asserted that opponents of the Comprehensive [Illegal] Immigration Reform wanted nothing less that the death penalty for all illegal immigrants and who uses "his gut" to determine whether we will experience another terrorist attack or not.

I hope that the Chertoff speculation was merely that of AP.

If we really want to talk about quirky nominations for AG, the White House could do worse in nominating another AP (Allahpundit; a lawyer) to fill the post. That ought to get the jihadis in an uproar; not necessarily a bad thing. :-)

UPDATE: Ugh. Chertoff as AP isn't merely press speculation.

WASHINGTON (CNN) — President Bush may nominate Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff to replace Alberto Gonzales as Attorney General, senior administration officials told CNN Monday.

Pet Peeve Monday, August 27, 2007

Have you ever tried to make your way down a grocery store/drug store/department store aisle only to find the way blocked by:

--a mother, one or more children and a cart?
--two fat women standing abreast and not moving?

Have you ever been driving down a parking lot aisle only to find your way blocked by one or more persons taking a leisurely stroll right down the middle of it?

Have you been walking down a sidewalk and had to walk on someone's grass or in the street because folks are just standing in the middle of the walk?

If you have experienced any of these phenomena, then you have come upon yet another thing that annoys me to no end. Why do people feel it necessary to block public passages? Get moving or move to the side!

UPDATE: Don Surber has a solution.

Two words: cattle prod.

Martin Lewis Invites the FBI to Tea

Have you ever had this type of "conversation" with a person? Said person makes nonsensical suggestions based on topical ignorance and when you try to clue the person in, he/she tells you not to interrupt. The person then proceeds to come to conclusions and/or make further recommendations based on the original faulty premises.

Though a blog post is by its nature not a conversation, Huffington Post's Martin Lewis puts up a post that reminds me of above-mentioned type of "exchange."

Dear General [Peter] Pace,

I note with admiration your courage in making clear your private concerns about the safety of the US military and the longterm danger to US national security caused by the President's stubborn refusal to acknowledge the quagmire in Iraq.

Though you are Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the President's principal military advisor - President Bush has shown his disdain for your honesty and wisdom. Though you are a decorated Vietnam war hero - who has served his nation honorably for four decades - the President is dispensing with your services. You have one month left in your position before you are tossed out by the President.

President Bush is going to ignore your advice. Just as he has ignored the advice of other Generals who have had the courage to respectfully point out how terribly wrong he is in respect of the Iraq War and the safety of the US military he is sworn to protect. Highly-decorated colleagues of yours such as General Anthony Zinni (Commander in Chief of U.S. Central Command), General Eric Shinseki (Chief of Staff of the U.S. Army) and General John Abizaid (Commander of the U.S. Central Command).

General Pace - you have the power to fulfill your responsibility to protect the troops under your command. Indeed you have an obligation to do so.

You can relieve the President of his command.

Not of his Presidency. But of his military role as Commander-In-Chief.

You simply invoke the Uniform Code Of Military Justice.

Lewis goes on to list the features of several Articles of the UCMJ and how they could be applied to the removal of the president's CinC powers--but not his domestic duties--blithely unaware that the president's role as defined by U.S. Constitution undermines the premise of his entire proposal.

This is merely another demonstration that reading and comprehending are two different things. (Is this guy is another one of those well-read Liberal/Leftists that we've heard about recently?)

To be fair, Lewis is a Brit, but he does live in the US. That means that he'll probably be receiving a visit from ChimpyMchitler's Boys and Girls--as well he should. Those who publicly advocate a military coup (treason) should be investigated.

When Lewis's commenters point out that he has suggested treason in a time of war, he denies it. Pathetically, he didn't even realize that his proposal to General Pace was the very definition of Treason.

(Thanks to Ed Morrissey)

UPDATE: Now Lewis is taking the "just-kidding" posture.

Most of the right-wing-nuts who have read this column seem to be oblivious to irony and satire...

Castro Dead?

Of course we know that rumors of Cuban dictator Fidel Castro's death have been greatly exaggerated before. Keep an eye, however, on Babalu Blog, where Val is optimistic but cautious.

Nothing is official, lots of buzz, no confirmation. However, was told something that may make unfortunate sense: the Cuban government has gotten us all riled up only to proudly and snidely display fidel castro in full green fatigues regalia.

(Thanks to Hot Air)

UPDATE: Keep an eye on Perez Hilton also (although I'm hoping that Val scoops PH).

IMMEDIATE BACK STORY: Cuban Foreign Minister Felipe Perez Roque said earlier today that Castro was "doing very well" in the wake of a recent surgery.

UPDATE: From WSVN in Miami (via Babalu):

FOX News cites multiple officials at the White House saying there is nothing to back up rumors coming out of Miami that Fidel Castro is dead.

Human Stain

See this guy? I knew him and worked with him a long time ago. I even liked him back then.

To all of those who would assert that we veterans believe that all other veterans are good and that we would not say anything bad about others veterans, I present to you one James P. Finn.

A 42-year-old man faced child pornography charges Thursday after police say they caught him in the act of downloading child pornography off the Internet during a search of his home.

A flier circulated in the neighborhood where James P. Finn lived identifying him as a "pedophile activist" that included his name and photograph led police to investigate Finn, Wayne County Sheriff Warren Evans said.

During a search of Finn's home Tuesday, police said they found about 30 digital movies and nearly 600 photos showing children in sexual situations.

As it happens, Finn used to be an active duty USAF NCO (before that, he had been a Marine Reservist). In the late eighties, I worked in the same USAF office (in then West Berlin) with Finn along with several others. He was introduced to me and was mostly referred to as “JP,” which made sense in a place in which there were a lot of American men and, therefore, several men who had been given the name of “James.”

JP had an air about him which most of us with working “gaydar” recognized. The fact that there have been many homosexuals in the military isn’t new to those of us who have been a part of it. The Clinton policy of “don’t-ask-don’t-tell” was a de facto among regular military members long before the forty-second president made it de jure.

I had known about JP’s downfall of twenty years ago via RUMINT. When JP was due to rotate out of Berlin, a flag involving his security clearance had popped up. The word was that he had been accused of molesting an underage male cousin in the years before his military service. The accusation of molestation became known to military authorities via the cousin’s psychiatrist.

However, when JP took his plane from Berlin to Atlanta via Frankfurt, he wasn’t under arms(!) So when he landed in Atlanta that was the last that the military had heard of him until 1995.

Taking the advice of a friend, Finn said, he fled the [Atlanta] area to escape going to trial. After being on the run for six years, he said, the Air Force tracked him down in 1995 in New York.

Facing the possibility of 20 years in prison, Finn said, the case against him was ultimately dropped after the boy whom he had the relationship with refused to testify against him.

JP served seven months in a military prison, likely for desertion.

Here’s the most hair-raising quote from the article:

"I am convinced that inter-generational love is not wrong," he wrote. "I must help spread the message. I realize it would be easier to sink into obscurity and perhaps find a beautiful, satisfying relationship with a boy.

This is what people who are consumed by evil do. Instead of turning away from what they know is wrong, they convince themselves that their desire is the opposite of wrong. JP may have been born with the desires he has, but I’m not buying any of the crap which would absolve him of his guilt—that he was unable to control himself.

Not only did JP not control himself, he waded into his perversion, nearly drowning himself in it and became its representative. He has a huge online footprint as a “pedophile activist.” (One of my fellow Cold Warriors advised us to Google his name, but I’m just not up to that.)

Some who were close friends with JP way back when are beating themselves up about how they could have missed this about him. But as my friend Marty points out, “the most effective predators are very good at compartmentalizing their different lives.”

James P. Finn is a blot on the reputations of both the USMC and the USAF and I hope that he is put somewhere far, far away from children.

Can he be redeemed in the eyes of God? Of course. However, that does not change the fact that there are earthly penalties which he will have to pay. It looks as though he will but I’m sorry that it took so long and I’m betting that there are many people—many parents and children—who are sorrier than I am.

UPDATE: Another pervert is set to receive earthly justice.

Support PMI

Bill Roggio's Public Multimedia Inc. (PMI) is a non-profit organization which aims to

provide original and accurate reporting and analysis of The Long War (also known as the Global War on Terror). This is accomplished through its programs of embedded reporters, news and news aggregation, podcasts, and other multimedia formats.

The organization needs your support in order to raise $20,000 in the next three weeks. Several bloggers, including Blake Powers, Bill Ardolino and the BlackFive Joint Special Operations Task Force - Philippines (JSOTF-P) embed team will be making trips to Iraq and to the PI in the coming months.

If you'd like to fund this worthy effort, click here or here.

VA Hospital Dumping Patients?

From KABC-7 in Los Angeles:

The Los Angeles Police Department is investigating two more alleged cases of hospital patients being dumped on L.A.'s Skid Row. In one incident, police are checking surveillance video.

LA-area private healthcare facilities have an ugly reputation for dumping homeless patients--that is, those with no medical insurance--onto the streets of its downtown-Skid Row area.

Security guards at the Union Rescue Mission saw video just after midnight on Sunday: A man, barefoot, face bandaged, who had just been dropped off -- not by an ambulance or a health care provider, but by a United Independent taxicab. He told the guards that he was in severe pain and could barely walk, and had come from the Veterans Administration Hospital.

The reporter, Miriam Hernandez, also tells of another dumped patient--a mentally-ill man--who came from the civilian and privately-incorporated Western Medical Center in Anaheim. It's a looong way from Anaheim to downtown LA.

In an update, Hernandez states that

The one from the VA Hospital was returned to that hospital, but in the care of paramedics. The second man was cared for at the Union Rescue Mission for two days, then he walked off.

Now, I'm not one to say the VA hospitals dispenses pristinely perfect health care--far from it; it is socialized medicine--but something about the VA part of this story smells. Can't quite put my finger on it.

If the first man had actually belonged at the VA, why would he be dumped on purpose at Skid Row? It's not as though he had any huge bill to pay.

It would be interesting to discover to which LA area VA hospital the man was returned, the West LA facility (near Santa Monica) or the one in Long Beach--or whether he was actually returned to a VA facility at all.

(Thanks to Don Surber and to Glenn Reynolds)

UPDATE: :::two Instalanches in two days---->>>always link to Don Surber:::