Posted on 08/30/2007 9:55:32 AM PDT by doug from upland
Hillary Answers Hsu Questions, Spitzer Helps by Jason Horowitz
Published: August 30, 2007
Tags: Politics
Sen Hillary Clinton said today that she was "surprised" to learn that one of her bundlers, Norman Hsu, had a warrant out for his arrest related to a California fraud case.
"Obviously we were all surprised by this news and we have a procedure that we follow and upon verifying it we returned his money and continue to analyze all contributions and take action if that's warranted," she said.
Clinton, answering questions after a press conference about children's health insurance with Eliot Spitzer at the governor's office in midtown, went on to say, "I wish Mr. Hsu well in all the problems that he is confronting."
She refused to respond as to why she had given to charity the money Hsu contributed directly to her campaign but not the money he had raised by bringing in other donors.
Clinton was then pressed to respond to critics who said the Hsu matter was similar to past Clinton fund-raising controversies, such as letting top donors sleep in the White House's Lincoln bedroom.
"I don't think it's analagous at all," she said.
"When you have as many contributors as I am fortunate enough to have, we do the very best job we can on the information available."
Spitzer then jumped in, effectively blocking any more questions on the issue, saying, "I think it's a fair question to ask - is Sen Clinton's campaign or any campaign supposed to doing a better job than the authorities of California who theoretically had an open warrant for this guy and didn't do anything? Come on, guys. Let's get real."
That response prompted a question about whther Clinton's presence at the press conference was a show of support for the embattled governor - which he was returning in kind.
"Well," said Clinton, "I support the governor."
Spitzer wants to be Clinton’s AG.
Well that was better than “I do not recall.”
Can we have that address so we can stick his ass in jail?
True, but that didn’t happen only because Spitzer ran interference.
Effectively blocked more questions? WHY? Spitzer himself received $52,000 from Hsu. And none of the reporters on the scene knew enough to ask him him about it.
Effectively blocked more questions? WHY? Spitzer himself received $52,000 from Hsu. And none of the reporters on the scene knew enough to ask him him about it.
_________________
Dashgummit. Why can’t some Freepers get press passes?
Surprised that he was a wanted man since 1992?
This is a long term association. You know who your key contributors are.
Will we get another videotape with the sound "lost"?
You are correct sir, I guess if the Hsu fits Hillary and Spitzer will have to wear it.
Not surprisingly, Hillary is lying. She didn't return his money; she gave it to charity. If it is an illegal donation, she is obligated to return it to the donor. If it was his money and not illegal, she just gave a donor's money to charity.
If you think the Clintoon political machine is as crooked as a country road now, just think what the addition of Spitzer would do! Frightening.
John Edwards was quoted as saying,
“Hsu? If anyone wants to Hsu, I’ll be happy to represent them. My customary fee is 40% of the judgment. You pay nothing if you do not win.”
“What do you mean this has nothing to do with class action or personal injury litigation?
Why hasn’t anyone asked what charity she donated the money too? I’d certainly like to know. Was it her husband’s library or do they have a special “charity” where they squirrel away all illegal monies? Inquiring minds want to know.
If you think the Clintoon political machine is as crooked as a country road now, just think what the addition of Spitzer would do! Frightening.
Actually, I figure Spitzer’s own arrogance will bring him down long before next years election cycle. You can see it coming a mile away....or from here in Southern Ohio for that matter.
“She refused to respond as to why she had given to charity the money Hsu contributed directly to her campaign but not the money he had raised by bringing in other donors.”
I can tell you that. She can afford to give away $50,000, not $1,000,000.
I would love to ask follow up questions of Hillary, such as why she thinks it’s not analogous at all to the Lincoln bedroom fundraising problems.
She is running so far on the legacy of the Clinton administration. She has to then take the good with the bad. This fundraising issue can only remind people of the fundraising problems with Bill Clinton.
The best guess is that this is all part and parcel of the Clinton’s standard operating procedure. But see if the MSM will follow up, or will instead jump back into the matters of “wide stances” of men in restroom stalls.
‘the authorities of California who theoretically had an open warrant’
Theoretically? ‘Had’ and not have? Hmmmmmmmmmmmm.
For a woman who has an opinion about everything, she really knows nothing. Do we want this woman to be President?
I surprised the BS meter didn’t fly off the wall when she spoke.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.