Posted on 09/20/2007 8:00:15 AM PDT by SmithL
A New York investment group run by one of the promoters of the 1969 Woodstock festival has sued disgraced Democratic fundraiser Norman Hsu for allegedly funneling $40 million in financing for a nonexistent clothing company into political campaign contributions and an "extravagant international lifestyle."
The lawsuit brought by Source Financing Investors LLC says Hsu fooled investors into believing they were financing an operation to supply Chinese-made clothes to U.S. retailers when in fact he was running a Ponzi scheme, in which initial investments are repaid with money from subsequent investments until the operation collapses.
Hsu, 56, was convicted in San Mateo County of running a similar scam in the early 1990s but fled before he could be sentenced to prison. He resurfaced years later as a Democratic moneyman, turned himself in last month after his past caught up with him, and now he is about to be extradited to Redwood City from Colorado after he skipped out on $2 million bail.
Democratic politicians to whom Hsu arranged a total of about $2 million in contributions in recent years, including presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, have rushed to announce in recent days that they will return the money. The New York lawsuit, however, could complicate those plans as attorneys for the plaintiffs have asked politicians to hold onto what could be money from the allegedly bilked investors.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
“don’t worry...hillary’s got your back “
Hmmmm. Who, besides Robin Hood, steals money in order to give it all away?
Dead Man Walkin’ = Hsu
You know, I would never dream you could join Woodstock and China in the same story.
How much campaign money are the Clintons willing to “give away” to make sure Hsu does not talk....??? The donor (quid pro quo) list would be most revealing and probably devastating to Bonnie and Clyde, as well as other well known law-breaking, felonious Dems.
For their sake, I hope this "investment group" hires an attorney who is smarter than they. There is a straight and direct line between greed and financial myopia.
He got it from suckers, one born every minute. The better question is “Cui bono?”
Who benefits?
I see a real possibility of charges being brought against Hillary Clinton.
Why has the media overnight agreed to the term “disgraced Democratic fundraiser Norman Hsu”? Would it not be correct for them to refer to the disgraced Democratic former President Bill Clinton? Funny how the media is always tiptoeing around the word “alleged” we its some murderer with a bloody knife, but here they all agree it is now the “disgraced Democratic fundraiser Norman Hsu”. Somehow me thinks the Dem fax machine has been busy sending out marching orders to the news rooms. The funny thing is our intrepid reporters do nothing than say “Hiel Hillary”.
DID HE WRITE THE SUICIDE NOTE???????????
ARE HIS FINGERPRINTS ON IT?????
The money trail will eventually lead to the Chinese government.
I’m wondering about Woodstock Guy’s real role in this. I noticed in the reader comments of the OpinionJournal.com site when this story was first broached, it was pointed out that, while venture capitalists are risk-takers by nature, nobody hands out $40 million to someone without doing some serious background checking.
I seriously wonder if Joel Rosenman is the innocent dupe he makes himself out to be.
IF...that ever happens I will run naked thru a tick and chigger infested field.
I highly doubt it will happen...so I think I'm safe.
Blogger Suitably Flip got an email from a person claiming to have been someone who was pressured to donate on behalf of Hsu apparently since he was an investor in Rosenman’s “Source Financing” venture:
http://suitablyflip.blogs.com/suitably_flip/2007/09/hillary-truth-n.html
If this is really true, then it would seem that Rosenman was fully in this scheme to finance the campaign.
Thanks for the link. As interesting as the no-refund check part is, is the part where the investor describes how no one at the campaign seems even to know how they’d go about a issuing a refund.
Also, Pidot provides a nice summation of the Federal charges read today against Hsu.
The last part was good too: the stuff that was seized with Hsu on the train. Ledgers. Names of donors. Checkbooks. Now why would he take all that stuff with him if he were going to commit suicide? (Not to mention why charter a jet cross country to get to CAm, then hop a train to Denver to do it?) Even supposing for a moment that he wanted the incriminating evidence to be found—a vengeful move from the grave—he’d have simply sent it to the WSJ and the DA.
All the evidence is right there. This is a slam dunk, at least as far as Hsu is concerned, and there’s got to be a ton of incriminating evidence in his records to involve a whole slough of people. I suspect that Rosenman’s suit is a feint on his part. He had to have known that his “investors” were getting shaken down for contributions.
She who will not be named is going to be able to distance herself for a while, playing the victim again, but eventually this will do plenty of damage to the campaign (I’ve watched too many of these scandals fizzle out to think that it will take her down completely).
The big hope is that the WSJ may dribble this stuff out (like the very similar Danielczyk case) over time to keep the story alive.
I agree. And the donation records seem to suggest that Rosenman not only knew, he was part of the strongarm to donate. Otherwise, why wouldn't these unwilling donors just tell Hsu to take a hike? Donations were probably part of the deal. You want in on the SFI venture with Hsu? Then you gotta write a check to these campaigns. Pay to play.
What is also intriguing is that when Hsu decided to spill his guts, so to speak, to the FBI he explicitly refused to have his lawyers present and waived his Miranda rights. The guy must be afraid of his lawyers. I wonder who recommended them!
I bet he spilled more than the contents of his Blackberry.
I found that most intriguing too. Maybe he read press accounts about his “suicide”’ note and his attorney’s ominous pronouncements about Hsu’s “mental health.”
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.