Clinton in New Orleans this week. Campaign says no reason to suspect anything amiss with leading campaign fundraiser. Photo by Paul Richards/AFP/Getty Images
by Mark Silva and Christi Parsons
How does it happen that the family of a mail carrier who makes $49,000 and his wife, a homemaker – a family that also owns a gift shop, but lives in a 1,280-square-foot house in the flight path of San Francisco International Airport – have donated a combined $45,000 to the state and national campaigns of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton?
The Wall Street Journal is asking that question today, and answering with a comparison of the campaign contributions of the Paw family and a wealthy New York businessman which match nearly date for date, dollar for dollar.
The contributions from six members of the Paw family household, the father an employee of the U.S. Postal Service, have placed them on a par with the donations from some tony addresses in Greenwich, Conn., and Manhattan’s Upper East Side. Not only have they donated $45,000 to Clinton’s campaigns since 2005, but they also have donated a total of $200,000 to Democratic Party candidates.
William Paw, 64, is a mail carrier, and Alice Paw, also 64, a homemaker, the Wall Street Journal’s enterprising reporter, Brody Mullins, has found. Their grown children hold jobs ranging from account manager at a software company to “attendance liaison’’ at a public high school. One is listed in Federal Election Commission records as a mutual fund executive.
But their donations “closely track’’ those of Norman Hsu, a wealthy New York businessman in the apparel industry who once listed the Paw residence in San Francisco as his own address, according to the Journal’s examination of public records. Hsu is one of the top fund-raisers for Sen. Clinton's presidential campaign and has hosted or co-hosted some of her most prominent fund-raising events.
Hsu's lawyer, E. Lawrence Barcella, Jr., also had this to say to the Tribune: "The WSJ story is crap and they know it.''
(Added Swamp feature: See an invitation to an upcoming fundraiser that Hsu is sponsoring: Download file)
One of the Paw’s sons, Winkle, told the Journal that he had sometimes been asked by Hsu to make contributions, and sometimes he had asked members of his family also to donate. But he added: "I have been fortunate in my investments and all of my contributions have been my money."
“I have NEVER asked a single favor from any politician or any charity group,’’ Hsu told the Journal. “If I am NOT asking favors, why do I have to cheat... I've asked friends and colleagues of mine to give money out of their own pockets and sometimes they have agreed."
Lawrence Barcella, a Washington attorney representing Hsu: “You are barking up the wrong tree. There is no factual support for this story and if Mr. Hsu's name was Smith or Jones, I don't believe it would be a story."
Clinton campaign spokesman Howard Wolfson: "Norman Hsu is a longtime and generous supporter of the Democratic party and its candidates, including Senator Clinton. 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."
Yet Kent Cooper, a former disclosure official with the Federal Election Commission, suggests that the two-year pattern of donations of the Paws and Hsu justify a probe of possible violations of campaign-finance law, which forbid one person from reimbursing another to make contributions.
According to public records, Hsu once listed his address at the Paw home in Daly City, though it isn't clear if he ever lived there, the Journal reports. He now lives in New York, according to campaign-finance records, on which he also lists a half-dozen apparel companies as his employer. In the campaign-finance forms, Hsu lists his companies as Next Components, Dilini Management, Because Men's Clothes and others.
Hsu has pledged to raise $100,000 or more for Clinton, earning him the campaign’s title of “HillRaiser.’’ He co-hosted a fund-raiser that raised $1 million for Clinton at the Beverly Hills, Calif., home of billionaire Ron Burkle.
The Journal found this:
“On four separate dates this year, the Paw family, Mr. Hsu and five of his associates gave Mrs. Clinton a total of $47,500. In all, the family, Mr. Hsu and his associates have given Mrs. Clinton $133,000 since 2005 and a total of nearly $720,000 to all Democratic candidates.
“The Paw's Daly City home is a one-story house in a working-class suburb of San Francisco.
“No one in the Paw family had ever given a campaign contribution before the 2004 presidential election, according to campaign-finance reports.
“Then, in July 2004, five members of the family contributed a total of $3,600 to the presidential campaign of Sen. John Kerry, the Massachusetts Democrat. Five of the checks were dated July 27, 2004. About the same time, Mr. Hsu made his first donations to a political candidate, contributing the maximum amount allowed by law to Mr. Kerry in two separate checks, on July 21, 2004, and on Aug. 6.
“From then on, the correlation of campaign donations between Mr. Hsu and the Paw family has continued. The first donations to Mrs. Clinton came Dec. 23, 2004, when Mr. Hsu and one Paw family member donated the then-maximum $4,000 to her Senate campaign in two $2,000 checks, campaign-finance records show. In March 2005, the individuals gave a total of $17,500 to Mrs. Clinton.
“Since then, Mr. Hsu, his New York associates and the Paw family have continued to donate to Democratic candidates. This year, Alice Paw and four of the Paw children have donated the maximum $4,600 to Mrs. Clinton's presidential campaign.’’
• 
• 
• 
Comments
What a mystery!
Wait, don't call the Scooby gang, put down the Bat Signal, I've figured it out!
Hillary Clinton is a corrupt sleaze bag! She knows what is going on and approves of it! 49% of the population hates her, and they are right!
Anybody besides Hillary (or Romney.)
Posted by: nisleib | August 28, 2007 3:33 PM
Here we go again with the smear Hillary campaign.
Mention the name "Clinton" and just like Pavlov's dog, the Wingnuts will start barking.
Posted by: John E | August 28, 2007 3:49 PM
It's not like she spent more time at Yankee Stadium watching baseball than at ground zero yet claimed otherwise.
Posted by: jethro | August 28, 2007 3:54 PM
Alternate Caption:
During her speech, Hillary Clinton recreates Marcel Marceau's famous "trapped in a box" mime to illustrate the US position in Iraq.
Posted by: Tony | August 28, 2007 3:56 PM
The Bush tax cuts are working!!!! Americans are keeping more of THEIR money to spend however they choose!
Posted by: janet | August 28, 2007 3:57 PM
George W's incompetence lives on .... we will soon have Hillary as our president because all of the Independents will not vote for another Republican.
Posted by: PD | August 28, 2007 3:58 PM
What a mystery!
Wait, don't call the Scooby gang, put down the Bat Signal, I've figured it out!
Hillary Clinton is a corrupt sleaze bag! She knows what is going on and approves of it! 49% of the population hates her, and they are right!
Anybody besides Hillary (or Romney.)
Posted by: nisleib | August 28, 2007 3:33 PM
I could not have said it better myself. Hillary motives are driven by her own greed. Take away the "Clinton", and you have nothing. Her other motive is to show up her husband and not go down as the first lady that lost out to Monica. What better way than to make her husband the first, "First Man". I use the word man figuratively, not literally.
Posted by: Rob S | August 28, 2007 4:08 PM
Hillary's Beijing connection from 1996 appears to be in full bloom again. The Johnny Chung syndrome is alive and well. Last time, the Communist Chinese got satellite technology. What will they get this time?
Posted by: Mingmei | August 28, 2007 4:11 PM
Hey, wheres John D? Hating Hillary is something I think we could both agree on!
My parents (huge rush limbaugh fans) have been saying for years that Hillary would be the nominee in '08. I keep telling them no way, Democrats aren't that stupid.
Maybe they are!
Posted by: nisleib | August 28, 2007 4:23 PM
Another fine example of the Libune's liberal media bias...wait...nevermind.
Posted by: kb | August 28, 2007 4:29 PM
Here we go again with the smear Hillary campaign.
Mention the name "Clinton" and just like Pavlov's dog, the Wingnuts will start barking.
Posted by: John E | August 28, 2007 3:49 PM
John E- Did you even read the article? Where is the smear campaign?
So this regular Joe's donation of a year of his salary to the shrill one does not seem at best suspicious to you- ?? and you start talking about wingnuts?
What are you, Hillary's hairstylist?
Posted by: heartburn | August 28, 2007 4:34 PM
How does this woman keep getting tricked? That vast right wing conspiracy group is now sneeking money to her just to make her look corruptand she's still in court over a similar situation in a previous election.
"I'm your girl" she said boasfully.
Posted by: whatnow | August 28, 2007 5:03 PM
The latest Rasmussen Poll, which hasn't been reported on by the Swamp, has Edwards tying Obama at 18% among Democrats, with both far behind Clinton's 40%. On the GOP side, Giuliani and Thompson are tied at 23%, with Romney at 16% and McCain at 11%. Since the poll numbers are disasterous news for Obama, the Swamp might ignore the poll. In case the Swamp tries to hide the results from its readers, here they are:
http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/daily_presidential_tracking_poll__1
Posted by: Bruce | August 28, 2007 5:17 PM
Maybe Mr. Hsu is a buddahist monk?
Full article in WSJ is good.
Posted by: Terry | August 28, 2007 5:28 PM
Does this mean I can't sleep easy any more with the knowledge that a Democratic president is coming to clean up Washington? But Sen. Obama and John Edwards are still out there. Certainly they've never lied or misrepresented the truth, engaged in legally questionable activities or been associated with questionable characters. Oh, wait...
Posted by: JB | August 28, 2007 5:34 PM
Hillary Clinton is supposedly a corrupt sleaze bag because a mailman and members of his family apparently made suspiciously large contributions, $45K, to her campaign over two years. Nevermind that she raised over $26 million in one quarter alone and is not so desperate as to need to invite this unnecessary speculation.
No findings of wrongdoing on anyone's part. No evidence that Hillary even knows who these people are. Just slimy, unsupported "suggestions" that something is amiss.
So, the smear-laden, mudslinging, innuendo-ridden campaign begins in earnest. Fine. We'll scrutinize campaign contributions to each of the candidates -- and let the chips fall where they may.
The Wall Street Journal? Please. I don't think there is a more rabidly anti-Democrat -- and especially anti-Clinton --publication. Their editorial page is shameless, and at times irrational, in its conservative bias.
Let me know when there's a real story.
Posted by: Biggdawg | August 28, 2007 5:38 PM
Wow, the Wingnuts can always get fired up for a Hillary post, to bad they won't have time to attack her if they happen to be stupid enough to nominate Rudy and all his "baggage".
Posted by: John E | August 28, 2007 5:49 PM
So what! Maybe the Paw family have a couple of money trees in their back yard. Just think if everyone donated their annual salary to a politician we would always have good clean politicians. Right?
Posted by: GW | August 28, 2007 6:01 PM
Bruce:
I appreciate your zeal, but I really don't think poll numbers mean squat right now. The elections are still 14+ months away, there has yet to be a single primary, there won't be a primary until next year, not a single vote has been cast that means anything, and there is still time for people to enter the race instead of burning themselves out now.
Furthermore, I don't think people are strongly committed to any candidate right now. This is reflected by the fact that no one has more than 40% in any poll. History has shown that it doesn't make any difference if one is ahead in an opinion poll. All those numbers can change dramatically over the duration, as the recent past has shown. If you recall, Howard Dean was once ahead of the pack among the Democratic frontrunners. He wasn’t the nominee.
This stuff is only good for politics junkies. The campaign started too soon for everyone else.
Posted by: John W. | August 28, 2007 6:33 PM
I recall that a Buddhist "temple" in California gave tons of cash to Bill's last presidential campaign -- which turned out to be a front for the Chinese government. The Chinese own the Clintons. They always have and they always will. Bill remained silent when Hong Kong was "repatriated" against its will. Hillary will do nothing when the Chinese take Taiwan. Chinese know all about corruption --- hence they are well acquainted with the Clintons.
Posted by: Patriot | August 28, 2007 6:35 PM
Biggdawg:
You mean this little episode with the generous mailman doesn't at all raise questions in your mind how she she is able to pull down $26 million a quarter?
Your're right in stating there have been no findings of wrongdoing. But that doesn't mean this stuff doesn't warrant an investigation, or that nothing will turn up if an investigation is conducted.
Furthermore, I agree that we should scrutinize all the campaign contributions of all the candidates. Fair for one is fair for all.
Posted by: John W. | August 28, 2007 6:39 PM
Wow. If the left-leaning Wall Street Journal implies there is a problem (in a way that won't get them sued), then I guess it must be true.
I knew I should have applied for that Post Office job...
Posted by: Tom O | August 28, 2007 6:40 PM
Why is anyone surprised by this story? Hillary is scum, always has been scum, and always will be scum. I will have to say that I actually sympathize with most of the Loony Left when it comes to Hillary. She will be the Dem nominee.
Will she win? I'd like to think not.
Really, though neither party has what I would consider a strong, solid candidate running for president. Perhaps the best on the Dem side is Joe Biden. And perhaps the best on the GOP side is out of the race, Tommy Thompson, who was a great governor in Wisconsin for 20 years and an innovative politician. Sadly, neither has a chance.
Nisleib, where did your parents go wrong? They are Rush Limbaugh fans and you are a proud member of the Loony Left? Nisleib, listen to you parents, seek absolution, plead for help, and maybe you'll get on the path to mental health!
Posted by: John D | August 28, 2007 9:11 PM
Nisleib, where did your parents go wrong? They are Rush Limbaugh fans and you are a proud member of the Loony Left? Nisleib, listen to you parents, seek absolution, plead for help, and maybe you'll get on the path to mental health!
Posted by: John D | August 28, 2007 9:11 PM
Little Johnny Droid,
I don't think anyone on here is surprised to learn that you are a Rush Limpdick supporter.
Posted by: John E | August 28, 2007 10:46 PM
I don't think Hillary Clinton is going to lose much ground over this scandal. She should, but she won't. In fact, one of her biggest supporters thinks a Clinton/Obama ticket would be invincible. From CNN:
"WASHINGTON (CNN) – Add another name to the list of political observers who think a Clinton-Obama ticket would be unbeatable: Cuban leader Fidel Castro.
In an editorial in Cuba's communist party newspaper, Granma, the ailing dictator said the pairing of the two White House hopefuls seemed "invincible," according to an English translation on the paper's Web site."
Posted by: Bruce | August 29, 2007 12:42 AM
Last time, the Communist Chinese got satellite technology. What will they get this time?
-
No, the last time they got a spy plane and an apology from the Decider.
Posted by: Bruce Y | August 29, 2007 2:43 AM
Want to get the rest of the story (or the real story)? Read this.
People should always consult Media Matters first.
http://mediamatters.org/items/200708280016
Posted by: Read some real reporting | August 29, 2007 3:53 AM
The scandal gets even juicier. From the LA Times:
"
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.
“He is a fugitive,” Ronald Smetana, who handled the case for the state attorney general, said in an interview. “Do you know where he is?”
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.
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.
On Tuesday, E. Lawrence Barcella Jr. — a Washington lawyer who represents the Democratic fundraiser — confirmed that Hsu was the same man who was involved in the California case. Barcella said his client did not remember pleading to a criminal charge and facing the prospect of jail time. Hsu remembers the episode as part of a settlement with creditors when he also went through bankruptcy, Barcella said."
Posted by: Bruce | August 29, 2007 9:09 AM
John D said: Nisleib, where did your parents go wrong? They are Rush Limbaugh fans and you are a proud member of the Loony Left? Nisleib, listen to you parents, seek absolution, plead for help, and maybe you'll get on the path to mental health!
Actually John D, I'm not a "proud member of the Looney Left." I just hate Bush. He is the worst president we have ever had. As to my parents, well, they have both had strokes and their minds no longer work all that well. I hear that is common amongst Rush Limprod fans.
That being said I can't stand Hillary. I was so disappointed in 2000 when Bradley and McCain lost the primaries. I would have gladly voted for either of them. It always come down to the two worst canidates, therefore, my unhappy prediction is that it will be Hillary vs Mitt in 2008.
Posted by: nisleib | August 29, 2007 9:10 AM
Media Matters is Hil front group only leftist kooks would consult it for politcal news. Jerry White, Springfield, IL
Posted by: Jerry White | August 29, 2007 9:15 AM
Hillary's dirty money problem is nothing new, but it's not going away either. She seems to be calculating that the average Democratic voter isn't smart and attentive enough to understand and care about this issue. But statements like "Lobbyists represent real Americans" are starting to reveal the real Hillary Clinton, and it's not a pretty picture:
http://unitedagainsthillary.wordpress.com
Posted by: Y | August 29, 2007 9:58 AM
Alternate Caption:
"Ya got trouble, Right here in River City! With a capital 'T' And that rhymes with 'P'."
Posted by: TheReamer | August 29, 2007 1:35 PM