The ‘cha-ching!’ in Chung’s case?

Johnny Chung must feel like the whole world is against him.

A minority Asian man with a dubious past connected to the Clinton
administration while living in the U.S. has to be one of the most
culturally and politically difficult situations of our day. Few can
claim as much.

But no matter for Chung; his current poor situation isn’t bad
enough for thugs in the Clinton administration’s leviathan
government. Those sick individuals feel he needs to be punished
even more — though he is virtually the only one connected with a
heap o’ Clinton-Gore scandals that a) knows the details about them
(because he was involved) and b) has cooperated with “investigators”
from the “justice department” trying to “discover” what “really
happened.”

The deteriorating situation for Chung is worse than a travesty of
justice; it is rife with ironic and moronic twists akin to an O.J.
Simpson case instead of a serious judicial attempt to root out
government corruption and those in power who have committed that
corruption.

Like O.J., who was found “not guilty” of killing his wife and a
waiter but found “liable” to pay damages to the victims’ families
because, the court said, he was somehow responsible for their deaths
anyway, there is similar hypocrisy in Chung’s case. Unlike O.J.,
however, Chung is being held “liable” after first being found
“guilty,” though Uncle Sam promised he would not be held “liable” if he
cooperated. He did but Uncle didn’t.

Last Friday, WND headlined with a story

detailing the U.S. government’s latest slap at Chung. Now, U.S. probation officers won’t let him travel to Philadelphia for this newssite, in a serious and necessary role as a correspondent assigned to cover the Republican National Convention with our colleague, Julie Foster. Both Foster and Chung are on equal terms as far as being legitimate reporters for WND; the difference is Julie isn’t getting hosed by the Clinton administration.

This, on the heels of an announcement by the farcical Federal Election Commission that they are planning to sue Chung

because he served as a conduit for illegal campaign
contributions that — here’s a surprise — made it into the coffers of the Democratic National Committee and the 1996 Clinton-Gore reelection campaign.

Chung admitted this; for his crime, he has been sentenced. But there’s more.

Chung has also agreed to help — on numerous occasions — federal officials still investigating these campaign finance abuses (including those ungrateful, politically-motivated pikers at FEC) make sense of all that has happened in this issue by providing details that they were previously unable to extract from anyone else, including Clinton, Gore, and Reno — as well as Reno’s FBI minions and hordes of special counsels.

For that help, Chung is still being harassed, intimidated and treated as though he is the main criminal — the ringleader so to speak — and mastermind behind what is clearly known as the Clinton-Gore campaign’s attempts to break finance laws and bring in money from a wealth of illegal sources.

Republican “opponents” in the House and Senate committees who ostensibly are supposed to exert control over these agencies they love to fund have done absolutely nothing to help Chung out of his dilemma.

Worse, none of them seem concerned that this most recent FEC attack on Chung is an irony, wrapped in a mystery, draped in an enigma.

For example, if Chung can be sued for being a “conduit” for illegal campaign contributions by a federal agency, how come the Clinton-Gore campaign — including Mr. No. 1 and No. 2 — as well as the DNC, has been spared such punishment?

After all, it is not rocket science to deduce that Chung’s filtered contributions went somewhere; and that someone at the top had to know where it came from but accepted it anyway. Why aren’t the federal lynch mobs holding these — the true criminals — liable?

Well, because nothing else has been proven, you say. To which I answer, “Oh, really?”

How about this little snippet.

During fours hours of testimony to federal campaign finance investigators in April, Clinton all but blamed former DNC chief Donald Fowler, and Marvin Rosen, the DNC’s finance chairman, for eliminating a “vetting process” that ordinarily screened out such illegal contributions.

Clinton and, in a way, Gore, are both tertiary “heads” of the DNC, by virtue of being Democrats as well as the president and vice president of the United States. Clinton himself is a former chief of the DNC; so his explanation to federal investigators that he “didn’t know” Fowler and Rosen had eliminated the financial vetting process is bunk. Clinton, more than anyone, knows how the DNC operates, what policies it does and does not have in place, and how the whole system of raising funds works (and doesn’t work). In short, he is in one of the best positions to know how to skirt laws, how to bend rules — and how to feign ignorance if or when he is caught.

He told federal investigators in April he was “livid” when he finally “discovered” this amazing discrepancy.

Yeah; I’m sure.

In the meantime, and at a minimum, the FEC thugs should also be interested in suing Fowler and Rosen — that is, if the goal truly is “justice.” Even Clinton has indicated them as being responsible for permitting Chung’s funds to land in DNC coffers — conveniently and just in time for a hard-fought 1996 presidential reelection campaign.

But then again if justice was the goal, Chung — the cooperator — would not even be considered for a suit and Clinton, Gore, Reno, Fowler and Rosen, as well as a host of other administration miscreants, would have been gone or in jail by now.

Along with a host of congressional coconspirators who have allowed this mess to progress far beyond what is “reasonable” and “judicious” because of stupid ideological beliefs and party loyalty over proper execution of duty.