Hsu's money was it, anyway?

In many ways, the story of Norman Hsu is a story in miniature of today's Democratic Party.

Mr. Hsu:

TRENDING: Republicans move to replace GOP canvasser who voted to certify Biden win

• Took money from one group of people and gave it to another.

• In the "giving" process, he made himself look good to the recipients.

• Did not care about the people he hurt by stealing from them. All that mattered was the influence his "gifts" bought.

The Democrats:

• Take money from one group of people (taxpayers) and give it to another (public employees and welfare recipients).

• Paint themselves as the party of "compassion," although their "gifts" are stolen from other people through coercion and the threat of violence.

• Don't care about the damage they do to the people they steal from – all that matters is spreading enough money around to buy another re[election term.

One of Mr. Hsu's favored techniques was "bundling." According to the Chicago Tribune ("Hsu is accused of Ponzi scheme," by Tom Hamburger of the Los Angeles Times, Sept. 21), Mrs. Clinton received 260 individual contributions totaling $850,000 from Mr. Hsu. These the Clinton campaign is now "returning."

Of course, if these people don't actually exist, all this money comes back to the Clinton campaign. (Mail undeliverable as addressed. Unable to forward.)

But what happens if people didn't know they "gave"? "Hey, Frieda! What the heck are you doing? Why'd you give Hillary Clinton $3,269? And who's Norman Hsu?"

Campaign finance reform, of course, was the magic bullet designed to prevent just these kinds of abuses. No more "fat cats" buying favors from the politicos with wads of cash. No more influence-peddling. Just campaign nirvana, where every campaign is supported by committed, passionate, small donors (bundled together in groups of 260) giving because they believe in the candidate.

Mr. Hsu certainly seems to have had the commitment and passion of at least 260 small donors in his funding efforts for the Clinton campaign. While it's possible Hsu was operating from his own admiration (multiplied 260 times) for Mrs. Clinton, he may have been fulfilling another role as well.

Certainly, if you were a very large donor who was committed and passionate about Mrs. Clinton's campaign, a man like Norman Hsu might come in very handy. Large sums of money can be given to political parties – but not individual candidates. So a large contribution given to the Democratic Party and intended for Mrs. Clinton might well find its way to – gasp, Mr. Obama's campaign. Especially if the people in the Democratic Party didn't particularly share your enthusiasm for the Clintons. (Howard Dean comes to mind.)

In the midst of such uncertainties, a man like Mr. Hsu might well be the answer to a political fat cat's prayers. It may be that the proper way to think about Norman Hsu is as a gift wrapper operating the concession at a fancy downtown department store over the holidays. By collecting money for vague "business deals" from unspecified "investors" – then parceling this money out as individual political gifts of the amount the law allows and filling out gift tags with the names of many small shoppers at the store – well, for someone who's not enamored with Christmas, it certainly worked out well for Mrs. Clinton, didn't it?

When push comes to shove, the "investors" were cheated out of their funds by Mr. Hsu and can write the loss off on their taxes. They are the victims – and Mr. Hsu the bad guy. Gift tags are strewn everywhere, but the money seems to have vanished.

Related special offers:

"Her Way: The Hopes and Ambitions of Hillary Rodham Clinton"

"I've Always Been a Yankees Fan: Hillary Clinton in Her Own Words"

"Hillary's Secret War: The Clinton Conspiracy to Muzzle Internet Journalists"