America is justifiably proud of it's political systems. One person, one vote; an equal voice for all. Like the equality of the vote, laws governing campaign financing are designed to make the process of raising campaign funds as representative of the will of the people as possible, with the campaign war chest a direct measure of the number of a candidate's grass roots supporters. This is the reason for a fixed upper limit on the amount of money any single individual or corporation may donate to a candidate.
This measure is complicated by the issue of "soft money", given to a party instead of a candidate. No limits are imposed on the amount of such contributions, but the law clearly states that such contributions must originate with citizens, or with corporations which maintain offices inside the United States. The same rule applies to contributions to a candidate.
The reason for the citizenship/residency requirement is the same as the amount limits on direct contributions. It's to ensure that a parties campaign war chest is indicative of it's real support among citizens and corporations.
The theory behind the laws is that a candidate who cannot raise enough money to win his campaign lacks the support to effectively govern. Campaign financing allows corporations and the wealthy to become involved in the process of selecting the leadership, but always subject to the veto power of the ballot box. Overall, a preferable system to the wealthy raising armies to settle leadership issues more "directly". That's what the American political system is, abstracted (and bloodless) warfare among the landed gentry.
Of course, the system breaks down if the rules are not followed, and as it is the nature of power that it attracts the very type of human who really should not have it, it is inevitable that candidates can become quite creative at circumventing those rules, bypassing the inherent guarantee that a candidates funding represents the will of the people.
Such appears to be the case with the political career of William Clinton.
Over the years from the 1992 campaign to the present day, a series of unusual occurrences surrounding the financing of Clinton's rise to power reveal a clear pattern of abuse of campaign finance laws.
Here are some (but by no means all) examples.
Four campaign finance officials from the 1992 Clinton campaign have died under suspicious circumstances.
The most famous case is that of Former DNC fund raiser and Secretary of Commerce Ron Brown who, and the eve of being indicted, died in a plane crash. The claim that the crash as the result of bad weather, in addition to having been proven a lie, fails to account for why the aircraft lost all of it's cockpit radios and radar transponders while still 7 miles from the crash site.
Another fellow 1992 fund raiser was C. Victor Raiser II, co-chairman of Clinton's 1992 presidential campaign finance committee. He and his son, Montgomery Raiser, died in a plane crash in clear weather. Associates report that he had become disillusioned by the campaign.
Another member of Clinton's 1992 presidential campaign finance committee was Herschel Friday, who also died in a plane crash.
Ed Willey, the manager of the Clinton 1992 presidential campaign finance committee, and notable for handling briefcases full of cash, died of a gunshot wound which was declared to be a suicide (not unlike Vincent Foster).
Ron Brown's assistant at the Department of Commerce was John Huang. John left the Department of Commerce to become a fund raiser for the Democratic National Committee, soliciting contributions. As of this writing, John Huang has been stripped of his DNC position owing to an investigation into campaign finance irregularities, and is the subject of a Federal manhunt.
Prior to working for Ron Brown at the Department of Commerce, John Huang was an employee of the Lippo Group, founded by Mochtar Riady who built his fortune with gun and drug running in WW2. Lippo Group was partners with Jackson Stephens in Little Rock.
So it hardly comes as a surprise that Lippo donated several hundred thousand dollars to the Clinton campaign, through some highly questionable channels.
In one case, the donation was made through an Indonesian couple legally living within the United States. How a professional landscaper ever thought a four hundred thousand dollar donation wouldn't attract attention is a mystery we shall never solve, as they, like John Huang, are nowhere to be found.
Also a mystery is the source of several dozen donations which listed as their personal address the address of the DNC. The names under which the donations were made cannot be found in computerized phone and address databases inside the United States. Most have foreign surnames.
One more mystery is the source of cash donations which were being laundered through a California Buddhist Temple, as was reported in the Wall Street Journal. Money that requires laundering is money whoes origin must be concealed.
Quite unmysterious is the story in the current Newsweek of complaints by Taiwanese officials of solicitations for donations to the Clinton campaign; a clear violation of campaign finance laws.
Normal partisanship can account for the occasional false accusation. But in the present case, the complaints from foreign governments, fund raisers and campaign contributors on the run from the law, and the strange deaths of past campaign finance officials cannot be easily dismissed.
A pattern of abuse clearly exists. A pattern which suggests that Clinton's campaign war chest may not reflect his grass roots support at all, but may well be an amalgam of foreign influence, shakedowns, and worse, laundered money flowing from an airport in Mena, Arkansas. A huge campaign chest that most assuredly does NOT represent the will of the law abiding citizens of the United States.
Four dead 1992 campaign finance officials. One 1996 official already missing in action.
What secrets do these deaths and disappearances conceal?
