The latest in Commie Chic: “Oba Mao” t-shirts!

Nope, not manufactured by RAAAACIST Tea Party protesters. Manufactured in China and sold by the Chinese for the rest of the Citizens of the World.

Mao-cheerleading White House communication director Anita Dunn has already put in a special order (via Breitbart TV):

***

On a related note, Bill Gertz reported last week:

President Obama recently shifted authority for approving sales to China of missile and space technology from the White House to the Commerce Department — a move critics say will loosen export controls and potentially benefit Chinese missile development.

The president issued a little-noticed “presidential determination” Sept. 29 that delegated authority for determining whether missile and space exports should be approved for China to Commerce Secretary Gary Locke.

Commerce officials say the shift will not cause controls to be loosened in regards to the export of missile and space technology…

…Henry Sokolski, director of the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center, said restoring Commerce Department control over the sensitive experts is a “step backward.”

“It’s as though Commerce’s mishandling of missile-tech transfers to China in the 1990s never happened,” said Mr. Sokolski, a former Pentagon proliferation specialist. “But it did. As a result, we are now facing much more accurate, reliable missiles from China.”

Mr. Sokolski said he expects the U.S. government under the new policy to again boost Chinese military modernization through “whatever renewed ‘benign’ missile technology” is approved.

“It was foolish for us to do this in the 1990s and is even more dangerous for us to do now,” he said.

More reasons why you should be worried? Read my Gary Locke archives and see also the Locke section in Culture of Corruption.

Here’s the e-mail of the day, from a beleaguered federal employee at the Commerce Department.

Thanks to the e-mailer for giving us a revealing glimpse into the bowels of the spam-happy, appointee-overrun Obama bureaucracy.

Michelle,

I reported extensively on former Washington state governor Gary Locke’s extensive China ties, conflicts of interest, and questionable judgments– all documented well before Locke “sailed through” his confirmation hearing with help from apathetic or clueless Republican senators.

Now comes word from Shanghai, via the WSJ, that Gary Locke said Americans “need to pay” for China’s carbon emissions:

“It’s important that those who consume the products being made all around the world to the benefit of America — and it’s our own consumption activity that’s causing the emission of greenhouse gases, then quite frankly Americans need to pay for that,” Commerce Secretary Gary Locke told the American Chamber of Commerce in Shanghai.

Ed Morrissey has more.

I don’t want to hear any complaints in the Senate — especially from you, Sen. Hutchinson — about how Locke’s China pandering is going to hurt American businesses and taxpayers.

You were warned. And you were too “bored” to do anything about it.

***

You can find all the dirt on Locke in one handy place in Culture of Corruption…coming July 27.

As I’ve long argued, shamnesty as the letter of the law and shamnesty in spirit endanger us in bottomless ways. The very policies of non-enforcement that are suicide for the Republican Party are the very policies of non-enforcement that led to 9/11 and needless deaths across the country thanks to catch-and-release/sanctuary/the deportation abyss. Yesterday in the House, open-borders activists attacked Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio for his staunch commitment to enforcing immigration laws. Ray Tranchant testified for the minority. I have published his full testimony here and urge you to read it.

Attention, GOP: Public relations campaigns aren’t going to solve the problem.

***

Obama Census Plan: No Illegal Alien Left Behind

I have seen the electoral future, and it is rigged. With fraud-prone, ideologically-driven interest groups swarming the census-gathering process, the Left is solidifying its chances of a permanent ruling majority. Lax immigration enforcement is the not-so-secret key to the Democrats’ power grab. And the Obama administration is all too happy to aid and abet.

At a meeting to mobilize volunteer trainees assisting with the decennial national head count, Commerce Secretary Gary Locke encouraged the government’s partners to spread the word that privacy rights of census-takers would not be violated and that accuracy and fairness would be ensured. Locke assured the activists: “We all recognize what is at stake.”

But do you?

The volunteer groups Commerce Secretary Locke is entrusting to protect accuracy and fairness include the race racketeers and voter registration con artists of tax-subsidized ACORN, the amnesty activists of Voto Latino, and the labor mobsters of the SEIU. The fate of $300 billion in federal funding – and, most importantly, the apportionment of Congressional seats – rest in their hands.

As for “privacy rights,” it’s not your privacy rights they care about. It’s the privacy rights of millions of illegal aliens whose advocates have enshrined for them a sacred right never to be questioned about their immigration status. Obama’s census partners are using the process to pressure homeland security agents to halt interior enforcement efforts and workplace raids so that illegal alien cooperation with the national survey is maximized. Inclusion of the massive illegal alien population has resulted in a radical redrawing of the electoral map.

The Census is used to divvy up seats in the House as a proportion of their population based on the head count. More people equals more seats. More illegal immigrants counted equals more power. This is not hypothetical. The Center for Immigration Studies determined that in the 2000 election cycle, the presence of non-citizens (including illegal immigrants, temporary visitors, and green-card holders) caused nine seats in the House to switch hands. As the think tank’s analysis reported: California added six seats it would not have had otherwise. Texas, New York, and Florida each gained a seat. Indiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin each lost a seat. Montana, Kentucky, and Utah each failed to secure a seat they would otherwise have gained.

Translation in plain English: Open borders have profound consequences. And they don’t end with congressional apportionment. The redistribution of power extends to presidential elections because the Electoral College is pegged to the size of congressional delegations.

Under the Carter administration, the men and women who enforce our immigration laws were ordered not to do their jobs during the census count; non-enforcement was the unspoken policy during the Clinton administration in 2000. The policy, in other words, was to put political interests above security interests and leave No Illegal Alien Left Behind. The Obama Department of Homeland Security is already continuing the tradition – reversing the work of investigative agents who have uncovered massive document fraud at illegal alien worksites and cutting immigration and customs enforcement operations at the knees.

During the eight years of the Bush administration, groups such as ACORN received millions of dollars in subsidies for their racial and corporate shakedown activities. The pro-amnesty faction of the GOP pandered to unions such as the SEIU and ethnic lobbying groups such as Voto Latino seeking to boost their membership rolls.

Now, Republicans can only stand by helplessly while the political opponents they helped fund use the census to help wipe them off the electoral map. You reap what you sow.

Washington has been warned — not just by me, but by many other close observers of the former Washington state governor who have followed his career marked by sloppy adherence to campaign finance laws and corporate cronyism. (The Washington Times follows up on one Chinagate thread I reminded all of you about last month based on my Seattle Times reporting in the 1990s.) The rest of the MSM has done a fine job whitewashing Locke’s record.

For their part, Senate Republicans find his record “boring:”

Locke was President Barack Obama’s third choice for the post. The other two, New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson and Sen. Judd Gregg, a New Hampshire Republican, withdrew. If confirmed, Locke would be the first Cabinet secretary from Washington state since the Carter administration in the 1970s.

Locke was nominated only three weeks ago. Compared with other Obama nominations, his has moved quickly.

Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee Chairman Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., said his panel could vote on the nomination as early as today if Locke were able to answer written questions from the members.

None of the Republicans on the committee indicated he or she would vote against Locke.

Rockefeller said he and Texas Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, the panel’s top Republican, had reviewed Locke’s background check done by the FBI and his financial statements.

“They were clean,” Rockefeller said.

“Boring would be a better word,” Hutchison said.

Clueless.

Like I said: Don’t express shock and surprise later if/when Commerce Secretary Locke screws up later.

Yawn now, whine later. Seems to be the Washington way.

I was amused to read about Tucker Carlson’s finger-wagging to conservatives at CPAC yesterday — apparently repeating the canard that the Right doesn’t do reporting like the vaunted New York Times and needs to stop “just analyzing things based on what the mainstream media has reported.”

Yeah, he really said we need to copy the New York Times.

Uh, no thank you.

Over the past week, I have reported on how MSM outlets refuse to disclose the truth about ACORN foreclosure “victims” — which you can find documented on conservative blogs, but not in the New York Times.

Today my syndicated column reports on the truth about Gary Locke’s ethics-tainted record, which you can find in blogs, but not in the New York Times. (More from Jim Miller at Sound Politics.)

It’s one thing to see left-wingers pimp the myth that conservatives don’t do reporting. But to have a Beltway conservative show up to CPAC and lazily engage in such uninformed sanctimony? Funny thing is: Carlson was a terrific reporter in the early days of his own career…before he went on to become one of those many, you know, professional analyzers of things. Do as he says, not as he does.

He deserves all the boos he got.

***

Obama’s new Commerce Secretary nominee: Not so “squeaky clean”
by Michelle Malkin
Creators Syndicate
Copyright 2009

Liberal media outlets are doing their best to boost former Washington State Gov. Gary Locke, President Obama’s third pick for the beleaguered Commerce Secretary job. “Obama’s New Commerce Pick Has Clean Reputation,” declared National Public Radio’s Tom Banse. The Democrat possesses “a largely scandal-free resume” reported the New York Times. He is a “safe choice,” the Washington Post asserted, because of his “strait-laced reputation.”

But repeating the Mr. Clean claim doesn’t make it so. Those in his home state who know Locke best paint a far grimier picture of a crony politician with a serial habit of skirting campaign finance laws and conflict-of-interest rules. In other words: Locke’s “Do As I Say, Not as I Do” record makes him a good fit for the ethically-impaired Obama administration.

The left-leaning Seattle Weekly newspaper notes that Locke presided over a $3.2 billion tax break for Boeing while “never disclosing he paid $715,000 to – and relied on the advice of – Boeing’s own private consultant and outside auditor for advice.” Then there’s the tainted matter of Locke’s “favors for his brother-in-law (who lived in the governor’s mansion), including a tax break for his relative’s company, personal intervention in a company dispute, and Locke’s signature on a federal loan application for the company.” Locke’s laces ain’t so straight.

The glowing profiles of Locke have largely glossed over his troubling ties to the Clinton-era Chinagate scandal. As the nation’s first Chinese-American governor, Locke aggressively raised cash from ethnic constituencies around the country. Convicted campaign finance money-launderer John Huang helped grease the wheels and open doors. In the same time period he was drumming up illegal cash for Clinton-Gore at the federal level, Huang organized two 1996 galas for Locke in Washington, D.C. (where Locke hobnobbed with Clinton and other Chinagate principals); three fund-raisers in Los Angeles; and an extravaganza at the Universal City, Calif., Hilton in October 1996 that raised upwards of $30,000. Huang also made personal contributions to Locke — as did another Clinton-Gore funny money figure, Indonesian business mogul Ted Sioeng and his family and political operatives. Sioeng, whom Justice Department and intelligence officials suspected of acting on behalf of the Chinese government, illegally donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to both Democrat and Republican coffers. Bank records from congressional investigators indicated that one Sioeng associate’s maximum individual contribution to Locke was illegally reimbursed by the businessman’s daughter.

Checks to Locke’s campaign poured in from prominent Huang and Sioeng associates, many of whom were targets of federal investigations, including: Hoyt Zia, a Commerce Department counsel, who stated in a sworn deposition that Huang had access to virtually any classified document through him; Melinda Yee, another Clinton Commerce Department official who admitted to destroying freedom-of-information-act-protected notes on a China trade mission involving Huang’s former employer, the Indonesia-based Lippo Group; Praitun Kanchanalak, mother of convicted Thai influence-peddler Pauline Kanchanalak; and Kent La, exclusive distributor of Sioeng’s Chinese cigarettes in the U.S.; and Sioeng’s wife and son-in-law.

Locke eventually returned a token amount of money from Huang and Kanchanalak, but not before bitterly playing the race card and accusing critics of his sloppy accounting and questionable schmoozing of stirring up anti-Asian-American sentiment. “It will make our efforts doubly hard to get Asian Americans appointed to top-level positions across the United States,” Locke complained. “If they have any connection to John Huang, those individuals will face greater scrutiny and their lives will be completely opened up and examined – perhaps more than usual.”

That scrutiny (such as it was) was more than justified. On top of his Chinagate entanglements, Locke’s political committee was fined the maximum amount by Washington’s campaign finance watchdog for failing to disclose out-of-state New York City Chinatown donors. One of those events was held at NYC’s Harmony Palace restaurant, co-owned by Chinese street gang thugs. And then there were Locke’s not-so-squeaky-clean fund-raising trips to a Buddhist temple in Redmond, Wa., which netted nearly $14,000 from monks and nuns — many of whom barely spoke English, couldn’t recall donating to Locke, or were out of the country and could never be located. Of the known temple donors identified by the Locke campaign, five gave $1,000 each on July 22, 1996 — paid in sequentially ordered cashier’s checks. Two priests gave $1,000 and $1,100 respectively on Aug. 8, 1996. Three other temple adherents also gave $1,000 contributions on Aug. 8. Internal campaign records show that two other temple disciples donated $2,000 and $1,000 respectively on other dates. State campaign finance investigators failed to track down some of the donors during their probe.

But while investigating the story for the Seattle Times, I interviewed temple donor Siu Wai Wong, a bald, robed 40-year-old priest who could not remember when or by what means he had given a $1,000 contribution to Locke. He also refused to say whether he was a U.S. citizen, explaining that his “English [was] not so good.” Although an inept state campaign-finance panel absolved Locke and his campaign of any wrongdoing, the extensive public record clearly shows that the Locke campaign used Buddhist monks as conduits for laundered money.

The longtime reluctance to press Locke — who became a high-powered attorney specializing in China trade issues for international law firm Davis, Wright & Tremaine after leaving the governor’s mansion — on his reckless, ethnic-based fund-raising will undoubtedly extend to the politically correct and cowed Beltway. Instead, supporters are now touting Locke’s cozy relations with the Chinese government as a primary reason he deserves the Commerce Department post. Yet another illustration of how “Hope and Change” is just another synonym for “Screw up, Move Up.”

Don’t read the New York Times if you want to know the full truth about Commerce Secretary nominee Gary Locke.

The paper “reports:”

Although the Commerce Department job is not the most prominent in the cabinet, it has been one of the hardest for Mr. Obama to fill. Two previous picks have withdrawn.

Supporters say Mr. Locke, the nation’s first and only Chinese-American governor and now an expert on China issues as a partner in a prominent Seattle law firm, brings something new: an international focus, centrist pragmatism, strong skills in public policy and a largely scandal-free résumé.

What wasn’t fit to print in the fishwrap of record:

The Chinagate/Buddhist temple cash skeletons in Gary Locke’s closet

And yet more reasons Gary Locke is another Obama mispick

Of course, there was that memory loss and all those “I don’t recall . . . I don’t remember” statements to Congressional investigators in 1999, probing his gubernatorial campaign fund-raising efforts; the astonishing $3.2 billion tax break he gave to Boeing while never disclosing he paid $715,000 to - and relied on the advice of – Boeing’s own private consultant and outside auditor for advice; and those favors for his brother-in-law (who lived in the governor’s mansion), including a tax break for his relative’s company, personal intervention in a company dispute, and Locke’s signature on a federal loan application for the company.

Other than that, yes, squeaky clean.

***

Earlier today: The Chinagate/Buddhist temple cash skeletons in Gary Locke’s closet

Is it possible for Barack Obama to pick a Commerce Secretary nominee who’ll actually make it past first base? Bill Richardson withdrew in the midst of a pay-for-play scandal. Judd Gregg withdrew in the midst of a humiliating power play over the Census and porkulus bill.

Now, former Democrat Gov. Gary Locke — a lawyer for international firm Davis, Wright, and Tremaine who specializes in China — is rumored to be the next nominee for the post. The MSM is pulling for him. WaPo writes: “Locke is regarded as a safe choice by senior officials in the Obama administration given his long history in public life, his strait-laced reputation and his bipartisan governing credentials.” Wishful thinking? Willful cluelessness? Probably a bit of both.

I covered Gary Locke when I worked at the Seattle Times. I dealt with his campaign and gubernatorial staffs. “Strait-laced” is not the adjective I’d use for my dealings with him and his people.

In response to my columns pressing Locke on his close ties to campaign finance crook John Huang, the governor’s office first stonewalled. His standard Democrat smokescreen? Play the race card and play the victim.

From June 1999:

When I asked what the governor had to say about Huang’s guilty plea, Locke’s spokesman, Keith Love, responded tersely: “He has no comment and no interest.”

This is a most peculiar stonewall of silence.

Though Huang and his wife gave token personal donations to Locke totaling a mere $1,000, Huang is no casual acquaintance of Locke or his out-of-state fund-raising staff. As reported here previously, Huang helped organize May 1996 galas involving Locke at the Mayflower Hotel and Sheraton Carlton in Washington, D.C.; three fund-raisers at restaurants in Los Angeles, and an extravaganza at the Universal City, Calif., Hilton in October 1996 that raised upwards of $30,000.

In the Washington Post, Boston Globe and Dallas Morning News, Locke steadfastly defended his Huang-linked funds. He persistently invoked the race card to deflect criticism and castigated the national media for aggressively investigating those who benefited from the fund-raising of the then-presumed-innocent-now-self-confessed-felon Huang.

At a gathering of Asian-American journalists, Locke recently lamented: “The fund-raising scandal will have repercussions for several years. It will make our efforts doubly hard to get Asian Americans appointed to top-level positions across the United States. If they have any connection to John Huang, those individuals will face greater scrutiny and their lives will be completely opened up and examined – perhaps more than usual.”

And deservedly so. The Huang donation was the tip of the iceberg. In August 1998, I reported:

Gov. Gary Locke’s 1996 campaign treasure chest is like a box of chocolates left out in the sun: You never know what kind of sticky mess you’re gonna get.

News broke over the weekend that the Internal Revenue Service wants to examine Locke’s donor list. That’s in addition to a fresh congressional inquiry and three separate probes by the state Public Disclosure Commission (two prompted by this column).

Locke’s loyalists imply that scrutiny of his contributors is racist. The claim is as desperate as it is deceitful. Locke himself crowed that his campaign was being watched closely at the highest levels of the Chinese government. Locke himself called for a thorough investigation of charges of illegal influence-peddling and money-laundering in the Democratic Party by suspected foreign agents.

Locke complains that all yellow- and brown-skinned donors are being targeted unfairly. But the handful of contributors in question are not ordinary citizens; some may not be U.S. citizens at all. They are Buddhist monks who have left the country, Beijing-linked tycoons and family members, professional fund-raisers, and trade experts alleged to have compromised national security. The only colors at issue here are green and red: the color of campaign cash and the possible shadow of overseas communist meddling in the most trade-dependent state in the union.

The Los Angeles Times and Newsweek reported last year that in 1995, the FBI intercepted communications in which Chinese officials detailed a covert operation to counter pro-Taiwan political influence in the U.S. by funneling at least $2 million to federal, state and local races. New revelations of fishy foreign fingerprints on Locke’s campaign coffers come from the Far Eastern Economic Review, a respected Hong Kong-based publication. The Aug. 13 issue reports that Locke received $5,400 in campaign contributions from family and political operatives of Indonesian businessman Ted Sioeng.

The FBI suspects Sioeng, a real estate and tobacco baron, of supplying Chinese government money to American candidates; a Senate report says he drew some of the campaign cash from Hong Kong bank accounts. The Democratic National Committee and California’s GOP state treasurer Matt Fong returned hefty donations made by Sioeng’s daughter, Jessica Elnitiarta, after she refused to verify their source.

The magazine article about the Locke-Sioeng connection has yet to hit these shores. But it forced Locke to admit preemptively that he had given a secret July deposition about the donations to the House Government Reform and Oversight Committee (to be made public this week). Locke also revealed that he returned a maximum $1,100 contribution from a Sioeng associate after learning it was likely reimbursed illegally by Sioeng’s daughter. Yet, Locke’s spokesman insists in one breath that “We’re not saying it was improper” and “we didn’t want anything to do with it.”

If bank records from congressional lawyers indicating an immediate illegal reimbursement aren’t unequivocal evidence of impropriety, what is?

Given Locke’s high threshold for proof of wrongdoing, it’s no wonder he still refuses to return tens of thousands of dollars raised for his campaign by John Huang – the former DNC fund-raiser, ex-Commerce Department official, ex-V.P. of the infamous Indonesian Lippo Group, suspected Chinese agent, and close friend of the Sioengs (daughter Jessica refers to him as “Uncle Huang” in one internal Democratic document, according to the L.A. Times).

Huang and his wife gave token personal donations to Locke; staffers have emphasized that his finance role was minimal. Past news articles reported that Huang raised “a total of $19,000″ for Locke. But last year, the campaign described to me no less than eight occasions on which Huang “coordinated,” “attended,” “organized” or “co-sponsored” political events attended by Locke. These include May 1996 galas at the Mayflower Hotel and Sheraton Carlton in D.C. (where Locke hobnobbed with Sioeng and President Clinton); three summer 1996 fund-raisers at Chinese restaurants in L.A.; and a cash-soaked California bash at the Universal City Hilton in October 1996 that raised upwards of $30,000.

Checks to Locke’s campaign poured in from prominent Huang and Sioeng associates across the country, including: Maeley Tom, a Sacramento lobbyist who worked as a Lippo consultant; Hoyt Zia, a Commerce Department counsel, who stated in a sworn deposition that Huang had access to virtually any classified document through him; Melinda Yee, another Commerce Department official, who made routine phone calls to Lippo and is under investigation by the Justice Department for destroying notes she took on a China trade mission; Ginger Lew, who allegedly helped pilfer classified intelligence documents when she left Commerce last summer; Praitun Kanchanalak, mother of indicted Thai influence-peddler Pauline; Kent La, exclusive distributor of Sioeng’s Chinese cigarettes in the U.S.; and Sioeng’s wife and son-in-law.

Most of these individuals are targets of federal investigations. None of their contributions has been returned by Locke. Ostensibly, Locke doesn’t want to offend his donors. But what about the embarrassment his indiscriminate fund raising has caused the citizens of Washington state?

Locke finally returned the money to Huang in June 1999.

But it wasn’t the end of his funny money troubles. In March 1997, I reported on Locke’s Chinatown fund-raisers out-of-state that raised thousands of dollars of cash that the campaign failed to disclose in violation of state campaign finance laws. One of those events was held at NYC’s Harmony Palace restaurant, co-owned by Chinese street gang thugs.

In September 1997, I broke the story of Locke’s suspicious trips to the Ling Shen Ching Tze Temple in Redmond — where the governor pulled an Al Gore and raised thousands of dollars from monks and nuns who barely spoke English, couldn’t recall donating to Locke, or were out of the country and could never be located:

Already under investigation by the Public Disclosure Commission for mishandling cash contributions, Gov. Gary Locke’s gubernatorial campaign must now contend with new revelations concerning two trips to a Buddhist temple last summer where campaign dollars changed hands.

On two separate occasions, Locke visited the Ling Shen Ching Tze Temple in Redmond at the invitation of the temple’s founder, Grand Master Sheng-Yen Lu. Grand Master Lu, his wife, his son and several people self-described as church administrators and priests gave Locke about $13,100 in contributions.

Of the known temple donors identified by the Locke campaign, five gave $1,000 each on July 22, 1996. Two priests gave $1,000 and $1,100 respectively on Aug. 8, 1996. Three other temple adherents – Lin Wan Liu of Redmond, and Moon Chuen Lo and Shek Shuk Yee Lo of Renton – also gave $1,000 contributions on Aug. 8.

Internal campaign records show that two other temple disciples donated $2,000 and $1,000 respectively on other dates.

The money involved is considerably less than the amount connected to Vice President Al Gore’s fund-raiser at an unrelated Southern California Buddhist temple last spring (about $45,000). But Locke’s visits raise intriguing questions about whether similar, if smaller-scale, improprieties involving monks and nuns took place in our own backyard:

– Did the temple violate federal tax law?

The Ling Shen Ching Tze Temple in Redmond, like the Hsi Lai temple in Los Angeles which Gore visited last spring, is a tax-exempt, 501(c)(3) organization. The Internal Revenue Service has long forbidden such places of worship from campaigning for or against a specific candidate, endorsing or opposing a candidate in writing or in speech, or raising money for a candidate.

Yet, at one of the two events, Grand Master Lu expressed his unabashed wishes that Locke be elected governor, then senator, vice president and, someday, president. Moreover, as an internal Locke campaign memo states, “The funds in question were all received at the temple. . . .”

– Did the donors and the Locke campaign comply with public disclosure rules?

The Public Disclosure Commission requires individual donors to list their residence and employer. But several of the temple donors failed to list their occupation. Others reported their address as that of the temple.

The Rev. Shi Lian Ning, a temple spokesman, acknowledged to Locke staffer John Stonham that the information was incorrect and that some of the temple donors were merely volunteers, according to an internal campaign memo from Stonham to campaign-finance chairman Bill Marler dated Feb. 20, 1997. PDC records have not yet been amended with the accurate data.

– Did the donors use their own money to make their contributions?

State law expressly forbids individuals from making contributions on behalf of another person or entity. Yet Grand Master Lu presented Locke with a donation “on behalf of everyone,” according to a feature article by the ethnic newspaper International Examiner, which covered one of the special temple events.

How much was that original donation? Did it violate the state’s legal limit for individual contributions? Was it then funneled, as in the case of the Hsi Lai fund-raiser, through straw donors?

What about the donors’ checks? Were they written from one account or many? In the same handwriting or not? Bill Marler (who was not involved in arranging the temple events) confirmed last week that the campaign possessed copies of the temple donors’ checks.

However, Marler said late last week that the campaign had decided not to provide The Times with copies of the checks or any further details about the temple events.

Those involved directly in the temple fund-raiser are reluctant to answer questions about the donations. The governor’s office did not return a phone call seeking comment. Phone calls to Locke staffers Stonham and Dia Hujar – both of whom attended at least one of the temple events – were not returned. Hand-delivered written questions to temple donors were unanswered. Rev. Ning refused to discuss the fund-raisers and declined to schedule an interview with Grand Master Lu.

According to the Feb. 20 internal campaign memo, Rev. Ning told Locke campaign staffer Stonham that all the donors had the financial wherewithal to make their contributions. But the lack of accurate information about donors’ occupations and whereabouts makes it difficult to validate Ning’s assertion.

I did track down temple donor Siu Wai Wong, a bald, robed 40-year-old priest who lives in a modest Redmond condo not far from the temple.

Wong could not remember when or by what means he had given a $1,000 contribution to Locke. He also refused to say whether he was a U.S. citizen, explaining in perfect English that his “English is not so good.”

The last question is pertinent because under campaign-finance law only U.S. citizens and legal permanent aliens can make individual contributions to local, state and federal campaigns. Wong referred all other questions to a woman he said was his niece. She wasn’t at home and has yet to respond to requests for information.

I also located Kwok Lung Chan, another $1,000 donor listed as a temple priest. Chan was genuinely unable to communicate in English and seemed perplexed at the name “Gary Locke.” She, too, referred questions to a relative who was not at home and has not responded.

At the address listed for Shu-Chuan Chen, a $2,000 donor, a young man who identified himself as Chen’s cousin said “she hasn’t lived here for three years. I’ve seen her, but I don’t know where she lives.” Calls to Chen’s reported employer, T.D. Investments of Tukwila, were not returned.

In a telephone interview, $1,000 donor Moon Chuen Lo insisted that it was his money – but could not recall when he had given the donation and whether he had given cash or a check to the campaign. Nor could he recall whether he had sent his donation to Locke by mail or handed it to the candidate at the temple.

Attempts to track down Xiao-Guang Shen of Redmond, who contributed the maximum $1,100 on July 30, 1996, failed. A search of Washington state tax-assessor records, deed-transfer records, voter-registration rolls, phone books and a state driver’s-license database turned up empty.

Locke staffer Stonham noted in his memo that he himself “was unable to locate all of the individuals” associated with the temple who had donated to the campaign.

Why did Locke and his campaign staff collect money at the temple not once, but twice? Paul Hendrie of the Washington, D.C.-based Center for Responsive Politics says the law is “absolutely clear” that tax-exempt temples cannot hold fund-raising events or make in-kind contributions to campaigns.

“But legality aside,” Hendrie observes, “it’s unseemly in the first place to be collecting money at any house of worship. It rubs against the whole notion of separation of church and state. Common sense says this is something campaigns just shouldn’t do.”

Although an inept state campaign-finance panel absolved Locke and his campaign of any wrongdoing, the extensive public record clearly shows that the Locke campaign used Buddhist monks as conduits for laundered money.

I uploaded all the original documents I obtained in my reporting on the scandal here, including these cashier’s checks:

And this spreadsheet of temple donors:

It’s illegal to funnel campaign contributions through straw donors. It’s illegal for tax-exempt churches to hold campaign fund-raisers. It’s illegal to accept money from foreign citizens who are not permanent residents of this country. It’s illegal to file false public disclosure forms (four years after the temple fundraisers, PDC records were not amended with the Buddhist monks’ correct addresses and occupations). It’s illegal to commit perjury to cover up a political money-laundering scheme.

In a trade-dependent state such as Washington state, the incentive to engage in quid pro quos is high. At Commerce, it’s even higher. Locke’s campaign finance scandal-tainted past raise sserious issues about his judgment. His cozy relations with the Chinese government and favor-currying add even more doubt.

Locke and his cronies escaped public accountability in their home state, where the media demonstrated systemic incompetence and indifference to the law-breaking and ethical improprieties. Looks like Team Obama is betting on similar largesse from the national media.

And they know they can always fall back on the race card.