EC2013 Liu Thacher Report Final FOIL Distribution

CONFIDENTIAL
REPORT TO THE
NEW YORK CITY
CAMPAIGN FINANCE BOARD
JULY 15, 2013
QTHACHER
a!iJ ASSOCIATES
I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................... 5
A. Thacher Associates' Assignment ..................................................................................................................... 5
B. Selection of Contributors to Interview ............................................................................................................ 6
C. Overview of Interviews .................................................................................................................................... 7
i. Employers Reimbursed Contributions Made by Their Employees .......................................................... 7
ii. Some Contributors Did Not Live at Their Reported Addresses ............................................................... 8
iii. Some Contributors Did Not Know Their Reported Intermediary ........................................................... 8
iv. Some Contributors Made Significant Contributions Despite Evidence of Low Income ......................... 9
v. Some Contributors' Denials of Reimbursement Were Not Credible ....................................................... 9
vi. Some Contributors Contributed After Jenny Hou Resigned as Campaign Treasurer. .......................... 9
vii. Some Contributors Had Connections to Events and/or Individuals That Were Part of the Trial of
Jenny Hou and Oliver Pan ........................................................................................................................... 9
viii. Further Investigation is Likely to Reveal Additional Potential Violations of Campaign Finance Laws
...................................................................................................................................................................... 10
II. INTERVIEW SUMMARIES ................................................................................. 11
A. Great Wall Supermarket Summary .............................................................................................................. 13
i. General Information ................................................................................................................................... 13
ii. Information Provided to the CFB .............................................................................................................. 13
iii. Contributor Was Reimbursed By Her Employer .................................................................................... 13
iv. Contributions to Other Candidates ........................................................................................................... 14
v.
vi.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
, ............................................................................................................................................... 14
Interview Summaries .................................................................................................................................. 14
................................................................................................................................. 15
, ............................................................................................................................... 17
; ................................................................................................................................ 19
. .................................................................................................................................. 20
.............................. :: ............................................ : .................................................... 21
. .................................................................................................................................. 22
. ...................................................................................................................................... 22
. ...................................................................................................................................... 23
. ................................................................... : ............................................................ 23
. ................................................................................................................................ 23
. ............................................................................................................................................ 24
l ........................................................................................................................................... 25
B. McCormick & O'Brien, LLP Summary ....................................................................................................... 26
i. Information Provided to the CFB .............................................................................................................. 26
ii. Contributors Were To Be Reimbursed By Their Employer ................................................................... 26
iii. Interview Summaries .................................................................................................................................. 27
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 1
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
............................................................................................................................. 28
............................................................................................................................. 29
. ....................................................................................................................... 30
. .................................................................................................................... 31
. ......................................................................................................... 33
C. Yang Shing Trading Co. Summary ............................................................................................................... 38
ii. Contributor was Reimbursed ..................................................................................................................... 38
1. . ..................................................................................................................... 40
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
ll.
12.
....................................................................................................................... 42
. ................................................................................................................. 43
. .................................................................................................................... 43
. ................................................................................................................... 45
. ................................................................................................................... 46
. ................................................................................................................. 46
. ............................................................................................................. 47
. ............................................................................................................. 47
. ............................................................................................................................ 48
. .......................................................................................................................... 48
. ............................................................................ ; .................................................................. 49
D. Farwell International Summary .................................................................................................................... 50
ii. Overview of Interviews ............................................................................................................................... 52
1. . .................................................................................................................... 53
2.
3.
4.
5.
.................................................................................................................... 55
. ............................................................................................................................ 56
. .................................................................................................................... 56
. ................................................................................................................. 56
E. Jennan Comprehensive Medical Summary .................................................................................................. 57
iii. Overview of Interviews ............................................................................................................................... 57
iv. Interview Summaries ............................. .................................................................................................... 57
1. . ................................................................................................................................. 58
2. . .......................................................................................................................... 60
3. . ....................................................................................................................... 60
4. . ................................................................................................................. 61
5. , ................................................................................................................. 62
F. Fly tiger Plumbing & Heating ........................................................................................................................ 63
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 2
ii.
iii.
1.
2.
3.
4.
G.
i.
ii.
iii.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
H.
i.
ii.
iii.
iv.
1.
2.
Overview of Interviews ............................................................................................................................... 63
. .................................................................................................................................. 64
................................................................................................................................. 66
. ............................................................................................................................... 66
. ......................................................................................................................... 68
i Summary ................................................................................................. . ~ ........................... 69
Information Provided to the CFB ................................................................................ :.: ........................... 69
Overview of Interviews ................................................................................................................................ 69
.......................................................................................................................... 70
"
................. " .. , ............. , .. , ........ , ........................................... ,.:: .. , .............. , .... , .... 71
. .......... " .... , .................. " ... " ........................ , ....... , ........... , ...... , ... , ................ , .... , .... , ....... 72
. ........ , ..... , ... , ......... , ... ,,', .......... , .... , ... ,., .. ,., .................... , ........ , .............................. 73
.. ................... " ............... , ...... "." ................... , ...... , .... , ............ , ..... , .... , ................ ,.74
, ................................. , .. "., .. " ... , ............. , ...... , ................... ,., .... , ..... , .. , ........... , .......... 74
. .... , ............ ,., ............ , ..... , ......... , ........................... ,., ............ , .......... , ........................ 75
: .. , .. , ....................... , .......... , ...... ,.,', .................. ,., .... ,., .... , ........................ , ........... ,., ... 75
. .. , ....................... "., .. , ............. , .... , ... , .................. , ...... , .... , .................... , ............... 76
. Summary ............................................................................................................................ 77
General Information , ............ , ................ , ................ ,', .... , .................... ,., ...... , ............................................. ' 77
Information Provided to the CFB ....... , ................ , ............................. , ......................... ,., .. , ..... , .................. 77
Public Housing Income Limits ................... ,., ... ".,., .. , ................... ,., .... , ................. , .... , ............................... 78
Interview Summaries ...................... , ... , ........ , ........... , ..... , ............................ , ..................... ,: ......................... 78
. ........................................................................................................................ 79
.................................................................................................................. 79
I. China Grand Buffet ........................................................................................................................................ 80
i.
ii.
iii.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
Information Provided to the CFB .............................................................................................................. 80
Overview of Interviews ............................................................................................................................... 80
. .................................................................... ., ............................................... 81
.................................................................................................................... 82
. .............................................................................................................. 83
. ............................................................................................................. 84
. .................. : ................................................................. : ........................................ 84
. ........................................................................................................................... 85
. ......................................................................................................................... 85
~ ...................................................................................................................... 86
. ...................................................................................................................... 86
. ....................................................................................................................... 87
i ............................................................................................................................... 87
J. Ng Fook Funeral Group ................................................................................................................................. 88
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 3
iii. Overview of Interviews ............................................................................................................................... 88
iv. Interview Summaries .................................................................................................................................. 88
1. .............................................................................................................................. 89
2. . ............................................................................................................................ 90
3. . .................................................................................................................... 90
4. .. .................................................................................................................. 91
5. . ............................................................................................................................... 91
6. . .............................................................................................................................. 92
7. . ........................................................................................................................ 92
8. . ........................................................................................................................ 92
K. Hua Yang Development Corp ........................................................................................................................ 93
1. ....................................................................................................................................... 94
2. . .................................................................................................................................. 94
3. . ........................................................................................................................ .... 94
4. . .................................................................................................................................... 95
5. . .................................................................................................................................. 95
6. . ............................................................................................................................... 96
L. : Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 97
1. ........................................................................................................................... 98
2. . .......................................................................................................................... 98
3. . .............................................................................................................................. 99
4. . ........................................................................................................................... 99
5. . ......................................................................................................................... 100
M. Stone Computer Summary .......................................................................................................................... 101
i. Information Provided to the CFB ............................................................................................................ 101
ii. Overview of Interviews ............................................................................................................................. 101
iii. Interview Summaries ................................................................................................................................ 101
1. ! .............................................................................................................................. 102
2. . ............................................................................................................................. 104
3. .. ....................................................................................................................... 105
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 4
I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Thacher Associates (liT A"} was retained by the New York City Campaign Finance Board ("CFB") to assist
the CFB in determining, pursuant to the its legal mandate, the eligibility for public matching funds of
John Liu's campaign for New York City Mayor in 2013 (the "campaign" or the "Liu campaign") and to
supplement the CFB's investigation of possible violations of campaign finance laws. The CFB provided
TA with reported contribution data covering the period December 2010 - January 2013 and directed TA
to identify, research, and interview contributors to the Liu campaign.
Thacher Associates' research and interviews found evidence of potential campaign finance law
violations, including reimbursed contributions and falsified documents. In addition, Thacher Associates
found evidence that raised concerns regarding the reporting of campaign activity by the Liu campaign.
The interviews and research conducted by TA at the behest of the CFB also suggest that further
investigation could reveal additional potential violations of campaign finance law.
Additional information regarding contributions to and fund raising by the Liu campaign can be found in
audit work conducted by the CFB and in the record of the recent trial of the Liu campaign's former
treasurer, Jia Hou (aka Jenny Hou) and a fundraiser, Xing Wu Pan (aka Oliver Pan). This report
supplements those sources of information. 1
A. Thacher Associates' Assignment
The CFB had done a preliminary analysis of most of the contribution data it provided to TA and, based
on this preliminary analysis, the CFB directed TA to focus its review on specific types of contributions
(described below). TA was specifically directed to focus on contributions other than those that would be
at issue at the trial of Jenny Hou and Oliver Pan. The CFB also placed limits on the amount of time and
work that could be expended on this assignment as the CFB needed most of the work completed by
June 10, 2013 and authorized a limited budget. In addition, as it became evident that TA would
complete most of its research and analysis of contributions and contributors, and be prepared to
conduct interviews, close to start of the trial of Hou and Pan, the CFB and TA agreed that interviews
would not be conducted until after the trial had been completed.
1 Hou and Pan were prosecuted by the United States Attorney's Office, Southern District of New York, and on May
2, 2013, were found guilty after trial. The charges against Hou and Pan stemmed, in part, from their role in a straw
donor scheme for some of the contributions made to the Liu campaign. At trial, witnesses described straw donor
schemes that were designed to fraudulently increase the amount of CFB matching funds that the Liu campaign
would receive. The trial testimony also demonstrated that employers who had their employees act as straw
donors coached them and others to lie about the contributions.
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 5
B. Selection of Contributors to Interview
The CFB provided TA with contribution data, as reported by the Liu campaign, for about 6,500
contributions made between December 2010 and January 2013 and documentation for specific
transactions. The CFB's preliminary analysis of the data had flagged approximately 550 contributions:
For which common employers, common intermediaries, or common received dates were
reported;
For which discrepancies had been noted between the documentation and reporting (e.g., the
campaign reporting to the CFB a different home address or employment information than was
on a contributor's contribution card);
For which there were indicia on documentation that suggested intermediary activity but for
which no intermediaries were reported (e.g., no intermediary being reported but contribution
cards having handwritten on them the initials of a principal of the business for which the
contributors worked); and/or
For which there were other issues (e.g., signatures on a check and contribution card not being in
the same handwriting and contributions being made with starter checks).
TA was directed to focus on those contributions, other than approximately 50 that would be at issue at
the trial of Hou and Pan. TA further analyzed the contribution data, focusing on the contributions
flagged by the CFB but also doing a limited review of all contributions, in part because the CFB had not
flagged every contribution that met one or more of the criteria listed above. TA had multiple
discussions with the CFB to identify contributors to interview. We focused on contributions for which
there were matching funds claims and we excluded those contributors whose home addresses, as
reported by the campaign, we could not verify through online and database research or for whom we
could not identify an alternative address. This excluded a significant number of contributors; of an initial
selection of 70 contributors, we could not identify an address for 20 of them, or just less than 30%.
Finally, to be efficient, since we planned to conduct most interviews at contributors' homes, we also
excluded, for logistical reasons, contributors whose home addresses were not near other contributors
we planned to interview.
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 6
C. Overview of Interviews
In total, TA interviewed or attempted to interview 85 select contributors based on the criteria set forth
above, many of whom were reported as having common employers. Of the 85, we interviewed 22
contributors and 19 family members of contributors. Below is an overview of the results of our
interviews.
i. Employers Reimbursed Contributions Made by Their Employees
Thacher Associates received information that at least three of the employers in our selection
reimbursed, or said they would reimburse, employees or, in one case, a non-employee for whom a key
person in the company was identified as the intermediary. At least one of the contributors who
admitted that he had been reimbursed signed a contribution card affirming that he was not being
reimbursed.
Great Wall Supermarket - A former cashier told Thacher Associates that her $800
contribution had been reimbursed by her boss. This contributor did not know the name
John Liu and said that she had only contributed because her boss had asked her to and had
told her that he would reimburse her. This contribution was one of 15 made by Great Wall
employees, each of which was for $800.
McCormick & O'Brien, LLP - A former bookkeeper for this law firm informed Thacher
Associates that she had been directed by one of the firm's partners to tell employees that
they were required to contribute to the Liu campaign but that they would be reimbursed.
Three employees made $800 contributions and subsequently cancelled them, reportedly as
a result of concerns a paralegal raised regarding the campaign, including Jenny Hou having
been investigated in connection with campaign donations.
Yang Shing Trading Co. - A contributor for whom a key employee of Yang Shing Trading Co.
was identified as the intermediary also informed Thacher Associates that he had been
reimbursed for his $800 contribution. Although this contributor does not work for Yang
Shing and said that he did not know his reported intermediary, he informed Thacher
Associates that he thought that his boss, who had reimbursed him, also owned Yang Shing.
The same intermediary was reported for contributions by 13 Yang Shing employees and five
other individuals, each of whom made one $800 contribution.
CON FI DENTIAl
July 15, 2013
Page 7
r
ii. Some Contributors Did Not Live at Their Reported Addresses
Contributions for which matching claims are made are only matched with public funds if they are from
individual New York City residents. Thacher Associates found that New York City home addresses that
the campaign reported for some contributors were not accurate.
Since we specifically did not attempt to interview contributors wtlO met our selection criteria but whose
home addresses, as reported by the campaign, we could not verify through online and database
research or for whom we could not identify an alternative address, we do not know how many of their
reported addresses were not accurate.
However, at five of the contributor addresses that we had verified, we were told that the contributor did
not live there, and it appeared the contributor had not lived there at the time of the contribution:
at three addresses, a relative said that the contributor only received mail but did not live
there;
at another address, a relative said that the contributor, for whose contribution matching
funds were claimed, only stayed at that address in Brooklyn for part of the week and that
the contributor's family lived on Long Island; and
at another address, a house with three apartments, the landlord said he did not know the
contributor but that a lot of people received mail at the contributor's reported apartment.
For each contributor who contributes $100 or more, campaigns are also required to provide the CFB
with the contributor's employment information - occupation, employer name and employer address.
We were unable to verify reported employment information for many contributors because: (i) most
employment information could not be verified through online research; (ii) at many of the contributors'
homes, either the contributor was not home or no one else was home who could verify employment
information; and (iii) we did not attempt to interview those contributors for whom we could not verify a
home address.
iii. Some Contributors-Did Not Know Their Reported Intermediary
Of the 22 contributors Thacher Associates interviewed, 13 had an intermediary reported for their
contribution to the campaign. Thacher Associates asked nine of those 13 if they knew the intermediary
and/or how they had submitted their contribution (some contributors ended an interview before one or
. both of these questions could be asked). Seven of the nine contributors said that they did not know the
intermediary reported with their contribution or said that they had given their contribution to someone
other than the reported intermediary.
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 8
While there may be legitimate reasons for this, we note that these seven contributors include two who
informed Thacher Associates that they had been reimbursed for their contributions and two
contributors who worked for an employer who reportedly told employees that they would be
reimbursed. Since an intermediary solicits contributions for a campaign, with the campaign's
knowledge, and/or delivers contributions to a cam paign, this suggests that, at best, in five instances the
intermediary did not solicit the contribution but delivered to the campaign a lawful contribution that the
contributor had given to someone else. We note that campaigns are required to maintain clear and
accurate records sufficient to show an audit trail that demonstrates compliance with the CFB's rules.
iv. Some Contributors Made Significant Contributions Despite Evidence of Low Income
We are by no means suggesting that individuals living in public or low-income housing or having
traditionally low-income occupations are not capable of contributing to campaigns. However, we found
that four individuals with residential addresses in public housing buildings and other individuals living in
low-income housing and/or working in traditionally low-income occupations (e.g., housekeeper, cashier)
contributed $800 or more to the liu campaign - in some cases amounts that may have exceeded their
monthly rent.
v. Some Contributors' Denials of Reimbursement Were Not Credible
The three Thacher Associates employees who conducted these interviews have extensive experience
conducting interviews as prosecutors, attorneys and investigators in the public and private sectors,
including conducting interviews with interpreters and conducting many prior interviews for the CFB.
Their professional opinion, based on over six decades of experience, is that some of the contributors
interviewed were not credible when they stated that they had not been reimbursed for their
contributions. The report sets forth in detail the observations giving rise to these credibility
assessments.
vi. Some Contributors Contributed After Jenny Hou Resigned as Campaign Treasurer
13 of the 85 contributors interviewed, or attempted to be interviewed, by Thacher Associates,
contributed to the campaign after Jenny Hou resigned as campaign treasurer following her arrest on
February 28, 2012. These contributors include all five contributors we attempted to interview who were
employed by, or linked to employees of, Jennan Comprehensive Medical and seven of the eight
employees ofthe Ng Fook Funeral Group (some of whom also contributed before February 2012).
vii. Some Contributors Had Connections to Events and/or Individuals That Were Part of the
Trial of Jenny Hou and Oliver Pan
Thacher Associates, at the direction of the CFB, specifically focused on contributions other than those
that would be at issue at the trial of Jenny Hou and Oliver Pan. In spite of this, unanticipated
connections were found between some contributors we interviewed or attempted to interview and
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 9
events and/or individuals that were part of the trial of Hou and Pan. The connections were with
employees of Farwell International, a seafood company with a Brooklyn, NY address.
Eleven Farwell employees each made $800 contributions and at least five of these contributions were
made in connection with a May 9, 2011 fundraising event or were otherwise linked to individuals
identified in connection with the trial as possible straw donors. During the trial, two business owners
testified that they had reimbursed employees and others in connection with the May 9,2011 event and
that in April 2011 they had had dinner together and discussed obtaining contributions for this event.
According to the criminal complaint against Hou, law enforcement agents spoke with an intermediary
who said that s/he reimbursed between 10 and 20 straw donors in connection with this event and they
spoke with multiple straw donors who donated at this event. In addition to direct connections between
Farwell and the May 9, 2011 event, it appears that the President of Farwell attended the April 2011
dinner at which those present discussed obtaining contributions for the May 9 event.
viii. Further Investigation is likely to Reveal Additional Potential Violations of Campaign
Finance Laws
Thacher Associates' work revealed red flags that suggest that additional research and interviews could
identify additional potential violations of campaign finance law. For example, TA identified a possible
address for a Farwell employee that is almost identical to a false business address that The New York
Times had identified for a company that had 10 employees contribute and, which testimony at the Hou
and Pan trial subsequently demonstrated, included straw donations.
Database research that TA had conducted connected a Farwell employee to in
Flushing. In a November 9, 2011 story regarding the Liu campaign, the Times reported on contributions
by 10 Kang Kang employees and noted that "all of the workers list the company's business address as
in Flushing, but that address does not exist." (A copy of this story is attached as
Exhibit 1.) During the Hou and Pan trial, . {the owner of Kang Kang, testified that he had
reimbursed employees of his construction company for contributions to the Liu campaign.
We subsequently learned that the campaign had reported . as the home address for
two other contributors and that their contributions were very similar to the reported contributions by
the 10 Kang Kang employees. These similarities with known straw donations suggests that further work
regarding these two contributions, and other contributions that we identified that were linked by
common employer or common address to these two, could reveal additional potential violations of
campaign finance laws.
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 10
II. Interview Summaries
Using the information provided by the CFB and the selection criteria set forth above, Thacher Associates
selected 85 contributors to interview; we also interviewed two former employees of McCormick &
O'Brien regarding contributions made by the firm's employees. Nearly all of the attempts to interview
occurred during unannounced visits to contributors' homes. Visits were made weekday evenings after
standard work hours but prior to 9:00 pm; in order to take maximum advantage of this narrow window
of time, a car and driver were used and interviews were grouped by geography. Some of the interview
attempts were made during the day on a weekend and a few interviews occurred by telephone. On
many occasions, when a family member or neighbor said that a contributor would be home at a later
time, follow-up visits were made.
The interviews were conducted by three employees of Thacher Associates with over 60 years of
combined relevant experience. This includes extensive experience conducting interviews as
prosecutors, attorneys and investigators in the public and private sectors, including conducting
interviews with interpreters, and conducting many prior interviews for the CFB. In addition, these
employees have conducted many prior investigations for the CFB, some of which have involved
reviewing contribution data and researching contributors to identify suspicious contributions and
performing related fieldwork.
The majority of the contributors interviewed spoke Chinese and spoke very little, if any, English.
Therefore, the Thacher Associates employees were accompanied by experienced, professional
interpreters fluent in multiple Chinese dialects from a firm that Thacher Associates has worked with for
over ten years. The CFB provided a letter in simplified Chinese and traditional Chinese, as well as in
English, that Thacher Associates could show to contributors or others. The letter states that the CFB
authorized Thacher Associates to assist with the CFB's audits of political campaigns and that, in
connection with these audits, Thacher Associates was authorized to conduct interviews, request
documentation and undertake any other actions necessary to assist with the CFB's audits. Copies of the
three versions of this letter are attached as Exhibit 2.
Out of the 85 attempted interviews, Thacher Associates spoke with 22 contributors. In addition, we
spoke with 19 family members of contributors, some of whom were able to provide information
regarding the contributions.
With regards to the remaining 44, we either spoke with neighbors, current residents or no one at all.
CON FI DENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 11
Below is a chart ofthe results of our attempts to interview contributors.
2
Group Contributor Family Other
3
NoOne TOTAL
Member
Great Wall Supermarket 4 2 3 3 12
McCormick & O'Brien
4
2 1 3
Yang Shing Trading 3 3 4 2 12
Farwell International 1 2 2 5
Jennan Comprehensive Medical 2 3 5
Flytiger Plumbing & Heating 3 1 4
3 2 4 9
2 2
China Grand Buffet 3 1 3 4 11
Ng Fook Funeral Group 1 4 3 8
Hua Yang Development 5 1 6
4 1 5
Stone Computer 1 1 1 3
TOTAL 22 19 24 20 85
The report is a summary of the interviews conducted by Thacher Associates. This report is not intended
to be a comprehensive account of the interviews. Rather, the summaries are merely brief descriptions
of some of the information that was learned during the meetings.
Please note that the date of contributions referred to in the report is the date that the campaign
reported receiving the contribution. This date may not necessarily match the date. that the contributor
drafted a check or the date on a contribution card.
2 Attempts to interview each contributor were only assigned to one of the four categories in the chart. Although in
four instances a family member was spoken to before a contributor was interviewed during a subsequent visit or
phone call, these were counted under "Contributor," and not also under "Family Member." In three instances, an
interview of a family member was counted more than once; for example, an interview of a contributor who
worked at Great Wall Supermarket and who provided information regarding a contribution by his brother, who
also worked at Great Wall and who the contributor said lived with him but was not home, was counted under both
"Contributor" and "Family Member."
3 "Other" refers to either a neighbor, current resident, or other individuals that were spoken to regarding the
whereabouts of the contributor's location.
4 Totals for this group do not include interviews with two former employees who were not contributors.
July 15, 2013
CONFIDENTIAL
Page 12
I
I
I
Great Wall Supermarket
A. Great Wall Supermarket Summary
i. General Information
The website for Great Wall Supermarket, also referred to as GW Supermarket, identifies eight locations,
two of which are on Northern Boulevard in Flushing, Queens; the others are in Georgia, Massachusetts,
Maryland, and Virginia.
ii. Information Provided to the CFB
Information the Liu campaign provided to the CFB identified Great Wall Supermarket as the employer of
15 contributors, each of whom made one contribution. These 15 contributors' reported positions at
Great Wall Supermarket ranged from cashier and sales to manager and general manager. The
intermediary for 14 of these contributions was , who was identified as the
owner of Great Wall Supermarket; the one contribution for which she was not listed as the intermediary
was by who has been identified as her husband and who has the same
(Long Island), NY address as
The other 14 contributors have New York City addresses and records the CFB provided from the Liu
campaign indicate that they were seeking matching funds for all. Each of the 15 contributions was for
$800, all were made by check, and all were reportedly received by the campaign between July 7, 2011
and July 11, 2011. A list of fundraising events that the Liu campaign provided to the CFB included a
"Guest Appearance for on July 8, 2011, at Mellie's, 2
nd
FI, 137-87 Northern
Blvd., Flushing, NY 11354.
iii. Contributor Was Reimbursed By Her Employer
TA attempted to interview 10 of the 15 Great Wall employees and we were able to locate and interview
four of them. One of these contributors told us that her boss reimbursed her for her contribution.
None of them mentioned having gone to a fundraising event.
The first contributor, I a former cashier, initially denied having made a contribution.
However, after we showed her a copy of her check she admitted that she had made the contribution.
She said that she had done so only because her boss, husband, asked her to and told her before
she made it that he would reimburse her, which he did do. When was asked about "John Liu," she
stated that she did not know the name.
The three other Great Wall employees we interviewed all stated that they were not reimbursed. Two
stated that either - or her husband had asked them to contribute and had suggested the amount of
$800 and one of those two said that had asked everyone at work to contribute. The other
employee said that no one had asked him to contribute and that he had come up with the amount of
$800 on his own. He also said he was not aware of anyone else at work contributing and could not
explain why others at work would have contributed on the same date he did. We note that, unlike the
CON FI DENTIAl
July 15, 2013
Page 13
other employees, this employee had advance notice that we wished to speak with him about his
contribution; before we were able to reach him, we spoke with his wife and told her we wished to speak
with her husband about his contribution.
iv. Contributions to Other Candidates
The three employees who stated that they were not reimbursed all said they had contributed to other
campaigns. With regards to the other contributions: (i) one said she likes to contribute to Chinese
politicians and cited _; as an example; (ii) one said he had contributed before when his boss
had asked but he could not recall the names of any other candidates to whom he had contributed; and
(iii) the third said he had contributed to a candidate named but he could not recall the
candidate's first name.
TA reviewed contribution information on the websites of the CFB, the New York State Board of Elections
("BOE") and the Federal Elections Commission ("FEC"). We found that one employee and the apparent
spouse of another employee made contributions to the same candidate, on the exact date
I
that also made a contribution to IIWe did not find records that indicated the third
employee made any contributions.
v.
In addition to serving as the intermediary for contributions by 14 Great Wall employees, I was
also the intermediary for contributions made by 11 additional individuals. These individuals all made
one contribution, each of which was for $800 and was reportedly received by the campaign between
July 8 and July 12, 2011. We did not interview these contributors. However, we note that three ofthese
contributors were reported as having the same
"retired."
'as Pan and were identified as
We were also informed by a contributor, " that one of these additional 11 contributors,
, reimbursed him for his contribution. This reimbursement is discussed further in the section on
Yang Shing Trading below. We note this here to highlight that has a connection to two
contributors who admitted to Thacher Associates that they were reimbursed.
vi. Interview Summaries
See below.
CON FI DENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 14
1.
Contributor:
Employment: Cashier, Great Wall Supermarket
~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Address:
Contribution: $800, check; 7/10/11
Intermediary:
Interview Date/Time: 5/9/13; 6:10PM
Summary
r - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~
,was interviewed, in Chinese, in front of her residence.
Initially, she said that she had not made a political contribution and that because she is only a green
card holder she could not contribute. When shown a check in her name for $800, she confirmed that it
was her check and that she had signed it.
She said that she had worked at Great Wall Supermarket as a cashier for about one year, from 2010 to
2011, and that her boss had asked her to contribute. Her boss, whom she only knew as
(she thought that was the spelling) told her before she contributed that he would reimburse her and he
did do so. She belieyed that GW had one or two branches and said that she did not know if her boss
was the boss of all branches. The store she worked at was on Northern Boulevard but she could not
recall the street number.
She recalled that her boss' wife, who visited the store once in a while, had the last name
could not recall her first name and did not know the name
but she
She made the contribution because he was her boss and he asked her to. She did not know if he asked
other employees to contribute. She added that if he had asked other employees to contribute, he
would not tell her he had done so and if other employees had been asked to contribute, they would not
tell her if they had contributed.
She gave him the check at the supermarket and said she could not recall if she had filled out a
contribution card; she said that if she had-done so, she could only have done so on her own if it was in
Chinese and that if it was in English she would have needed help. She confirmed that the signature on
the check was hers but said she was not sure about the rest of the writing on the check and noted that
it had been a long time ago. (TA did not receive a copy of a contribution card.)
When we asked her about "John Liu," she said she did not know the name.
She said she has lived at this address for three years and has never lived at
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 15
She was concerned about getting in trouble or her former boss finding out that she had told us that he
had reimbursed her for the contribution, but she provided her phone number and agreed that we could
call her if we had additional questions. She noted that she speaks Mandarin and does not speak
English.
[Note: TA subsequently conducted searches of contribution information on the CFB, NYS BOE and FEC
web sites and did not find any other contributions made by.
CON FI DENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 16
:1
2.
Contributor:
Address:
Contribution:
Intermediary:
Interview Date/Time:" 5/9/13; 7:25PM
Summary
i was interviewed, in Chinese, in front of her residence.
At the start of the interview, she asked if this was about the $800. She explained that she had been
questioned about this about a year earlier by one person and a translator. She didn't know who they
worked for but thought they also worked for the City of NY (we had told her we were assisting the NYC
CFB).
She said she used to work as a cashier at GW Supermarket and that her boss, . had asked her
to contribute and had suggested the amount of $800. She insisted she was not reimbursed for her
contribution. Her boss asked everyone at work to contribute, to do their part, but she said she didn't
know if other employees did contribute. She later said that her boss had asked her in private to
contribute and that she had given the check to her boss at the GW Supermarket at 144 Northern
Boulevard; she said that her boss has many supermarkets.
When we asked about John Liu, she said she knew who he was but she could not identify the office he
was running for, although she said that she had known at the time of the contribution. She added that
she thought he was running for the United States Government and said that she knows there are a
President, Senators and Congressman but she didn't know which position he was running for.
She said she likes to contribute to Chinese politicians and cited as another politician to
whom she has contributed. Her husband, whose name she gave as arrived during
the interview. Although his name is also on the check, she said that he did not contribute to John Liu.
web sites and found two other contributions by a
September 22, 2010 for '
\of Flushing -a $1,000 contribution on
and a $250 contribution in September 2012
for _ The 2010 contribution to was on the same date as
contributions by ,land the wife of (#3 below); the amount was the same as .
wife while gave $3,800, which, according to the NYS BOE web site, was the maximum allowable
individual contribution for primary elections for the New York State Assembly in 2010. We did not find
any contributions by her husband. While we did find one contribution in the same name as her
husband's, the reported address was in Woodside, Queens, rather than in Flushing; that was a $100
July 15, 2013
CONFIDENTIAL
Page 17
contribution to John Liu in January 2013.)
When we asked if she had told her husband what the interview was about, she thought we wondered if
she had told him about the $800 and she laughed and said that she had told him about the $800
because it was not $8. When we then asked why she had contributed so much, she said it was her first
contribution and her boss, who was very nice to the employees, had suggested that amount. She
added that sometimes the business would have a party and John Liu would come and speak, although it
was not a party for Liu.
She said that she completed a contribution card and signed it in English. She said that she can read a
little bit in English and can write simple things in English, such as her name and address, and that for
items on the card that she didn't understand, she asked for assistance from the head cashier, whom
she only knew as I '(TA did not receive a copy of a contribution card).
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 18
3.
Contributor:
Employment: Manager, Great Wall Supermarket
~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - + - - - - - - - - ~ .
Address:
Contribution: ';$800, check; 7/8/11
Intermediary:
Interview Date/Time: 5/11/13; 11:00AM
Summary
This address appeared to be a relatively new, well-maintained two-family home. When we arrived,
was in the driveway sitting in an Infiniti NY plate , with the engine
running. [According to NYS DMV records, this license plate I!> lUI a Infiniti registered to at
He said he did not speak any English and he was interviewed in Chinese. He said that he is a manager
at GW Supermarket. He said he contributed $800 because his boss, asked him if he was
willing to contribute $800. His boss said that if he was willing to, he could contribute more. He
contributed because he is a manager and stock shareholder and thought it would be good for the
community. He insisted that he was not reimbursed for his contribution and said that he has
contributed before when his boss, who has good relationships with politicians, has asked for
contributions. He could not recall the names of any other candidates to whom he has contributed.
He confirmed the signature on the check was his but said that his wife had filled out the rest of the
check because he cannot write in English. He added that the check was filled out at home.
His wife, who spoke a little English, came out as we were talking and confirmed that she had written
the check other than the signature and said she did not contribute to the Liu campaign.
web sites and did not find any other contributions made by We did find one contribution
by a who would appear to be his wife; we did not obtain his wife's name but is the
other name or, check to Liu and the contributor eported the same address on as
The one contribution !lade was a $1,000 contribution on September 22, 2010 to
: - the same date as contributions by (#2 above) and
it was the same amount as Nhile gave $3,800, which, according to the NYS BOE web site,
was the maximum allowable individual contribution for primary elections for the New York State
Assembly in 2010. 1
His wife said they had to leave to go to work but before they did ,said that , (# 4 below)
was his brother, also contributed, was also a manager at GW Supermarket, was working at that time,
and lived with them.
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 19
4.
Contributor:
Employment:
Address:
Contribution:
Intermediary:
Interview Date/Time:
See notes under
/
Manager, Great Wall Supermarket
): $800. check; 7/9/11
5/11/13; 11:00AM
Summary
,#3 above.
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 20
I
5.
Contributor:
Address:
Contribution: , $800, check; 7/10/11
Intermediary:
J
Summary
This apartment is in one of a group of four apartment buildings, all of which appeared to be in disrepair.
At Apartment , a woman stated, in Chinese, that she was wife and that he was working
at GW Supermarket where he is a manager. At first she said that he could not make a political
contribution because he is only a green card holder but then she said that she didn't know if he would
make a contribution and that he would not tell her if he did. She said his company has events for
natural disasters and such but she did not know about political events.
We showed her the contribution check and she confirmed that the signature on it was her husband's
but said that she did not know about the check. She suggested that we call her husband and talk with
him, provided his phone number, and said that he doesn't speak English. She took a photograph of the
check and of the letter from the CFB authorizing T A to assist with the CFB's audits.
Summary
was reached at phone at the number provided by his wife and interviewed, in Chinese.
After he was told the purpose of the call, he said that he had written a check for John Liu at home, that
no one had asked him to contribute, that he had not been reimbursed and that he had thought of the
contribution amount of $800 on his own. He could not recall if he had mailed the check and noted that
it was a long time ago.
At first he could not recall if he had completed a contribution card and then said that he thought he
might have and that he might have gotten one at a library on Main Street where John Liu had had an
event. (TA did not receive a contribution card.) He said he worked at Great Wall at the time and still
works there. He did not know if anyone else at work contributed and said he did not think it was
appropriate to ask others if they had done so. He could not explain why others at Great Wall would
have made contributions to Liu on the same date. His boss's last name is
When asked if he had contributerl to other campaigns, he said that he had contributed to a City Council
member with the last name when asked if it was he said he did not know. He said
he supported her because of her ethnicity and that it was like "Jews supporting Jews and Italians
supporting Italians./I [Note: TA subsequently conducted searches of contribution information on the
CFB, NYS BOE and FEC web sites and did not find any other contributions made by
CONFIDENTIAL
July IS, 2013
Page 21
6.
Contributor:
Address: ~
Contribution: ;$800, check; 7/10/11
Intermediary:
Summary
This address is a large apartment building and would appear to contain modestly-priced apartments.
1
At Apartment _,! an elderly woman stated, in Chinese, that she was wife and that he
was working at Great Wall Supermarket. She said that she did not know anything about contributions
and was unwilling to talk with us.
7 ..
Contributor:
Employment: Sales, Great Wall Supermarket
Address:
-
Contribution: \; $800, check; 7/11/11
Intermediary:
Summary
This large, modest apartment building had buzzers but no names out front. We did not get an answer
when we rang the buzzer. An elderly Chinese-speaking male who was coming out of the building said
that ;was working "in the basement" at a GW Supermarket down the street.' We observed a
! .
GW Supermarket a couple of blocks away on Northern Boulevard.
CON FI DENTIAl
July 15, 2013
Page 22
8.
Contributor:
-
Address:
Contribution:
!
: $800, check; 7/9/11
Intermediary:
Summary
This address is a well kept two-family home. There were no names in front of the house, we got no
answer when we rang the buzzers and no neighbors were observed.
9.
Contributor:
Address: .-
- .
Contribution: ~ $800, check; 7/9/11
Intermediary:
Interview Date/Time: 5/11/13; l1:lOAM
Summary
This is the same address as #8 above. No one answered the door at this two-family home.
10.
Contributor:
-,
Address:
-_._-. ,-
Intermediary:
Interview Date/Time: 5/11/13; 1O:20AM
Summary
This address is a large apartment building that appeared to be well-maintained. The name next to the
buzzer for Apartment - was
- - - -
-We got no answer when we rang that buzzer. When we
accidentally rang the buzzer for Apartment , we asked the male who answered in English if he knew
was
I and he said that he did not know the name; the name by the buzzer for Apartment
,
- -
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 23
11.
Contributor: :
Employment: Office Clerk, United Fruit & Produce
Address:
Contribution: ; $800, check; 7/11/11
Intermediary: None
.. "
Summary
This address is a three-family home. No one was home on the second floor but we spoke with the
landlord, an Asian male who lives on the first floor and spoke English. He told us that he did not know
the name' but said that a lot of people get mail at the second floor.
Interview Date/Time: 5/10/13; 5:45PM (Second Attempt)
Summary
No one answered when we rang the buzzer for the second floor.
Interview Date/Time: 5/10/13; 6:05PM (Third Attempt)
Summary
-"
We went to this location, a two-family home, because database research by TA had identified it as a
potential address for
We got no answer at either unit, no names were visible out front and no neighbors were around.
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 24
12.
Contributor:
Employment: Manager, United Fruit & Produce
Address:
Contribution: ; $800, credit card; 7/11/11
Intermediary: None
Summary
No one answered at this well-maintained two-family brick home. There were no names on the house
and no neighbors were around.
Parked in the driveway was a large Mercedes Benz SUV with NY plate I[Accordingto NYS
DMV records, this license plate is for a Mercedes Benz registered to
.. A search of contribution information on the CFB web site did not
find any contributions by to the Liu campaign.]
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 25
McCormick & O'Brien, LLP
B. McCormick & O'Brien, LLP Summary
i. Information Provided to the CFB
Information the Liu campaign provided to the CFB identified contributions by five employees of
McCormick & O'Brien, LLP ("M&O"), a Manhattan-based law firm. Each of these employees was
reported to have made one contribution for $800 and paid by credit card, although three of the credit
." .
card charges were subsequently cancelled. The contributions that were cancelled were by
and .. attorneys, and I office administrator. The other two contributions were by
, and I Records that the campaign provided to the CFB include a copy of
a one-page fax from \ at M&O to , 1\ I, requesting receipts for contributions by
the five individuals identified above and for I and .1 (likely the spouses of
and' I)' Seto was the intermediary for all seven of these contributions
and all but the McCormicks' contributions were reportedly received by the campaign on April 15, 2011.
ii. Contributors Were To Be Reimbursed By Their Employer
We interviewed
stated that
. . and a former paralegal at the firm.
(iold her to tell employees at the firm that they had to contribute and
that they would be reimbursed. __ and said that they were not reimbursed for their
contributions but gave conflicting reasons for why they contributed and why they cancelled their
contributions.
According to , a former bookkeeper at the firm, one of the partners,
told her to tell the other employees that they had to contribute to the Liu campaign.
stated that \ told her to tell the employees to contribute from their personal accounts and
then the firm would reimburse them. 'stated that \ "was demanding that the
other staff do it ... put money in to John Liu's account, you had to make the contribution whether you
wanted to or not ... that's what he said he was going to do ... whether they wanted to or not, they had to
do" it. \ was on vacation and called her and told her that "they had to do that and they had to
do it right away."
At that time, there were approximately seven or eight lawyers at the firm, including and
.1,. When . - -! asked tbem to cOl'ltr:ibute, "they were worded about losing their jobs
ll
if
they didn't. When she asked them to contribute she told them that they would be reimbursed because
that was what \had told her to tell them.
i, stated that some employees did contribute to the Liu campaign but several requested that
the Liu campaign return their contributions.
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 26
and save conflicting stories. -) said he believed that a client of the firm's was
affiliated with Liu and, because they wanted to help the client out, employees of the firm contributed.
His recollection was that the money was not going directly to Liu and that a paralegal in the office had
found out that there was a problem with "the bundler," so he withdrew his contribution. said
that she had contributed because she supported the candidate and that she had cancelled her
contribution because, on her own, she had read something in the newspaper "that something fishy was
going on" with the campaign. She said that after she found this out she told " her sister, to
cancel her contribution. She said that, with the exception of her sister, she was not aware of others at
the firm having contributed to the campaign and said it was a coincidence that others at the firm had
done so at the same time she had. Neither . nor.i I knew the name I
I
We also spoke with ~ a former paralegal at M&O. She said that at the time of the
contributions she researched John Liu and found articles regarding Jenny Hou having been investigated
in connection with campaign donations. She had further concerns after she did some research
regarding the Liu campaign, including concerns about the address and phone number on the credit card
receipts. She said that she and shared the information she had found with ~ n d
that he said "I don't want to hear it." She then shared her concerns with I and and
and they all cancelled their contributions. She said that .. later asked if she still had the
information she had found; she didn't think she had it but she later found it and in January 2012 she
sent him an email with the article. In her email, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit 3, she described
her research and what she had found. She closed the email with, "About mid-month in May 2011, there
was renewed media coverage on campaign funds fraud for John Liu.
who contributed of the issues with fraud."
iii. Interview Summaries
See below.
CONFIDENTIAL
and I informed the employees
July lS, 2013
Page 27
McCormick & O'Brien, llP
1.
Contributor:
Employment: Attorney, McCormick & O'Brien
Contribution: ; $800, credit card; 4/15/11 (chargeback to credit card on
6/1/11)
Intermediary:
Summary
was interviewed by phone at McCormick & O'Brien. After explaining the purpose of the
call, he was asked about his contribution to the John Liu campaign. He stated at the start that the
contribution was not completed. He said that he believed that a client was affiliated with Liu and they
wanted to help the client out so they contributed. The client was not his but the client of another
lawyer in the firm, although he could not recall which lawyer. His recollection was that the money was
not going directly to Liu and that a paralegal in the office had found out that there was a problem with
lithe bundler," so he withdrew his contribution. He said he could not recall any details about this.
When he was asked about the name he said he was not familiar with that name and that
he could not recall the bundler's name.
He noted that he is often asked for contributions and that sometimes he does contribute.
web sites and found only two other contributions by a with an address or employment
match: a $500 contribution for lin August 2012 and a $100 contribution to
I
, in May 2012.]
When asked about , and " he stated that they are sisters, one is an attorney, and that
both had worked for the firm but neither currently does. He did not know what firm the attorney is
currently with but suggested that that information could be found online.
He said that he could be called if we had any u ! t h ~ r Questions.
CON FI DENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 28
2.
Contributor:
Employment: Attorney, McCormick & O'Brien
Contribution: ; $800, credit card; 4/15/11 (chargeback to credit card on
6/10/11)
Intermediary:
Summary
was interviewed by phone. After explaining the purpose of the call, she was asked about
her contribution to the John Liu campaign. She said that she had made the contribution using her
American Express card and then had "cancelled" it; she said the contribution was for $800 or less.
When asked why she had contributed, she said that she had done so for the "usual reasons," and
explained that she supported the candidate. She later said that she never went to a campaign event or
had any contact with the campaign.
When asked why she had cancelled her contribution, she said she had read something in the
newspaper "that something fishy was going on." She said she found this out on her own and that it was
right at the start when "things" started to come out about the campaign. She couldn't recall details
about what she had found and later said that she thought it was probably about the start of "the case."
She said that "we faxed" the contribution forms and when asked why she had said "we," she said that
she had given the form to a secretary at work to fax; she could not recall the name of the secretary.
She could not recall how she decided on the amount of $800 to contribute and did not recall that that
amount had been typed on her contribution form. Her recollection was that she had completed the
contribution form by hand.
is her sister and worked at McCormick & O'Brien as the office administrator. i also
contributed to the Liu campaign and she reviewed her contribution form before it was faxed.
withdrew her contribution for the same reasons that she I did because she told to do so.
She was not aware of an intermediary having been irwolvee with-her contribution-ane die not know the
name She asked us if was a client of the firm's and we said that we did not
know.
She worked at McCormick & O'Brien for a little less than two years. She handled the immigration
practice and her clients were mostly her own. Her sister, who is a few years younger than her, worked
at the firm for about one year or one year and a few months (TA database research found that was
born in and in
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 29
She acknowledged that she has not made other political contributions and said "I think I'm done with
it," and later said that it had "left a bad taste in my mouth." [Note: TA subsequently conducted
searches of contribution information on the CFB, NYS BOE and FEC web sites and did not find any other
by or
She did not discuss her contribution with anyone and said that, besides her sister, the only person she
told why she withdrew her contribution was a female attorney that she shared an office with. She did
not believe that this attorney contributed to Liu and did not want to provide her name; she asked if she
had to provide the name and was told that she did not have to.
When asked if anyone ever told her that they would reimburse her for her contribution, she said that
no one had. She said she was not aware of others at McCormick & O'Brien having contributed and
when told that others had and on the same date that she had, she said that, as far as she knew, it was a
coincidence that they had done so on the same date. She was not aware of anyone else at the firm
cancelling their contribution.
When told that $800 was a lot of money, she said that she did not think it was that much.
At this point in the interview, a phone could be heard ringing in the background and she said that she
had to go but that she could be called back if we had further questions.
3.
Contributor:
Employment:
Address:
Contribution:
Intermediary:
-
See #2 above.
!
i,
Office Administrator, McCormick & O'Brien
None
; $800 credit card; 4/15/11 (chargeback to credit card on
6/10/11)
6/11/13; 2:45PM
- -
Summary
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 30
4.
Contributor:
Employment: Accountant, McCormick & O'Brien
Contribution: None
Intermediary: None
Summary
~ - . ~ - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - - - - ' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - l
!was interviewed by phone. She was told that TA was assisting the CFB with an audit
of the John Liu campaign and that, among the steps we were taking, we were reviewing contributions
by employees of McCormick & O'Brien. She said that she had worked at the firm as a bookkeeper, two
days a week, for about one year and that she had left the firm about 13 or 14 months ago. She was
asked about a document that the CFB had received from the campaign. This document is a fax cover
sheet in which she asked the Liu campaign for receipts for contributions (the cover page is dated May 4,
2011, and asks for receipts for the following:
She said that one of the partners at the firm, whom she subsequently identified as
had asked her to ask other members of the staff if they would be willing to contribute to the Liu
campaign. She asked for receipts "because I didn't trust anything that was going on." She added that
two people who had contributed pulled out because "I told them that it didn't look legit."
She said that employees had to contribute from their personal accounts and then the company was
going to reimburse them. "was demanding that the other staff do it ... put money in to John
Liu's account, you had to make the contribution whether you wanted to or not ... that's what he said he
was going to do ... whether they wanted to or not, they had to do" it. \was on vacation and
called her and told her that "they had to do that and they had to do it right away."
There were approximately 7 or 8 lawyers at the firm and when she asked them to contribute "they
were worried about Ibsing their jobs" if they didn't. When she asked them to contribute she told them
that they would be reimbursed because that was what, , had told her to tell them. Her initial
recollection was that was the only one who contributed and she did not know if he got
reimbursed. She then recalled th9t ~ ~ ~ . had conJributec! ami then "she pullecl out." _She thought
that had contributed $800 on her American Express card. She also recalled that
, a lawyer who did wills and trusts, talked to his wife who told him not to contribute but that he
did, though he later cancelled it.
Regarding request for contributions, she said that "me and
did our own investigation of John Liu" and they told "it was a fraud and he didn't want to
hear it." She thought that I, who she believed had changed her first name from .. would
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 31
remember more than she did. She noted that was there full-time and she was only there two
days a week, so she was not aware of all conversations.
at the law firm of where she used to work.
left the firm and she got a job
She recalled that 's sister and a receptionist at McCormick & O'Brien, had also
contributed but she thought that, like she also "pulled out." She didn't ask Ito contribute and
did not know who did; just asked her to ask the lawyers and he did not ask her to
contribute.
The fax cover sheet was addressed to and the Friends of John Liu. She does not know ~
had no contact with and did not think was a client of the firm. She recalled talking with a
woman from the Friends of John Liu, who she thought was the treasurer. She could not remember her
name and when asked if it was Jenny Hou, she said that that was the name of the woman she spoke
with. She did not mention anything to Hou about the reimbursement of contributions and said that she
did not think that ___ Iknew Hou.
In discussing, " she brought up that if TA attempted to talk with him that he would not talk
and that he would not be honest if he did. She said there would have been emails from , in
addition to phone calls, about these contributions and that "they were definitely going to be refunded."
She provided\'s cell phone number, suggested calling her around 6:00 or 7:00 in the evening,
since she works during the day, and said that we could tell that we had spoken with her.
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 32
5.
Contributor:
..
Employment: Paralegal, McCormick & O'Brien
Contribution: None
Intermediary: None
Summary
called Thacher Associates and was interviewed by phone. She said that - .
had called and given her TA's name and contact information. She provided the following
information.
She worked at McCormick & O'Brien (M&O) from 6/28/10 until 8/9/12. She was hired as the Chief
Litigation Paralegal but also served other roles: general IT help; litigation tech support specialist; and
she did securities anrl background checks on clients and others. She has a Master's degree in
I
Criminology/Law from )niversity in Louisiana and completed post-Master's studies at
the University of ,/here sne studied forensics.
Regarding contributions by lawyers at M&O to the John Liu campaign, she said that ' gave her
contribution forms and she scanned them and typed in information on the form: on one form she only
typed in a contribution amount of $800 and on other forms she typed in the contribution amount and
the contributor's name and other information. She later said that she took $800 off one of the forms
because one of the attorneys at the firm wanted to give less; she thought there might be an email
regarding this. She believed that gave the contribution forms to
After she saw the contribution forms, she Googled John Liu and found articles linking Jenny Hou, Liu's
finance manager, to a Chinese businessmen's association in Chinatown that had given a collective
donation to the ',campaign and that Hou was under investigation. She went to
land
J
"wondered if it was on me up and Up" because the finance manager was under investigation.
went to 'and came back and said that he didn't want to hear about it.
She continued to look into the contributions. She asked . -,if she had run the American Express card
information that emp!oye_es had used to make fon!ributions ang __ s a i d she bag. brolJgbtber
the American Express receipts and she checked on the address and phone number on it and found both
suspicious. She found that the address was for an apartment building on Mott Street (an address on
Mott Street was on the contribution form; the American Express receipt had an address of
'), which she thought couldn't be right for a campaign office. She
called the phone number on the receipt, which she thought should be for the campaign office, and it
was answered "hello," rather than a greeting for a campaign office. She told the woman who answered
that she was trying to reach the Liu campaign office because she wanted to confirm that some
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 33
contributions had been received and she wanted receipts other than an American Express receipt. The
woman told her that they did not give receipts and she told the woman that was impossible and asked
for the woman's office number, as it sounded like she was on a cell phone. The woman told her that
someone would call her but the woman did not ask for her name and phone number. She then called
the liu campaign office and asked to speak with Jenny Hou. When she was told that Hou did not take
phone calls, she asked for receipts and she was told they did not give receipts. The unknown male she
was speaking with said they would give her a call and, although he did not ask for her contact
information, she gave it to him.
After this she told' " that she should give the attorneys the information she had found and which
she had pulled together. She and .. went to ~ office and presented him with the article
and information she had found and he said "I don't want to hear it." told them he hadn't
asked them to do that and that he just wanted them to do what they were told.
She and then called the other attorneys down to their office and told them what they had found.
The attorneys wondered if "it" was legitimate and she said she didn't think that it was and she gave
them the reasons why, including the information she had found on Jenny Hou, the address being
residential and the way the phone was answered.
She provided the following information on attorneys and spouses at M&O who may have contributed:
- he and his wife, who works at Conde Nast, both contributed. had to

convince his wife, who she believes also has the last name , to contribute. (A search of the
CFB online database did not identify any contributions to liu by a female with the last name of
and information the campaign provided to the CFB shows no other contributors with the
same residential address as
- he was in North Carolina when this came up and he sent an email to cancel his
contribution; his wife did not want to contribute and she did not know if she did (CFB records show
that a with the same residential address as " also contributed).
- she believed he and his wife both contributed (CFB records show that a .
;, with the same residential address as , also contributed).
She spoke with
contributions.
and and ,about what she had found and they all voided their
She said that one time \ told her that he had been called by a newspaper reporter regarding
John liu. When I told her this, he asked if she had the information she had done regarding the
articles and, at that time, she didn't think she did. A couple of months later she realized she did have
the information and she sent I an email about it, but he said that it was too late. She said that
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 34
did not recall the reporter's name. (During this interview she located and forwarded the email
she had sent to '. and his response, which are attached as Exhibit 3. In that January 19, 2012
email to ; she went over some of the research she had done to confirm that the contributions
by the firm's employees were legitimately applied to the Liu campaign and some of her findings,
including information on the campaign manager and residential addresses for campaign offices.
, responded on the same date with simply "Thanks.")
She said she believed that if \ is contacted by TA that he would call her.
She still does contract work for M&O and said that she is the only one they trust to do background
research.
She did not directly hear 'tell lawyers at the firm to contribute and she said that "he dealt
with that." She did think that there was an email in which instructed
to ask the attorneys for contributions and she said she would check to see if she had it. She also said
she had heard that at a partners' meeting 'had told the lawyers to give to the Liu campaign;
she thought that \ had told her about this. There were some convers<;ltions at the time of the
contributions about contributors being reimbursed; she heard this from \ and she thought others
and suggested that would be able to speak about this.
She said that M&O did not pay its employees very much and as a result she did not believe that
would have given $800 for herself and for her sister unless she knew that she was going to be
reimbursed.
She said that some people left M&O because of the poor pay but she left the firm because they would
not give her adequate time off to recover from major surgery. had left and gone to work at Levy
Ratner and helped her get a job there and she is still working there (and said she was calling from
there). She was not certain why left M&O but thought that they had blamed her for a mistake on
one of the accounting accounts although she didn't think that had made the mistake.
wrote a recommendation for John Liu to join country club, which she thought
was the Woodbury Country Club in Woodbury Heights, New Jersey. She typed the letter and put the
- -
recommendation package together.
When asked about the name , she said that she knew the name. She recalled that she had
seen the name in an article and said that she and I called the Liu campaign office and asked to
speak with (the contribution forms direct that they were to be mailed to Friends of John
Liu, c/o ,spoke with' who said to send a fax to get receipts
for the contributions. A fax was sent but no receipts were received. When they called back they were
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 35
told they could leave a message for and later they were told that was not there.
When asked about Jenny Hou, she said that she had no contact with her. As noted previously, she had
called the campaign office and asked to speak with her but couldn't reach her. She also called the
campaign office and asked an unknown female about Hou and the investigations and told her that they
had people who were going to make a contribution. The woman wondered if she was a reporter and
did not give her any information. She did not identify herself to the woman.
and
believed that
were the main accountants at M&O; worked two days a week and she
worked four days a week. Neither of them still works there and she thought that
would have contact information for
When she left M&O she copied some emails onto a thumb drive. She said that it was at home and that
she would contact TA after she had reviewed it and that she could be called if there were additional
questions.
Interview Date/Time: I 6/13/13; 3:55PM (Follow-up)
Summary
TA called Regarding the review of emails that she had said she would do, she said that she had
not completed it and that she would advise TA when she had (as of the date of this report, she has not
advised that she has completed her review and she has not provided copies of any emails, other than
the one she provided on June 12).
She also said that she had heard that M&O had just fired an attorney, . She said that
had been hired in August 2012, which was after the Liu contributions. Last night she spoke with ;
i a former attorney at M&O, regarding being terminated because had replaced
. She said she asked if she had read about the trial involving the John Liu campaign and
asked if she had been asked to contribute to the Liu campaign while at M&O.said that she had
not been and that she was not aware of anyone having been asked.
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 36
, __ identified the attorneys that had worked at M&O when - had asked some to
make contributions to the Liu campaign. She said that she believed that only the partners were asked
to contribute.

.-

,_ - partner
,- partner, no longer there
- partner
: - no longer there
1- no longer there
The support staff at M&O at that time, in addition to herself, were:

A couple of others who had "very minimal" roles
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 37
Yang Shing Trading Co.
C. Yang Shing Trading Co. Summary
Information the Liu campaign provided to the CFB identified 17 contributions by 15 employees of Yang
Shing Trading.
s
13 contributors made one contribution each, all for $800, all reportedly received by the
campaign between June 1 and June 3, 2011 or between July 10 and July 12, 2011, and all with
, a Yang Shing employee, as the reported intermediary. was one of the two other
employees who made contributions; his position was identified as "businessman," he was reported as
having the same residential address in New Jersey as the other employee who contributed, I
;, the CEO, and both of their names are on his contribution check.
In addition to serving as the intermediary for contributions by 13 Yang Shing employees,
was also the intermediary for contributions by six other individuals. These individuals all made one
contribution, each of which was for $800, and five of which were reportedly received between July 11
and July 13, 2011; the other contribution was reportedly received on June I, 2011. One of these
contributors advised TA that he was reimbursed for his contribution.
ii. Contributor was Reimbursed
TA attempted to interview nine Yang Shing employees and three non-employee contributors for whom
was the reported intermediary. We were able to locate and interview three ofthem.
One of these contributors,
$800. He said that his boss,
an employee of Gold Line Express, told us that he had contributed
, had told him that he should contribute and that he would
reimburse him, which he did do. He did not know the name ' but when asked about Yang
Shing Trading, he said he thought Gold Line and Yang Shing were owned by the same person.
We found a number of similarities between' " who told us he had been reimbursed,
and three other contributors:
contributors for whom
" whom identified as his boss, and two other
was the reported intermediary, and
_II). Some of these similarities were found on these contributors' contribution
cards but not in the information the campaign reported to the CFB regarding them. These similarities
include the following:
The contribution cards for all list the same employment address;
The contribution cards for /list the same employer;
The contribution cards for !list the same occupation - manager;
(The campaign reported to the CFB different employment information for ' than was on
her contribution card);
5 Yang Shing Trading is also referred to in records provided to the CFB as Yong Shing and Young Shing but all have
the same address in Maspeth, Queens, NY.
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 38
The contribution cards for list the same home address (while the
campaign reported to the CFB slightly different information for all three);
is the reported intermediary for ~ and the name'
is handwritten on the contribution cards of all three (although told TA that he did not know
the reported intermediary for :ontribution was :of
Great Wall Supermarket, discussed in Section A above);
and contribution cards have the identification number for
contribution handwritten on them, crossed out and handwritten above it have the identification
numbers for their contributions (according to the CFB, these identification numbers would be
written by the campaign);
All contributed $800 by credit card;
All of their credit cards were charged within a short period of time on July 13, 2011;
Three of the contributions were reported to the CFB as having been received on July 11, 2011,
which was before the contributors' cards had been charged (the other contribution was
reported having been received on July 13, 2011; the contribution card for that contribution and
one other were not dated and the others were dated July 8, 2011 and July 11, 2011); and
Although the credit card charges for all contributions were processed on the same date, the one
reported as having been received on July 13, 2011 was included in the campaign's disclosure
statement for the 4th filing period and the others were included in the disclosure statement for
the 3
rd
filing period (the CFB advised TA that July 11, 2011 was the closing date of the 3
rd
filing
period and that the 4th filing period began on July 12).
Although told Thacher Associates that he had been reimbursed, his contribution card is signed
under a sectidn headed "IMPORTANT, MUST READ" and that includes the statement, "I herby affirm
that this contribution is being made from my personal funds, is not being reimbursed in any manner,
and is not being made as a loan."
Copies of the contribution cards and credit card charge receipts for all four contributions are attached as
Exhibit 4.
We also interviewed two Yang Shing employees. Both said that no one had asked them to contribute
and tbey stated tbat they had not-been reimbursed for .tbeir contributions. Each said that they had -
given their checks to someone at Yang Shing. When questioned further about that, one did not explain
why he had not mailed the check and the other one ended the interview.
See below.
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 39
1.
Contributor:
Employment: Manager, Gold Line Express
Address:
Contribution: .; $800, credit card; 7/11/11
Intermediary:
Summary
This address is a large, middle-class appearing, apartment building.
At Apartment : an Asian male and female said, in Chinese, that they were (father and step-
mother. The father said that had not lived at this address in over three years and provided a
phone number and said that we should call I with any questions.
Interview Date/Time: 6/21/13; 4:45 PM (Second Attempt)
Summary
was reached by phone and interviewed in Chinese. After he was told the purpose of the call,
he recalled that he had written a check for $800 for John Liu. He said that his boss, ' told
him that he should contribute to support the candidate. His boss told him that he would be reimbursed
and he was.
He recalled that he had written the check at work but he could not recall what he did with it. At the
time of the contribution he worked at Gold Line Express and he still works there.
He did not know the name ; but when asked about Yang Shing Trading he said that he
thought that his company and Yang Shing were owned by the same person. He later said that he
thought that his boss had bought Yang Shing two or three years ago.
After several minutes of conversation, he indicated that he was not comfortable t'alking about this and
the call was ended.
. [We identified addition_al ioformation Iegardiog the_ - - . ,who.m _ . , identifie.d as his boss.
Information the Liu campaign provided to the CFB identifies /I as having
contributed $800 with his employer reported as Hop Hing Produce, which has the same address in
Maspeth, NY as Gold Line Express. While the campaign reported the name as /I.
the name on the contribution card is /I "; we also found an online directory that
identified /I } as a representative of Gold Line Express,
We found several similarities between
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 40
I
; #2 below) and ; #3 below). Some of these similarities were found
on these contributors' contribution cards but not in the information the campaign reported to the CFB
regarding them. These similarities include the following:
The contribution cards for all list the same employment address, 58-45 47th Street, Maspeth, NY
11378;
The contribution cards for
Produce Inc.;
\list the same employer, Hop Hing
The contribution cards for list the same occupation - manager (on
contribution card he is identified as a "business man");
(In spite of the information on I contribution card, the campaign reported to the CFB
that she was a "self-employed business owner" with a business address of
Brooklyn, NY);
The contribution cards for: I, all give the same residential address,

" (in contrast, the campaign reported slightly
different addresses for each; for all they reported but for' \ they
reported the city and zip code as for they reported it as r
and for as .,
was the reported intermediary for
was handwritten on the contribution cards of all three (although
not know ; the reported intermediary for . contribution was
of Great Wall Supermarket, discussed in Section A above);
and the name
said that he did
and contribution cards have the identification number. for
contribution . handwritten on them, crossed out and handwritten above it have the
identification numbers for their contributions , respectively; according to the
CFB, these identification numbers would be written by the campaign);
All four contributed $800 by credit card and their credit cards were charged within a short
period on July 13, 2011 ( - 18:31:13; . - 18:32:03; - 18:32:59; and
17:57:56);
The campaign reported to the CFB that contributions had been
received on July 11, 2011, although their credit cards were not charged until July 13, 2011 (the
campaign reported having received I on July 13; i;:lnd contribution
cards are not dated, - is dated July 8; 2011 and' ,is dated July-ll, 2011); and
Although the credit card charges for all contributions were processed on the same date, the
campaign reported to the CFB that I had been received on July 13, 2011 and it was
included in the 4th filing period and the others were reported as having been received on July
11, 2011 and were included in the 3
rd
filing period (the CFB advised TA that July 11, 2011 was
the closing date of the 3
rd
filing period and that the 4th filing period began on July 12),
Although' - told Thacher Associates that he had been reimbursed, his contribution card is signed
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 41
under a section headed "IMPORTANT, MUST READ" and that includes the statement, "I herby affirm
that this contribution is being made from my personal funds, is not being reimbursed in any manner,
and is not being made as a loan."
Copies of the contribution cards and credit card charge receipts for all four contributions are attached
as Exhibit 4. 1
2.
Contributor: , (same address as #3 below)
Employment: Manager, Hop Hing Produce
Address:
-
Intermediary:
Interview Date/Time: 5/9/13; 7:40 PM
Summary
This address is a very well kept home in a residential neighborhood.
There was an Express mail envelope outside the door addressed to , which looked like it
may have been there for more than a day. There was no answer to our knocks. We asked a white male
neighbor whether he knew of the , and/or had seen them lately, but he answered in the
negative.
Summary
There was no answer to our knocks and no lights were on inside the house but a dog was inside the
house and barked when we approached and knocked.
See , #1 above.
CON FI DENTIAl
July 15, 2013
Page 42
3.
Contributor: : (same address as #10 above)
Employment: Business Owner
Address:
i .
Contribution: _. ; $800, credit card; 7/11/11
--
Intermediary:
Summary
See, . # 2 above.
Also see #1 above.
4.
Contributor:
Employment: Mechanic, Yang Shing Trading
..
Address:
Intermediary:
Summary
This is an externally well kept private home in a neighborhood of similar homes.
spoke very little English and the interview was conducted almost exclusively through the translator.
Also present during the interview was a man identified as his son. For the most part the son stood
quietly, but he did speak English.
acknowledged making a contribution to John Uu but he could not recall when he made the
contribution.
When asked how much he contributed he responded without hesitation, in English, $800.
He said he made the contribution because-he like-d John-Uu and wanted him to win. In response -to
questions he said that no one asked him to make the contribution or suggested the amount to
contribute. He made the contribution by a check.
said he was not aware of whether any others at Yang Shing Trading also contributed. He did not
know whether the owner also contributed. He stated that the owner did not ask him to make a
contribution. He gave the check to someone in the office. He was unable to provide the name of the
person, but described the individual as the one in the office who takes orders from other companies.
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 43
He did not explain how it was that he came to give the check to someone in his office rather than mail it
himself.
He advised that he no longer works at Yang Shing, and is retired.
He said he was not reimbursed for his contribution, and did not know if anyone else in his office would
have received any money back either (and then repeated that he did not know whether others in the
company had contributed.)
He was shown the check and confirmed that the signature was his handwriting, and that it was a copy
of his check. When asked if he wrote out the rest of the check, hesitated, then said, "My son wrote
the check," turning to his son and saying, "You wrote it right." The son hesitated before responding,
the father repeated himself (in English) and the son responded, "Yes, I wrote it." The son did not
appear completely confident with his answer.
.was asked if he knew I : another Yang Shing employee, and whether they might be related; he
said he did not know the name and they were not related.
As the conversation progressed, appeared to get increasingly uncomfortable, although he was not
rude and initially was willing to talk. When asked whether he recalled filling out any other documents,
such as a form that gave his name, address, where he worked, etc., asked (in Chinese) to terminate
the conversation, saying that the conversation was getting "too complicated" and he did not wish to
speak with us further. Efforts by the translator to calm him, including explaining again the purpose of
our visit, were not successful in getting any additional information. We thanked him and his son for
their time, and left a business card for him to contact us if he thought of anything additional he wanted
to add.
After leaving the interview, the translator reported that at some point in the conversation ;aid to her
that he knew about the case and asked her if our inquiry was related to the case. She said she told him
it was not, and that this was part of an audit being conducted by the CFB, which does audits of all the
campaigns.
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 44
5.
Contributor:
Employment: Driver, Yang Shing Trading
Address:
Contribution: .; $800, check; 7/11/11
Intermediary:
Interview Date/Time: 5/8/13; Approximately 8:15PM
Summary
This address appears to be a one or two-family home.
was not at home. We spoke to a who said he was "s nephew. We
observed other adults, male and female, in the background.
said his uncle was not home, and was working. He confirmed that works as a driver
for Yang Shing Trading, and said it would be difficult to find him at home as he works long hours, and is
sometimes out of town.
He said his uncle speaks Mandarin and does not speak English. He provided a cell number for his uncle.
Summary
We spoke with He said that his uncle was not home and he didn't know when he would be.
He recalled that the translator and a colleague had stopped by before and said that he had given them
his uncle's phone number and that we could call him.
Summary
was reached at the phone number his nephew had provided and was interviewed, briefly,
in Chinese. He said that he was driving and that he had a passenger with him. After he was told the
purpose of the call, he recalled that he had made an $800 contribution to John Liu, who he knew was
running for mayor. He said that no one had asked him to contribute and he had done so because Liu
was Chinese. He could not recall if he had completed a contribution card and said that he had not been
reimbursed, noting "why would anyone?" When asked what he had done with his check, he recalled
that hehad handed it to someone at work: When-then asked if someone was collecting checks atwork,
he hung up.
CON FI DENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 45
6.
Contributor: .
Employment: Office Assistant, Young Shing Trading
Address:
Intermediary:
Summary
This address is a modest multifamily apartment building.
Upon obtaining entry into the building, we saw someone open the door at ,and we went up. At least
two young children, and two adults, including a female who was sleeping on a couch, and another
male, could be observed from the doorway. The home appeared modest, and it appeared that more
than one family may be residing in the apartment.
We spoke to a " 11 who reported that his brother, , and ,are married, and that they
both still work at Yang Shing Trading. He asked that we return at another time, since
sleeping and his brother was working.
Summary
There was no answer when we rang the buzzers for this apartment.
7.
Contributor: (same address as
-
Employment: Salesman, Young Shing Trading
Address:
-..
Intermediary:
_.
Summary
See - #5 above.
CONFIDENTIAL
,#5 above)
July 15, 2013
Page 46
was
8.
Contributor:
Employment: Stocker, Yang Shing Trading
Address:
~
Intermediary:
Interview Date/Time: 5/8/13; Evening
Summary
This address is a small multifamily building. A woman opened the outside door in response to our
ringing bells (there were no name on any bells); she said she resided in had moved in 2 weeks ago,
and did not know anyone by the name of She said she did not know who lived in the
apartment before she moved in.
9.
Contributor:
Employment: Clerk, Young Shing Trading
Address:
Contribution: :$800, check; 6/1/11
Intermediary:
Summary
There was no answer at this address. All the windows were covered with sheets or fabrics, and one
could observe a pair of socks hanging on a hanger in the window.
Summary
As we approached this address, a modest three-story building, an Asian male was preparing to enter
the building. He provided the following information, in Chinese: i lives at this address but she
was not home as she works nights and gets home around 1:00 AM. The company she works for is Long
Hua, which is located nearby, and he also works there. Five or six employees who work the night shift
at the company also live at this address. He was unwilling to answer any further questions.
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 47
10.
Contributor:
Employment: Clerk, Young Shing Trading
-
Address:
,
Contribution:
" -
'; $800, check; 6/1/11 ..
Intermediary:
Summary
This address appeared to be a single family dwelling.
We spoke to a woman who said she was sister-in-law, that was not at home and she did not
know when she would be. She asked for a phone number from us, and said she would pass it on to
in. She said that could speak in English to us, but she provided no further information.
Summary
A female neighbor said, in Chinese, that had just got home from work and then had left.
As we were leaving, an Asian male approached the door to this residence. When he was asked about
said, in Chinese, that she didn't live there anymore and that she had moved away at
least three years ago. The female neighbor, who was still out front, then she said that she did not know
anything and neither she nor the male appeared willing to provide any further information.
11.
Contributor:
-"
Employment: Manager, Young Shing Trading
Address: I
Intermediary:
-
-"
Summary
This address is an attached 2 family home. We rang both bells in front (neither had a name by it) and
when a woman opened the door, we identified ourselves and asked for The woman
did not answer arid slammed-the door Closed. We made repeated efforts to get a response but were
unsuccessful.
got no answer.
We also attempted to try the phone number we had as identified as the residence but
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 48
12.
Contributor: same address as
-
,#8 above}
Employment: Clerk, Yang Shing Trading
Address:
I
Contribution: !$800, check; 7/11/11
-
Intermediary:
-
Summary
-
See #8 above.
Also, \ #4 above, was asked if he knew
said he did not know the name and they were not related.
(Note: This address was listed on a contribution card for
to determine whether this was a current address.)
CON FI DENTIAL
and whether they might be related; he
but TA database research was not able
July IS, 2013
Page 49
Farwell International
D. Farwell International Summary
Information the Liu campaign provided to the CFB identified contributions by 11 employees of Farwell
International ("Farwell"; misspelled in some records as Farewell), a seafood company with a Brooklyn,
NY address. Each employee made one $800 contribution. These employees' reported positions were:
sales (5); sales manager; warehouse worker; office administrator; manager (2); and president. At least
five of these contributions have links to a suspect fundraising event or individuals connected to the
criminal case against Jenny Hou.
May 9,2011 Fundraising Event
Three of the contributions by Farwell employees were reportedly received in connection with a May 9,
2011 fundraising event. A li<;t of fund raising events that the Liu campaign provided to the CFB included
a "Guest Appearance for /' on May 9, 2011, at the Jade Asian restaurant in Flushing, NY. That
I
event was referenced in the cnminal complaint against Jenny Hou. According to the complaint, FBI
agents spoke with an intermediary who stated that s/he reimbursed between 10 and 20 straw donors
for their contributions in connection with this event. The complaint further states that law enforcement
agents spoke with multiple straw donors who donated at the May 9 event and who admitted to having
their contributions reimbursed. During the trial of Hou and Pan, owners of W&L Construction ("W&L")
and Kang Kang, a construction company, testified that they had reimbursed employees and other
contributors in connection with this event.
" the reported President of Farwell, appears to have been at a dinner in April 2011 with eight or
nine individuals that included the owners of W&L and Kang Kang and at which the May 9, 2011
fundraising event was discussed. .- \ ~ the owner of Kang Kang, testified at the trial of Hou
and Pan that he attended a dinner in April 2011 that wac; at the same restaurant where the May 9, 2011
fundraising event was held. He testified that /, the host of the May 9 event, asked the
suggested that individuals at the April dinner to each find ten people to maKe contributions and that
each contribution be for $800. According to a transcript of thattrial, identified some of
I" and who he testified the people at that dinner, including an individual he only referred to as II
owned a "seafood business." Farwell is reportedly a seafood business and
i ~ d.ated ~ Y 9, 2Q11.
Connections with a Possible Straw Donor
. contribution card
The contribution by. _
by
the President of Farwell, shares several characteristics with a contribution
was reported to be a manager at Super Plumbing & Building Supply ("Super
Plumbing") and, in the criminal case against Hou and Pan, he was included on the Government's Witness
List of individuals that the Government might call or reference lias possible straw donors."
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 50
The contribution cards for and Iist the home address for each as
. In addition to the home addresses on both cards being the same, they also appear to be in
the same handwriting and in different handwriting than other parts of the contribution card. (Copies of
the contribution cards the campaign provided to the CFB are attached as Exhibit 5.) TA conducted
online and database research and we were not able to find any connections between
and We also went to that address and we found no indication that either
individual lived there.
The contributions by . and were for the same amounts and were made at the same
time. The Liu rampaign reported that it received $800 credit card contributions from and
from on June 8, 2011. The campaign also provided charge card receipts for both
contributions and they show that both cards were charged within two minutes of each other on June 8,
2011. Although their credit cards were charged on June 8, ; contribution card is dated
"5/9/11," the date of the suspect fundraising event described above, and
be dated "5/9."
, card appears to
i one of the owners of Super
I
I did not testify at the trial of Hou and Pan, but
Plumbing and a son of the owner of Kang Kang, did testify. He testified that he had reimbursed
employees for contributions they made and he stated that
Plumbing.
~ Street/ Street
had never worked at Super
TA found a number of similarities between a false business address for Kang Kang that The New York
Times had identified and a possible address that TA had identified for a Farwell employee .
TA went to .,.1 to attempt to interview
with the same reported home address as .and
. ' a Farwell employee
No one answered at this single-
family home and there were no names on the outside indicating who lived there. Database research
that TA had conducted had connected to as well as to
This address in Is almost identical to as the false business address for Kang Kang. In a
November 9, 2011 story regarding the Liu campaign, the Times reported on contributions by 10 Kang
Kang employees and noted that "all of the workers list the company's business address as
- - 1- ~ but that address does not exist."(A -copyef- this -story, which also disUsses-
contributions by purported employees of W&L, is attached as Exhibit 1.)
When we went to a single-family home, the woman we spoke with said that she did
not know the Farwell employee, but she added that her father was friends with the owners of
Farwell and that they had used her address to get mail. We subsequently learned that the campaign
had reported this address as the home address for two other contributors ( :hen).
The contributions by these two contributors were similar to the reported contributions by the Kang
Kang employees who had reportedly identified as Kang Kang's business address: all
July 15, 2013
CONFIDENTIAL
Page 51
of the contributions were for $800; all but one of the contributions were made in early May 2011; all of
the contributors were reported to be employed as a "worker" - with the two other contributors
reportedly employed by Super Plumbing and Kang Shun Corp.; and the Kang Kang employees and \
, the contributor reportedly employed by Super Plumbing, were on the Witness List of individuals
that the Government might call or reference in the trial of Hou and Pan as possible straw donors.6
ii. Overview of Interviews
TA attempted to interview five of the Farwell employees and we were able to locate and interview one
of them. That employee, who works in sales, said that no one had reimbursed her for her contribution
and that she had contributed following discussions she had had with friends at work. She said that she
had come up with the contribution amount of $800 on her own and agreed that it was a lot of money.
She also said that she did not follow politics and she could not identify the office that Liu was seeking.
See below.
6 We note that in addition to the contribution cards of the two purported employees of Super Plumbing and Kang
Shun having the same home address, the contribution cards and contribution checks of two other purported
employees of these firms share certain similarities. The contribution checks for (reported by the
campaign as ! are each for $800, are dated May 9, 2011 (the date of the suspect
fundraising event) and the payee sections appear to be in the same handwriting and identify the payee as "Friends
of Jhon (sic) Liu." Also, contribution card identifies Kang Shun's business address as
" and this same address is listed on i, contribution card as his home address. Copies of these
contribution cards and checks are attached as Exhibit 6.
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 52
1.
Contributor:
Employment: Sales, Farwell International
Address:
Contribution: L ',; $800, check; 7/8/11
Intermediary: None
Summary
This address is a four story walk-up apartment building that did not appear well-maintained, with no
names on the bells in front. We rang a few bells and a young man who subsequently gave his name as
~ came to the door. He said that' was his aunt and that she was working and was
not home. He suggested that she would be home at 7:00 and that we should return then. He was
unable to tell us which bell was for his aunt's apartment.
Summary
We returned and rang all of the bells but no one came to the door.
Summary
-
A young Asian male answered the door and said, in Chinese, that he was a relative of . He
let us into the apartment building and directed us to her apartment where an elderly female told us, in
Chinese, that was picking up a child at day care and that we could wait. After about ten minutes,
arrived.
I said, in Chinese, that she had made the contribution to the Liu campaign voluntarily and that it
came about because she and friends at work were talking about contributing, so she did. She was
shown a contribution card and check with her name on them and she confirmed that she had filled out
the contribution card and written the check. Initially, she said that she had written the check at work
and then mailed it in but she later said that she had written the check at home. She said that someone
at work had the contribution card but she couldn't recall that person's name or the names of the co-
workers she spoke with about contributing.
-
- -- - -
She said that she still works at the company and gave its name in Chinese but did not know the English
name (she indicated that she does not speak any English). She said it is a seafood company and is
located on 50
th
Street in Brooklyn (which is consistent with Farwell International).
She said that she came up with the amount of $800 on her own and that she did not know the amount
others were giving. She agreed that $800 was a lot of money and when asked why she gave so much,
she said she didn't know why and then said that she did so in the spirit of things at work.
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 53
She did not know what office John Liu was running for and explained that she had been in China and
hadn't followed things. She later said that she had gone to China for over two months after writing the
check (July 2011). Although she did not know what office Liu was running for she said she wanted to
support him because he was Asian.
When asked about ' ! (a reported contributor who was identified as a manager at Farwell and
who gave $800), she said that he was a regular employee, no higher than her, and that she didn't know
if he had contributed or if any other employees had contributed. She was also asked about the owner
of her company and she said that she knew him by sight but that she did not know his name.
She insisted that no one reimbursed her for her contribution.
web sites and did not find any other contributions made by ~
CON FI DENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 54
r
l
1
2.
-
Contributor:
Address:
Intermediary: None
Interview Date/Time: 5/10/13; approximately 6:00PM
Summary
This is a private home. There was no name out front and no answer when we rang the bell. A neighbor
was not willing to speak with us .
. '
[Note: ! is the home address on - contribution card and is also the address in
records provided by the campaign to the CFB for , identified as the President of Farwell
International, and I, identified as a manager at Super Plumbing & Building Supply. Additional
information regarding
-
\ and I can be found in the Farwell International Summary at
the beginning of this section.]
I
Address:
Summary
This is a well-maintained single-family home in a neighborhood of similar homes. An Asian female with
a young child answered the door and answered our questions mostly in Chinese, although she did
speak a little English. She said that she did not know the name
"
We asked about
Farwell International and she said that her father is friends with the owners of the company and that
they used to use her address to get mail. She said that she did not know anything about the business
and that her father, whose name she did not provide, did not live there. She ended the conversation
shortly after that.
,
[Note: While. was not included in records the campaign had provided to the CFB, we
went tq this address because TA database research had identified a connection between this address
,
and \. Additional information regarding this address can be found in the Farwell
International Summary at the beginning ofthis section.]
- -
CONFIDENTIAL
- . - -
July 15, 2013
Page 55
3.
Contributor:
..
j (same address as ',#4 below)
Address:
Contribution: i ; $800, check; 7/8/11
Intermediary: None
Summary
This address is an attached modest home, When we arrived we saw a woman going up the stairs to go
in so she was asked, in Chinese, for
I
, The woman looked at us and ran inside and slammed
the door. We rang the bell and knocked on the door but did not get a response.
4.
Contributor:
-
(same address as ,,#3 above)
Employment: Manager, Farwell International
..
Address:
-
Contribution: : $800, check; 5/9/11
Intermediary: None
Summary
We got no response when we knocked and as we were leaving an Asian male showed up and said, in
Chinese, that he lived on the top floor and that vVas the landlord and lived on the first floor. He
said that he did not know when
- .
would be home.
5.
Contributor:
Employment: Sales Manager, Farwell International
Address:
Intermediary: None
Date/Time: 5/30/13; 8:00PM
- - - - --
Summary
This was a well-maintained residence. There was no name in front and we got no response when we
rang the buzzer.
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 56
Jennan Comprehensive Medical
E. Jennan Comprehensive Medical Summary
The Jennan Comprehensive Medical web site identifies three offices it operates, two in Brooklyn and
one in Manhattan. Information the Liu campaign provided to the CFB identified nine contributions by
six Jennan employees.
:, a physician, made four contributions totaling $3,550 and five employees each made one
contribution, by check, of $250. One of contributions was received in January 2011 and all of the
other contributions, by J and the other employees, were received in May and June 2012. The
occupations of the five other employees were reported as: bookkeeping (2); receptionist;
administrator; and student. The student and one of the bookkeepers were reported to have the same
home address and have the last name ; this home address was also reported by an employee of First
American International Bank, who also contributed $250 at the same time and has the last name
Another employee from the same branch of First American International Bank and with the last name
also contributed $250 at the same time.
iii. Overview of Interviews
TA attempted to interview three of the five Jennan employees who contributed $250 and the two First
American International Bank employees. We were able to interview one contributor: the Jennan
bookkeeper who had the same reported address as the student and the employee of First American
International Bank and who said that they were her brother and niece. She said that no one had asked
her to contribute but that everyone at work had been talking about supporting Liu. She added that she
wrote her check at work and that checks were collected there. She said that she was not reimbursed for
her contribution, however, she said that while her niece wrote a check in the niece's name that it was
really her niece's mother's money (the check signed by the niece is a starter check and does not have an
account holder's name printed on it). She said that she came up with the contribution amount of $250
on her own and when asked why her brother and niece had also chosen to contribute $250, she said
that they had followed her lead because she had told them about her contribution after making it
(although her check is dated 5/31/12, ten days after theirs, which are dated 5/21/12; copies of these
_ ch_e_cks are att9ched as E)(bibit 7L
iv. Interview Summaries
See below.
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 57
1.
Contributor:
Employment:
..
Address:
\
Contribution: '; $250, check; 5/21/12 (although the check is dated 5/31/12,
the campaign reported it received the contribution on 5/21/12)
Intermediary: None
Summary
This is a modest house with 3 or 4 apartments. Two tenants, neither of whom spoke English, said, in
Chinese, that the family, a husband, wife and daughter are the landlords. They said that they live on
the 1 floor and were not home but that they were usually home by this time. There were no names
by the h
1
lzzers and there was no answer when we rang the top buzzer, which the tenants had said was
for the
1 floor.
Summary
We rang the top buzzer but got no answer.
Interview Date/Time: 5/8/13; 8:55 PM (Third Attempt)
Summary
,
We drove by and saw that there were no lights on in the. (floor, so we did not stop.
Interview Date/Time: 5/10/13; 5:40 PM (Fourth Attempt)
Summary
A male smoking a cigarette in front of this house said, in Chinese, that he was a resident (he was not
one of the residents spoken with on 5/8/13). He said that the ) were not home, that they usually get
home between 7 and 8 and that they work at a medical facility.
Interview Date/Time: 5/10/13; 8:00 PM (Fifth Attempt)
. Summary
The same resident we had spoken with earlier in the evening was in front of the house. He told us that
the were still not home and we observed that there were no lights on in the second floor.
Interview Date/Time: 5/29/13; 8:30 PM (Sixth Attempt)
- - - -
Summary
was interviewed and she provided the following information, in Chinese.
f (#2 below) is her brother and (#3 below) is her niece. just went back to
China and lives with her but was not home then. She works at a clinic, confirmed that the name
was Jennan, ana !>aid that is a student at College and works at Jennan part-time.
She acknowledged making a contribution to Liu and said that no one in particular had asked her to
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 58
contribute but that everyone at work had been talking about supporting him. When we later asked
who had been talking about him she could not recall specific names and said there were over 30
employees. She wrote a check at work and said the checks were collected there but she could not
recall who collected them; she then added that she was not sure if other employees had given.
When asked why she had given $250, she said that she came to that figure on her own. When it was
pointed out that ilnd had also each given $250, she said that they had followed her
lead as she told them about her contribution after making it. She confirmed that she wrote the check
at work, turned it in and then told them about her contribution (although her check is dated 5/31/12,
10 days after theirs, which are dated 5/21/12; it should be noted that the dates the campaign reported
having received these checks, copies of which are attached as Exhibit 7, are not consistent with the
dates on the checks: check is dated 5/31/12 but was reported as having been received on
5/21/12 and and checks are dated 5/21/12 but were reported as having been
received on 6/15/12).
No one reimbursed her or offered her anything for contributing. She noted that who is living
with them while going to college, wrote her check but that it is really mother's money (as can
be seen in Exhibit 7, the check signed by
holder's name printed on it)
is a starter check and does not have an account
She did not know if Henry Chen, her boss, contributed and did not know the following names that were
identified by the Liu campaign as contributors:
I (Jennan employee, $250);

i (Jennan employee, $250);

($250, reportedly an employee of First American International Bank, which is also the
reported employer of ; the CFB reference number for
I, .Iis is and. . "lis
L-__ ________________________ ___
CON FI DENTIAL
contribution is
July 15, 2013
Page 59
2.
Contributor:
Employment:
Address:
Contribution:
Intermediary:
See notes under
3.
Contributor:
Employment:
Address:
Contribution:
Intermediary:
See notes under
Banking, First American International Bank
.
I; $250, check; 6/15/12
None
Summary
,#1 above.
Student, Jennan
-
;; $250, check; 6/15/12
None
Summary
,,#1 above.
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 60
4.
Contributor: -
-
Employment: Banking, First American International Bank
Address:
--
Contribution: ;$250, check; 5/21/12
Intermediary: None
Summary
This address is a modest row house. A male answered a few questions, in Chinese, but he would not
open the front door. Initially, he said that was not his name and then he said it was. He said
,
that he does not work at First American International Bank (
-
reported employer and the
bank on which the check making the contribution was drawn) and after saying that he had a bank
account there, said that he wasn't sure if he did and that his wife, who wasn't home, handles
everything. He said he has never made a contribution to anyone and that the signature on the check
was not his. He added that he's "small potatoes," doesn't have a business, doesn't have any money
and refused to answer any other questions.
web sites and did not find any other contributions made
CONFIDENTIAL
:.J
July 15, 2013
Page 61
5.
Contributor:
Employment: BookkeepeGJennan
Address:
Intermediary: None
Summary
Several individuals at nearby row houses were spoken with but were not able to locate An
elderly male at said, in Chinese, that he was a relative of [and that . lived in
the basement level at . An elderly female at . said, in Chinese, that :did not live there. The
elderly male said again that I did live there and when asked where worked, he said that he
worked at Jennan Medical nearby. He added that was working there now, we could talk to him
there and that he would be home between 8:00 and 8:30. He also said that works in Long Island
on Thursdays and Sundays (this was a Thursday). We also went to " which had been
identified as a possible address for , and a Chinese-speaking male said that he did not know the
name.
Summary
We returned to and the elderly male relative said that
that 'only stays there for convenience because he works nearby on
family lives on Long Island.
CONFIDENTIAL
was not home. He added
and that
July 15, 2013
Page 62
I
Fly tiger Plumbing
F. Fly tiger Plumbing & Heating
Information the Liu campaign provided to the CFB identified contributions by five employees of Fly tiger
Plumbing & Heating, a Manhattan-based business. the President, who has a home
address in New Jersey, made three contributions totaling $2,050. The campaign reported receiving
$800 contributions from three other employees on April 22 or April 23, 2011 and a $250 contribution
from one other employee on April 6, 2012 (one of the contributions by ,vas also for $250 on
April 6, 2012). The reported positions for the four employees, all of whom have home addresses in
Brooklyn, were: bookkeeper (2); plumber; and not given (the employee with the $250 contribution).
The contributions by the bookkeepers were made with starter checks and their contribution cards had
the contribution amount of $800 typed in.
TA attempted to interview four of the Fly tiger employees and we were able to locate and interview
three of them; we did not attempt to interview '\ The employees interviewed said that they were
not reimbursed for their contributions and that they had come up with the amount of their
contributions on their own. Two of the emplovpes with whom we spoke were sisters who live together
and work as bookkeepers. They said that had mentioned Liu as a good person and that they had
given their checks to . Their explanation for why $800 was typed on the contribution form was
that they had a typewriter in the office and they liked to be neat but they had no explanation for why
their names and other information on the card had not been typed. Initially one sister said that $800
was not a lot of money but she later said that they would have given more but $800 was all they could
afford. She also said that they had had their checking accounts for a long time but were still using
starter checks because they pay everything online. She said that Liu was running for President of the
United States but when questioned about that, she corrected herself and said she meant Mayor.
See below.
CON FI DENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 63
Fly tiger Plumbing
1.
Contributor: (same address as . ,,#2 below)
Employment: Bookkeeper, Fly tiger
..
Address:
Contribution: '; $800, check; 4/22/11
Intermediary: None
Summary
Initially, we went to , i
~
, the address reported to the CFB. This address is a
modest attached two-family home. A woman came to the window and said that
1 had
moved out and that she had no further information.
Summary
We then went to
1
(, a possible address identified by TA database research.
A contractor working on an adjacent home told us that he had seen a woman go out.
Summary
A young woman answered the door at and said that she was As we
started to talk with her and explain the purpose ot our visit another woman came out, said she was
I, and that they were sisters. appeared to be somewhat older (her date of birth is
10/20/80) and she became the primary spokesperson during the conversation. (Unless otherwise
noted, the information below came from
She said they both worked at Fly tiger as bookkeepers. She said they both made contributions, and she
thought it may have been last year but she was not sure.
said she thought the contribution was maybe $700 or $800 and I said she was
not sure of the amount. They said that they did not know John Liu personally, but had read about him
in the Chinese newspaper and wanted to support a Chinese American for office. The owner of their
company, whom she identified as talked about Liu and mentioned him as a good
person.
She is aware that others in the company may have made contributions.
She claimed no one told them the amount of the contribution to make, and that they gave their checks
to the boss.
When we showed both their contribution cards and the checks they each confirmed that the
handwriting was their own.
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 64
Fly tiger Plumbing
They were asked about the fact that both of their checks were starter checks, and whether they had
just opened up bank accounts at the time of their contributions. . said no, they had had
accounts for a long time, but that they paid everything on line and did not use many checks, and so
these were the checks from when they first opened their accounts.
When asked again about the choice of the amount of $800, and the fact that the amount was typed in,
she had no explanation other than to say that there is a typewriter in the office and that they like things
to be neat. When asked then why not all the information was typed, for example the name, address,
etc., she had no explanation.
She said she was not sure where the contribution cards came from, but repeated that they each filled
out their own. When asked why there were Chinese characters on the forms, she said that was their
names, and the reason for including the Chinese characters is because the boss knows them by their
Chinese names.
Regarding the amount of the contribution, she first stated, "What's the big deal, $800 is not a lot of
money?", and then at later points in the conversation said that they would have given more but that
$800 was all they could afford.
She insisted that they were not reimbursed for the money they contributed, and no promises were
made to them.
She said they contributed because they wanted Liu to have the money and wanted him to win. She
went on to say that he was running for such an important office, President of the United States, and
this was an honor for the Asian people, and he deserved the money. When we questioned her about
the office she thought he was running for she corrected herself and said she meant for Mayor.
Both women spoke English well, but the
more assertive and insistent.
clearly deferred to who was much
At s o m ~ p-QinJ __ _ said she kl1ew_ abouUhe trjal, a_nd thatsbe knew "Liuwas in_ trouble" and
that she wanted him to win and to have the money. She insisted that they were not reimbursed.
They acknowledged that they have never donated to any other campaign.
web sites and did not find any other contributions made by'
CONFIDENTIAL
lor
July 15, 2013
Page 65
Fly tiger Plumbing
2.
Contributor: ; (same address as #1 above)
Employment: Bookkeeper, Fly tiger
-.
Address:
Contribution: .'; $800, check; 4/22/11
Intermediary: None
Summary
-
See (#1 above.
-
3.
Contributor:
-
.-
Employment: [Identified as an employee of Fly tiger but no position given]
Address:
Contribution: , ; $250, check; 4/6/12
Intermediary: None
Summary
T,his is a modest private home. A young man in his 20s came to the door and identified himself as
i ; son. We explained the purpose of our visit and said that he believed that his
-
father had made a contribution to John Liu because he likes him. said he works for a financial
services firm in land was telecommuting on this date.
As we were talking a car pulled up, and it was i As the father did not speak fluent English,
our interview was conducted partly in English, partly in Chinese with the son and translator
interpreting. When we explained the purpose of our visit, the father went into the house to look at his
check book. came back out with a note paper on which he had written the date, 4/6/12, and the
amount $250. (Unless otherwise noted, the statements below are from the senior
I
said his "partner"
- - - - - -
lis in the same business association as John Liu, and so he made
the contribution because of this connection.
referred to "afternoon tea parties" and described a scenario where other businessmen would be
present and there would be a table set up with people who would help you fill out the necessary forms
to make a contribution. (It was not completely clear at first whether he was talking generically or about
this specific contribution; later in the conversation it appeared that he was recalling the circumstances
of his contribution.)
CONFIDENTIAL
July IS, 2013
Page 66
Fly tiger Plumbing
said no one told him what amount to give, and that he wanted to support a Chinese American
candidate so he donated for that reason.
He believed he did this at a fund raising event in a restaurant on Mott Street in Chinatown; he could not
recall the name. The event was the same date as the check date. He believed that he signed a form
that someone helped him fill out, at one of the desks that had been set out.
isaid he was not reimbursed for his contribution. He stated in substance "Why would we get
money back? Then it would not be a donation!"
volunteered that he would not make another donation, because he was not happy with what he
was reading in the papers about what has happened (this appeared to be a reference to the trial).
According to the translator, the father and son communicated with one another mostly in Cantonese,
but from what she could determine they did not say anything inconsistent to what we were heard in
English, or she learned from the father in Mandarin.
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 67
Fly tiger Plumbing
4.
Contributor:
Employment: Plumber, Fly tiger
- - --
Address: ' (TA research identified this as the
current address)
Contribution: I; $800, credit card; 4/23/11
Intermediary: None
Summary
We knocked on the door for in this public housing building. An older woman answered
the door and then a younger woman came to the door and invited us in. Neither of these women
spoke English and the conversation with the younger woman was in Chinese. This was an extremely
modest home, with a very old and ill man present. It appeared that all of these individuals were living
in a single room.
The younger woman said that was her brother and that he lived in We asked
her if he lived on (the address on the contribution card; TA research had indicated that
address was not current and that he was living at this apartment on . \ and she said that was
where he was living. She asked why we were looking for him and when it was explained to her she said
that she did not think that he would be likely to have made any contribution. [Note: TA subsequently
conducted searches of contribution information on the CFB, NYS BOE and FEC web sites and did not
find any other contributions made by
She acknowledged that he was a plumber.
CON FI DENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 68
G. _ Summary
Information the Liu campaign provided to the CFB identified 23 contributions for which
the Executive Director of the McSam Hotel Group, was the reported intermediary. All of these
contributions were for $800 and all were reportedly received between July 1, 2011 and July 9, 2011. Six
of these contributions were by employees of McSam Hotel Group and six were by employees of the
Comfort Inn Flushing. The Comfort Inn employees' reported positions were: desk/front desk/hotel desk
(3); housekeeping (2); and general manager.
A story in the November 22, 2011 New York Post links , who is identified as the CEO of
McSam Hotel Group, to $29.600 in contributions, including contributions by six employees of what is
referred to in the story as II 'r Comfort Inn Flushing."
TA attempted to interview nine contributors for whom r"as the reported intermediary,
including four Comfort Inn Flushing employees. We were able to locate and interview three of these
contributors. The Liu campaign reported these contributors' employment as: Manager, Rainbow
International Group; unemployed; and homemaker. The contributors said that they had made the
contributions and had not been reimbursed. None said they knew
See below.
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 69
I
1.
Contributor: J
Employment: Manager, Rainbow International Group
Address:
Intermediary:
Summary
An Asian female who answered the door said, in Chinese, that she was I sister-in-law and that he no
longer lived there (TA database research had identified this address; the contribution card and check
have an address on ). She then said she was going to get her glasses and when she came
back she had a cell phone and said that she had called. and he was on the phone.
The translator spoke with in Chinese. She said that i said that no one asked him to contribute or
reimbursed him. He said that there had been no special occasion for the contribution but that it came
about because friends were talking about John Liu. He said that he mailed in his check. At first he said
that hehad not filled out a contribution card and then said that he could not recall if he had (TA did not
receive a contribution card from the CFB).
He knew that John Liu was running for Mayor. He did not know the name
he livedon
CONFIDENTIAL
I
He said that
"
July 15, 2013
Page 70
2.
Contributor:
Employment: Unemployed
Address:
Intermediary:
Summary
answered the door and was spoken to in the hallway of the building. He was asked (in Chinese)
about contributions generally. stated in substance that he did not make any contributions at all.
We then showed him the contribution card. seemed surprised by the contribution card.]
then stated in substance that it may have been his uncle. However, . stated that he filled out the
check and the contribution card (he confirmed that it was his writing). He also stated that he could not
remember if there was an event for Liu that he attended.
Without notice, went into his apartment (he still had the contribution card with him). (A
conversation could be heard from the hallway; however, it was not in a dialect that was understood by
the interpreter.)
., his wife and mother, : (also a contributor) came out of the apartment.
only remained in the hallway for part of the remainder of the conversation. However, from that
point on, only wife answered our questions.]
Iwife spoke to us in both English and Chinese.
;wife stated in substance that \and !did make the contributions. According to
wife, their friend, :(spelling?), talked to them about making contributions. wife further
stated that she knew \from the Chinese "association" that and the family were members
of. [The association was described as an organization comprised of individuals who were from a
particular region in China.]
She stated that they did not know.
wife stated that, even though the card did not list employment, was self-employed.
wife further stated that neither nor were reimbursed for their contributions and that
no promises were made to them in exchange for the contributions.
Throughout the conversation, . wife praised for all the work he has done and how they
supported him. However, she did not know when the election was (including the year).
July 15, 2013
CON FI DENTIAL
Page 71
\ 1
j[
)1
1
)
\
:)
I I)
I 1
{ l
3.
Contributor:
Employment:
Address:
Contribution:
Intermediary:
See ,#2 above.
-
Homemaker
-.
:
; $800, check; 7/6/11
5/8/13; Evening
Summary
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 72
4.
Contributor:
Employment: Manager,
Address:
Intermediary:
Summary
A young man and woman answered the door. They stated in substance (in Chinese) that they had
never heard of and that he did not live there. They were also asked about (whose name is
on the contribution card as well). They stated that was their roommate but that she was not home.
They stated that they would have contact us but we did not hear from her.
We left a business card and a copy of a letter from the CFB that explained TA's role.
Summary
A couple answered the door for Apartment I and said, in Chinese, that no longer lived there.
They said that they had moved in after she left and they did not know if she had lived there two years
ago. They noted that she was the landlord's sister and they thought that she had moved to Long Island.
The male said that he recalled having previously spoken with our colleagues about campaign finances.
It appeared that multiple families lived in this apartment.
[The TA employees who had gone to this address discussed their visits and determined that they had
spoken with the same couple. The TA employee who had spoken with this couple on May 8, said it was
clear that this couple had said that
the TA employee's business card.)
was currently their roommate and that they would give her
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 73
5.
Contributor:
Employment: Housekeeping, Comfort Inn
Address:
-
-
Intermediary:
Interview Date/Time: 5/11/13; Approximately 10:30AM
Summary
This apartment is located in a public housing building.
7
There was no answer when we rang the bell.
6.
Contributor:
Employment: Housekeeping, Comfort Inn Flushing
Address:
Intermediary:
Summary
The address for is a public housing building.
s
We rang the bell for apartment in the lobby and
there was no answer. There were no names on the mailboxes. We knocked on the door for apartment
but there was no answer (there were no markings on the door to indicate who lived there.)
-
7 For information on public housing income limits, see section H(iiiL below.
8 Ibid.
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 74
7.
Contributor: \
Employment: Hotel Desk, Comfort Inn Flushing
..
Address: i
Contribution: ~ $800, credit card; 7/9/11
Intermediary:
-.
Summary
The apartment was listed as 1
st
floor - there were no names on the bells. There was no answer for the
1
st
floor.
We also attempted the 2
nd
floor bell. There was no answer. There was no mail in the mailbox.
There was a silver Honda Civic parked in the driveway, NY plate number [According to NYS
DMV records, this license plate is for a Honda Civic registered to - -,
...
A search of contribution information on the CFB web site did not find any
contributions by \0 the Liu campaign.]
8.
Contributor:
Employment: Desk, Comfort Inn
Address:
--
Intermediary:
..
Summary
There was no answer when we rang the bell. The name listed on the bell for
CON FI DENTIAl
:was'
July 15, 2013
Page 75
9.
Contributor:
Employment: President Assistant, New World Mall
Address:
Contribution: '; $800, credit card; 7/9/11
Intermediary:
--
Summary
There are 3 bells on the building (the address provided did not indicate a floor). We rang all three and
spoke with a neighbor. We were informed by the neighbor that --
where to.
CONFIDENTIAL
had moved and she did not know
July 15, 2013
Page 76
H. Summary
As previously noted the CFB conducted an initial review of contribution information and flagged certain
contributions, including some instances in which the signatures on a contribution card and on the
corresponding check did not appear to be in the same handwriting. One such contribution in which the
signatures do not appear to match was by
attached as part of Exhibit 8).
:copies of his contribution card and check are
Information the campaign provided to the CFB identified .as having made one contribution for
$800 and listed his employment as Manager, New Space Fashion (although on his contribution card his
employer is identified as "Fu Jin Star Incorp."). Recordsprovided to the CFB regarding John Liu's 2009
campaign for NYC Comptroller identified as having made seven contributions totaling
$4,900; his reported employment for 2009 was also as a Manager, New Space Fashion, and his address
as reported by Liu's 2009 and 2013 campaigns was the same:
The records for Liu's 2009 campaign also show that a contributed $4,950 (including
$250 that was returned), reported employment as Manager, New Space Fashion, and reported an
address of In addition to and ~ both
reporting the same employment information and contributing similar amounts for 2009, they are both
connected to'
I reported address was , .. ~ and the check on which wrote his
contribution for 2013 has on it an address of That check, dated February 18,
made a separate contribution of $800 and gave
(copies of her check and contribution card
(A search of contribution information on the CFB web site did not
2011, is also in the name of I.
!
the same address as . .
are also attached as part of Exhibit 8).
find any other contributions by
campaign.)
;, or any contributions by to the Liu 2013
In an attempt to interview ~ \ a n d i ; TA went to , which is in a
public housing building. At we spoke with sister who told us that he
was in China and that his daughter, received mail there but did not live there. She had no
knowledge of political contributions by either of them.
CON FI DENTIAl
July 15, 2013
Page 77
iii. Public Housing Income Limits
In addition to and . two other contributors that Thacher Associates
,
attempted to interview were reported as living in public housing: and
(no one answered at either of the reported addresses for these contributors, each of whom was
identified by the campaign as working in housekeeping at the Comfort Inn Flushing; see Sections Gs and
G6, above). The campaign reported that all four of these individuals had contributed $800 (we also note
that Liu's 2009 campaign for Comptroller reported that \ontributed $4,900 for that
election).
According to the New York City Housing Authority (IfNYCHA"), the current income limitations for living in
public housing are as follows:
Person(s) in Family Income Limits
1 $48,100
2 $55,000
3 $61,850
4 $68,700
5 $74,200
6 $79,700
7 $85,200
8 $90,700
9 $96,200
10 $101,700
11 $107,200
12 $112,700
13 $118,200
14 $123,700
15 $129,200
Rent in NYCHA buildings is calculated at 30% of the tenant's adjusted gross income. Therefore,
assuming an individual made the maximum amount and had no adjustments to their income, the
highest possible rent for one person would be approximately $1,200 per month. Clearly, the average
tenant would not have an income at the maximum level and most tenants would have adjustments to
their gross income. Therefore, the average rent for single tenants would likely be considerably lower
than $1,200 per month.
See below.
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 78
1.
Contributor:
-
(same address as . #2 below)
Employment: Manager, New Space Fashion
Address:
I
- -
Intermediary: None
Summary
AU , an Asian female said, in Chinese, that her name was She said that
,was her brother and that
about any political contributions but said
:(#2 below) was his daughter. She did not know
had photographs of John Liu. She said that
he was in China and that he had a business there. She said that , did not live at this address but
that she used it to receive mail. She did not know where lived but said that she was fn the US
now. She said that was in her 30's and worked as an officer at a bank (based on her brief
description it did not sound like a high-ranking position). She was not aware of
involvement in politics.
.j having any
2.
Contributor:
Employment:
Address:
Contribution:
Intermediary:
See #1 above.
(same address as
No employment information reported
': $800, check; 2/20/11
None
5/29/13; 6:15PM
Summary
CONFIDENTIAL
~ , # 1 above)
July 15, 2013
Page 79
China Grand Buffet
I. China Grand Buffet
Information the Liu campaign provided to the CFB identified contributions by the owner and four
employees of China Grand Buffet, located in Farmingdale (Long Island), NY. Four of these contributions
were for $800 each and one was for $500. The contributors' positions were reported as: part-time
waiter; waitress; chef; president; and owner. The President,
reported the same residential address in Manhattan.
-;
'and the owner,
I was also linked to other contributions. A list of campaign that the Liu
campaign provided to the CFB included a "Guest Appearance for .. , . " on April 9, 2011,
at the Fujianese Consolidated Benevolent Association Headquarters, 9 Division Street, NYC, NY 10002.
In addition, even though the Liu campaign did not identify' _ I as an intermediary for any
contributions, the initials" }II were handwritten on contribution cards for 10 contributions made in
connection with a December 7, 2010 fund raising event, including all of the other contributors who listed
their employment as China Grand Buffet.
TA attempted to interview 11 contributors, including contributors for eight of the 10 contribution cards
on which the initials II ill had been written (the two we did not attempt to interview listed the same
residential address as !) and five contributions that were made with starter checks, one of which was
by a contributor who was listed as unemployed. We were able to locate and interview three
contributors. All confirmed that they had contributed to the Liu campaign and said that they had not
been reimbursed for their contributions. Contribution cards for two of the contributors had written on
them the initials 11/." Both of those contributors said that they knew and one said that the initials
had not been on the card when he had completed it; the other contributor would only consent to an
abbreviated interview and was not asked about the initials.
See below.
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 80
China Grand Buffet
1.
Contributor:
Employment: Owner, Da B i ~ l O Construction Inc.
Address:
Intermediary: None
Summary
This address was a single-family house. A van with the name of the construction company was parked
in the driveway.
When we rang the bell, a young boy answered, left and his older sister (in her early 20s) returned. The
young woman identified herself as ; daughter. We explained (in Chinese - however, some parts
of the conversation with the daughter were in English) our reason for being there. She left and when
she returned she stated in substance that her father did not want to speak to us.
We observed a man in the driveway and approached him. He identified himself as I After
speaking with him (in Chinese) for a while, he agreed to answer our questions and we entered the
hallway of the house to talk.
acknowledged making the contribution to Liu. I stated in substance that he personally knew
Liu. In addition, he stated that no one else from his business contributed to Liu.
I stated in substance that he was not reimbursed for his contribution and that no promises were
made to him in exchange for his contribution.
_ stated in substance that he attended an event for Liu in Chinatown. further stated that he
knows, J from the Jlconstruction world."
\ confirmed that it was his signature on the check and that he wrote the information on the
contribution card. He further stated that when he filled out the contribution card that JIll and the
numbers written on the bottom I ') were not on the form.
was asked about the check he used for the contribution. According to , he opened the bank
account that the check was drawn from years prior to the contribution. We showed the check
and explained to him that it was a starter check. I simply stated that he does not write a lot of
checks and he had that check from when he opened the account.
CON FI DENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 81
China Grand Buffet
2.
Contributor:
Employment: Manager, Young's Entertainment USA, Inc
Address:
Intermediary: None
Summary
was in a rush so we did an abbreviated interview (he said he needed to leave to pick-up his son).
stated in substance (in English) that he made the contribution to Liu. Istated in substance that he is
I
friends with and that he knows Liu.
confirmed that he completed the contribution form and wrote the check.
stated in substance that he was not reimbursed for his contribution and that no promises were
made to him in exchange for the contribution.
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 82
I
China Grand Buffet
3.
Contributor:
Employment: Office Supervisor, HomeFirst
.0
Address:
Contribution: :; $800, check; 4/10/11
Intermediary: None
Summary
We spoke with at this modest residence where several small children who appeared to be his
were running around. He provided the following information ( spoke broken English and the
interview was conducted in both English and Chinese).
He made the contribution at a party a couple of years ago; John Liu was not at the party. He was drunk
at the time and as a result he claimed to remember few details. He gave about $500 and contributed
because a friend, , asked him to. whom he never worked with, has been back in China for
two years. He did not know what office Liu was running for.
We showed him a check on a Citibank account in the name of ,to "Friends of John Liu" for $800,
dated April 10, 2011, and, a contribution card. He said he never lived at the address that is on the check
and contribution card ( OOj and that he didn't work at the employer listed on
the contributi"n card ("Int'l Immigration Consulting Center"). He said that there are many individuals
named and that we might be looking for a different one. However, he did say that the
signature on the check and on the contribution card could be his and he acknowledged that he does
have a bank account at Citibank. In addition, when we asked about HomeFirst ( reported
employer, according to information provided by the campaign to the CFB), he said that he used to work
there. He said that Chinese writing on the contribution card is the name II (and the translator
confirmed this).
After covering the above subjects, said that he was not comfortable talking about this. and asked
to talk with translator alone. The translator reported that he told her that he had made the
contribution in cash that no one had reimbursed him for it and he stressed again that he had been
drunk at the time he made the contribution so he could not remember much about it.
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 83
China Grand Buffet
[Note: While Nas the address on the contribution card and check in the
name of, the address that the campaign reported for him was' . I,
where this interview was conducted. Also, while the Iwe interviewed said there were many
individuals named , this was the only contribution the campaign reported by a I; the
campaign also reported contributions by : TA database
research had confirmed address on md identified his complete name as
; the campaign did not report any contributions under that name. Copies of the check and
contribution card are attached as Exhibit 9. We note that the campaign provided a copy of the
contribution card that has the top part of the card covered by the contribution check - and apparently
another check under that.]
4.
Contributor:
I
Employment: Chef, China Grand
Address:
.--
Intermediary: None
Interview Date/Time: 5/11/13, Approximately 10:10AM
Summary
This building is very old and did not appear to be well maintained.
There were no names on the mailboxes. We knocked on the apartment door and a woman answered.
The woman stated in substance (in Chinese) that she was 's sister-in-law and that was in
China on vacation. We asked her generally if she knew of any contributions that were made by
She responded in substance that she was unaware if . made any contributions.
5.
Contributor:
Employment: Unemployed
Address:
-
Contribution: . ~ $800, check; 4/8/11
Intermediary: None
Interview Date/Time: 5/11/13; approximately 10:05AM
Summary
There were no names on the mailboxes. We knocked on the apartment door but there was no answer.
CON FI DENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 84
China Grand Buffet
6.
Contributor:
,
,
Employment: Part-time waiter, China Grand Buffet
Address:
Intermediary: None
Summary
This is a three floor building, with one unit per floor.
We spoke with the tenants on the Floors and they did not know the contributor's name. The
tenant on the Floor SDoke C;:hinese; the tenant on the Floor spoke English and said that the
landlord lived on the and that the contributor's name might be the son, who is a student, or
the while the tenant did not know their names she said that the last name of the landlord's wife
I
I
was ' No one was home on the floor and no names were visible.
I
. Cummary
No one answered when we knockprl on the 'floor. A neighbor, a " told us
that the landlords lived on the level and that they wouldn't open the door even if they were
home. He didn't know the contributor's name and said that there were a lot of Chinese residents in the
building, especially on the upper floors.
7.
Contributor:
Employment: Waitress, China Grand
Address:
Contribution: j; $800, check; 4/9/11
Intermediary: None
Summary
Hoi.; building is very old and did not appear to be well maintained; the apartments were located above
a The outside door to this building was locked and there was no way to access the
doorbells.
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 85
China Grand Buffet
8.
Contributor:
Employment: No employment information reported
Address:
Intermediary: None
Summary
This address is a plain, large apartment building on the corner of un the
edge of
\
..
There was no answer when we rang the buzzer for this apartment. We spoke with a
(
who appeared to do work around the building and he didn't know the name. No names were visible by
the buzzers or elsewhere outside the building.
9.
Contributor:
Employment: Cashier, Watawa Japanese Restaurant
Address:
Intermediary: None
Summary
The building did not appear to be well maintained and is located above a
way to access the doorbells in the lobby since the outside door was locked.
were unable to see if there were any names on the mailboxes or bells.
CON FI DENTIAl
There was no
From outside the lobby, we
July 15, 2013
Page 86
China Grand Buffet
10.
Contributor:
Employment: Partner/Manager, Hong Yip Restaurant, Thomasville, GA
Address:
I
Contribution: 1; $800, check; 12/16/10
Intermediary: None
Summary
We spoke to the current resident and she stated that no one by the name lived there. She further
stated that no one of Asian descent lived in the house.
11.
Contributor:
Employment: Superintendent, Wing Fat Mansion
Address:
Contribution: s;$800,check; 12/16/10
Intermediary: None
Summary
There were no names on the mailboxes or bells. We knocked on the apartment door but there was no
answer.
CON FI DENTIAl
July 15, 2013
Page 87
Ng Fook Funeral Group
J. Ng Fook Funeral Group
The web site of the Ng Fook Funeral Group identifies five locations: Ng Fook and Boe Fook Funeral
Services in New York's Chinatown; Chun Fook in Flushing; and King Fook and Tain Fook (also spelled Tian
Fook) in Brooklyn.
Information the Liu campaign provided to the CFB identified 30 contributions by 20 employees from
these five locations. , the President, made three contributions totaling $4,850. She
was also identified as the intermediary for eight contributions by six individuals, including contributions
by five Ng Fook Group employees identified as either clerks or drivers. All of the contributions by the Ng
Fook employees for whom was identified as the intermediary were for $1,000 or $2,000 and some
of these employees made other contributions for similar amounts. Ten Ng Fook Group employees,
identified as drivers, janitors, clerks or with no position given, made contributions of $50, $100 or $150.
iii. Overview of Interviews
TA attempted to interview eight Ng Fook Group employees (including one individual who had been
reported under two different names). We were not able to interview any of them but we did speak with
the wife of one contributor, a driver. She told us that her bonus from working at a gym was used to
contribute to the Liu campaign and that $4,000 (the total of the four contributions reportedly made by
her h'usband) sounded like the correct amount.
See below.
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 88
1.
Contributor: I
Employment: Driver, Boe Fook Funeral Services
Address:
Contribution: :$800, check; 12/7/10
; $1,000, credit card; 1/11/12
; $200, check; 4/6/12
; $2,000, check; 11/15/12
Intermediary: \ None
; None
Summary
This was a single-family house in what appeared to be a high-income area.
; wife answered the bell. She stated in substance [in Chinese] that her husband would not be
home until very late (around 11 p.m.). When asked about contributions generally, she knew that her
husband had made some to Liu. She estimated that it was about $1,000 last year but said she did not
really know.
We asked about the 4 contribution amounts and she said that those amounts sounded right. She said
that she works for a gym and that her bonus was used to contribute to Liu.
When she was asked about her husband's employment, she stated in substance that she knew he
worked for a funeral home but did not know what he did.
She knew of
..
She stated in substance that i was a high-profile person in the
community and described her as "famous."
She stated in substance that she did not make any other contributions but she was not sure if her
husband did.
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 89
2.
Contributor: (identified as same individual as
Employment: Account Clerk, Ng Fook Funeral Service
Address:
Contribution:
I
;; $1,000, check; 1/9/12
I
': $2,000, check; 11/15/12
i; $800, check; 12/1/10
Intermediary:
None
Summary
The apartment building was very high-end with multiple doormen.
We asked the doorman at the desk for and he stated in substance that was not home.
However, he still attempted to call 's apartment; there was no answer.
3.
Contributor:
--
Employment: Office Clerk, Ng Fook Funeral Service
Address:
Contribution:
I
i; $800, check; 12/7/10
; $1000, check; 1/7/12
,
Intermediary: ' None
Summary
For apartment 1/ i" the name on the door was 1/ ," We spoke to someone via intercom
after ringing the bell. A male voice stated in substance that the apartment was rented out and he did
not know (the male voice initially responded in Spanish).
We spoke to the doorman who stated in substance that he thought the people who lived in
Asian.
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 90
were

4.
Contributor:
Employment: Clerk, Chun Fook Funeral Services
Address:
'I
J.
; $500, check; 6/28/12
:; $2,000, check; 11/15/12
Intermediary:
,
None
, None
- -
Summary
-
,
The address was located in the same
-1
S. There was going
on at the time of our visit and because many of the ;employees were on the street, we did
not attempt to interview !
Summary
We entered the building and were greeted by several individuals who appeared to work for the funeral
home. When asked about I these individuals said, in Chinese, that he was working at the Chun
Fook Funeral Home.
5.
Contributor:
--
Employment: Janitor, Ng Fook Funeral Service
Address: TA database research
identified this address for
,.
rs check gives an address of _ . I,
, the address of Ng Fook Funeral Services)
Contribution: ;$100,check;4/6/12
Intermediary: None
Summary
The door to was locked; there were no buzzers and no names by the door. An Asian male
came out of the building and said, in Chinese, that ""as a tenant there but he would not say if he
knew if he was home. He suggested that we should call'
number for him. I
CONFIDENTIAL
,
, though he did not provide a telephone
July 15, 2013
Page 91
6.
Contributor:
Employment: Office Assistant, (hun Fook Funeral Service
Address:
-
Contribution:
,
;$800,check;5/31/11
Intermediary: None
Summary
The door to this building was locked. There were no buzzers and no names by the door.
7.
Contributor:
Employment: Driver, Ng Fook Funeral Services
Address:
Contribution: \; $50, credit card; 4/6/12
Intermediary: None
Summary
The door to this building was locked. There were no buzzers and no names by the door.
8.
Contributor:
Employment:
Address:
Contribution:
Intermediary:
The buzzer for Apartment
,
the building was locked.
Janitor, Ng Fook Funeral Services
; $50, check; 4/6/12
None
5/29/13; 6:00PM
Summary
--
had 's name by it but we got no response when we rang it. The door to
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 92
Hua Yang Development Corp.
K. Hua Yang Development Corp.
Information the Liu campaign provided to the CFB identified seven contributions by five employees of
Hua Yang Development Corp., a business with a reported address in Flushing, NY. Three of these
contributions, totaling $1,950, were by . , the President of Hua Yang. The four other
employees made one contribution each, all for $800, all reportedly received by the campaign between
July 5, 2011 and July 7, 2011 and all with \as the reported intermediary. These employees'
reported positions were: bookkeeper; assistant; manager; and office manager. i was also the
reported intermediary for 11 other contributions, all of which were for $800 and all of which were
reported to have been received on July 5 or July 6, 2011. A list of fundraisers that the Liu campaign
provided to the CFB included a "Guest Appearance for
Restaurant, 381 3
rd
Avenue, New York, NY 10016.
TA attempted to interview six contributors for whom
';. party" on July 6, 2011, at Amber
was the reported intermediary,
including three Hua Yang employees. We were not able to locate any of them and a roommate and
former landlord with whom we did speak did not have any information relevant to these contributions.
See below.
CON FI DENTIAl
July 15, 2013
Page 93
1.
---
Contributor: ,(same address as ,#2 below)
Employment: Office Manager, Hua Yang
Address:
Contribution: ;; $800, check; 7/7/11
Intermediary:
Summary
We spoke with a roommate who gave his first name as and who spoke English. He said that
, had gone back to China and would be 'back in about a month and t had moved to
. he added that . and are not related. He said he didn't know anything about
political contributions by them. He thought one of them worked for Hua Yang but he was not sure of
that.
2.
Contributor:
I
(same address as _, #1 above)
Employment: Bookkeeper, Hua Yang
Address:
Contribution:
,
--
i $800, check; 7/6/11
Intermediary:
Summary
See / #1 above.
3.
Contributor:
Employment: Assistant, Hua Yang
..
Address:
Intermediary:
Summary
This appeared to be a well-maintained house. A woman said, through a window and in Chinese, that
she was the
not recall if
and that
,
used to live there but moved out about two years ago.
had lived there in July 2011.
CON FI DENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 94
She could
4.
Contributor:
Employment: Retired
Address: I
Intermediary:
Summary
There was no bell or name on the door. We repeatedly knocked but no one answered. At one point,
we observed a light go on and off.
There was a white BMW SUV, NY plate. , parked on the strept blocking the driveway for this
house. [According to NYS DMV records, this license plate is for; BMW registered to
web site did not find any contributions by
A search of contribution information on the CFB
to the Liu campaign.]
5.
Contributor:
Employment: Owner, Golden City Iron Work
Address:
Contribution:
r
; $800, check; 7/6/11
Intermediary:
Summary
This building is very old and in did not appear to be well maintained.
There were no names on the mailboxes.
A woman answered the apartment door when we knocked. When she was asked for
she stated in substance (in Chinese) "I don't know. I don't know." She then closed the door on us.
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 95
I
6.
Contributor:
Employment: Teller, Valley National Bank
--
Address:
"

Contribution: '; S8UU, check; 7/0/11
Intermediary:
Summary
We spoke to the current resident on the floor. He stated in substance that he did not know'
-
He further stated that he has lived there for approximately 2 ~ months. According to the resident, he
sometimes receives mail that has an Asian name on it. We checked the mail for that day but did not
see anything addressed to
We also spoke with the neighbor on the
and did not know
j floor. She has lived in the building for approximately 1 year
CON FI DENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 96
L. ,Summary
Information the Liu campaign provided to the CFB linked , a physician, to by five
employees of New York Downtown Hospital. made three contributions,totaling $4,950 and the
five employees each made one contribution for $800. Four of the contributions by the employees were
made by credit card in connection with a December 7, 2010 "Kick-off Fundraiser" and have the initials
" handwritten on the corresponding contribution cards. While these contribution cards are all dated
December 7, 2010, receipts for the charges are dated December 27, 2010.and that is the date the
campaign reported having received them. also made an $800 contribution which the campaign
reported receiving on December 7, 2010; for that contribution his employer was identified as "self-
employed" but for his two other contributions his employer was identified as New York Downtown
Hospital.
The Liu campaign did not identify as an intermediary for the contributions made in connection
with the December 7 fundraiser, even though his initials were handwritten on each of the contribution
cards. However, he was identified as the intermediary for three other contributions. These
contributions, all of which were for $800 and were received by the campaign in July 2011, included one
by the fifth New York Downtown Hospital employee and two by self-employed physicians.
TA attempted to interview the five New York Downtown Hospital employees. We were not able to
interview any of them but we did speak with relatives of four of them, although none of them were able
to provide any information about contributions. One relative said that his cousin only used his address
to receive mail but did not live there.
See below.
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 97
1.
Contributor:
Employment: Receptionist, New York Downtown Hospital
Address: .,
Contribution: :; $800, credit card; 12/27/10
Intermediary: None
Summary
This was a relatively new well-maintained townhouse-type house on a private street.
We spoke, in English, with an Asian male who was sitting on the front steps and who said he was
brother. He told us that she lives there and that she had just left to go to work. He said that she works
in Flushing but he did not know where. When we asked if she had worked at NY Downtown Hospital,
he said he didn't know and that she had worked a lot of places. He said he didn't know anything about
any political contributions by her. During our conversation he also mentioned that she is a mother.
2.
Contributor:
Employment: Office Manager, New York Downtown Hospital
Address: \
Contribution: _; $800, check; 7/11/11
Intermediary:
Summary
A man with a young child answered the bell; he identified himself as L. :s husband (he spoke English).
He stated in substance that he was too busy to answer questions and that was at work. We left a
business card and a copy of a letter from the CFB explaining TA's role; he stated in substance that
would contact us but she did not do so.
CON FI DENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 98
I
3.
Contributor:
Employment: Occupation not given, New York Downtown Hospital
..
Address: i
Intermediary: None
Summary
This address is a modest building with a few apartments.
We spoke, in English, with an Asian male who came to the front door and said that is his cousin and
uses his address to get mail but does not live there. He said that she went back to China a few months
ago and he did not know when she would be back. He didn't know if she had worked at NY Downtown
Hospital and he didn't know about any political contributions by her but he did say that she would
receive political materials in the mail, including invitations to fundraisers. He was civil but said he did
not think that a contribution of $800 was a lot of money and he wondered if all candidates got this kind
of scrutiny.
4.
Contributor:
Employment: Physician Assistant, New York Downtown Hospital
Address:
Contribution: :; $800, credit card; 12/27/10
Intermediary: None
Summary
A woman spoke to us, mostly in Chinese, from behind a glass door. She said she was
i'
. mother,
confirmed that she lived there and said that she was not home. She would not answer other questions,
including when we asked her if her daughter worked at NY Downtown Hospital or if she knew when she
would be home.
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 99
5.
Contributor:
Employment: Physician Assistant, New York Downtown Hospital
..
Address:
Contribution: . -- - ; $800, credit card; 12/27/10
Intermediary: None
Summary
This address is a three-story building with one apartment per floor. No names were visible on the
outside of the building.
Tenants on +ho . and. floors were <;noken with, in and they didn't know ; there was no
answer on floor. Tenants on the

.floors (
the buildings are connected, and they alsu did not know the namt:.
CONFIDENTIAL
Avenue were also spoken with, as
July 15, 2013
Page 100
Stone Computer
M. Stone Computer Summary
Information the Liu campaign provided to the CFB identified contributions by the owner and three
employees of Stone Computer, a Queens-based business. The campaign reported that the
owner, who has a home address on Long Island, made two contributions totaling $1,300, and that three
employees, all with home addresses in Queens, each made an $800 contribution on May 28 or May 31,
2011. The reported intermediary for all three employees was. the President of United
Construction & Development Group. was identified as the intermediary for a total of 28
contributions, all for $800 and all of which were made in May, June and July 2011.
TA attempted to interview all three Stone Computer employees. We were able to locate and interview
one and we spoke with the wife of one of the other employees. The employee with whom we spoke
said that he had made the contribution at a Chinese business association event, that he had not been
reimbursed for his contribution and that was the president of this association. The wife with
whom we snoke confirmed that her husband had contributed $800. Although she said she did not know
\
the names or United Construction, we later learned that she was also reported to have made
an $800 contribution to the campaign in May 2011 that was intermediated by
See below.
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 101
Stone Computer
1.
Contributor:
Employment: General Manager, Stone Computer
..
Address:
Contribution: l; $800, check; 5/28/11
Intermediary:
Summary
This address is a single family home.
A woman answered the door, gave her name as .and said that she was j'S wife. She said
her husband would be home about 8:00. After we explained the purpose of our visit, she suggested
that we come back and talk directly to her husband. She confirmed that he worked at Stone Computer.
Summary
We returned about 8:30 and the wife apologized but said that her husband had left again and had gone
with their son to buy a baseball glove. She began to ask us some questions about the purpose of our
visit again, and as we were talking with her \returned with the son.
We began to discuss the purpose of our visit with I, and as it was beginning to get dark, we were
invited inside. We sat in the front room and spoke with
I
his wife did not remain for the
conversation.
,
. confirmed that he made a contribution to the Liu campaign. He said that he believed that this was
discussed at a Chinese Business Association event, at a restaurant on Queens Boulevard, whose name
he could not recall.
i recognized the name i (no relation; the named intermediary for the contribution) as the
president of this Business Association.
He confirmed that his contribution was in the form of a check. He was asked how he came to the
amount of $800 and said that no one asked him for that amount. He could not explain however, how
he arrived at that particular amount, or why the amount was typed in on the contribution form. The
clear implication from his statements was that he believed the contribution might be good for Stone
Computer's business (which is why he goes to these meetings in the first place) .
. said he did not know if others in the office contributed, including
I
acknowledged that his boss may have since "he is richer than I am."
CONFIDENTIAL
his boss
July 15, 2013
Page 102
I but
Stone Computer
I said that no one gave him any money back for his contribution, and questioned what would be the
point of such a thing.
We discussed the CFB matching funds program and the notion of a straw donor, and you could see that
he understood what we were explaining, and was not happy with the idea that taxpayer money could
be used to improperly fund a campaign.
I was shown both the contribution card and the copy of the check and confirmed the handwriting as
his on both. He recollected that he completed the information at home and mailed it in on his own, not
necessarily through the office. When pressed again about the typed in $800, he said that perhaps the
forms were at the meeting and he took it home with him. It is also possible that they merely took his
name down at the meeting and then followed up by sending him the form, he did not recall exactly.
offered that he recently had been getting calls from the campaign to ask for additional
cobtributions. They first asked for $800 and when he said that business wasn't going so well they asked
for $400. Because of the current economic climate at Stone Computer he has not made an additional
contribution and was not yet certain whether he would do so .
expressed some disappointment with Liu's current state of affairs, said that he wanted Liu to win
because he is an Asian American, in order to provide a greater voice in government to the Asian
Americans living in NY, but he also wanted Liu to run an honest campaign .
was asked again as to whether he received anything in exchange for his contribution and said he had
not, and made the contribution with his own funds .
[Note: . 1 contribution card identified his employer but not his occupation; the CFB advised TA that
the campaign recently reported that information.]
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 103
Stone Computer
2.
Contributor:
. Employment: Marketing Manager, Stone Computer
Address:
Intermediary:
.,
Summary
This address is a very well kept private home in a similarly well kept neighborhood. A woman in her
mid to late 50s answered the door, identified herself as wife and later gave her name as
. stated that her husband was in China, spending time with his mother who is not well. She was not
certain exactly when he would be returning; early in the conversation she said within a month, then
later in the conversation she said perhaps sometime the following week.
said she believed that her husband may have made a contribution to John Liu, although she was
not aware of the amount. She said that she did not know if he attended a fund raiser, but would not be
surprised if he did.
mentioned that there have been contributions to other Asian candidates, she cited
and also said that they were invited to a fund raiser for where the table cost $5,000 but
that they did not attend .
. said that they have contributed before to other candidates but no one has ever asked them to
confirm their donation and asked if this was because of the trial, of which she was familiar. (We again
explained the purpose of CFB audit and its independence of the trial). She talked generally about
fundraisers and said that her husband has attended some.
She explained that Stone Computer has about 5-7 people working for the company, and at one time
had more, but the economy has affected business. She did not know if others at Stone Computer
contributed to John Liu's campaign.
They have two daughters, one in college at the other who is working in financial services.
When shown the copy of the check :onfirmed that it was her husband's signature, and said that
she now remembered that the contribution amount was $800. She was not sure about the
contribution form, and said she had not seen that before.
CONFIDENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 104
Stone Computer
, was asked about : and the company, United Construction, (the named intermediary for
this contribution), and said she did not know the name.
She also said she did not know anyone by the name
[NOTE: TA subsequently conducted searches of contribution information on the CFB, NYS BOE and FEC
web sites and did not find any other contributions made by. ". However, a search in the name
of the wife, , revealed one contribution, a 5/30/11 $800 contribution to John Liu i
i
in her name, which she did not mention to us in our conversation. Records provided to the CFB also I
show that contribution as having been intermediated by It should also be noted that
contribution card identified his employer but not his occupation; the CFB advised TA that the campaign
recently reported that information.]
3.
Contributor: ( {also known as
Employment: Sales, Stone Computer
.,
Address:
I
,
I
Contribution:
' !
'; $800, check; 5/28/11
Intermediary:
Summary
This address is a multi-story apartment building with bells on the exterior ofthe building. There was no
answer to the bells we rang and the door to the building was locked.
CON FI DENTIAL
July 15, 2013
Page 105
October ii, 2011
Doubts Raised on Donations
to Comptroller
By RAYMOND HERNANDEZ and DAVID W. CHEN
John C. Liu, the New York City comptroller, has vaulted into the top tier
of political figures in the city, building a formidable fund-raising machine
that has quickly established him as a contender to succeed Mayor Michael
R. Bloomberg.
Mr. Liu recently announced, with great fanfare, that he had taken in $1
million in the first six months of the year, much of it from donors who
gave him $800 - to reflect the number 8, which is lucky in Chinese
culture.
But there is much about Mr. Liu's campaign money that does not add up.
Canvassing by The New York Times of nearly 100 homes and
workplaces of donors listed on Mr. Liu's campaign finance reports raises
questions about the source and legitimacy of some donations, as well as
whether some of the donors even exist. Some two dozen irregularities
were uncovered, including instances in which people listed as having
given to Mr. Liu say they never gave, say a boss or other Liu supporter
gave for them, or could not be found altogether.
Two people who described attending banquets in which Mr. Liu appeared
and posed for photos said that company executives who support him
provided donations in the names of those in attendance.
In addition, Mr. Liu is not complying with some basic campaign finance
laws: To protect against so-called straw donors, the city requires that
donor cards submitted with campaign contributions be filled out only by
the person making the donation. In numerous instances in Mr. Liu's
campaign, one person appears to have filled out cards for multiple donors.
His campaign is also engaging in bundling, in which well-connected
individuals collect contributions for a candidate from friends, relatives
and others, but Mr. Liu has not disclosed the bundlers' names, as
required.
Asked about the findings, Mr. Liu, 44, a Democrat, expressed bafflement
and vowed to conduct an internal investigation.
"To the extent that there are problems - and I'm not suggesting there are
- we cannot accept those contributions, nor do we need them," Mr. Liu
said.
The veracity of Mr. Liu' s donor list has implications beyond his
campaign. In New York City, which has a generous campaign finance
system, candidates can receive $6 in public money for every $1 raised
from individual donors.
Many of the irregularities in Mr. Liu' s campaign account are tied to
companies in the Chinese business community in Queens, where he has
been hailed as a hero and his picture adorns the walls of shops and
restaurants.
One of his most visible sources of support is Dynasty Stainless Steel in
Maspeth, Queens, a city contractor that makes metal doors and guardrails
for public housing and other agencies. Campaign finance documents show
that Dynasty's president, Ming Kun Lee, and eight people listed as
Dynasty workers each gave Mr. Liu $800 in January.
All the donor cards bear the same handwriting, suggesting they were
filled out by one person.
Of the eight people listed, however, at least four do not work for the
company, according to interviews with them or their relatives. Two of the
four told The Times that they never gave to Liu; two others were out of
the country. A fifth, a scientist at Columbia University, declined to
answer questions.
Raymond Chen, in Flushing, who was listed as a Dynasty project
manager who gave $800, said he did not work for Dynasty and did not
give to Mr. Liu's campaign. Mr. Chen, a Pace University student, said he
could not afford to contribute to political campaigns, though he may
consider doing so in the future.
"Small amounts, yeah, probably," he said. "Not like a few hundred
dollars."
Dynasty's president, Mr. Lee, did not reply to e-mails and phone calls
seeking comment.
In another case, 18 employees, from janitor to clerk to project manager,
for W &L Construction in Fresh Meadows, Queens, were listed as having
given $800 apiece to Mr. Liu.
More than half of the donor cards appeared to be filled out by the same
hand.
Among them was Zhong Qun Tan of Gravesend, Brooklyn, who is listed
as a carpenter. But, in an interview, Ms. Tan said she worked at a garment
factory and had never heard of W &L. She said that her husband, a livery
driver, had talked to her about donating to Mr. Liu but that she did not
know if someone had given money in her name.
Five W &L employees reported their home address as the residence of the
company's owner, Meng Jia Wang. Mr. Wang initially said that the
donors were his employees and subcontractors who had attended a fund-
raising event for Mr. Liu and that he had permitted them to list his address
because their English was not good. When The Times sought contact
information to speak to the donors, Mr. Wang referred a reporter to Xing
Mei Ni, a secretary at the company.
Ms. Ni said she did not recognize some of the names and declined to
provide contact information for those she did. She offered a different
account from Mr. Wang's, saying that there was no fund-raising event,
but that the employees decided together, over lunch one day, to make out
checks to the Liu campaign, and sent it in one package.
"It was easier for all of us to do the paperwork together," she said.
Yet another version of events was offered by Kui Ping Young of
Flushing, who was described in the campaign finance report as an office
worker for W&L who gave $800. In interviews, she and her husband,
Andy, said she worked not for W &L but at a nail salon. She said that she
was not politically active but that she had bought a ticket for a Liu fund-
raising event after her brother, whom she described as a partner at W &L,
asked her to.
But she said she spent only $200 on the ticket - not the $800 she is listed
as having donated. "Her brother paid for it," her husband said. "I don't
know anything about the amount. Please go interview somebody else."
Then there is the case of a construction company called Kang Kang: 10
people are listed on the Liu campaign finance report as a "worker" for
Kang Kang, each having given $800 in early May. All of the workers list
the company's business address as 135-25 167 Street in Flushing, but that
address does not exist. At the home addresses listed for three of the
workers, there is no one there by that name, according to public records
and neighbors.
The Kang Kang donor cards all appear to have been filled out by one
person.
And one of the workers listed, Sheng Lin Zhang of Elmhurst, Queens,
provided an account of how donations were made to Mr. Liu's campaign.
He described attending a recent fund-raising party for Mr. Liu. He said
the comptroller appeared at the event, shook hands and posed for photos.
While campaign finance records say that Mr. Zhang donated $800 to the
Liu campaign, he said that his boss, whose name he gave as Jian Kang
Chen, did.
"My boss took care of all that," he said. "I heard that it was 800 or 900
dollars."
In a follow-up interview, Mr. Zhang said that the boss had made
donations on behalf of some other workers who attended, and would, in
some cases, later garnish their wages.
The company itself is hard to locate. The address on the campaign records
does not exist, and another address for the company that The Times found
through independent research is a residential house. The man listed as its
owner did not know anything about Kang Kang.
Mr. Zhang said that he had never visited the company's premises, and that
he and other workers typically met at sites where they worked.
The problems are occurring against a backdrop of an aggressive fund-
raising drive by Mr. Liu, the first person of Chinese descent to hold major
elective office in New York City.
But with that success have come questions about how he has amassed his
war chest. The Times began reviewing his campaign finance records after
his nlost recent filing in July.
In response to the inquiry from The Times, Mr. Liu furnished copies of
checks and donor cards for those listed on his campaign finance report.
But some of the records raised more questions. Mr. Liu said he had a
check for $800 written by Cheng Tsung Tung of Oakland Gardens,
Queens, who was listed as a project manager for Dynasty Stainless Steel.
But in an interview, Mr. Tung said that he did not give Mr. Liu's
campaign a check and that he did not work for Dynasty; he owns a gift
store.
Mr. Liu, in reviewing his records, acknowledged that donor cards
appeared to have been filled out by people other than the purported
donors, and said his campaign should not tolerate that.
"It's got to be your own money," he said.
In the interview, Mr. Liu vowed to return any money from questionable
sources and said he had personally warned many of his donors that they
were not helping him if they broke the rules.
As for his failure to list bundlers collecting money for him, Mr. Liu said
he would begin complying with the city's rules.
He also questioned how The Times approached people whose names were
on the donor list, many of whom do not speak English well. He suggested
that perhaps they were intimidated by the experience, and may have
denied donating when they actually did. Many of the interviews were
conducted in Mandarin.
"If someone was asking me the question, I'd say, 'No, no, no, no - I
don't know who you are,' "Mr. Liu said.
Mr. Liu's campaign records suggest he is attracting an unusually large
number of new donors to politics; more than half of his 2,100 donors had
never given before to any candidate.
A spokesman for the city's Campaign Finance Board, while declining to
comment directly on Mr. Liu' s situation, said that before the city released
public money to a campaign, it sought to ensure that donors were being
reported accurately.
"If our routine audit reveals documents or contribution patterns that raise
further questions, we may conduct a more intensive investigation," said
the spokesman, Eric Friedman.
Mr. Liu began his political ascent in 2002 when he became the first Asian
member of the City Council, representing Flushing. He coasted to re-
election in 2003 and 2005, then ran for the comptroller's. office in 2009
and won.
Since then, Mr. Liu has emerged as a significant force in city politics,
known for his fiery speeches, aggressive courtship of labor unions and
blunt criticism of Mr. Bloomberg.
Mr. Liu said that his campaign had never heavily relied on an accountant
or treasurer to handle its finances, and that he oversaw much of the
operation.
"I'm responsible for my own campaign," he said. "To the extent that I
think something has been done wrong, or people engaged in behavior that
broke my rules, we'll reverse anything."
Jeffrey E. Singer contributed reporting, and Toby Lyles contributed research.
C8
New York City
Campaign Finance Board
40 Rector Street. New York. NY 10006
tel. 2 1 2.306.7100
fax 212.306.7143
www.nyccfb.info
To Whom 11 May Concern:
May3,2013
Joseph P. Parkes. S. J.
Ch,lll"m<1n
Art Chang
Richard J. Davis
Courtney C. Hall
Mark S. Piana
Members
Amy M. Loprest
Executive Di,ector
Sue Ellen Dodell

The New York City Campaign Finance Board, an agency of the City of New York, has
authorized Thacher Associates, LLC to assist with the Board's audits of political campaigns in New
York City elections. These audits are required by law and are performed for every candidate who files
disclosure statements with the Board.
]n connection with these audits, Thacher Associates, LLC has been authorized to conduct
interviews, request documentation, and undertake any other actions necessary to assist with the
Board's audits.
Thank you very much for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
Peri Horowitz
Director of Campaign Finance
Administration
C8
New York City
40 Rector Street, New York, NY 10006
tel. 212.306.7100
fax 212.306.7143
www.nyccfb.info
2013-05-03
Joseph P. Parkes, S. J.
Chairman
Art Chang
Richard J. Davis
Courtney C. Hall
Mark S. Piazza
f1en1be,s
Amy M. Loprest
Ex"cL:tive Director
Sue Ellen Dodell
General Counsel
fifF 7-1 -, JYG.lfrtr1;J;JThacher Associates,
0 E]:D1 tiJ,J3jj J;j; i-r I fl= 0
J;j;it, fJifj rPJ!& 7 0JTYlt9};IJ\ mF" AR s{]i& ;1JMtiztA <Jt rlJi it Q
7-1 T i-f T it- Thacher Associates, '] i'HYilll-r7R-i)],

1JVt 11 1iHiI
3l f2.: 11
iT 1& g !zl:
[:8
New York City
40 Rector Street. New York. NY 10006
tel. 212.306.71 00
fax 212.306.7143
www.nyccfb.info
2013-05-03
Joseph P. Parkes. S. J.
Chairman
An Chang
Richard J. Davis
Courtney C. Hall
Mark S. Piazza
l'1ernbers
Amy M. Loprest
ExecutivE" Din:ctor
Sue Ellen Dadeli
General COi..!nsel
-, ULif:rttfmThacher Associates,
11= 0

.f.?9 7 I 11= iT, Thacher Associates, 0 iTJWtMii!1TJiHfj,

From:
Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2012 11:33 AM
To: '
Subject: RE: John Liu
Thanks.
McCormick & O'Brien, UP
9 East 40th Street
Fourth Floor
New York, NY 10016
Tel:
Fax: 212-504-9574
Mobile:
E-mail:
Web Site: www.mcoblaw.com
This message and any attached documents contain informatiC!n from McCormick & O'Brien, lLP,
that may be confidential and/or privileged. If you are not the intended re.cipient, you may not
read, copy, distribute, or use this information. If you have received this transmission in error,
please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and then delete this message.
IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we
1
.' .. : .. ,;.
... .:
,"" )oJormyou that.anyU,s. ....
is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding
penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to
another party any matter addressed herein.
From:
Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2012 11:06 AM
To: :
Subject: John lIU
, I've searched my e-mail archives and found only four (4) e-mails re the John Liu
contributions from MCOB in late April to early May 2011. Thcse e-mails were
regarding confirming that you, AMEX cards were
actually charged.
My research involved confirming that these contributions were legitimately applied to
Mr. Liu's campaign. I discovered that the addresses associated with Mr. Liu's campaign
headqumters were actually residential apaltment buildings - one in China Town, one in
Flushing. Also, the campaign manager for Mr. Liu was under investigation for fraud
associated with raising campaign funds in the Asian community re I. and a
few local politicians. When we finally were able to locate a working number (the number
on the contribution form rolled to voicemail when dialed each time), no one would
confinn that the location was the campaign headqualters or an affiliate location oft11e
"Friends of John Liu". When MCOB received the AMEX invoice re the contributions, it
listed a J as the recipient of the campaign funds and her voicemail. When I finally
reached r I, she answered with a standard, personal greeting ("Hello" not "Friends
of John Lill") and T asked her to confirm the receipt of campaign contributions for
the MCOB employees; after stalling for at least five minutes, she gave us a telephone
number to the campaign manager, who never once returned our calls. About mid-month
in May 20] 1, there was renewed media coverage on campaign funds fraud for John Liu.
\ and I informed the employees who contributed of the issues with fraud.
Attached is a recent article re the John Liu campa.ign funds and fraud fiascos. The abovc-
refd notes are from my handwritten notes re the calls. Thanks!
Cordially,
<imageOO I .png>
Law Clerk/Paralegal
9 East 40th Street, 4th Floor
New York, New York 10016
Telephone:
Facsimile:
E-mail:
www.mcoblaw.col11
This message and any attached documents contain information from McCormick & O'Brien, LLP
that may be confidential and/or privileged. If you are not the intended reCipient, you may not
read, copy, distribute, or use this information. If you have received this transmission in error,
please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail or by dialing hen delete
this message.
IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we
inform you that any U.S. tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments)
2
2
0
1
1
- "f
1
'f.
1
...
2
2
N
"
Y
C
C
F
B
,
M.\Y-31-2011
FRlENDS "OF JOHN LIU
For more info, please email:
i:SUPPORT JOHN LIU! HERE [S MY CONTR1BUTION OF S 800.00
Check (no company, corporation, or. LLC checks permitted)
,
j i5 e make checks payable 10 "FriendS or John lIu" .,' ,
Friends 01 John liu, PO 80l( 520631, Flushing NY 11352
. ;. : ", .
THANK YOU!
.a by Credit Card (must be personal account, - Please1ax to: 646-490-9819 (thIs numlw ie
i' eifel. Type Vi9ili Account
K Da'o -----304'-'- 7- /
7
.......:::,'">_____ _
Number "" ,. _ / I V
I
C2mpalgn Flnanc,P 'o')rting pleas. give Ihe following informalion:
I , 'I Phon&1 __
, .... J
Phone2 _______
;/
,,'
.p- ;-tt--
G,;IJ )

5:8' - {t s: <17 j F
f;l;'
t 0 I ( n
..It l' """'rP

Email _______________ _
fOR COMM!ITEE \!sf GniJ
sr A ITMENT # _____ _
TRANSACTION 10
IMPORTNfl. MUST READ
Illal SIBte lew requiles thall! (onlIibuilon be In my ""me &nd bo frOfl'i my own lunds.
t . af1m:n that this contribution is bein9 made Irom my pelion., funds, is nol being in aroy mannu,
, and It not being made iI' a loan,
1ft. addillon, in Ihe case 01 a credit card I also hllSeby affirm that Ihis contTlbuUon Is belnll made iTom
my pel$tlRal cledit card ilccounl, billed 10 and paid by me for my pelsonal use, lind has no corpolate or bus In
aC'1JIariDn,
L DATE OF CONTRIBUTION:
':\ : G Yes No ill tiDISure ..
__ , ,i.O::t , _ .
I I Name 3nd Address Of Doing 'c. CategDry
! Business Entity . '(tOr crample, ConlracU)
I
f.< I
I i; :Li I
t

RelaUon=hJp(s)
(IDr example, CEO)
.' .:-::"
"- ".;.,

P<.id fOI by F,icn":: :-','":",, Lie - - - THA..'l\1K YOU !'OR YOUR SUPPORT!

,OTAL ?OOI
I
d
2
0
1
- .w'
1.
1 !
2
2
N
Y &:I
C r...

c

F

B
:;
t'l

I
or.i
.-i
I

(6;1
.r;)
", ...................... -:-,"
FRIENDS OF JOHN LIU
SANFORD AUE
APT 4H
FLUSHING NY 11355
646-490-9818
07/13/2011 18:32:59
Sa.llS:
Transaction
Card
.. Ace:
Exp.
Entry: Manual
AMount: 800. 00
Device rD: 0225
Reference No.:
MDSQICTJ407:13
Auth.Code:
Respon. AUTH/TXT 602909
AUS Rssp.:
Address (Street) and
5 digit 2ip match.
Merchant number
. I AGREE TO PAY ABOUE
TOTAL AMOUNT ACCORDING
TO CARD ISSUER AGREEMENT
(MERCHANT AGREEMENT IF
CREDIT UOUCHER)
x ..................... .
SIGNATURE
MERCHANT COpy
.'
........................
FRIENDS OF JOHN LIU
14480 SANFORD AUE
APT 4H
FLUSHING NY 11355
646-490-9818
C 0 F' 'r
07,13/2011 18:32:59
Sa.l.a:
Transaction
Card Type:
Ace:
Exp. Dats:
Entry:
AMount:
:3
MasterCard
..........
Manual
800.00
Device 10: 0225
Reference No.:
HDSQICTJ40713
Auth.Coda:
Respon. 602909
AUS Resp.:
5 digit 2ip match.
Merchant. numbar
CPSTOHER CUrT
\.
2
o _ .. __ ... _ .. ___ , _ ..... _.
1
1
0
7
1
5
N
{
C

r,i;
y
!.)
.)<

III
.;,
("

I

M
Il:l
t-l
. i
.
f.
f.
......
I SUPPORT JOHN LID! HERE IS MY CONfRlBUTION 0
o by. Personal Check (no company, corporation, Of' LLC checks permitted)
Please make perllonal checks payable to "Friends of John Uu
n
Mall 10: Friends of John Uu. PO Box 520631, Flushing NY 11352
THANKYOUI
o by Credit Card (must be personal account) - Please fax to: 645490-9819 (this number is securel
Circle Type _--"-V,,,ls.,.,.o-,-1 !.!.!M.::;iltl ... llCerc=IVc.::dc..:..I.!-'AM"-"-"E,,,,,X..L.I.;::O.:.:.th:..:::e=-f__ Account Holder
Account Number .:
Apiration Date _____ --"rtY-i...::l_vv ____ _
To comply with Campal!m Finance Board requirements, please give the following information:
Name __ _ Phone 1
Home Address Phone 2
CityfSt.atelZip _ Email
fOR COMMITIEE USE ONL Y
5T ATEMENT II ____ _
TRANSAcnON lD
IMPORTANT, MUST READ
.. I understand that Stale law requires that II contribution be in my name and be from my own runds.
o I hereby affirm that this contribution is being made from my personal funds, is not being reimbursed in any marmer,
and is not being made as II loan.
III In addition, in the case of II crerlll card contribution, I also hereby affirm that this contribution is being made from
my personal credit card account, bil"'Ij to and paid by me for my personal use, and has no corporate or business
affiliation. . 7 / 'f) / ") ,) J f
CONTRIBUTOR'S SIGNATURE: DATE OF
Indicate whether you halfs or are utlsiness dealing with the City: 0 Yes [1 No 01'1101 Sure
City Name and Address of Doing Business Category Ralationshlp(s)
Business Entity (for example, Contracts} (ior example, CEO)
Paid for by Flie..",ds of John liu - . - THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT!
2
0
1
2
0
1
1
7
N
Y
'i:t
C

i'
1
C
F
(....;

B 'qP'
".
t;

:

;N
J
r .. j'

N
FRIENDS OF JOHN LIU
I SUPPORT JOHN UUt HERE IS MY CON1"RlBUTION OF $ 800.00
THANK YOU I
Grodtt Card (mtlit be aeooullt) = fal( w: tI1\ll I'UI..I!mb.?;r Is J
Clro\tl p.m IOther Ace:ounl -
AcotMrt _ Oatt! 02) ( I 6
____ PhoM1 _
______
I
EmIIM . _______________ _

STArEMBNTII ___ _
_ st
CltylStmlll21p l"\.Q.4. M \ \ g
IW"QRTANT. MUM BgAQ
Ilmdmtand 111111 law that a be IntnY Mme end be fnmI my 9'Ifm
I hefllby IiIffIrm tbst fl\b " biIng mllde my fun$, Is not 00/1'1" ill any msnner,
end II IWt being fMde .3101n.
o 11'1 8IkildCII, In 11'1. CUtI of I:fOSdIt CMf COI'ItriOOtJoo.llUo affirm tW thle cont!'Ibulloo " OOIng 1'11006 from
my pmoM mdIt &OCOUnt, blh! to ilII\d p5!d by 1M foe my US" and MIl no corpornte or bl/illneu

__ DATil Of CONTRlIW1'tOH: _____ _
ClIy
N:IIM And AddntH Dclng Bu!dn ..
8ua.lll_ l:I\uty (ft!P CEO)
Paid for by J'rtmd!I ol1ohn Uu- - - THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT!
.4/
1l.
2
o
1
2
o
1
1
7
N
Y
C
C
F
B
J
........................
FRIENDS OF JOHN LIU
14480 SANFORD AUE
APT 4H
FLUSHING NY 11355
646-490-9818
07/13/2011 18:31:13
Sale:
:1. Transact.ion Ii
Card Ty:,o'
Ace:
Uisa
Exp. Date:

MM/JU'
Manual
800.00 AMount:
Device ID: 0225
Reference No.:
161194843948468
Aut.h.Code:
Respon. 042619
AUS Resp.:
Address (St.reet) and
5 digit. 2ip mat.ch.
Herchant. number
I AGREE TO PAY ABOUE
TO CARD lSSUER AGREEMENT
CREDIT UOUCHER)
x ..................... .
SIGNATURE
MERCHANT COFY
FRIENDS OF JOHN LIU
14480 SANFORD AUE
APT '1H
fLUSHING NY 11355
646-490-9818
cop Y
07/13/2011 18:31:14
Sale:
Transactio.n t:l :1
Card Uisa
Acc:
Exp. Dat.e: .... / ....
Manual
. AI1ount.: SOD. 00
Device ID: 0225
Reference No.:
161194843948468
Auth.Code:
Respon. AUTH/TXT 0'12619
AUS Resp.:
Address (St.reet.) and
5 digit Zip mat.ch.
Merchant. number
CUSTOMER COpy
1
- .,
._ ... --_ ...... -.-_ .. _'.' . -" .. _ .. -.-
FRIENDS OF JOHN LID
I SUPPORT JOHN UUI Hmm IS MY CONTRIBtmON OF $
o by Penona! Chf!d (nc ccrpo!'lItjon. or u.C ched<a
PI.!Dst peratlllal dIeekt payable ID "fr\tI\:dI at John Uu
7U
MaD 10: Frilamla'" Jolm Uu. PO BJI S2IlU1, Flllllhino Nl' iUIi2
mANKYOUl
Card (1TAnt be panOOAl account) - Pleaso f!lOI to: 646-490-9819 Mill number Is fleeUFlI \
CIrde Typ6 VI!;.I AMl!J!!.1 OOifjf
\'>luil'i!> _ O!!la ...... ( ___ --
___ \"Ml1l@1 _
_____
____________________ ------

$;]=--4>: ClJS
Pi
STI\"I'EMENT1i ___ _
IMP}!fUOO. WSl RIM
I vnd.mami Itlld StIte '-requlmf ItI!!I a eamtn'llu9l111 be In my MIlle snd be frmn Wl'f - fund$.
I S'fiIm IMIIJIII It boiIogliIId6 limn iUY pnonIII foDds. Is VIOl being In any ms!lllIIr,
;ncI1i not IIeInD mlilde au tcan. ..
In adllltlon.ln I!\e CIlIa 01 II aedh I amnn ttlst Ihb emlribufloll " being IIIlid& rrom
my p!ifSOJI8I eredll amf bIIed bllilfid p$Id by me for i!lY pemm$I use. end hal ftO at
rdfIr.atlOl\.
lndleale YIN hIM or p!lreulDt bus/lnI:Ia wIIh tI1III CI!y: 0 V" CJ No [] Sure
1bn'l)IId fit
Patd ",.. by J'rlends 01 fohn till - -. THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT!
2
0
1
1
-
.J
1
.,
1
2
2
N
Y
/Xl
C
0
c
(,)
F
:>:'
B

t'J

I
Y-<
-ri
I
-".4'
.,.1
(S)
(\3
FRiENDS OF JOHN LIU
14480 SANFORD AUE
APT 4H
FLUSHING NY 11355
646-490-9818
0?/13/20jl 18:32:08
Sale:
Transaction
.Card Type: MasterCard
Ace:
Exp. Date:
Entry: Manual
AMount: 800.00
Device ID: 0225
Reference No.:
MCWP1W1J'l'0713
Ruth.Code:
Respon. AUTH/TKT T04605
AUS Resp.:
Address <Street) and
5 digit 2jp match.
Merchant number-
I AGREE TO PAY
TO CARD ISSUER AGREEMENT
<MERCHANT AGREEHENT IF
CREDIT UOUCHER)
X ..... , ............... .
. SIGNATURE
MEIiCHANT COPY
........................
FRIENDS OF JOHN LiU
14480 SANFORD AUE
APT 4H
FLUSHING NY 11355
646-490-9818
C 0 F 'r
07/13/2011 18:32:08
Sale:
Transaction It
Card Type:
Ace:
Exp. Dat. ...
Ent.ry:
AMount:
:2
MasterCard
MW/1:G1d
Manual
800.00
Device 10: 0225
Reference No.:
MCWP1W1JY0713
Auth.Code:
Respon. AUTH/TXT T04605
AUS Resp.:
-5 2in mat.ch.
Mereha nt. number'
CUSTOMER COpy
..... ..... ,.
aww:
FRIENDS OF JOHN LIU
For more info, please email: FriendsOOohnLiu@gmail.com
I SUPPORT JOHN LlU! HERE IS MY CONTRIBUTION OF $ 800.00
o by Personal Check (no company, corporation, or LLC checks permitted)
Please make personal checks payable to "F riends of John Liu"
Mail to: Friends of John Llu, PO Box 520631, Flushing NY 11352
THANK YOU!
fJ by Credit Card (must be personal account) - Please fax to: 6464909819 (this number is secure)
Circle Type VIsa I Account Holder _'
Account Number expiration Date __ _______ _
To comply with CampaIgn Finance Board reponing requirements, please give the following information:
Name
Phone 1 _______________ _
Home Address
Phone 2 ________________ _
City/State/Zip Email ________________ _
- .,-
Employer Svwe/f JI1i'1 In C,
Occupation Pre
FOR COMMITTEE USLill!.L Y
'" r-r....l-l 12 ..... _, i.fYv\
Business Address .&-;>L -> VfI1.....) P ,....,.--.j,. I ..
STATEMENT #
City/Slate/Zip IV. Y 112. :I D
TRA .. NSACTION lD
MUST READ
I understand that State law requires that a contribution be in my name and be Irom my own funds.
I hereby affirm that this contribution is being made from my personal funds, is not being reimbursed in any manner,
and is not being made as a loan.
In addition, in the case of a credit card contribution, I also hereby affirm that this contribution is being made from
my personal credil card accounl. billed to and paid by me for my personal USE, and has no corporate or business
affiliation.
CONTRIBUTOR'S SlGNATURE: ____ DATE OF CONTRIBUTION:
Indicate whe.lher you have or are pursuing business dealing with the City: DYes f No 0 Not Sure
City Agency/Agencies Name and Address of Doing
Business Entity
1 Business Category
! (for example, Contracts)
Relatlonship(s)
(for example, CEO)
raid for by Friends of )0hn u" ... THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT!
r'-
1
1
2
2
N
Y
C
C
f'
B
FR I ENDS 'Of JOH'-j Ll U
14480 SANFORD AUE
APT 4H
FLUSHING 1J351
646-879-5401
06/08/2011
Sale:
19 22: jQ
Transaction
Card Type:
:J..4
AmericanExp
Ace:
Exp. Date:
Entry:
Order f:i
RMount:
Device ID:

Manual
20110509014
800.00
0225
Reference No.
0002247t?<lQC;"??
Auth.Code:
Respon. AUTh/TKT 1814q7
AUS Resp.:
Address (Slreet) and Zip
code do not match.
Merchant number
1 AGREE TO PAY ABOUE
iCTAL AMOUNT ACCORDING
TO CARD ISSUER AGREEI1ENT
CREDli UOUCHER)
1<' ....
SIGNATURE
COpy
FRIENDS OF JOHN LIU
14480 SANFORD AUE
APT 4H
FLUSHING NY 11357
646-879-5401
COP Y
06/08/201j 19:22:10
Sale:
Transaction
Card Type:
Ace:
Exp. Dale:
Entry:
Order 11
RMount.:
Device ID:
Reference No.
:14
AmericanExp
tHt/".
Manual
20110509014
800.00
0225
00022472249"\17?
Ruth.Code:
Respon. AUTH/TkT
FlUS Resp.:
Address (St.reeU and Zip
code do not match
Merchanl number
CUSTOMER COpy
..
w%W#
\".:
1

.) ..
!':
FRIENDS OF JOI-II\'] LTV
For more info, pleilse clTlilil: FricncisOOohnLiu@grnilil.com
I SUPPORT JOHN UU! HERE IS f\:iY CONTRIBUTION OF $ 800.00
rJ by Personal Check (no company, corporation, or LLC checks permitted)
Please make personal checks payable to "Friends of John Liul!
Mail to: Friends of John Liu, PO Box 520631, Flushing NY 11352
THANK YOU!
f. by Credit Card (must be personal account) - Please fax to: 646-4909819 (this number is secure)
(
Circle Type AMEX IOther Account Holder
Account Number .xpiration Dale ____ . ___________ _
To comply with Campaign Finance Board reporting requirements, please give the following information:
Name
---.------
Phone1 ______ _
Home Address
'--____ Phone 2 __________ . _________ . ____ _
City/State/Zip __ Email
Employer __ ___ ,l 2r
Occupation ________ _
Business Address 3-
City/State/Zip )1 (;A >
7
---------------------
STA TD,lENT #
TRANSACT1()N ILl
L-____________
I understand that State law requires that a contribution be in my name and be from my own funds.
and is nol being made as a loan.
In addition, in the case of a credit card contribution, I also hereby affirm that this contribution is being made from
my personal credit card account, billed \6'and paid by me for my personal use, and has no corporate or business
affiliation_
CONTRIBUTOR'S SIGNATURE:
/f{
_ DATE OF CONTRIBUTION: ___ _
Indicate whether you have or are pursuing business dealing with the City: 0 Yes c%io 0 Not Sure
I
i City Agency/Agencies -------:- Name and Address of Business Category I Relationship(s) !
L ; Business Entity I (for example, Contracts) j(for example, CEO) ______ 1
1
! ,
i !
! --------------------T---------------------+-----------j ---------..
I
,.;,
," ..
i
I
,
,
,
i
I
i
I
I
\
i
\
Ii
FRIENDS OF JOI-INLIU
For more info, pleflSe email: FriendsOfIohnLiu@gmail.com
'.

I SUPPORT JOHN LIU! HERE IS MY CONTRIBUTION OF $ 800.00
/,I by Personal Check (no company, corporation, or LLC checks permitted)
Please make personal checks payable to "Friends of John Liu'
Mail to: FrIends of John Llu, PO Box 52063', Flushing NY 11352
THANK YOU!
o by Credit Card (must be personal account) - Please tax to: 6464909819 (this number Is secure)
Circle Type _--,-Vi",s;::..a __ Account Holder ____________ _
Accounl Number ___________ Expiration Date ___________
To comply wllh Campaign Finance Board reporting requirements, please give the following information:
Name Phone 1
Home Address
Phone 2 ________________ _
Clty/StalelZ!p _
Employer /<4tJ til ShtA la U);f p
Occl1pation w<211kL-iZ
Business Address S'2. -, S"l,.f i?j j;J .&"+
City/StatelZip r::Jn,huXsL Alt 1137"1
IMPORT ANT, MUST READ
Email
EQE...c..OMM IDEE USE ONLY
STATEMENT # ____ _
TRANSACTION ID
I understand that State law requires that a contribution be in my name and be from my own funds.
J hereby affirm that this contIlbullon is being made from my personal funds, Is not being reimbursed In any manner,
and is nol being made as a loan.
In addition, in the case of a credit card contribution, I also hereby affirm that this contrlblJ1i<m is being made from
my personal credit card account, billed to and paid by me for my personal use, and has no corporate or business
affiliation.
CONTRIBUTOR'S SIGNATURE: ___ DATE OF CONTRIBUTION:
Indicate whether you have or !Ire pursuing business dealing with the City: 0 Yes 0 Not Sure
City Agency/Agencies Name and Address of Doing Buslne.ss Category Relationshlp{s 1
Business Entity (for example, Contracts) (for example, CEQL ____
Pni!l for by Friend., of John !.iu - - - THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT!
;---'" ----
2
2
!
c
B
I
191
~ l (
"'"
---
------------------------------
I
3/
.1
I
I
I
\
i
,

t

i
. _. __ ---. ..
FRIENDS OF JOHN LIU
For more info, please email: FriendsOGohnLiu@gmaiJ.com
1 SUPPORT JOHN LIU! HERE IS MY CONTRIBUTION OF $ 800.00
Personal Check (no company, corporation, or LLC checks permitted)
Please make personal checks payable to "Friends of John Liu"
Mail to: Friends of John Llu, PO Box 520631, Flushing NY 11352
THANK YOU!
o by Credit Card (must be personal account) - Please fax to: 6464909819 (this number rs secure)
Circle Type __ V-,-,i",-silo:...',-!I""lIa""s'!-'te:..:.:rc""ac:.:rd,-,'...:.A.:.:;Mc..:EX=..:.'..:O'-'!th.:.>eC!..r__ Account Holder ___________ _
Account Number ___________ Expiration Date _________ _
10 comply with Campaign Finance Board reporting requIrements, please give the following Information:
Name Phone 1
Home Address
Phone 2 ______________ _
City/StaL
Emall _______________ _
Employer $'V{Ud' 'PI LllMbi 11 & c( 'Ru'(
Occwpation 'lv1vU(
Business Address c5 YV1fAu. v\ U' k
STATEMENT 11 __ .
0
__ _
City/State/Zip t!{ (( I g'
TRANSACTION ID
IMPORTANT. MUST READ
I understand tha! State lilw requires that a contribution be In my name and be from my own funds.
In addition, in the case of a credit card contribution, I also hereby aHirm that this contribution is being made from
my personal credit card account, billed to and paid bv me for my personal use, and has no corporate or business
afiiliation.
CONTRIBUTOR'S SIGNATURE: DATE OF CONTRIBUTION:
Indicate whether you have or are pursuing business dealing with the City: 0 Yes )iNa 0 Not Sure
City Agency/Agencies Name and Address of Doing Business Category Relationship(s)
Business Entity (for example, Contracts) (for example, CEO)
Paid lor hy Friends of john Uu - - - TH/\NK YOU FOr-: YOUR SUPPORT'
" -
t,.;.
rS'
".,.
I.,.,
11-
" .
.... 1
\-,;.

14(
n
...
, , 0"

........
2
o
1
1
1
2
2
c
CmBA.NK. N.A. en. t'16!l
2MOn STFlE'l
NEW YORK. Ny t013
Memo
237
"'"
--. .. ---
!' . .:'
,"',
... !!
05:1:1
11
sf

First American IntemaUonal Balik
fB: jj all fJ . 404i Main S...,
Flushing. NY 11354
Mam __ ____________ ___
162
'2'
D 0
l 1
l 1
f 1
i -
> 2
2
I
/ N
[ Y
F
B
C
FRIENDS OF JOHN LIU
1 SUPPORT JOHN UU! HERE IS ]'vlY CONTRIBUTION OF S 800.00
- by Personal Check (no company, corporation. or LLC checks permitted)
Please make personal checks payable to "Friends of John liu"
Mail to: Friends of John LiLl. PO BOI 520531, Flushing NY 11352
THANK YOC!
:-l by Credit Card (must be personal account) - Please fax to: 6464909819 (this number is secure)
Circle Type ViS3! Ma$tercard i Ar.\EX :0 ",'"",h-=-er,--_ ,A.ccotlnt Holder
Account Number __ . ___ . ___ ._. ______ . ___ Expiration Date ___ _
To comply with Camnainnl'ln:lf1ce Board reporting requirements. please give the following information:
Phone 1 ____ . ____ .. _. ________ .. _._. __ .. _____ ._
Home Address "hone 2 ___ . ____ . ___ .... ___ ........ __ ._ .. ____ ... ____ _
City/State/Zip _ mail ___ _
Employer ________ .. _. ___ .. _
.,
.--,- , ;-.
Ocr,upation __ /:-l'l_.:1_U.J ___ ?:1{ILLu
J
C .. E1.<.fl- ....
J v .
Business Address _________ ._ .. _________ . __ .
City/StateIZip ____ _

I understand thai State law requires that a contribution be in my name and be from my own funds.
I hereby affirm that this contribution is being made from my personal funds: is not being reimbursed in any manner,
In addition, in the case of a credit card contribution. I also hereby affirm that this contribulion is being made from
my personal credit card account, billed to and paid by me for my personal use, and has nc corporate or business
affiliation,
CONTRIBUTOR'S SIGNATURE: DATE OF CONTRIBUTION:
Indicate whether you have or arE' pursuing businl',s dealing with thE City: :-: Yes C" No : Not Slife
fCTi y AgencyJAgencies
i
----.-...-----.----
, Nome ;;nd of Doing Business Categori' i Reialionship(s)
i Business Enti!)' : (for example, Coniraclsj : !for example, CEO)
L.
.'--'--__ -'._ _.-_____ . __ ..-'----'--c----'-----
,_. - .... ----------
----_._ .... -... _._-----_.---------
:.:
Iy
2
1
L
2
c
--_._- ------
FRIENDS OF JOHN LIV
,-
\ ..
For more info, please email: Fric!lcbO(JohnLil1:{I;!;Wi1iLco!l1 ..
__ . _______ ._e-
] SUPPORT JOHN LIU! HERE IS MY CONTRlBUTION OF $ 800.00
Personal Check (no company, corporation, or LLC checks permitted)
Please make personal checks payable 10 "Friends of John Liu"
Mail to: Friends of John Liu, PO Box 520631, Flushing NY 11352
THANK YOU!
'J by Credit Card (must be personal account) - Please fax to: 6464909819 (this number is secure)
Circle Type __ O""t"-'.h!:.!er__ Account Holder ___________ _
Account Number ________ _ Expiralion Date ___________ _
To comply with Campaion Finance Board reODrtlno "''1uirements, please give the following information:
Name
Phone 1 ______________ _
Home Address Phone 2
City/StateJZip _ Email ______________ _
Employer _______________ _
fOR CC",j\lITTEF L;SE Oh:L Y
Occupation __ _
._----------------
Business Address
STATEMEI-.:T# ____ _
---. ----------_._--
ID
City/StatelZip
I understand that Stale law requires that a contribution be in my name and be from my own funds.
I hereby aHirm that this contribution is being made from my personal funds, is not being reimbursed in any manner,
In addition, in the case of 3 credit card contribution, I also hereby affirm that this contribution is being made from
my personal credil card accollnt. to and paid by me for my personal use, and has no corporate or business
affiliation.
r
DATE OF CONTRIBUTION: ____ _ CONTRIBUTOR'S SIGNATURE:
Indicate whether you have or are pursuing business dealing wlth thp Cily; Yes ::.' No [Not Sure
i City AgencylAgencies , Name and Address of Doing i Bus-iness Category i Relationship(s) J
' Business Entity __ ;-i ,-(fo_r_e_x3_m--,p_le-,-, _C_EO-')'---__ I i

____________ L ___ . _____ ._____ !
!
7

2 ____________ _
MEMO_
United Orient Bank
fse CANAl.. STR.EEi
wt:"w V("'oD\i NY fOpJS
0382
... .. . ...-
----.. -----.- " '.---... -.-"'-' ...... ' :., . .";-- .. .. :....::...:...,.
R __
';';;;0 .' .,- . j /' C
: .! /\ ( :....._----'i''''_ .. _..Y_._/_--''''--1<-_-'-''--'--________ -'-_J
.' . .
Jl1iiEX 100 e-r '-,-' ___ ______ _
___ '-'-_____ -'-_xpi:r.mon .D.ili ___________ _
Home AddreS$ :..:.
Citylst::rtemp _ E:trml
Employ.u-----Xrd::l.e/- , Ca..J4 -,
I _. .Il. r
-O.=rpafinil D Id N f-:.- I
I U:-'ABlvd- I STA1"Bffi:>j7F __ _
-r ,...,........., I ID
0/A,4!bb ,
!f!1PORTANT
t
fliUST READ '\.N. ,
lllllderstamUhat Stata laW =lui=! tbal a btt ia andi>et-Ml ::lj r::Ml funds. '.
I r.N bSng :reimhtm:ed in.any m<lDllel',
am] is not . ,.
=niribDlitlI7, l;Iso maden-om
my crecllt CCii'd c.Q;ouid. bmed to and =iii I:iy me for my ?e=l:aluse, and h:as ;ro GmpOraI:e orbnlin=
Zfiii.mOll.
(XltOUmBUroR"S SSNATURE: __ ___ DATE OF CCr.TR!SUTIOilt _____ _
-'::.
....... ----------
/
3/
;;t
1.(:
I
I
I
I
I
I
-,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

EC2013 Liu Thacher Report Final FOIL Distribution

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

EC2013 Liu Thacher Report Final FOIL Distribution

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CONFIDENTIAL

You might also like