A Campaign on Chinatown or Not?

In recent days both the LA Times and New York Times have run articles examinging the validity of donations to Clinton's campaign from the Chinese community.

Both articles say reporters couldn't track down many of the listed donors, other donors held jobs such as "dishwasher" or "cook," which presumably make it hard to imagine they could afford a donation, and still others apparently lack legal-resident status.

The LA Times article states...

At this point in the presidential campaign cycle, Clinton has raised more money than any candidate in history. Those dishwashers, waiters and street stall hawkers are part of the reason. And Clinton's success in gathering money from Chinatown's least-affluent residents stems from a two-pronged strategy: mutually beneficial alliances with powerful groups, and appeals to the hopes and dreams of people now consigned to the margins.

It goes on to speak of criminal associations and donors feeling pressured to give by neighborhood associations.

The Asian & Pacific Islander American Vote, a DC-based advocacy group, is fighting back, saying in a press release that "undue scrutiny on a specific ethnic subgroup" is a sign of "negligent journalism."

And the Washington Post quoted board member Noelani Kalipi saying "in the past, Asian Americans have been criticized for not participating enough in the political process. It is ironic, we are being attacked for doing exactly what citizens are supposed to do: exercise their rights and fulfill their responsibilities."

Your thoughts?