How is the King Losing His Virtue the Queen's Responsibility?

How is the King Losing His Virtue the Queen's Responsibility?
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
September 17, 2008

Summary: To pass the buck for his crimes onto Wu Shu-chen, then have Wu Shu-chen refuse to appear in court. This is Chen Shui-bian's grand strategy. Will Wu Shu-chen, who has taken 16 sick leaves already, appear in court on Friday? Inquiring minds want to know. Caesar's wife must be above suspicion. But on Taiwan, the person accusing Caesar's wife is Caesar himself. How bizarre is that? Caesar debases himself, then points the finger at Caesar's wife. Is this A Bian's legacy for the "Republic of Taiwan?"

Full Text below:

To pass the buck for his crimes onto Wu Shu-chen, then have Wu Shu-chen refuse to appear in court. This is Chen Shui-bian's grand strategy. Will Wu Shu-chen, who has taken 16 sick leaves already, appear in court on Friday? Inquiring minds want to know.

The Chen Shui-bian clan is resorting to a bizarre tactic to evade prosecution for the State Affairs Fund scandal, the SOGO scandal, and the money-laundering scandal. Every member of the clan has passed the buck on to Wu Shu-chen. The collection of phony receipts, the accepting of bribes, and the overseas transfers of funds, they all say, were all masterminded and executed by Wu Shu-chen alone. Chen Shui-bian and the other family members were all kept in the dark. They were "given instructions and ordered about."

Some people have apparently bought this fairy tale, and actually believe that Chen Shui-bian was brought down by "Lady MacBeth."

Chen Shui-bian's tactic of "sacrificing the wife to save the husband" has a number of salient points. One. From a legal perspective, Wu Shu-chen is not a public servant. By passing the buck on to her, Chen Shui-bian may evade prosecution for accepting bribes, dereliction of duty, corruption, and other crimes. The charges against him may be reduced. Two. From a political perspective, Chen's tactic takes advantage of the ongoing ideological standoff between the Blue and Green camps. Disassociating A Bian from these crimes gives Taiwan independence elements a reason to keep supporting him. It allows Chen to persist in corruption and remain on the throne. Three. From a humanistic perspective, Wu Shu-chen is crippled. The public and the legal system cannot apply normal standards of justice to her. As a result, she has been able to stay at home for the past 20 months and launder money all over the world, even as she refuses to appear in court. So waddya gonna do about it?

Chen's tactic is wishful thinking. It reflects the Chen Shui-bian clan's defense strategy. But it is unlikely to win over the public and meet with its moral approval. What makes most people look askance is that the first two people to question the Queen's virtue were the King and the Prince. No matter how sophisticated their legal arguments, does this sort of "selling your wife and mother" to weasel your way out of trouble really meet with public expectations?

When Chen Chih-chung and his wife returned to Taiwan from the United States and proclaimed that "We were merely heads of dummy corporations," the public found their action incomprehensible and chilling. How could they so callously pass all blame onto his mother? Even assuming Wu Shu-chen masterminded the graft and amassed the fortune, the bulk of the money wound up in the accounts of Chen Chih-chung and his wife. Chen Chih-chung and his wife are the beneficiaries. Even assuming this highly educated young couple had no moral qualms about their actions, don't they care about the legal liability? Wang Yu-cheng's sons and daughters have publicly admitted their parents' wrongdoing. If Chen Shui-bian's children think they can pass all responsibility for their crimes onto their mother, and bear no legal responsibility, how can the public not look askance upon them?

Chen Shui-bian is trying to disown all responsibility for his crimes. But one lie can never hide another. He has repeatedly let the cat out of the bag. We do not believe for one minute Chen Shui-bian "only learned of Wu Shu-chen's transfer of funds overseas after the fact." But even assuming, as Chen Shui-bian alleges, Yeh Sheng-mao privately informed Chen of his wife's money-laundering only two years ago, Chen nevertheless abused his authority as president. He prevented the legal system from prosecuting the case. He allowed Wu Shu-chen to transfer the funds all over the world. Therefore Chen Shui-bian's guilt should be clear for all to see. He is in fact the mastermind behind the money-laundering scandal.

In fact the provenance of the funds is more important than the use of dummy overseas account for money-laundering. Chen Shui-bian has been lying about the source of the funds. The funds amount to at least 700 million NT. Were they leftover campaign funds? Were they political contributions unrelated to any election campaign? Were they corporate bribes? It makes no difference. They came his way only because Chen Shui-bian was President. In other words, it makes no difference whether the money came his way through Wu Shu-chen. Without the sign on the front gate of their official residence reading "President," Wu Shu-chen could never have established her secret chamber. Had Wu Shu-chen failed to brief Chen Shui-bian on the backroom deals she brokered, supplicants would have ceased arriving at her official residence. Chen Shui-bian claims he never "personally" transferred funds overseas. Didn't he assure us he was the head of Wu Shu-chen's dummy accounts, and transferred vast sums of money overseas without realizing it?

President Chen Shui-bian was president for eight years. Yet he would have everyone believe he was merely a busboy in his wife's restaurant, that all the dishonorable deeds committed were his wife's doing, that he knew nothing. Who is going to be taken in by such lies? President Chen Shui-bian has repeatedly invoked democracy and justice. Yet he has turned his own backyard into a foreign concession, outside the law. He has embezzled State Affairs funds. He has illegally accumulated wealth and transferred it overseas, engaging in money-laundering. As we scrutinize Chen Shui-bian and Wu Shu-chen, who can say who used whom? Are they not a marriage made in heaven? Are they not the perfect pair? A couple of political con artists?

Caesar's wife must be above suspicion. But on Taiwan, the person accusing Caesar's wife is Caesar himself. How bizarre is that? Caesar debases himself, then points the finger at Caesar's wife. Is this A Bian's legacy for the "Republic of Taiwan?"

國王失貞操，為什麼是皇后的責任？
【聯合報╱社論】
2008.09.17 03:11 am

把一切罪過都推給吳淑珍，吳淑珍則拒不出庭；這是陳水扁的大戰略。國人都在看：周五開庭，已請假十六次的吳淑珍是否出庭？

從國務費案、ＳＯＧＯ案到洗錢弊案，陳水扁家族一直採取這種奇特的烏賊戰術：把一切責任均推給吳淑珍，蒐集發票、接受餽贈和海外匯款都是她一手策劃執行，陳水扁與其他家屬則全被蒙在鼓裡，或是「受指使、受支配」的。

久而久之，有些民眾似乎也接受了此一觀點，認為阿扁是被扁嫂所誤。

陳水扁採取這種「棄妻保扁」的戰法，不外著眼於幾點：第一，在法律面，吳淑珍不具公務員身分，把責任推給她，扁本人即可避開索賄、瀆職、貪汙等罪，大事化小。第二，在政治面，利用藍綠對峙的意識形態，如此切割可有效維持綠營及獨派繼續支持阿扁的理由，讓他一邊貪瀆一邊當王。第三，在人性面，吳淑珍的殘疾之身，讓外界乃至司法無法以常人的標準看待她；因而，廿個月來，她可以在家中進行環球大洗錢，卻拒不出庭，嘸你嘜安吶？

但這種如意算盤，反映的只是陳水扁家族的訴訟策略，終究難以取信於社會，更不符社會的道德觀點。最教人側目的一點是，率先喊出「皇后的貞操有問題」的人，竟然是國王和王子；就算他們的辯術再高明，這種「賣妻責母」的論調能通得過台灣人民敦厚的倫理觀嗎？

也因此，陳致中夫婦自美返台時宣稱「我們都只是人頭」，大家對他們作為人子如此冷靜地將罪咎一舉推給母親，除了感到不解，更有幾分背脊發麻。試想，就算吳淑珍再工於盤算聚斂，這些錢畢竟絕大多數進了陳致中夫婦的戶頭，且陳致中夫婦又是密帳的「受益人」；那麼，這對受過高等教育的年輕夫婦，就算不思考良心問題，難道也從來沒有想過法律責任的問題嗎？王又曾的子女尚公開承認其父母犯錯，但扁家子媳若以為將責任往母親頭上一推，自己便無法律上及良知上的責任，能不令人側目？

再看陳水扁，他企圖把自己的責任推得一乾二淨，卻因為謊言壓不住謊言，而一再露出馬腳。我們絕不相信陳水扁「事後才知道吳淑珍匯錢」的謊話，但即使如陳水扁所說是在葉盛茂兩年前將洗錢情資私交給他時始知，他還是利用了元首職權打壓司法偵辦，才讓吳淑珍得以將錢四處轉匯。從這點看，陳水扁的瀆職罪嫌已十分明確，他根本是洗錢的主犯。

進一步看，比利用人頭帳戶海外洗錢更嚴重的，其實是這些資金的來源，陳水扁對此始終支吾其詞。這至少七億的巨款，無論是選舉結餘款，或是與選舉無關的政治獻金或其他企業賄款，都是因為陳水扁的總統職務關係而流進他家。亦即，不管錢是流經什麼管道進入吳淑珍之手，沒有玉山官邸前門掛的那塊總統招牌，就不會有後門這個扁嫂密室；而扁嫂若未將密室的交易訊息通知阿扁交辦，她官邸後門的訪客就不可能如此絡繹不絕。所以，陳水扁可以聲稱他沒有「親手」匯款海外，但他能說對吳淑珍這只「黑手套」調度的鉅款毫不知情嗎？

陳水扁當了八年總統，他卻要大家相信，他只是個管前檯的店小二，後院的不名譽事都是妻子的問題，他毫不知情。這種廉價故事與低劣謊言，誰會相信？何況，陳水扁當總統時口口聲聲民主正義，卻把自家後院變成法外租界，詐取國務機要費不說，還違法取財、匯款、洗錢。這副景象，能說陳水扁和吳淑珍誰利用了誰？或者他們根本就是一對堪稱絕配的政治金光黨？

皇后的貞操，原不容懷疑。但在台灣，喊「都是皇后的錯」的，卻是國王本人，寧非咄咄怪事？請問：國王敗德，卻將一切說成皇后失貞，難道這就是阿扁留給「台灣國」的典範嗎？