The Taipei District Prosecutors' Office Friday questioned People First Party (PFP) Chairman James Soong (
During a press conference after he was questioned, Soong on the one hand passed the buck to former president Lee Teng-hui (
In other words, Soong's latest explanation of the case was the same old tune that he has been playing for the past three years, although it was perhaps a bit more dramatic this time. But the world still hasn't gotten any clear answers.
Today, Soong is a vice presidential candidate, nominated by the KMT and the PFP. It is necessary for him to clarify his role in the case, instead of repeatedly telling us how deeply his family members have suffered from the accusations against him. We can understand the pain of the Soong family over the past few years, but if Soong quickly clears up all doubts about the case, maybe the suffering of his family members can end sooner.
People have been wondering why a donation of NT$100 million from Chen You-hao (
Furthermore, when the scandal first broke, James Soong said that none of his family members owned any property in Hawaii. It was then discovered that his son owned five houses in the US, and that he already owned these houses when he was a student at the University of California at Berkeley. In response to questions from the media, Allen Soong said the money was a gift from his parents, while his wife later said that Allen Soong had earned the money himself. Why all the discrepancies and contradictions?
Third, why didn't James Soong return to the KMT the NT$240 million that was in his bank account when he discontinued his KMT membership in July 1999? Why did he wait until prosecutors requested that the Ministry of Finance turn over materials from an audit of his accounts on December 26 that year?
Only days later did Soong hurriedly deposit the money with the Taipei District Prosecutors' Office, where the money remains to this day. What are his reasons for such behavior, which is clearly a matter of criminal misappropriation?
Frankly speaking, the burden to prove whether Lee authorized Soong to set up accounts for the KMT secretary-general at the Bank of Taipei and Chung Hsing Bills Finance should rest with Soong. Lee has already unambiguously told prosecutors that he never issued such an authorization to Soong.
If Lee has his facts mixed up, the KMT, which today fully supports Soong, should be able to produce from its archives concrete evidence in support of Soong.
The issue that concerns voters is the question of Soong's ethics and integrity, not that the KMT has withdrawn its accusations against Soong or that the court has decided not to prosecute. The best thing Soong could do would be to start from the beginning and provide explanations for every issue that the public wants clarified.
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
On a quiet lane in Taipei’s central Daan District (大安), an otherwise unremarkable high-rise is marked by a police guard and a tawdry A4 printout from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs indicating an “embassy area.” Keen observers would see the emblem of the Holy See, one of Taiwan’s 12 so-called “diplomatic allies.” Unlike Taipei’s other embassies and quasi-consulates, no national flag flies there, nor is there a plaque indicating what country’s embassy this is. Visitors hoping to sign a condolence book for the late Pope Francis would instead have to visit the Italian Trade Office, adjacent to Taipei 101. The death of
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
As the highest elected official in the nation’s capital, Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an (蔣萬安) is the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) candidate-in-waiting for a presidential bid. With the exception of Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕), Chiang is the most likely KMT figure to take over the mantle of the party leadership. All the other usual suspects, from Legislative Speaker Han Kuo-yu (韓國瑜) to New Taipei City Mayor Hou You-yi (侯友宜) to KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) have already been rejected at the ballot box. Given such high expectations, Chiang should be demonstrating resolve, calm-headedness and political wisdom in how he faces tough
RSS