Hillary Commits A Felony On Film and NOTHING Happens.
↑ Click on the image above to see her caught on film committing a felony that should have gotten her 5 years in↑
Federal Prison.
Posted on 05/26/2014 9:00:34 PM PDT by nickcarraway
Dinesh D’Souza faces more than a year in prison for giving away his money. Guilt lies with the law and not the lawbreaker here.
The conservative author pled guilty to violating campaign finance laws, which is another way of saying he opened up a lemonade stand without a license or ripped the tag off a mattress. The case stems from D’Souza’s 2012 donations through intermediaries to a friend’s senatorial campaign. Congress, made up of incumbents, has placed restrictions of dubious constitutionality on the amount individuals can legally donate to candidates. They haven’t, tellingly, placed any such limits on what they can legally raise or spend on campaigns.
The candidate D’Souza donated to, Wendy Long, lost the fundraising race 40 to 1 and the spending race 15 to 1 to Senator Kirsten Gillibrand. She lost the vote race by a mere 3 to 1 margin.
One could say D’Souza foolishly wasted his money on a lost cause. But does his unwise unselfishness really make him a criminal deserving of the penitentiary?
The guilty party, to his credit, admits the facts presented against him. The pursuing party, to their discredit, never explained why they seized on D’Souza’s two illicit donations when much grander transgressions of campaign finance laws by Harry Reid, the Obama campaign, and others have gone unnoticed by federal prosecutors.
D’Souza violated the law. The law violates his rights.
D’Souza has made a few missteps in recent years. A personal scandal, dredged up by men no longer on the payroll of the school he led, forced him from his six-figure job as president of King’s College. Hell hath no fury like an employee scorched.
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
Meanwhile, top Obama donation bundler Jon Corzine stole $1.6 billion dollars of legally segregated customer funds and hasn’t so much as been detained for questioning, let alone prosecuted and convicted.
Selective enforcement is a tool of tyrants.
‘Meanwhile, top Obama donation bundler Jon Corzine stole $1.6 billion dollars of legally segregated customer funds and hasn’t so much as been detained for questioning, let alone prosecuted and convicted.
Selective enforcement is a tool of tyrants.’
Yep. When you are right you are right.
Lock Bammy up - already...
Totalitarian countries do, that’s who. And if anyone hasn’t noticed, the tools of government have been used more blatantly and aggressively against political opponents in the last 5 years than in any time in US history.
Obama is a personality cult totalitarian.
He admitted to breaking the law.
It maybe selective enforcement, but the law is the law.
If you are going to break it knowingly, even from a sense of conscience, you have to be willing to suffer the consequences.
If we really believe that, let's each of us fine ourselves $1 million, conservatively! ( if I read those highway signs correctly, ) and I wouldn't care to guess how many years in prison.
Interesting movie based on that.
"The line is usually interpreted as questioning why someone would put massive effort into achieving something minor or unimportant, or who would punish a minor offender with a disproportional punishment."
Absolutely true. D’Souza did violate the law. Regardless of the hypocrisy and double standards, he committed a crime and has to deal with the consequences.
It’s unbecoming of D’Souza to say that he’s just being targeted. This may be true, but that doesn’t justify his crime.
!
The guilty party, to his credit, admits the facts presented against him. The pursuing party, to their discredit, never explained why they seized on D’Souza’s two illicit donations when much grander transgressions of campaign finance laws by Harry Reid, the Obama campaign, and others have gone unnoticed by federal prosecutors.
Didn't Harry Reid funnel campaign funds to his grand daughter? Didn't Nancy Pelosi engage in insider trading? Hopelessly corrupt!
The issue in D’Souza’s particular case is not whether or not politicians are corrupt. We know that many of them are, and we see this double standard on display every day.
The issue is whether or not D’Souza committed a crime. He did. Frankly, Conservatives must hold their leaders to a higher standard. D’Souza paraded himself as Conservative voice. He can’t accuse the Left and expect to behave in the same manner as those he’s accusing and be unaccountable.
Dinesh D’Souze commanded thousands of dollars as a speaker. He portrayed himself as a Christian Conservative. We then discovered that he was sleeping with another woman whilst married, and committed crimes. Unlike the Left, he has to own up to those crimes and deal with the consequences.
The guilty party, to his credit, admits the facts presented against him. The pursuing party, to their discredit, never explained why they seized on D’Souza’s two illicit donations when much grander transgressions of campaign finance laws by Harry Reid, the Obama campaign, and others have gone unnoticed by federal prosecutors. D’Souza violated the law. The law violates his rights.
The real gun show loophole. So many times agencies like the ATF or the FEC will look the other way when convenient. These people get to do private transactions without license of any kinds.
These selective enforcers are accessories to crimes.
Selective enforcement invalidates the law on its face. Lincoln made the case against the South on this very argument. If my neighbor has a preferential treatment over me in conducting business, especially polititcal business of statehood by cooking the books, then there is a case for war.
What has the article got to do with wheels and butterflies?
So everyone can commit crimes. The law is invalid. Elliot Rodger killed innocent ppl. He didn’t violate the law because the law is invalid.
As you can see, the, “you violate the law with impunity, therefore I can violate the law. After all, there is no law”, logic is absurd.
Our behavior and conduct isn’t governed by those who violate the law. Our actions are determined by God’s law through established codes.
Gotta say, I think what he did was wrong and the is right but, it didn’t need to be prosecuted to the extent it was.
Particularly, in light of what we know of the other sinners, who transgressions where so much greater and well known.
Partissan hacks abound with no chexks on their illicit and absolute crimes, the evidence of such being unimpeachable, though the joker in the White House and his lackey AG should be.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.