They accuse others of what they are.
Posted on 09/11/2014 8:15:02 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
D'Souza pled guilty to making straw donations to the 2012 United States Senate campaign of Wendy E. Long. He asked two friends and their wives to donate the maximum to Long's campaign - $20,000 in all - and then reimbursed them, thus exceeding the $5,000 limit on donations per election cycle.
In seeking a prison term for Mr. D’Souza, 53, the government disputed his lawyer’s contention in recent court papers that his client had “unequivocally accepted responsibility” for his crime.
“The defendant pled guilty at the last possible moment before trial began,” prosecutors wrote, “not because he actually accepted responsibility for his conduct, but because he was in fact guilty and he had no defense or excuse for his criminal conduct.”
“The defendant’s crime is serious and strikes at the heart of our federal election system,” prosecutors added.
The government had said Mr. D’Souza arranged in August 2012 to have two friends each donate $10,000 on behalf of themselves and their spouses to Ms. Long’s campaign, with the understanding that Mr. D’Souza would reimburse their contributions. That resulted in a contribution of $20,000, exceeding the $5,000 individual limit for the 2012 election cycle.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
As much as I like D’Souza, those of us who stand for lawful government need to be more pristine than the rogues who believe the end justifies the means.
But I really would like a level playing field as far as culpability.
Why is it the rats just get to give the money back — no questions asked?
Jail time for exercising Freedom of Speech is just wrong on so many levels.
Meanwhile, Jon Corzine gets off scot free.
Makes no sense. Progressives love voter fraud and honor those that practice it:
Its ridiculous that unions can extort millions in dues from members which they then use to buy elections & political influence; corporations can hire lobbyists who sit with unelected bureaucrats and write law while an individual citizen is not allowed to donate what they have honestly earned, in any amount they choose, to the candidates of their choice.
D’Souza knew better. He did the everybody doing it dance and got caught. Thanks for making Conservatives look bad in the news Dinesh.
You produce a legal system that is so muddled two different Judges can elicit a totally different outcome just by adjudicating the case in subtly different ways. Add all the legal eagles involved nod knowingly...
With the democrat criminal cabal in power the law becomes a tool for the destruction if its enemies.
Add = and...
So if D’Souza had contributed one cent more than the legal limit for donations, he would have liable to a prison term. What a great country we live in where 527 groups can contribute millions and it’s legal. But an individual exceeds 5,000 and he (or she) is a criminal. (snicker)
Yep.
Since the George Soroses of the Left are already doing this, might as well level out the playing field.
Even if the Left loses on their Lawfare lawsuit on appeal, they have successfully sent the message that they will use these weapons without provocation and force people to expend resources over years defending themselves with the resultant damage to reputation. Mission accomplished.
Look at what the Austin Marxists are doing to Gov. Perry. Suing him for CONSTITUTIONALLY vetoing legislation! Outrageous!!!
RE: Thanks for making Conservatives look bad in the news Dinesh.
Why?
There are millions of conservatives in the USA, perhaps even outnumbering liberals. How does the fault of ONE MAN taint every other conservative?
They accuse others of what they are.
I think the Regime is going easy on him. I’m surprised they didn’t go for a death sentence.
As to the issue (1) it appears that the defense was raised and dismissed by the judge. At this level we must accept is a fact that there was no political prosecution but that is a fact which is very difficult to swallow given the political climate created by this administration and especially by this Attorney General. There can be no argument but that there has been unequal prosecutorial bias in favor of Democrats on so many issues from voter intimidation by Black Panthers, to gunrunning, to IRS abuses, and to alleged voter fraud committed by Democrats and alleged abusive voter fraud investigations initiated by Eric Holder.
Selective prosecution is rarely persuasive when contesting guilt because it is not a defense to say to an arresting officer, "everybody does it." It is no defense to a speeding ticket to say that other drivers were speeding as well. Generally when we invoke a selective prosecution defense it is for a crime which is malum in se but here we speak of a political crime. There is a raging dispute which went all the way to the Supreme Court about the meaning of money in elections. In one context at least, the Supreme Court has said that money is the equivalent of free speech and must be protected, although the court apparently permits regulations in other areas in which money seeks to affect elections. So it is not clear that the Dinesh D'Souza violated a law which is malum in se. Therefore, selective prosecution takes a different tone, it smacks of the very sin which the Souza himself as being accused of, an attempt to influence an election but this time by the opposite political party now clothed as prosecutor.
The consideration of issue (2) as to the extent appropriate punishment is also to be considered in this political context. In any event, the criminal in this case is a first offender and should be treated like other first offenders absent egregious aggravating circumstances. This is all the more true in a political case. Especially a political case in which the issue of selective prosecution cannot be far from our thoughts and in a case in which the morality behind the law is and has been openly questioned by no less an authority than the Supreme Court.
Other violators who are Democrats apparently received probation and that would seem to be an appropriate punishment for Dinesh D'Souza who is a first-time offender as well.
Do folks remember all the tax problems Obama appointees had?
Heck, their infractions didn't even prevent them from getting some of the highest paid government jobs.
Now this. Of course it's a subversion of the election process.
Armed thugs outside voting precincts weren't of course.
Asking for IDs before allowing someone to vote is though.
And so it goes...
En el Republico del Chiquita...
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.