Posted on 04/20/2018 5:39:58 AM PDT by Kaslin
When the dominoes start falling, it’s going to be quite a scene.
Marina Medvin is a criminal defense attorney recognized as one of Washington’s Best Lawyers by Washingtonian Magazine. Ms. Medvin’s courtroom experience ranges from murder to embezzlement, and includes all of the fraud and conspiracy charges in between. She represents clients investigated by the DOJ for election fraud and other white collar crimes. Marina Medvin’s clientele include an FBI 10 Most Wanted, WikiLeaks and Anonymous hacker activists, CEOs, lawyers, politicians, and law enforcement officers, amongst others.
Meanwhile over at the Special Counsel and the USASDistrictNY, payments to the hooker AKA porno star Davis to keep quiet are considered campaign contributions beyond the limits.
It sure will be, and they can’t fall soon enough.
Unfortunately none of the real bad guys will ever be truly investigated.
The fix is in and has been for years.
This sounds delightful on the surface, but it basically says Obama donors got away with similar behavior on a much smaller scale.
Hillary, of course, has to put campaign fraud on steroids.
Which is why all those Clinton donors are investigating Trump. It isn’t to get anything on Trump, it’s to find and shred any documentation relating to the Clinton’s. They are burying the Clinton scandals and Mueller is providing the cover and time.
That sounds rather similar to what Dinesh D’Souza was imprisoned for, albeit on a much smaller scale. Curious to see how far down/up the societal hierarchy our somewhat new dual-tiered system of justice extends.
Hope the article is correct.
However, given the fact that virtually all of our government deep state marshmallow major types have managed to fail us (military excepted), I shall not hold my breath.
Call me a super pessimist, with just a smidgen of optimism. 8>(
We shall see. The GOP is really in a position where they simply have to unleash Watergate 2.0 if they want to survive. If they do we have a chance. If they don’t We will have to take care of business and things will get ugly.
...alleging the Hillary Clinton campaign laundered $84 million in contributions from big-name donors, such as Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg, filmmaker Steven Spielberg, and designer Calvin Klein. The complaint outlines a money laundering scheme that violated multiple campaign finance laws, specifically laws related to limits on contributions by independent donors. As of this week, the complaint has escalated with a lawsuit urging the FEC to take action on the complaint which appears to have been largely ignored by the FEC since being filed in December of 2017.
Thanks Kaslin.
You just have to wonder....twenty years ago with the Clinton Foundation, if the masterminds (not Hillary or Bill) sat there and created the whole thing as a money laundering scheme, and this $84 million is just one-percent of what moved through from day one on.
This is something that a special prosecutor needs to be appointed over. I doubt if Hillary or Bill are the ones signing papers or would be responsible...but whoever served as the ‘officer’ over the foundation...would do real jail-time, and some folks with a real name...would be called in for some fines (into the millions).
The fact that “donations” dropped off quickly after Hillary’s slap-down by Trump alone merits investigation. Calling bribes “donations” is absurd, and we’re devolving into Third World political nonsense without any improvement on the horizon...
This is the point where Eric Braverman’s continued absence from the public eye becomes notable.
I am a true “ Doubting Thomas”. I will only believe it when I see her actually going to jail. The clinton’s along with the obama’s and so many others have gotten away with so much for so long and continue to thumb their noses at our legal system while anyone else pays dearly for any infraction of the law.
The government will not be able to prove a knowing violation of the law by the donors in the HRC case. What will have happened is that party fundraisers will have approached major donors, saying "I know you've maxed out on your donations to Hillary. But that's for her own campaign committee. You can legally contribute much more to independent party committees, which of course are all working "independently" for the common purpose. We've made it easy for you to max out on your global limit by attending this event. Don't worry; the lawyers have vetted this."
The donors will all have believed that they were acting within the law, because that's what they would have been told by senior party officials. The people who are in jeopardy are the fundraisers and party committee officials who were illegally coordinating their efforts. "Independent" committees have to jump through some hoops to maintain the fig leaf that they are independent as defined by law and regulation. If the government can prove that they were, in fact, centrally controlled and that their independent status was a fraud, then people can go to jail. Not the donors, but the instigators and managers of the scheme.
No. D'Souza knowingly reimbursed someone for making a contribution. It was a relatively trivial amount on behalf of a candidate, a personal friend, who had no chance of winning. D'Souza knew he was throwing his money away but wanted to support his friend's valiant though hopeless effort. So he arranged a straw man donation. This is clearly illegal.
The equity argument in D'Souza's case had to do with arbitrary and disproportionate punishment. Straw man donations are often made, but they are rarely prosecuted and are generally settled with an appropriate fine. The classic case is the wealthy man who makes the maximum contribution to a candidate ... as do his wife, all four children, his personal assistant, chauffer, housekeeper and cook, all the senior executives in his company, as well as the 13 year old neighbor girl who walks his dog and the 15 year old boy who mows his lawn. All of these people, of course, will assert if asked that they had made authentic, personal contributions with their own funds, when in reality they were all reimbursed in thinly disguised ways.
The whole area typically involves a lot of winks and nods, and slaps on the wrist when someone gets careless. Prosecutors threw the book at D'Souza and demanded jail time. It was clear a selective and vindictive prosecution.
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.