John R. Houk
© June 4, 2018
Dinesh D’Souza released a documentary in 2012 entitled, “2016: Obama’s America.” The documentary so inflamed Obama by revealing the truth during his reelection year in 2012, he unleashed his DOJ on D’Souza to find anything that enable D’Souza’s arrest to shut him up.
The Obama DOJ found that D’Souza made a minor campaign donation infraction in support of Wendy Long’s GOP campaign to gain the Senate seat vacated by Crooked Hillary in New York. Long was clobbered by current Senator Kirsten Gillibrand.
Here is what led to Dinesh D’Souza pleading guilty:
Conservative filmmaker Dinesh D’Souza, whose documentary 2016: Obama’s America took a critical look at President Barack Obama and was a surprise hit in 2012, will be arrested in New York on Friday for allegedly violating campaign-finance laws, The Hollywood Reporter has learned.
Federal authorities accuse D’Souza of donating more than is legal to the campaign of Wendy Long, who ran in 2012 for the U.S. Senate seat vacated by Hillary Clinton three years earlier but lost to incumbent Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand. Long, though, is not mentioned in an indictment obtained by THR on Thursday.
Insiders say D’Souza has been friends with Long since they attended Dartmouth College together in the early 1980s. According to the indictment, D’Souza donated $20,000 to Long’s campaign by aggregating the money from various people and falsely reporting the source of the funds. But Gerald Molen, a co-producer of 2016, says the charge is politically motivated. (‘2016: Obama’s America’ Filmmaker Indicted for Violating Campaign Finance Laws; By Paul Bond; The Hollywood Reporter; 1/23/14 3:16 PM PST)
Was it a normal occurrence to receive prison time for this kind of campaign violation?
Nothing unleashes mental terror like the thought of spending time in incarceration. It might be an exaggeration to call where Dinesh D’Souza slept for the last eight months jail, but the longtime conservative author, and in recent years anti-Obama filmmaker, was just released from a San Diego work release center.
The place where D’Souza had had to report every night after pleading guilty to campaign finance violations was riddled with hardened violent criminals, but he was far from terrorized or intimidated.
Time served is almost always a subtraction from the life of a convict. Not the case with D’Souza. Not only did he begin writing a new book; he also raised funds for a new film to coincide with next year’s presidential campaign, formulated what will become the sequel to his 2014 film “America: Imagine the World without Her,” taught English to about 100 Hispanic immigrants and in the process claims to have transformed most of them from socialist-leaning Democrats to Republican voters.
D’Souza’s conviction was clearly political retribution. Compare attorney Pierce O’Donnell, who gave $26,000 in illegal contributions to 2004 Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards and ended up facing only misdemeanor charges. (Dinesh D’Souza’s Time In Jail Was Well Spent; By THOMAS MCARDLE; IBD; 6/1/15)
D’Souza’s felony conviction was politically motivated, DUH!
Conservative filmmaker Dinesh D’Souza claimed Monday that a newly released case file on his 2014 prosecution for violating campaign finance laws shows he was targeted under the Obama administration for “political” reasons.
D’Souza, in an interview on “Fox & Friends,” said that former U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara’s office and the Obama administration had been blocking a “congressional oversight committee” from obtaining the file, but Congress has since received it.
“There’s evidence in this case file, and there’s a lot more, that this was a political prosecution conducted by Bharara as a henchman for the Obama administration,” he said. (Dinesh D’Souza claims case file reveals his prosecution was ‘political’; Fox News; 3/13/17)
Comparing D’Souza’s penalty to the typical penalty:
… As Hamilton elaborated in Federalist No. 74, “The criminal code of every country partakes so much of necessary severity, that without an easy access to exceptions in favor of unfortunate guilt, justice would wear a countenance too sanguinary and cruel.”
The selective, politicized prosecution of conservative author, producer, and activist Dinesh D’Souza was an exercise in gratuitous severity. President Trump’s pardon of D’Souza, announced today, is the remedy the Framers had in mind.
D’Souza was (and is) a strident anti-Obama critic. He committed a trivial campaign-finance violation. This is not to excuse the conduct; it is to reaffirm the principle that the punishment should fit the crime, and to observe that the conduct at issue is typically not treated as a crime at all. Routinely, misconduct of the kind engaged in by D’Souza is settled by payment of an administrative fine to the Federal Election Commission. In stark contrast, the Obama Justice Department not only selectively prosecuted D’Souza; prosecutors turned the case into a multiple felony indictment.
So now the Obama administration has indicted D’Souza for not one but two felony charges, arising out of alleged campaign-finance irregularities. Specifically, he is accused of corruptly reimbursing straw donors to the campaign of Wendy Long, Republican candidate in the New York Senate race — contributions D’Souza could not lawfully make himself because he was already “maxed out” at the $5,000 ceiling.
… The $20,000 amount of the offense alleged is puny — a negligible fraction of the Solyndra scam and a figure that would not even register … It is the kind of case on which the government routinely declines criminal prosecution, handling, instead, by an administrative fine.
D’Souza has no criminal record. Moreover, contrary to myriad voter-fraud violations that Attorney General Holder will not lift a finger to pursue, the transactions at issue posed no conceivable threat to the integrity of the election process: Ms. Long lost by 46 points. …
As Legal Insurrection’s Bill Jacobson notes, the 2008 Obama campaign was caught illegally hiding not $20,000 but nearly $2 million in irregular contributions (in addition to dragging its feet on the return of millions more in suspect donations). You probably don’t remember that because — I know this will shock you — the Obama Justice Department didn’t prosecute anyone. It was considered a mere hiccup: resolved by a fine considerably smaller than the $500,000 in bail D’Souza was forced to post lest he be detained pending trial on his multiple-felony indictment for conduct worth 25 times less that amount.
The Obama Justice Department’s extortionate tactic of turning a regulatory violation into a potential seven-year felony put enormous pressure on D’Souza to plead guilty. When he did, rather than just accept its pound of flesh, the Justice Department aggressively pushed for a prison sentence. A bravura performance at the sentencing proceeding by D’Souza’s lawyer, Ben Brafman, convinced the sentencing judge not to imprison him; but D’Souza was still confined to a halfway house for several months … (A Worthy Pardon for Dinesh D’Souza; By ANDREW C. MCCARTHY; National Review; 5/31/18 5:24 PM)
If Obama could persecute D’Souza unjustly, do you think Obama’s Deep State acolytes would do less to nail President Trump with any kind trivial or fabricated legal violation?
So, I found D’Souza’s FULL documentary of “2016: Obama’s America.” If you’ve never watched, it’s a good time to do. Understand what political power does to Democrats.
Posted by Erna Lohwasser
Published on Nov 29, 2016