Dinesh D'Souza indicted for violating U.S. election law

[Mojo2]

What reason would Obama have to suddenly go after Dinesh D'Souza? Most Americans don't even know who he is. Because he was debating Bill Ayers? Who cares? It just never crossed the minds of some Republicans that one of their darlings could possibly have done something wrong. They have to jump to the most extreme of conspiracy theories instead.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uuh9k6Ttsm0&list=PLayGa5hBBtwSgYmgtD0xKxpXWYB0s5psE]Dinesh D'souza Analyzes Predictions from "2016: Obama's America" in Late 2013 - YouTube[/ame]

This guy has Obama's number.

And if Ayers were to say in such a public forum. as Dartmouth would be, what he'd admitted to two individual reporters on separate occasions, though ambiguously kiddingly, that he (Ayers) had actually penned Obama's autobiography, well, Obama would be toast.

If it was important enough to him to orchestrate so many people's silence until now, it's just as important that he maintain their silence.

And he has magical powers of getting people to do things HIS WAY after meeting with them.

Maybe D'Souza couldn't be approached privately so Obama is sending this shot across D'Souza's bow and in public so EVERYONE will get the message.

And he is uncaring of who knows he is sending a threat to either of the participants in the debate.

If his thinly veiled warning had a message, it might be something like this, from Obama to Ayers AND D'Souza:

"Talk about anything you want in your Dartmouth debate. But don't mention my name involving anything more than just routine anti-Administration allegations. If you do, I know how to make you sorry you ever crossed me. You think an indictment is bad? I can make you go away, like *that*."

Dinesh D'Souza is getting exactly what he asked for. Don’t mess with the President unless you are walking as straight a line as the pope. D’Souza hasn’t!

Ham Sandwich Nation: Due Process When Everything Is a Crime


I. The Problem with Prosecutorial Discretion

Attorney General (and later Supreme Court Justice) Robert Jackson once commented: “If the prosecutor is obliged to choose his cases, it follows he can choose his defendants.”4 This method results in “[t]he most dangerous power of the prosecutor: that he will pick people he thinks he should get, rather than pick cases that need to be prosecuted.”5 Prosecutors could easily fall prey to the temptation of “picking the man, and then searching the law books . . . to pin some offense on him.”6 In short, prosecutors’ discretion to charge—or not to charge—individuals with crimes is a tremendous power, amplified by the large number of laws on the books.

Prosecutors themselves understand just how much discretion they enjoy. As Tim Wu recounted in 2007, a popular game in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York was to name a famous person—Mother Teresa, or John Lennon—and decide how he or she could be prosecuted:

It would then be up to the junior prosecutors to figure out a plausible crime for which to indict him or her. The crimes were not usually rape, murder, or other crimes you’d see on Law & Order but rather the incredibly broad yet obscure crimes that populate the U.S. Code like a kind of jurisprudential minefield: Crimes like “false statements” (a felony, up to five years), “obstructing the mails” (five years), or “false pretenses on the high seas” (also five years). The trick and the skill lay in finding the more obscure offenses that fit the character of the celebrity and carried the toughest sentences. The, result, however, was inevitable: “prison time.”7​

With so many more federal laws and regulations than were present in Jackson’s day,8 a prosecutor’s task of first choosing a possible target and then pinning the crime on him or her has become much easier. If prosecutors were not motivated by politics, revenge, or other improper motives, the risk of improper prosecution would not be particularly severe. However, such motivations do, in fact, encourage prosecutors to pursue certain individuals, like the gadfly Aaron Swartz, while letting others off the hook—as in the case of Gregory, a popular newscaster generally supportive of the current administration.

This problem has been discussed at length in Gene Healy’s Go Directly to Jail: The Criminalization of Almost Everything9 and Harvey Silverglate’s Three Felonies a Day.10 The upshot of both books is that the proliferation of federal criminal statutes and regulations has reached the point where virtually every citizen, knowingly or not (usually not) is potentially at risk for prosecution. That assertion is undoubtedly true, and the consequences are drastic and troubling.

Columbia Law Review ? Ham Sandwich Nation: Due Process When Everything Is a Crime

And what does the "Ham Sandwich" in the title refer to?

It's a "...longstanding aphorism that a good prosecutor can persuade a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich."

D'Souza may or may not be guilty. But we KNOW there have been several notable examples of someone critical of this admininistraytion all of a sudden being COINCIDENTALLY chosen for IRS audits. Two come to mind right away.

Sarah Palin's dad (a retired school teacher) and noted neurosurgeon Benjamin Carson.

Anyone can be imprisoned if Obama's prosecutors want to get you.

And heaven help you if they do.

The guy who made the video critical of Muslims got sent to prison because he was being used by Obama and Hillary as the scapegoat for Benghazi. Oh, sure. He was ALSO behind in his child support or something but why send him away when they did?

He was their Ham sandwich.

We ALL should be fucking alarmed about everything that's happening in this country.

This shit has NEVER happened like this before.

And if they can do it to D'Souza they can do it to you.

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out--
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out--
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out--
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me--and there was no one left to speak for me.

http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10007392

 

[Mojo2]

"As we have long said, this Office and the FBI take a zero tolerance approach to corruption of the electoral process," the U.S. Attorney for Manhattan, Preet Bharara, said in a statement released by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

Yeah, "Zero Tolerance" unless it's an open and shut case against the New Black Panther Party. Then they drop the charges.

Introduction

Prosecutorial discretion poses an increasing threat to justice. The threat has in fact grown more severe to the point of becoming a due process issue.

Two recent events have brought more attention to this problem.

One involves the decision not to charge NBC anchor David Gregory with violating gun laws. In Washington D.C., brandishing a thirty-round magazine is illegal and can result in a yearlong sentence. Nonetheless, the prosecutor refused to charge Gregory despite stating that the on-air violation was clear.1

The other event involves the government’s rather enthusiastic efforts to prosecute Reddit founder Aaron Swartz for downloading academic journal articles from a closed database. Authorities prosecuted Swartz so vigorously that he committed suicide in the face of a potential fifty-year sentence.2

Both cases have aroused criticism. In Swartz’s case, a congresswoman has even proposed legislation designed to ensure that violating a website’s terms cannot be prosecuted as a crime.3 But the problem is much broader. Given the vast web of legislation and regulation that exists today, virtually any American bears the risk of being targeted for prosecution

.

http://columbialawreview.org/ham-sandwich-nation_reynolds/

 

[Mojo2]

"As we have long said, this Office and the FBI take a zero tolerance approach to corruption of the electoral process," the U.S. Attorney for Manhattan, Preet Bharara, said in a statement released by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

Yeah, "Zero Tolerance" unless it's an open and shut case against the New Black Panther Party. Then they drop the charges.

This guy has Obama's number.

And if Ayers were to say in such a public forum. as Dartmouth would be, what he'd admitted to two individual reporters on separate occasions, though ambiguously kiddingly, that he (Ayers) had actually penned Obama's autobiography, well, Obama would be toast.

If Ayers is really his friend, as some on the right claim, why wouldn't he just approach him about it, instead of going through the trouble of falsifying a crime? And how exactly would Obama be toast? He isn't up for reelection, and having Ayers pen your autobiography isn't an impeachable offense.

By the way, if you are saying you question whether Ayers and Obama really are friends (I think that's one of your assertions.) check this out:

From Living Room to Back Stab: Bill Ayers Says Obama is a War Criminal

Katie Pavlich | Jun 19, 2013

Despite allowing Barack Obama to launch his political career in his living room way back in the day, Bill Ayers is calling for the now President to be charged with war crimes. To be fair however, Ayers did call for every president in American history to be tried for the same thing.

Bill Ayers, former University of Illinois professor and co-founder of the violent anti-war group Weather Underground, said Tuesday that President Barack Obama should be put on trial for war crimes, according to RealClearPolitics.

"Every president in this century should be put on trial," Ayers told Charlie Stone on RealClearPolitics' "Morning Commute." “Every one of them goes into an office dripping with blood and then adds to it. And, yes, I think that these are war crimes. I think that they’re acts of terror.”

Ayers, whose Weather Underground bombed police stations, the U.S. Capitol and the Pentagon during its anti-Vietnam War crusade in the 1960s and 1970s, said he'd give Obama a failing grade based on his presidency's policy and politics. Nevertheless, Ayers said he likes the president.

"He's a curious person. One of the things I like about him is he's curious. He wants to know things. He asks questions, he's not just charming, he's also interested. He reads," Ayers said. "I liked him personally -- he's a really good guy."
​

Ayer's slight change of heart is not surprising considering Obama threw him completely under the bus when new media pointed out his connection to the domestic terrorist back during the 2008 presidential election.

On another note, what exactly has Ayers been up to? Accepting invitations to be a prestigious visiting scholar at universities of course.

Administrators at Minnesota State University – Moorhead (MSUM) announced late last month that former Weather Underground co-founder and domestic terrorist Bill Ayers has been selected as the 2013 “visiting scholar” by the school’s College of Education and Human Services.

Dr. William Ayers… will be the 2013 College of Education and Human services Visiting Scholar,” read the Feb. 25th campus-wide announcement.

Ayers accepted the prestigious award while delivering a campus-wide lecture entitled “Teaching from the Heart: Education for Enlightenment and Freedom.”

From Living Room to Back Stab: Bill Ayers Says Obama is a War Criminal - Katie Pavlich

Seems they've had a falling out after Obama (typically) threw Ayers under the bus. Sending a warning to Ayers (to keep his mouth shut about writing the book) through the indictment of D'Souza seems even more plausible now after reading this article from June 2013.

 

[JoeB131]

looks like an open & shut case

Pretty much. There's a limit, he exceeded it.

 

[Dot Com]

someone from a rw think tank like Heritage appraoched him about it & told him it was a sure thing. I hope they do the good cop v bad cop on him and he sings like a bird/implicates all his rw associates/partners in crime

 

[Uncensored2008]

This nation has invited in this virus residing in the WH.

Here is plain and obvious proof of politically motivated persecution by departments of the Government at the behest of barack Obama.

D'Souza was going to debate Bill Ayers at the end of the month.

I guess Barry feared what Bill might have said.

Like confirming that he and not Barry penned, "Dreams From My Father."

Obama is a scum sucking dog.

A Chicago hood.

A third world inspired Marxist who gives not a shit about anything but him, his benefit and what will make him look good.

Maybe he is saying to the Conservatives, "See what happens when even one of your notable celebrity Conservatives asks too many questions or makes me angry?"

I can't say for the moment whether this will produce more than a wave of outrage on the internet or not.

Think it might be the straw that broke the camel's back IF D'Souza is innocent.

It looks bad.

Highly political.

It is reckless, destructive and indefensible.

IF D'Souza is a victim of unwarranted targeted political persecution.

Suddenly the most corrupt AG in history cares about election irregularities?

It's more of a street gang than an administration.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Dinesh

Conservative author Dinesh D'Souza hit with federal charges | MSNBC

“As we have long said, this office and the FBI take a zero tolerance approach to corruption of the electoral process,” Manhattan U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara said in a statement. “If, as alleged, the defendant directed others to make contributions to a Senate campaign and reimbursed them, that is a serious violation of federal campaign finance laws.”

At least by enemies of the party..

 

[Katzndogz]

Warren Buffet and George Soros have been doing the same thing for years.

Of course, we just have an allegation. We had allegations against Tom Delay too. They were false. The regime doesn't care if they are eventually proven to be false. The point is to interfere, to stop the criticism, so make an example so that others do not criticise.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Warren Buffet and George Soros have been doing the same thing for years.

Of course, we just have an allegation. We had allegations against Tom Delay too. They were false. The regime doesn't care if they are eventually proven to be false. The point is to interfere, to stop the criticism, so make an example so that others do not criticise.

Bingo.

There is VERY little chance that someone as politically savvy a D'Souza would stumble on something as simple as finance limits.

This is no different than the IRS attacks - it is the corrupt Chicago gangsta and the Boyz from Da hood AG harassing Obama's enemies list.

This is Soviet era shit. Obama is a fucking cancer.

 

[Uncensored2008]

someone from a rw think tank like Heritage appraoched him about it & told him it was a sure thing. I hope they do the good cop v bad cop on him and he sings like a bird/implicates all his rw associates/partners in crime

We need a congressional investigation into this investigation to find if the United States Dept. of Justice is engaged in political hazing on behalf of the Administration, as the IRS has been proven to have done.

Time for Eric Holder to go to prison.

 

[Jroc]

What reason would Obama have to suddenly go after Dinesh D'Souza? Most Americans don't even know who he is. Because he was debating Bill Ayers? Who cares? It just never crossed the minds of some Republicans that one of their darlings could possibly have done something wrong. They have to jump to the most extreme of conspiracy theories instead.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uuh9k6Ttsm0&list=PLayGa5hBBtwSgYmgtD0xKxpXWYB0s5psE]Dinesh D'souza Analyzes Predictions from "2016: Obama's America" in Late 2013 - YouTube[/ame]

This guy has Obama's number.

And if Ayers were to say in such a public forum. as Dartmouth would be, what he'd admitted to two individual reporters on separate occasions, though ambiguously kiddingly, that he (Ayers) had actually penned Obama's autobiography, well, Obama would be toast.

If it was important enough to him to orchestrate so many people's silence until now, it's just as important that he maintain their silence.

And he has magical powers of getting people to do things HIS WAY after meeting with them.

Maybe D'Souza couldn't be approached privately so Obama is sending this shot across D'Souza's bow and in public so EVERYONE will get the message.

And he is uncaring of who knows he is sending a threat to either of the participants in the debate.

If his thinly veiled warning had a message, it might be something like this, from Obama to Ayers AND D'Souza:

"Talk about anything you want in your Dartmouth debate. But don't mention my name involving anything more than just routine anti-Administration allegations. If you do, I know how to make you sorry you ever crossed me. You think an indictment is bad? I can make you go away, like *that*."

Dinesh D'Souza is getting exactly what he asked for. Don’t mess with the President unless you are walking as straight a line as the pope. D’Souza hasn’t!

You just haft to sit back and marvel at the sheer stupidity of idiots like this.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Warren Buffet and George Soros have been doing the same thing for years.

Of course, we just have an allegation. We had allegations against Tom Delay too. They were false. The regime doesn't care if they are eventually proven to be false. The point is to interfere, to stop the criticism, so make an example so that others do not criticise.

Bingo.

There is VERY little chance that someone as politically savvy a D'Souza would stumble on something as simple as finance limits.

This is no different than the IRS attacks - it is the corrupt Chicago gangsta and the Boyz from Da hood AG harassing Obama's enemies list.

This is Soviet era shit. Obama is a fucking cancer.

D'Souza's lawyer has pretty much admitted his guilt already. The "facts" aren't being disputed.

“Mr. D’Souza did not act with any corrupt or criminal intent whatsoever,” Brafman said in the statement. “He and the candidate have been friends since their college days, and “at worst, this was an act of misguided friendship by D’Souza. . .It is important to note that the indictment does not allege a corrupt relationship between Mr. D’Souza and the candidate.”

 

[theDoctorisIn]

someone from a rw think tank like Heritage appraoched him about it & told him it was a sure thing. I hope they do the good cop v bad cop on him and he sings like a bird/implicates all his rw associates/partners in crime

We need a congressional investigation into this investigation to find if the United States Dept. of Justice is engaged in political hazing on behalf of the Administration, as the IRS has been proven to have done.

Time for Eric Holder to go to prison.

You seem to have an interesting definition of "proven".

 

[Uncensored2008]

D'Souza's lawyer has pretty much admitted his guilt already. The "facts" aren't being disputed.

“Mr. D’Souza did not act with any corrupt or criminal intent whatsoever,” Brafman said in the statement. “He and the candidate have been friends since their college days, and “at worst, this was an act of misguided friendship by D’Souza. . .It is important to note that the indictment does not allege a corrupt relationship between Mr. D’Souza and the candidate.”

This is a "nothing" infraction that is only pursued by Obama's Shock Collar because D'Sauza is on Obama's enemy list.

D'Sauza faces a possible fine. Just Obama has used the IRS to harass the political opposition, the DOJ is now used to attack enemies of the party.

Holder belongs in prison.

 

[Uncensored2008]

You seem to have an interesting definition of "proven".

Not really. It's a fact that the IRS targeted conservative groups.

That it was done to further the aims of Obama might make it acceptable, maybe even admirable to you, but it doesn't alter the fact that it happened.

 

[S.J.]

Another example of selective prosecution. All of the foreign (and illegal) donations to Obama's campaign that were ignored, not to mention all the law breaking by his administration since he's been in office.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

D'Souza's lawyer has pretty much admitted his guilt already. The "facts" aren't being disputed.

“Mr. D’Souza did not act with any corrupt or criminal intent whatsoever,” Brafman said in the statement. “He and the candidate have been friends since their college days, and “at worst, this was an act of misguided friendship by D’Souza. . .It is important to note that the indictment does not allege a corrupt relationship between Mr. D’Souza and the candidate.”

This is a "nothing" infraction that is only pursued by Obama's Shock Collar because D'Sauza is on Obama's enemy list.

D'Sauza faces a possible fine. Just Obama has used the IRS to harass the political opposition, the DOJ is now used to attack enemies of the party.

Holder belongs in prison.

You can ask Norman Hsu how "nothing" this "infraction" is. He'll be out of prison in 2030.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

You seem to have an interesting definition of "proven".

Not really. It's a fact that the IRS targeted conservative groups.

That it was done to further the aims of Obama might make it acceptable, maybe even admirable to you, but it doesn't alter the fact that it happened.

Again, you're not using the word "fact" properly.

Really wanting something to be a "fact" doesn't make it one.

 

[Mojo2]

You seem to have an interesting definition of "proven".

Not really. It's a fact that the IRS targeted conservative groups.

That it was done to further the aims of Obama might make it acceptable, maybe even admirable to you, but it doesn't alter the fact that it happened.

Again, you're not using the word "fact" properly.

Really wanting something to be a "fact" doesn't make it one.

2013 IRS scandal
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In 2013, the United States Internal Revenue Service (IRS) revealed that it had targeted political groups applying for tax-exempt status for closer scrutiny based on their names or political themes.


The Federal Bureau of Investigation began investigating the IRS's actions as part of a criminal probe ordered by United States Attorney General Eric Holder.[1]

This led to both political and public condemnation of the agency and triggered further investigations.[2]

Initial reports had described the targeting as nearly exclusively on conservative groups with terms such as "Tea Party" in their names.

Further investigation revealed that certain terms and themes in the applications of liberal-leaning groups and the Occupy movement had also triggered additional scrutiny, though possibly at a lower rate.[3][4][5][6][7] The only known denial of tax-exempt status occurred to a progressive group.[8] The use of target lists continued through May 2013.[9]

2013 IRS scandal - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Mojo2]

Another example of selective prosecution. All of the foreign (and illegal) donations to Obama's campaign that were ignored, not to mention all the law breaking by his administration since he's been in office.

He's increasingly being called a lawless president. And this period in our country's history is being called post-Constitutional.