D’Souza is accused of directing various donors to give contributions to Long’s campaign totaling $20,000, and then reimbursing them. Individuals are only allowed to donate a maximum of $5,000 to a candidate per election cycle.
"SELECTIVE' CHARGES?"
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...nti-obama-documentary-indicted-for-violating/
Pretty sad state of affairs when someone can't be critical of the president without being locked up for it.
I think the question boils down to is it actually trumped up? If he really funneled the $20,000 in donations through third parties, than he should be punished. Of course, I would like to see EVERYONE who does this punished, but that is for another topic.
What we have are a bunch of scoff laws. Laws so many and obscure that Americans break one on average every day without even realizing it. That isn't a problem though because they're rarely enforced; only when the government is interested in bringing down the hammer on someone they're out to get. He was simply targeted for not buying into the liberal mainstream media conspiracy of casting the president in the most positive light possible.
What we have are a bunch of scoff laws. Laws so many and obscure that Americans break one on average every day without even realizing it. That isn't a problem though because they're rarely enforced; only when the government is interested in bringing down the hammer on someone they're out to get. He was simply targeted for not buying into the liberal mainstream media conspiracy of casting the president in the most positive light possible.
Did he break the law or not?
But one you had to mention. The conservative brain always counter charges and attacks, not that I disagree. I just prefer my first instinct isn't to deflect.
What we have are a bunch of scoff laws. Laws so many and obscure that Americans break one on average every day without even realizing it. That isn't a problem though because they're rarely enforced; only when the government is interested in bringing down the hammer on someone they're out to get. He was simply targeted for not buying into the liberal mainstream media conspiracy of casting the president in the most positive light possible.
I've bolded the part that is accurate. However, considering he repaid individuals who he had earlier told to donate to a particular campaign, it would seem rather clear he was aware that he couldn't give more than $5000.
That depends. If he did something the current administration doesn't like, then probably. If not, then no, he didn't.
He probably broke all sorts of laws, but he'll get prosecuted while others will not because his views don't line up with the dear leader.
We've already seen that the administration has no problem using the IRS or other government agencies to punish those who don't get in line.
When you guys concoct a conspiracy theory for cases like this it just makes you look insane.
On the one hand, I agree if a crime was committed then he should be punished.
In that case, he'd just get some cushy job as an ambassador to somewhere. :whiste:On the other hand, I can't help but wonder if he were raising for the D's, if Obama would get him out of it? http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1996_United_States_campaign_finance_controversy
Yeah, it's almost like all those crazy cooks who kept insisting there was some sort of conspiracy with the IRS scrutinizing their applications based on their political affiliation or something Obviously that could never happen.
Yeah, it's almost like all those crazy cooks who kept insisting there was some sort of conspiracy with the IRS scrutinizing their applications based on their political affiliation or something Obviously that could never happen.
Doesn't that particular political affiliation advocate not paying taxes?
It advocates changing the law to pay fewer taxes, not break the law.
The Democratic party seems to attract the criminals for some reason.