Two items in the Times' piece suggest things aren’t alright with the investigation and prosecution of D'Souza
Is there a legitimate reason to make a “Federal Case” out of Dinesh D’Souza’s alleged unlawful donations to Republican-Conservative Wendy Long ?
This rather mundane NY Times article about the D’Souza case starts out rather routinely, like this: “Dinesh D’Souza, a best-selling conservative author and filmmaker, was indicted on Thursday on charges that he used straw donors to illegally donate to a 2012 Senate campaign. *** Mr. D’Souza is an outspoken political commentator who directed ‘2016: Obama’s America,’ a scathing anti-Obama documentary released in the final months of the president’s re-election campaign. *** Federal prosecutors in Manhattan said that Mr. D’Souza encouraged others to give $20,000 to a Senate candidate and reimbursed them for the donations. Election law prohibits such arrangements and caps donations at $5,000 per donor to any one candidate.” (See “Dinesh D’Souza Is Charged With Using Straw Donors” by Matt Appuzzojan, 1/23/14, NY Times [http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/24/nyregion/dinesh-dsouza-is-charged-with-using-straw-donors-to-give-to-a-campaign.html?ref=nyregion]).
Based on a rather simple investigation of its own, the Times concluded that, even though the name of the Senate candidate was not given in the indictment, D’Souza had donated to only one federal candidate in 2012, giving $5,000 to Wendy Long, a New York Republican who lost her challenge to Senator Kirsten E. Gillibrand, a Democrat; and doubtless the donations were to the Wendy Long campaign. later in the piece, there is an apparent confirmation of that by remarks made by Mr. D'Souza's attorney.
The first indication that the Times might be somewhat skeptical about the handling of this case is this: “It is not clear from the court documents what led investigators to Mr. D’Souza in a fund-raising case involving relatively small donations, in a race that ended in a blowout win for Ms. Gillibrand. Ms. Long raised about $785,000 in the race.”
The second indicator of the possible suspicion of DOJ motives at the Times is the finish to Times reporter Matt Appuzzojan’s article, which implicitly demonstrates some degree of affinity with the sentiments of the charged defendant: “We are now living in the America that we warned our fellow citizens could come to pass if President Obama were re-elected,” [D’Souza] wrote on his website.”
9 comments:
D'Souza is no shrinking violet.
This case may be a tipping point for Obama.
This is just the latest unfortunate circumstance to befall real conservatives and Republicans coming out of the very disastrous 2012 candidacy of Wendy Long for the U.S. Senate seat held by Kristin Gillibrand. That particular political blunder of a GOP state-wide candidate was largely attributable to continuous pressure by NYS Conservative Party Chairman Mike Long. Mike Long was using Wendy (reportedly no relation) as his “cock-blocker” candidate against various stronger GOP candidates who wanted to run against Kristin Gillibrand. All of it benefitted Gillibrand and the Democrats big time in 2012, and it was all probably done as part of an accommodation with Alfonse D’Amato. (Take a look at who he recently endorsed for governor!)
The Dinesh D’Souza case shows that Wendy Long is one of Mike Long’s gifts to Republicans in NY and around the country that keeps on giving.
The winners take office and the losers go to jail.
It's worked for Putin and it's working for Schumer.
Nobody remembers there was a U.S. postal flap connected to Schumer's using state employees on the campaign for his first election to congress.... a U.S. Attorney didn't think it was a significant federal matter.... Republican, I think.... Good times, good times !
I think not Gale !!!
Schumer was caught using NYS Assembly staffers to run his first Congressional race by acting Brooklyn DA Rosen. Holtzman got elected and buried it.
To the know it all above, the Feds also had a case against Schumer concerning that first congressional race. Chumer hired Washington fixer Arthur Liman, and he did what fixers do. He fixed it.
Anonymous January 25, 2014 at 7:59 PM says Certs is a candy mint ---
Anonymous January 25, 2014 at 9:27 PM says Certs is a breath mint....
Stop, you're both right !
AND as I said before, "Good times, good times !"
Didn't DA Holtzman have to defer to the Feds once they had jurisdiction? Then later, when the Feds lost interest.......
btw, I think that some time later, somebody who had run against Schumer in that first congressional primary arranged for one of the anonymous people above and me to get law jobs at a large nationally known insurer. But that was well after a rather comical evening with FS at George's Diner on Coney Island Avenue around the corner from Mel Miller's club (delicious pork chops, as I recall it) -- but that was something about a state senate race and little side thing about OTB....
Post a Comment