Dinesh D’Souza tried a novel argument in the criminal case against him for illegal campaign contributions, arguing that since the Supreme Court has struck down some limits on political contributions that have nothing to do with his case, the charges should be dismissed. Unsurprisingly, he lost that argument.
Dinesh D’Souza, the conservative author and filmmaker, on Thursday failed to win the dismissal of criminal charges that he used straw donors to make excessive contributions to a 2012 Senate candidate.
Ruling from the bench, District Judge Richard Berman in Manhattan rejected D’Souza’s contention that last month’s U.S. Supreme Court decision striking some limits on political donations also rendered a straw donor prohibition as unconstitutionally vague.The judge also denied a request by D’Souza, a prominent critic of President Barack Obama, to seek the production of evidence that would support his claim the prosecution was in retaliation for his political activities.
“The court concludes the defendant has respectfully submitted no evidence he was selectively prosecuted,” Berman said.
D’Souza sat silently as Berman made his ruling. Benjamin Brafman, D’Souza’s lawyer, afterwards said he was disappointed but was prepared for trial, which is expected Tuesday.
“We have always believed this is a case that should be decided by a jury,” Brafman said.
Really? You’ve always said that? Then why did you try to get the case decided by a motion to dismiss rather than wanting to go to trial? You’re as bad a liar as your client.