Dinesh D’Souza and the False Equivalence

Rachel Alexander makes a highly disingenuous argument about how Dinesh D’Souza’s conviction and sentencing. She compares that situation to the indictment of former Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards. But even the facts in her own column show why the comparison is absurd. But first, there’s this:

This incident reminds me of one of my favorite books, Three Felonies a Day, written by Harvey Silverglate, a criminal defense attorney, who explains how the average American unknowingly commits three felonies a day. As bright as D’Souza is, I guarantee you he did not realize there was a severe penalty for merely giving money to two friends, who then donated it to an obviously losing political campaign.

But D’Souza admits that he knew it was against the law. And not only did he do it with the full knowledge that it was illegal, he instructed others to lie to cover it up. And why is it in any way relevant that the person he made the illegal donations to lost the election?

Let’s contrast this with what happened to former Democratic candidate for president, John Edwards, who reportedly used nearly $1 million in campaign funds to hide an extramarital affair. If convicted, he would have faced up to 30 years in prison, a much more severe penalty than the three to 10 years D’Souza was facing. According to prosecutors, Edwards accepted $725,000 from an elderly lady, other donations from a wealthy Texas attorney, and filed a false campaign report in order to funnel roughly $1 million from those sources to his mistress, Rielle Hunter, ostensibly to keep her quiet, and an aide, Andrew Young, who pretended to be the father of Hunter’s child with Edwards. Young, who was married, later came out and denounced Edwards in a book for putting him in that position. Edwards, for his knowing and immoral shenanigans, served ZERO time – not a day in a halfway house, jail or prison.

Edwards’ two attorneys, who include Geoffrey Fieger, the notorious attorney for euthanasia doctor Jack Kevorkian, were also acquitted of any wrongdoing. They had been indicted for allegedly causing more than 60 straw donors to contribute over $125,000 in illegal campaign contributions to Edwards’ 2004 presidential campaign. That’s right, more than 60 straw donors, not just two like D’Souza allegedly recruited. It was easy for prosecutors to show the 60 were straw donors, because they were virtually all employees of Edwards’ attorney’s law firm Fieger Law, family members of the firm’s employees or third-party vendors of the firm.

The indictment of Edwards’ attorneys stated that Fieger “tried to obstruct and impede the grand jury’s investigation of the illegal campaign contributions…attempted to shift responsibility for the illegal contributions to a deceased officer of the Fieger firm, attempted to mislead the grand jury by telling witnesses false information with the intent that the witnesses would repeat that false information to law enforcement authorities, and attempted to conceal an incriminating document from the grand jury.”

This grossly unfair treatment of Edwards and his attorneys vs. D’Souza comes down to the leftists who control the judiciary and the legal system. The judge who imposed the sentence on D’Souza, U.S. District Court Judge Richard Berman, is a liberal who was appointed to the court by former president Bill Clinton. Berman is a former executive director of the New York Alliance to Save Energy, which states that part of its goals are to “lessen greenhouse gas emissions and their impact on the global climate.” He has a masters in social work, and is known for rulings such as approving a settlement requiring Islamic inmates to be served a diet that follows their religion.

Notice that she quotes indictments. Why? Because none of them were convicted. They were indicted, they went to trial and juries found them not guilty. And who was it that brought those charges? That liberal Obama administration. The only difference between the two cases is that a jury acquitted in one case and D’Souza pleaded guilty in another. Logic — not exactly Rachel Alexander’s strong suit.

"But even so they keep -- mainly -- losing the culture wars. Homos are getting ..."

Wiles: Christians in America Just Like ..."
"Carries on to East German paradeI am well aware of European historyLooks like germany is ..."

Crokin: Trump Was Sending a Message ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • colnago80

    Obviously, ole Rachael either doesn’t know the difference between an indictment and a conviction or she’s a liar. Don’t believe that an indictment isn’t a conviction, just ask Marcia Clark and Chris Darden.

  • http://en.uncyclopedia.co/wiki/User:Modusoperandi Modusoperandi

    Berman is a former executive director of the New York Alliance to Save Energy, which states that part of its goals are to “lessen greenhouse gas emissions and their impact on the global climate.”

    That monster!

     

    He has a masters in social work…

    That monster!

     

    He has a masters in social work, and is known for rulings such as approving a settlement requiring Islamic inmates to be served a diet that follows their religion.

    That monster!

     

    They were indicted, they went to trial and juries found them not guilty.”

    Yeah. Liberal juries. Appointed by Jimmy Carter. So they’re invalid, obviously.

     

    And who was it that brought those charges? That liberal Obama administration.”

    The elitist Leftists Harvard-slash-Madrassa educated Obama? He only pushed forward the charges against Edwards to distract from [insert other story]!

  • kantalope

    “his grossly unfair treatment of Edwards and his attorneys vs. D’Souza comes down to the leftists who control the judiciary and the legal system.”

    Turns out that at the time Edwards was on trial the Judiciary was in control of the cons. And for D’Souza it was just off 50/50. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/10/31/obama-judges-democrat-republican-senate/3286337/

    Facts: what are they?

  • John Pieret

    Logic — not exactly Rachel Alexander’s strong suit.

    It was so full of dog whistles that I bet every canine in the county is headed for her front door.

  • Michael Heath

    Ed states:

    Notice that she quotes indictments. Why? Because none of them were convicted. They were indicted, they went to trial and juries found them not guilty.

    They appear to be getting stupider; rapidly.

  • cjcolucci

    One of Judge Berman’s high school English teachers was Paul Simon’s mother. I think, but am not sure, that Simon and Garfunkel were classmates of his.

  • http://Reallyawakeguy.blogspot.com somnus

    Another important difference: while Edwards was not convicted, the incident shattered his political career. Prominent liberals won’t touch the guy with a 39-1/2 foot pole. D’Souza was convicted, is doing his damnedest to make mockery of both his sentence and the law, and Conservatives are embracing him all the harder for it. Because they’re the party of morality and personal responsibility (or militant tribalism – it’s so hard not to get those ideas mixed up).

  • dingojack

    One wonders if D’Souzaphone will use his time in ‘Club Fed’ to write his next bestseller: Four and a Half Years (of Struggle) Against Lies, Stupidity and Cowardice?

    Dingo