08 May 18
Originally posted by @mott-the-hoopleWhat's the normal penalty the alleged case?
http://insider.foxnews.com/2018/05/07/dinesh-dsouza-rosie-odonnell-illegal-democrat-campaign-donations-broke-law-five-times
08 May 18
Originally posted by @mott-the-hoopleApples and oranges.
read the article...
"D'Souza was charged in 2014 for making a $20,000 contribution to Wendy Long's senate run. He served five years probation and eight months in a confinement center. He was also fined $30,000."
D'Souza deliberately and fraudulently violated the law and admitted doing so:
At the court hearing Tuesday, D’Souza admitted he knew what he did was against the law.
“I knew that causing a campaign contribution to be made in the name of another was wrong and something the law forbids,” D’Souza said, according to Newsday. “I deeply regret my conduct.”
Brafman added in his press statement: “Mr. D’Souza agreed to accept responsibility for having urged two close associates to make contributions of $10,000 each to the unsuccessful 2012 senate campaign of Wendy Long and then reimbursing them for their contributions. Given the technical nature of the charge, there was no viable defense.”
https://www.politico.com/story/2014/05/dinesh-dsouza-pleads-guilty-illegal-campaign-contribution-106882
By contrast, O'Donnell violations are most likely inadvertent (she gave $90,000 to 50 different candidates in 2017-18 and only 5 received amounts over the legal limit) , no fraud has been shown and thus even according to the New York Post article that revealed them:
Contributions over the limit can be refunded or counted toward a different election, and married donors can attribute the money to a spouse.
https://nypost.com/2018/05/05/rosie-odonnells-campaign-donations-to-dems-went-over-legal-limit/
So probably criminal violations of the law, such as D'Souza's, will be treated as such and mere errors, such as O'Donnell's appear to be, will be treated as such.
Originally posted by @no1marauderExactly!
Apples and oranges.
D'Souza deliberately and fraudulently violated the law and admitted doing so:
At the court hearing Tuesday, D’Souza admitted he knew what he did was against the law.
“I knew that causing a campaign contribution to be made in the name of another was wrong and something the law forbids,” D’Souza said, according to Newsday. “I ...[text shortened]... l be treated as such and mere errors, such as O'Donnell's appear to be, will be treated as such.
It's like Hillary and her e-mails
She had no intent, so innocent!!
Lucky for them, Dims never know what they are doing or why.
Hell, even Obama first heard about all of his scandals on the 6 o'clock news like the rest of us.
- Joined
- 05 Nov 06
- Moves
- 147479
Originally posted by @no1maraudernow explain the different names and addresses used by odonell...
Apples and oranges.
D'Souza deliberately and fraudulently violated the law and admitted doing so:
At the court hearing Tuesday, D’Souza admitted he knew what he did was against the law.
“I knew that causing a campaign contribution to be made in the name of another was wrong and something the law forbids,” D’Souza said, according to Newsday. “I ...[text shortened]... l be treated as such and mere errors, such as O'Donnell's appear to be, will be treated as such.
08 May 18
Originally posted by @mott-the-hoopleHave to see the actual names and addresses but most probably errors by some of the 90 campaigns in their record keeping. I've worked for campaigns; such transcription errors are commonplace.
now explain the different names and addresses used by odonell...
Originally posted by @whodeyOur law treats intentional violations of it more harshly and more likely to be criminal.
Exactly!
It's like Hillary and her e-mails
She had no intent, so innocent!!
Lucky for them, Dims never know what they are doing or why.
Hell, even Obama first heard about all of his scandals on the 6 o'clock news like the rest of us.
It has done so before there were Republicans and Democrats.