Troll King T'Rump Issues Pardon to D'Souza
 

"On Thursday, President Trump announced that he is pardoning conservative pundit and author Dinesh D’Souza, who pled guilty in 2014 to violating campaign-finance laws. Unlike other presidents who used their pardon power to correct injustices, Trump has used it almost exclusively to dole out favors to the right wing.
That Trump decided to pardon D’Souza, one of the most despicable and poisonous figures in American public life, is further proof that this president spends a good deal of his time acting like a right-wing Internet troll whose greatest pleasure in life comes from finding ways to Trigger the Libs.
I suspect a lot of the coverage of this decision will be framed as “Trump Pardons Conservative Author,” which will inevitably soft-pedal the rancid bile D’Souza regularly spews into American debate. So we have to be clear about just who D’Souza is. He isn’t just a conservative or a provocateur. He’s a bigot, a liar, a criminal, and a peddler of insane and hateful conspiracy theories." WP

cont. here
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...=.f226d8092e6b

Fringe hack that plead guilty to illegal political funding. Fairly convicted and sentenced.

From your post:

Unlike other presidents who used their pardon power to correct injustices, Trump has used it almost exclusively to dole out favors to the right wing.

Exactly how would pardoning Martha Stewart and Rod Blagojevich, who are also rumored to be under consideration for pardons, be a "favor to the right wing"?

Also, from the Wapo opinion piece:

...is further proof that this president spends a good deal of his time acting like a right-wing Internet troll whose greatest pleasure in life comes from finding ways to Trigger the Libs.

Nah. I think its just proof that the left is easily triggered by anything this Prez does. :rolleyes:

His rumored pardons are irrelevant for the moment. His pardons of Arpaio and D'Souza are unquestionably political trolling for wingnut support.

Welcome to the Banana Republican Party!

Any explanation other than Trump throwing a few bones to his base and sending signals to Cohen and Manafort isn't remotely credible and you know it. Our disagreement is whether this is a good thing for him to do. You think it's cute and I don't.

Yaaaawn. Go troll someone else. Your shit won't work on me.

Two dangerous precedents Trump will set with his Dinesh D'Souza pardon https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinio...ert-ncna878956

Legit questions don't work on you. Ok, got it. Thanks.

Friends in high places: How Trump uses the power of the pardon https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/pol...pardon-n879011

Sending signals? No. Throwing bones to his base? No. Attempting to poke some folks in the eye while removing political crimes from some other folks records? Yeah, I'd buy that.

Neither Arpaio nor D'Souza were convicted of "political crimes" (there is no such thing in this country). These contemptible sleazeballs were convicted of felonies. What's with all of your "process crime" and "political crime" nonsense used to excuse felonious behavior by your tribe? It's clear that these pardons were political, but the crimes weren't.

Good point. I'd substitute politically correct establishment for left.

........, and for good reason. Pardons of Arpaio, D'Souza and Libby were strictly for political purposes and an abuse of his pardon power.

For accuracy. :)

I'm pretty sure all presidential pardons are political.

Dotard is lowering the bar and setting the stage for Pence (:mad:) to pardon him when he gets skewered by Mueller, aka Muellered. :)

Congrats Mr D’Souza

For what, gaming the system and being rewarded for it?

Dsouza PEAD guilty. Under the plea agreement, he was sentenced to eight months in a halfway house and probation, and had to pay a $30,000 fine. What did he do? D’Souza admitting he used straw donors to donate $20,000 to the U.S. Senate campaign of Wendy Long, a friend of his. Federal campaign law limits contributors to U.S. Senate campaigns to $5,000 each.

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.

NOTE: Fieger also ran for office in Michigan as a Democrat.

Political? Yeah, it probably was.

So, if there was a case to be made, who blocked the proscecution or failed to proscecute?

The difference is that D'Souza pleaded guilty and Edwards fought his charges in court and was found innocent on one charge and a mistrial was declared for all the other charges. D'Souza has that choice and chose not to take it. We'll see what happens to Trump and Cohen for their apparent campaign finance crimes.

In any event, you always resort to whataboutism when you have no real argument. By your logic, all wife-murderers should not be prosecuted because OJ Simpson got away with it.

^^ Since you brought up OJ, here is an interesting comparison and an interesting reading.
Why indeed? This from the Deep Red Solano County, CA.

The Other Side: OJ Simpson and the cult of Trump

https://www.dailyrepublic.com/all-dr...cult-of-trump/

A Politically Motivated Prosecution?
 

Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz felt that the charges were unfair: "The idea of charging him with a felony for this doesn't sound like a proper exercise of prosecutorial discretion.... I can't help but think that [D'Souza's] politics have something to do with it.... It smacks of selective prosecution." He went on to say such alleged campaign violations are common in politics.
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinesh_D%27Souza