People in the know, people with brains and an ability to draw conclusions based on the evidence, know that this administration is one of the most corrupt in history and that its corruptness is measured in large part by its willingness to bring down upon its enemies the raw power of the federal government.
That's a given.
But rallying around Dinesh D'Sousa is not something those of us who abhor the Obama administration need 
to be compelled to do:
Well, he made that movie attacking Obama, but when I read what his lawyer is saying....
"Mr. D’Souza did not act with any corrupt or criminal intent whatsoever.... He and the candidate have been friends since their college days, and at most, this was an act of misguided friendship by D’Souza."... I think it looks pretty much like a confession that D'Souza committed the criminal acts. What's the defense? That he's a good person who meant well and enjoyed camaraderie with the beneficiary of his illegal acts? I don't think campaign finance laws work that way, but maybe I'm wrong.
Dinesh D’Souza is not the Martyr you were looking for.
We will increasingly be faced with those willing to use the law to foment and spread their ideology. The Obama administration being the most willing arguably in history.
Yet we must be discerning as to who we decide will be championing our own ideals.
Most careful.
Carry on.
