Brain-surgeon-turned-political-analyst Dr. Ben Carson says officials in the Obama administration are “acting like Gestapo.”
Carson was specifically referring to the indictment of Dinesh D’Souza by the Justice Department and the IRS political targeting of those in opposition to the administration.
Carson was also the target of an IRS audit after he criticized Obama’s policies at the National Prayer Breakfast in Washington last year.
“I believe we are dealing with an extremely corrupt administration,” Carson says.
“I’ve always been someone who has been very careful about my finances and the way I take care of my business,” he explains. “I’ve never undergone this kind of scrutiny before, but then it comes after the prayer breakfast. They’re harassing my family. They’re harassing my colleagues. And they’re not finding anything—so that just makes them dig a little deeper.”
In an interview with WND, Carson said he was also disturbed by Obama’s comments during his pre-Super Bowl interview with Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly last week.
“What he said was that his administration was not guilty of any wrongdoing with regard to the IRS, and he blamed Fox News for reporting it,” Carson said. “I don’t think he would be happy unless Fox News were shut down and there was no more criticism of his actions.”
A representative of a possible new brand of non-politician presidential candidates in 2016, Carson is only the latest in a string of high-profile figures who have expressed serious concerns about the indictment of D’Souza, who is an author, scholar and filmmaker. Like Carson, many see the Obama administration abusing the criminal justice system for political payback.
Clearly D’Souza was one of Obama’s staunchest critics when he released the extremely popular and vividly candid documentary 2016: Obama’s America.
A federal grand jury indicted D’Souza on two felony counts for violating campaign laws. He could face up to seven years in prison if found guilty of making false statements to the Federal Election Commission and for illegally contributing $15,000 to a candidate running for the U.S. Senate.
A high-profile Washington-based attorney specializing in campaign finance issues, Cleta Mitchell, told WND, “The decision to prosecute—or not prosecute—is always a matter of discretion. It was the prosecutor’s decision—indeed [the] DOJ’s decision—not to prosecute widespread conduit contributions to the John Edwards campaign in 2008. Contrast that with this prosecution, which involved $15,000 (not $20,000 as claimed).”
When Mitchell was queried as to whether she believes the indictment was politically motivated, she responded, “Do I think this is politically motivated? I think if a Republican appointee had done this, the press corps would be going ballistic. Just consider how outraged they were when Bush asked for and received resignations of all U.S. attorney appointees at the start of his second term, something that is customary. Imagine if his appointee had gone after a George Soros friend. Imagine the outrage.”
President Bill Clinton and Obama both have a history of accepting highly questionable campaign donations, charges Brent Bozell, founder and president of Media Research Center.
“Let’s assume Dinesh D’Souza is guilty, and I mean 100 percent guilty,” Bozell says. “What is he guilty of? Circumventing FEC dictates by directing [$15,000] to a Senate candidate of his choice. Big deal,
“First, in a multimillion [dollar] Senate campaign, this is a fraction of a fraction. It buys a can of soda pop, and that’s about it. Second, and more importantly, compare this ‘crime’ with Bill Clinton, who raised millions of dollars from questionable at best, and illegal at worst, sources, including felons and Chinese Communist generals.
“Compare it to Barack Obama, who raised millions upon millions from who-knows-who-or-where to this day. Nothing ever came of their fundraising abuses, abuses 1,000-fold larger than anything attributed to D’Souza. And yet he was arrested and forced to post a $500,000 bond. It is astonishing. Given all the other abuses of power swirling around this administration, so many of them finding their origins in the ‘Justice’ Department, do I see deliberate persecution against conservatives? I am not conspiratorial by nature, but I will say unequivocally, you better believe it.”
“100 percent” political, says Rep. Michele Bachman, R-Minn.
“Of course it is,” she says. “It is payback from the DOJ. Plus, it sends a signal to anyone else for 2016 who may be thinking of producing a movie. It is up to the candidate to return the money. This should have been found when the FEC filing occurred. I don’t know the details, but this could cost Dinesh literally millions in legal defense fees, plus destroying his name and making him toxic to conservatives and Republicans. These are the goals of the political destruction machine at the DOJ.”
And Rep. Steve Stockman, R-Texas, also says, “Yes, I think it is political. It fits a pattern of abuse of power. As someone else said, President Obama is the president Nixon wanted to be.”
See an error in this article?
To contact us or to submit an article
