Basically yes. But again, when this occurred, even if he did know, there were no laws against it at the time. It is my understanding that part of campaign finance laws regarding this, were written and made law years later.
Ex post facto - that is to say when a law is passed to criminalize a prior act, it's unconstitutional because of the prohibition of ex post facto in Art. I, Sec 10. I don't know the particulars of the relevant TX money laundering and campaign finance statutes, but to assert that he's being prosecuted with an ex post fact law, seems profoundly unlikely.
OK, thanks for cluing me in on that.
You’re exactly right. I followed this way back when it first started. Basically.....the “Hammer” was too effective and the Dems found a way to silence him.