Like many who come from bureaucratic Marxism (Ayn Rand, George Orwell, and so on), once they get a taste of freedom (or reminder of progressive oppression), they tend to take a very pro-individualism and pro-liberty position -- which means while they are popular, informed and insightful, they will be vilified and pilloried by the media and our left. D'Souza fits that mold. Despite his books being best sellers, and making the top grossing documentaries, the media either ignores or attacks them. Or uses words like "Polemic" in their reviews, which they would never use an equally partisan/agenda focused left wing author or Newspaper, such as themselves.
While D'Souza has become more of a polemic (and definitely has an agenda he's selling in his books and films), it is no worse so than most of the newsmen and talking heads on CNN or on NPR. He's like a literate Michael Moore, only with a triple digit IQ, and while D'Souza definitely spins things for his side and doesn't always disclose both sides of every issue, he doesn't play gotcha or nearly as many dirty tricks as you find in a Moore film, or in Washington Post. So if you watch/read Dinesh, you should know what you're getting: it is not a non-partisan view... but the delusion is that others pretending to be non-partisan are any more/less so.
Hated by reviewers, loved by viewers. A better movie than Fahrenheit 9/11, but that's a pretty low bar. It tries to give you what the Press didn't, the backstory and motivations of President Obama, from a right wing point of view. It shouldn't be taken too literally, but good background on Obama's sphere of influences: what his friends, family, mentor and Father believed. How much you think that shaped him, or how, is likely to be based on your political views. Slow, but informative, and it's up to you to decide what that all means.
On May 20, 2014, D'Souza was railroaded and forced to plead guilty in federal court to one charge of using a "straw donor" to make an illegal campaign contribution to a 2012 United States Senate campaign, a felony.
Government is something that turns moral actions into immoral ones. I'm not sure why giving money to someone else is considered a crime -- and how we can outlaw that, and claim we live in a free country, but it's not just a bad idea, it's the law. Somehow in lefties-minds government sticking a gun in my face, taxing me and saying "give or die" is moral... but Dinesh giving money to a friend is a high crime, because he wasn't smart enough to give through enough money launderers, like Soros does.
Dinesh's behavior (giving more than is approved) is something that I suspect most Republican big donors and virtually every major Hillary/Obama supporter has done... but a Republican/Libertarian doing it during the Obama administration (while they were using the DOJ for obstruction of Justice, and the IRS and DOJ as their own personal stasi), was just asking for it, and they delivered. The book thrown at him included eight months in a halfway house, five years probation, and a $30,000 fine for donating to his friends campaign.
Rosie got caught doing it 5 times, and the left is eerily silent, the only time they demand justice is when it's against a Republican. 
Trump pardoned Dinesh because Dinesh was prosecuted for political reasons by the Obama Administration. Dinesh did break the law. As long as Rosie, Clinton and Obama donors, and others aren't prosecuted, there is a certain amount of tit-for-tat, and Dinesh shouldn't have been prosecuted either. So Trump is seeking justice the way that Democrats do: by ignoring or undermining laws they don't like. But I'm irked when either side does that. I'd rather both sides were prosecuted, or the stupid and unenforceable law was repealed. In this case the latter would have been better, as it shouldn't be a crime to donate to a friend of yours campaign. While giving pardon's for people that break dumb laws is better than only allowing Republicans to be punished for things that Democrats do regularly is better than the alternative -- it's not the best outcome. I'd be much happier if Trump just worked on campaign finance reform, or hunted down and prosecuted all DNC supporters that have done the same.
When the left doesn't have intelligent responses to the other sides arguments, and they can't refute the facts presented (and both happen often)... they resort to the only tactic they have left, which is often Ad Hominem's and Character Assassination. Ask a lefty what they think of D'Souza, and if they are politically literate, they will have an opinion, and it will often be a long lecture and hand-waiving about what an evil person Dinesh is, but if you ask them why, or what specifically makes him evil or a liar, and they'll often go back to character attacks. Sometimes they'll talk about how he's a conspiracy theorist, but if you ask on what, they'll bring up examples where there's actual evidence of conspiracies -- that doesn't make him a theorist, but an observer of history. So yes, it's a conspiracy theory to imply that many people colluded with Obama to hide evidence of who he was or what he believed for political gain -- but it's also based on many facts that proved that happened. So what they hate about Dinesh the most, is that many of his points are on-target.
That doesn't make Dinesh as saint, or even that great a documentarian -- he's a political animal promoting his side's agenda, and able to do it effectively, because more often than not, he's very well researched, and has a lot of truths on his side. So it's good to watch his stuff, because you can learn a lot of things, and he's one of the few voices that gives you the right or centers point of view. But know what you're getting, and it is not a center of the road view. But if you ever find one of those, be sure to let me know... I haven't found one.