Is the Delay Case Falling Apart?

I've been following this story for a long time...ever since he was rebuked by his own party. I'm surprised the indictments took as long as they did, but I suspect it would be hard to charge the Republican house leader, in a place like Texas.
 
bsnyder said:
Delay's counsel filed a motion to dismiss the first indictment. The judge is out of town and hasn't ruled on that motion yet. But Earle obviously thinks it will be thrown out, otherwise he wouldn't have been rushing around at the 11th hour grand-jury shopping the new one.
Well, we'll just have to watch and wait to see what the court says...right?

Unless you think that I should use your standard line of reasoning and start screaming that the reason that Earle has to shop around indictments at the 11th hour is because the unscrupulous Texas court system is unfair and unethical and have it out against Democrat prosecutors because they force Earle to prosecute more Dems than Republicans!! Boo hoo, poor Earle!!

Kinda silly coming from the other side, huh? Now you know how we feel.
 
Since I'm too tired to make a critical appraisal of this thread, I'm gonna let the Professor do the talking.

page401001full2ea.jpg




Rich::
 
Laugh O. Grams said:
Well, we'll just have to watch and wait to see what the court says...right?

Unless you think that I should use your standard line of reasoning and start screaming that the reason that Earle has to shop around indictments at the 11th hour is because the unscrupulous Texas court system is unfair and unethical and have it out against Democrat prosecutors because they force Earle to prosecute more Dems than Republicans!! Boo hoo, poor Earle!!

Kinda silly coming from the other side, huh? Now you know how we feel.

My line of reasoning is this:

In the 2002 election cycle, both parties used a "shell game" of moving money to and from different entities (PACS, national and state committees) and candidates. It was a routine and common practice and both parties employed people specifically to monitor and handle the different accounts, to make sure that the money flowed to and from the accounts to legally comply with the existing campaign finance laws.

Ronnie Earle has decided to interpret the Texas statues to read that it was illegal to do this. Reasonable people can disagree as to whether it actually was illegal. But he's also putting his partisan leanings ahead of his ethical standards as a prosecutor by targeting only one party, not both, for political reasons. As has already been noted, he got the political outcome he was seeking - the indictment forced Delay to step down from his leadership position.
 

sgtdisney said:
Oh, so it is an opinion that he is a crook. Ok. I understand now. I just thought it was being presented as factual information. You know, like the fact that Bill Clinton lied under oath. :cheer2:

Or that Bush and Cheney are both convicted criminals. I agree.
 
bsnyder said:
So then you're only concern with Tom Delay is the current indictment? Because that's the only thing he's ever been accused of that's illegal. And I'll be wllling to make a wager with you right now that he will never be found guilty of money laundering or conpiracy in this case. Because the prosecutor doesn't have a case. How about it?

The possible scenario is Delay beats the charge, you dance a jig because your side won, and the reality is we all lose.

What a kick in the head.
 
As I said before, I think Delay is evil. That said, I am not comfortable with using three grand juries after one voted no. I don't think Earle is partisan, just crusading and idealistic. But we had too much abuse of prosecutorial power in the 90s, and though this is a different species, I am still not comfortable with it
 
sodaseller said:
As I said before, I think Delay is evil. That said, I am not comfortable with using three grand juries after one voted no. I don't think Earle is partisan, just crusading and idealistic. But we had too much abuse of prosecutorial power in the 90s, and though this is a different species, I am still not comfortable with it

I'm very comfortable with the idea that if this is what it takes to get rid of a scumbag like Delay, who pushed through legislation protecting sweatshops, forced abortions, and prostitution in the Marianas, God bless Ronnie Earle.
 
Laugh O. Grams said:
In the tit for tat political world today, you can't tell me that the Republicans aren't searching high and low for someone on the left to indict...somehow, no one's turned up yet...interesting...

In the tit for tat political world today, you're suggesting there are no Democrats participating in illegal fundraising? Interesting. Naive, but interesting.
 
While I will be the first to agree that this has nothing to do with the charges against Delay I still find it very interesting. The Washington Times is reporting today that Ronnie Earl who is the elected DA of Travis County accepted political contributions directly from the AFL-CIO in 2000. I live in Texas and know the Election Ethics code very well since I had to help defend a group that was at risk of running unintentionally violating them. For Earl's campaign to have accepted those contributions is a violation of the law. So that begs the question who prosecutes the prosecuter?

I think that this also points out the reason that other than the first blush comments you heard from many Democratic Leaders about Delay's indictment you will hear very little from many more. The type of charges being bantered about are so technical and the methods of moving political money around so widely used by both parties that any in depth investigation could uncover numerous violations on both sides of the aisle. I think a lot of politicians both Republican and Democrat are hoping this one just goes away.
 
richiebaseball said:
In the tit for tat political world today, you're suggesting there are no Democrats participating in illegal fundraising? Interesting. Naive, but interesting.
If there are, than find them and charge them!

I guess that in your cynical take on the world of politics, they're all crooks so we should just sit back and let them to continue to rule upon high with no repercussions to their illegal activities. Hell, people steal all the time in day to day life, so why don't we all steal, I mean, it's only the naive suckers who think that paying for things is the way to go.

I'm just glad that the Republicans have followed through on their campaign promise to bring integrity and honor back to Washington, with Majority Leader DeLay leading the pack. It's really quite refreshing!!
 
Here's the Times article:

DeLay accuses Earle of taking corporate fundsBy Stephen Dinan
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
October 7, 2005
Rep. Tom DeLay said District Attorney Ronnie Earle, who is prosecuting him for trying to involve corporate money in Texas politics, has taken such contributions himself.
"It's real interesting he has this crusade against corporate funds. He took corporate funds, and he's taken union funds, for his own re-election. That's against the law," Mr. DeLay told The Washington Times yesterday.
A review of Mr. Earle's campaign-finance filings in Texas shows that he has received contributions from the AFL-CIO, including a $250 donation on Aug. 29, 2000. He also has received contributions listed on the disclosure forms only as coming from the name of an incorporated entity, often a law firm.
Mr. Earle has said repeatedly that state law bars corporate and union contributions. Attempts to reach Mr. Earle yesterday for comment, including a phone message left on his assistant's voice mail detailing Mr. DeLay's charge, were unsuccessful.
The prosecutor for Travis County, Texas, has secured indictments against Mr. DeLay on charges of conspiracy to violate campaign-finance laws, money laundering and conspiracy to launder money.
He argues that a political action committee founded by Mr. DeLay and run by associates of his collected corporate money and sent a check for $198,000 to the Republican National State Elections Committee (RNSEC), an arm of the Republican National Committee. The RNSEC then contributed money to state candidates in Texas -- donations that Mr. Earle says were an attempt to funnel corporate contributions into state races.
Mr. DeLay followed House Republican rules and stepped down as majority leader after the first indictment Sept. 28.
Party leaders have said he will return to his leadership post if he defeats the charges, but Mr. DeLay said he intends to run for the House again even if he is not majority leader.
"That's up to the people I represent, but I'm confident they'll send me back to do their work," he said. "No matter what title they give me back in Washington, I'm 'congressman' first. I intend to run, I intend to run harder than ever before, and I intend to win."
Mr. DeLay was interviewed by The Times in the majority leader's room just down the hallway from the front entrance to the House floor. He said he is eager to advance House Republicans' agenda and said for now he will fill the role of adviser to the leaders.
He said he and House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert, Illinois Republican, have forged a long partnership.
"He has expressed it this way -- I have institutional knowledge that's valuable. I have an energy level that's valuable. I have assets that are valuable. The leader's staff is still in place," he said. "I think most of the members will find there's not much, as far as their ability to have input into the agenda and into the leadership, it's not going to change a whole lot. So the Democrats did not win."
Mr. DeLay said the House will tackle most of the major issues that leaders have set out including reducing entitlement spending through the budget process, cutting taxes, passing new energy legislation and approving "a strong border-security bill and a bill that forces the government to enforce our immigration laws."
The Texan said his legal defense is simple.
"Money raised legally by corporations was sent to the RNSEC. They took that money -- what is it, Texas is only one of 16 states that forbids corporate funds to be in campaigns, the vast majority of the country's campaigns can accept corporate money -- that money went to them," he said. "In fact, $1.4 million was sent to Texas [by the RNSEC], not just $198,500."
Mr. DeLay said it's up to his lawyers whether to ask for a change of venue from Austin, a liberal enclave in the midst of one of the country's most conservative states.
Asked whether Mr. Earle should be disbarred, Mr. DeLay said he "ought to be held accountable."
"I don't know how, but there's all kinds of avenues, I'm told," he said. "You just think about how he has abused his power, how he has undermined the criminal justice system, how he is undermining the election system by criminalizing elections and dragging them into criminal courts, it's incredibly dangerous to our representative government. And if he's not held accountable, then other DAs who would like to do this can feel they can freely do it."
Mr. DeLay said he is convinced that Mr. Earle has coordinated with national Democratic officials, and said the same thing happened with outside groups when a Democratic member of Congress brought ethics charges against him last year.
"It was all set up with [Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington] -- they're out there doing the media stuff, paying for ads," he said. "One ad would start, stop at the end of the week, a new ad from another organization would start up -- my, isn't that a coincidence? That would go on for weeks."
He said he does not know whether Mr. Earle is taking orders from Washington, but said the entire situation is collaboration.
"If you step back and look at his operation for three years on this particular issue, talking to the press, of course he's talked to the Democratic leadership. I don't know who. But he's a political animal; he's not a district attorney," he said.
He also said the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee "was shopping the story" that Mr. DeLay was about to be indicted a day before the Sept. 28 indictment was handed up, which Mr. DeLay implied means that the DCCC had knowledge of secret proceedings.
"How did they know it was the deadline, number one, and how did they know I was going to be indicted the next day?" he said. "Isn't it amazing how much information they have when they're spinning you? All of that is coordinated."
Democrats have consistently said there is no basis to Mr. DeLay's charges.
"I know that Tom DeLay may find himself distracted by conspiracy-related issues, but I'm being honest when I say that there are no local or federal jurisdictions that allow the DCCC to indict anyone," DCCC spokesman Bill Burton said yesterday. "At some point, Tom DeLay is just going to have to come to grips with the fact that it's the evidence that did him in, not Web sites or newspapers or the staff of the DCCC."

If there are, than find them and charge them!

I guess that in your cynical take on the world of politics, they're all crooks so we should just sit back and let them to continue to rule upon high with no repercussions to their illegal activities. Hell, people steal all the time in day to day life, so why don't we all steal, I mean, it's only the naive suckers who think that paying for things is the way to go.

I'm just glad that the Republicans have followed through on their campaign promise to bring integrity and honor back to Washington, with Majority Leader DeLay leading the pack. It's really quite refreshing!!

WTH????

How, by any stretch of the imagination, do you jump from this indictment on breaking campaign finance laws to the notion that stealing is involved?
 
bsnyder said:
WTH????

How, by any stretch of the imagination, do you jump from this indictment on breaking campaign finance laws to the notion that stealing is involved?
I'm not!!

I'm saying that richie's take that "Well, Dem's are breaking campaign laws too, so don't be so naive" as an OK for DeLay's illegal actions is like saying "Well, John Q. Public shoplifts, so why don't we all shoplift?". It's a cynical way to look at the world around you. But I guess there's something wrong with America expecting more from our elected officials.
 
I think the fine line is this, the particular charges that Ronnie Earl has chosen to indict on are for things or more specifically a certain thing that lots and lots of politicians do, on both sides of the aisle. Delay is a slimy guy, I know better than most, he's my Congressman. The reality at the moment is that if they are actually able to convict Delay on this charge, then the door swings open wide to go after a lot of politicians from both parties. The moral is when you don't like a politician and want to convict him for wrongdoing so he or she will go away, don't pick a very technical charge that many others could possibly be charged with as well. Don't let your abject hate of the man temper your judgement. Such actions could come back to effect a lot of politicians you may like.
 
If both sides are guilty of this, then they should both be prosecuted. So far, I've seen no evidence (aside from one article from the Weekly Standard or some other "reputable" source :rotfl: ) that this is happening.

Has anyone else noticed that nobody has offered a defense of DeLay ? All you see on this thread are attacks on the democrats and on Earle. Gee...I wonder why that is ? :rotfl2: SOP for the right these days...Why defend a position when you can attack anyone questioning you ? :sad2:
 
brerrabbit said:
I think the fine line is this, the particular charges that Ronnie Earl has chosen to indict on are for things or more specifically a certain thing that lots and lots of politicians do, on both sides of the aisle. Delay is a slimy guy, I know better than most, he's my Congressman. The reality at the moment is that if they are actually able to convict Delay on this charge, then the door swings open wide to go after a lot of politicians from both parties. The moral is when you don't like a politician and want to convict him for wrongdoing so he or she will go away, don't pick a very technical charge that many others could possibly be charged with as well. Don't let your abject hate of the man temper your judgement. Such actions could come back to effect a lot of politicians you may like.
I understand what you're saying, but I look at my elected officials with a higher standard than most, I guess. If there was a Democratic Congressmen who I loved and it turned out that he broken laws, especially campaign finance laws, because we all know whoever has the most green usually wins, then I would want him gone. I wouldn't be happy about it, but I tell you this, I wouldn't be complaining about the system or the prosecutor or the man in the moon for that matter. I would be extremely disappointed in the individual who broke the law. I try to look at the individual and not the party. I just happen to agree with a lot more Dems than Republicans.
 
wvrevy said:
If both sides are guilty of this, then they should both be prosecuted. So far, I've seen no evidence (aside from one article from the Weekly Standard or some other "reputable" source :rotfl: ) that this is happening.
Didn't you see Bet's article from the Rev. Sun Myung Moon's Washington Times?!?! That's two!! I'm sure an exerpt from The Limbaugh Letter will make it three and then we will know that we can call off the trial! DeLay must be innocent...:rotfl:
 
Laugh O. Grams said:
Didn't you see Bet's article from the Rev. Sun Myung Moon's Washington Times?!?! That's two!! I'm sure an exerpt from The Limbaugh Letter will make it three and then we will know that we can call off the trial! DeLay must be innocent...:rotfl:
Nope...Afraid I didn't see that. Haven't read anything by that poster in quite a while, actually.

And I wouldn't use the Washington Times to housetrain a puppy. :teeth:
 
I see some of the same posters who recently had Karl Rove charged, found guilty, and jailed. :rolleyes:

:rotfl: (added so some of you would feel more at home)
 
JoeEpcotRocks said:
I see some of the same posters who recently had Karl Rove charged, found guilty, and jailed. :rolleyes:

:rotfl: (added so some of you would feel more at home)
You might be a bit premature with that post there, Joe.

Rove Said to Testify in CIA Leak Case

By JOHN SOLOMON, Associated Press Writer Thu Oct 6, 3:16 PM ET

WASHINGTON - Federal prosecutors have accepted an offer from presidential adviser Karl Rove to give 11th-hour testimony in the case of a
CIA officer's leaked identity but have warned they cannot guarantee he won't be indicted, according to people directly familiar with the investigation.

The persons, who spoke only on condition of anonymity because of grand jury secrecy, said Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald has not made any decision yet on whether to file criminal charges against the longtime confidant of
President Bush or others.

The U.S. attorney's manual requires prosecutors not to bring witnesses before a grand jury if there is a possibility of future criminal charges unless they are notified in advance that their grand jury testimony can be used against them in a later indictment.

Rove has already made at least three grand jury appearances and his return at this late stage in the investigation is unusual.

The prosecutor did not give Rove similar warnings before his earlier grand jury appearances.
--------------------
Remember...he who :rotfl: 's last, :rotfl: 's longest.
 


Disney Vacation Planning. Free. Done for You.
Our Authorized Disney Vacation Planners are here to provide personalized, expert advice, answer every question, and uncover the best discounts. Let Dreams Unlimited Travel take care of all the details, so you can sit back, relax, and enjoy a stress-free vacation.
Start Your Disney Vacation
Disney EarMarked Producer






DIS Facebook DIS youtube DIS Instagram DIS Pinterest DIS Tiktok DIS Twitter

Add as a preferred source on Google

Back
Top Bottom