Tom DeLay indicted

[bsnyder]

So IOW, you didn't read and/or don't know what was alleged in terms of criminal conduct - you just read the conclusion that the two were the same on some right-wing website and that the linked article proved it. As Dan Quayle would say, it's a terrble thing to waste one's mind, although its certainly good for party loyalty

 

[sodaseller]

Two words. Texas redistricting. That will live on regardless of whether Delay is convicted of jaywalking, or anything else. And that's what's at the heart of all of this. Not the pious complaints of moral bankruptcy. The Dems got beat at a game they perfected years ago.

When did we redistrict in a noncensus year on a matter under judicial order (and for that matter, when did we use DHS or its predecessor equivalent to pull off something like that?)

Beware repeating talking points on issues one is not fully versed in

 

[ThAnswr]

Two words. Texas redistricting. That will live on regardless of whether Delay is convicted of jaywalking, or anything else. And that's what's at the heart of all of this. Not the pious complaints of moral bankruptcy. The Dems got beat at a game they perfected years ago.

Here's one word: bull****! Delay's a disgusting individual and the fact that you're looking for some kind of a scapegoat excuse for this indictment tells me and the good folks here just what is wrong with the Republican party.

Here's a little secret about politics: Political winds change. Those same safe districts for Republicans, when the winds change, will then be safe districts for Democrats. Or do you think the ride's going to last forever?

 

[bsnyder]

Here's a little secret about politics: Political winds change. Those same safe districts for Republicans, when the winds change, will then be safe districts for Democrats. Or do you think the ride's going to last forever?

That's not a secret, that's common sense. But it's one the Democrats have had a hard time accepting, because for so many years they really did think the ride was going to last forever.

 

[bsnyder]

When did we redistrict in a noncensus year on a matter under judicial order (and for that matter, when did we use DHS or its predecessor equivalent to pull off something like that?)

Beware repeating talking points on issues one is not fully versed in

So, you're really not opposed to partisan redistricting at all, just the timing of it?

 

[ThAnswr]

That's not a secret, that's common sense. But it's one the Democrats have had a hard time accepting, because for so many years they really did think the ride was going to last forever.

This thread is about Tom Delay's indictment and most thinking people have expressed the sentiments "it's about time" because Delay is a disgusting, disgraceful, morally bankrupt individual and those same thinking individuals don't give a crap how/why he gets off the political stage as long as he does.

 

[septbride2002]

Wow two little right in a row to sodaseller. Careful, Bet - people might start to think you don't have a rebuttle.

~Amanda

 

[bsnyder]

Wow two little right in a row to sodaseller. Careful, Bet - people might start to think you don't have a rebuttle.

~Amanda

Or maybe they'd realize I don't care what they think.

 

[ThAnswr]

Or maybe they'd realize I don't care what they think.

Begs the question: Why bother at all?

 

[septbride2002]

So, you're really not opposed to partisan redistricting at all, just the timing of it?

You didn't answer his original question.

And YES I think you care very much, or else you really wouldn't be posting on the thread

Have a nice day!
~Amanda

 

[sodaseller]

Let's use logical sequence. What you said was that Delay did nothing Dems hadn't done, i.e. partisan redistricting. That facile overbroad comparison betrayed a vast ignorance of the actual complaints against the redistricting that Delay accomplished. The anger at what Delay did is not he engaged in partisan redistricting, which occurs in 50 different places every two years, but the he did not do it on decennial basis as called for in the Constitution, but on an 02, and while the districts were under judicial supervision, and that he ran it from Washington, all unprecedented. And the he used DHS, demonstrating the same utilitarian view of the Dept that recently led to the misery of so many. Like all matters he has touched, he exhibited behavior in the same category that other pols had for years, and then he added an extra level of malevolence and criminality. He has left a trail of similar calamities throughout the Republic, laying traps for troubadours, etc.

As to personal views on redistricting, I signed the petition supporting a commission here and I support it everywhere. But politics is part of the fallen nature of mankind, unavoidable, and we should avoid relying to greatly on utopian solutions, so we shouldn't count on that too greatly.

In any event, to logically link a factual rebuttal to the claim that Delay was being punished for doing better what Dems do as being supportive of the practice in general is a nonsequiter much like comparing the linked piece to the indictment. Then again, in some worldviews, like those that sourced the comparison, doing something corruptly may indeed be doing it "better", so perhaps your comparison was knowing

 

[Laugh O. Grams]

I do find it amazing how the DISboards have somehow attracted the only 2 members of the Tom DeLay Fan Club!! Wow...what are the odds?!?!

Personally, I think that these days, DeLay does more harm than good to the Republicans and any time that this man is shown in the news, it's good for Dems nationally. I say the Republicans should make him their posterboy as an example of quality Republican leadership in 2006. He seems to garner a lot of respect from a couple of posters here!!

 

[brerrabbit]

I live in Texas, heck I even live in Delay's congressional district. I don't like the guy either and I consider myself Republican. I won't get into a debate about Delay and his character flaws, for or against. I'll just let the whole thing play out and if he is found guilty so be it, lock him up. But when it comes to the redistricting of legeslative districts in Texas neither side was innocent in that whole affair. Our State Legeslators took no actions in 2001 after the release of the cencus data, and after Republicans won the majority of the State seats in 2002 and tried to change the districting they were villianized for doing so. Even though the numbers showed that Texas was a majority Republican state. Democrats in Austin held up voting on the final proposal by leaving the state. Granted one can argue that the majority of Republicans could have been aided by the contributions that Delay is currently indicted for but for the prior 130 odd years that Democrats had controlled the state house in Austin and redistricting came up they never tucked tail and ran to avoid debating or voting on the issue. Poll numbers show that Texas at the time had something like a 60/40 split Republicans to Democrats and yet the Congressional Delegation from Texas in Washington was something like 15 to 17 in favor of the Dems. Rest assured that if the Republicans had more reps in DC and the Dems controlled Austin, changes would have been made. That's politics. Delay is slimey I did not vote for him in the last election and would not vote for him should he avoid conviction and run again. And while he was involved with the redistricting and in some cases to involved (as in using federal resources to locate the wayward Democrats who went to Oklahoma, and New Mexico) the process would have developed with or without him. This stuff goes on on both sides of the aisle. I heard some reports yesterday that even some liberal members of Congress were upset about the indictment because it will mean open season for political witchhunts during a time when we as a nation face so many challenges. I say let Mr Earl make his case and find Delay innocent or guilty and lets get on with the more important issues.

 

[bsnyder]

Let's use logical sequence. What you said was that Delay did nothing Dems hadn't done, i.e. partisan redistricting. That facile overbroad comparison betrayed a vast ignorance of the actual complaints against the redistricting that Delay accomplished. The anger at what Delay did is not he engaged in partisan redistricting, which occurs in 50 different places every two years, but the he did not do it on decennial basis as called for in the Constitution, but on an 02, and while the districts were under judicial supervision, and that he ran it from Washington, all unprecedented. And the he used DHS, demonstrating the same utilitarian view of the Dept that recently led to the misery of so many. Like all matters he has touched, he exhibited behavior in the same category that other pols had for years, and then he added an extra level of malevolence and criminality. He has left a trail of similar calamities throughout the Republic, laying traps for troubadours, etc.

As to personal views on redistricting, I signed the petition supporting a commission here and I support it everywhere. But politics is part of the fallen nature of mankind, unavoidable, and we should avoid relying to greatly on utopian solutions, so we shouldn't count on that too greatly.

In any event, to logically link a factual rebuttal to the claim that Delay was being punished for doing better what Dems do as being supportive of the practice in general is a nonsequiter much like comparing the linked piece to the indictment. Then again, in some worldviews, like those that sourced the comparison, doing something corruptly may indeed be doing it "better", so perhaps your comparison was knowing

You're completely mixing up two different posts (arguments) of mine. And I assume you're doing it deliberately. Hence the

 

[bsnyder]

Let's use logical sequence. What you said was that Delay did nothing Dems hadn't done, i.e. partisan redistricting. That facile overbroad comparison betrayed a vast ignorance of the actual complaints against the redistricting that Delay accomplished. The anger at what Delay did is not he engaged in partisan redistricting, which occurs in 50 different places every two years, but the he did not do it on decennial basis as called for in the Constitution, but on an 02, and while the districts were under judicial supervision, and that he ran it from Washington, all unprecedented. And the he used DHS, demonstrating the same utilitarian view of the Dept that recently led to the misery of so many. Like all matters he has touched, he exhibited behavior in the same category that other pols had for years, and then he added an extra level of malevolence and criminality. He has left a trail of similar calamities throughout the Republic, laying traps for troubadours, etc.

As to personal views on redistricting, I signed the petition supporting a commission here and I support it everywhere. But politics is part of the fallen nature of mankind, unavoidable, and we should avoid relying to greatly on utopian solutions, so we shouldn't count on that too greatly.

In any event, to logically link a factual rebuttal to the claim that Delay was being punished for doing better what Dems do as being supportive of the practice in general is a nonsequiter much like comparing the linked piece to the indictment. Then again, in some worldviews, like those that sourced the comparison, doing something corruptly may indeed be doing it "better", so perhaps your comparison was knowing

Oh please! The anger at what Delay did with redistricting is that he had the political wherewithall, and he succeeded.

 

[bsnyder]

A question for sodaseller: Have you read the indictment?

 

[sodaseller]

It's actually very simple. Earle has to provide direct evidence of two issues. First that the $200,000 or so that was transferred from TRMPC to the RNC with instructions as to who should be supported in the same $190,000 (I have seen the first figure both exact ($190,000) and approximate (around $200,000) is the same $190,000 sent out shortly thereafter (again (I have seen differing timeframes) to the same specified candidates. Parenthetically, I still find it hard to believe that there were actual written instructions on which candidates it was to go to, which seems both incredibly clumsy and extremely incriminating, but I have not seen that rebutted yet, so I am presuming the incredible is actually true. And that's not a leak - it was part of the public indictments.

That would normally be a very hard obstacle to mount, but given the note, it seems to have been met. The specific challenge with respect to Delay is to show that he as an individual had specific knowledge of that particular laundering. Unless there is another note, which is hard to imagine, the logical speculation, and it is only that, is that a donor recounted a conversation with delay in which he explained what would occur in response to the donor saying that he could not contribute on behalf of a corporation to a Texas campaign. The other reasonable speculation is that another indictee has proffered and testified before the GJ that Delay directed it, but that usually gets out, if nothing else by reporters that watch who goes into the courthouse - targets don't testify, so it would be noteworthy if one was seen entering and leaving the courthouse. Perhaps the GJ was not being actively monitored, but presuming it was, that would have been noted. If so, the former is the more likely scenario, unless the prosecutor truly has no direct evidence..

 

[sodaseller]

You're completely mixing up two different posts (arguments) of mine. And I assume you're doing it deliberately. Hence the

I'm not mixing up anything, and what I'm typing is deliberate. You don't understand some of the points you're arguing

 

[sodaseller]

A question for sodaseller: Have you read the indictment?

yes, at smoking gun yesterday

 

[bsnyder]

It's actually very simple. Earle has to provide direct evidence of two issues. First that the $200,000 or so that was transferred from TRMPC to the RNC with instructions as to who should be supported in the same $190,000 (I have seen the first figure both exact ($190,000) and approximate (around $200,000) is the same $190,000 sent out shortly thereafter (again (I have seen differing timeframes) to the same specified candidates. Parenthetically, I still find it hard to believe that there were actual written instructions on which candidates it was to go to, which seems both incredibly clumsy and extremely incriminating, but I have not seen that rebutted yet, so I am presuming the incredible is actually true. And that's not a leak - it was part of the public indictments.

That would normally be a very hard obstacle to mount, but given the note, it seems to have been met. The specific challenge with respect to Delay is to show that he as an individual had specific knowledge of that particular laundering. Unless there is another note, which is hard to imagine, the logical speculation, and it is only that, is that a donor recounted a conversation with delay in which he explained what would occur in response to the donor saying that he could not contribute on behalf of a corporation to a Texas campaign. The other reasonable speculation is that another indictee has proffered and testified before the GJ that Delay directed it, but that usually gets out, if nothing else by reporters that watch who goes into the courthouse - targets don't testify, so it would be noteworthy if one was seen entering and leaving the courthouse. Perhaps the GJ was not being actively monitored, but presuming it was, that would have been noted. If so, the former is the more likely scenario, unless the prosecutor truly has no direct evidence..

When you say "note" do you mean the actual check?