Reply With Quote
pant, pant, pant, pant, heavy breathing, very heavy breathing......wet dream time for Dan. Ah, Dan, charges aren't convictions....re Clinton.
Yahoo NewsWASHINGTON - A Texas grand jury's recent interest in conspiracy charges could lead to last-minute criminal indictments possibly against House Majority Leader Tom DeLay as it wraps up its investigation Wednesday into DeLay's state political organization, according to lawyers with knowledge of the case.
Conspiracy counts against two DeLay associates this month raised concerns with DeLay's lawyers, who fear the chances are greater that the majority leader could be charged with being part of the conspiracy. Before these counts, the investigation was more narrowly focused on the state election code.
By expanding the charges to include conspiracy, prosecutors made it possible for the Travis County grand jury to bring charges against DeLay. Otherwise, the grand jury would have lacked jurisdiction under state laws.
The Associated Press spoke to several lawyers familiar with the case, all of whom requested anonymity because they were not authorized to comment publicly. DeLay, R-Texas, said Tuesday that prosecutors have interviewed him. He has insisted he committed no crimes and says Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle, a Democrat, is pursuing the case for political reasons.
The disclosure came as congressional officials said top House Republicans were quietly considering how to respond if an indictment were issued.
House GOP rules require any member of the elected leadership to step down temporarily if indicted, and it would be
It's up to the rank and file to select an interim replacement. Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., could make a recommendation, whether choosing to elevate another member of the leadership or tapping an alternative to reduce the possibility of a struggle if DeLay were cleared and then sought to reclaim his post.
pant, pant, pant, pant, heavy breathing, very heavy breathing......wet dream time for Dan. Ah, Dan, charges aren't convictions....re Clinton.
Regardless if there is any reality to these charges....he's not going anywhere.
Dan's about to get his rocks off..
Maybe it will get a pass like Sandy Burgler?
I ing hate his smug gerrymandering ass
It's funny reading the reactions of every conservative to like this.
try scoffing Haliburton or the Patriot Act and see them argue for Haliburton and against the Cons ution
never fails to make me hysterical with rage
I don't support the Patriot Act. I'm not a Haliburton stock holder, but if it is the best company for the job, then let them have it. I have never seen any proof that there was a better or cheaper company that could do what they do. Show me some consistent proof of this and you might have some credibility.
Ok Dan you are cleared for Neolibgasm...
He was charged...
It is also funny to read the reactions of the "liberals"!
we're sheep. while we fight and call each other names all these freakin politicians are drunk with power and laughing their way str8 to the bank.
September 28, 2005
DeLay Is Charged With Criminal Conspiracy in Texas
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Filed at 1:24 p.m. ET
WASHINGTON (AP) -- A Texas grand jury on Wednesday charged Rep. Tom DeLay and two political associates with conspiracy in a campaign finance scheme, forcing the House majority leader to temporarily relinquish his post.
DeLay was accused of a criminal conspiracy along with two associates, John Colyandro, former executive director of a Texas political action committee formed by DeLay, and Jim Ellis, who heads DeLay's national political committee.
''I have notified the speaker that I will temporarily step aside from my position as majority leader pursuant to rules of the House Republican Conference and the actions of the Travis County district attorney today,'' DeLay said.
The White House, meanwhile, called DeLay a ''good ally,'' and said President Bush still considered DeLay a friend and effective leader in Congress.
GOP congressional officials said Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., will recommend that Rep. David Dreier of California step into those duties. Some of the duties may go to the GOP whip, Rep. Roy Blunt of Missouri. The Republican rank and file may meet as early as Wednesday night to act on Hastert's recommendation.
Criminal conspiracy is a state felony punishable by six months to two years in a state jail and a fine of up to $10,000. The potential two-year sentence forces DeLay to step down under House Republican rules.
At the White House, press secretary Scott McClellan said the president still considers DeLay ''a good ally, a leader who we have worked closely with to get things done for the American people.''
''I think the president's view is that we need to let the legal process work,'' McClellan said.
Doesn't have to be that way if we start holding our elected leaders accountable at the ballot box. This is exactly why we need a Bi-partisan Investigation into the Katrina disaster relief effort, for accountability, not the blame-game.
for accountablility, not the blame game?
wtf?
if you try to hold someone accountable for what happend are you not blaming them?
idiot
I blame the hurricane for the most.
whattttt??????????????????????????
Tom Delay that crooked smug gerrymandering rich piece of is going down
And then this: "mookie2001 whattttt??????????????????????????
Tom Delay that crooked smug gerrymandering rich piece of is going down
Today 01:24 PM "
Now there is a real comparison of accountability, not the blame game. From the "stuck on stupid" twins.
You two only have three more years of Bush. And then four more years of who we, the majority, elect to drive you crazy with four more years.....hehehehehehe!
Some sources say Delay may already have a plea deal in place...
The long and short of all the legalese is that Delay, acting with the advice of his counsel, waived his statute of limitations defense in advance of the issuance of the State indictment against him.
You know, the statute of limitations is the part of the law that says for certain crimes you have to bring the charge within a certain number of years, months, whatever. Delay waived the 3 year statute on this charge.
He was not indicted out of the blue, then. His attorneys were aware of the pending indictment, and must have participated in its preparation.
Why would he waive the statute of limitations on a state jail felony charge? (Under Texas law a 'state jail felony' is a sort of cross between a misdemeanor and a felony. It's a felony, but you get probation right off the bat and you can't go to prison for it) It says he waived it with the advice of counsel.
The only reason any defense attorney worth having would advise a client to waive a statute of limitations objection to a felony is if it were in exchange for a reduced charge.
In other words, Ronnie Earle must have told Delay's attorneys that if he didn't agree to waive the statute of limitations for a state jail felony, he would be charged with something more serious, some sort of charge with a longer statute of limitations.
This case may already be headed for a no-jail but resign sort of plea bargain for Delay.
Here is a pack of moist wipes. Thought you might need them.
washingtonpost.com
GOP Ignores Lessons of Democrats' Past Mistakes
By Terry M. Neal
washingtonpost.com Staff Writer
Wednesday, September 28, 2005; 6:27 PM
In response to the criminal charges he now faces, House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) has offered up the time-honored defense of Washington politicians: My enemies are out to get me.
In a Capitol Hill news conference, DeLay lashed out, calling the Texas prosecutor who brought the felony charge against him an "unabashed partisan zealot" and a "fanatic." DeLay's supporters echoed the theme. House Majority Whip Roy Blunt (Mo.) -- the man who will fill in for DeLay -- said: "Unfortunately, Tom DeLay's effectiveness as Majority Leader is the best explanation for what happened in Texas today."
It didn't take long for DeLay's supporters to get the talking points. In a statement e-mailed to reporters hours after news of the indictment broke, the Rev. Louis P. Sheldon, leader of the Traditional Values Coalition, said DeLay was "a Christian man" and accused prosecutor Ronnie Earle of exacting "political retribution."
Yet, The Washington Post's Jeffrey Smith reported last year that "Earle, an elected Democrat who oversees the state's Public Integrity Unit, previously prosecuted four elected Republicans and 12 Democrats for corruption or election law violations."
And the Associated Press reported last December that Earle had prosecuted some of the biggest Democratic names in the state, including, "former Texas House Speaker Gib Lewis, former Texas Attorney General Jim Mattox, former State Treasurer Warren Harding and former Texas Supreme Court Justice Don Yarbrough."
Buried under a sea of political scandal in the late 1980s and early 1990s, congressional Democrats often evoked the same defense. And it didn't work .
"Common Cause has made itself the handmaiden of a partisan political initiative," Democratic House Speaker Jim Wright (Tex.) complained in a May 18, 1988, press release --the day the nonpartisan watchdog group filed an ethics complaint against him in the House.
Wright resigned the next year in disgrace. Republicans exploited Wright's troubles and a series of other Democratic foibles to put an end to the Democrats' four-decade reign in Washington in 1994.
The reason was simple: It is entirely possible both that your enemies are out to get you and that you did exactly what you are being accused of doing. The two concepts are not mutually exclusive.
Ask Bill Clinton.
DeLay is innocent until proven guilty. Yet whatever his intentions, the timing of Earle's indictment couldn't have been worse for the Republican Party. Going into next year's midterm elections, the second most powerful person in the House is under indictment, and the most powerful person in the Senate, Majority Leader Bill Frist (Tenn.), is being investigated by both the Securities and Exchange Commission and federal prosecutors. In addition, a special prosecutor is investigating whether top White House officials may have leaked the name of CIA operative Valerie Plame to reporters.
On top of that, the White House's top procurement officer, David Safavian, was arrested last week on charges of lying and obstructing a criminal investigation into Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff's dealings with the federal government. And Abramoff, once one of Washington's top lobbyists, is being investigated for his lobbying activities on behalf of Indian tribes and his role in paying for overseas trips for DeLay. DeLay has said he didn't know Abramoff paid the expenses.
But with the voting public so inured to political scandal in Washington, all of those things together might not mean much for the party were it not already in deep water with the voters over the war in Iraq, its response to Hurricane Katrina and the summer's e in gas prices. Bush's approval rating in some polls hovers around 40 percent, and Congress's is even lower.
Amy Walter, who analyzes House races for the nonpartisan Cook Political Report, said, "If people were confident about the direction of the country, happy with performance of the White House and Congress, it's not as big of an issue. But when you put it in this in the current political environment, Democrats don't have to work very hard" to damage Republicans.
Walter's comments raise the question about whether Democrats will make ethics and scandal front-burner issues next year. Walter makes another salient point when she points out that approval ratings for Democrats aren't much higher right now than they are for Republicans.
Can Democrats coalesce around scandal and ethics as a unifying theme, after largely failing to do so with Iraq, Katrina, tax cuts and other major issues? Difficult to say.
Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) fired a shot yesterday, saying in a statement: "The criminal indictment of Majority Leader Tom DeLay is the latest example that Republicans in Congress are plagued by a culture of corruption at the expense of the American people."
But when I called a top Democratic congressional staffer to discuss the broader political implications, the person was skittish and wanted go "on background."
Contrast the Democrats' tepid approach to that of the Republicans of the late 1980s and early 1990s. You could hardly turn on C-Span back then without seeing a pudgy, white-haired back-bencher from Georgia by the name of Newt Gingrich inveighing against the rampant corruption and arrogance of the Democratic party.
True enough, there are Democrats in Congress today with their own ethics problems , complicating efforts to tag the GOP as the party of low standards. But the same was true of the Republicans when they were in the minority party, and that didn't stop them from pressing their case against the Democrats. The bottom line is leaders are always held to a higher standard than back-benchers.
For a long time, Democrats acted like no one was listening or cared. Then came November 1994.
Will Republicans repeat that mistake?
© 2005 Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive
=======================
By their very self-defined nature and the dirty business they have chosen, all politicians are gulity until proven innocent, no presumption of innocence.
Is this a political charge? If so, WGAF? He's politician, a particularly nasty one, so how can HE blame anything on politics? the dumb .
The Repubs impeached Clinton for a blow-job.
Payback's a .
is he not rich and gerrymandering?
I've read the indictment twice...and, for the life of me, I can't find the allegations against Tom DeLay.
Kay Bailey Hutchison: Indicted by Earle three times. All three times the indictments were dismissed post haste.
Jim Mattox: Indicted by Earle. Dismissed.
Bob Bullock (Conservative Democratic friend of the President's): Indicted by Earle. Dismissed.
This is, by far, the most pathetic attempt yet foisted by his office. The only thing I can figure is that he is trying to stretch it out until mid-terms before it is dismissed.
It's already unraveling...
From a former DOJ Lawyer:
Then, this:Ronnie Earle argues that Tom DeLay conspired to make a contribution to a political party in violation of the Texas Election Code. There was no contribution to a political party in violation of the Texas Election Code. There was no conspiracy. Ronnie Earle is wrong on the facts. Ronnie Earle is wrong on the law.
According to the indictment, the conspiracy was to unlawfully make a political contribution of corporate funds to a political party within 60 days of an election.
The Texas Election Code clearly states that "A corporation or labor organization may not knowingly make a contribution [to a political party] during a period beginning on the 60th day before the date of a general election for state and county officers and continuing through the day of the election." le 15, Texas Election Code, § 253.104. Texas law also states in part that "A person commits criminal conspiracy if, with intent that a felony be committed: (1) he agrees with one or more persons that they or one or more of them engage in conduct that would cons ute the offense; and (2) he or one or more of them performs an overt act in pursuance of the agreement."
The Problems with Earle's case:
In an effort to contrive jurisdiction over DeLay, Earle charges that because Congressman DeLay may have known about the transaction before it occurred, he was then part of a conspiracy.
However, Earle's office has sworn testimony and other exculpatory evidence showing that Congressman DeLay did not have knowledge of the transaction.
In addition:
No corporation or labor organization was indicted in this conspiracy. Neither Jim Ellis nor John Colyandro is a corporation or labor organization.
No corporation or labor organization made a contribution during 60 days of an election.
What cons utes a contribution under the Texas Election Code is not strictly defined.
Neither the RNC nor RNSEC cons ute a political party under Texas election law. They are considered PACs, just as the DNC is.
Corporations in Texas could have legally made contributions to the RNC or RNSEC during the period in question under Texas election law.
There was no violation of the Texas Election Code. There was no conspiracy. The underlying transaction was legal. Had corporations sent money directly to the RNC or RNSEC, the transaction would be legal. How could anyone conspire to do indirectly what could legally have been done directly?
Ronnie Earle is dog squeeze...Ronnie Earle has a history of using his office for attacks on his political and personal enemies.
·"The Travis County, Texas, prosecutor investigating Mr. DeLay has a history of using his office for partisan ends."(Congressional prerogative, The Washington Times, November 19, 2004)
·Earle has demonstrated a past zeal for indicting conservative figures and even liberals with whom he has personal or professional disagreements. (Target: DeLay, National Review, April 11, 2005)
Earle's partisan prosecutions - which have frequently failed - are designed for political harm, not legal harm. Earle is the same partisan prosecutor who politically indicted and failed to convict:
Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison
Conservative Democrat Bob Bullock (when he was Comptroller - later he was Lt. Governor)
Democrat Attorney General Jim Mattox
Ronnie Earle's three year political vendetta against Rep. DeLay has been marked by:
Illegal grand jury leaks,
A fundraising speech by Earle for the Texas Democrat party that inappropriately focused on the investigation,
Misuse of his office for partisan purposes, and
Extortion of money for Earle's pet projects from corporations in exchange for dismissing indictments he brought against them.
Ronnie Earle has been frequently criticized for his methods:
The Dallas Morning News criticized Earle in the Hutchison case:
"the impression of partisan unfairness has certainly been reinforced by the leaks and public comment about Hutchison's case from the District Attorney's office throughout the summer. That the Grand Jury investigation has been conducted with so much fanfare such as the tip-offs to the new media when key records were seized from the former treasurer's office has added a darker tone to the cloudy proceedings." (Hutchison Probe; Fair and Speedy trial is essential, The Dallas Morning News, September 28, 1993)
The Houston Chronicle called into question Earle's impartiality and judgment:
"The fact that Earle refuses to recognize his blunder and would do it again calls into question whether he has the necessary impartiality and judgment to conduct the investigation that to a great extent will determine whether Texas election campaigns will be financed and perhaps determined by corporations or by individuals."
(Self-inflicted wound; District attorney's poor judgment in speaking at a Democratic fund-raiser provides an unintended boost for DeLay's defenders., The Houston Chronicle, May 20, 2005)
There was no contribution to a political party in violation of the Texas Election Code. There was no conspiracy
ohhh...
Some things you ought to know about Ronnie Earl. First of all, since he got installed as the Austin prosecutor going after political corruption, he's indicted about twice as many Democrats as he has indicted Republicans. (12 (D) - 4 (R) to be exact)
He's been voted Texas' prosecutor of the year and the public administrator of the year for Austin. His office has been listed as among the top ten model offices in the nation by the National District Attorney's Association.
The Harvard professor who wrote "Broken Windows", the study that helped Giuliani clean up New York called his office "one of the most thoroughly problem-oriented agencies in criminal justice today".
Even Bill O'Reilly once singled him out for "innovative approaches to law enforcement".
He is not a crackpot and he's not a partisan. He's highly respected and he's a force to be reckoned with.
Here we go - A List of PARTISAN EARLE'S PAST VICTIMS:
" Former state Rep. Gilbert Serna, D-El Paso. Pleaded guilty to charges of theft by a public servant in 2000.
Former state Rep. Lane Denton, D-Waco. Found guilty of theft in 1995.
State Rep. Betty Denton, D-Waco, pleaded guilty in 1995 to perjury charges.
Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, Republican, indicted on a charge of official misconduct. Earle in 1994 declined to present a case at trial. Hutchison received a directed verdict of acquittal.
Land Commissioner Garry Mauro, Democrat, investigated in 1992 for political misuse of his agency for Bill Clinton's presidential campaign. Earle found no "conscious pattern of misuse of state property for political or personal purposes."
Speaker Gib Lewis, D-Fort Worth. Pleaded guilty in 1992 of misdemeanor filing of false financial statements. Lewis in 1983 also pleaded guilty to misdemeanor failure to file a financial statement.
San Antonio voter registrar Marco Gomez, Democrat, pleaded guilty in 1992 to tampering with a government record.
State Rep. Charles Staniswallis, R-Amarillo, pleaded guilty to felony theft in 1990.
Attorney General Jim Mattox, Democrat, found innocent by a jury in 1983 on charges of commercial bribery.
Texas Treasurer Warren G. Harding, Democrat, pleaded guilty in 1982 to misdemeanor official misconduct.
State Rep. Mike Martin, R-Longview. Pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor perjury charge in 1981 for having lied about arranging to have himself shot to generate publicity.
State Sen. Gene Jones, D-Houston, pleaded guilty in 1980 to a misdemeanor charge of official misconduct for using a state computer for political purposes.
Travis County Commissioner Bob Honts, a Democrat who later switched parties, pleaded guilty in 1979 to misdemeanor misapplication of county property."
Washington Monthly
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
