Redstate

This guy is a real-life version of Rosco P. Coltrane.

transparent, really.

The more indictments he rolls out, the more he will look like he's chasing an elusive whale. He will get more and more desperate, and when the dust settles, he will be the one looking for a job.

It's a diversion to take our attention away from Harriet Miers. Or vice versa. Or something. Not much is adding up the past few days.

Don't mess with Texas (it's just fine messing with itself)!

Hmmm.

Unless they have some wierd laws in Texas this indictment is just plain ridiculous.  Money laundering statutes apply to illegal money.  I.e. the proceeds of illegal acts such as selling drugs or stolen property.  You can't be charged with money laundering if the money wasn't illegal to begin with.

If I legitimately earn $20 and wire it to you.  And you wire that $20 to someone else.  And that person wires that same $20 back to me.  That's not money laundering because the money isn't illegal to begin with.

This has gone beyond the foolish stage and entered into the realm of utter mockery.  I'm still wondering if DeLay can sue Earle and Travis county.

Ah, yes, it's the capitol of Texas, but it's hardly what you think of as red-state Texas.  Travis County goes blue every year.  You have to put Ronnie Earle in the context of Austin, not of Texas.  His job is secure, and even if it's not, he's old and can't really harbor further political ambition.  That boat sailed long ago.  He just sees things as either something you do or something you don't do.  It's definitely simplistic and can be somewhat incendiary in tense political climes, but Earle is Earle.  A goody two-shoes who has visions of crusading for what is right.  That may be good or bad, but I'll leave that up to you.

But a collaborator in some sort of DNC scheme, well, he seems like a hard to control collaborator.  I really doubt that he was part of any plan hatched anywhere else than the brain of Ronnie Earle.

"could any politician hope for a more disastrously incompetent prosector to be "hot on the trail"? "

Maybe Dan Rathers can look into this. Does Bill Burkett have the secret memos on Tom DeLay? Come on Dan, even if the memos are false the premise of them must be true.

My reading of the facts (which are admittedly one sided at this point) lead me to believe that even if he these charges are thrown out, Tom DeLay is finished.  He just has too many strikes against him and come election time, very few Republicans are going to want to admit that they have taken money from him.  Without his ability to fund other campaigns, his hammer turns into a slapstick; all noise and no weight.  

As far as the belief that the law did not apply prior to 2003, I found this in the Houston Cronicle:

George Dix, a professor at the University of Texas law school who is an expert in criminal law and procedure, said he doesn't believe changes made to the Texas election code by the 2003 legislature have any effect on the conspiracy charge.

The penal code's conspiracy charge allows for the charge if the defendants allegedly conspired to commit any felony, including an election code felony.

Just because the election code was "silent" on the penal code provision until 2003, it doesn't mean it wasn't a valid charge before 2003, Dix said.

"To me it just says, 'We really mean what we said implicitly before,' " Dix said.

Don't know if he is right, but it's a little early to start celebrating DeLay's acquittal.

Time for a conspiracy.

He has as fine of a legal mind as God ever made, and not a bad teacher either.  But, then again, I'm biased on the subject.

how to take advantage of a slow news day.

> He just has too many strikes against him

> and come election time, very few Republicans

> are going to want to admit that they have taken

> money from him.

That might be true if the rest of Texas was as lunatic-packed as Travis County, but it's not. DeLay is probably going to get apologies on behalf of the State from some Texas judge before this is all over. At least he should.

That's essentially what the TX money laundering statute says -

it happens when a person knowingly receives

"the proceeds of criminal activity or funds that the person believes are the proceeds of criminal activity."

 http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/statutes/docs/PE/content/htm/pe.007.00.00003
4.00.htm

The prosecution will have to prove that DeLay knew or believed that the funds raised were the proceeds of criminal activity (meaning, money derived from commission of a felony or equivalent offense).  

In the election code, certain types of corporate contributions constitute a felony.  If DeLay received funds that he knew came from these type of contributions, he might have a problem.

...oh ya, thats are ready been done by a runaway prosecutor.

In case you missed it.. he was referring to Congressional elections generally, not TX elections.  

Far from being incompetent, Earl played DeLay like a fiddle.  Here's how it went down:  With the statute of limitations looming, Earl had no idea what the grand jury was going to do.  Therefore, he approached DeLay's attorney and secured a waiver of the statute of limitations (see http://www.statesman.com/metrostate/content/metro/stories/10/4delay.html which states: "Last month DeLay signed that waiver in an attempt to head off an indictment.")  The waiver gave Earl an opportunity to present the same set of facts to a second grand jury THAT HADN'T EVEN BEEN CONVENED YET, in hopes of getting an indictment or indictments on additional charges.  Net result, the first grand indicts DeLay for conspiracy and the second indicts him for money laundering.  Far from being incompetent, looks to me like Earl knew exactly what he was doing and played DeLay like a fiddle!  No doubt DeLay is p*&$% as h&^$ about signing that waiver, cause he knows he got played!

Not to mention the world of trouble Delay's about to find himself in vis a vis Jack Abramoff.  The Abramoff scandal is going to rock the current GOP machine to the core.  Abmramoff, Delay, and soon Rove.  

At what point do these investigations reach a critical mass, forcing even the most fear-filled right-wing loyalists to accept the reality that their great revolution has ended?

Or maybe Delay played Earl

How do you figure Delay is playing Earle?

It seems, at least on the surface, like a pretty clear cut case.

You're embarrassing yourself.  You just described money laundering when you gave the $20 analogy.

Maybe if it read something like this, it would make more sense to you:

"If I have $20 and want to wire it to someone, but state election law states clearly that since my $20 is corporate money I am not allowed to use it in state legislative races, so to get around that I instead wire it to my party's national chapter which in turn cleanses (you might say "launders") that money into new "private" money and sends it to the origninally intended candidate, then that's money laundering."

I think when you word it more like this it's probably clearer for everybody to understand.

"I for one, welcome our new alien overlords."

Guilty or not guilty, DeLay's ability to perform his job as a vote wrangler may have been seriously hamstrung.

Even if the cases are thrown out, the very act of bringing them up may create a black pall around him that others may not want to touch.

My grandmother called it "tainted goods," someone ostracized from the local society.

And as many know, sometimes you don't even have to have done what they say you did...just the rumor of it can be enough.

Such is how it might be for DeLay in Congress after the legal issues are settled.  If DeLay's reputation is seriously damaged because of the indictments, even if they're thrown out, he'll no longer be able to effectively leverage votes to pass legislation.

Time will tell, but it is a possibility.

If someone in TX donates $20 for electing Republicans and someone in NY does the same, and they can't be used in their own state but they can in the other, why would it be illegal to swap them?

This is going to get down to the same sort of stupid little technicalities we see like when a candidate has to set up a different phone in his current office to use for campaign calls as opposed to using his normal phone. It's all a big shell game.

So far it's looking like Earle has done as fine a job with this case as with Kay Bailey Hutchison's.

It would be almost comical if not for the fact that while Earle has had his office dedicated for the past three years to nailing DeLay that he's let real criminals slip through, as in this example from earlier this year.

http://www.austinpolice.com/localnews-aas.htm#fail

just saying it is a possibility.  Isn't it?  It is just as possible as Earl playing DeLay.  

So how do you get to forcing even the most fear-filled right-wing loyalists to accept the reality that their great revolution has ended?

After all you said it yourself these are ONLY investigations and two THIN indictments that even Molly Ivins and Travis Smiley are scuffing at.

Ya gotta love these trolls!  

Sleaze. Corruption. Breaking the law.

"On top of that - DeLay's lawyers have simply pointed out that the very law Earle is citing to go after DeLay for actions in the 2002 election didn't even apply to the election code under which Earle is prosecuting - until the Texas Legislature amended it - in 2003." - Krempasky

you created an account just for this? I'm touched.

Was your ticket to bye-bye land. Do us a favor and email the They Banned Me! ME!!!! Diary link, ok?

You see where he and his are going with this Mike.

If they can't beat you on the field of rational thought and ideas they will accuse you to death with unethical prosecutors. They have finally shuffled off the mortal coil of citizenship and are about our collective destruction by whatever means possible.

"Liberalism is a mental disorder wherein any absurd and bigoted belief that supports its agenda must be tolerated, promoted by force and revered as doctrine by its fanatical partisans. Any and all means will be employed to achieve its despotic and tyrannical objectives, even the embracing of an enemy sworn to destroy it's own existence and the sacrifice of it's unborn infants."

Please remember this assertion:

The Democrats are worse off for the Abramoff rock being turned over since they thought their political cover in the press would keep their sloppy tracks under wraps. There will be much more democrat fur flying than republican.

I'm rather rare in that I'm a no-party moderate.  I don't take political sides because it would infringe on my ability to vote for whoever I believe is best for the job (in my state, if you're registered to one party, you're not allowed to vote for opposing party candidates in primaries, which I don't agree with...a vote is for the best candidate, not just your party's candidate).

I'm not "the other side."  I'm just me.  Above is my personal opinion.

And remember, in politics, appearances can be stronger than reality.  My observation is neither new, nor should it simply be swept under the rug, because it's possible.

It's not the same $20 that moves around, which makes it complicated to understand.  It's like the difference between 'hard money' and 'soft money' and there is an important distinction.

TRMPAC raised corporate money, but they couldn't spend it on races in Texas.

The RNC raised hard money, which they could use anywhere they wanted.  They also raised soft money, which they could use for operations, administration, and whatever else soft money can be used for.

TRMPAC sent a check of $190,000 which was the corporate money.  RNC deposited that into their soft money account.

RNC then sent money ($190,000) to Texas from their hard money account for the legislative races.

All of that is perfectly legit and totally legal, so long as the money was deposited into the correct accounts.  And even if the accountant made an error, it is not a crime so much as it is an infraction and a penalty would normally be assessed.

Both the Dems and the GOP do these types of transactions every day, every week, every month.  It's all totally legitimate.

is that the media only talks about the charges being leveled against Delay. They don't present the facts as is done here.

I wonder how quickly public opinion on this issue would shift if the media would do its job and actually report all the facts in the case.

A revision of law was passed in 2003,but there was no real change???  The law was the same in 2002 but implicit instead of statutory ?  So why the need to change it, to make it more implicit?  Was the law in 2002 an emanation from a penumbra, or a penumbra from an emanation?  Will the Cicero in Texas who said this one day sit on the Supreme Court to make John Paul Stevens look like Cato .  Maybe DeLay is in more trouble than we realized.

This could become a cottage industry, something Earle could pass on th his children,rocked to sleep at night while Daddy stumbles over the big words in "Heather has Two Mommies"  Actually I believe it's all being done to keep the internal fires burning inside the NY Times "Letters to the Editors" crowd, a collective Moloch that can never be satisfied.

Hmmm.

1. The money has to be from an illegal proceed.  I.e. the money itself has to be illegal right from the beginning.
   
2. DeLay never received the money from the RNC.  It was sent directly to the Texas candidates.

So how on earth could it possibly be money laundering if the money was completely legitimate at all times, was never "laundered" at any point and DeLay was never associated with it at any point?

Remember the original indictment was for conspiracy, not an overt act.  So if Earle couldn't pinpoint DeLay being personally involved, and could only define a "conspiracy" in an extremely vague indictment, then how on earth could Earle tie DeLay to an overt act such as "money laundering"?

Personally I think Earle needs to be disbarred.

That's the fight that has been placed in DeLay's hands.  While we here may know it's a crock of bull, the common voters don't.  Texas may continue to back him but the backlash on fellow republicans for supporting him afterwards from unknowing voters may not be worth him running again.

For example, the first line in my local paper yesterday, "A defiant Tom Delay, removed from house leadership for criminal charges..."

The Blogosphere or whatever ya'll call it may be making a difference, but there are millions of Americans who don't even know of it let alone use it.  And a lot of them are right here in PA.

One is that the DNC did the exact same process in the same elections cycle.

The second is that what was done was not illegal and thus cannot be conspiracy nor laundering.

State law allowed for such movement of monies (e.g.) Corporation donates $100,000 to PAC.  PAC sends money to RNC, RNC sends private donations to candidates...this was made illegal in 2003 (though how this can be monitored escapes me, but that is another discussion).

So, if Mr. Earle wants to indict the Democratic PACs that did the exact same thing...then it might be OK, but that isn't going to happen.

You guys must remember a guy named Ken Star? Huh? Oh yeah him...That guy.. Independent Investigator? Was well more than 2 years he was into that.

...you may want to get to it - quickly.

Those who get to send people to The Pile™ have been in a baaaaaaad mood these last couple of days.

Just sayin'

Yes, we're doing a fine job of the charlie-foxtrot down here lately.  Not the least being, 2nd-and-goal on the 3, 2 minutes left trailing the Raiders 19-13, and WELL, LET'S JUST THROW UP OUR SKIRTS!!!!!!

And here at RS, we haven't even gotten into Madame No, the evil RINO mayor of Dallas.  That

's for another day....

that Hillary had to carry around those Rose Law Firm billing records for that long. I bet her arm got tired.

(1) Get newest version of MS Word

(2) Locate on the internet and download font package called 'Cool 70's Selectric Fonts'.

(3) Research Tom Delay's political history, looking specifically for people who are now deceased, so that memos ostemnsibly from them can be created.

(4) Get fresh toner for the printer.

(5) Go to Walgreen's to pick up this week's antipsychotic meds

Those in power will be hurt the most, in my most humble oppinion. It will be interesting to see how that all pans out.

Lived there for 2 years, sorry to have left.

Meanwhile, today's Earle stories are funnier than yesterday's, as hard to believe as that is.

I guess Delay's motion to dismiss/quash the first indictment succeeeded, forced Earle to get #2 in microwave time, and now Delay's atty. is withdrawing the waiver which tolled the stat. of limitations - beyond masterful into hilarious if it succeeds, especially the part about undoing the political effects which Mr. Earle piously disavows.

Meanwhile - Horns looking to a fine season - no excuses vs. the Sooners this year.

I dont think anyone is getting sent to any pile any time soon. I read the rules and Im following them. No profanity or personal attacks. I thought you guys welcomed people with different political views (not that i do i might be playing bush's er i mean devils advocate). But seriously you can sit there with what they did with the Starr Investigation and be fine with it. BUT GOD FORBID ( uh oh is using gods name in vain allowed? oh well) That they indict the majority leader of an actual crime he commited.

Not so much fun when it hits home huh?

Don't worry.  You're safe, unless the rules don't apply to people who don't love the Republican Party and Tom Terrific.

It took Earle three years and the last day of the sixth grand jury to get the first indictment. Then he gets a new indictment the first morning the seventh one is seated? Sounds fishy!

The Austin American-Statesman reported this morning that Earle polled the outgoing grand jury by phone over the weekend to tailor his new arguments to use before the seventh one. Is that normal?

The Statesman also had a piece today saying that from what they could tell, 7 of the GJ members were regular Democratic voters and only 1 was a regular GOP voter. The others voted mixed or not at all. (In Texas you don't have to declare a party. You can choose to vote in either primary, with the only limitation being that you can only vote in that party's runoff election.) It also sounded like 2 of the GJ members were executives in the same union, which certainly sound fishy to me.

I cannot relocate it, but the Austin paper had an extremely belabored phrase about the indictment and re-indictment which talked about techinicalities and loopholes, but basically said Delay is innocent and his lawyers think so too, and so far he is, but Earle doesn't think so.

It was up to the very best miseloquence ever printed in the NYT.

If Earle were going after a Dem, which has many, many times in the past, you'd be cheering him on regardless of the charges or evidence. What's with the arrogance and indifference to Delay's wrongdoings and the action taken against him?

BTW, a grand jury of Texas citizens from his district indicted Delay, not Earle. One man on this jury admitted to supporting Delay's politics but couldn't ignore the foul play and voted to indict him.

Again, if Delay were a Dem, you'd be Earle's biggest cheerleader.

Travis County (Austin) DA Ronnie Earle was using a local county grand jury. It was NOT in DeLay's district, which is near Houston. Travis County is much more liberal than DeLay's district, unfortunately so since I live in Travis County. :-(

People really need to set partisan loyalties aside on matters like these. You'd be quick to believe anything suggesting corruption and foul play by a Dem but you refuse to belive it for Delay?? Sounds blindly partisan.

you wrote:

"While we here may know it's a crock of bull, the common voters don't."

So where do that leave the jury, many of whom voted for Delay, when they indicted him after having the evidence shoved down their throats??

When it comes money and corruption in politics, ANY politican is guilty til proven innocent for me.

The point of the post is still valid though. And many on the jury were still Republicans.

7 Democrats and 1 Republican on the panel. 2 others who voted back and forth and 2 others who never vote. In fact, there were twice as many executives of the National Active and Retired Federal Employees Association (NARFE) as there were Republicans, so that gives you a good idea of the balance of this panel.

But lemme guess. You'll post that your point is still valid.

and the Republican voted to reject these obviously frivolous and partisan charges...?

i.e. whether the GJ vote needs to be unanimous or what. All I was doing was correcting multiple misstatements of fact by one poster.

One of the jurists said he liked Delay's politics but saw that something was clearly wrong here. I wish I could remember where I saw that. I'd be glad to show you.

Besides, you'd be that quick to believe that none of 12 were supportive republicans??

So OK, I mispoke on the voting part since this was done outside his district. That doesn't change the fact that it wasn't a jury of 12 anti-Delay liberals that indicted him. Not at all.

So yeah, ya guessed right. My larger point is still valid. This is not a liberal or partisan conspiracy.

You speak to me as though I am a personal supporter of DeLay and refuse to believe things about him.

I don't fully support anyone unless I have met that person and can judge his character.  Much as with my own Senator Stevens (about the Only politician I Do support against all comers).

I do not know DeLay and if he's guilty, then he needs to go to jail.  Plain and simple.  And I really don't like the fact that he Still says he's going to do the job of Majority leader even though he isn't.  He needs to step out of the limelight and deal with the problem.

However, a 3 minute search of google that even I can work will give you this particular prosecutor's history.  Let me tell you, it isn't pretty.

... they indict the majority leader of an actual crime he commited.

So, Delay is already guilty in your book, huh? What country do you live in? You don't know the difference between an indictment and a conviction?

Not so much fun when it hits home huh?

Actually, it's a lot of fun lampooning a political hack of a prosecutor whose indictment is so obviously a political attack, and a clumsy one at that. Isn't it a shame that the first indictment already fell apart, since what Delay was accused of wasn't even illiegal until a year later? Or maybe ex post facto is ok in your book too?

I thought you guys welcomed people with different political views

This site thrives on intelligent debate, but that requires that some intelligence be displayed on both sides. I don't know how much intelligence you have, but you sure didn't display any with your posts in this thread. And we really get tired of being hit over the head with non sequiturs ("You guys must remember a guy named Ken Star (sic)?"), ad hominem attacks (playing bush's (sic) er i mean devils (sic) advocate) and leftist talking points ("That they indict the majority leader of an actual crime he commited" (sic))

So, if you want to discuss the issue intelligently, please proceed. Otherwise, to Kos with you.

I repeat:

The partisan affiliations of his targets is not what makes Ronnie Earle a charlatan hack. Ronnie Earle is a hack because he has proven himself willing, time and again, to use the powers of his office to persecute his political foes even when it was absolutely clear that he has no case against his target.

His pathetic crusades against Jim Mattox, Bob Bullock, Kay Bailey Hutchison are more than enough to make his actions suspect, especially after examining the extremely thin reed upon which he hung his indictment of Tom DeLay.

I am unaware of anyone claiming that Earle has only ever prosecuted Republicans, so endlessly repeating the pathetic "I've prosecuted both Republicans and Democrats" talking point is answering a charge no-one has made and is nothing more than an act of misdirection.

Oh ... and as many must have already told you, Travis County ain't in DeLay's district. And second, considering the Left's penchant for impersonation, I am taking this favorite juror of yours' word for it.

If Earle were going after a Dem, which has many, many times in the past, you'd be cheering him on regardless of the charges or evidence.

Nice straw man there. Have fun attacking him.

What's with the arrogance and indifference to Delay's wrongdoings and the action taken against him?

Few people here believe that Delay did anything wrong. Heck, I bet even Ronnie Earle doesn't believe Delay did anything wrong. And it's an indictment, not a conviction, but the lefties are already ready to lock Delay up and throw away the key. Apparently you've already convicted him in your mind ("arrogance and indifference to Delay's wrongdoings").

To leftists and their media, Republicans are guilty until proven innocent.