he has already been indicted, and has already stepped down as required by the tehics rules in the House (which the GOP did try unsuccessfully to change earlier this year, but were prevented by public outcry).
The joke is you can indict a ham sandwich. They say he accepted an illegal ~$155k donation. Show me the receipts, prove the intent, and I'd be more than happy to have the man in jail. But so far both sides are claiming victory with right already poo-poo'ing it as a partisan attack.
This is just going to be plain nasty with very, very little facts shaping people's opinions.
The Democrats that Earle prosecuted were his political foes—they were conservative/moderate Democrats, and Earle is liberal.
There has long been a deep schism in the Texas Democratic party. It's not so evident anymore, since many of the conservatives/moderates went ahead and became Republicans (like my entire family did).
To be entirely honest, I'm having a hard time drumming up much interest one way or the other. If he's guilty then he's gone and won't be missed (by me). If he's not, then it's just more business as usual of the two parties sliming each other.
So far as I'm concerned, anyone who's been in congress more than 20 years, or in a leadership position in either party for more than ten is automatically suspect anyway.
(Yes, I'm a supporter of term limits. Too bad it appears to be a lost cause.)
Okay, I'm a Texan. I think it's common knowledge in Texas Delay ain't clean. He's rolled in the pig pen more than once. The only thing that would shock me is if they actually had enought to get him.
I'm with Dean on the term limits. If the President (elected by EVERYONE) can't serve as many as the people want, why the hell should Congress be able to serve 'til they decide to quit. I swat mosquitos all the time, and most Congressmen aren't much different from the bloodsucking flyers...other than they don't fly without help.
I would bet that he did it (whatever it was) but it wasn't against the law. The ethics laws were written by congressmen (and women) who like the perks so the loopholes are huge.
As for the editorial, I've seen too many that are full of outright lies to trust this one. Especially with this
A spokesman for the Republican Party of Texas called Earle's investigation frivolous. That charge is rebutted by the impressive legal talent hired to represent the targets of the probe.
What does the talent of the defense have to do with the validity of the charges? If you think you have a politically motivated foe you would assume he (she) won't play nice so you get the best defense you can find to keep the prosecution honest.
You also get the best talent you can find to defend yourself against real charges.
So the talent of the defense is immaterial to the validity of the charges.
I do look forward to the knowing looks, innuendo and aggreived air of the MSM as they report on this./sarcasm>
An indictment doesn't mean anything. A conviction means something. If DeLay is convicted of anything as a result of this then I will be stunned and amazed.
I don't know if Earle is politically motivated or not, but I do suspect he's grandstanding. DeLay is stepping down temporarily isn't an admission of anything. It's just to avoid giving the Democrats an even bigger stick. Either way, DeLay will forver have "once indicted" stuck on his name, and Earle risks nothing if the indictment fails.
Delay helped to setup a committee to raise money for Republicans running for the Texas State legislature. This committee raised money from corporations. Under Texas election law it is illegal for money from corporations to be given to candidates. It can only be used for administrative expenses and issue advertising. The committee gave the money to the national Republican party, which the next day wrote checks totally exactly the same amount of money to the Texas candidates for the state legislature.
My understanding is that Earle has a very strong case that this was money laundering in violation of the Texas election law. What is not clear is whether he has any real evidence that Tom Delay was involved in the money laundering. Certainly, Tom Delay helped found the committee and he could have used his influence with the national Republican party to arrange the money laundering, but I have not seen any evidence of this. Unless someone is willing to say that Delay told them to do this or there is something in writing that links Delay to the money laundering, I don’t see how Earle is going to get a conviction on Delay.
The other argument is whether the Texas law is constitutional. I believe that so far the Texas courts have ruled that it is, but I’m sure that will get appealed to the US Supreme Court eventually.
Mikeca - A correction: Based on the indictment (I don't know Texas campaign law and thus limited by the indictment), it appears that it is only illegal in the 60 days prior to the election.
However, I am with you on not being certain how Delay is connected. The indictment doesn't even say what Delay is being charged with. It only appears to say that Delay has waived his right to the statute of limitations with respect to this incident.
This is NOT about national politics. It is about the growing impotence (oxymoron??) of the Democratic Party in Texas. It is about payback for Republicans being victorious in the redistricting battle.
Tom Delay, as a representative in Texas, had an interest in that issue, and used his power and influence to help undue the gerrymandering that had been going on for 20 years to keep an disproportionate number in power. Texas Democrats were and are irate at their inability to continue gaming the system.
Ronnie Earle has been dogging Delay ever since. Like a police car tracking you in traffic, he was waiting for the proverbial "changing lanes without signaling," or "rolling through a stop sign" moment so he could "hit the lights and pull over" Delay.
But unlike traffic court, Earle has to prove his case against Delay. The "officer" won't be given the benefit of the doubt in this case. It is possible that Earle, after three long years of tracking Delay's every move, really did catch Delay doing something that is technically illegal. But even if that is true, it doesn't mean that it is not trivial.
Getting a ticket for changing lanes without signalling, or not signalling more than 100 feet before a stop sign is evidence of a pedantic officer. Those tickets, while technically correct, are trivial. But you still have to pay the fine.
The charges can be both trivial AND true - unfortunately.
Delay helped to setup a committee to raise money for Republicans running for the Texas State legislature. This committee raised money from corporations. Under Texas election law it is illegal for money from corporations to be given to candidates. It can only be used for administrative expenses and issue advertising. The committee gave the money to the national Republican party, which the next day wrote checks totally exactly the same amount of money to the Texas candidates for the state legislature.
I may be wrong but as I understand it the corporation money was funneled through a PAC to the RNC, in which case whether the amounts received by the TX legislators were the same or not, there is no foul.
I have read the indictment and Texas Law. I am having a hard time putting together the conspiracy when Earle is saying DeLay may have had knowledge therefore there is a conspiracy. He has evidence stating the complete opposite of what he is charging.
Dean I am with you on term limits and I would add age limits to it.
Well, perhaps this will work out like the Trent Lott affair...they replaced him with the uber-clean Frist...oh, wait...belay that
Ah, well, then maybe is will work out the way Reid has been so much more effective than Daschale...hmmm...
You know, the leadership pretty much sucks, wich has led to the general impotence of both parties in both houses. Though, arguably, due to parlimentary rules, the majority parties in the house always have a structural advantage and will be more successful more or less by default...hence the 'loss' of Delay is meaningless to the Republicans.
And given the Democartic hyperbole on soooo many issues, in the even that Delay has really done something wrong, I don't think they'll get the outrage. In fact, by not allowing the rule change, if Delay is convicted, they lost the chance to have the Majority leader do a perp walk. Now he'll just be a back bencher, regarldess of how much the Media Screams.
I looked but couldn't find much info. It is claimed that Earle "goes after" politicians for political reasons. Anyone know how many convictions he has on the politicians he had indicted? The only one I knoe about id Kay B Hutchinson's case was dismissed. What about the others? Anyone know where I can find his record?
"Earle says local prosecution is fundamental and points out that 11 of the 15 politicians he has prosecuted over the years were Democrats."
Just heard Delay state (with a chuckle) the reason for that is because most of the indictments are from back when the state was all Democratic, when the charges were liberal Democrats vs conservative Democrats.
I'm betting that--since Delay's replacement has been his primary lieutenant--the moonbats are going to take to periodically shrieking that Mr. Blount is simply carrying out Delay's orders, and that nothing has changed. Should be good for opportunities to abuse the loonies, if nothing else--and it's somewhat less distasteful than the sexuality related innuendoes that the usual suspects were throwing around earlier today when it looked like Dreier was going to be the new Majority Leader.
Delay helped to setup a committee to raise money for Republicans running for the Texas State legislature. This committee raised money from corporations. Under Texas election law it is illegal for money from corporations to be given to candidates. It can only be used for administrative expenses and issue advertising. The committee gave the money to the national Republican party, which the next day wrote checks totally exactly the same amount of money to the Texas candidates for the state legislature.
Is inaccurate. The amount of money received from corporations was $156,000. The check written to the RNC was $190,000 (so even if the corporate money was used, it wasn't the only source.)
Ronnie Earle isn't a partisan. He's a little, vindictive man who goes after any politician who pisses him off. (Ask some of the Democrats he's gone after what they think of him.) He could care less what party they are members of.
And his argument about indicting more Democrats than Republicans is silly. There are no Republicans in Austin. It's the bastion of la la land in Texas, a little pond of liberals surrounded by an ocean of conservatives.
The Washington Post would love to get behind this but even they are having trouble understanding why this indictment was brought. They hedge, but they also say
This was an obvious end run around the corporate contribution rule. The more difficult question is whether it was an illegal end run -- or, to be more precise, one so blatantly illegal that it amounts to a criminal felony rather than a civil violation.
Of course they end up with the need for the GOP to get rid of Delay. But then, they've been advocating that for years. They like their Republicans weak and ineffectual.
Okay, I'm a Texan. I think it's common knowledge in Texas Delay ain't clean. He's rolled in the pig pen more than once. The only thing that would shock me is if they actually had enought to get him.
I'm a Texan and I'd say just about every politician in the state (there are a few relatively clean ones) have rolled in the pig pen. The only question is how long and with whom.
I personally don't like delay's style and I think he's bad for the GOP because he has the personal charisma of a pit bull and he seems to like a leadership style that I find off-putting.
But Earle is probably (from accounts I've read) as much of a jerk as Delay. They deserve each other, in other words, and we don't deserve either of them.
And the comment about the prosecution of democrats because Texas was an all-democratic state is probably true. I still remember when Bill Clements became the first Republican governor since reconstruction. In SE Texas, the county I used to work in didn't even run candidates for local offices.
Tom Delay, as a representative in Texas, had an interest in that issue, and used his power and influence to help undue the gerrymandering that had been going on for 20 years to keep an disproportionate number in power.
Yep. But the Republicans just replaced Democratic gerrymandering with Republican gerrymandering. Delay's party won, but our state still comes out a loser.
Gerrymandering's been part of American politics for about 200 years--look up the genesis of the word and you'll see that.
It got raised to a high art form by Democrats in California in the 1980s when they started using computers to carve up districts that looked like modern art pieces, and it's spread to other states since.
Surprisingly, despite all this, congress usually winds up looking fairly representative of the country as a whole anyway.
If the charges are true, DeLay should suffer the consequences. If not, he'll suffer them anyway because he's already being condemned as it it is.
The joke is you can indict a ham sandwich. They say he accepted an illegal ~$155k donation. Show me the receipts, prove the intent, and I'd be more than happy to have the man in jail. But so far both sides are claiming victory with right already poo-poo'ing it as a partisan attack.
This is just going to be plain nasty with very, very little facts shaping people's opinions.
Yours,
Wince
There has long been a deep schism in the Texas Democratic party. It's not so evident anymore, since many of the conservatives/moderates went ahead and became Republicans (like my entire family did).
So far as I'm concerned, anyone who's been in congress more than 20 years, or in a leadership position in either party for more than ten is automatically suspect anyway.
(Yes, I'm a supporter of term limits. Too bad it appears to be a lost cause.)
I'm with Dean on the term limits. If the President (elected by EVERYONE) can't serve as many as the people want, why the hell should Congress be able to serve 'til they decide to quit. I swat mosquitos all the time, and most Congressmen aren't much different from the bloodsucking flyers...other than they don't fly without help.
As for the editorial, I've seen too many that are full of outright lies to trust this one. Especially with this
A spokesman for the Republican Party of Texas called Earle's investigation frivolous. That charge is rebutted by the impressive legal talent hired to represent the targets of the probe.
What does the talent of the defense have to do with the validity of the charges? If you think you have a politically motivated foe you would assume he (she) won't play nice so you get the best defense you can find to keep the prosecution honest.
You also get the best talent you can find to defend yourself against real charges.
So the talent of the defense is immaterial to the validity of the charges.
I do look forward to the knowing looks, innuendo and aggreived air of the MSM as they report on this./sarcasm>
I don't know if Earle is politically motivated or not, but I do suspect he's grandstanding. DeLay is stepping down temporarily isn't an admission of anything. It's just to avoid giving the Democrats an even bigger stick. Either way, DeLay will forver have "once indicted" stuck on his name, and Earle risks nothing if the indictment fails.
My understanding is that Earle has a very strong case that this was money laundering in violation of the Texas election law. What is not clear is whether he has any real evidence that Tom Delay was involved in the money laundering. Certainly, Tom Delay helped found the committee and he could have used his influence with the national Republican party to arrange the money laundering, but I have not seen any evidence of this. Unless someone is willing to say that Delay told them to do this or there is something in writing that links Delay to the money laundering, I don’t see how Earle is going to get a conviction on Delay.
The other argument is whether the Texas law is constitutional. I believe that so far the Texas courts have ruled that it is, but I’m sure that will get appealed to the US Supreme Court eventually.
However, I am with you on not being certain how Delay is connected. The indictment doesn't even say what Delay is being charged with. It only appears to say that Delay has waived his right to the statute of limitations with respect to this incident.
Tom Delay, as a representative in Texas, had an interest in that issue, and used his power and influence to help undue the gerrymandering that had been going on for 20 years to keep an disproportionate number in power. Texas Democrats were and are irate at their inability to continue gaming the system.
Ronnie Earle has been dogging Delay ever since. Like a police car tracking you in traffic, he was waiting for the proverbial "changing lanes without signaling," or "rolling through a stop sign" moment so he could "hit the lights and pull over" Delay.
But unlike traffic court, Earle has to prove his case against Delay. The "officer" won't be given the benefit of the doubt in this case. It is possible that Earle, after three long years of tracking Delay's every move, really did catch Delay doing something that is technically illegal. But even if that is true, it doesn't mean that it is not trivial.
Getting a ticket for changing lanes without signalling, or not signalling more than 100 feet before a stop sign is evidence of a pedantic officer. Those tickets, while technically correct, are trivial. But you still have to pay the fine.
The charges can be both trivial AND true - unfortunately.
I may be wrong but as I understand it the corporation money was funneled through a PAC to the RNC, in which case whether the amounts received by the TX legislators were the same or not, there is no foul.
Dean I am with you on term limits and I would add age limits to it.
Well, perhaps this will work out like the Trent Lott affair...they replaced him with the uber-clean Frist...oh, wait...belay that
Ah, well, then maybe is will work out the way Reid has been so much more effective than Daschale...hmmm...
You know, the leadership pretty much sucks, wich has led to the general impotence of both parties in both houses. Though, arguably, due to parlimentary rules, the majority parties in the house always have a structural advantage and will be more successful more or less by default...hence the 'loss' of Delay is meaningless to the Republicans.
And given the Democartic hyperbole on soooo many issues, in the even that Delay has really done something wrong, I don't think they'll get the outrage. In fact, by not allowing the rule change, if Delay is convicted, they lost the chance to have the Majority leader do a perp walk. Now he'll just be a back bencher, regarldess of how much the Media Screams.
Just heard Delay state (with a chuckle) the reason for that is because most of the indictments are from back when the state was all Democratic, when the charges were liberal Democrats vs conservative Democrats.
Ronnie Earle isn't a partisan. He's a little, vindictive man who goes after any politician who pisses him off. (Ask some of the Democrats he's gone after what they think of him.) He could care less what party they are members of.
And his argument about indicting more Democrats than Republicans is silly. There are no Republicans in Austin. It's the bastion of la la land in Texas, a little pond of liberals surrounded by an ocean of conservatives.
This was an obvious end run around the corporate contribution rule. The more difficult question is whether it was an illegal end run -- or, to be more precise, one so blatantly illegal that it amounts to a criminal felony rather than a civil violation.
Of course they end up with the need for the GOP to get rid of Delay. But then, they've been advocating that for years. They like their Republicans weak and ineffectual.
I'm a Texan and I'd say just about every politician in the state (there are a few relatively clean ones) have rolled in the pig pen. The only question is how long and with whom.
I personally don't like delay's style and I think he's bad for the GOP because he has the personal charisma of a pit bull and he seems to like a leadership style that I find off-putting.
But Earle is probably (from accounts I've read) as much of a jerk as Delay. They deserve each other, in other words, and we don't deserve either of them.
And the comment about the prosecution of democrats because Texas was an all-democratic state is probably true. I still remember when Bill Clements became the first Republican governor since reconstruction. In SE Texas, the county I used to work in didn't even run candidates for local offices.
Yep. But the Republicans just replaced Democratic gerrymandering with Republican gerrymandering. Delay's party won, but our state still comes out a loser.
It got raised to a high art form by Democrats in California in the 1980s when they started using computers to carve up districts that looked like modern art pieces, and it's spread to other states since.
Surprisingly, despite all this, congress usually winds up looking fairly representative of the country as a whole anyway.