Delay...

[FromTexas (Premo)]

Interesting extra info on Delay - I can not seem to load up the Delay thread on NMCI so this is going here.

In regards to the voting tendencies of the 1st Grand Jury to indict Delay...

Seven of the members have voted in Democratic primaries on and off in elections since 1992.

Not just registered or have voted Democratic, but they took the time to vote in Democratic primaries. That is more passion in their belief than the regular voter. Only one member was a registered Republican who had voted in Republican primaries. Two of the twelve had not voted in any primary. Another had voted on primaries on both sides of the fence over the years. That leaves information missing on one.

What do you make of that?

[Lenny]

Originally Posted by FromTexas

Interesting extra info on Delay - I can not seem to load up the Delay thread on NMCI so this is going here.

In regards to the voting tendencies of the 1st Grand Jury to indict Delay...

What do you make of that?

Since a grand jury only needs a majority (or 60% in some cases) vote to indict, I wonder how the vote split out on the recent DeLay indictment.

[FromTexas (Premo)]

I checked the rep/dem votes in the last Presidential Elections and some historical data from Travis County (Austin). Typically, it swings Democrat, but not by that big of a ratio (52-56% voting Dem and 43-45% Republican). Yet, the Grand Jury representation is 7 primary going Democrats to only 1 primary going Republican. You have 1 that probably represents the independent factor okay since they kept swinging between Rep/Dem primaries. A little skewed in the representation there.

I have never been a huge fan of Delay. In fact, he pisses me off on occasion, but this sounds more and more like a witch hunt.

[vraiblonde]

Originally Posted by FromTexas

I have never been a huge fan of Delay. In fact, he pisses me off on occasion, but this sounds more and more like a witch hunt.

I'm not a big Delay fan either but this smear tactic is just ridiculous.

Limbaugh had some additional news about the jury. The foreman of the jury was interviewed on a radio talk show in Texas that was recorded, and after the interview was over the foreman started talking about how he had really been upset about TV and newspaper ads for Republican politicians, and that he had based his decision to convict on those commercials and NOT on any evidence presented during the grand jury!!! It'll be real interesting to see how that plays out.

[SamSpade]

Can someone - anyone - explain to me in simple terms what he is accused of, what was done that was illegal, and how Delay is connected to it?

As far as I can tell, money was donated to a PAC inside the legal time limits, and money was later given to a campaign from the PAC inside the legal time limits - and as far as I can tell, Delay had nothing to do with it other than being from Texas and a Republican.

Could someone fill in the details?

[willie]

Originally Posted by SamSpade

Can someone - anyone - explain to me in simple terms what he is accused of, what was done that was illegal, and how Delay is connected to it?

As far as I can tell, money was donated to a PAC inside the legal time limits, and money was later given to a campaign from the PAC inside the legal time limits - and as far as I can tell, Delay had nothing to do with it other than being from Texas and a Republican.

Could someone fill in the details?

I think you just did.

[otter (Premo)]

From PowerLine blog


America's worst DA, the execrable Ronnie Earle, admitted today that he went grand jury shopping. After his initial indictment of Tom DeLay fell apart, he went to a second grand jury, presented his evidence, and the grand jury refused to return any charge against DeLay. Undeterred, Earle then went to a third grand jury that was more pliable and agreed to a "money laundering" indictment on the basis of what could only have been, at most, a few hours of "evidence." The Austin Statesman has a report:


A Travis County grand jury last week refused to indict former U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay as prosecutors raced to salvage their felony case against the Sugar Land Republican.

In a written statement Tuesday, Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle acknowledged that prosecutors presented their case to three grand juries — not just the two they had discussed — and one grand jury refused to indict DeLay. When questions arose about whether the state's conspiracy statute applied to the first indictment returned last Wednesday, prosecutors presented a new money-laundering charge to second grand jury on Friday because the term of the initial grand jury had expired.


Working on its last day Friday, the second grand jury refused to indict DeLay. Normally, a "no-bill" document is available at the courthouse after such a decision. No such document was released Tuesday.


Ronnie Earle is a disgrace to the legal profession and the people of Austin, Texas. I'm not sure whether his abuse of his office is ground for disbarment or not, but, in any event, his shameful political pursuit of Tom DeLay must end.

Apparently the money laundering endictment was sought after DeLay's lawyer made it know that he was going to ask the judge on monday to throw out the first indictment because it was so feeble. Earle then hijacked a third grand jury based on some new evidence that mysteriously materialized just this last weekend, showed it to the grand jury, allowed them to ponder the evidence and arrive with an endictment all before close of business Monday.

Now, how can that happen? DeLay is one of the most astute politicians in the US, and validates everything he does with lawyers, so he isn't the kind of guy who would leave evidence around that makes it blatantly apparent he's committing a crime. And it would take, one would think, some mighty strong evidence for a grand jury to see it and indict on it in the course of one afternoon.

Since grand jury testimony is secret, we don't know what was presented, but I'm betting it's some cooked up crap that one of Earle's cronies contrived at the last minute to keep the indictments alive, and that will fall apart under future scrutiny.

One more thing to consider is that Earle has had a film crew following him around for two years recording his efforts to fight political corruption and campaign funding violations, and they're making a documentary of his actions. He's sure going to look pretty rediculous if after two years of expending the tax payer's money and time he comes up with a lot of nothing.

[FromTexas (Premo)]

Sam,

The charges come from Texas state law, and they are not federal campaign laws. In short, the groups they say Delay was involved with took money in from corporations. Corporate money is restricted in Texas state campaigns (state legislature, etc...). The corporate PAC money was sent up to a national party group. The national party group later gave a similar amount of money split between multiple Republicans running for the state offices.

So, the money laundering charge comes from the allegation that corporate money (which was not allowed to go to the state Republicans running) was filtered to the national level and then back down as "good" money. The conspiracy charge would be if Delay knew all this and ran the show so multiple Republicans could receive the money (in the year this all happened the Republicans took control of the state legislature FYI -- a little bitterness, eh?).