<p>and temporarily Steps Down From House Leader Post</p>
<p>Just to take away the pleasure for some to break this news on CC!</p>
<p>By LARRY MARGASAK, AP</p>
<p>WASHINGTON (Sept. 28) - 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.</p>
<p>DeLay, 58, 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.</p>
<p>DeLay is the first House leader to be indicted while in office in at least a century, according to congressional historians.</p>
<p>PS NEWS ALERT 2:45PM: Rep. Tom DeLay says he has “done nothing wrong” and will be cleared of all allegations.</p>
<p>I’m not a big DeLay fan, but I’m very suspicious of Ronnie Earle. I guess he couldn’t bag a Republican senator when he went after Kay Baily Hutchison so he went after DeLay. We’ll see where this goes. But in the meantime I think it’s a win with Drier - I am much more impressed with him than I ever was with DeLay.</p>
<p>Well fundingfather, I think we finally agree on something. I’m no DeLay fan either. But, I am from Texas, and everything is bigger in Texas - including the snakes!</p>
<p>I didn’t see this post when I asked the question elsewhere about how this would change the Bush end game. What will they be able to do without him.</p>
<p>This one’s going in the deep file, along with Dan Rather. I wouldn’t be surprised to see Earle disbarred over this. But enjoy your latest fantasy. BTW, does anyone else find it interesting that the Republican majority leaders in both houses, plus the president’s top advisor are being subjected to questionable legal attacks? Yes, the obvious CC answer is that it’s because the Bush administration is so corrupt. But I was looking for a serious answer. This isn’t happening by accident. It’s political warfare, and I don’t see the Dems pulling it off. Or pulling anything else off, if their performance during the Roberts “hearings” were any indication of what they have to muster.</p>
<p>Are delay and all this little indicted friends innocent?<br>
by the way, look back at Ken Starr and that whole mess, you want to talk about witch hunts</p>
<p>and yes, it is interesting that in several different states, by several different organizations- SEC, Texas Prosecturer, Florida, its a giant conspiracy to get those pure as the driven snow republicans…they are corrupt and its finally coming out</p>
<p>We have some of Bush’s friends being arrested, we have some of his fundraiser friends being checked out for murder, in FLORIDA no less, that bastion of liberal evilness</p>
<p>Talk about parinoid and conspiracy nuts, that is what I am hearing from Bush fans- its a giant partisan hunt- as if the Republicans didn’t write that book</p>
<p>Remember when the Republicans wanted to make it okay to keep your leadership positions even if you got indicted? Who were they trying to protect</p>
<p>oh, yeah, themselves</p>
<p>and didn’t they not choose drier, and choose bulton…guess the closeted gay who votes against gay rights is too scary for the republican base</p>
<p>I think that Clinton’s personal behavior set him up for civil prosecution for sexual harassment of female employees. I think that Republican operatives found out about Paula Jones, a state employee who, most would say, had a legitimate grievance. I think they egged her on to sue him, and I think he got in trouble in part because he had a history of womanizing, but also because he as a candidate, and again as president, had supported making a man’s pattern of behavior fair game in sexual harassment cases. The NOW folks loved this when he was running for office as a champion of women’s rights, but grew strangely silent once it was clear that they had caught one of their own. Unable to extricate himself from the lawsuit, Clinton lied under oath to avoid admitting a similar, ongoing pattern of behavior with a current employee (Lewinski). The blue dress left him with his thing caught in the wringer. He ended up paying a lot of money to Paula Jones to settle her suit. He was disbarred, both in Arkansas, and by the Supreme Court. A president caught committing perjury gets impeached. End of story.</p>
<p>You don’t have to be a Democrat to cheer this news. There are well-meaning, honorable Republicans out there, but DeLay isn’t one of them. Good riddance to a bad guy.</p>
<p>The indictment alleges that DeLay and others entered into a conspiracy to violate three Texas election statutes when they allegedly did the following: they solicited $155,000 in donations to “Texans for a Republican Majority PAC,” then delivered a check for $190,000 written on the same PAC bank account payable to the Repulican National Committee, together with a document stating that in return for the $190,000 check, the RNC should donate specific sums to the campaigns of specific candidates in Texas.</p>
<p>Here are the Texas statutes cited in the indictment:</p>
<p>"Sec. 253.003. UNLAWFULLY MAKING OR ACCEPTING CONTRIBUTION. (a) A person may not knowingly make a political contribution in violation of this chapter.
(b) A person may not knowingly accept a political contribution the person knows to have been made in violation of this chapter.
(c) This section does not apply to a political contribution made or accepted in violation of Subchapter F.
(d) Except as provided by Subsection (e), a person who violates this section commits an offense. An offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor.
(e) A violation of Subsection (a) or (b) is a felony of the third degree if the contribution is made in violation of Subchapter D.</p>
<p>"Sec. 253.094. CONTRIBUTIONS AND EXPENDITURES PROHIBITED. (a) A corporation or labor organization may not make a political contribution or political expenditure that is not authorized by this subchapter.
(b) A corporation or labor organization may not make a political contribution or political expenditure in connection with a recall election, including the circulation and submission of a petition to call an election.
(c) A person who violates this section commits an offense. An offense under this section is a felony of the third degree.</p>
<p>“Sec. 253.104. CONTRIBUTION TO POLITICAL PARTY. (a) A corporation or labor organization may make a contribution from its own property to a political party to be used as provided by Chapter 257.
(b) A corporation or labor organization may not knowingly make a contribution authorized by Subsection (a) 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.
(c) A corporation or labor organization that knowingly makes a contribution in violation of this section commits an offense. An offense under this section is a felony of the third degree.”</p>
<p>It looks to me like the strength of the prosecution’s case will depend on whether the PAC raised at least $190,000 in non-corporate contributions, or in corporate contributions outside the 60-day window where they’re prohibited. I suppose he could argue that comingling the tainted corporate funds with other funds would mean that some percentage of each dollar contributed to the RNC consisted of a prohibited corporate contribution; I don’t find that to be a compelling argument, personally. </p>
<p>But if the PAC raised less than $190,000 total from non-prohibited sources, DeLay may be forced to argue that parking the money for a short time in the PAC’s back account cleansed it of any corporate taint. I’d hate to build a defense around that argument, personally.</p>
<p>Regarding Earle and Sen. Hutchinson, to clarify that part of the record, from an e-mail from a research librarian friend:</p>
<p>The defense didn’t agree about the evidence. The critical evidence was the backup tapes and documents from the treasurer’s office. They were seized under a subpoena, not a search warrant. The defense indicated it would challenge the admissibility. Earle requested a pretrial hearing for a ruling up or down on the evidence. Judge Onion refused the hearing, but stated he expected the defense attorney had a case. Earle tried to finesse - not submit the evidence, get the trial dropped so he could prosecute under a new judge. Judge Onion out-finessed him, empaneled a jury and ordered them to acquit as the prosecution wasn’t submitting evidence. No retrial possible as the counts were tried and the defendant acquitted - double jeopardy isn’t allowed.</p>
<p>==========</p>
<p>And apparently Hastert had his flank turned, with the Conference choosing Blunt for most of the acting power. A mistake, imo, as Blunt is deeply tied to DeLay’s web. </p>
<p>Dreier is squeaky clean, though increasingly vulnerable, about which his being outed as being gay–an open secret–isn’t going to help.</p>
<p>DeLay actually being indicted is a pleasant surprise. There are still other investigative torpedoes running and I think there’s a good chance that Grover Norquist and Ralph Reed will be hit. And I think it’s 50/50 about Rove. Corruption, cronyism, and incompetence…both at home and abroad.</p>
<p>Sometimes I think the saddest part of Washington corruption is that they sell out for so little. $190,000? A 50K campaign donation guarantees favorable action on pet legislation? That’s chump change for any decent company, and chump change in truly corrupt circles.</p>
<p>So yes, let’s throw the book at the bumbs, for incompetence, cheap sellouts as well as the corruption. You wanna see how it’s done right? Come on up to Chicago, and see how the “hired trucks” program was run - of course they got caught there, ahem. Or take a look at some of the no bid Katrina contracts. Now there’s some real money for friends (and real jobs for other friends, I suspect.)</p>
<p>Delay, the exterminator get exterminated?</p>
<p>BTW, for those that think this is just a partisan witch hunt, keep in mind that a grand jury, NOT the prosecutor, passed down the indictment. Last time I checked, there were more republicans in Texas than dems.</p>
<p>Greybeard, the mechanism the PACs involved used is a time honored tradition in Texas. The Democrats actually funneled more money into their committees this way in 2002 than the Republicans did. It’s all in the public records. As near as I can tell, the specific transaction involved wasn’t illegal, or if it was, there should be a more indictments coming.</p>
<p>The more interesting point is, even if someone could make the case that it was illegal, the DA is going to have to show that Delay knew about the transaction, approved of it, knew it was illegal and intended to commit the illegal act.</p>
<p>The weird part, though, is that Earle, the Travis County DA, doesn’t have venue in this case. Since Delay is a resident of Texas, charges against him have to be brought in his county of residence down near Houston, not up in Austin (aka, the People’s Republic of Austin).</p>