DeLay indictment

[cnredd]

As for actually discussing the details of his investigation, just exactly what did he tell everyone? And I want a reputable link for that too.

Partisan fighting between Republicans and Democrats is particularly intense in Texas, but Republicans were particularly angered by the district attorney's speech in May at a Democratic fundraiser in Dallas.

Characterizing the DeLay case as involving money, power and corruption, Mr. Earle told Democrats: "This case is not just about Tom DeLay. If it isn't this Tom DeLay, it'll be another one, just like one bully replaces the one before."

The dinner and the speech raised $102,000 for Texas Values in Action, a political action committee created to help fund Democratic Party efforts to recapture control of the state legislature.

Texas Republicans demanded Mr. Earle's resignation, and a spokesman for Mr. DeLay said the speech demonstrated that the Travis County prosecutor was using his investigation as "a fundraising effort for Democrats."

Texas Republicans yesterday called the indictment of Mr. Delay a payback for the House majority leader's success in organizing and directing the Republican takeover of the state's political institutions.

http://washingtontimes.com/national/20050929-121259-6923r.htm

From the same source, pertinent to the previous defence that he went after more Dems the Repubs...

Mr. Earle notes that he has tried 15 politicians for felony crimes and 11 of them were Democrats. However, during most of the time since he was elected to the office in 1976, Democrats were the state's dominant party, controlling legislative majorities and nearly every statewide office in Texas.

Read on to see his defeats of charges on both sides...

It seems the contention is that Republicans believe he is going after DeLay because of his party...I think that's the wrong accusation...

To me, it looks like Earle is trying to fry ANY big fish to make a name for himself, and it's just DeLay's turn to be the target.

 

[danarhea]

Partisan fighting between Republicans and Democrats is particularly intense in Texas, but Republicans were particularly angered by the district attorney's speech in May at a Democratic fundraiser in Dallas.

Characterizing the DeLay case as involving money, power and corruption, Mr. Earle told Democrats: "This case is not just about Tom DeLay. If it isn't this Tom DeLay, it'll be another one, just like one bully replaces the one before."

The dinner and the speech raised $102,000 for Texas Values in Action, a political action committee created to help fund Democratic Party efforts to recapture control of the state legislature.

Texas Republicans demanded Mr. Earle's resignation, and a spokesman for Mr. DeLay said the speech demonstrated that the Travis County prosecutor was using his investigation as "a fundraising effort for Democrats."

Texas Republicans yesterday called the indictment of Mr. Delay a payback for the House majority leader's success in organizing and directing the Republican takeover of the state's political institutions.

http://washingtontimes.com/national/20050929-121259-6923r.htm

First and foremost, notice how Earle said bully, not Republican bully. He prosectues Democratic bullies just as hard. Also notice that he spoke in generalities, and did not mention any specifics of this particular case. So whats the problem?

That quote only shows how passionate Earle is about prosecuting those corrupt individuals who misuse their positions of power. Dont forget that Earle has gone after 12 Democrats and only 3 Republicans, and Earle's previous work is one of the reasons that the Republicans took back the state of Texas. Among the Democrats he has sent up are a prominent Senator and a State Supreme Court justice.

The only thing coming from the Republicans is a lot of whining, in my honest opinion. If a Democrat had done the same thing Delay did, Earle would be their hero, just as he has been their hero in the past.

Its just blatant hypocrisy, and a page from the GOP playbook of sleaze. Thats all it is.

 

[cnredd]

Dont forget that Earle has gone after 12 Democrats and only 3 Republicans, and Earle's previous work is one of the reasons that the Republicans took back the state of Texas. Among the Democrats he has sent up are a prominent Senator and a State Supreme Court justice.

I can see by this quote you didn't read the whole thing and went straight to partisanship...The last two sentences would've stopped your party affiliation tirade...

 

[danarhea]

I can see by this quote you didn't read the whole thing and went straight to partisanship...The last two sentences would've stopped your party affiliation tirade...

What party affiliation? I am a Libertarian, and proud of it. Neither whore owns me, and I am referring to the Democratic and Republican parties.

 

[cnredd]

What party affiliation? I am a Libertarian, and proud of it. Neither whore owns me, and I am referring to the Democratic and Republican parties.

Irrelevant of what YOU happen to be, this is a partisan statement...

The only thing coming from the Republicans is a lot of whining, in my honest opinion. If a Democrat had done the same thing Delay did, Earle would be their hero, just as he has been their hero in the past.

Now my last two sentences...

It seems the contention is that Republicans believe he is going after DeLay because of his party...I think that's the wrong accusation...

To me, it looks like Earle is trying to fry ANY big fish to make a name for himself, and it's just DeLay's turn to be the target

I took the partisanship out of it...

 

[danarhea]

Irrelevant of what YOU happen to be, this is a partisan statement...

The only thing coming from the Republicans is a lot of whining, in my honest opinion. If a Democrat had done the same thing Delay did, Earle would be their hero, just as he has been their hero in the past.

Now my last two sentences...

It seems the contention is that Republicans believe he is going after DeLay because of his party...I think that's the wrong accusation...

To me, it looks like Earle is trying to fry ANY big fish to make a name for himself, and it's just DeLay's turn to be the target

I took the partisanship out of it...

About the whining. That is what it is, just as the Demorcrats whined when Bill Clinton was impeached for lying to a grand jury. He should have been convicted, but impeachment, of course, is a political process. Its also why impeachment wont work with Bush either.

The way I see it, Democratic and Republican ideologues are going to whine if the shoe is on the other foot. It is their nature.

Also, Earle is not trying to make a name for himself, and never has. It is his job to prosecute wrongdoing. The wrongdoing happened in the State of Texas, and Austin is the capital. He did not decide one day that he was going to get so and so. It is his jurisdiction, and it is his duty. A lot of Democrats have found that out the hard way. During the prosecution of Yarbrough, Democrats made the accusation that Earle was a phoney Democrat and was working with Republicans to destroy the Democratic party in Texas. What destroyed the Democratic majority here was corruption, the same kind of corruption that we see in Delay and TRMPAC.

 

[cnredd]

About the whining. That is what it is, just as the Demorcrats whined when Bill Clinton was impeached for lying to a grand jury. He should have been convicted, but impeachment, of course, is a political process. Its also why impeachment wont work with Bush either.

The way I see it, Democratic and Republican ideologues are going to whine if the shoe is on the other foot. It is their nature.

It seems the contention is that Republicans believe he is going after DeLay because of his party...I think that's the wrong accusation...

I have already addressed this, so your former generalization...

Its just blatant hypocrisy, and a page from the GOP playbook of sleaze. Thats all it is.

...is funny, because I, a GOP member, apparently am not using the GOP "playbook"...I apologize for not being an "ideologue":roll:

Also, Earle is not trying to make a name for himself, and never has. It is his job to prosecute wrongdoing. The wrongdoing happened in the State of Texas, and Austin is the capital. He did not decide one day that he was going to get so and so. It is his jurisdiction, and it is his duty. A lot of Demcrats have found that out the hard way. During the prosecution of Yarbrough, Democrats made the accusation that Earle was a phoney Democrat and was working with Republicans to destroy the Democratic party in Texas. What destroyed the Democratic majority here was corruption, the same kind of corruption that we see in Delay and TRMPAC.

THAT is more debatable...my quote again...

To me, it looks like Earle is trying to fry ANY big fish to make a name for himself, and it's just DeLay's turn to be the target

I've only stated an opinion...if you disagree, that's fair...:2wave:

 

[danarhea]

It seems the contention is that Republicans believe he is going after DeLay because of his party...I think that's the wrong accusation...

I have already addressed this, so your former generalization...

Its just blatant hypocrisy, and a page from the GOP playbook of sleaze. Thats all it is.

...is funny, because I, a GOP member, apparently am not using the GOP "playbook"...I apologize for not being an "ideologue":roll:

THAT is more debatable...my quote again...

To me, it looks like Earle is trying to fry ANY big fish to make a name for himself, and it's just DeLay's turn to be the target

I've only stated an opinion...if you disagree, that's fair...:2wave:

I do disagree, but respectfully. As far as your not being an ideologue, that is excellent. Your kind will be exactly what the GOP needs once the Bushneviks are gone. At that time, I just might come home too.

 

[cnredd]

I do disagree, but respectfully. As far as your not being an ideologue, that is excellent. Your kind will be exactly what the GOP needs once the Bushneviks are gone. At that time, I just might come home too.

If I look deep enough, I think there's a compliment in there somewhere...:2wave:

 

[Canuck]

In case you lefties don't know it in this country you are innocent until proven guilty by a jury of your peers..........I know you don't like that..You would love hang him without a trial.............



can you repeat that for all the iraq citizens in your jails and being tortured
please!

 

[Stinger]

Fitzpatrick goes to Republican fundraisers, and gives to whomever he pleases.

And has he ever given a speech at one discussing his ongoing investigation? Did you miss that part in my post about Earle doing so and that being my complaint?

When he indicts Rove and Libby,

When he does? You know for a fact he will?

are you going to claim he isnt ethical either and call for his disbarment too?

Why would I do that?

You probably will, but on what grounds, since he gives to the GOP?

Let me suggest you not try to make a living giving predictions.

As for actually discussing the details of his investigation, just exactly what did he tell everyone? And I want a reputable link for that too.

:rofl so let me get this straight you are sitting there trying to chasize me over this without even knowing what Earle said or did. No wonder you post seems so ignorant of the facts.

http://www.talkshowamerica.com/2005/05/prosecutor-in-probe-of-delay-pac.html
Thursday, May 19, 2005

Prosecutor in probe of DeLay PAC raises funds for other side

Earle's speech on political corruption keys on the GOP leader, whom he likens to a bully

Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle, who denies partisan motives for his investigation of a political group founded by Republican leader Tom DeLay, was the featured speaker last week at a Democratic fund-raiser where he spoke directly about the congressman.


A newly formed Democratic political action committee, Texas Values in Action Coalition, hosted the May 12 event in Dallas to raise campaign money to take control of the state Legislature from the GOP, organizers said.

Earle, an elected Democrat, helped generate $102,000 for the organization.

In his remarks, Earle likened DeLay to a bully and spoke about political corruption and the investigation involving DeLay, the House majority leader from Sugar Land, according to a transcript supplied by Earle.

"This case is not just about Tom DeLay. If it isn't this Tom DeLay, it'll be another one, just like one bully replaces the one before," Earle said.

"This is a structural problem involving the combination of money and power," he added. "Money brings power and power corrupts."

The crowd of 80 to 100 Democratic activists responded by making donations that exceeded the event's fund-raising goal.

*****************************


Oh and here is a link to information about the film he is having made of his crusade, yep what an unbias'd prosectuor.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/09/30/opinion/main892946.shtml

 

[ShamMol]

Embattled Rep. Tom DeLay is indicted on a new charge of money laundering by a Texas grand jury, AP reports.

Cnn.com

So, another charge to conspiracy, and one that is theoretically easier to prove (as conspiracy is a very hard charge to ever prove)....wonder what this will mean.

 

[scottyz]

Cnn.com

So, another charge to conspiracy, and one that is theoretically easier to prove (as conspiracy is a very hard charge to ever prove)....wonder what this will mean.

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20051003/ap_on_go_co/delay_indictment_1

Both indictments accuse DeLay and two political associates of conspiring to get around a state ban on corporate campaign contributions by funneling the money through a political action committee to the
Republican National Committee in Washington.

The RNC then sent back like amounts to distribute to Texas candidates in 2002, the indictment alleges.

 

[BWG]

*****************************


Oh and here is a link to information about the film he is having made of his crusade, yep what an unbias'd prosectuor.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/09/30/opinion/main892946.shtml

Quotes taken from your own link.

"We approached him [Earle], and he offered us extraordinary access to him and, to an extent, to his staff," Birnbaum told National Review Online Thursday. "We’ve been shooting for about two years."

If it's Earle's film, why didn't he seek out a film crew?

Whoever ends up showing it, the film has so far been funded entirely by its makers. "We tried really hard to get it funded," Birnbaum says, "but we didn’t get any takers."

If it's Earle's film, why didn't he seek funding or fund it himself?

"We got to follow him back to his home a couple of times, which I understand he doesn’t allow anybody to do." Schermbeck says the film includes interviews with some critics of Earle, as well as lawyers who are representing some of the targets of the investigation.

Is this EXTRAORDINARY ACCESS? Why would Earle have critics of him interviewed if he made the film?

 

[Stinger]

Cnn.com

So, another charge to conspiracy, and one that is theoretically easier to prove (as conspiracy is a very hard charge to ever prove)....wonder what this will mean.

Easier to prove if there is evidence, I haven't read the indictment, although I did hear most legal anyalist saying this added nothing new. Curious to see if he at least charges Delay with something in this one since he didn't in the first.

 

[Stinger]

Quotes taken from your own link.

If it's Earle's film, why didn't he seek out a film crew?

why do that when one comes to you with the offer?

If it's Earle's film, why didn't he seek funding or fund it himself?

He's a lawyer you think a lawyer is going to pay for something if he can get someone else to do it?

Is this EXTRAORDINARY ACCESS?

Fliming the Grand Jury going in and out is not EXTRAORDINARY ACCESS?

Why would Earle have critics of him interviewed if he made the film?

So he could deflect what they say later.

It's grand standing no matter how you try to paint it. And does it serve justice when the prosecutor is trying to get a film about himself out it, do you really think Earle wants the film about the pinnnacle of his career ending in what would be a massive defeat for him? Don't you believe there is the slight possibility it just might influence his prosecution?

 

[Stinger]

Cnn.com

So, another charge to conspiracy, and one that is theoretically easier to prove (as conspiracy is a very hard charge to ever prove)....wonder what this will mean.

So let's look at what really is going on. We find out that Delay's lawyer go into to court and show the incompetence of Earle due to his issuing an indictment for a breaking a law that wasn't even in existence at the time. Seeing his case going down the drain, with the film crew rolling, he pulls in another grand jury and in a matter of hours comes out with NEW charges against Delay. Why didn't he indict him on these charges last week? How could he possibly have put together a thought out, proveable charge in the matter of a few hours?

Repeated calls to his office by the Associated Press to answer such questions went unanswered.

As the AP reported

............
Defense lawyers asked a judge Monday to throw out the first indictment, arguing that the charge of conspiring to violate campaign finance laws was based on a statute that did not take effect until 2003 — a year after the alleged acts.
The new indictment from District Attorney Ronnie Earle, coming just hours after the new grand jurors were sworn in, outraged DeLay.
"Ronnie Earle has stooped to a new low with his brand of prosecutorial abuse," DeLay said in a statement. "He is trying to pull the legal equivalent of a 'do-over' since he knows very well that the charges he brought against me last week are totally manufactured and illegitimate. This is an abomination of justice."
Earle's office did not return repeated phone calls from The Associated Press.
In a written statement, the office outlined the new charges and possible punishments, but did not address criticism from DeLay's attorneys.....
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051004/ap_on_go_co/delay_indictment

 

[ShamMol]

Easier to prove if there is evidence, I haven't read the indictment, although I did hear most legal anyalist saying this added nothing new. Curious to see if he at least charges Delay with something in this one since he didn't in the first.

This one actually requires less evidence theoretically...because taht is how hard conspiracy is to prove.

Stinger, you may not be aware, but it is not ethical for lawyers to adress each other in the court room or outside of it regarding the case until it is over. The DA is most likely following procedure which is based off that understood rule and thus probably can't say anything...but watch me be disproven.

It is possible to charge someone with a law that takes place after the fact, but it is very hard to do and from all intents and purposes, this DA has done a good job of it building the fact that the conspiracy continued until after 2003, possibly even today from what reports I have read on the indictment. That would basically allow them to try Delay and the others under taht.

Go ahead and keep on attacking the DA, but honestly, attack the case more...it just shows weakness to attack the prosecutor, at least in my opinion. Find flaws in the case-you seemed to be onto something except for the fact that the conspiracy continued until after the law was passed supposedly. Why didn't he indict on these charges last week...that is a damn good question that I want answered, but the most likely answer is that he started this line of inquiry to teh grand jury as the evidence presented itself and thus could not tie it to the same indictment.

 

[BWG]

why do that when one comes to you with the offer?



He's a lawyer you think a lawyer is going to pay for something if he can get someone else to do it?



Fliming the Grand Jury going in and out is not EXTRAORDINARY ACCESS?



So he could deflect what they say later.

It's grand standing no matter how you try to paint it. And does it serve justice when the prosecutor is trying to get a film about himself out it, do you really think Earle wants the film about the pinnnacle of his career ending in what would be a massive defeat for him? Don't you believe there is the slight possibility it just might influence his prosecution?

You are the one saying Earle is having a film made of his crusade.

So far you have failed to prove that accusation.

 

[Stinger]

This one actually requires less evidence theoretically...because taht is how hard conspiracy is to prove.

Then why has it taken half a dozen grand jury's to bring it. Why didn't he bring it last week. While it may be easier to prove, theoretically, you still have to have the evidence to do it. He pull this grand jury together AFTER he realized that he had made a gross error in the one he got last week. And let's not forget the camera's are there to document his getting Delay as he has pledged to do (another ethics violation). So he goes in and in hours, not even getting any further testimony from Delay as to this charge, and walks out with a NEW AND IMPROVED version.

Stinger, you may not be aware, but it is not ethical for lawyers to adress each other in the court room or outside of it regarding the case until it is over.

Lawyers talk all the time, before during and after a case. That's how settlements are drawn, that's how evidence is presented and investigated.

The DA is most likely following procedure which is based off that understood rule and thus probably can't say anything...but watch me be disproven.

He's had no problems saying things before and now all of a sudden his office is shutting up, yes I'd be doing some watching too.

It is possible to charge someone with a law that takes place after the fact, but it is very hard to do

If they pass a law that says you must use your right foot when stepping off a curb and they find a video of me using my left before the law is in effect they cannot charge me with a crime. Do you know what ex post facto is and how it is mentioned in the constitution? Try Article 1 sec 9 and sec 10.

Go ahead and keep on attacking the DA

Is pointing out that he is using the case to build a movie around himself attacking him?
Is pointing out that he made a gross error in the original inidictmen attacking him?
Is pointing out that he is speaking about the ongoing case in public for the purpose of raising campaign money attacking him?

, but honestly, attack the case more...it just shows weakness to attack the prosecutor, at least in my opinion.

I think refusing to acknowledge the conflicts and prejudice this prosecutor has exhibited just shows a weakness.

Find flaws in the case-you seemed to be onto something except for the fact that the conspiracy continued until after the law was passed supposedly.

And the evidence Earle has presented of this? And where is the eveidence that there was anything at all that was ongoing beyond the single check that has been presented?

Why didn't he indict on these charges last week...that is a damn good question that I want answered, but the most likely answer is that he started this line of inquiry to teh grand jury as the evidence presented itself and thus could not tie it to the same indictment.

What new evidence? He had no investigation going he had completed the grand jury and issued the indictments. He went running to a new one when the gross errors of his first one were exposed in court. That was a slam dunk. He desperate now to get anything. Just as when three weeks ago he wrote to Delay's attorney's and announced publicly that Delay was NOT a target of the investigation and the papers slammed him, he turned around and got a grand jury to issue this vague indictment no one was able to explain. And now we can see the haste and desperation he was in because they didn't even check to see if the law was in effect at the time.

Hey if Delay is guilty of something then prove it in court and fine him and make him serve time if the law so demands. But let's look honestly at what this DA is engaged in here.