Not hearing much on the Delay indictments suddenly

vulturesrow · #1 10-05-2005, 10:18 AM

Now that Ronnie Earle's indictment(s) have been revealed for the partisan hit job that they are, I notice that the libs on this forum havent said much. C'mon boys, lets hear your support for good ol' Ronnie Earle! [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Dotson · #2 10-05-2005, 10:27 AM

Tom Delay may go to jail or he may not. I think he did do what he was acussed of but it could be hard to prove. Either way he has been sidelined and I'm okay with that. Delay is an ethically challenged politician and if he goes does at the hands of an ethically challenged DA, so be it.

vulturesrow · #3 10-05-2005, 10:43 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Tom Delay may go to jail or he may not. I think he did do what he was acussed of but it could be hard to prove. Either way he has been sidelined and I'm okay with that. Delay is an ethically challenged politician and if he goes does at the hands of an ethically challenged DA, so be it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Which indictment are you referring to? The first indictment wherein Delay was charged with a crime that didnt exist in Texas code or the second one where he is charged with money laundering, which he couldnt even get DeLay indicted on before.

What exactly did DeLay do that was illegal?

Dotson · #4 10-05-2005, 10:51 AM

Delay is accused of using TRMPAC to collect corporate donations with the intention of delivering them to politicians running for state office. This plan was alledgedly excuted by sending the money to the RNC with instructions of having them send a similar amount back to the Texas politians. If this is true this would be illegal.

#5 10-05-2005, 10:36 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Now that Ronnie Earle's indictment(s) have been revealed for the partisan hit job that they are

[/ QUOTE ]

They have??? Really??? That's funny, I just checked foxnews.com and there's nothing there about Delay being exonerated. Please provide a link to this breaking news.

vulturesrow · #6 10-05-2005, 10:46 AM

Where did I say he had been exonerated? But when DeLay's lawyer filed a motion to dismiss, Ronnie Earle, in less than a day, with a brand new grand jury, managed to get an indictment on money laundering charges, you have to start thinking maybe there wasnt much merit to the charges. And Im quite sure you know about all these developments, why you are being deliberately obtuse is beyond me.

#7 10-05-2005, 11:43 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Where did I say he had been exonerated? But when DeLay's lawyer filed a motion to dismiss, Ronnie Earle, in less than a day, with a brand new grand jury, managed to get an indictment on money laundering charges, you have to start thinking maybe there wasnt much merit to the charges. And Im quite sure you know about all these developments, why you are being deliberately obtuse is beyond me.

[/ QUOTE ]

So you see an indictment on a charge carrying potential penalty of life in prison as an improvement over an indictment on a charge carrying a penalty of six months to two years? Ummmm, ok.

Let's just say that I know enough about how criminal law and plea and charge bargaining work to know that it is difficult to draw any firm conclusions from the publicly available information. I can construct arguments "proving" that the indictments are baseless and politically motivated and I can construct arguments "proving" that Delay knows his goose is cooked and has been trying to work out a plea-bargain that salvages his political career. But what I *believe* is that we don't know that *either* of those things are true yet.

Obviously, you have put your faith in Delay's ethics. Ummm...good luck with that, I guess. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

jaxmike · #8 10-05-2005, 11:25 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Now that Ronnie Earle's indictment(s) have been revealed for the partisan hit job that they are

[/ QUOTE ]

They have??? Really??? That's funny, I just checked foxnews.com and there's nothing there about Delay being exonerated. Please provide a link to this breaking news.

[/ QUOTE ]

I will just point to the fact that he was indicted on "charges" that weren't even illegal as proof of a political motivation. You can't really counter that, because it's a fact.

MtSmalls · #9 10-05-2005, 12:29 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I will just point to the fact that he was indicted on "charges" that weren't even illegal as proof of a political motivation. You can't really counter that, because it's a fact.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not that it will change Jax's mind (or Felix's or the rest of the koolaid bunch), but since he put the RNC talking point out there like a good little dittohead, here's the truth:

Texas state penal code has had the conspiracy issue outlined for years. It allows for a charge of conspiracy against defendants if they conspired to commit ANY felony, including an election code felony.

In 2003 (after the money laundering was done), the ELECTION CODE law was expanded to include, explicitly, conspiracy charges.

So the indictment Earle made, under the Texas state PENAL code, is more than valid. I anxiously await the trial date on both this charge and the money laundering charge.

mmbt0ne · #10 10-05-2005, 02:55 PM

</font><blockquote><font class="small">En réponse à:</font><hr />
In 2003 (after the money laundering was done), the ELECTION CODE law was expanded to include, explicitly, conspiracy charges.

So the indictment Earle made, under the Texas state PENAL code, is more than valid. I anxiously await the trial date on both this charge and the money laundering charge.

[/ QUOTE ]

How is this true? I thought you couldn't be charged because of an act committed before it was considered a crime.