DeLay Indicted

[Felix_Nietsche]

politicians are and ambitious bunch and I am sure there are some guys who have been waiting in the wings to get their chance and they are not going to put their goals on ice for Delay.
************************************************** ********
Good point. Ronnie Earle will do everything in his power to delay the trial. Based on his past behavior, he wants to milk this incident for all the publicity he can. A long drawn out trial could give more ambitious republicans the excuse to move on and choose another house leader.

I have heard several interviews of lawyers that have read the indictment and their reactions are one of shock that there is no details of DeLays supposed crime. The trial will be a complete joke. The propaganda campaign against DeLay may be more serious......

[elwoodblues]

[ QUOTE ]
I have heard several interviews of lawyers that have read the indictment and their reactions are one of shock that there is no details of DeLays supposed crime.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have no idea where yoiu saw this interviews, but do you think the lawyers were chosen at random to respond, or do you think they were chosen because their reaction was one of "shock."

[Felix_Nietsche]

I have no idea where yoiu saw this interviews, but do you think the lawyers were chosen at random to respond, or do you think they were chosen because their reaction was one of "shock."
************************************************** ****
So far I have heard three lawyers interviewed. One said he was a liberal and found the lack of details in the indictment troubling and he was not sure what DeLays SPECIFIC crime is. As for the politcal affilations of the other two lawyers one was definately a conservative and the other I don't know. I would love to see a poll of lawyers who read the indictment to see if there is a general concensus on the validity of the indictment.

Indictments are suppose to include enough detail where the defendent knows the specifics of the alleged crime so that a defense may be prepared. I have some doubts this will go to trial. After all, Ronnie Earle's case against Kay Baily Hutchinson case was dropped the day of trial when Earle decline to prosecute because he "feared" the judge would not allow certain evidence to be presented.

Ronnie Earle was poltical allies with Ann "Ma" Richards and he indicted her chief political rival Greg Maddox on bribary charges. Maddox won the case easily but Earle damage Maddox enough where Richards was able to become govenor. This is a typical play from Ronnie Earle's playbook.

[nyc999]

[ QUOTE ]
I have no idea where yoiu saw this interviews, but do you think the lawyers were chosen at random to respond, or do you think they were chosen because their reaction was one of "shock."
************************************************** ****
So far I have heard three lawyers interviewed. One said he was a liberal and found the lack of details in the indictment troubling and he was not sure what DeLays SPECIFIC crime is. As for the politcal affilations of the other two lawyers one was definately a conservative and the other I don't know. I would love to see a poll of lawyers who read the indictment to see if there is a general concensus on the validity of the indictment.

Indictments are suppose to include enough detail where the defendent knows the specifics of the alleged crime so that a defense may be prepared. I have some doubts this will go to trial. After all, Ronnie Earle's case against Kay Baily Hutchinson case was dropped the day of trial when Earle decline to prosecute because he "feared" the judge would not allow certain evidence to be presented.

Ronnie Earle was poltical allies with Ann "Ma" Richards and he indicted her chief political rival Greg Maddox on bribary charges. Maddox won the case easily but Earle damage Maddox enough where Richards was able to become govenor. This is a typical play from Ronnie Earle's playbook.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is just a theory...

Several media outlets/publications believe that maybe 1 of the other 3 people who were indicted a while back have decided to testify against DeLay.

I don't know if this explains the wording of the indictment, but it may indicate why Earle has been fairly tight-lipped regarding the case.

[elwoodblues]

[ QUOTE ]
Indictments are suppose to include enough detail where the defendent knows the specifics of the alleged crime so that a defense may be prepared.

[/ QUOTE ]


Have you read it? If he doesn't know what act he is being charged with, he's retarded.

Text of the indictment

[slamdunkpro]

My favorite Ronnie Earle bit - “A grand jury in Travis County, Texas, last September indicted eight corporations in connection with the DeLay investigation. All were charged with making illegal contributions (Texas law forbids corporate giving to political campaigns). Since then, however, Earle has agreed to dismiss charges against four of the companies — retail giant Sears, the restaurant chain Cracker Barrel, the Internet company Questerra, and the collection company Diversified Collection Services — after the companies pledged to contribute to a program designed to publicize Earle's belief that corporate involvement in politics is harmful to American democracy.”

I guess extortion is legal in Texas.

[Felix_Nietsche]

In a way I'm glad Ronnie Earle is going national. Earle has been abusing his office in Texas for years. Now more people will realize what a scumbag he is......

The campaign laws are retarded.
It is LEGAL for corporations to donate to PACS which in turn donate to the candidates. All Americans have the right to form a PAC, solicit donations for the PAC, and for the PAC to donate to campaigns. Even small business owners from Sugarland, TX have this right......

[Dotson]

Right or wrong, it's agianst the law in Texas for corporations to donate to people running for state office. I think a couple of his fellow indictees are actually taking the constitutionality of the law to the Texas Supreme Court. But as it stands now its the law. If Delay and Co. solicited corporate money with the intention of sending it to the RNC so they could send it to the Texan politicians then he is guilty. It is going to be hard to prove intent but the result are pretty clear. He better pray no one flips and he didn't leave a paper trail.

[slamdunkpro]

I just read the whole indictment – what a convoluted joke. In order to prove Delay guilty, he has to prove all the other parties guilty, but in order to prove the other parties guilty he has to prove Delay guilty. This will go nowhere.

[Nepa]

[ QUOTE ]
There is a joke among DAs that they could get a Grand Jury to indict a ham sandwich.

[/ QUOTE ]

Funny that this is the same thing that Trent Lott said yesterday.

Remember that Trent vote to AGAINST impeaching Nixon but voted to impeach Clinton.