|
|
#21
10-05-2005, 04:23 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Delayed statements
[ QUOTE ]
"Guns have little or nothing to do with juvenile violence. The causes of youth violence are working parents who put their kids into daycare, the teaching of evolution in the schools, and working mothers who take birth control pills." [/ QUOTE ] You're serious? Source? 
|
|
#22
10-05-2005, 04:26 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Not hearing much on the Delay indictments suddenly
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] People are trying to sidetrack the issue with attacks on DeLay's character [/ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Also, Earle has brought tenuous charges against people before and been shut down. [/ QUOTE ] [/ QUOTE ] nh. Was about to make a similar post. Earlier he said Earle was a partisan hit-man, and now he says people are avoiding the topic by attacking DeLay's character. Just so blatantly hypocratical, how can he be serious.
|
|
#23
10-05-2005, 04:34 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Not hearing much on the Delay indictments suddenly
I don't know if the judge will allow this charge to stand as a legally chargable offense or not, but I believe you do not understand fully the legal nature of this. I've read many legal experts who have claimed that the offense was already implicitly in the law before the act was committed and therefore can be legally charged. The legislature added the specific language later just as a way of saying, "if you didn't already understand this, then let us make this perfectly clear, this is against the law."
Again, I'm not saying that the judge might not possibly throw this out, but it's very debatable as to whether or not it was already on the books.
|
|
#24
10-05-2005, 04:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Not hearing much on the Delay indictments suddenly
[ QUOTE ]
I don't know if the judge will allow this charge to stand as a legally chargable offense or not, but I believe you do not understand fully the legal nature of this. I've read many legal experts who have claimed that the offense was already implicitly in the law before the act was committed and therefore can be legally charged. The legislature added the specific language later just as a way of saying, "if you didn't already understand this, then let us make this perfectly clear, this is against the law." Again, I'm not saying that the judge might not possibly throw this out, but it's very debatable as to whether or not it was already on the books. [/ QUOTE ] Has anyone even read the "charge"? There are no real facts in it, usually an indictment sort of "relies" on facts to even be presented, they are strangely and profoundly missing in this "case". Especially involving Mr. Delay.
|
|
#25
10-05-2005, 04:55 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Not hearing much on the Delay indictments suddenly
Regardless of whether or not the indictments were a "partisan hit job," Delay is still one of the lowest of the low.
It would be nice if the people on this forum stopped showing so much blind allegiance to their own party members. It won't happen, but it would be nice. NOTE: For all those waiting to say it, I'm still not a liberal.
|
|
#26
10-05-2005, 05:26 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Not hearing much on the Delay indictments suddenly
[ QUOTE ]
Regardless of whether or not the indictments were a "partisan hit job," Delay is still one of the lowest of the low. It would be nice if the people on this forum stopped showing so much blind allegiance to their own party members. It won't happen, but it would be nice. NOTE: For all those waiting to say it, I'm still not a liberal. [/ QUOTE ] Dont misunderstand me. I have no particular loyalty to Mr DeLay. Hes done some good things for the Republican party. He has also hurt the image of the party at times. Frankly. I dont give a crap whether he gets convicted or not. I just think its funny how it the DeLay issue got real quiet on here after the initial gloating. Also, to those that are calling me a hypocrite, no. I am saying judge his case on the merits of the facts, regardless of whether or not he is a douche. No one is charging Earle with a crime, at least I'm not, and thus adressing the role his character may have had in these charges is completely relevant, especially given that he has engaged in this sort of behavior before.
|
|
#27
10-05-2005, 05:28 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Not hearing much on the Delay indictments suddenly
[ QUOTE ]
Has anyone even read the "charge"? There are no real facts in it, usually an indictment sort of "relies" on facts to even be presented, they are strangely and profoundly missing in this "case". Especially involving Mr. Delay. [/ QUOTE ] Have you read the charge? The parties involved, the exact dollar amounts, the money trail through the various accounts in question, and a photocopy of one of the checks don't count as facts? Here is the link to the indictment: http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2005/images/0...indictment.pdf Please note as well that this is an indictment, not a conviction, thus a landslide of rock-solid airtight evidence is not going to be included. That's what the trial will be for.
|
|
#28
10-05-2005, 05:42 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: He\'ll be convicted
[ QUOTE ]
It's clear that you share the the corrupt ethical belief system of your masters. [/ QUOTE ] we've missed you jokerswild. Can't keep a good troll down, huh? [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]
|
|
#29
10-05-2005, 05:54 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Delayed statements
|
|
#30
10-05-2005, 09:31 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Not hearing much on the Delay indictments suddenly
[ QUOTE ]
Indictment 1: A charge for crime that wasnt even a crime at the time DeLay allegedly commited the crime. [/ QUOTE ] To clarify, conspiracy to violate the election code was not a specific statute. Nevertheless, conspiracy to commit a crime has been a illegal for a long long time, regardless of whether it's been "in the books". To say "this isn't a crime" is like saying murder's not a crime, if it has not been codified.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
