I just saw him quoted as saying that the prosecutor, Earle "a partisan fanatic" who carried out the investigation for political reasons.
wow, can you say whitewater? WHAT GOES AROUND COMES AROUND.....
the facts surrounding this case are not very murky.... and I LIKE the Texas law prohibiting CORPORATE donations...
i would like to see a Federal Law requiring all campaign contributions to be fully reported on a centrally located database available on the INTERNET, and ONLY from REGISTERED VOTERS...NO-ONE ELSE... no furrinnerz and no corporations....
Posted by Dustoff101 on :
I met Tom Delay at an airport one time, he was selling books and chanting Hari Crishna......J/K
Ya, they gonna be slinging da chit on this one!
Some of these chacacters do have, that really odd smile though....
Democrat or Republican, it gets so you can spot um from they're facial features..
Must be the Right versus Left brain function.LOL
Posted by bdgee on :
As far as brain processes go, I know both good and
bad rightees and lefftees.
Same thing is true with politics. There are both
good guys and bad guys on the right as well as the left.
However, with this current group in the dud's
Administration and their close associates in
Congress and elsewhere, there just aren't any good guys.
Posted by Dustoff101 on :
bdgee, I liked Dwight Eisenhower he played golf and didn't bother people..Besides, he smoked Camel straights, good smoke..
That is, when he wasn't recovering from multiple heart attacks..
Posted by keithsan on :
just finished reading the court document, barely mentions delay defiantely doesn't specify what he's done, does specify 2 others i don't know of pretty well.
I find this one interesting, will watch, prosecutor has done this in the past and lost. delay has always been under suspicion, one of them is lying.
currently, DA hasn't presented any facts, which is weird but, maybe he needs to hide them, not sure. very unimpressed with his case, he doesn't really specify one. I wonder if he'll face charges on using the law for political purposes.
from a law perspective very intersting. I don't care about delay dems or repubs. interesting with last seat in supreme court needing to be filled that a couple of guys are now being investigated... fishy at least.
as far as whitewater goes, completely different, but all political as always.
Posted by bdgee on :
"prosecutor has done this in the past and lost"
Prosecutor has done this in the past and won.
Prosecutor has done this in the past and bargained
dismissal for assurance of resigning or never
running for office again and fines etc......those
are the losses the republicans point to.
Contrary to Republican reports, over 80% of the
political figures Earle has charges were
Democrats.
I don't know what is included in criminal charges
in other places, but in Texas, FACTS are NOT
included in an inditement, only the statement of
the offenses.
Yes, this is entirely different from
Whitewater.....Delay actually did conspire to
break the law. Whitewater was only a bunch of
sick Republicans telling lies and tales of ghost
that never were, endangering the welfare of the
Republic for political gain.
Posted by glassman on :
every case is different, my reference to whitewater is that the GOP used the courts to "go after" the dems non-stop...
the SEC is investigating Frist too...
the SEC isn't partisan is it
the dominoes are tipping everywhere....
can't wait to hear what Judith Miller has to say about Cheneys cheif of staff....
Posted by keithsan on :
quote:Originally posted by bdgee: Yes, this is entirely different from
Whitewater.....Delay actually did conspire to
break the law. Whitewater was only a bunch of
sick Republicans telling lies and tales of ghost
that never were, endangering the welfare of the
Republic for political gain.
Who needs judges when we have know it alls. thanks for the insight. I'll stop reading now can you tell me where the missing college girl is oh guru.
Sorry but I make my own opinions on facts that I can find. Currently I have none, so I can't make a case. I'll take my facts from the court, both sides and not just media, thanks anyways.
Texas cases, I could swear, but am not positive, I'll go to westlaw and pull a couple cases when I get a sec. But normally, the prosecutor charges you with a crime, lets say murder, he tells you who you killed and explains (not in detail) how and why he arrived at conclusion.
Therefore you can have a defense that knows how to defend itself, courts aren't for surprises they are for a discussion of 2 sides of the facts.
Maybe the guy did prosecute 80% dems. I don't really care, my point was he has attempted to attack another repub thru the law and lost after that repub and he were in some political wranglings.
Hopefully he is doing his job and arresting everybody.
Glass. the only relevance i see to whitewater is the fact that politicians for a defense ALWAYS cry political frame up. Different case from what I can guess fact wise.
If anyone is commenting on this without reading the facts you are completely silly. Also, pull some other indictments and you will see that they have more facts in them.
anyways on a personal note, I don't care if Delay gets life or goes free.
[ September 30, 2005, 17:38: Message edited by: keithsan ]
Posted by Dustoff101 on :
I wouldn't want to be convicted before they find me quilty!!LOL
But on the other hand, everything I ever was arrested for, well, I was quilty as hell!!
I had good lawyers, if I hadn't, well I probably would be an expert on "Chain Gangs".
Posted by bdgee on :
According to you:
1) " DA hasn't presented any facts"
2) "If anyone is commenting on this without reading the facts you are completely silly,"
3) ".... I make my own opinions on facts that I can find"
A clear appeal for logical consistancy has been made.
But, you comment:
1) "DA hasn't presented any facts, which is weird but, maybe he needs to hide them, not sure. very unimpressed with his case, he doesn't really specify one."
2) "I wonder if he'll face charges on using the law for political purposes."
Based purely on your insistance that there are "no facts" available and that no one should comment on this matter absent facts, why did you?
Too, I ask: It certainly appears that you feel that being republican exempts people from being subject to the law and restricts anyone from objecting to that privilege. Are republicans also granted license for name calling, so that whoever disagrees with a republican can be demeaned and labeled as a menber of the class of "know it alls" and flippantly referred to as "oh guru"? I suppose, with such attitudes, you will be offended if it is suggested that a glance in the mirror in order?
Just why does it become necessary to indulge in name calling? Exactly why must republicans resort to insult instead of debate and why do they believe it is acceptable behavior? Easier than reason, perhaps. I gave disagreement and differing opinions, but no disrespect. How foolish of me, I guess.
Posted by keithsan on :
Are you kidding me. That is your argument?
You state that delay actually did conspire to break the law. How do you know this, are you a mouse in the house of congress?
I never stated delay was guilty or innocent. I did wonder about the prosecutor, not till after having read the indictment of course. Since i wasn't thrilled with the facts on the indictment andhe has had one other case that a republican nemesis was aquitted for, it made me think. I also wonder about the timing with the last supreme court justice on the way. Mind you, I DID NOT say the prosecutor did these things, but these will most likely be defense type arguments.
You also state that Sick republicans out to destroy the republic were the cause for Whitewater. Will you be saying the same thing about the dems "if" delay is acquited?
I am not a republican nor a democrat, I hate "party thinking". I do love the law and some of the cases. As some on this board know, I do have a law degree. Although it doesn't make me an expert.
How can one have a debate with a person that has already made up their mind on the issue before the facts have been presented. I don't know what you disagreed with me about I made no statements of fact to anything acept the indictment, when there is some form of rebuttal I will comment on that.
Currently its a case I'm interested in and I do not care if Delay fries or wins.
Posted by bdgee on :
And exactly how do you know anything about it? You admit to knowing no facts, then suggest impropriety by the prosecuter, by claiming to "wonder if {the prosecuter}'ll face charges on using the law for political purposes." Astounding! So you were in the know and were "a mouse in the {Austin Court House}?" "I know", you say, but, "I don't know", you say.....all at the same time.
No, you didn't say Delay was either guilty or innocent.....in so many words. Instead, to serve that purpose by implication, you assault the credibility and honesty of the prosecuter, for bringing charges againse Delay.
At no time or place did I say, "Sick republicans out to destroy the republic were the cause for Whitewater." What I did say was, "Whitewater was only a bunch of sick Republicans telling lies and tales of ghost that never were". I certainly DID NOT SAY those, or any other, republicans were out to destroy the Republic. It results that, by attacking Clinton with false charges, they endangered the Republic. They attacked as a pack, not as reasoning animals, and were oblivious to any consequences, including the stress they placed on the Constitution.
I congrratulate you on graduating from law school. I grant you the respect you have earned in doing so.
It is not me with the mind made up in advance, so I will not tender debate again.
As to your implied query, "I don't know what you disagreed with me about....": What I disagree with is simple.....you declare you have no facts and further that commenting on the case without facts is silly.....I grant that conclusion. It is stipulated, in the lingo of the court. Then you procede to comment and conclude that the prosecuter has no case and is only after Delay because of politics. That's commenting without facts! When I point that out, you respond with insult and name calling. Why?
What Delay and his functionaries did with corporate donations (donations may be the wrong term as that carries connotations of both willingness to give and the non-willingness to do so for improper use) and is illegal in Texas. Even, when, as was the case here, it is done in an office in Washington D.C. or other such locations, so as to present a question of jurisdiction. Conspiracy does not require actually physically handing the funds in question and does not require them to be handled in Texas. Indeed, one may conspire by failing to prevent an illegal act or action. You will know that and a lot more from your law courses, of course.
By the way, no one hates "party thinking" more than me. It is a path to dictatorship...just ask the Germans or Itallians or Russians.
Posted by keithsan on :
You seem to know what delay did with corporate donations? I don't other than media speculation. In the indictment the prosecutor doesnt specify, yes i could read dem blogs and find why delay is guilty, I could also read repub ones and find why he's innocent.
You are assuming a man delay is dishonest, and are attacking me for wondering if there may be other motivation here by the prosecutor. I assume everyone is not guilty until they are proven to be. I wondered and did not state the prosecutor did this. Since I obviously have no proof other than a past case and the timing. I would not dare call the prosecutor nor delay guilty of anything at this point.
You are correct I did misquote you, you did not say "destroy" the republic, my bad. You said " endangering the welfare of the Republic for political gain".
Still party politics in my mind, you state delay is Actually guilty without a trial, the facts, or even a response from him.
You spoke of the republicans as a "wild pack of animals" both parties are guilty of that, thats what they do, they attack one another.
Watch now with the last supreme court judge, there will be a ton of corruption in the administration talk with delay at the forefront.
IMO without much fact. A couple of the guys in delays "group" look like they are guilty. Usually, but not always, it doesn't matter if the guy at the top knew or not. Without any evidence yet I assume Delay will plea out quickly to get it all behind him. Unless there is more than circumstantial evidence.
Posted by glassman on :
i have to say i disagree about the "one at the top" keith....
whitewater came to nothing ...the tactics were not invented by the GOP to abuse Clinton, but the GOP? they ratcheted the pressure up to just about full tilt...so we should not be surprised either way here.. i want him to have a fair trial... like Scott and OJ did...
glad to to see you are ringing in on this, i am not a fan of delay at all, becuase he claims that he represents the "moral majority" which is the fictional product of a few loud mouths imagination....
the moral majority is bankrupt wham it comes to morals, and just because they shout the loudest, doesn't make them a majority...
Posted by keithsan on :
whitewater came to nothing, doesn't mean it wasnt anything just like scott and oj dont' forget mj. the list goes on. But when you are accusing, you better have clean sheets especialy when they have the best lawyers.
I don't read over here but I was reading the delay indictment and figured someone started a thread. I get bored with the fanatical anti administration chants and those who fanatically attempt to defend everything.
Its just boring for me, and I'd rather spend my time doing something else. I tried to read your bankruptcy post, that has been coming down the chute for a while we discussed it my first year of law school and that was 7 or 8 years ago i think. I couldn't get past 3 posts on the thread and i had to quit reading.
you can find me talking stocks though.
Posted by glassman on :
still playing keith, moved out of the pennies for awhile... making some glass, playing safer stuff that i don't have to watch...
decided to wash my hands and keep 'em clean for (a little) awhile...
i did get that 100 shares of whatever it was that RSed a little while back... 75$ on 7.43$ woohoo
Posted by keithsan on :
still holding mine, bought cuz of news rumor, never happened or hasn't yet but if it runs
been busy on this front no time for runners right now. Also playing other things, KWK killing for me Posted by BuyTex on :
lol, glass, i cashed mine in, too...funniest play of the summer. I loved Scottie compliance's lecture...and subsequent phone call, apologizing
Keith: nnvc back up and in news...didu hold any of that one?
Posted by glassman on :
i'm afraid to even mention any of my holdings these days...they are doing so much better since i stopped "pumping" them
anybody looked into whether the new supreme court appointee is connected to Bush's Harken play??????(and subsequent get out of jail free card??)
Posted by keithsan on :
I hope she is, I don't like her, I want a strict constructionist.
I'm ok whether I post or not, looking for omni to break resistance at about 6 and run too...
Posted by glassman on :
she's just like cheney...vetted the picks and said "hey what about me?"
Posted by keithsan on :
haven't read the new indictment.
whats wrong with saying what about me? LOL I won't know if she is a strict constructionist till she's 70. Roberts is good though. Should be no horse **** from him on the bench.
Posted by keithsan on :
still haven't read indictment but its for money laundering.
the whole premise of the law is taking illegal money and laundering it.
ie. bookmaking, or drugdealing.
Could be a HUGE charge but I don't know what he's done to illegally earn the money yet.
on 1st charge, it comes down to a few different things, 1. is what delay said in an interview with earle, delay has already said he misspoke. will be tough to prosecute him on that alone. This would be a political hack job.
2. for the prosecutor to have brought the charges I'm guessing one of the guys in Delays group ratted him out. So they're keeping it hush for now. But he will sing and Delay will tank.
Again, just guessing, no new news on the charges. If he hasn't done anything illegal to earn the laundered money, that new charge could backfire. If no illegality is in place since it was filed an hour or so after Delays motion to dissmiss first charge.
interesting at least.
Posted by glassman on :
well, i think the enforcemnet of laws has been stretched way beyond their original intent in a lot of cases for a lot of good reasons...
Bush admitted outright during the campaign that the swift boat dirtbags were overstepping the intent of the law.....
federal income tax was created SPECIFIALLY to go after Al Capone wasn't it? and look where that ended up... as i understand it? there is no constitutional provision for the Federal Govt to collect income taxes except in wartime, and the last time we were legally at war was? 1945????
the way i hear? delay was moving exact amounts of cash around from corporate "sponsors" to the RNC back to individauls campaign accounts... avoiding the INTENT of the law on a questioanble technicality..... no doubt it will go to the supreme court which has been "stacked"? and then all the drug kingpins will have to be set free?????? does the law discriminate between "clean and dirty" money? and? if the intent is to bypass the law? which is pretty clear in this case, when does the money become "dirty"?
Posted by glassman on :
a few excerpts:
DeLay PAC Is Indicted For Illegal Donations Corporate Gifts Aided GOP in Texas Races By R. Jeffrey Smith Washington Post Staff Writer Friday, September 9, 2005;
John Colyandro was indicted last year for accepting illegal corporate donations and for illegally laundering $190,000 in corporate funds through the Republican National State Elections Committee that later wound up in the hands of Texas Republican candidate....
Texas election law, akin to rules in 17 other states, that strictly bars political contributions from corporations for election purposes.
The funds paid for surveys, mailings, receptions, candidate investigations and probes of Democratic candidates that helped Republicans gain control of the Texas House for the first time in 130 years, and enabled them to redraw the state's congressional districts in 2003 in such a way that Texas voters elected five more Republicans to Congress in 2004.
the gerrrymandering itself was criminal IMO.... but only in a moral sense, i guess...
DeLay, who was a member of the committee's advisory board, signed fundraising solicitations and participated in at least one conference call to discuss the committee's plans, was not named in the indictment.
they musta rolled on him.... the Texas prosecutor has gone after Dems in greater numbers than GOPs from what i hear too...
seems to me that it's about FRIGGIN TIME.... take 'em all out to the wood shed......
you do realise that if Frist, Delay and Cheney (Plame) end up going down? the Presidency could look very VERY weak... we may see some more history here in a year or two....
Posted by keithsan on :
swiftboat isn't a prosecutor,
i'm not saying what they did isn't illegal. yes they are or were laundering money per se, but, thats not a "money laundering" charge.
Ive read the same glass, but going after more criminal dems than criminal repubs is one thing, (this is apples and oranges) does he go after more dems for the charges that get thrown out....in other words, borderline, trumped up law charges.(not saying this is the case) but because 20 dems commit murder in his state and 5 repubs...its a silly analogy. In either case it only matters if Delay is innocent.
History: presidency could look pretty weak, definately, take a look back at clintons or daddy bush.
could look pretty strong though "IF" there is no longer a threat from libya, N.korea, and Iraq. N.Korea is still on the fence but looking better.
could go either way. It is what it is andwill be what it will be.
still don't like the lates judge.
Posted by Chadsly on :
What do you think the PAC was set up for? PACs have to be set up in an organize fashion showing where the money is going. It went to GOPs because that's what the PAC was set up for. They weren't hiding anything. It's illegal for a corp to give money to a single candidate not a PAC.
quote:Originally posted by glassman: a few excerpts:
DeLay PAC Is Indicted For Illegal Donations Corporate Gifts Aided GOP in Texas Races By R. Jeffrey Smith Washington Post Staff Writer Friday, September 9, 2005;
John Colyandro was indicted last year for accepting illegal corporate donations and for illegally laundering $190,000 in corporate funds through the Republican National State Elections Committee that later wound up in the hands of Texas Republican candidate....
Texas election law, akin to rules in 17 other states, that strictly bars political contributions from corporations for election purposes.
The funds paid for surveys, mailings, receptions, candidate investigations and probes of Democratic candidates that helped Republicans gain control of the Texas House for the first time in 130 years, and enabled them to redraw the state's congressional districts in 2003 in such a way that Texas voters elected five more Republicans to Congress in 2004.
the gerrrymandering itself was criminal IMO.... but only in a moral sense, i guess...
DeLay, who was a member of the committee's advisory board, signed fundraising solicitations and participated in at least one conference call to discuss the committee's plans, was not named in the indictment.
they musta rolled on him.... the Texas prosecutor has gone after Dems in greater numbers than GOPs from what i hear too...
seems to me that it's about FRIGGIN TIME.... take 'em all out to the wood shed......
you do realise that if Frist, Delay and Cheney (Plame) end up going down? the Presidency could look very VERY weak... we may see some more history here in a year or two....
Posted by glassman on :
and i suppose Rove is innocent too.... sheesh..... there's a few decent people left trying to do their jobs and jerks like Rush Limbaugh ( isn't he also facing enditement?) tell everybody it's just some political wrangling and they believe it..... LOL
Posted by Chadsly on :
Try to stay on topic. We're talking about DeLay.
quote:Originally posted by glassman: and i suppose Rove is innocent too.... sheesh..... there's a few decent people left trying to do their jobs and jerks like Rush Limbaugh ( isn't he also facing enditement?) tell everybody it's just some political wrangling and they believe it..... LOL
Posted by keithsan on :
quote:Originally posted by glassman: and i suppose Rove is innocent too.... sheesh..... there's a few decent people left trying to do their jobs and jerks like Rush Limbaugh ( isn't he also facing enditement?) tell everybody it's just some political wrangling and they believe it..... LOL
hey G, you do know it took Earle 3 grand juries to get the indictment on delay. the others didn't think there was enough evidence for an indictment. I am also sure your aware that for a grand jury indictment you need much less evidence than in a court of law. Just keep an open mind, he may be guilty as hell. Its looking very fishy so far.
Rove, I'm not watching as he's not indicted yet.
Posted by glassman on :
no i didn't know it took 3 grand juries.... but that doesn't surpise me, it is his home state of Texas, and, considering delays reputation, they don't call him the hammer for nothing....
all i know is that OUR politicians votes are bought and paid for, and it's about time the SPIRIT of the campaign laws was enforced....
it's our money they are "giving away" and just because you paid less taxes last year doesn't mean you won't pay in the end.... the bill always comes due sooner or later.....
Posted by Chadsly on :
Why are saying that their votes are bought? You support the candidate you agree with and will most likely benefit you. That's why this not illegal. It is illegal for a company to sponsor a specific candidate, not a party.
quote:Originally posted by glassman: no i didn't know it took 3 grand juries.... but that doesn't surpise me, it is his home state of Texas, and, considering delays reputation, they don't call him the hammer for nothing....
all i know is that OUR politicians votes are bought and paid for, and it's about time the SPIRIT of the campaign laws was enforced....
it's our money they are "giving away" and just because you paid less taxes last year doesn't mean you won't pay in the end.... the bill always comes due sooner or later.....
Posted by glassman on :
the three grand juries is apparently a stretch...
i understand it was two grand juries, one for each enditement....
chadsly, do you follow the way the federal govt is spending money at all???
let's watch and see how the delay case plays out...i am of the opinion that the prosecutor is in fact TRYING to enforce the spirit of the law.
IF?
and i do mean if, delay did in fact take corporate money into the party coffers and redirect it right back out to candidates? AND conspired to do that? then the law has been subverted and probably broken... laundering is exactly what they were doing...yes, they have to prove it...so let's see what happens....
Texas, the eyes of America are upon you Posted by keithsan on :
not a stretch, one grand jury told earle, no. so he convened another.
I'll pull it up in a bit. technician just left had internet screwups leaving me hanging.
as far as all politicians being evil and needing to follow the rules. I agreee. If delay did this I want him busted. Everyon else too.
This ones just fishy.
kinda like the michael jackson trial. we all know he rapes kids, but did he rape that one. Family was not very believable and definately fit the role of lying for money.
Posted by keithsan on :
figured delay would subpeona earle. info about non convicting grand juries is hard to find.
interesting:graqnd juries are secret by nature and there have been a few here Earle will use that as a defense. can't discuss it...
heres the petition for disclosure of grand jury preceedings. I hope this comes out, will be very interesting. And should immediately show if Earle is using the law or Just a good law abiding man.
besides the repub that earle did this to before, he did this to a dem that was a political foe also. I'll pull the name up when i get a sec.
Posted by keithsan on :
quote:Originally posted by keithsan: figured delay would subpeona earle. info about non convicting grand juries is hard to find.
interesting:graqnd juries are secret by nature and there have been a few here Earle will use that as a defense. can't discuss it...
heres the petition for disclosure of grand jury preceedings. I hope this comes out, will be very interesting. And should immediately show if Earle is using the law or Just a good law abiding man.
besides the repub that earle did this to before, he did this to a dem that was a political foe also. I'll pull the name up when i get a sec.
just quoting myself, what is written next is probably horse**** so please don't argue it with me. I'm posting it to get the names of the dem out with just a smatering of Earle posts and their respective papers, with dates, before delay indictment of more importance obviously.
·"The Travis County, Texas, prosecutor investigating Mr. DeLay has a history of using his office for partisan ends."(Congressional prerogative, The Washington Times, November 19, 2004)
·Earle has demonstrated a past zeal for indicting conservative figures and even liberals with whom he has personal or professional disagreements. (Target: DeLay, National Review, April 11, 2005)
Earle's partisan prosecutions - which have frequently failed - are designed for political harm, not legal harm. Earle is the same partisan prosecutor who politically indicted and failed to convict:
Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison Conservative Democrat Bob Bullock (when he was Comptroller - later he was Lt. Governor) Democrat Attorney General Jim Mattox
Ronnie Earle's three year political vendetta against Rep. DeLay has been marked by:
Illegal grand jury leaks, A fundraising speech by Earle for the Texas Democrat party that inappropriately focused on the investigation, Misuse of his office for partisan purposes, and Extortion of money for Earle's pet projects from corporations in exchange for dismissing indictments he brought against them.
Ronnie Earle has been frequently criticized for his methods:
The Dallas Morning News criticized Earle in the Hutchison case:
"the impression of partisan unfairness has certainly been reinforced by the leaks and public comment about Hutchison's case from the District Attorney's office throughout the summer. That the Grand Jury investigation has been conducted with so much fanfare such as the tip-offs to the new media when key records were seized from the former treasurer's office has added a darker tone to the cloudy proceedings." (Hutchison Probe; Fair and Speedy trial is essential, The Dallas Morning News, September 28, 1993)
The Houston Chronicle called into question Earle's impartiality and judgment:
"The fact that Earle refuses to recognize his blunder and would do it again calls into question whether he has the necessary impartiality and judgment to conduct the investigation that to a great extent will determine whether Texas election campaigns will be financed and perhaps determined by corporations or by individuals."
(Self-inflicted wound; District attorney's poor judgment in speaking at a Democratic fund-raiser provides an unintended boost for DeLay's defenders., The Houston Chronicle, May 20, 2005)
Posted by glassman on :
that all sounds like typical mud-slinging to me...
the question about quashing it would be a simple answer: if BOTH grand juries heard the exact same evicence then Earle is prolly guilty of misconduct dontcha think????
new evidence would require a new grand jury????
somebody inside the oragnisation/pac cuts a deal for immunity? and delay hangs? just guessing, but considring it is DELAY? i doubt Earle would go in with an empty clip...... delay has clout.... or should i say HAD?????
i haven't seen the evidence, but it sure sounds like they were taking funds straight thru the PAC to the candidates...
remeber what Hillary said? it's a VAST right-wing conspiracy....blah blah blah.... the song remains the same only the musicians have changed.....
ain't America Great!!!!!! Posted by keithsan on :
hopefully the open up the minutes frome earle's grand juries including the ones that said no.
haven't seen the evidence, thats the point here, yes it "sounds" like something is wrong but is there. I'm looking for the evidence myself.
A lot of the crap I posted was mudslinging and from conservative sites. but earle did go after political foes and lost in the past at times losing extremely quickly.
this is way more interesting than that purjory case your all jacked up on.
Posted by glassman on :
the perjUry case? you mean the one where Rove or Libby or somebody lied to cover up the fact that that SOMEBODY broke the "i can neither confirm nor nor deny" national security laws? my guess is either Libby or Rove will have to fall on their sword to cover for whichever of their bosses ordered the outing of not just one agent but probably a whole string of covert operatives in deep cover around the world, in order to convince the intel community to go along with the bigger lie or they will be job hunting, or even worse?
did you hear about the alqaeda letter released today? from the #2 man to zarquawi? the one begging for money? LOL
there was something deeply troubling in there. it said that Iran is holding about a hundred alqaeda operative in their jails... now that is interesting isn't it???? i thought Iran was supporting terrorism??? makes you wonder who the heck we are really fighting doesn't it?
Posted by keithsan on :
I dont' think the laws were actually broken or it wouldn't have taken 4 grand juries for Rove to squirm. My guess for now is perjury but rumor has it (recent as of couple hours) could be big news released shortly.
LOL trusting al queda more than bush. puts you in a quandry doesnt it.
you doubt Iran is supporting terrorism? we could bomb them and find out. I will make the assumption that Iran while trying to get the nuke police off their backs will say almost anything. Or have the right people say it for them...
Posted by glassman on :
4 grand juries? just to make sure you have everything right and don't make a mistake, when the fate of the US govt is on the line? take 10 if thats waht he needs, i don't want any mistakes here, and neither does anybody else...
I Can Neither Confirm nor Deny: that IS the law..... no joke...
no, i don't trust one word of that letter, but Bush seems to be quoting from it.... personally i think it's a joke,
and,
no i don't doubt Iran is supporting terrorism at all..
BUT?
ask yourself this: Why is zarquawi bombing so many Shiite Muslims? Iran is what 90% plus Shia? so alqueda and Iran aren't zackly on good terms...
let's face it: people just aren't very nice to each other are they
we stuck our azzes right into the middle of muslim tribal warfare... and winning this in th e long run won't be as easy as Nam was....
Posted by keithsan on :
on the 4,
if he was guilty of a crime jury one, they would indict him. Just the way it is. No protection this time.
Most likely purged himself. Unless there is new evidence.
Posted by glassman on :
if perjury was committed? i would thnk you would have to re-question different people several times to sort out the truth....so that makes sense
Rovey was quoted as saying Plame is fair game...
if she was? then why did they have to lie? lies usually cover up some worse fact....
this will drag out for another 6 months i bet... the dems need it to impact the next elections...
Posted by Dustoff101 on :
Well, now Bill Frist gets to talk to the boys at the SEC.
Posted by Pagan on :
Arrest warrant issued for DeLay A routine step before court appearance
AUSTIN, Texas (AP) -- A Texas court issued a warrant Wednesday for former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay to appear for booking, where he is likely to face the fingerprinting and photo mug shot he had hoped to avoid.
Bail was initially set at $10,000 as a routine step before his first court appearance on conspiracy and money laundering charges. Travis County court officials said DeLay was ordered to appear at the Fort Bend County jail for booking.
The warrant was "a matter of routine and bond will be posted," DeLay attorney Dick DeGuerin said.
The lawyer declined to say when DeLay would surrender to authorities but said the lawmaker would make his first court appearance Friday morning.
The charges against the Texas Republican stem from allegations that a DeLay-founded Texas political committee funneled corporate money into state GOP legislative races through the National Republican Party. Texas law prohibits use of corporate money to elect state candidates.
DeLay is charged with conspiracy to violate state election laws and money laundering, felony counts that triggered House Republican rules that forced him to step aside as majority leader.
Two separate indictments charge that DeLay and two political associates had the money distributed to state legislative candidates in a roundabout way -- sending it from the political action committee in Texas to the Republican National Committee in Washington and finally back to candidates' campaigns.
DeLay has denied wrongdoing.
The effort had major political consequences, first by helping Republicans take control of the Texas Legislature in the 2002 elections. The Legislature then redrew congressional boundaries according to a DeLay-inspired plan, took command of the state's U.S. House delegation and helped the GOP retain its U.S. House majority.
Copyright 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
Posted by glassman on :
i wonder if i can get an autographed mug shot?? Posted by bdgee on :
The Dallas Morning News is connnected to the Republican National Committee by a never severed umbilical cord. It is the model after which the New York Post was designed.
Using the Dallas Morning News as a reliable or unbiased souce is about as honest as invading a tiny third world country with not quite second world war technology, claiming a need to do so because the third world country "has storehouses of WMD and programs to develop more", then, when it is proved you knew all along they had no WMDs or WMD programs, mounting a silver stallion and waving a white Stetson and hollering "Hi Ho, Silver. We did it to free the people."
Yeah suuuuuuuuuurre you did.......
[ October 19, 2005, 17:32: Message edited by: bdgee ]
Posted by 4Art on :
Tom DeLay's arrest warrant:
Posted by glassman on :
what was the GOP prez campaign slogan? "flip-flop" ????? Delay fights back against indictment (October 16, 2005) -- Embattled U.S. Rep. Tom Delay, R-Texas, is pleading his case to supporters via his Web site as he awaits trial on a money laundering charge. Delay ... > full story
White House stands behind indicted DeLay (September 29, 2005) -- The White House is standing behind Rep. Tom DeLay, R-Texas, who was indicted for violating Texas campaign finance law. White House spokesman Scott ... > full story
Indicted DeLay denies wrongdoing (September 28, 2005) -- Rep. Tom DeLay, R-Texas, characterized an indictment against him in Texas as purely political and denied any wrongdoing in the campaign-finance ... > full story
He said he has come under attack because he's been a strong advocate of conservative causes, the Houston Chronicle reported Friday.
This is the second letter DeLay has sent to supporters since he was indicted on election law violations last month. DeLay has repeatedly said he is a victim of political persecution by District Attorney Ronnie Earle, a Democrat.
"Because of their decade of defeat, Democrats have now dropped to the least common denominator -- the politics of personal destruction," DeLay said, using the same defense mounted by former President Clinton during his impeachment.
i think the slogan was "just win baby" and they did resoundingly.
delay still waiting for news.Boring.
scooter is interesting. charges look similar to clintons. what comes around goes around.
Been busy. so not well read into intricate details.on this one, I've just haven't grabbed the fevor of the media or glass on this one, maybe i'm wrong but i still think it'll be a waste of time perjury argument.
If it is something big, that'll be fun.
Posted by glassman on :
i think there will be more indictments after discovery...
Libby will porabably try to take all of the blame, but i BET that Fitgerald had all of those extra grand jury interviews to "lock down" the stories.... i doubt that tehre is much wriggle room left
rove is breathing easier right now (maybe) but, the recods do indicate that he forgot the "i can neither confirm nor deny" issue...
this prosecutor( fitzpatrick) is going very carefully, and for good reason... he is truly a david up against an army of goliaths..... interesting is the proper term... next they'll be claiming he's a democrat activist too...
delay? i love the way he's claiming all of these judges are incompetent... the whole judicial system is evil according to him... remember the US supreme court had to smack him for the FLA girl in the vegetative state.... i for one am very disturbed about how many people think the politcians are so good and the judges are so evil.. there are no honest politicians above the small-town hall level In My Opinion.... they get weeded out early...
Posted by keithsan on :
on the judge, delay has a complaint, (he is also pushing it to far) but donating to moveon.org or whatever that group is, then being in charge of delays case could be argued fairly as bias.
the opposite argument will be judge shopping, nothing new.
as far as libby's case, currently so media hyped of ties to the white house, i can't get a good read. nor have i put the time in. on the surface it looks as what I said earlier. Lots of could be's though here this one could be very fun if they can implicate cheney et al.
Posted by glassman on :
the only media hype in the libby case has been the speculation over Roves part... having studied rove a little (the guys is a scalpel, no doubt about it, he is the sharpest knife in the drawer, unfortunately? he seems to have the moral principles of a scalpel as well) my guess is he put himself in the media crosshairs KNOWING it was libby/cheney so that when the indictment came out? everybody could say wow that's fantastic, rove didn't get hit...
i'm not saying that is what happened, but i think rove is capable of just such a plan...
in the end? there are people with VERY high intellect and integrity of the same measure in the intel community... they will make sure the truth comes out, and they will conrtol how and when it does..
i expect Tennet will eventually drop the bomb on Bush.... he fell on his sword for bush, and it appears bush didn't honor his commitment to tenet..
i hope Tennet can wait til after bush leaves office...
bush and comapny were too busy with planning big spending packages on missile systems to be bothered with fleas like osama...
Posted by keithsan on :
"only", you haven't heard speculation on cheney c'mon G. I hear it every 15 mins on all channels."Will it be Rove, Will it be cheney", nope just scooter on some lying charges (more charges than i predicted though)
2 years they've been hunting for this "leak' and we now have a lying charge on libby. again, i think its a waste of time. Fry libby. 2 years is an insane waste of money and time, he should be arrested for not finding the leak.
your later paragraphs are fantasy.
finally a decent judge nominee, not my favorite, but a solid foundation.
Posted by glassman on :
you told me this was fantasy a year ago, just before the election, when i told you there was going to be some bad stuff coming outa this...
you of all people know fitz put the part of the case out that is a slam dunk first...he can't make a single mistake.... there are more to follow, UNLESS Libby can take all the blame, which he didn't YET,because they haven't charged anybody with the release of classified data...and that isn't a question of whther it was legal it is only a question of proving a few technical details... somebody DID do it or we wouldn't know about it...
roves name didn't really come up as a source until a few months ago...my recollection is that it was attributed to Cheney almost from day one....
Posted by keithsan on :
i said a year ago FANTASY and so far still is. 2 years he's got nothing, its not like he worked on other cases, this is what he did for 2 years.
i thought rove would get the same ole lying charge. he didn't, from what i hear he went and talked with fitz, said hey i screwed up that one conversation, it wasnt intentional and I've been honest all along don't bring me through the gutter and ruin my political career on some martha stewart charge....(what i hear at least, could be hogwash)
if thats true, fitz remains a good man in my book its easy to get off taarget when you only focus on one thing for years.
libby was caught lying a bunch of times, don't ask me how, you bring notes of what you said last time and he still screwed up. This may be all we get and thats a sad waste of time and money.
Posted by glassman on :
no doubt rove used a word or two that have two meanings and wriggeld out... so far... there is apparently a law that allows a person to change their testimony to a grand jury before it is disbanded that allows the prosecutor some leeway in filing charges... we all know they have all lied.... proving it in court isn't the same as knowin git tho... obviously some people are happy to be lied to...
Posted by bdgee on :
Yes, when we are playing in the game of "My Party" rather than "My Country", getting away with lying is fine if it puts the Party's interest first.
Posted by keithsan on :
this is supposed to be about a leak, not 15 grand jury interviews and some mis statements or lies. It was silly when it happened to clinton, its silly know. these special prosecutors are a joke. not him personally, but the job and role.
again, if all that comes is libby's lies, its a pathetic waste of my money.
Posted by bmaxingout on :
well if you cant find a crime dream one up
Posted by MasterQuinn on :
Fitzgerald is a puppet like the 9/11 commission and all the other jokers... Bush says he will personally investigate what happened in katrina, NO SHEET.
If you ever get arrested say, don't worry, I'll investigate. That's basically what he's saying.
I doubt anyone else will be indicted and if they do the bush spin machine will be ready to chage subjects just as fast.
No one seemed to think the scripted play bush and the troops put on was a big deal a few weeks ago...
Posted by glassman on :
if it's only libby's lies? then why did he lie?
that may be all they prove, but we have found out that Plames cover was blown, and it wasn't "common washington gossip"
Posted by bdgee on :
What happened to Clinton wasn't silly. It was a treasonous effort to destroy the chance of the country to function. It is not illegal to make a big profit buying and selling stock options. There was no crime to investigate so they "created" one out of a private sexual affair, that any proper person would have had enough pride and taste not to nose into. Clinton did not leak any classified information to the chick. Someone should have been charged with a crime for making false charges to law enforcement officials. However,
WAR IS NOT A PRIVATE AFFAIR!
and Wilson was making public one of the lies they used to taqke us to war.
Libby fed false information to the grand jury to keep them from finding out exactly who was guilty of the crime of leaking the identity of a US secret agent. That may be worse then the crime itself and charging him is not silly.
Posted by keithsan on :
quote:Originally posted by glassman: if it's only libby's lies? then why did he lie?
that may be all they prove, but we have found out that Plames cover was blown, and it wasn't "common washington gossip"
Don't know why libby lied, why did clinton, martha stewart, he should do time for it like stewart did and clinton didn't, seems there was a bunch of lies. Remember he lied in the second meeting about what he said in the first and so on....
We knew the cover was blown thats why the "special prosecutor". Just sad that they don't have an answer yet or no proof. Remember prosecutor is trying to prove that she was outed on purpose, that this was planned or a conspiracy. At that point its a crime. If pres. bush lets it slip at a cocktail party, not a crime.
Posted by keithsan on :
bgee, i'm not getting into politics, it clouds your judgement, fact is all 3 lied to the grand jury. whether or not there should've been a grand jury is a different argument.
you can't say this grand jury is stupid i can lie to them.
personally, special prosecutors are the dumbest idea. You take a hard working prosecutor in this case fitzgeral, by all accounts a great prosecutor, he spends 2 years investigating this. Do you think he just wants to say I found no proof and quit. The way these are done lead to a lot of crap. These issues (especially political ones) can be dealt with like any other crime.
Posted by bdgee on :
Lying to cover up breaking the law on a virtual treason charge is NOT trivial and needs to be severely punished, with or without a special prosecutor.
Posted by keithsan on :
the reason for the lie is always speculation. A lie to a grand jury is a lie to a grand jury and should be prosecuted with or without special prosecutors. Agreed on the punish part. Libby should be punished for his lies! I don't care why he made them i won't pretend to be in his head, maybe he felt they were trivial, who cares. burn him.
Posted by bdgee on :
agreed
Posted by glassman on :
looks like the curtain is coming down on the Hammer
remember the russki connection is unconfirmed SO FAR:
The DeLay-Abramoff Money Trail Nonprofit Group Linked to Lawmaker Was Funded Mostly by Clients of Lobbyist
By R. Jeffrey Smith Washington Post Staff Writer Saturday, December 31, 2005; A01
The U.S. Family Network, a public advocacy group that operated in the 1990s with close ties to Rep. Tom DeLay and claimed to be a nationwide grass-roots organization, was funded almost entirely by corporations linked to embattled lobbyist Jack Abramoff, according to tax records and former associates of the group.
During its five-year existence, the U.S. Family Network raised $2.5 million but kept its donor list secret. The list, obtained by The Washington Post, shows that $1 million of its revenue came in a single 1998 check from a now-defunct London law firm whose former partners would not identify the money's origins.
Two former associates of Edwin A. Buckham, the congressman's former chief of staff and the organizer of the U.S. Family Network, said Buckham told them the funds came from Russian oil and gas executives. Abramoff had been working closely with two such Russian energy executives on their Washington agenda, and the lobbyist and Buckham had helped organize a 1997 Moscow visit by DeLay (R-Tex.).
The former president of the U.S. Family Network said Buckham told him that Russians contributed $1 million to the group in 1998 specifically to influence DeLay's vote on legislation the International Monetary Fund needed to finance a bailout of the collapsing Russian economy. ....In addition to the million-dollar payment involving the London law firm, for example, half a million dollars was donated to the U.S. Family Network by the owners of textile companies in the Mariana Islands in the Pacific, according to the tax records. The textile owners -- with Abramoff's help -- solicited and received DeLay's public commitment to block legislation that would boost their labor costs, according to Abramoff associates, one of the owners and a DeLay speech in 1997.
A quarter of a million dollars was donated over two years by the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians, Abramoff's largest lobbying client, which counted DeLay as an ally in fighting legislation allowing the taxation of its gambling revenue.
The records, other documents and interviews call into question the very purpose of the U.S. Family Network, which functioned mostly by collecting funds from domestic and foreign businesses whose interests coincided with DeLay's activities while he was serving as House majority whip from 1995 to 2002, and as majority leader from 2002 until the end of September.
After the group was formed in 1996, its director told the Internal Revenue Service that its goal was to advocate policies favorable for "economic growth and prosperity, social improvement, moral fitness, and the general well-being of the United States." DeLay, in a 1999 fundraising letter, called the group "a powerful nationwide organization dedicated to restoring our government to citizen control" by mobilizing grass-roots citizen support.
"conservative values" yeah, baybay....
"an ally in fighting legislation allowing the taxation of its gambling revenue."
These threads on the non stock talk sections sound just like Air America Radio. And all of you sound like Al Gore, Al Frankin and Barbara Boxer when I read your comments. It's DISGUSTING! HA HA HA Posted by glassman on :
good, i'm glad i got yer attention
at least i don't sound like rushie limbugger
Posted by DWE on :
Who cares about Rushie Limbugger! Pat Robertson is the Voice of America and he makes Limbugger sound like all of you!
Posted by BuyTex on :
DWE, funny you *should* post on a thread by this name...now, that's *entertainment* Posted by jordanreed on :
quote:Originally posted by DWE: Who cares about Rushie Limbugger! Pat Robertson is the Voice of America and he makes Limbugger sound like all of you!
Hmmm... let me guess?...You're= Young,white,quasi-christian, extreme-conservative, maybe a pinkish with a red- hue neck. I'm I close?
Posted by DWE on :
quote:Originally posted by jordanreed:
quote:Originally posted by DWE: Who cares about Rushie Limbugger! Pat Robertson is the Voice of America and he makes Limbugger sound like all of you!
Hmmm... let me guess?...You're= Young,white,quasi-christian, extreme-conservative, maybe a pinkish with a red- hue neck. I'm I close?
Ah! Maybe that's why I live in The City of Angels! But you're not close at all. Posted by bdgee on :
Yeah, you're wrong........he ain't young, just immature.
Posted by glassman on :
Pat Robertson Made a Last Minute Offer to Donate His Brain to Terri Schiavo
"And what a good deal it would be for Terri. A secondhand brain that’s hardly been used for years!
You're trying to convince me Pat Robertson has a brain, ain'tca?
Posted by DWE on :
God has blessed Robertson with a brain worth a billion dollars. Compare Robertson to all of you including me, we're retarded.
Posted by glassman on :
LOL it didn't hurt that he inherited...
tax shelters work don't they?
his success in business has primarily been talking peoples parents into disinheriting them Posted by DWE on :
There you go..... The 2 American Icons, The Dynamic Duo, The Tag-Team Champions of the World, The 2 Living Legends, America's Team, My Heros, Your Heros, America's Heros, The World's Heros!
I Proudly Introduce..... And it Doesn't Get Any Better Than This.....
Mr. Pat Robertson and Our Great President of the United States, George Walker Bush!!!
Posted by bdgee on :
As the saying goes....There are fools and there are damned fools.....
Posted by DWE on :
It's not good to downgrade yourself like the way you just did.
Posted by bdgee on :
Hmmmmm, you have just shown the error in that old saying.......there is a third and even lower class of fool. Is it lonely in there?
Posted by DWE on :
A lower class fool, no. However, I'm a patriotic Conservative American that would teach a child of what is right and what is wrong and you're the blind clown that allow your sons to have sex with other males and your daughters to be dykes on bikes.
Posted by bdgee on :
Well, you just proved the "lower" designation......lol.....shall we make that "baser"?
Posted by DWE on :
So you're saying you're PRO gay marriage, gay sex is okay with you, men marrying men, women marrying women, gay couples adopting kids, exposing their gay filth to those poor children who will eventually follow into their gay parents' footsteps. If you think all the above is right and you would teach your children that it is right, then you are just as filthy as any homosexual out in this world. And you call me "lower"? What a bunch of CRAP!
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
Studies have shown that homophobia is often a sign of latent homosexuality.
Posted by BuyTex on :
Gordon,
DWE has *issues* re responding to my posts--which is understandable.
i'd say anybody who believes that it is taught is fighting the urge pretty hard....
Posted by Gordon Bennett on :
I agree.
Posted by bdgee on :
Doesn't that mean the "fear" of it is learned and not natural?
Posted by DWE on :
I just figured it out..... All of you are gay here..... Is that why all of you are so offended?
Posted by glassman on :
who's offended?
seems that you are the one offended
Posted by Jelly on :
quote:Originally posted by DWE: I just figured it out..... All of you are gay here..... Is that why all of you are so offended?
One thing that I've noticed about you is that when you run out of things to say that may help your debate, you retreat to bashing people. Makes you look pretty foolish and gives you zero creditbility.
Posted by bdgee on :
Yep, "zero credibility".
And it makes you look dumber than a post, too.
Confirmation.
Posted by DWE on :
Why? Because I tell the truth?
Posted by DWE on :
Zero brains is what you are, idiot.
Posted by bdgee on :
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha - - -
Oh, my!
Proof, beyond a reasonable doubt.
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha - - -
Posted by Jelly on :
quote:Originally posted by DWE: Zero brains is what you are, idiot.
Who is this for? Your mom for having you? You are a childish loser. Piss off now please.
Zero brains coming out of YOUR mouth, how completely IRONIC.
Posted by bond006 on :
What is all this fighting over and about gay people. I am a hetrosexual man that is comfortable being one. Gay people are no threat to me. Homosexuality has been with us for as long as there has been people. It is here and becase it it is more out in the open now I for one had never had a disire to practice it. Homophobic people that hate for no reason may have the disires to give gay a try and fight with this there whole life as to what I have seen about them. Do most of these folk have a choice about the way they feel? I would say no they are what they are and I think they are just born that way. So IMHO we should just get on in life live with each others differences and as long as we are free to practice our own lives and to practice our beliefes who really cares.
Posted by bdgee on :
bond006,
Yup. You have a habit of saying precisely what is best for world in such matters.
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
