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....
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.
IP: Logged |
posted
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.
IP: Logged |
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.
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.
IP: Logged |
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.
IP: Logged |
posted
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.
IP: Logged |
posted
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.
IP: Logged |
posted
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...
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.
IP: Logged |
posted
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.
IP: Logged |
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.
IP: Logged |
posted
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.
posted
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"?
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.
IP: Logged |
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....
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.
IP: Logged |
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.
posted
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....
-------------------- If you don't sweat the pennies, you're not making any money.
IP: Logged |
posted
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
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.
IP: Logged |
posted
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
-------------------- If you don't sweat the pennies, you're not making any money.
IP: Logged |
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.
IP: Logged |
posted
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.....
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.
IP: Logged |
posted
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.....
-------------------- If you don't sweat the pennies, you're not making any money.
IP: Logged |
posted
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
IP: Logged |
posted
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.
IP: Logged |
posted
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.
IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
