Powered by TypePad

« Spy In The White House! Please. | Main | Reuters On Plame: Ready, Set... »

October 05, 2005


Jimmy's Attack Rabbit

I guess Harry Pelosi would call it a Carnival of Corruption.


I think you meant to say, "a prosecutor can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich, unless he is a wiener."


Butcher on the Wry.


Mort Kondracke on Fox News' Special Report describing Ronnie Earle's 2nd indictment for money laundering by a newly empanelled grand jury:

"If a district attorney can convince a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich, then this must be fast food."


Supersize that Subpoena!


I keep trying to push a different meme -- The Dixie Chicks and Goodbye Earl. Especially if you've seen the video...

cathy :-)


Could it be that DeGuerin is behind the selective leaks to the Statesman et al? Where else have we seen selective leaks used to shape public opinion?
Plame, maybe? Ya think?!

Fire up the spin machine boys! If the glove dont fit, you must acquit!


Jury selection firms are flocking to Austin like Snowbirds. Cyclonic, perhaps tornadic, meteorics are trimming all tales...er sails. Brendan Loy, hoy. Gotta little T for the Tillerman?

Geek, Esq.

The Earle indictments are just the undercard.

DeLay still has to face the music for the corrupt enterprise he and Jack Abramoff ran.

Appalled Moderate


I agree with you, but usually, you throw out the joker, rather than play it. Seriously, Earle runs the risk of diminishing the likely charges against DeLay that will come out if Abramoff sings.


Even when you throw out the anonymously sourced stuff, this thing looks like a three grand jury circus. "I just found new evidence over the weekend?!" What's next? The dog ate my 2002 Texas statute book so I couldn't look at it?


If one were particularly devious, one could speculate that this is a campaign to innoculate DeLay from prosecution for real crimes. I mean Earle's legal theory seems to be something like: "I wrote down a description of what DeLay did, and I found a law which includes a description of an illegal act. Both descriptions use a lot of the same letters of the alphabet." This is the sort of thing that Jay Leno makes fun of in the monologue, and then it's simply impossible to bring any other charges.

But anyway, nobody's that devious, right? (Besides, while it might work that way, it probably wouldn't. Who would take that risk?) Besides, why use devious as an explanation when brazen thuggery fits so well? So I don't believe it, but it's fun to wander into tinfoil hat theory...

cathy :-)


One can't flip an indictee into a state's witness on a Saturday morning?


Looks like DeG's argument was that the indictment's referral to the election code was defective as the applicable statute should have been in the penal code - i.e. a defective indictment quashed and than barred by the SOL. A prosecutor would obviously seek additional charges in light of a withdrawal of an SOL waiver.

Sausagemaking - it ain't pretty.

Gary Maxwell

TT You are stretching buddy. It cant feel very good to see the mess that Earle has made just after you thought this was Democrat dream come true. A judge is going to throw this pile of dung out. An impartial jury will never convict anyway and dont you think DeGuerin might ask for a change of venue? So therefore it will be an impartial jury, not the residents of the canyons around Hippy Hollow.

Ammo for the judge in considering sanctions:

The speech in front of the Texas Democrat Party where he named DeLay by name, being followed around by a filmmaker during "Secret" grand jury proceedings, continual leaks of secret grand jury testimony from his office, the first indictment showing either gross incompetence or a malicious disregard for the law with the resulting smear on DeLay, the whole unseemly grand jury shopping episode, anger displayed at a grand jury when it does not bow to the DA wishes but No bills, taking over two years on the first indictment but then scurrying around in less than a day on the third grand jury on a different and even more tenuous charge.

Not to mention a member of the first grand jury who should have studied the information in depth saying that he based his judgement on the contents of some 2002 tv commercials not on any evidence presented. And then the 2nd grand jury says the evidence of a conspiracy presented was: DeLay admits to the prosecutor he was "generally aware" of what his associates were doing. That is it in total.

Think there might be some pay back coming to Democrats someplace somewhere? If the Hammer gets a chance, I would bet on it.



Lets move it to Fort Bend county.

as a side note, my grandfather was on the city council of Sugarland many years ago.
Delay came to the council meeting one day complaining that the Guv'ment wouldn't let him use the chemicals he wanted to use to kill bugs. They told him they couldn't do anything about it, but, if he wanted to change it, he should run for office.

If there is such a thing as corruption of the blood, I'm hopeful that the sins of my fathers are soon coming to an end. Perhaps, between Earle and Jack A, the long family nightmare will end.


That's the ticket. Terminator/Terminix '08.

Gary Maxwell

Fort Bend county. I just built a landfill there. Seriously. With the help of Commissioner Bud Shields. Closer to Rosenburg.

Your nightmare is not likely to end any time soon from anything I can see.


"Former House majority leader Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) met for at least 30 minutes with the top fundraiser of his Texas political action committee on Oct. 2, 2002, the same day that the Republican National Committee in Washington set in motion a series of financial transactions at the heart of the money-laundering and conspiracy case against DeLay.

During the meeting at his Capitol office, DeLay conferred with James W. Ellis, the head of his principal fundraising committee in Washington and his chief fundraiser in Texas. Ellis had earlier given the Republican National Committee a check for $190,000 drawn mostly from corporate contributions. The same day as the meeting, the RNC ordered $190,000 worth of checks sent to seven Republican legislative candidates in Texas."

Washington Post.


"But a fund-raising letter TRM sent to corporate leaders indicated the political committee planned to go beyond a strict definition of Texas law that allows for the use of corporate money to pay for only administrative expenses such as rent and utilities.

'Unlike other organizations, your corporate contribution to TRMPAC will be put to productive use,' the piece said. 'Rather than just paying for overhead, your support will fund a series of productive and innovative activities designed to increase our level of engagement in the political arena.'

While TRM officials have said they gave no corporate money to candidates, a TRM document released Wednesday raises questions about that claim. The document lists soft money contributions totaling $7,500 to two Republican House candidates. Those donations are listed along with a $190,000 contribution to the Republican National State Elections Committee, which TRM officials have acknowledged was corporate money but a legal donation.

Houston Chronicle - 3/4/2004.

Gary Maxwell

Drudge has up under DEVELOPING "DeLay Attorney files charges of prosecutorial misconduct with Court"

Anyone who thinks this doesn't have a pretty good chance of finding its mark stand over in the far left line over there.

The comments to this entry are closed.