What is DeLay's crime?

Greetings, CMG:

I am in beautiful Ocean City, NJ on a business trip.

I heard Sean Hannity saying precisely this on his radio program yesterday. Amazing how quickly the Republican Noise Machine (David Brock's term, not mine) mobilized to rally to his defense. After he started defending DeLay, Sean Hannity felt compelled to claim that he is independent of the GOP. I almost wrecked my car laughing at that one.....

Although it doesn't surprise me at all that the usual cast of characters on this board feel as you do, don't worry: Tom DeLay will beat this.

Regards,
BiR

 

Don't know about all that - I live in a suitcase lately.

Wow, I didn't realize just how quickly the RNM would mobilize. I didn't listen to Rush lately, but I would imagine that he too is attacking as well. Additionally, I haven't read Matt Drudge this morning.

Doesn't matter: DeLay will walk on this.

Actually, I did enjoy watching Brown make a total a complete fool of himself. The funniest part of the whole thing is his unapologetic and brazen attitude. But that is a different topic....

Hope you have a FANTASTIC weekend, CMG - I am headed to Ohio for the weekend,
BiR

It might be a blessing in disguise if the GOP had a shakeup in Congressional leadership. I am for dumping Frist as GOP frontrunner for 2008 and hope that he will fade away when he retires in 2006. I think that Mike Pence of Indiana has his eye on DeLay's job. When I was a kid, my district was represented by red-nose Charlie Halleck, house minority leader, when Dirksen was Senate minority leader. Ev and Charlie got things done for Ike. I like to see conservative Hoosier Republicans in power. [/QB][/QUOTE]

 

Corporations made "soft" money contributions which were legal to Texans for a Republican Majority PAC (TRMPAC).

TRMPAC sent money to RNSEC which was legal.

Individuals made "hard" money contributions which were legal to Republican National State Elections Committee (RNSEC).

RNSEC sent money to candidates which was legal.

TRMPAC did not send money to candidates which would have been illegal.

Corporation Political Action Committees (PAC) are legal. Your employer may well have one. Maybe you've even worked on the committee.

Individual contributions are legal. You may well make such contributions. Maybe you've even solicited for them.

How can there be a "crime" if everything was legal?

How can there be a "conspiracy" to commit a crime if there was not even a crime?

The "crime" here seems to be a politically motivated District Attorney with nothing better to do but waste local tax payer money.

The "conspiracy" here seems to be to disrupt the national political process by discrediting a key Republican leader.

 

DeLay, who represents a Houston-area district, has been under investigation by Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle for possible illegal fund-raising and use of corporate funds by his Texans for a Republican Majority committee, or TRMPAC.

Texas law generally prohibits corporate money from campaign activities.

Three men -- John Colyandro, Jim Ellis and Warren Robold --with links to DeLay and the committee were indicted last year in the case and are awaiting trial. They were charged with accepting a total of $600,000 in illegal corporate contributions.

On Sept. 8, TRMPAC and lobby group Texas Association of Business were indicted on charges of illegally funneling corporate donations into the 2002 elections for Texas Legislature.

 

However, particular amounts were earmarked to go to specific Texas state candidates, which certainly violates the spirit of the law prohibiting corporations from donating to candidates 60 days before an election - and which may be ruled to violate the letter as well.

Reportedly with a note attached specifying which amounts were to be returned for distribution to which candidates, which may be ruled conspiracy to break the law.

True, but irrelevant.

Except the particular amounts sent to specific candidates just happened to match the amounts & individuals specified by the corporations - could it be conspiracy to flout the law?

Not directly, but apparently indirectly. The question is does passing it through the RNSEC erase its fingerprints sufficiently?

They are legal as long as they don't contribute to Texas candidates 60 days before an election.

Are they part of this case or just thrown in to muddy the waters?

There may be a crime if conspiracy to launder money can be proven.

The conspiracy would committing the crime without appearing to commit it and with helping the coverup.

Enforcing campaign laws seems suitable.

Wooo, shades of White Water!

 

However, particular amounts were earmarked to go to specific Texas state candidates, which certainly violates the spirit of the law prohibiting corporations from donating to candidates 60 days before an election - and which may be ruled to violate the letter as well.

Reportedly with a note attached specifying which amounts were to be returned for distribution to which candidates, which may be ruled conspiracy to break the law.

True, but irrelevant.

Except the particular amounts sent to specific candidates just happened to match the amounts & individuals specified by the corporations - could it be conspiracy to flout the law?

Not directly, but apparently indirectly. The question is does passing it through the RNSEC erase its fingerprints sufficiently?

They are legal as long as they don't contribute to Texas candidates 60 days before an election.

Are they part of this case or just thrown in to muddy the waters?

There may be a crime if conspiracy to launder money can be proven.

The conspiracy would committing the crime without appearing to commit it and with helping the coverup.

Enforcing campaign laws seems suitable.

Wooo, shades of White Water! </font>[/QUOTE]We'll see how far it goes in court when the evidence has to be produced, examined, and judged. It may not even make it that far! No crime here I can see. I do see a lot of wishful thinking, however. But, hey, maybe there's some evidence buried somewhere that will be revealed. IF Tom DeLay is proven guilty then punish him according to law. If NOT then punish Ronnie Earle in the media for stirring up trouble and wasting tax payer money. Neither is very likely.