Ah, I missed ScottJ's question. The habit of walking out to deny a legislative quorum is traditional in Texas.
The 70s had the "killer bees", a group of democrats who walked out to keep the primary dates from being changed to accomodate a Texas politician.
In 1993 the republicans (the "killer WASPS") walked out to shut down the legislature to keep state judges from being elected by congressional district.
And when DeLay ordered the legislature to redraw districts to eliminate Texas democrats, democrat legislators again walked. It's not a crime, but the Speaker can order the Texas Rangers to find the walkouts and return them.
What is a crime, is to try to enlist the Homeland Security department, under false pretenses, to find them. This, apparently, is what DeLay did, and there may be a federal indictment under way.
In Texas, people don't get too upset about the legislature being shut down. They are more worried about what they do when they are in session.
Republicans move to protect DeLay
Discussion in 'Free-For-All Archives' started by The Galatian, Nov 18, 2004.
Page 2 of 4
-
-
Galatian, It is intereseting that Lee said nothing of the kind. I think you will also find the following interesting.
Oops ... Turns out Galatian is wrong again. Larry was right all along. The Democratic rule does not apply to the top party leaders apparently, meaning they don't even have the rule they criticized the Republicans for changing. When will you learn, Galatian?
It is also interesting to see what this rule change actually does. It doesn't give a free pass. It gives the responsibility to the house Republicans to decide. I didn't know that.
-
If you are serious, then you should do a google search using "Novak" and "Wilson."
What he did was despicable. -
Actually, the rule requires house leaders to step down, but for the top leadership, that's never been an issue; no one thought it would be. It didn't take a conviction for the last democratic leader under investigation to be removed.
The democrats had a house corruption problem of their own, in the 80s. Jim Wright, although he was not indicted as DeLay is expected to be, or accused of felonies, as DeLay has been, was forced by the democratic caucus to resign.
It didn't take a rule. Never has, up to now. And now that it does, the republicans have repealed the rule to protect the the crook.
It's not the first time DeLay has committed a felony while in Congress.
In February of 1994, he denied being an officer or director of his pest control company. In May of that year, he filed a financial disclosure form for the House that admitted he had been Chairman of the corporation during that time.
Fortunately for DeLay, the perjury had not been discovered until after the statute of limitations had expired.
DeLay, as you might know, was the one who was saying that Clinton was unfit to serve for not being truthful about his affair.
No wonder the republicans want to keep him; he's the perfect example of the "new republican." -
If you are serious, then you should do a google search using "Novak" and "Wilson."
What he did was despicable. </font>[/QUOTE]Why? I presume you must be talking about his allegedly outing a CIA person. That has not yet been fully investigated. But doesn't he have freedom of the press? He broke no laws that I am aware of. Do you know of any?
When someone uses freedom of the press for something you like you probably are all in favor of it. When he doesn't, you aren't. It seems kind of hypocritical to me. But I haven't followed the story closely, and it doesn't appear to make much difference. -
-
Did you consider, Larry that the democrats had no rule for the No.1 and No. 2 positions, because they didn't need them?
Jim Wright wasn't even indicted or accused of a felony, and the democrats got rid of him. DeLay has been so accused, and will apparently soon be indicted, and the republicans hastily removed the rule that would make him step down.
That says all that needs to be said about the matter.
The part where DeLay (who perjured himself) argued that Clinton should be removed from office for lying about his affair, is just further evidence about DeLay's ehtical and moral state.
You're a loyal republican, and I can understand why you want to minimize the hypocrisy of the GOP in this matter, but there it is. -
-
-
They have no rule because they had no rule. It certainly wasn't because they didn't need it. And neither one needs it now. The new Republican rule places the leadership in the hands of the Republican caucus rather than in the hands of prosecutors.
This is the second major lie you got caught telling in this thread (after the one that the Dems have a similar rule when they don't).
You should be learning to close your browser and resist the urge to post. You are not good at this. You are getting caught in false statements, lack of basic rudimentary knowledge, and bad logic way too many times. YOu need to try a new hobby. -
I don't think either side should such an idiotic rule as this. Remove someone from power simply because they are accused by an ousted Representative and indicted by a prosecuter from the most liberal county in Texas who's got a case of the big head? The Travis County DA is laughable and, he is not even newsworthy here in Houston. Not even our 'liberal media' believe him.
Chris Bell, the accuser, has been reprimanded for 'exaggerating' DeLay's supposed misconduct. In other words, he made up most or all of the allegations.
Bell is a former Houston city councilman who lost his seat and ran for mayor. He lost in the primaries, so he decided to run for Congress. He won and served for one term until DeLay pressured TX Republicans to redraw state district lines that had illegally be drawn by judges.(State law says that the congress shall redraw the lines after every Federal Census. When the process was stalled for a time, activist judges decided to take over the legislature's job and redraw them themselves.)
Chris Bell lost his seat in the primaries, again, and has since taken on the task of making up any kind of story he can to get back at DeLay for the new district lines.
Bell is a hack who never should have been elected to any office. He is a nobody who wants to be a somebody, just like the Travis County DA. They should both be ashamed of themselves. -
Let's be real for a bit. DeLay has been reprimanded three times by the House Ethics Committee. He's a perjurer. And he's most likely going to be indicted for violating Texas criminal statutes, and unless Bush finds a way to protect him, he's probably going to be indicted for causing false statements to made to the Department of Homeland Security.
The ethics rules the republicans themselves instituted in the name of reform are being dismantaled, to protect their own.
That's a fact.
And I note that Larry has again claimed he's not a republican. :rolleyes:
And the Pope isn't Catholic. -
-
"Disarm politically" means...
Follow your own ethics rules, instead of scrapping them when your leaders are about to be indicted?
The democrats should all just join the republican party, now that it's become exactly what the democrat party used to be. -
-
Larry, who has loyally defended any and all republicans, is not a republican? Sorry Larry, your behavior has been far more convincing than your denials.
"when someone tells you something truthfull..."
By now, Larry, no one here can count on anything you say as being truthful. And now, if we can get off the subject of whether or not Larry is dishonest, back to the thread...
"WASHINGTON (AP) - The House ethics committee rebuked Majority Leader Tom DeLay for the second time in a week for questionable conduct, sternly warning the Texas Republican to temper his behavior.
The committee late Wednesday admonished DeLay for creating an appearance of giving donors special access on pending energy legislation and using the Federal Aviation Administration to intervene in a Texas political dispute.
Last week, the same committee admonished DeLay for offering to endorse the House candidacy of a House member's son in exchange for the member's favorable vote on a Medicare prescription drug bill.
The committee's publicly issued findings constituted the panel's mildest punishment, and spared DeLay from a lengthy investigation.
But the committee noted the rare back-to-back admonishments and that in 1999 DeLay received an ethics committee warning for pressuring a lobby company to hire a Republican.
"In view of the number of instances to date in which the committee has found it necessary to comment on conduct in which you engaged, it is clearly necessary for you to temper your future actions," the committee said in a letter to DeLay."
Predictably, DeLay, rather than offer an apology or a pledge to reform his behavior, demanded that representative Chris Bell, who blew the whistle on DeLay, pay his legal expenses.
Someone should tell DeLay that if you lose, you don't recover legal expenses. He got reprimanded. The committee, although critical of Bell, did not reprimand him.
DeLay, who has had four ethics rebukes from the House in five years, was protected by the Republicans, who changed their ethics rules to allow an indicted leader stay in office.
Remember when republicans were the party of reform?
[ November 21, 2004, 10:23 AM: Message edited by: The Galatian ] -
And I can understand why you don't like it. If I were continually wrong, I would hate someone pointing it out as well. So in order to avoid that, I just tell the truth. You unfortunately have not learned that lesson yet. You keep hoping you will get away with it. But you don't ... You just haven't learned that you are not good at this game. Virtually every time you lie, you get caught. It is a frequent occurrence, unfortunately. And it is easily remedied.
-
So if you're not a republican Larry, how do you feel about DeLay insisting that the guy who filed the charges that got him reprimanded, should pay his legal fees?
Agree, or disagree? -
Silence...
-
If DeLay is found guilty, he should be removed from all offices, restore all improperly taken money, pay any expenses incurred in his removal and the appointment of someone to fill his roles, and go to jail.
But that is not a Republican issue. I think the same thing about Republicans making charges about Democrats, or employees about employers, or neighbors about neighbors. That is just plain old common sense.
Page 2 of 4