DeLay goes to court on Texas charges

#1
AUSTIN, Texas (Reuters) - U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay appeared in court to face campaign finance charges for the first time on Friday, but the session was cut short by his lawyer's charge that the judge was politically biased against the former second-ranking Republican in the House of Representatives.

State District Judge Bob Perkins was to arraign DeLay on conspiracy and money laundering charges, but postponed the hearing until another judge could rule on a defense motion that argued that he could not conduct a fair trial because he is a Democrat who gave money to Democratic candidates and the activist group MoveOn.org.

"It seems to me this is going to be a continuing issue when there's a Democratic judge and Republican defendant, or vice versa," Perkins said.

He said he would ask administrative judge B.B. Schraub, a Republican, to decide whether he should be replaced.

DeLay was once one of the nation's most powerful politicians, nicknamed "The Hammer" for his iron-fisted control of House Republicans, but now is an accused felon fighting for his political life by casting himself as the victim of a Democratic plot.
http://today.reuters.com/news/newsA..._01_ROB155989_RTRUKOC_0_US-POLITICS-DELAY.xml
 
#2
Delay has for a change of venue because he knows that his indictment was a democratic hit job. If he gets it he will be released.

The formal arraignment of DeLay, who has stepped down as leader of the Republican majority in the House of Representatives, was delayed because his attorney said Judge Bob Perkins had made contributions to the Democratic Party and other groups that oppose the Republicans.
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2005/10/21/051021183904.c55byznt.html
 
#3


Things don't look good in Austin for the Hammer

"Hey DeLay, Welcome to Waterloo,"

AUSTIN — The cradle of Texas' liberalism wasn't about to let one of the nation's top conservatives come to town without a full onslaught of protests.

In typical Austin fashion, naysayers greeted former Republican House Majority Leader Tom DeLay outside the courthouse with singing, chants and signs demonstrating their displeasure with the Sugar Land Republican. DeLay, facing conspiracy and money laundering charges, made his first court appearance in Austin Friday.

"Is the Hammer heading for the Slammer?" one large sign read, using the nickname DeLay earned because of his arm twisting and hard-knuckle politics to obtain votes in Congress.

As a defense attorney for DeLay faced reporters, one man dressed as the grim reaper brandished a sign demanding: "Surrender Tom DeLay."

The attorney, Dick DeGuerin answered questions while about two dozen protesters sang an a cappella hymn. "Tell the truth, you're no damn good," they sang.

The reaper, using the tune to "Yankee Doodle," crooned, "Tom DeLay's a pious fraud, he's got cash aplenty. He's for sale, he'll go to jail, he'll do 10 to 20."

Before the hearing began, about six protesters hosted a morning celebration, serving punch and cookies, tooting noisemakers and surrounded by balloons. They carried a sign proclaiming "Public Celebration."

"Bye-Bye Tom DeLay," the sign said.

In front of the Capitol, where DeLay spoke to a gaggle of reporters after the hearing, one man carried a poster in which DeLay's head was superimposed on a picture of Napoleon Bonaparte. "Hey DeLay, Welcome to Waterloo," it said.

Darcie Fromholz, who watched DeLay speak from the Capitol lawn, said she came to "watch history being made." She wore a white T-shirt, inscribed with "Hey, hey, Tom DeLay, how much did you wash today?"

DeLay is accused of circumventing state election law to funnel restricted corporate money into the 2002 Texas legislative races.

The alleged scheme helped Republicans gain control of Texas House, and eventually adopt a DeLay-engineered congressional district map that put more Texas Republicans in Congress.
http://news.galvestondailynews.com/texasstory.lasso?ewcd=0a230ed08f4ff1af

(Beware those that make 'ethics' rules...if ya can't walk the walk)
 
#4
The charges against Delay are more political than anything. The prosecutor tried getting indictments from several juries before he found a friendly jury. In fact the jury foreman stated publicly his mind was made up before hearing any testimony.
 
#5
NO SINGLE STANDARD FOR SLEAZE

It's the appearance of impropriety that will 'nail the hammer'



http://www.dekker.com/sdek/abstract~content=a713481563~db=enc

It's 'Jim Wright karma'



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Wright

Wright became the target of an inquiry by the House Ethics Committee. Their report in early 1989 implied that he had used bulk purchases of his vanity book Reflections of a Public Man to earn speaking fees in excess of the allowed maximum, and that his wife, Betty, was given a job and perks to avoid the limit on gifts. Faced with an increasing loss of effectiveness, he resigned as Speaker on May 31, 1989, effective upon the selection of a successor. On June 6th, the Democratic caucus brought his speakership to an end by selecting his replacement, and on June 30th he resigned from Congress.

The incident itself was controversial and was a part of the increasing partisan infighting that has plagued the Congress since then. The original charges were filed by Newt Gingrich in 1988, and their effect propelled Mr. Gingrich's own career advancement to Minority Whip and, seven years later, to the Speaker's chair itself. They may have originally been part of a response to Democratic efforts that had forced Edwin Meese's resignation as attorney general or the rejection of Senator John Tower's nomination as Secretary of Defense.
historical context to "Ethics Wars"

https://secure.mediaresearch.org/news/mediawatch/1989/mw19890701stud.html
 
#6
tomahawk6 said:
The charges against Delay are more political than anything. The prosecutor tried getting indictments from several juries before he found a friendly jury. In fact the jury foreman stated publicly his mind was made up before hearing any testimony.
Evidence please.
 
#8
#9
tomahawk6 said:
crabtastic said:
tomahawk6 said:
The charges against Delay are more political than anything. The prosecutor tried getting indictments from several juries before he found a friendly jury. In fact the jury foreman stated publicly his mind was made up before hearing any testimony.
Evidence please.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=1186116

http://www.statesman.com/metrostate/content/metro/stories/10/5earle.html
Obviously reading comprehension wasn't your strong suit at school. But don't worry now, because I'll tell you in simple English what the big, nasty articles mean:

The First Grand Jury indicted DeLay. However, a second didn't on other (unspecified) charges and then a third tacked on the money laundering charge. That makes the score 1-2 by my count. (2>1 by the way, just in case you didn't do that well in mathematics either.)

We do not know what evidence or charges were presented to the second Grand Jury. Since DeLay is as crooked as a $3 bill and has been censured on ethics violations repeatedly during his tenure in Congress it could be anything.

Please make sure you understand what it is you're trying to talk about before trying to debate the points further. (Engage brain before mouth.)
 
#10


"So, what do I have to do today to put YOU in the driving seat of this beautiful, low mileage, pre-owned Ford?"
 
#11
crabtastic said:
tomahawk6 said:
crabtastic said:
tomahawk6 said:
The charges against Delay are more political than anything. The prosecutor tried getting indictments from several juries before he found a friendly jury. In fact the jury foreman stated publicly his mind was made up before hearing any testimony.
Evidence please.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=1186116

http://www.statesman.com/metrostate/content/metro/stories/10/5earle.html
Obviously reading comprehension wasn't your strong suit at school. But don't worry now, because I'll tell you in simple English what the big, nasty articles mean:

The First Grand Jury indicted DeLay. However, a second didn't on other (unspecified) charges and then a third tacked on the money laundering charge. That makes the score 1-2 by my count. (2>1 by the way, just in case you didn't do that well in mathematics either.)

We do not know what evidence or charges were presented to the second Grand Jury. Since DeLay is as crooked as a $3 bill and has been censured on ethics violations repeatedly during his tenure in Congress it could be anything.

Please make sure you understand what it is you're trying to talk about before trying to debate the points further. (Engage brain before mouth.)
Crab you clearly dont care about anything other than what you want to believe. When Delay is acquitted you can apologize to me.
 
#12
tomahawk6 said:
crabtastic said:
tomahawk6 said:
crabtastic said:
tomahawk6 said:
The charges against Delay are more political than anything. The prosecutor tried getting indictments from several juries before he found a friendly jury. In fact the jury foreman stated publicly his mind was made up before hearing any testimony.
Evidence please.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=1186116

http://www.statesman.com/metrostate/content/metro/stories/10/5earle.html
Obviously reading comprehension wasn't your strong suit at school. But don't worry now, because I'll tell you in simple English what the big, nasty articles mean:

The First Grand Jury indicted DeLay. However, a second didn't on other (unspecified) charges and then a third tacked on the money laundering charge. That makes the score 1-2 by my count. (2>1 by the way, just in case you didn't do that well in mathematics either.)

We do not know what evidence or charges were presented to the second Grand Jury. Since DeLay is as crooked as a $3 bill and has been censured on ethics violations repeatedly during his tenure in Congress it could be anything.

Please make sure you understand what it is you're trying to talk about before trying to debate the points further. (Engage brain before mouth.)
Crab you clearly dont care about anything other than what you want to believe. When Delay is acquitted you can apologize to me.
They're your sources, mate. Not mine. I can read- that's the difference.

See the post I made regarding Neo-Con's bone posts. If I were you, I'd take the same to heart.

http://www.arrse.co.uk/cpgn2/Forums/viewtopic/t=24535/postdays=0/postorder=asc/start=10.html

On an intellectual level, I don't care about whether DeLay is convicted or acquitted.* Indictments are not convictions. It means only that there is a case that the accused must answer. In the wider context, just the indictments serve as a powerful reminder to the 'great and the good' (and I use the term in its loosest sense) that they remain accountable and are not above the law.

*On a personal level, I've had an erection ever since I saw the footage of him at the Sheriff's office. I can't think why. :D

How about, instead of apologising to you, I'll get you a spoon so you can eat my arrse?
 
#14
tomahawk6 said:
Not sure why you seem to think you are an expert on every subject - you arent.
I don't proclaim to be an expert on every subject, my friend. It's just that when it comes to this sort of thing I know more than you do. The difference between us is that when I don't know what's going on, I either make the time and effort to find out about it or I STFU instead of being stuck on transmit all the time. The fact is that it's my job to know this stuff. You won't see me barging into the professional fora and pontificating wildly. I stick to what I know.

Enough for the off-thread banter for now. If you have anything more to add, PM me and your comments will be regarded with the respect they deserve.

"It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than open one's mouth and remove all doubt."- Samuel Johnson.
 

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top