Posted on 09/28/2005 6:53:16 AM PDT by Egregious Philbin
Conspiracy charge a possibility for DeLay: Travis County grand jury to weigh indicting House leader, lawyers say
U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay's leadership post is on the line today as a Travis County grand jury is expected to consider indicting DeLay on conspiracy charges, several lawyers familiar with the investigation said.
The charges would stem from the DeLay's role in using corporate money in the 2002 elections. State law generally bans corporate money from campaign activities.
"I wouldn't have expected this a year ago," one Austin criminal defense lawyer said. "It's quite a turnaround if it happens."
Those same lawyers, though, expect the grand jury to take no action against Texas House Speaker Tom Craddick, Texas Association of Business President Bill Hammond or state Reps. Diane Delisi and Beverly Woolley for their roles in the election. The lawyers requested anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the grand jury's discussions.
Grand jury proceedings are secret, and jurors took no action Tuesday. Even as DeLay, a Republican from Sugar Land, continued to insist that he did nothing wrong, his defense team has been bracing for the worst.
An indictment would not force DeLay to resign as a member of Congress, but the GOP's rules would demand that he resign his post as majority leader.
Wednesday's secret vote by the grand jury could mark the end of a three-year investigation into whether DeLay and his Republican and business allies illegally spent corporate money to help elect a Republican majority to the Legislature in 2002. In turn, state lawmakers drew congressional districts urged by DeLay that gave Texas Republicans more clout in Washington. The lawmakers also elected Craddick, a Republican from Midland and a DeLay ally, as their speaker.
DeLay had appeared to escape criminal scrutiny as early as last year when Travis County prosecutors concluded that they did not have the jurisdiction to pursue election code violations against him. Under the law, only DeLay's local district attorney, a Republican, had jurisdiction, and he expressed no interest in trying to topple the second most powerful Texan in Washington.
But a conspiracy charge would fall under the criminal code, not the election statute that bans corporate money from being spent on a campaign.
That tactic is what defense lawyers fear — and would give Travis County prosecutors jurisdiction over DeLay.
A conspiracy charge would likely allege that DeLay worked with others to circumvent state law.
But DeLay's political committee, Texans for a Republican Majority, as well as the Texas Association of Business, used corporate money on what GOP officials claimed was committee overhead or issue advertising and not campaign-related activity.
Prosecutors have investigated whether the money actually was spent in connection with a campaign.
Over the past year, Travis County grand jurors have indicted three DeLay associates — John Colyandro, Jim Ellis and Warren Robold — as well as eight corporate donors, the Texas Association of Business and DeLay's Texans for a Republican Majority.
In recent days, the broad-based investigation has focused on one particular transaction that could tie back to DeLay.
In late September 2002, Colyandro, the executive director of Texans for a Republican Majority, sent a blank check to Ellis, who is DeLay's primary fundraiser in Washington.
According to the money-laundering indictment returned against those two, Ellis was accused of having the Republican National Committee launder $190,000 of corporate donations into noncorporate money to seven Texas House candidates, including Austinites Jack Stick and Todd Baxter.
If the grand jury takes action against DeLay, several lawyers expect it be related to that transaction.
As late as Tuesday, Travis County prosecutors were interviewing Republican National Committee staffers about their roles in the transaction.
Even if DeLay is indicted, many Republicans will breathe a sigh of relief that Craddick and others won't be indicted.
Theoretically, prosecutors could ask another grand jury to consider charges between now and the Nov. 2 anniversary of the 2002 election, when a three-year statute of limitations expires. But the defense lawyers expect today to be the last chance for 2002 allegations.
"What will you know in October," one defense lawyer said, "that you didn't know the past six months?"
Apparently campaign donors + political parties + candidates constitute a "conspiracy" when they defeat Democrats.
The Travis County DA is a highly partisan Dem. and has sworn to get Delay at any cost. He knows there will be NO conviction, but an indictment is almost as good because of the headlines and resulting media frenzy and the fact Delay would be removed from his leadership post. Chances are it would never even go to trial because that would end it.
If this is a witchhunt by a crooked Austin lawyer...change the GOP rules!!
Ask Lloyd Doggett...
Ten bucks says that the DA involved has ambitions of someday holding higher political office.....Attorney General....Chief Legal Counsel at DNC Headquarters.....
Let me guess, it's OK to use Union money.
I'm not sure how we can attack a grand jury for evaluating a charge and coming to a conclusion.
If he's guilty, let him fry. Delay was once a valuable member of congress, he is now corrupt fool who is doing more than anybody to destroy the party and the country. He puts his own power ahead of all of those who beleive in anything other than pork and raw power. Let him go, good riddance.
What on earth has happened in TX?
I thought it was the State not to be messed with. Yet it doesn't field people free of rot? And Dems command a free ride in the land of Bushes?
Wouldn't they first have to prove a crime had been committed in court before he could be charged with conspiracy?
They tried, tried to change from indictment to conviction, remember the uproar!!!! The press took it and ran with it and the libs/dems helped.
No, that's what's so bizarre about the law. It's similar to what they got Martha Stewart on. She was found guilty of proclaiming her own innocence for a crime that she was never charged with.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.