Libertarian ping.To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here
Posted on 09/28/2005 10:52:59 AM PDT by kellynla
A Travis County grand jury today indicted U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay on one count of criminal conspiracy, prompting the Sugar Land Republican to give up his leadership post in Congress.
"I have notified (House Speaker Dennis Hastert) that I will temporarily step aside from my position as majority leader pursuant to rules of the House Republican Conference and the actions of the Travis County District Attorney today," DeLay said in a statement.
The charge, a state jail felony punishable by up to two years incarceration, stems from his role with his political committee, Texans for a Republican Majority, a now-defunct organization that already had been indicted on charges of illegally using corporate money during the 2002 legislative elections.
The grand jury, however, took no action against Texas House Speaker Tom Craddick, Texas Association of Business President Bill Hammond or state Reps. Dianne Delisi and Beverly Woolley, both of whom sit on the political committee's board, for their roles in the election.
The grand jury's term ended today.
Delay's defense team will hold a news conference in Austin later this afternoon. The team includes defense attorneys Bill White and Steve Brittain of Austin and Dick DeGuerin of Houston.
"It's a skunky indictment. It stinks to high heaven," White said.
DeLay and his associates insisted the corporate money was legally spent on committee overhead or issue advertising and not campaign-related activity.
An indictment does not force DeLay to resign as a member of Congress, but the GOP's rules demand that he resign his post as majority leader as he fights the charges. Congressional Republicans earlier tried to drop that requirement, citing Earle's investigation as a political vendetta, but they ultimately maintained the rule after withering criticism.
(Excerpt) Read more at statesman.com ...
It is my understanding that Grand Juries are presented only with the evidence that would support indictment or that the evidence leans disproportianately in that direction. Also isn't it the judge who decides what evidence shall be presented? Someone correct me if I am wrong. But isn't the grand jury's proceedings not subject to the same rules of discovery that an actual trial would be?
I would be very cautious in concluding that this indictment is any proof of wrong doing.
Having served in a Texas DA's office for over ten years, I will let you in on a little secret. The DA can get anyone indicted he wants. He is the presenter of the facts, and makes recommendations to the grand jury.
Think so? Wait until the Dims really start throwing out the rumors about Dreier being gay, and everyone here and in the MSM who is braying in triumph over DeLay's indictment starts hounding Dreier and calling him a "queer".
The DA is Ronnie Earl a Democrat political hack. He went after Kay Bailey-Hutchinson a few years back. the process played out over about 10 months, cost millions of dollars and the jury came back with not guilty in about 20 minutes.
This is a pure political ploy to neutralize Delay for the mid-term elections. Ronnie Earl couldn't get a conviction if his life depended on it. Interestingly his job never does.
Since you have some inside info, what kind of prosecution record do they have down there?
So basically he's their Larry Klayman.
Or should I say what is their rate of conviction?
These charges have no basis in the facts or the law. This is just another example of Ronnie Earle misusing his office for partisan vendettas. Despite the clearly political agenda of this prosecutor, Congressman DeLay has cooperated with officials throughout the entire process. Even in the last two weeks, Ronnie Earle himself had acknowledged publicly that Mr. DeLay was not a target of his investigation. However, as with many of Ronnie Earle's previous partisan investigations, Ronnie Earle refused to let the facts or the law get in the way of his partisan desire to indict a political foe.
This purely political investigation has been marked by illegal grand jury leaks, a fundraising speech by Ronnie Earle for Texas Democrats that inappropriately focused on the investigation, misuse of his office for partisan purposes, and extortion of money for Earle's pet projects from corporations in exchange for dismissing indictments he brought against them. Ronnie Earle's previous misuse of his office has resulted in failed prosecutions and we trust his partisan grandstanding will strike out again, as it should.
Ronnie Earle's 1994 indictment against Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison was quickly dismissed and his charges in the 1980s against former Attorney General Jim Mattox-another political foe of Earle-fell apart at trial.
We regret the people of Texas will once again have their taxpayer dollars wasted on Ronnie Earle's pursuit of headlines and political paybacks. Ronnie Earle began this investigation in 2002, after the Democrat Party lost the Texas state legislature to Republicans. For three years and through numerous grand juries, Ronnie Earle has tried to manufacture charges against Republicans involved in winning those elections using arcane statutes never before utilized in a case in the state. This indictment is nothing more than prosecutorial retribution by a partisan Democrat.
They can look at any fact, or non fact without reguard to how it was gained.
A member of the DA's office is present to guide and present facts.
The Grand Jury can ask the member of the DA's office to leave, and then they are refered to as a runaway Grand Jury.
"...Wait until the Dims really start throwing out the rumors about Dreier being gay..."
Democrats and liberals love gay men. Just ask Barnie Frank.
Libertarian ping.To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here
I live in Travis County and think Ronnie Earle is a Sleezball, so I will withhold opinions on the caqse.
Didja mean legal process?
Thanks for the information and the context.
Well, it shouldn't be too hard to find out their rate of conviction down there. Unless that's a secret.
"Guilt" by association?
They are not know for their great court cases.
Thanks for the information. So it seems the workings of the Grand Jury may and can be politically motivated.
Especially with a member of the DA guiding the Grand Jury.
I think I have read arguments that the Grand Jury system is outdated and should be reformed. But I just can not recall where I saw this.
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.