Skip to comments.
Prosecutor reveals third grand jury had refused DeLay indictment
Austin American-Statesman ^
Posted on 10/04/2005 10:43:26 PM PDT by j.frank.dobie
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-66 next last
It just gets curiouser and curiouser.
It's no wonder that Ronnie hasn't had time for a press conference this week.
To: j.frank.dobie
I just hope the news of earle's outrageous conduct in the delay affair makes as much news as the indictments themselves.
2
posted on
10/04/2005 10:47:16 PM PDT
by
smonk
To: j.frank.dobie
...In his statement, Earle said he would have no further comment because grand jury proceedings are secret...Except, of course, for the ones he allowed to be filmed for Matlock moment.
To: j.frank.dobie
This sign allegedly is in the office of ronnie earle...when he goes off to work!
To: j.frank.dobie
5
posted on
10/04/2005 10:48:09 PM PDT
by
MEG33
(GOD BLESS OUR ARMED FORCES)
To: j.frank.dobie
Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle acknowledged that prosecutors presented their case to three grand juries — not just the two they had discussed — and one grand jury refused to indict DeLay.Well, at least DeLay can have the satisfaction of knowing that there was one Grand Jury that saw him as less criminaloid than a ham sandwich.
6
posted on
10/04/2005 10:48:27 PM PDT
by
sourcery
(Givernment: The way the average voter spells "government.")
To: j.frank.dobie
Earle said he would have no further comment because grand jury proceedings are secret.Unless you are a couple of filmmakers.
7
posted on
10/04/2005 10:54:34 PM PDT
by
kcvl
To: j.frank.dobie
"Earle said he would have no further comment because grand jury proceedings are secret."
Oh, now they are secret. After he and his last jury forman have been blabbing all over town for weeks or months. BS.
8
posted on
10/04/2005 10:56:30 PM PDT
by
KingKongCobra
(Trying to save the "Donner Party" from themselves.)
To: j.frank.dobie
Only conspiracy here is by Ronnie!!!
9
posted on
10/04/2005 10:57:07 PM PDT
by
adam_az
(It's the border, stupid!)
To: j.frank.dobie
If DUELING were still legal, DeLay would have an appropriate means to reply to this ass-clown Prosecutor....
The legal right to challenge an offending asshole to a duel, must be restored...
The risk of serious consequences for being an ass-clown, would make for a more professional and polite society...
It would also have the effect of culling the assholes out of the gene pool.
Semper Fi
10
posted on
10/04/2005 10:57:33 PM PDT
by
river rat
(You may turn the other cheek, but I prefer to look into my enemy's vacant dead eyes.)
To: j.frank.dobie
*This* is gonna go over big. >B-)
To: j.frank.dobie
I wonder who the US Attorney for that part of Texas is, and whether there is a federal "hook" for grand-jury shopping.
12
posted on
10/04/2005 10:59:41 PM PDT
by
steveegg
(The quarterly FReepathon is the price you pay for FR...until enough people become monthlies!)
To: KingKongCobra
Earle is a clown, all he needs to complete his "ensame'" is
a clown nose. The fact that this bozo can still occupy a
elected office is a testemony to the efficency to the TX
Dem practice of Gerrymandering. I pay no more attention to
this clown than I do to a little yapping schnauzer.
13
posted on
10/04/2005 11:00:48 PM PDT
by
p[adre29
(Arma in armatos)
To: Sgt_Schultze
Except, of course, for the ones he allowed to be filmed for Matlock moment. If it is true that there were film makers in the grand jury room (and Delay says it is) that alone should be enough to get the indictment quashed.
I wonder if the Texas State Attourney General can bring Earle up on conspiracy charges?
14
posted on
10/04/2005 11:06:26 PM PDT
by
konaice
To: j.frank.dobie
This just gets dumber and dumber. Man, I hope this gets press.
If I were able to convene multiple Grand Juries like this, I'd probably be able to get them to indict you for molesting your daugther (even if you don't have a daugther).
15
posted on
10/04/2005 11:07:40 PM PDT
by
furquhart
(Cheney-Bush '08)
To: j.frank.dobie
Very unusual for a grand jury to deny a request for an indictment. His case must really, really be flimsy.
To: smonk
The embattled Bush administration, weighed down by the lowest poll numbers of an incumbent president in recent political history, tried early this week to salvage some face by alleging that a prominent prosecutor was forced to rush to present new evidence to two grand juries in as many days because the Republican majority objected to a plea bargain that was merely rumored in the press to be offered by what was previously thought to be a state in thrall of their adopted native son.
...
17
posted on
10/04/2005 11:12:48 PM PDT
by
Old Professer
(Fix the problem, not the blame!)
To: j.frank.dobie
It becomes clerarer, day by day, that if *anyone*
should be facing indictement, it the DemoScum Croney
Ronnie Earle, for Malfeasance.
To: river rat
19
posted on
10/04/2005 11:35:05 PM PDT
by
bethtopaz
(Even a fool is considered wise when he is silent.)
To: j.frank.dobie
In his statement, Earle said he would have no further comment because grand jury proceedings are secret. Not secret enough for him to distance himself from a propagandista film crew documenting the show trials of Tom DeLay.
20
posted on
10/04/2005 11:42:05 PM PDT
by
weegee
(The lesson from New Orleans? Smart Growth kills. You can't evacuate dense populations easily.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-66 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson