Something is starting to stink to high heaven - and it ain't Tom DeLay!
To: Aussie Dasher
After this is thrown out to the curb, can't Delay file suit against Ronnie for harassment or something of the kind?
2 posted on
10/05/2005 10:11:06 PM PDT by
vwatto
To: Aussie Dasher
We all smarties on Freep knew that this was abuse of prosecutorial power. Now, the whole world will finally find out. The DUmmies will not care of course. They will claim that the right wing is disprespecting law.
To: Aussie Dasher
I see a real boomarang against the Democrats on this. By 2006 their sleazy operations will be out there for all to see.
5 posted on
10/05/2005 10:15:48 PM PDT by
Mind-numbed Robot
(Not all that needs to be done needs to be done by the government.)
To: Aussie Dasher
"Something is starting to stink to high heaven - and it ain't Tom DeLay!"
My thought exactly. Earle has been after DeLay for - what? - three years, and he just got this "new evidence" for the new grand jury "over the weekend"? Doesn't that seem more than a little peculiar?
6 posted on
10/05/2005 10:15:51 PM PDT by
hsalaw
To: Aussie Dasher
like this?
8 posted on
10/05/2005 10:20:40 PM PDT by
SandRat
(Duty, Honor, Country. What else needs to be said?)
To: Aussie Dasher
Ol' Ronnie is scrabbling for anything he can get.
He is throwing things against the wall to see what sticks, when the only sticky, slimy thing is looking at him from his own mirror.
Probably jealous of the Cindy BullSheehan coverage.....
9 posted on
10/05/2005 10:28:47 PM PDT by
SpinyNorman
(The ACLU empowers terrorists and criminals, weakens America, and degrades our society.)
To: Aussie Dasher
The way I read it, Earle tried to get DeLay on the same money laundering charges on three different grand juries. I suppose protection from double jeopardy doesn't count in the indictment process. Besides, maybe triple jeopardy is OK.
11 posted on
10/05/2005 10:38:04 PM PDT by
AndyTheBear
(Disastrous social experimentation is the opiate of elitist snobs.)
To: Aussie Dasher
**2nd DeLay charges initially were rejected **
LOL!
12 posted on
10/05/2005 10:44:47 PM PDT by
Salvation
(†With God all things are possible.†)
To: Aussie Dasher
To: Aussie Dasher
I think this is a good thing. Every time the liberals have attacked like this lately they've been knocked two or more steps back on the counter. I say bring it on Earle, we'll throw you in the same dustbin we did Rather.
To: Aussie Dasher
Question .. is Jury shopping legal??
16 posted on
10/06/2005 1:54:14 AM PDT by
Mo1
To: Aussie Dasher
Also yesterday, the foreman of the first grand jury, which returned the campaign-finance conspiracy indictment, said yesterday that his vote to indict was based on TV commercials that he disliked and were run by a Texas business group in 2002 and not on any evidence presented to the grand jury. "My decision was based upon those, not based upon what happened in the grand jury room," William Gibson told Austin radio station KLBJ. "They were stating their positions, and I could state my position by saying I don't like that."
Good grief! Isn't this grounds for dismissal on the indictment and charges against this weasel?
17 posted on
10/06/2005 8:22:48 AM PDT by
gopheraj
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson