Here is a picture of Delay. I think Ronnie Earle is the guy underneath!
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1533800/posts?page=304#304
Any word on the so-called "money laundering" charges based on a law that didn't even exist at the time when the so-called crime occurred?
Looks like the Judge denied the Change of Venue.
Judge Upholds Some Charges Against DeLay
We are extremely pleased and confident that the money laundering will be found baseless also.
You want streamlined synergy in the House under Tom or status quo politics with little progress? COME ON!
Avenge us Tom!
Honestly, the “story” is the charges that were dropped. Of course, they focus on the charges remaining.
Is he still a money launderer?
Good news about the conspiracy charges, but the money-laundering one is a felony. I'm surprised that the judge let that one stand, because it's just as baseless. I wonder how long it will take for this to go to trial? I really wanted all of this stuff out of the way so DeLay could reclaim his rightful position in the House.
And AP's take --- "DeLay's Money Laundering Charges Upheld "
Great! On Monday afternoon 144 hrs away until the sunday news shows 1 major charge dismissed. Guess the Dem judge was hoping that it'll be yesterday's news by next sunday. Can wait to hear Eleanor Clift's take on it--if the old bag can even remember a whole week back. Or maybe she's swiftly booking an unscheduled vactation.
Its not clear as to why the "money laundering" charge was not thrown out along with the ‘conspiracy’ charge, but it is clear that this indictment is an example of the the current servitude of the court system to the ends of political power satyrs...in this instance Ronnie Earle and his Democratic groupie cadre.
This fanatical Grand Inquisitor has no case, it just seems that the judge did not have the balls to rule against the NYTimes left. After all, money laundering is the act of taking the proceeds of one or more criminal activities and making them untraceable. Typical 'money laundering' includes 'cleaning' the proceeds from drug sales, illegal gambling, bunko scams, etc. by making them financially invisible through off shore accounts, legal gambling operations, etc.. In this light, the speciousness of Earles charges should be self-evident - even to a Democratic judge:
a) During the time in question, no funds (coinage, currency, etc.) eligible (under the law) for laundering was transferred between named parties. All transactions were openly transferred by checks, excluded by law (at the time) as “funds" that are used in money laundering.
b) Proceeds (dictionary def: ''the amount of money derived from a commercial or fundraising venture; the yield") were legally solicited and openly transferred between parties prior to any alleged crime, not (as Texas law stipulates in the meaning of money laundering) derived as a yield from a "criminal" activity.
c) In any case, a predicate criminal act is required and then any resulting proceed laundering consists of two, separate, crimes and transactions. Texas and Federal courts have held they cannot occur in the same transaction. For example, when the courts have ruled on bank fraud and money laundering, seperate acts are required for both charges: the fraud that obtains the funds AND then (following it) a separate transaction that is required that to show an attempt to "launder" the money.
d) Texas election code replaced all related Penal Code in 1975, setting the civil and criminal limits to violations of election law (e.g. the election code stipulates there can be no corporate contributions to canidates beyond administrative expenses and it was defined as a third degree felony). They did not intend to "layer" that code with identical and the more severe Penal code on money laundering (1st degree felony) otherwise it would make election code limits irrelevant.
Still, the judge did not have the guts to call a fool a fool. In the end Earle will lose, but he will have done his dirty job of destroying the leadership of the house Republicans on a phony charge cooked up in his office.
Such is the state of our "justice" system..
"(Upholding charge on money laundering)"
The charge of money laundering is still under consideration...not upheld. Those charges could be
dismissed, too.
The headline in AP and on this site makes it sound as if he is guilty. The actual story has the judge throwing out 1/2 the crap as total bogus indictment. Hope this AG is canned when this case is acquitted.