Posted on 11/24/2010 3:18:25 PM PST by Non-Sequitur
For five years, the case against Tom DeLay for money laundering through his Texans for a Republican Majority PAC has been seemingly trapped in the Texas courts facing pre-trial appeals. On November 1, it finally made it to trial and today the verdict is in: guilty on both money laundering and conspiracy to commit money laundering.
The slightly-less-than-humble DeLay lost his majority leadership in Congress after the indictment came down, but he has maintained his claims that this case was politically motivated throughout the entire process right up to defense attorney Dick DeGuerin's closing arguments.
The jury clearly didn't buy his argument and now DeLay is potentially facing life in prison on money laundering and conspiracy to commit money laundering charges. DeLay is accused of channeling $190,000 in corporate money through his Texans for a Republican Majority PAC in 2002 to aid GOP candidates.
Evidently Delay violated(somehow) sec 253.104 since the September date on a check was somehow within a 60 day window.
DeLay wasn’t charged with campaign finance violations but rather with criminal money laundering under the Penal Code. The campaign finance charge was dropped early on.
DeLay will surely find that many of the past Republican politicians that he helped will be MIA on his conviction. You won’t see any speak out for him, I suspect.
Are these the same charges the feds investigated and found no evidence of wrongdoing?
Since 1903, Texas has prohibited corporations from giving money to candidates directly or indirectly.
DeLay took corporate money donated to a PAC, and channeled it to Republicans running for Legislative Office in Texas.
In all fairness, they were probably the cream of the crop. This is Austin, ya know. Home of UT diversity, Hippie Hollow’s sunbathing nekid libs, and the city’s motto says it all, “Keepin’ Austin Weird.” No way is a Republican going to get a fair trial there.
Who said politics was fair? It’s not complicated, it’s very simple. DeLay is Republican, Rangle isn’t. Just like Republicans are limited to one vote whereas the other side has no limits.
No way in hell
He stands a better chance after the Christmas season.
Did I really need the sarcasm tag?
Just occurred to me.. today is Black Friday, the Austin paper is 4 inches thick with advertisements. EVERYBODY has this story on the front page of their copy, bigger than Dallas.
Is there *any chance* of any combo of appeal strategy that would require another jury? A jury who could not say they were unfamiliar with the case and verdict?
Austin is a very pretty city, but it is full of homosexual perverts.
No kidding.
This is yet another Ronnie Earle fishing trip. Earle goes after all Republicans, and also some Democrats who do not toe the hard left line. He even tried going after Bob Bullock. BTW, Earle is not liked by law enforcement (including the Travis County deputies).
The only money I will spend in Travis County is the renewal of my professional engineering license. Otherwise Austin can just go away.
The section you cited prohibits corporate donations to candidates. Such donations are banned.
“...but illegal AFTER he did the action.”
That makes it an ex post facto prosecution. That would be a clear Constitutional violation.
But when it comes to Donkey politics, we don’t need no steeenkin Constitution! Just like its perfectly ok for the number of votes counted being more than the number of voters signing in! (an actual ruling of the MN Supreme Court regarding the governor’s election).
“...but illegal AFTER he did the action.”
That makes it an ex post facto prosecution. That would be a clear Constitutional violation.
And that charge was dismissed by the Judge and upheld all the way to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals......
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2632686/posts?page=156#156
December 5, 2005: Judge Priest dismissed one count, conspiracy to violate election law, but let stand two counts alleging money laundering and conspiracy to commit money laundering.
“Meanwhile, my current and soon to be former congressman did basically the same thing and paid a $250,000 fine and went on to DC.”
As I understand it the issue here surrounds the fact that in Texas getting campaign money from other States is illegal.
As I understand it the issue here surrounds the fact that in Texas getting campaign money from other States is illegal.
So what you are saying is that I am wrong, and that the jury was not made up of 12 partisan Democrats?
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.