"Jeff Rigby" wrote in message
...

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Jim Carter wrote:
News Flash...

Delay has been charged with criminal conspiracy!!!!!!

Jim





What a delight.

Of course, the right-wing trash said he'd never be delighted. Now I am
sure they will say he will never be convicted.


Does that make me "right wing trash" if I also believe that he won't be
convicted. There was a loophole in the Texas law that Delay and co. took
advantage. IF it's a loophole it's not illegal just irregular to
unethical.
That's politics, just as this charge is politics because Earl knows that
he
can't get a conviction. Is that also unethical????

Former DOJ official Barbara Comstock's legal analysis:
Ronnie Earle argues that Tom DeLay conspired to make a contribution to a
political party in violation of the Texas Election Code. There was no
contribution to a political party in violation of the Texas Election Code.
There was no conspiracy. Ronnie Earle is wrong on the facts. Ronnie Earle is
wrong on the law.
According to the indictment, the conspiracy was to unlawfully make a
political contribution of corporate funds to a political party within 60
days of an election.

The Texas Election Code clearly states that "A corporation or labor
organization may not knowingly make a contribution [to a political party]
during a period beginning on the 60th day before the date of a general
election for state and county officers and continuing through the day of the
election." Title 15, Texas Election Code, § 253.104. Texas law also states
in part that "A person commits criminal conspiracy if, with intent that a
felony be committed: (1) he agrees with one or more persons that they or one
or more of them engage in conduct that would constitute the offense; and (2)
he or one or more of them performs an overt act in pursuance of the
agreement."

The Problems with Earle's case:

In an effort to contrive jurisdiction over DeLay, Earle charges that
because Congressman DeLay may have known about the transaction before it
occurred, he was then part of a conspiracy.

However, Earle's office has sworn testimony and other exculpatory evidence
showing that Congressman DeLay did not have knowledge of the transaction.

In addition:

No corporation or labor organization was indicted in this conspiracy.
Neither Jim Ellis nor John Colyandro is a corporation or labor organization.

No corporation or labor organization made a contribution during 60 days of
an election.

What constitutes a contribution under the Texas Election Code is not
strictly defined.

Neither the RNC nor RNSEC constitute a political party under Texas
election law. They are considered PACs, just as the DNC is.

Corporations in Texas could have legally made contributions to the RNC or
RNSEC during the period in question under Texas election law.

There was no violation of the Texas Election Code. There was no
conspiracy. The underlying transaction was legal. Had corporations sent
money directly to the RNC or RNSEC, the transaction would be legal. How
could anyone conspire to do indirectly what could legally have been done
directly?


Comstock adds:

Ronnie Earle has a history of using his office for attacks on his
political and personal enemies.
·"The Travis County, Texas, prosecutor investigating Mr. DeLay has a
history of using his office for partisan ends."(Congressional prerogative,
The Washington Times, November 19, 2004)

·Earle has demonstrated a past zeal for indicting conservative figures and
even liberals with whom he has personal or professional disagreements.
(Target: DeLay, National Review, April 11, 2005)

Earle's partisan prosecutions - which have frequently failed - are
designed for political harm, not legal harm. Earle is the same partisan
prosecutor who politically indicted and failed to convict:

Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison
Conservative Democrat Bob Bullock (when he was Comptroller - later he was
Lt. Governor)
Democrat Attorney General Jim Mattox

Ronnie Earle's three year political vendetta against Rep. DeLay has been
marked by:

Illegal grand jury leaks,
A fundraising speech by Earle for the Texas Democrat party 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 has been frequently criticized for his methods:

The Dallas Morning News criticized Earle in the Hutchison case:

"the impression of partisan unfairness has certainly been reinforced by
the leaks and public comment about Hutchison's case from the District
Attorney's office throughout the summer. That the Grand Jury investigation
has been conducted with so much fanfare such as the tip-offs to the new
media when key records were seized from the former treasurer's office has
added a darker tone to the cloudy proceedings." (Hutchison Probe; Fair and
Speedy trial is essential, The Dallas Morning News, September 28, 1993)

The Houston Chronicle called into question Earle's impartiality and
judgment:

"The fact that Earle refuses to recognize his blunder and would do it
again calls into question whether he has the necessary impartiality and
judgment to conduct the investigation that to a great extent will determine
whether Texas election campaigns will be financed and perhaps determined by
corporations or by individuals."

(Self-inflicted wound; District attorney's poor judgment in speaking at a
Democratic fund-raiser provides an unintended boost for DeLay's defenders.,
The Houston Chronicle, May 20, 2005)

On 29 Sep 2005 05:19:23 -0700, presented another typical
'adult' post...


You dumb ****, he was CONVICTED of leaving the scene of an accident. If
he "walked because of money and power", I take it by that you think he
should have been convicted of murder, correct? IF the court system in
the U.S. is that corrupt, do you not think that it would be even easier
to do away with the leaving the scene of an accident charge???

Kevin, when will you be 13 years old?
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
...

"Jim Carter" wrote in message
...
News Flash...

Delay has been charged with criminal conspiracy!!!!!!

Jim


I thought the US legal system was based upon the principle that you are
innocent until proven guilty in a court of law?


And your point is???

Bert didn't say he was guilty, just that he has been charged, it's now up to
court of law to decide.

"Jim Carter" wrote in message
...

"Bill McKee" wrote in message news:K2J_e.6528

Jim
No, you are the idiot. He walked because of money and power.

Are you telling me that the United States of America has a corrupt court
system? Are you telling me that you believe that your court system can
be
bought out by money or power? If this is your belief, then don't you
think that you and your fellow American Citizens should work towards
correcting your own county's court before trying to change other countries
systems?

Jim



Not corrupt courts. The case never got to a court. And if you do not think
that money and power and people you know do not impact indictments, I have a
bridge I will be willing to sell you. And money and being famous does help
smooth the way in lots if things, crime included. Ask OJ.

wrote in message
oups.com...

Bill McKee wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...

Bill McKee wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

Bert Robbins wrote:
"Jim Carter" wrote in message
...
News Flash...

Delay has been charged with criminal conspiracy!!!!!!

Jim


I thought the US legal system was based upon the principle that you
are
innocent until proven guilty in a court of law?

Isn't their the thought that any prosecutor worth their pay could
get
an
indictment of a ham sandwich?

This indictment will not stand the light of day.


That's odd. The right wingers here constantly find politicians
instantly guilty of crimes that haven't been given due process.

What was Ted Kennedy found guilty of in the death of Mary Jo?


Found guilty of having enough power and money to walk free.


Idiot.


No, you are the idiot. He walked because of money and power.

Idiot.


Why did he walk, GuzziBoy?

wrote in message
ups.com...

Bill McKee wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...

Bill McKee wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

Bert Robbins wrote:
"Jim Carter" wrote in message
...
News Flash...

Delay has been charged with criminal conspiracy!!!!!!

Jim


I thought the US legal system was based upon the principle that you
are
innocent until proven guilty in a court of law?

Isn't their the thought that any prosecutor worth their pay could
get
an
indictment of a ham sandwich?

This indictment will not stand the light of day.


That's odd. The right wingers here constantly find politicians
instantly guilty of crimes that haven't been given due process.

What was Ted Kennedy found guilty of in the death of Mary Jo?


Found guilty of having enough power and money to walk free.


Idiot.


No, you are the idiot. He walked because of money and power.

You dumb ****, he was CONVICTED of leaving the scene of an accident. If
he "walked because of money and power", I take it by that you think he
should have been convicted of murder, correct? IF the court system in
the U.S. is that corrupt, do you not think that it would be even easier
to do away with the leaving the scene of an accident charge???


Minor charge. Cost more for the lawyer than the fine. And manslaughter
would have derailed his career permanently.

Let's not forget T.Cullen Davis, the Texas oil millionaire.

ed wrote:
Money does talk, example Michael Jackson, O.J. Simpson, both guilty, both
had $$ and both walked free.

thunder wrote:
On Wed, 28 Sep 2005 12:37:44 -0700, Curtis CCR wrote:


Agreed. I am still asking, "Indictments for what?"

Potentially the Espionage Act, perjury, obstruction of justice, and
conspiracy, that's just of the top of a non-lawyer's head. I'm sure a
prosecutor of Fitzgerald's caliber can think of a few more. This
investigation has been going on for close to two years, that doesn't
happen unless charges are expected. Oh, unless your name is Kenneth Starr.

Then I am thinking "conspiracy to commit what?" I think some charges
may fall out of this. But I am expecting that the names on the
indictments won't be the ones everyone is expecting (or wishing for).

Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
On 29 Sep 2005 15:56:13 -0700, "Curtis CCR"
wrote:


thunder wrote:
On Wed, 28 Sep 2005 12:37:44 -0700, Curtis CCR wrote:


Agreed. I am still asking, "Indictments for what?"

Potentially the Espionage Act, perjury, obstruction of justice, and
conspiracy, that's just of the top of a non-lawyer's head. I'm sure a
prosecutor of Fitzgerald's caliber can think of a few more. This
investigation has been going on for close to two years, that doesn't
happen unless charges are expected. Oh, unless your name is Kenneth Starr.

Then I am thinking "conspiracy to commit what?" I think some charges
may fall out of this. But I am expecting that the names on the
indictments won't be the ones everyone is expecting (or wishing for).

I suspect it isn't going anywhere and will be thrown out of court.

My bad for not being clear. The "indictment" I am talking about has
not materialized yet. We have gone off on a little tangent here - I am
talking about "Plamegate" - - or whatever it's called.



http://www.nationalreview.com/york/york200509291814.asp

"Jim Carter" wrote in message
...

"ed" wrote in message
...
Money does talk, example Michael Jackson, O.J. Simpson, both guilty, both
had $$ and both walked free.
Ed


Another person agrees that the USA's justice system is corrupt and can be
bought!

Rather than snickering at the problem, why don't your put forth a solution?