From: "Gary Wiltshire" 

On Wed, 28 Sep 2005 17:38:36 -0400, Randy H
 wrote:

> Oh, the irony of it all.
>
> "Adam" <""4thwormcastfromthemolehill\"{at}the
field.near the bridge"> wrote
> in
> message news:433adeec{at}w3.nls.net...
>> Oh joy.
>>
>> Adam
>
>

Not so fast.  This prosecutor has a pretty colorful history of his own:

* * *

Former DOJ official Barbara Comstock e-mails this 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)

--
Gary Wiltshire

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5