From: "Rich Gauszka" 

The partisan DA has prosecuted 3 times more Democrats for violating
fundraising rules in Texas. Now Delay is blaming a newspaper for putting
pressure on the prosecutor.

http://www.dfw.com/mld/startelegram/news/state/12766399.htm

AUSTIN - U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay, in responding to the conspiracy charge
against him, blamed a newspaper for putting pressure on a Texas prosecutor
to indict him.

"It was this renewed political pressure in the waning days of his
hollow investigation that led this morning's action," DeLay said
Wednesday after a grand jury indicted him on a criminal conspiracy charge.

The indictment accuses DeLay of conspiring to violate political fundraising
laws with two associates. DeLay temporarily stepped aside as majority
leader to fight the charge, which could result in a state jail term of up
to two years if he's convicted.

The Austin American-Statesman, which published an editorial Sept. 11
questioning why Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle's
investigation had recently been resulting in indictments of organizations
and not individuals, appears to be the newspaper DeLay was criticizing.





"Mark"  wrote in message
news:433b42fd{at}w3.nls.net...
>I don't particularly care for Delay all that much, but it disturbs me in a
>general way that some partisan DA from Anytown, USA can get use an
>indictment to force a congressman out of his position in the house -- since
>when are you guilty when charged and must act as if you are guilty? That
>rule should be changed by the GOP from indicted to convicted.
>
> I have little interest in exploring the merits of the case, the charges
> will be either be dismissed or a trial will go forward with the finding of
> the jury the ultimate arbiter.
>
> "Gary Wiltshire"  wrote in message
> news:op.sxua54veeipai0{at}news.barkto.com...
>> 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