Tom DeLay-Indicted

deniseE · September 2005

It appears that a Texas grand jury found enough evidence to indict Mr. DeLay...and the Rebuplican leaders are asking him to step aside.

see articles on cnn and msn....

Whatever · September 2005

However, the same people are strangely quiet when it comes to Bill Frist.

HRLASS · September 2005

Re Mr. DeLay - 'bout time.

Crout · September 2005

In keeping with the highest standards and traditions of Texas politicians. The best was LBJ's first Senate campaign, when a couple thousand votes were "found," which gave the election to Johnson. They were in a box, every single one in alphabetical order.

Whirlwind · September 2005

But let's not forget he was indicted here in Texas, my county of Travis to be exact. And in keeping with the highest tradition of "fair and balanced" journalism, our local Fox affiliate's lead-in line for this story was "Partisan Travis County D.A. pressures Grand Jury to indict DeLay." True, Travis Co. is one of the few Democrat counties left in Texas, but to blatantly call a District Attorney "partisan" as part of a news story, NOT an editorial piece, is outrageous.

Gillian3 · September 2005

And if what I read is correct, he has prosecuted 15 Democrats and 3 Republicans.

Whirlwind · September 2005

That sounds about right. I admire and respect Ronnie Earle a lot, and I think he's about as non-partisan as it's possible to be.

Shadowfax · September 2005

That is interesting to hear. Up here, all I have been hearing is what a sleazy political dirtbag he is, and none of the several persons he has attempted to prosecudte were ever found guilty. Admittedly, the only local radio is probably more conservative than even our buddy Don, but Earle has come off up here as little better than a malicious fool. Or, does it simply reflect one's political party affiliation?

slogan · September 2005

And, according to other news sources, this indicment, like so many others of Mr. Earl's, will be thrwon out of court. Just another yawner political hack story that has about as much political weight as a titsy fly.

Shadowfax · September 2005

Did you mean tsetsefly? Not that I really care - either way....

Gillian3 · September 2005

OK, but that can only be proved one way or the other, by knowing the number of cases that were thrown out - out of how many and it would be interesting to know the %'s by party. Only then could one say with some certainty that he is partisan and a hack. I'd like to know. At this point I know of only one that has been thrown out - a case against a Republican.

Crout · September 2005

And what's so bad about being under indictment? It's not like he can't be re-elected. And if he's convicted the House Republicans can/will simply change the ethics rules as they did last year. Another example of how the two-party system with its inherent checks and balances is sorely missed. Nixon knew he was the only politician who could end the Vietnam War. Why? Because no one could ever accuse Nixon of being soft on communism. Ron Reagan dreamed of welfare reform, but only Clinton could do it. Why? Because no one could accuse Clinton of being unsympathetic to the poor.

Whirlwind · September 2005

Good points, Crout.

As for the others above, I'm sure there are statistics in existence to make any point you care to. But as a registered voter in Travis County, I'm more than satisfied with Mr. Earle. And as a Texan, I'm ashamed of Mr. DeLay

Slogan, I wouldn't count the Tsetse fly out; it is, in fact, a highly venomous insect.

Okay y'all, fire away. I'm leaving town and computers for a long weekend.

Gillian3 · September 2005

What you are saying is that since you live there, your opinion is the only one that really counts?

Whirlwind · September 2005

Not at all, G3. Just saying that I've followed Ronnie Earle's career for a long time, and I have enough information to decide for myself that he is a man of integrity. Others may need more information, and still others will pull statistics -- sometimes out of context -- to support a conclusion they've already formed. Your previous post made sense to me; sorry I didn't say so, and sorry I don't have the information at my fingertips to answer your very good questions about the percentage of cases thrown out and the % from each party.

Gillian3 · October 2005

Ah, another failed attempt at subtle humor over the internet. Actually, I think that you are there, so your posts have much more validity than the average.

Whirlwind · October 2005

No problem, but next time please use the "Attention, you idiot Whirlwind: This is subtle humor" icon. Sometimes by the point in the evening when I have time to get on the computer and catch up on the Forum, most subtlety is lost on me.

slogan · October 2005

Ah yes, the great Ronnie Earl has had to re-file charges. It seem that the charges he originally filed are all for not, since the law did not take affect until 2003 and DeLay was accused of wrong doing in 2002. Ronnie boy was just a year behind.

Now Ronnie has to change the charge to "Money laundering". But that is non-sense since DeLay did it all exactly the way the law siad to do it. It's kind of a "Oh crap, he did it just the way we told him to do it"! This will be just another feather in Ronnie's shorts. Oh by the way, even thought Ronnie only went after three Republicans, one of those he went after three times (Kay Bailey) and all three times the charges were dropped. I guess Ronnie better spend more time studying current law rather than worrying about how he is going to look on film!

Tom DeLay-Indicted

Comments